• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Издания304
      • Показать ещё
      Люди1353
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы1156
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации188
      • Показать ещё
      Компании782
      • Показать ещё
      Разное610
      • Показать ещё
      Формат16
      Показатели39
      • Показать ещё
Foreign Policy
Foreign Policy
Foreign Policy («Форин полиси» ) — дословно «Внешняя политика» (то есть «Международные отношения»), американский журнал со штаб-квартирой в столице США. Тираж более ста тысяч экземпляров, выходит каждые два месяца (изначально выходила раз в квартал). Еж ...

Foreign Policy («Форин полиси» ) — дословно «Внешняя политика» (то есть «Международные отношения»), американский журнал со штаб-квартирой в столице США. Тираж более ста тысяч экземпляров, выходит каждые два месяца (изначально выходила раз в квартал). Ежегодно публикует собственную версию списка ста мировых мыслителей (The FP Top 100 Global Thinkers).

http://inosmi.ru/foreignpolicy_com/

Журнал основан в 1970 году Самюэлем Хантингтоном, американским политологом, автором концепции «столкновения цивилизаций», и Уорреном Маншелем, американским дипломатом и инвестором, при поддержке Фонда Карнеги.

Идея выпускать журнал раз в два месяца (вместо раза в квартал) принадлежит редактору Моисею Наиму (1996–2010), под чьим руководством журнал выигрывал премии National Magazine Awards в 2003, 2007 и 2009 годах. Журнал затрагивает темы глобальной политики, экономики, мировой интеграции, политических идеологий и теории международных отношений. 29 сентября 2008 года The Washington Post Company объявила о приобретении прав на издание журнала у Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

В начале 2006 года запущен блог Foreign Policy Passport, а 5 января 2009 года перезапущен сайт издания, который репозиционирован как «ежедневный сетевой журнал».

В 2012 году Foreign Policy вырос до группы (The FP Group)  – расширение журнала включает ForeignPolicy.com и проект FP Events («FP События»).

По утверждению сайта The FP Group количество читателей онлайн версии журнала достигает 2,4 миллиона в месяц.

Foreign Policy издается сегодня под руководством генерального директора и главного редактора The FP Group Дэвида Роткопфа (David Rothkopf), который присоединился к FP в этой роли в 2012 году после того, как был постоянным автором этого издания с 1997 года.

https://www.youtube.com/user/FPRIVideo

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/

Развернуть описание Свернуть описание
21 января, 02:44

Big Changes On White House Website As Donald Trump Takes Over

WASHINGTON ― With a new president comes a new presidential website. Gone are sections like “Civil Rights” and “Reducing Gun Violence” and in are pages like “America First Energy Plan” and “America First Foreign Policy.” But people also quickly noticed that certain pages seemed to have disappeared altogether. Searches for LGBT turn up nothing and the section on climate change goes to a broken link.  Advocacy groups for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer equality quickly condemned the Trump administration for scrubbing mentions of their community. There is a good chance that Trump’s WhiteHouse.gov will not have a specific section on LGBTQ rights. That’s not surprising, since it was not a focus of his campaign and he has spoken out against full equality. Same with climate change ― Trump has been skeptical of the human connection to global warming. That doesn’t necessarily mean, however, that that content is gone forever. The Trump administration is essentially building a new site from scratch ― even though it looks like the Obama administration’s WhiteHouse.gov ― and that means replacing the content bit by bit.  “The transition of the site is in progress as updates are made,” Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks said.  And the glitches aren’t restricted to progressive priorities. A search for “China” for example, comes up with only a handful of results. The site for the Office of Management and Budget similarly is gone.  The Obama White House content is also still accessible at a new site, ObamaWhiteHouse.Archives.Gov. As Kori Schulman, the Obama deputy chief digital officer explained in October, “Similar to the Clinton and Bush White House websites, President Obama’s WhiteHouse.gov will be preserved on the web and frozen after January 20th and made available at ObamaWhiteHouse.gov. The incoming White House will receive the WhiteHouse.gov domain and all content that has been posted to WhiteHouse.gov during the Obama administration will be archived with NARA [National Archives and Records Administration].” So far on Trump’s White House site, there are also no pages devoted to immigration or repealing Obamacare, which were two of Trump’s top priorities during the campaign.  Want more updates from Amanda Terkel? Sign up for her newsletter, Piping Hot Truth, here. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

21 января, 02:09

Weekend Roundup: Inauguration Into The Unknown

This week a whole nation was inaugurated into the unknown. We don’t know what Donald Trump will do once in the White House. But we do know how he got there. Everyone of good faith must hope that the new president will succeed in his promised aim of lifting up the left behind, which the political establishment he ousted could not do. Yet, anyone with the slightest sense of history must also worry how his path to power will define what he does with it. The debasement of the democratic discourse introduced during Trump’s election campaign and since has already inflicted damage that cannot be easily undone. The level of xenophobic demonization of the world outside and enemies within, like his impulsive invective unleashed against even marginal critics, has been unprecedented for any presidential candidate in memory. Perhaps most dangerously, his effort to delegitimize any media, and even denigrate official intelligence agencies, that won’t play along with his fast and loose use of facts or distortion of reality aims to make all information suspect. In this Orwellian universe, truth then becomes only what the self-anointed tribune of the people, speaking on their behalf, declares it is. Fortunately, the Trump electoral mandate fell far short of a majority in a country that has a more diverse and pluralistic civil society than other times and places (such as 20th century Europe) where demagogues have risen to power. Robust cultural resistance will be part and parcel of the Trump years. Whole swaths of the nation, even entire states like California, will stand up and push back. Several polls already show that there is more popular opposition than support for Trump as he enters office. Outside the U.S., concerns abound over what the new president will do next. Angst is probably the greatest south of the border, in Mexico. In grappling with Trump, Sergio Muñoz Bata advises Mexico to look back to its proud history of standing up to the “colossus of the north.” James Zogby predicts that if Trump follows through on his promise to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, it “would ignite a spark that would set the region aflame.” Writing from Australia, Helen Clark says the possibility of an American retreat from Asia and rising tensions in the South China Sea are putting the region on edge. Nick Robins-Early interviews an independent Russian journalist who says Russian media coverage of Trump is so sympathetic, “it’s getting bizarre.” Peter Wittig, German ambassador to the U.S., asserts that we need a robust transatlantic alliance more than ever to counter terrorism, deal with Russia and create growth and jobs.  Within the U.S., Juan Escalante, an undocumented immigrant, lays out his emergency plan in case the Trump administration tries to deport his family. A Pakistani Muslim immigrant whose visa is up for renewal this summer, Mahira Tiwana tells us that despite feeling “other” in Trump’s America, she is not ready to give up on the “American dream” yet. Sina Toossi worries that Iranian-Americans will lose the voice they gained under Obama and that the Iran nuclear deal will be dismantled, worsening U.S. relations with Iran. Richard Eskow addresses Americans who voted for Trump because they felt left behind, saying Trump will let them down and that then, the working class should create a “grand alliance,” as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. advocated. Filmmaker Ethan Coen pens a Dr. Seuss-style poem about Trump, saying, “He’ll change some people used to say / Calm down after Election Day / But Putin and the KKK knew / Trumpet always be that way.” Jon Deutsch suggests the plus side of a Trump presidency could be the disruption of a political system that is long overdue for reform. Ivan Eland argues the U.S. intelligence community ― comprised of 17 huge agencies that don’t communicate effectively ― needs a shake-up, and Trump― who criticized intelligence officials after the release of reports about Russians hacking the election ― may make it happen. Howard Fineman reflects on Obama’s legacy, maintaining that his presidency worked “moderately well in domestic affairs, less well in the world ... is likely to be regarded more as transitional than transformative ... and ... feels oddly more like the end of an era than the beginning of the one he promised.” As Obama and his world order said goodbye, this week also saw China’s President Xi Jinping looking to fill a global power gap. Xi became the first Chinese president to attend the World Economic Forum in Davos, and he gave a speech with strong messages on globalization and climate change. Jane Cai and Frank Tang responded to his presence at the summit, writing, “With choking smog, a weakening currency and a widening wealth gap at home and a fragmented global capitalist system abroad, President Xi Jinping is determined to take advantage of an elite forum to assure the world that China is doing fine and is ready to help pull the world together.” From Beijing, Akshay Shah and Carole Bernard paint another picture, sharing charts they made using new data that show warning signs that China could be headed for a financial crisis. In a WorldPost feature, Danielle Mackey reports from San Salvador that a U.S. program meant to help Central American refugees is leaving most in danger. Saskia Sassen contends global firms and local elites who take land from farmers are partly to blame for skyrocketing violence in Central America. Edward Alden explains why, if Trump wants good jobs and investment, he needs to shape rules for foreign investment competition to avoid a race to the bottom in wage, consumer and environmental standards. From Helsinki, Heikki Hiilamo explores the potential of Finland’s new program testing out basic income for unemployed citizens. “As the world begins to see the impacts of globalized society with the elections of new leaders ― including Mr. Trump ―” he writes, “the answer to the fears of declining economies may just be a basic income system.” Finally, our Singularity series this week looks at how cellular reprogramming boosted the lifespan of mice by 30 percent. WHO WE ARE   EDITORS: Nathan Gardels, Co-Founder and Executive Advisor to the Berggruen Institute, is the Editor-in-Chief of The WorldPost. Kathleen Miles is the Executive Editor of The WorldPost. Farah Mohamed is the Managing Editor of The WorldPost. Alex Gardels and Peter Mellgard are the Associate Editors of The WorldPost. Suzanne Gaber is the Editorial Assistant of The WorldPost. Katie Nelson is News Director at The Huffington Post, overseeing The WorldPost and HuffPost’s news coverage. Nick Robins-Early and Jesselyn Cook are World Reporters. Rowaida Abdelaziz is World Social Media Editor.   EDITORIAL BOARD: Nicolas Berggruen, Nathan Gardels, Arianna Huffington, Eric Schmidt (Google Inc.), Pierre Omidyar (First Look Media), Juan Luis Cebrian (El Pais/PRISA), Walter Isaacson (Aspen Institute/TIME-CNN), John Elkann (Corriere della Sera, La Stampa), Wadah Khanfar (Al Jazeera), Dileep Padgaonkar (Times of India) and Yoichi Funabashi (Asahi Shimbun). VICE PRESIDENT OF OPERATIONS: Dawn Nakagawa. CONTRIBUTING EDITORS: Moises Naim (former editor of Foreign Policy), Nayan Chanda (Yale/Global; Far Eastern Economic Review) and Katherine Keating (One-On-One). Sergio Munoz Bata and Parag Khannaare Contributing Editors-At-Large. The Asia Society and its ChinaFile, edited by Orville Schell, is our primary partner on Asia coverage. Eric X. Li and the Chunqiu Institute/Fudan University in Shanghai and Guancha.cn also provide first person voices from China. We also draw on the content of China Digital Times. Seung-yoon Lee is The WorldPost link in South Korea. Jared Cohen of Google Ideas provides regular commentary from young thinkers, leaders and activists around the globe. Bruce Mau provides regular columns from MassiveChangeNetwork.com on the “whole mind” way of thinking. Patrick Soon-Shiong is Contributing Editor for Health and Medicine. ADVISORY COUNCIL: Members of the Berggruen Institute’s 21st Century Council and Council for the Future of Europe serve as theAdvisory Council — as well as regular contributors — to the site. These include, Jacques Attali, Shaukat Aziz, Gordon Brown, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Juan Luis Cebrian, Jack Dorsey, Mohamed El-Erian, Francis Fukuyama, Felipe Gonzalez, John Gray, Reid Hoffman, Fred Hu, Mo Ibrahim, Alexei Kudrin, Pascal Lamy, Kishore Mahbubani, Alain Minc, Dambisa Moyo, Laura Tyson, Elon Musk, Pierre Omidyar, Raghuram Rajan, Nouriel Roubini, Nicolas Sarkozy, Eric Schmidt, Gerhard Schroeder, Peter Schwartz, Amartya Sen, Jeff Skoll, Michael Spence, Joe Stiglitz, Larry Summers, Wu Jianmin, George Yeo, Fareed Zakaria, Ernesto Zedillo, Ahmed Zewail and Zheng Bijian. From the Europe group, these include: Marek Belka, Tony Blair, Jacques Delors, Niall Ferguson, Anthony Giddens, Otmar Issing, Mario Monti, Robert Mundell, Peter Sutherland and Guy Verhofstadt. MISSION STATEMENT The WorldPost is a global media bridge that seeks to connect the world and connect the dots. Gathering together top editors and first person contributors from all corners of the planet, we aspire to be the one publication where the whole world meets. We not only deliver breaking news from the best sources with original reportage on the ground and user-generated content; we bring the best minds and most authoritative as well as fresh and new voices together to make sense of events from a global perspective looking around, not a national perspective looking out. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

21 января, 02:09

Weekend Roundup: Inauguration Into The Unknown

This week a whole nation was inaugurated into the unknown. We don’t know what Donald Trump will do once in the White House. But we do know how he got there. Everyone of good faith must hope that the new president will succeed in his promised aim of lifting up the left behind, which the political establishment he ousted could not do. Yet, anyone with the slightest sense of history must also worry how his path to power will define what he does with it. The debasement of the democratic discourse introduced during Trump’s election campaign and since has already inflicted damage that cannot be easily undone. The level of xenophobic demonization of the world outside and enemies within, like his impulsive invective unleashed against even marginal critics, has been unprecedented for any presidential candidate in memory. Perhaps most dangerously, his effort to delegitimize any media, and even denigrate official intelligence agencies, that won’t play along with his fast and loose use of facts or distortion of reality aims to make all information suspect. In this Orwellian universe, truth then becomes only what the self-anointed tribune of the people, speaking on their behalf, declares it is. Fortunately, the Trump electoral mandate fell far short of a majority in a country that has a more diverse and pluralistic civil society than other times and places (such as 20th century Europe) where demagogues have risen to power. Robust cultural resistance will be part and parcel of the Trump years. Whole swaths of the nation, even entire states like California, will stand up and push back. Several polls already show that there is more popular opposition than support for Trump as he enters office. Outside the U.S., concerns abound over what the new president will do next. Angst is probably the greatest south of the border, in Mexico. In grappling with Trump, Sergio Muñoz Bata advises Mexico to look back to its proud history of standing up to the “colossus of the north.” James Zogby predicts that if Trump follows through on his promise to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, it “would ignite a spark that would set the region aflame.” Writing from Australia, Helen Clark says the possibility of an American retreat from Asia and rising tensions in the South China Sea are putting the region on edge. Nick Robins-Early interviews an independent Russian journalist who says Russian media coverage of Trump is so sympathetic, “it’s getting bizarre.” Peter Wittig, German ambassador to the U.S., asserts that we need a robust transatlantic alliance more than ever to counter terrorism, deal with Russia and create growth and jobs.  Within the U.S., Juan Escalante, an undocumented immigrant, lays out his emergency plan in case the Trump administration tries to deport his family. A Pakistani Muslim immigrant whose visa is up for renewal this summer, Mahira Tiwana tells us that despite feeling “other” in Trump’s America, she is not ready to give up on the “American dream” yet. Sina Toossi worries that Iranian-Americans will lose the voice they gained under Obama and that the Iran nuclear deal will be dismantled, worsening U.S. relations with Iran. Richard Eskow addresses Americans who voted for Trump because they felt left behind, saying Trump will let them down and that then, the working class should create a “grand alliance,” as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. advocated. Filmmaker Ethan Coen pens a Dr. Seuss-style poem about Trump, saying, “He’ll change some people used to say / Calm down after Election Day / But Putin and the KKK knew / Trumpet always be that way.” Jon Deutsch suggests the plus side of a Trump presidency could be the disruption of a political system that is long overdue for reform. Ivan Eland argues the U.S. intelligence community ― comprised of 17 huge agencies that don’t communicate effectively ― needs a shake-up, and Trump― who criticized intelligence officials after the release of reports about Russians hacking the election ― may make it happen. Howard Fineman reflects on Obama’s legacy, maintaining that his presidency worked “moderately well in domestic affairs, less well in the world ... is likely to be regarded more as transitional than transformative ... and ... feels oddly more like the end of an era than the beginning of the one he promised.” As Obama and his world order said goodbye, this week also saw China’s President Xi Jinping looking to fill a global power gap. Xi became the first Chinese president to attend the World Economic Forum in Davos, and he gave a speech with strong messages on globalization and climate change. Jane Cai and Frank Tang responded to his presence at the summit, writing, “With choking smog, a weakening currency and a widening wealth gap at home and a fragmented global capitalist system abroad, President Xi Jinping is determined to take advantage of an elite forum to assure the world that China is doing fine and is ready to help pull the world together.” From Beijing, Akshay Shah and Carole Bernard paint another picture, sharing charts they made using new data that show warning signs that China could be headed for a financial crisis. In a WorldPost feature, Danielle Mackey reports from San Salvador that a U.S. program meant to help Central American refugees is leaving most in danger. Saskia Sassen contends global firms and local elites who take land from farmers are partly to blame for skyrocketing violence in Central America. Edward Alden explains why, if Trump wants good jobs and investment, he needs to shape rules for foreign investment competition to avoid a race to the bottom in wage, consumer and environmental standards. From Helsinki, Heikki Hiilamo explores the potential of Finland’s new program testing out basic income for unemployed citizens. “As the world begins to see the impacts of globalized society with the elections of new leaders ― including Mr. Trump ―” he writes, “the answer to the fears of declining economies may just be a basic income system.” Finally, our Singularity series this week looks at how cellular reprogramming boosted the lifespan of mice by 30 percent. WHO WE ARE   EDITORS: Nathan Gardels, Co-Founder and Executive Advisor to the Berggruen Institute, is the Editor-in-Chief of The WorldPost. Kathleen Miles is the Executive Editor of The WorldPost. Farah Mohamed is the Managing Editor of The WorldPost. Alex Gardels and Peter Mellgard are the Associate Editors of The WorldPost. Suzanne Gaber is the Editorial Assistant of The WorldPost. Katie Nelson is News Director at The Huffington Post, overseeing The WorldPost and HuffPost’s news coverage. Nick Robins-Early and Jesselyn Cook are World Reporters. Rowaida Abdelaziz is World Social Media Editor.   EDITORIAL BOARD: Nicolas Berggruen, Nathan Gardels, Arianna Huffington, Eric Schmidt (Google Inc.), Pierre Omidyar (First Look Media), Juan Luis Cebrian (El Pais/PRISA), Walter Isaacson (Aspen Institute/TIME-CNN), John Elkann (Corriere della Sera, La Stampa), Wadah Khanfar (Al Jazeera), Dileep Padgaonkar (Times of India) and Yoichi Funabashi (Asahi Shimbun). VICE PRESIDENT OF OPERATIONS: Dawn Nakagawa. CONTRIBUTING EDITORS: Moises Naim (former editor of Foreign Policy), Nayan Chanda (Yale/Global; Far Eastern Economic Review) and Katherine Keating (One-On-One). Sergio Munoz Bata and Parag Khannaare Contributing Editors-At-Large. The Asia Society and its ChinaFile, edited by Orville Schell, is our primary partner on Asia coverage. Eric X. Li and the Chunqiu Institute/Fudan University in Shanghai and Guancha.cn also provide first person voices from China. We also draw on the content of China Digital Times. Seung-yoon Lee is The WorldPost link in South Korea. Jared Cohen of Google Ideas provides regular commentary from young thinkers, leaders and activists around the globe. Bruce Mau provides regular columns from MassiveChangeNetwork.com on the “whole mind” way of thinking. Patrick Soon-Shiong is Contributing Editor for Health and Medicine. ADVISORY COUNCIL: Members of the Berggruen Institute’s 21st Century Council and Council for the Future of Europe serve as theAdvisory Council — as well as regular contributors — to the site. These include, Jacques Attali, Shaukat Aziz, Gordon Brown, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Juan Luis Cebrian, Jack Dorsey, Mohamed El-Erian, Francis Fukuyama, Felipe Gonzalez, John Gray, Reid Hoffman, Fred Hu, Mo Ibrahim, Alexei Kudrin, Pascal Lamy, Kishore Mahbubani, Alain Minc, Dambisa Moyo, Laura Tyson, Elon Musk, Pierre Omidyar, Raghuram Rajan, Nouriel Roubini, Nicolas Sarkozy, Eric Schmidt, Gerhard Schroeder, Peter Schwartz, Amartya Sen, Jeff Skoll, Michael Spence, Joe Stiglitz, Larry Summers, Wu Jianmin, George Yeo, Fareed Zakaria, Ernesto Zedillo, Ahmed Zewail and Zheng Bijian. From the Europe group, these include: Marek Belka, Tony Blair, Jacques Delors, Niall Ferguson, Anthony Giddens, Otmar Issing, Mario Monti, Robert Mundell, Peter Sutherland and Guy Verhofstadt. MISSION STATEMENT The WorldPost is a global media bridge that seeks to connect the world and connect the dots. Gathering together top editors and first person contributors from all corners of the planet, we aspire to be the one publication where the whole world meets. We not only deliver breaking news from the best sources with original reportage on the ground and user-generated content; we bring the best minds and most authoritative as well as fresh and new voices together to make sense of events from a global perspective looking around, not a national perspective looking out. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

21 января, 02:06

HUFFPOST HILL - Welp.

Like what you read below? Sign up for HUFFPOST HILL and get a cheeky dose of political news every evening! Donald Trump’s inauguration was sparsely attended and marred by rain, but we hear the dress shops were absolutely swamped. In an alternate universe, we would all be chatting about how stupid Katy Perry’s rendition of “Battle Hymn of the Republic” was at Hillary’s inaugural ― but instead we’re just here hoarding canned beans. And protesters tore up the downtown of one of the most liberal cities in the country. They’ll presumably be trashing Ed Begley Jr.’s Prius next. This is HUFFPOST HILL for Friday, January 20, 2017: GULP - Donald Trump was sworn in as president and ― fun fact! ― we all might die. S.V. Date: “The nation’s 45th president promised Friday to put ‘America first’ in all aspects of his administration, painting a dark picture of ‘American carnage’ in an inaugural address that borrowed heavily from his stump speech. ‘We assembled here today are issuing a new decree to be heard in every city, in every foreign capital and in every hall of power,’ President Donald Trump said in his 16-minute speech, delivered from the steps of the U.S. Capitol under gray skies and through light rain. ‘From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land. From this day forward, it’s going to be only America first. America first.’ Inaugural addresses often attempt to cleave to a unifying theme that brings the country together. But Trump, as he has largely done since his victory in the 2016 election, instead continued with the ideas he pushed during his campaign: that the nation’s leaders have ignored its people, the military has been weakened and bad trade policies have stolen America’s wealth.” [HuffPost] 98-1: @jessicaschulb: Gen. James Mattis, out of uniform for 3.5 years, confirmed as Defense Secretary Wow, George Will really did not like President Trump’s inaugural address. TRUMP SCREWS HOMEOWNERS MINUTES INTO PRESIDENCY - We don’t know what we’re going to do with our airboats now that the swamp is drained. Ben Walsh and Paul Blumenthal: “With one of his first orders, President Donald Trump made it more expensive for working- and middle-class Americans to buy their first homes. The move will increase costs for 750,000 to 850,000 Americans in the next year alone, according to the National Association of Realtors...The reversal of the reduction will mean that homebuyers who borrow $200,000 under the program will see their mortgage insurance fees go up by $500 a year relative to what the Obama administration had ordered, according to figures released by the FHA when the cut was announced. The reduction was intended to help partially offset the cost of rising mortgage rates and was scheduled to go into effect on Jan. 27. The government sells the insurance in case borrowers default. The mortgage industry’s main lobby group said when the cut was announced that it looked forward to working with the new administration on the issue. Congressional Republicans attacked the move, saying it would cut into the reserves the FHA held against defaults.” [HuffPost] That whole bit was awkward: “Trump signed a law passed by Congress granting a waiver allowing retired Marine Gen. James Mattis to serve as secretary of Defense. He also signed documents making his Cabinet nominees official, and a document proclaiming a national day of patriotism...The president also signed the nomination for Rex Tillerson, joking he hoped his choice for secretary of State had already been confirmed. ‘This was for Rex,’ he said of the former Exxon Mobil Corp. CEO. ‘I’m assuming he was approved today?’ ‘It’s coming through — right Chuck?’ Ryan asked Schumer to laughter. Schumer later responded ‘not that one, no thank you,’ when Ryan tried gifting him a pen used to formally nominate Betsy DeVos as Trump’s Education secretary.” [The Hill’s Mark Hensch] ‘AMERICA FIRST’ IS GREAT... - ...for talking about the Jewish Question, that is. Nick Bauman: “During Donald Trump’s campaign for president, the Anti-Defamation League, a nonprofit dedicated to fighting anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry, asked him to stop using the phrase ‘America First’ to describe his foreign policy views. As the ADL explained, the slogan was used by people who warned, ahead of World War II, that Jewish Americans were pushing the U.S. to enter the war because they put their own interests ahead of the country’s. But Trump never stopped using the slogan. And on Friday, he made it a key part of his inaugural address. ‘From this day forward,’ he proclaimed, ‘A new vision will govern our land. From this moment on, it’s going to be America First.’ The crowd went wild. People who aren’t Jewish or familiar with the history may not realize this, but ‘America First’ makes many people deeply uncomfortable. In 1941, as members of the America First movement campaigned against U.S. involvement in World War II and expressed sympathy for the Nazis, plenty of people already knew that Jews were being persecuted in Hitler’s Germany. Even Charles Lindbergh, the famous aviator who led the America First movement, knew it.” [HuffPost] MOY-CHENDIZING! MOY-CHENDIZING! - Once again, allow us to voice our disappointment with the lack of t-shirt cannons. Rosalind S. Helderman: “On his first day in office, President Trump declared on the White House website that he would roll back a clean water rule that has been opposed as bad-for-business by a coalition that included his own golf courses. He also effectively became his own landlord at his Washington hotel, which his company rents from the federal government despite a lease that forbids benefits going to any elected official. And in his official biography on the White House website, Trump bragged of the success of the business he still owns and his book, The Art of the Deal, which remains for sale. Likewise, First Lady Melania Trump’s biography noted that her jewelry line is for sale on the television channel QVC and notes it is trademarked, a registration now overseen by a trademark office led by her husband. Trump’s first day as president was full of reminders that his administration will be entangled with his personal interests in a way unprecedented in presidential politics.” [WaPo] Like HuffPost Hill? Then order Eliot’s new book, The Beltway Bible: A Totally Serious A-Z Guide To Our No-Good, Corrupt, Incompetent, Terrible, Depressing, and Sometimes Hilarious Government Does somebody keep forwarding you this newsletter? Get your own copy. It’s free! Sign up here. Send tips/stories/photos/events/fundraisers/job movement/juicy miscellanea to [email protected] Follow us on Twitter - @HuffPostHill HMMMM, WONDER IF THIS WILL GO AWAY NOW - Besides, who needs a fully staffed FBI when you have the FSB, y’know? “American law enforcement and intelligence agencies are examining intercepted communications and financial transactions as part of a broad investigation into possible links between Russian officials and associates of President-elect Donald J. Trump, including his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, current and former senior American officials said. The continuing counterintelligence investigation means that Mr. Trump will take the oath of office on Friday with his associates under investigation and after the intelligence agencies concluded that the Russian government had worked to help elect him. As president, Mr. Trump will oversee those agencies and have the authority to redirect or stop at least some of these efforts. It is not clear whether the intercepted communications had anything to do with Mr. Trump’s campaign, or Mr. Trump himself. It is also unclear whether the inquiry has anything to do with an investigation into the hacking of the Democratic National Committee’s computers and other attempts to disrupt the elections in November. The American government has concluded that the Russian government was responsible for a broad computer hacking campaign, including the operation against the D.N.C.” [NYT] TRUMP’S SPEECH SPOOKS WALL STREET - Ben White: “Wall Street did not exactly celebrate President Donald Trump’s deeply populist inaugural address on Friday, with the stock market losing some of its early gains as the 45th president spoke darkly of ‘American carnage’ and promised a new era of trade protectionism. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose about 100 points before Trump took the oath of office but began slipping as the new president promised to protect the country from foreign trade. That was a signal to investors that harsh rhetoric from the campaign trail could soon be policy reality…’Overall, that was a more protectionist and nationalist speech than I expected,’ said Megan Greene, chief economist at Manulife Asset Management. ‘Rather than unifying the country after one of the most divisive elections in U.S. history, he highlighted how bad things are in the U.S. economy and engaged in scaremongering, which was consistent with his campaign.’” [Politico] GODDAMNIT, ANARCHISTS - Those trash cans had families! Jessica Gresko, Michael Biesecker and Jeff Horwitz: “Protesters registered their rage against the new president Friday in a chaotic confrontation with police who used pepper spray and stun grenades in a melee just blocks from Donald Trump’s inaugural parade. Scores were arrested for trashing property and attacking officers while a burning limousine sent clouds of black smoke into the sky during Trump’s procession. Several spirited demonstrations unfolded peacefully at various security checkpoints near the Capitol as police helped ticket-holders get through to the inaugural ceremony. Signs read, ‘Resist Trump Climate Justice Now,’ ‘Let Freedom Ring,’ ‘Free Palestine.’ But about a mile from the National Mall, police gave chase to a group of about 100 protesters who smashed the windows of downtown businesses including a Starbucks, a Bank of America and a McDonald’s as they denounced capitalism and Trump. Police in riot gear used pepper spray from large canisters and eventually cordoned off protesters at 12th and L streets in northwest Washington.” [AP] BECAUSE YOU’VE READ THIS FAR - Here’s a dog comforting a small child. THAT TIME ‘QVC’ SNUCK INTO THE WHITE HOUSE’S WEBSITE - But when will the East Room be used to film a Slap Chop infomercial? Kelsey Snell: “Visitors to the newly revamped White House website get more than a simple rundown of first lady Melania Trump’s charitable works and interests — they also get a list of her magazine cover appearances and details on her jewelry line at QVC. Trump’s biography starts with traditional details such as her date of birth in her native country of Slovenia and information about her background as a model. That’s when the brief backgrounder takes a promotional turn. The website includes a lengthy list of brands that hired her as a model and several of the magazines in which she appeared, including the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue. It is not uncommon for the White House to note the accomplishments of the first lady in her official biography, but Trump’s decision to include a detailed list of her media appearances is unusual. The site also lists the brand names of Trump’s jewelry lines sold on QVC, at a time when questions have been raised by critics about the ethical implications of the family’s business entanglements. ‘Melania is also a successful entrepreneur. In April 2010, Melania Trump launched her own jewelry collection, ‘Melania™ Timepieces & Jewelry,’ on QVC,” the site reads.” [WaPo] COMFORT FOOD - Wow, Bill Withers had some lungs. - 2016 wasn’t just awful, it stunk. - What happens to your body when you die in space? A good primer for those of you thinking about hurling yourself into the ether. TWITTERAMA @aparnapkin: You know Donald Trump chair-dancing to Three Doors Down was def. something Nostradamus foresaw, but was like “No way I’m writing that down.” @HayesBrown: 12:01 PM OBAMA: [lights the fattest blunt of his entire life] @daveweigel: Flawless anarchist plan:1) Break windows in 94% Dem city2) …3) Overthrow capitalism Got something to add? Send tips/quotes/stories/photos/events/fundraisers/job movement/juicy miscellanea to Eliot Nelson ([email protected]) -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

21 января, 01:40

Trump's Great Betrayal

Legitimate or not, Donald Trump is President. His public support - under 40% -- is unprecedentedly weak. Even George W. Bush, after being elected by the Supreme Court, had inaugural approval of 62%. The crowd on the Mall for his inauguration was sparse; its applause tepid. (Compare Obama's Inaugural crowd on left with Trump's on the right below. All that white.) The speech itself - dark, nationalistic, and pugnacious - signaled that on trade and foreign policy, Trump will break the existing Republican mold. His appointments in that realm are compatible with the proclaimed vision of "America First," and the idea of "Buy America and Hire America." But other parts of the speech, and the rest of the Trump Transition, make clear that on jobs and middle-class prosperity Trump's Great Betrayal of his own voters has begun (His first economic policy change: raise mortgage rates for the poor.) The candidate who tried to make Hillary Clinton's paid speechifying to Wall Street an almost impeachable expense has now given the banking community four Cabinet slots. Goldman Sachs alone got three. Trump's most plausible promise to restore blue collar jobs and wages, his pledge to bring America's infrastructure up to global standards, "second to none" has now been put a distant back burner. Chief of Staff Reince Prebius said it certainly wouldn't come up in the first nine months. Trump conceded it wouldn't be a core issue "in the first few years" of his Administration. As candidate, Trump promised that he would bring back those coal mining and manufacturing jobs that were vanishing during the Recession. Now the coal industry concedes that repealing Barack Obama's environmental regulations will do nothing for Appalachian coal miners. When coal state advocates tried to guarantee continued health care benefits for miners, Republicans in Congress blocked them - Trump didn't lift a finger. Trump's first intervention to bring manufacturing jobs back - getting Carrier to keep in the US a plant slated to move to Mexico - came with a hidden poison pill, subsidies that Carrier will use to automate the plants and the eliminate the jobs anyway! The man who promised he would be good for average Americans because he was different than other Republicans has appointed a cabinet that embraces the entire conservative assault on the middle class. After pledging to safeguard Social Security or Medicare, Trump appointed a strong advocate of slashing both to run them. Congressional Republicans promptly revived their classic proposals to shred the senior safety net of Trump's senior supporters. On the campaign trail Trump defended Planned Parenthood's broad health services for women: "So you can say whatever you want, but they have millions of women going through Planned Parenthood that are helped greatly." Tom Price, his Health and Human Services nominee seems determined to eliminate not only funding for Planned Parenthood but guarantees for contraceptive access through any provider. Trump pledged that his replacement for the Affordable Care Act would "broaden healthcare access, make healthcare more affordable and improve the quality of the care available to all Americans." Price is the author of proposals that would do none of those three. Trump is still claiming that he will be a fierce advocate for clean air and water; that under his Administration a scandal like Flint "would not have happened." His chosen EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt, has made a career of attacking regulations to protect the public from pollutants like mercury and ozone, or to protect even his own state's waterways from pollution by out of state poultry interests. Pruitt attacks the very idea of strong national health standards for air and water for every American as "one sized fits all" federal overreach. It's not unusual for new Presidents to eventually discover that some of their campaign promises can't be honored - or that the political price is too high. Bill Clinton didn't strengthen fuel economy standards for Detroit. George W. Bush didn't clean up dirty power plants. Barack Obama didn't renegotiate NAFTA, or close Guantanamo. But such retreats usually happen after the Inauguration, and slowly, as the depth of the opposition to campaign pledges emerges. Most new Presidents try hard to live up to their promises. Never to my knowledge has an American President simply walked away, wholesale, from such a huge swathe of his campaign pledges by appointing a cabinet whose core instincts appear to be so deeply at odds with the core of his candidacy. Indeed, there are strong suggestions that Trump is drifting towards a new, quasi-parliamentary form of American governance, in which the President sets the tone and rhetoric, and runs foreign policy, while the Vice-President, Cabinet and Congress manage the domestic compass under cover of the President's presumed popularity. The most important Trump supporters - the true "swing" voters in today's electorate - are those who supported Obama in 2009, and turned to Trump this year. These voters rejected Hilary Clinton, but also rejected Republican alternatives, candidates like Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush, with their tired combination of fealty to plutocrats and patriarchal social values. For these swing voters, the news is already very, very bad. The very Republicanism they rejected, and that Donald Trump mocked, is back in the saddle in Washington - beginning its work before Trump had even taken the oath of office. Sadly, the majority of Americans, who rejected both extreme Republican reaction and reckless Trumpism now face a horrifying and even worse combination. From the cabinet and in congress conservatives will mount a massive assault on the progress of the last seventy years, while authoritarian nationalism and a "you're fired" management philosophy dominate Trump's White House. Most of us - and it is most of us - now face a double challenge. We must craft effective resistance to the threats posed by Trumpism mashed up with Cruzism, while (more challengingly) understanding how progressives let so many Americans down so badly that Trump and the Republicans could win, and what must be done to remedy that deeper catastrophe. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

21 января, 01:02

Trump’s Declaration of War

Trump’s Declaration of War Paul Craig Roberts President Trump’s brief inaugural speech was a declaration of war against the entirety of the American Ruling Establishment. All of it. Trump made it abundantly clear that Americans’ enemies are right here at home: globalists, neoliberal economists, neoconservatives and other unilateralists accustomed to imposing the US on the… The post Trump’s Declaration of War appeared first on PaulCraigRoberts.org.

21 января, 00:29

Спор о Трампе

Два моих постоянных соавтора - наверное, неудивительно, я считаю обоих выдающимися учёными - вступили в небольшой спор, в переписке, по поводу Трампа. Дарон Асемоглу из MIT, титан экономической науки, сравнимым с Рикардо, Фишером, Эрроу, Фридманом, Майерсоном (это не весь мой пантеон, но близко), один из основателей современной политической экономики (можно прочесть WNF, можно - работы, на которых основана книжка), тревожится за то, что произойдёт с Америкой в результате избрания Трампа. В колонке для Foreign Policy Дарон формулирует основную проблему - американские институты, обеспечивших уникальную устойчивость политической системы на протяжении двух с лишним столетий, не выглядят надёжной гарантией против "популиста", ситуации, когда к власти лидер приходит демократическим путём, а потом разрушает систему, оставаясь у власти дольше своего срока. Несколько таких примеров лежат на поверхности - в Германии, Аргентине, на Филиппинах, Доминиканской республике, Турции, России и многих других странах лидеры приходили к власти на выборах, а потом удерживали её недемократическим путём, разрушив те институты, которые привели их к власти. На протяжении тех же столетий федеральное устройство, при котором правительства штатов мало зависят от столицы, защищала американцев от захвата власти в центре, но сейчас, в период исторически высокой поляризации в двухпартийной системе, эта защита работает плохо.Мой другой соавтор, Георгий Егоров из NWU, возражает, отвечая на колонку в Foreign Policy. С разрешения Егора, я кратко перескажу его контраргументы. Почему невелики шансы того, что Трамп станет диктатором? Во-первых, Трамп стар (ему будет 74 года во время следующей кампании), президентство - это огромное напряжение и хорошо, если он дотянет до переизбрания. Во-вторых, Трамп крайне непопулярен для нового президента (впрочем, Нейт Кон правильно замечает, что, возможно, стандартные меры популярности к нему плохо прилагаются). Большинство американцев предпочли видеть Хиллари Клинтон, кандидата от демократов, президентом. В такой ситуации трудно совершить радикальные изменения, необходимые для перехода к режиму личной власти. В-третьих, он ещё менее популярен среди республиканцев, которые контролируют обе палаты Конгресса и большую законодательных собраний в штатах - они не согласны с большей частью того, что он собирается сделать. А в той части, в чём есть согласие - снижение налогов, например - мало возможностей для популизма. Непонятно, как можно в такой ситуации серьёзно ослабить институты и укрепить личную власть.Моя собственная позиция ближе к позиции Егора, чем Дарона - не исключено, что Берлускони, миллиардер без опыта госуправления, но с уникальным даром общения со "средним итальянцем" - это куда более подходящий аналог для Трампа, чем Гитлер, Маркос или Трухильо. Конечно, Берлускони нанёс немало вреда итальянцам и их политической системе - после сорока лет "итальянского чуда" (сорока лет быстрого роста после Второй мировой), Италия вступила в двадцать лет стагнации, которые так пока и не кончились. Впрочем, возможно, Берлускони был симптомом итальянских проблем, а не причиной. Тогда последствием избрания Трампа станет большая коррумпированность американской политики, стагнация и, наверное, размывание норм поведения во время избирательных кампаний. Ничего страшного. Или Трамп окажется чем-то вроде Джимми Картера, президента США в 1976-80, которого вынесла вверх волна нелюбви к "истеблишмента", которые тоже был избран против воли лидеров его собственной партии (и которая тоже контролировала Конгресса). Четыре года проблем, неудовлетворенности граждан и проигрыш, и всё. Или, может, Трамп окажется чем-то типа Обамы, у которого опыт государственного управления тоже был невелик - и ничего, получилось исключительно успешно.

20 января, 23:52

Foreign policy experts fret over Trump's America First approach

Trump’s inaugural address downgrades the value of America’s global leadership and traditional alliances.

20 января, 23:00

Trump's Uneasy Gamble

The 45th President’s inaugural address encapsulated the risky gamble the Republican Party is taking on his combative approach.

Выбор редакции
20 января, 22:51

Trump admin targets violent Islamist groups as foreign policy priority

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Trump administration will make defeating "radical Islamic terror groups" its top foreign policy goal, according to a statement posted on the White House website moments after Donald Trump's inauguration as U.S. president.

Выбор редакции
20 января, 22:51

Trump admin targets violent Islamist groups as foreign policy priority

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Trump administration will make defeating "radical Islamic terror groups" its top foreign policy goal, according to a statement posted on the White House website moments after Donald Trump's inauguration as U.S. president.

20 января, 22:37

Why Donald Trump's Inaugural Address Matters

Daniel McCarthy Politics, Throughout his time as a candidate and now in his first remarks as president, Trump has drawn a new map of politics. No other inaugural address, it’s safe to say, has ever drawn Donald Trump’s contrast between “American carnage” and American greatness. His speech was nothing like the polished, soothing, and rather nebulous talk the public has been accustomed to hearing from victorious politicians. Trump was not celebrating; he was readying the country for war. Specifically, a class war—not along Marxist lines but instead nationalist ones, with citizens exhorted to buy American and hire American, to put “America first” in everything from commerce to foreign policy. Trump also departed from the language of global hegemony that has marked inaugural addresses and presidential statements since the end of the Cold War. With echoes of an older U.S. strategic outlook—that of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and John Quincy Adams—Trump said, “We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world, but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first.” And without explicitly alluding to a “shining city on a hill,” Trump restored the metaphor’s original meaning: “We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example.” Trump’s words don’t bear comparison with the eloquence of Washington or Jefferson, of course, but it was a very good speech, vastly superior to vapid pretentiousness of most recent presidential rhetoric. What Trump has done is to establish a new tier in the history of inaugural addresses. The classic phase that lasted from the Founders until Lincoln won’t be matched, and the grand rhetoric of Cold War presidents like Kennedy and Reagan, lofty yet credible, is likewise a thing of the past. After Reagan, inaugural addresses became parodies of what they had been in the decades when America was tested by world wars and superpower rivalry. The speechwriters were skilled, but their words rang false. Trump’s words rang true, at least as an expression—clear and forceful—of how the president and his voters see the state of country. Even Trump’s critics should appreciate the clarity of his words and their import. Throughout his time as a candidate and now in his first remarks as president, Trump has drawn a new map of politics. That map needs be used to navigate only in the direction that Trump wishes to go. Certainly Bernie Sanders and other class warriors of the left could try to appropriate Trump’s appeal to national solidarity. Read full article

20 января, 22:17

America First Begins

Jacob Heilbrunn Politics, Donald J. Trump takes the helm. What happens now?  Consistent with his penchant for rebelling against the conventional rules, Donald Trump delivered more of a campaign speech than a traditional inaugural address. There were no paeans to American democracy or freedoms in his address. He didn’t quote any of the Founding Fathers or previous presidents. There was no attempt to reach out to his adversaries or bind the nation together. Instead, he came out swinging as he said, “This carnage stops right here and stops right now” and the “time for empty talk is over.” Such language will thrill his supporters and horrify his detractors, which is what he wanted. Trump delivered, in pungent, even lacerating, tones, the message that he intends to stick to the themes that he enunciated during the race for the presidency. It wasn’t Trump as peacemaker but revolutionary. His themes weren’t conservative but populist. Positioning himself as a new Andrew Jackson, he poured scorn on elites and said it was time for the American people to “rule” Washington. He wants it always to be America, to borrow from the title of an essay that Patrick J. Buchanan wrote in the National Interest after the end of the cold war, first, second—and last. Nothing else matters. Unlike Buchanan, who made an abortive run for the presidency in 1992, Trump succeeded in riding the populist tiger to the White House. Now he made it clear that he’s not dismounting. For both George W. Bush and Barack Obama his remarks probably came as a jolt even if they were familiar with the substance. He administered what amounted to a tongue-lashing to his predecessors. The only area in which Trump stuck to the rodomontade of past administrations was in claiming that he would “eradicate” radical Islam. This was as lofty a claim as Bush’s promise to “defeat the evildoers.” Of course it will never happen. This kind of apocalyptic rhetoric has less to today with foreign policy than Sunday school lectures. Read full article

20 января, 21:41

New President Trump Offers Same Dark Vision Of America

WASHINGTON ― The nation’s 45th president promised Friday to put “America first” in all aspects of his administration, painting a dark picture of “American carnage” in an inaugural address that borrowed heavily from his stump speech. “We assembled here today are issuing a new decree to be heard in every city, in every foreign capital and in every hall of power,” President Donald Trump said in his 16-minute speech, delivered from the steps of the U.S. Capitol under gray skies and through light rain. “From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land. From this day forward, it’s going to be only America first. America first.” Inaugural addresses often attempt to cleave to a unifying theme that brings the country together. But Trump, as he has largely done since his victory in the 2016 election, instead continued with the ideas he pushed during his campaign: that the nation’s leaders have ignored its people, the military has been weakened and bad trade policies have stolen America’s wealth. “One by one, the factories shuttered and left our shores with not even a thought about the millions and millions of American workers that were left behind,” Trump said. “The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes and then redistributed all across the world. But that is the past, and now we are looking only to the future.” Trump also continued with the idea he brought up late in his campaign that communities of color have been abandoned, particularly those in what he called “the inner cities.” “Mothers and children trapped in poverty in our inner cities. Rusted-out factories scattered like tombstones across the landscape of our nation. An education system flush with cash but which leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of all knowledge. And the crime and the gangs and the drugs that have stolen too many lives and robbed our country of so much unrealized potential,” Trump said. “This American carnage stops right here and stops right now. We are one nation, and their pain is our pain.” The speech was written by Trump personally, according to spokesman Sean Spicer, but it contained echoes of nationalist and almost authoritarian ideas favored by top advisers Steve Bannon and Steven Miller. “At the bedrock of our politics will be a total allegiance to the United States of America, and through our loyalty to our country, we will rediscover our loyalty to each other,” Trump said. “We must speak our minds openly, debate our disagreements honestly, but always pursue solidarity. When America is united, America is totally unstoppable.” As he had frequently during the campaign, Trump promised a foreign policy that turned inward ― “We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world, but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first” ― while pursuing a more aggressive policy against violent Muslim extremists: “We will reinforce old alliances and form new ones and unite the civilized world against radical Islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the face of the earth.” Trump closed his speech the same way he did most of his rallies. “Together we will make America strong again,” he said. “We will make America wealthy again. We will make America proud again. We will make America safe again. And, yes, together, we will make America great again. Thank you. God bless you and God bless America.” -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

20 января, 21:37

In His Inaugural Address, Donald Trump Embraced Anti-Semites' Slogan

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_1'),onPlayerReadyVidible); During Donald Trump’s campaign for president, the Anti-Defamation League, a nonprofit dedicated to fighting anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry, asked him to stop using the phrase “America First” to describe his foreign policy views. As the ADL explained, the slogan was used by people who warned, ahead of World War II, that Jewish Americans were pushing the U.S. to enter the war because they put their own interests ahead of the country’s. But Trump never stopped using the slogan. And on Friday, he made it a key part of his inaugural address. “From this day forward,” he proclaimed, “A new vision will govern our land. From this moment on, it’s going to be America First.” The crowd went wild. People who aren’t Jewish or familiar with the history may not realize this, but “America First” makes many people deeply uncomfortable. In 1941, as members of the America First movement campaigned against U.S. involvement in World War II and expressed sympathy for the Nazis, plenty of people already knew that Jews were being persecuted in Hitler’s Germany. Even Charles Lindbergh, the famous aviator who led the America First movement, knew it.  “It is not difficult to understand why Jewish people desire the overthrow of Nazi Germany,” Lindbergh said in Des Moines, Iowa, in September 1941. “The persecution they suffered in Germany would be sufficient to make bitter enemies of any race.” But Lindbergh blamed Jewish Americans for pushing the country towards war, and warned that tolerance of Jews in America could not “survive” war with Germany. The greatest danger to the U.S., he argued, came not from the Axis powers but in what he saw as Jewish “ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio and our government.” function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){'undefined'!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if('object'==typeof commercial_video){var a='',o='m.fwsitesection='+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video['package']){var c='&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D'+commercial_video['package'];a+=c}e.setAttribute('vdb_params',a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById('vidible_2'),onPlayerReadyVidible); This is dark stuff ― so dark it’s even inspired literature. Philip Roth, perhaps the most famous Jewish American writer, published The Plot Against America in 2004. The novel imagines an alternate U.S. history in which America First’s Lindbergh won the presidential election in 1940, defeating Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Things don’t go too well for the Jews after that. “How can people like these be in charge of our country? If I didn’t see it with my own eyes, I’d think I was having a hallucination,” Roth’s father says in the book. In real life, Lindbergh ― a celebrity who was at least as famous as Trump at a time when public anti-Semitism was far more acceptable than it is today ― actually faced some backlash for his speech, as The New Yorker’s Louisa Thomas noted in July: Anti-Semitism was prevalent in Lindberg’s time; his attitudes were not fringe. He had not made a secret of his interest in eugenics, nor his racial attitudes, which today seem reprehensible. But with that 1941 speech he seemed to cross a line. He was strongly and swiftly condemned for his anti-Semitic and divisive words—not only by interventionists who were opposed to America First but by those who had lionized him. The Des Moines Register called his speech “so intemperate, so unfair, so dangerous in its implications that it cannot but turn many spadefuls in the digging of the grave of his influence in this country.” The Hearst papers, which were generally sympathetic to the non-interventionists—and open about their hatred of Franklin Roosevelt—condemned Lindbergh, calling his speech “un-American.” His home town took his name off its water tower. Trump has received some similar criticism: “For many Americans, the term ‘America First’ will always be associated with and tainted by this history,” ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt warned last April. “In a political season that already has prompted a national conversation about civility and tolerance, choosing a call to action historically associated with incivility and intolerance seems ill-advised.” The new president doesn’t seem chastened. “To me, America First is a brand-new modern term,” he told The New York Times’ David Sanger in July. “I never related it to the past.” But the past has a way of catching up to you. David Duke, the Holocaust denier and former KKK leader who endorsed Trump and celebrated his ascension to power, has long been happy with the slogan (he used it in his campaign for U.S. Senate), and can hear the dog whistle loud and clear:  Great Trump Speech, America First! Stop Wars! Defeat the Corrupt elites! Protect our Borders!, Fair Trade! Couldn't have said it better!— David Duke (@DrDavidDuke) July 22, 2016 How will Trump’s first 100 days impact you? Sign up for our weekly newsletter to find out. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

20 января, 21:35

'America First': Donald Trump's Populist Inaugural Address

The new president borrowed from the bleak, fiery tone of his presidential campaign, but said his election represented the ascension of the people over politicians in Washington.

20 января, 21:01

Trump slaps campaign slogan on whitehouse.gov

The new version of the website now includes a splash page for collecting email addresses and Trump's biography.

20 января, 20:33

Is Silicon Valley Truly Libertarian? Is Politics Society's OS, Ripe For Disruption?

I heard it was you Talkin' 'bout a world Where all is free It just couldn't be And only a fool would say that - Steely Dan A hero is someone who understands the responsibility that comes with his freedom. - Bob Dylan Here's a ramble that's been hanging in my drafts for a while: Why do so many tech folks identify as libertarian? What do they mean? Is politics ripe for tech disruption? It's a brand new year, and all old posts must go! When I say libertarian, what gets me going is the person who, whenever something is messed up, thinks "OMG, if the government would step out of the way, a market solution would appear and work so much better!" ... Even for activities which historically have a strong government role, roads, schools, money and banking, safety standards, pollution, etc. I've written before about why I'm not a superfan of that strand of libertarianism. If you think this sort of immaculate, spontaneous order is a straw man, oh boy, just go to a Gary Johnson event and hear him questioned about whether it's OK for the state to issue drivers licenses and speeding tickets. Not to mention debates about whether the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a worse infringement on liberty than Jim Crow and segregation, or it's moral for the government to tax people to save them from an asteroid impact, or whether parents should have the legal right to not feed kids and let them die. And those thought experiments aren't anomalies, the libertarian scene is a hotbed of non-seriousness to downright kookiness. I like freedom as much or more than most. But the idea that freedom is, in and of itself, a sufficient condition for desirable outcomes for everything has never seemed a compelling, complete theory that can deal with public goods, coordination problems, financial stability, most of the things we consider economic policy. It just begs the question, it's the 'assume a can opener' of political ideologies. Once you give everyone freedom, you still have to design a market system and system of laws to solve social problems, define and assign property rights, decide what gets traded and how1. Policies are market designs. Markets are sophisticated mechanisms, complex social institutions that have highly co-evolved with economic and political frameworks. There is no such thing as a pure free market, just as there's no such thing as a pure human 'state of nature'. Free markets depend on laws, cultural norms, technology which are like David Foster Wallace's water. They may seem natural and invisible because we've internalized them...but try explaining them to an alien or an uncontacted Amazon tribe. Laissez-faire is not even wrong, it's not even a thing. Free markets are games within a game, they are institutions humans create to serve objectives, they have to obey natural laws but they don't exist in a social and cultural vacuum, they are intensely developed to be fit for purpose. And market designs involve values and choices. Freedom is not the only human value that matters. Policy involves difficult tradeoffs between freedom, some notion of effectiveness, and some notion of fairness. Here's a fancy graph! (3D version which seemed more logical but turned out pretty hard to read) That's my political science 'theory of everything'. (Inspired by Keynes) People organize to pursue their individual and group values2. They can choose to maximize different values. One universal value is freedom, or maximum power to the individual. Another universal value is fairness within the in-group according to some value system... each accorded status, power, material reward in accordance to their contribution and merit, with no one taking undue advantage of anyone else. Another value is 'efficiency', which is a catch-all for other possibly non-universal group values: economic efficiency and growth, national power and world supremacy, religious or sectarian values. Extreme pursuit of individual freedom leads to libertarianism. Extreme pursuit of fairness leads to communism. Extreme pursuit of narrow group values at the expense of freedom and fairness leads to fascism. Are tech types libertarian in that extreme sense of primarily maximizing freedom? Clearly not! The vast majority of Silicon Valley political contributions go to Democrats. A tiny sliver of CEOs identifies as Republican, sometimes keeps it secret, or wears it as a badge of contrarianism. Someone like Travis Kalanick used Ayn Rand as an avatar, but loves Obamacare, which lets gig-ers get healthcare without putting the onus on their employer/platform. The simplistic stereotype is that the tech elite are Randian technocrats who just want the government to get out of the way while they solve the big problems that confound the politicians, lobbyists, and bureaucrats, and make the world a better place. But I think the proper analogy is that Silicon Valley techies view government as code, the operating system that defines the operation of society...an operating system maybe overdue for disruption and a major upgrade. And Silicon Valley types think they know code, know complex systems, and are just the ones to do it. Let's explore the analogy between OS code and government a little. If you're not a coder type, skip ahead a bit. • Government defines rules between the people, corporations, the administrations, foreign policy. An operating system defines rules, protocols, APIs between the users, administrators, programs and processes, hardware, networking with other computers. • Government defines a market design that allocates public goods between competing interests. An operating system defines rules that allocate hardware (e.g. CPU time, peripherals) between different processes and users. • Like an operating system, you want government to have as small a footprint as possible, use as few resources as possible, and give users and developers maximum freedom to fully utilize all the computing resources at their disposal. • Like computers, economies have grown bigger, more powerful, and more complex. Both operating systems and governments have taken on greater roles over time. Add multiprocessing, now you need a good scheduler, memory protection. Add multi-user and networking, need much better permissioning and security. As systems get better and more complex, users expect more and more from the OS in terms of services, coordinating and scheduling complex tasks, security, supporting complex peripherals. So, as the system gets better, the percentage of work done by the OS vs. individual programs tends to grow, and the resources it uses grow as well. That's an essential paradox of operating systems and government. A better society is one where individuals are maximally empowered, and can also coordinate with others in complex ways. It's a hallmark of improving civilization to give more people access to a more complex network of interactions, because they are safe, they have good norms of behavior and trust each other, they have clear laws well enforced, they have access to basic services. The more complexity is supported, the better the society. More complexity and interaction tends to mean more complex laws and regulation, and more shared resources supported by government. That government is best which governs least, but as society grows more complex, the bar will tend to rise. • In code, you want to abstract problems into modules that solve parts of a problem well. In politics you have the concept of subsidiarity: national, state, local governments; solve every problem at the lowest level of government that can effectively deal with it.3 • The qualities that make good code are agreed upon...efficient use of resources, easy to use, simple to understand, easy to read and maintain. But code involves hard tradeoffs...fast, good, or cheap? Pick any two. What actually is good code is partly subjective. People get into religious wars about methodologies and languages...agile vs. extreme...functional vs. object-oriented, etc. • Premature optimization is the root of all evil. Government changes very slowly, tech changes very rapidly. So any optimization in government, i.e. writing really detailed regs applicable to the current state of technology and the economy, is generally a premature optimization. Therefore government is the root of all evil? Well anywhere there's something really wrong it's probably a government failure, by definition. But it's a catch-22, you don't optimize, government is bad; you optimize, and eventually you end up in an unplanned-for situation where the optimization makes things worse. Checks and balances slow things down. They're sort of like bias and variance. You want to tune your system so that it adapts to change...but if it responds too quickly you can get instability and overfitting. You want your government to respond to the people and to changing circumstances, but not pivot abruptly on every whim. Direct democracy can be a double-edged sword. Brexit, Proposition 134. • Sometimes you need to patch code pretty quickly and you accumulate technical debt, expedient solutions which need to be more carefully implemented later, or create maintenance and other problems in the long run. Hard cases make bad law...the solution that seems just in a complex case doesn't always generalize. You don't want to optimize code too much for the current use case, you need to be flexible. And you need laws that reflect universal principles. Sometimes worse is better...a simple, cheap solution everyone understands is better than a highly optimized, over-engineered one. The euro is the ultimate in political 'technical debt'. Build something that works today, even though it will need major re-engineering to be robust over the long term, and hope you can implement version 2 in time to avoid collapse. • As you add complexity, a well-designed system can iteratively get better and better. Up to a point. There comes a tipping point where it becomes impossible to maintain and iterate on. Sometimes you accumulate too much technical debt, or change is just too fast, and you need to start over from scratch. Security exploits, bugs multiply. The same may be true of society, the tree of liberty, etc. • Any computer system can get hacked. When you have a good market design, it's a good basis for powerful interaction and coordination. But all systems can be gamed and exploited. Unless people are mostly decent and bad actors are sanctioned, you can get moral hazard and a tragedy of the commons. • We don't write systems or build hardware in which the components are told, here's what we want to do, you guys work out the protocols5. APIs and protocols are specified in gory detail using things like RFCs. • You can write awful systems in any language, and you can write pretty good systems in any language. It's the same with ideologies. There are countries with moderately socialist orientations that work pretty well, and there are socialist countries which are disasters. There are countries with mostly market-oriented solutions that work pretty well, and there are free-market countries of weak-state and strong-state varieties which are disasters. Personally, I'll take Sweden over Pinochet's Chile. In my opinion there are no countries at the extremes of any axis that work well over a long period of time. Somalia, with no working government, is in some sense the apotheosis of small government and maximum private freedom, and not exactly paradise on earth. Ideologies are like development methodologies, people get pretty worked up about them, you need some methodology, but any reasonable methodology that isn't applied so strictly it gets in the way is probably OK, and having decent developers is more important than which methodology they use. If you're concerned about Obamacare trampling on liberties, and not about people unable to get care, being bankrupted, facing impossible choices and preventable deaths, you risk turning into an architecture astronaut caring more about buzzwords and ideological purity than actual solutions, outcomes, lives. The user wants code that works, and doesn't care about scrum or Ruby. Ultimately, I think the Silicon Valley brand of libertarianism is really the cult of disruption; healthy skepticism of government as premature or partial optimization and technical debt; nerd suspicion of wooly MBA/JD pointy-headed boss types; desire to empower people with tools, knowledge, ability to make their own choices, build their own solutions; when that requires a strong guiding hand in the form of code, or government intervention (education, net neutrality), so be it. When you translate the rules of society into code, is it always a win for the freedom and power of the individual? Not unless you're careful. Technology can be a sustaining technology for totalitarianism as well as a disruptor. It can be a tool for surveillance, social control, databases of Muslims. I like Uber, but a lot of the code is a pricing black box designed to maximize the value of Uber, not a free auction market. There are still questions of fairness to e.g. the disabled, blacks. You can use big data to understand customers better and offer them more and better choices, or selectively charge people more. Build a true 2-way market where drivers can offer services and riders can bid for them transparently, maybe even based on a blockchain ledger, and that's a true libertarian solution. If you work on free software, you are a true libertarian and a scholar and I salute you. Until then, you're paying lip service to freedom while creating a new layer of code to regulate behavior, while maximizing your own rent-seeking. It can sometimes look like tech hubris, liberty for me, the nerd, and not for thee, the unwashed mashes. Since we've expanded the scope to theories of everything, what really separates left and right? Some interrelation between interests, learned values, psychological makeup: How you feel about people making good choices on their own; How you feel about authorities coming up with good policies and market designs, avoiding deadweight losses; How you feel about markets, whether they are generally fair or some participants accumulate one-sided market power; whether externalities and market failures are important and common, relative to deadweight losses from interventions that interfere with markets like taxes, regs; In particular whether labor market outcomes for individuals are fair; whether people generally get what they deserve in the market economy, or whether the distribution of wealth and income is unfair; whether people generally rise or fall to the level they deserve, or whether initial endowments of wealth, educational opportunity, ethnic biases are determining factors6; How you feel about democracy and the likelihood of corruption and capture vs. the ability of government to work for common good; How much slack we should give to the 'losers'; how you feel about free riders; How you feel about authority; are you oriented toward rules, and motivated by a sense of moral outrage, or outcomes, thinking moral rules are heuristics to lead to good outcomes; is your personality high in 'conscientiousness'? How you feel about the 'other'; do you strongly identify with a group, are group values more important than individual values; is your personality high in 'openness' to the values of others? Are you motivated by fear, or hope, is the world a dangerous, zero-sum place with internal and external threats, or do people generally work together for progress? Decent people can solve problems using left and right solutions, just as programmers can solve problems with different languages. But there is good code and bad code. Indecent, extreme, and disagreeable people aren't going to solve anything. We've become a nation of architecture astronauts, spending our energy on ideological flame wars instead of shipping code that works. There's a fine line between being a critic and a contrarian, and being a hater tearing down the progress other people are trying to achieve. Once you get to the extreme of opposing all mandatory vaccinations, I would say you've left reason behind. Given what we understand about network effects, advocating freedom to engage in antisocial behavior without sanction seems like rejecting the categorical imperative and reason-based Western morality. Elevating individual freedom to the highest and only moral good, and following that to its extreme conclusion on matters of asteroids and vaccinations, seems like bad code. In the extreme, it leads somewhere between indifference to the possibility bad choices may create human suffering and outright cruelty. Of course, gentle libertarian-oriented friends, I don't ascribe cruelty to you, but I urge you ask yourself how far extremism in the name of liberty should be taken before it becomes a vice, or at best self-defeating. Men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters. -- Edmund Burke To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea. -- James Madison 1 Suppose individuals solve problems by freely agreeing on institutions like democratic governments with civil liberties and also taxes, police forces, prisons, some middle ground between non-violence and slavery? If people freely enter into a contract that imposes sanctions for violations, is it still freedom? 2 Yes, Virginia, people identify, and act with their tribe, nation, other institutions, not just as individuals. People have aspirations as individuals and also for their social unit. Have you ever been to a football game or other 'sacred' ritual where people dress, paint their face, eat and drink, sing, chant and play music in the proper manner to appease the universe and bring success to their in-group (and disaster to the out-group)? The original sin of communism and totalitarianism is not respecting the individual and private property; the original sin of libertarianism is not respecting the drive to identify and find meaning through an in-group, 'something bigger than me'. 3 If you think this is an easy problem, think again. Refactoring is a bitch. Some argue the 2nd Ave Subway costs more because it had to go deep below all existing infrastructure. If one entity owned all the buried infrastructure, you wouldn't dig up the road one week to fix electricity and the next to fix water, you would presumably do everything in one shot, or redesign an integrated subway/water/gas/electric/telecom package and have something more maintainable that saved money. But then every time you need an electric fix, you have to go through the monolithic infrastructure agency, maybe wait until you can schedule water/gas/electric simultaneously. Sometimes you need agencies that cross jurisdictions, like the Port Authority which coordinates transport activities that impact the NYC area with NY and NJ. Maybe guns are the poster boy for this problem. You can't regulate guns in Chicago if they are unregulated in Mike Pence's Indiana. So I would prefer a national registration system, with local authorities in charge of local regs, but then at least they would be able to look up what residents bought in another state, require training, insurance, follow the trail of guns used in crime. 4 Proposition 13, which freezes California property taxes at 1975 levels, achieves the unusual feat of being rash direct democracy (variance), and locking in an outdated policy over the long term (bias). Premature sub-optimization. 5 Actually, that's what machine learning is. But even in supervised learning, you define how the components can interact, and what they are trying to optimize and iteratively improve. Sci-Fi time! Imagine a society of the future where a giant computer is taught the human happiness 'loss function' and some kind of mother 'hello Google' and smartphone notifications directs everyone in the most optimal way. 6 Case in point: Civil rights. Was Jim Crow really more tolerable than the Civil Rights Act? Under normal circumstances a law targeting specific groups and specific outcomes, as opposed to universal principles, is bad code. But it's perverse to deny blacks the right to participate in democracy, enforce a system of segregation by extralegal means and unequal application of the law, and then say that system is less of a cruel insult to freedom than a law that ends it. When that system was maintained in many cases by unequal application of equal laws such as bogus 'literacy tests', I fail to see an alternative to mandating reasonable outcomes as a last resort in this sort of extreme situation. It's hard to do social science without thinking about outcomes; Noble principles and intentions should be eventually be checked against results. Ambrose Bierce said politics is a contest of interests, masquerading as a contest of principles. Better people acknowledge they are fighting for their interests, but also think of others and shared principles. The worst sort actually believe they are fighting on principle, and only their opponents are fighting for their own narrow interests. Whatever your ideology, at the end of the day you have to ship code that works. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

20 января, 19:34

UpFront special: Welcome to the Trump era

Donald Trump is the new president of the United States. What will that mean for the U.S. and for the rest of the world? In this UpFront special, we looked at what the U.S. and the world can expect from a President Trump. And in an interview with The Nation editor and publisher, Katrina vanden Heuvel, we examine the foreign policy legacy President Barack Obama will leave for Trump.

20 января, 19:27

How will we remember Obama on the world stage? - UpFront

Today marks not just the inauguration of Donald Trump, but the departure of Barack Obama. What legacy does he leave on the international stage? In a special interview with Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation magazine, we asked her about the impact of Barack Obama foreign policy decisions. Obama was “more continuity than change”, vanden Heuvel tells UpFront host Mehdi Hasan. “This country desperately needs a different foreign policy,” says vanden Heuvel. “One in which the United States isn’t the policeman of the world. One that doesn’t make regime change an American foreign policy.” “I don’t think presidents need hubristic foreign policy doctrines. I do think ‘don’t do stupid stuff’ is not a bad one at this time. But unfortunately, I think the United States continues to do stupid stuff.”

24 июля 2016, 21:21

Константин Черемных. "Недопереворот в Турции и другие события в контексте внешней политики США."

Беседа Дмитрия Перетолчина и эксперта Клуба динамического консерватизма Константина Черемных о подоплёке событий в Турции, Франции и на Ближнем Востоке в свете борьбы за власть в высшем правительственном эшелоне США. #ДеньТВ #Перетолчин #Черемных #Турция #переворот #США #НАТО #ЕС #Великобритания #Франция #БлижнийВосток #Эрдоган #БорисДжонсон #теракт #Ереван #Ницца #Гюлен #исламисты #военные #Стамбул #Генштаб #суды #полиция #democracy #Foreignpolicy #NATO #USA #EU #Britain #Brexit #Turkey

18 июля 2016, 08:15

Станет ли Фетхулла Гюлен турецким Хомейни?

Президент Турции Эрдоган назвал организатором неудавшегося военного переворота Фетхуллу Гюлена, своего бывшего соратника, ныне проживающего в США, в штате Пенсильвания. Так оно или нет, проверить вряд ли удастся, но даже если знаменитый писатель и проповедник не причастен к попытке турецких военных свергнуть Эрдогана, его деятельность и влияние настолько масштабны, что в 2008 году Гюлен был назван самым влиятельным интеллектуалом мира по версии журналов Prospect и Foreign Policy, а журнал Time включает его в список «100 самых влиятельных людей мира».Гюлен реально один из наиболее влиятельных людей в мире хотя бы по той причине, что при его участии создана широкая сеть университетов и школ (свыше тысячи в более чем 160 странах, а общее количество выпускников составляет несколько миллионов человек.Известный российский аналитик Шамиль Султанов считает Гюлена «одним из наиболее талантливых, а может и гениальных специалистов в сфере оргоружия. Фактически он создал и руководит одной из самых крупных в мире многослойных эшелонированных масонских организаций («Хикмет» - В.П.)…Об этой корпорации мало, что известно. И это уже ее огромное преимущество в мире, где тайные организации становятся все более и более влиятельными».Основа «Хизмета»(по-турецки - служение) - классическая закрытая суфийская структура, основанная на принципах безусловного подчинения мюрида(ученика) шейху. Внешняя оболочка такой структуры - «Хизмет», вполне открытая организация, владеющая сотнями лицеев, колледжей, университетов, мечетей, молельных домов и общежитий по всему миру. Официальный мессидж «Хизмета»- идея служения обществу. Сам Гюлен пропагандирует духовное наследие великого поэта-суфия Джалаледдина Руми. А скрытая, и «гораздо более существенная ее функция», как пишет Шамиль Султанов, заключается в том, что «она ищет, вербует, готовит профессиональные кадры, причем особый упор делается на поиске талантливых людей».Вокруг «Хизмета» постепенно создается неформальная общественных и государственных организаций, куда команда Гюлена внедряет своих людей. В 90-е годы гюленисты прочно укрепились в жандармерии, прокуратуре, полиции и профсоюзах Турции. Общая численность гюленистов в Турции - от 3 до 6 миллионов членов «Хизмета» и «сочувствующих», причем значительная часть - в госаппарате.Турецкий исследователь Сонер Чагатай считает, что Гюлен прибрал к рукам более 70 проце6нтов личного состава полиции и полностью управляет спецслужбами страны. Турецкий историк Неджип Хаблемитоглу в книге «Крот» разоблачил приверженцев Гюлена в силовых структурах Турции. Незадолго до издания своей книги – 18 декабря 2002 года – Хаблемитоглу был убит у своего дома». Справка:Суфи́зм или тасаввуф — эзотерическое течение в исламе, проповедующее аскетизм и повышенную духовность, одно из основных направлений классической мусульманской философии. Последователей суфизма называют суфиями.В суфизме существует несколько тарикатов (направлений). Фетхулла Гюлен воспитывался в традициях одного из самых распространенных и влиятельных - тариката Накшбандийа. Кстати, знаменитый русский маг двадцатого века, капитан военной разведки российской императорской армии, Георгий Гурджиев во время выполнения своих спецзаданий на Востоке тесно контактировал с накшбандийскими суфиями. Великий шейх суфиев Идрис Шах, большую часть своей жизни проживавший в Лондоне(говорим - Лондон, подразумеваем - МИ-6), был одним из основателей Римского клуба. Идрис Шах в своих многочисленных книгах пишет о последователях Накшбанди как о главных хранителях суфийской традиции, «Материнском» тарикате.Будучи достаточно независимым мыслителем, Идрис Шах различал «Традицию Накшбанди» и «Орден Накшбанди». «Традиция Накшбанди» это способ передачи бараки- божественного благословения, благодеяния. Или Высшего Знания, по Идрис Шаху.А «Орден Накшбанди» – это уже социальная организация с чисто конкретными земными целями. Идрис Шах считал, что в двадцатом веке ведущие тарикаты выродились в ордена.Шамиль Султанов называет Фетхуллу Гюлена теоретиком и вождем «соглашательского, политического суфизма, то есть суфизма, который стремится не только к духовной, но и светской власти, используя самые различные технологии, приемы и методы». По мнению российского аналитика Гюлен вырос из рамок «Ордена Накшбанди» и создал свой собственный тарикат.В конце 90-х годов у Гулена сложился тактический союз с тогдашним мэром Стамбула - Реджепом Эрдоганом, видным деятелем того направления в исламском движении, которое практически смыкается с «Братьями-мусульманами». Союз этот продержался более десяти лет. Разрыв Гюлена с Эрдоганом во многом был спровоцирован расстрелом военными кораблями Израиля так называемой «флотилии свободы» - кораблей с гуманитарным грузом для населения заблокированной Газы. Эрдоган резко осудил действия Израиля, а Гюлен, напротив, дал интервью газете Wall Street Journal, где выразил негодование по поводу «безответственности турецкого правительства», которое «не попыталось заранее договориться с официальными представителями Израиля для того, чтобы получить у них официальное согласие на оказание гуманитарной помощи жителям Газы» и обвинил правительство Эрдогана в «игнорировании авторитета» Израиля.В российской и украинской прессе можно встретить публикации, в которых Гюлена подозревают в сотрудничестве с ЦРУ. «Именно ЦРУ «успешно» ходатайствовало о предоставлении ему вида на жительство в США», пишет Шамиль Султанов.Влияние Гюлена основано на том, что в суннитском секторе исламского мира возник серьезный вакуум влиятельных и харизматических лидеров. И если с помощью своих западных покровителей Гюлен сможет устранить с политической арены Эрдогана, то у него есть все шансы стать турецким аятоллой Хомейни и опровергнуть знаменитые слова Кемаля Ататюрка: «Турецкая Республика не может быть страной шейхов, дервишей, мюридов и их приверженцев».Версий по поводу неудавшегося переворота не так уж много - числом всего три.Американский след.То, что Гюлен живет в США, - в пользу этой версии. Против нее - неудача переворота. Экспертное сообщество склонно считать, что если уж американцы затевают переворот, то он удается, как это было на протяжении четверти века.Германский след.Эрдоган сильно разгневал ведущие державы Евросоюза своей жесткой позицией, а реально - выламыванием рук (читай - шантажом) - по поводу проблемы с беженцами. Но способна ли БНД организовать даже неудачный переворот? Сомнительно. Не говоря уже о том, что германские спецслужбы полностью контролируются американцами.Инсценировака самого Эрдогана.В пользу этой версии - бенефициаром подавления мятежа стал сам Эрдоган. То есть на вопрос, кому выгодно: ответ - Эрдогану.На мой взгляд - американский след не стоит сбрасывать со счетов. Непрекращающиеся теракты в Казахстане, теракт в Ницце, мятеж в Армении, - считать это случайным совпадением могут лишь домохозяйки, воспитанные на слезливых сериалах.Мой выбор - с вероятностью 60 процентов здесь «порылась» американская «собака», причем задача свержения Эрдогана не ставилась. С вероятностью 40 процентов - неудавшийся переворот является инсценировкой самого Эрдогана. Так в свое время поступили Шеварднадзе и Саакашвили с целью укрепления своей власти. У них получилось, а чем Эрдоган хуже?+Впрочем, с точки зрения российских интересов, всматриваться в кривое конспирологическое зеркало и гадать на кофейной гуще (кстати, эффективность такого гадания - около 80 процентов), кто устроил «активку» на Босфоре - мало пользы.Вместо этого я предложил бы отдать должное американским мастерам мягкой силы, которые бережно и неторопливо создают всецело зависящую от самого главного «Материнского тариката» ( и это вовсе не вполне управлемый своими предполагаемыми кураторами из Лэнгли суфий Гюлен с его «Хизметом») глобальную сеть агентов влияния, которые рано или поздно придут на смену импульсивному реаниматору Османской империи Эрдогану. Как говорил изобретатель голографии Нобелевский лауреат Дэннис Габор, - «будущее невозможно предсказать, его можно изобрести».Будущее за теми, кто его изобретает. Жаль, что это не мы.Автор: Владимир Прохватилов, Президент Фонда реальной политики (Realpolitik), эксперт Академии военных наук http://argumentiru.com/society/2016/07/433655

06 мая 2013, 05:45

Американский журнал Foreign Policy опубликовал список 500 самых влиятельных людей мира, в который вошли 23 россиянина

...Это российские политики и крупные бизнесмены, один военный и один криминальный авторитет. В список самых влиятельных людей по версии Foreign Policy вошли президент России Владимир Путин, глава правительства Дмитрий Медведев, министр иностранных дел Сергей Лавров, глава Мифина Антон Силуанов и глава Минобороны Сергей Шойгу, председатель Банка России Сергей Игнатьев, директор ФСБ Александр Бортников, мэр Москвы Сергей Собянин и другие.Из российских бизнесменов в список вошли также основатель USM Holdings Алишер Усманов (№1 в рейтинге 200 богатейших бизнесменов России — 2013, состояние — $17,6 млрд), совладелец «Альфа-Групп» Михаил Фридман (№2 в рейтинге 200 богатейших бизнесменов России — 2013, состояние — $16,5 млрд), председатель правления «Новатэка» Леонид Михельсон (№3 в рейтинге 200 богатейших бизнесменов России — 2013, состояние — $15,4 млрд), владелец «Реновы» Виктор Вексельберг (№4 в рейтинге 200 богатейших бизнесменов России — 2013, состояние — $15,1 млрд), президент нефтяной компании «Лукойл» Вагит Алекперов (№5 в рейтинге 200 богатейших бизнесменов России — 2013, состояние — $14,8 млрд), председатель совета директоров «Еврохима» Андрей Мельниченко (№6 в рейтинге 200 богатейших бизнесменов России — 2013, состояние — $14,4 млрд), глава холдинга «Интеррос» Владимир Потанин (№7 в рейтинге 200 богатейших бизнесменов России — 2013, состояние — $14,3 млрд), председатель совета директоров НЛМК Владимир Лисин (№8 в рейтинге 200 богатейших бизнесменов России — 2013, состояние — $14,1 млрд), глава «Газпрома» Алексей Миллер (№2 в рейтинге самых высокооплачиваемых топ-менеджеров России), совладелец Mail.ru Group Юрий Мильнер (№102 в рейтинге 200 богатейших бизнесменов России — 2013, состояние — $1,1 млрд), президент «Роснефти» Игорь Сечин  (№3 в рейтинге самых высокооплачиваемых топ-менеджеров России). Из иностранных политических лидеров журнал включил в список президента Палестины Махмуда Аббаса, лидера австралийской оппозиции Тони Эбботта и премьер-министра Японии Синдзо Абэ. По мнению издания, влиятельными также являются исполнительный директор газеты The New York Times Джил Абрамсон и "король игорного бизнеса", американский магнат Шелдон Адельсон. Список составлен в алфавитном порядке, в нем преобладают американцы — 142 человека. При составлении перечня редакция Foreign Policy пользовалась всеми доступными рейтингами влиятельности, в том числе публикациями Forbes, Times, Vanity Fair, Wall Street Journal, Global Finance и другими. Mahmoud Abbas President, Palestinian Authority West Bank Tony Abbott Liberal Party leader Australia Shinzo Abe Prime minister Japan Jill Abramson New York Times executive editor USA Sheldon Adelson Las Vegas Sands CEO and chair USA Aga Khan IV Ismaili Muslim imam Britain Daniel Akerson General Motors CEO and chair USA Rinat Akhmetov System Capital Management owner Ukraine Karl Albrecht Aldi Süd owner Germany Vagit Alekperov Lukoil president Russia Keith Alexander National Security Agency director USA Paul Allen Microsoft co-founder and Vulcan Inc. chair USA Yukiya Amano International Atomic Energy Agency director-general Japan Shlomo Amar Sephardic chief rabbi Israel Mukesh Ambani Reliance Industries chair and managing director India Yaakov Amidror National security advisor Israel Celso Amorim Defense minister Brazil Marc Andreessen Andreessen Horowitz co-founder USA A.K. Antony Defense minister India Catherine Ashton European Union foreign minister Britain Taro Aso Finance minister Japan Bashar al-Assad President Syria Ibrahim bin Abdulaziz al-Assaf Finance minister Saudi Arabia Aung San Suu Kyi Opposition leader Burma Jean-Marc Ayrault Prime minister France Alberto Baillères Grupo Bal chair Mexico John Baird Foreign minister Canada Bernard Bajolet Directorate-General for External Security head* France Steve Ballmer Microsoft CEO USA Ban Ki-moon United Nations secretary-general South Korea Mario Barletta Radical Civic Union president Argentina José Manuel Barroso European Commission president Portugal Bartholomew I Ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople Turkey Omar Hassan al-Bashir President Sudan Fatou Bensouda International Criminal Court prosecutor Gambia Ben Bernanke Federal Reserve chair USA Pier Luigi Bersani Democratic Party secretary Italy Jeff Bewkes Time Warner Inc. CEO and chair USA Jeff Bezos Amazon CEO USA Ted Bianco Wellcome Trust acting director Britain Joseph Biden Vice president USA Carl Bildt Foreign minister Sweden Robert Birgeneau U.C. Berkeley chancellor USA Tony Blair Former prime minister Britain Lloyd Blankfein Goldman Sachs CEO and chair USA Len Blavatnik Access Industries chair USA Michael Bloomberg New York mayor USA John Boehner Speaker of the House of Representatives USA Jean-Laurent Bonnafé BNP Paribas CEO and director France Alexander Bortnikov FSB director Russia Leszek Borysiewicz Cambridge University chief executive Britain John Brennan CIA director USA Sergey Brin Google co-founder USA Andrew Brown Church Commissioners CEO and secretary Britain Warren Buffett Berkshire Hathaway CEO USA Ursula Burns Xerox CEO USA David Cameron Prime minister Britain Bob Carr Foreign minister Australia Vicente Carrillo Fuentes Juárez cartel leader Mexico John Chambers Cisco CEO and chair USA Margaret Chan World Health Organization director-general China Norman Chan Hong Kong Monetary Authority CEO Hong Kong Stephen Chazen Occidental CEO and president USA Dhanin Chearavanont Charoen Pokphand Group chair Thailand Chen Yuan China Development Bank chair China Cheng Yu-tung Investor Hong Kong Palaniappan Chidambaram Finance minister India Jean-Paul Chifflet Crédit Agricole CEO France James Clapper Director of national intelligence USA Helen Clark U.N. Development Program administrator New Zealand Joseph Clayton Dish Network CEO and president USA Bill Clinton Former president USA Hillary Clinton Former secretary of state USA Tim Cook Apple CEO USA Jean-François Copé Union for a Popular Movement president France Michael Corbat Citigroup CEO USA Ertharin Cousin U.N. World Food Program executive director USA James Cuno J. Paul Getty Trust CEO and president USA Siyabonga Cwele State security minister South Africa Ophelia Dahl Partners in Health executive director USA Dai Xianglong National Council for Social Security Fund chair China Dalai Lama Tibetan spiritual leader Aliko Dangote Dangote Group CEO and president Nigeria Kim Darroch National security advisor Britain Ahmet Davutoglu Foreign minister Turkey Henri de Castries AXA CEO and chair France Michael Dell Dell CEO USA Leonardo Del Vecchio Luxottica chair Italy Thomas de Maizière Defense minister Germany Christophe de Margerie Total CEO and chair France Martin Dempsey Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff USA Hailemariam Desalegn African Union chair Ethiopia Cobus de Swardt Transparency International managing director South Africa Philip de Toledo Capital Group Companies president USA Michael Diekmann Allianz CEO and chair Germany Jeroen Dijsselbloem Dutch finance minister and Eurogroup president Netherlands Sheila Dikshit New Delhi chief minister India Jamie Dimon JPMorgan Chase CEO, chair, and president USA Daniel Doctoroff Bloomberg L.P. CEO and president USA Tom Donilon National security advisor USA Thomas Donohue Chamber of Commerce CEO and president USA Jack Dorsey Twitter founder and Square Inc. CEO USA Mario Draghi European Central Bank president Italy Abu Dua al Qaeda in Iraq leader Iraq Jean-François Dubos Vivendi chair France Bob Dudley BP CEO USA Mike Duke Walmart CEO and president USA Mark Dybul Global Fund executive director USA Nabil Elaraby Arab League secretary-general Egypt Mohamed A. El-Erian Pimco CEO and co-CIO USA John Elkann Exor chair Italy Larry Ellison Oracle CEO and chair USA Erik Engstrom Reed Elsevier CEO Sweden Recep Tayyip Erdogan Prime minister Turkey Sergio Ermotti UBS CEO Switzerland Laurent Fabius Foreign minister France Richard Fadden Canadian Security Intelligence Service director Canada Teuku Faizasyah International affairs advisor Indonesia Mohsen Fakhrizadeh-Mahabadi Nuclear scientist Iran John Fallon Pearson CEO Britain Fan Changlong Central Military Commission vice chairman China Fang Fenghui People's Liberation Army chief of general staff China Drew Gilpin Faust Harvard University president USA Jon Feltheimer Lionsgate CEO and co-chair USA Hakan Fidan National Intelligence Organization undersecretary Turkey Laurence Fink BlackRock CEO and chair USA Chris Finlayson BG CEO Britain Jürgen Fitschen Deutsche Bank co-chair Germany James Flaherty Finance minister Canada Maria das Graças Silva Foster Petrobras CEO Brazil Mikhail Fradkov Foreign Intelligence Service head Russia Pope Francis Head of Catholic Church Vatican City Vagner Freitas Unified Workers' Central president Brazil Mikhail Fridman Alfa Group Consortium chair Russia Fu Chengyu Sinopec chair China Osamu Fujimura Chief cabinet secretary Japan Robert Gallucci MacArthur Foundation president USA Sonia Gandhi Indian National Congress party president India Bill Gates Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation co-chair and Microsoft co-founder USA Melinda Gates Gates Foundation co-chair USA Valery Gerasimov Armed forces chief of general staff Russia Rostam Ghasemi Iranian oil minister Iran Carlos Ghosn Nissan and Renault CEO and chair France Julia Gillard Prime minister Australia Ivan Glasenberg Glencore CEO South Africa Robert Glasser Care International secretary-general USA Pravin Gordhan Finance minister South Africa Terry Gou Foxconn CEO Taiwan Mario Greco Assicurazioni Generali CEO Italy Brad Grey Paramount Pictures CEO and chair USA William Gross Pimco co-CIO and managing director USA Sérgio Guerra Brazilian Social Democracy Party president Brazil Abdullah Gul President Turkey Fethullah Gulen Muslim religious leader Turkey Stuart Gulliver HSBC group CEO Britain Guo Jinlong Beijing Communist Party secretary China Guo Shengkun Minister of public security China Ángel Gurrí­a OECD secretary-general Mexico António Guterres U.N. high commissioner for refugees Portugal Javier Gutiérrez Ecopetrol CEO Colombia Joaquín Guzmán Loera Sinaloa drug cartel leader Mexico Fernando Haddad São Paulo mayor Brazil Chuck Hagel Defense secretary USA William Hague Foreign minister Britain Tony Hall BBC director-general Britain Andrew Hamilton Oxford University chief executive Britain Ingrid Hamm Robert Bosch Stiftung executive director Germany John Hammergren McKesson CEO, chair, and president USA Philip Hammond Secretary of state for defense Britain Han Zheng Shanghai Communist Party secretary China Jalaluddin Haqqani Haqqani network leader Afghanistan Stephen Harper Prime minister Canada Toru Hashimoto Osaka mayor Japan Gerald Hassell Bank of New York Mellon CEO and chair USA Jimmy Hayes Cox Enterprises CEO and president USA John Hennessy Stanford University president USA Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert Defense minister Netherlands Stephen Hester Royal Bank of Scotland CEO Britain Christoph Heusgen National security advisor Germany Marillyn Hewson Lockheed Martin CEO and president USA Hisashi Hieda Fuji Media Holdings CEO and chair Japan Nobuyuki Hirano Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group CEO and president Japan Ho Ching Temasek CEO and executive director Singapore Reid Hoffman LinkedIn co-founder and executive chair USA François Hollande President France Jan Hommen ING CEO Netherlands Mahabub Hossain BRAC executive director Bangladesh Hyun Oh-seok Finance minister South Korea Carl Icahn Icahn Enterprises chair USA Robert Iger Walt Disney Co. CEO and chair USA Sergei Ignatiev Central Bank of Russia chair Russia Jeffrey Immelt General Electric CEO and chair USA Naoki Inose Tokyo governor Japan Zaheer ul-Islam Inter-Services Intelligence director-general Pakistan Jonathan Ive Apple senior VP for industrial design Britain Paul Jacobs Qualcomm CEO and chair USA Mohammad Ali Jafari Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander Iran Anshu Jain Deutsche Bank co-chair Britain Paul Jean-Ortiz Diplomatic advisor France Antony Jenkins Barclays Group CEO Britain Jiang Jianqing Industrial and Commercial Bank of China executive director and chair China Jiang Jiemin State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission chair* China Jiang Zemin Former president China Edward Johnson Fidelity Investments CEO and chair USA Goodluck Jonathan President Nigeria Alok Joshi Research and Analysis Wing chief India Banri Kaieda Democratic Party of Japan president Japan Unni Karunakara Médecins Sans Frontières president India Hamid Karzai President Afghanistan Ashfaq Parvez Kayani Chief of army staff Pakistan Muhtar Kent Coca-Cola CEO and chair USA Neal Keny-Guyer Mercy Corps CEO USA John Kerry Secretary of state USA Ali Khamenei Supreme leader Iran Salman Khurshid Foreign minister India Paal Kibsgaard Schlumberger CEO Norway Kemal Kilicdaroglu Republican People's Party chair Turkey Kim Jang-soo National security advisor South Korea Jim Yong Kim World Bank president USA Kim Jong Un Supreme leader North Korea Kim Kwan-jin Defense minister South Korea Ian King BAE Systems CEO Britain Mervyn King Bank of England governor Britain Cristina Fernández de Kirchner President Argentina Fumio Kishida Foreign minister Japan Henry Kissinger Former secretary of state USA Susanne Klatten Investor Germany Bill Klesse Valero CEO and chair USA Philip Knight Nike chair USA Charles Koch Koch Industries CEO and chair USA David Koch Koch Industries executive VP USA Nobuaki Koga Japanese Trade Union Confederation, president Japan Larry Kramer Hewlett Foundation president USA William Kumuyi Deeper Christian Life Ministry general superintendent Nigeria Haruhiko Kuroda Bank of Japan governor Japan Raymond Kwok Sun Hung Kai Properties co-chair Hong Kong Thomas Kwok Sun Hung Kai Properties co-chair Hong Kong Oh-Hyun Kwon Samsung CEO South Korea Christine Lagarde IMF managing director France Arnaud Lagardère Lagardère CEO and chair France Pascal Lamy World Trade Organization director-general France Ryan Lance ConocoPhillips CEO and chair USA Germán Larrea Mota-Velasco Grupo México president Mexico Carol Larson Packard Foundation president USA Risa Lavizzo-Mourey Robert Wood Johnson Foundation CEO and president USA Sergei Lavrov Foreign minister Russia Jean-Yves Le Drian Defense minister France Lee Shau-kee Henderson Land Development chair Hong Kong Thierry Lepaon General Confederation of Labor secretary-general France Richard Levin Yale University president USA Jacob Lew Treasury secretary USA Li Hongzhi Falun Gong founder China Li Jianguo All-China Federation of Trade Unions chair China Li Ka-shing Hutchison Whampoa chair Hong Kong Li Keqiang Premier China Li Lihui Bank of China president China Robin Li Baidu CEO China Alfredo Lim Manila mayor Philippines Lim Siong Guan Government of Singapore Investment Corp. president Singapore Vladimir Lisin NLMK chair Russia Liu Zhenya State Grid Corp. president China Andrés Manuel López Obrador Opposition leader Mexico Hernán Lorenzino Economic minister Argentina Peter Löscher Siemens CEO and president Austria Lou Jiwei Finance minister China Emilio Lozoya Austin Pemex CEO Mexico Helge Lund Statoil CEO and president Norway Michael Lynton Sony Entertainment CEO and chair USA Peter MacKay Defense minister Canada Andrew Mackenzie BHP Billiton CEO South Africa Gregory Maffei Liberty Media CEO and president USA Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum Defense minister UAE Miguel Ángel Mancera Mexico City mayor Mexico Guido Mantega Finance minister Brazil Lutz Marmor ARD chair Germany John Mars Mars Inc. chair USA Agus Martowardojo Finance minister Indonesia Masayuki Matsumoto NHK president Japan Isao Matsushita JX Holdings CEO and president Japan Shigeo Matsutomi Intelligence chief Japan Peter Maurer International Committee of the Red Cross president Switzerland Marissa Mayer Yahoo! CEO USA Timothy Mayopoulos Fannie Mae CEO USA Lowell McAdam Verizon CEO and chair USA Margot McCarthy National security advisor Australia Mitch McConnell Senate minority leader USA William McNabb Vanguard CEO and chair USA James McNerney Boeing CEO and chair USA José Antonio Meade Foreign minister Mexico Mourad Medelci Foreign minister Algeria Dmitry Medvedev Prime minister Russia Hakimullah Mehsud Pakistani Taliban leader Pakistan Andrey Melnichenko Siberian Coal Energy Co. chair Russia Shivshankar Menon National security advisor India Angela Merkel Chancellor Germany Khaled Meshaal Hamas leader West Bank Gérard Mestrallet GDF Suez CEO and chair France Yona Metzger Ashkenazi chief rabbi Israel Leonid Mikhelson Novatek executive director Russia Carolyn Miles Save the Children CEO and president USA Ed Miliband Labour Party leader Britain Alexey Miller Gazprom CEO and chair Russia Yuri Milner Digital Sky Technologies founder Russia Le Luong Minh Association of Southeast Asian Nations secretary-general Vietnam Lakshmi Mittal ArcelorMittal CEO and chair India Semion Mogilevich Mafia boss Russia Nadir Mohamed Rogers Communications CEO and president Canada Moon Hee-sang Democratic United Party leader South Korea Pedro Morenés Defense minister Spain Mohamed Morsy President Egypt Pierre Moscovici Finance minister France Heydar Moslehi Intelligence minister Iran Brian Moynihan Bank of America CEO USA Fahad al-Mubarak Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency governor Saudi Arabia Alan Mulally Ford CEO and president USA Tom Mulcair New Democratic Party leader Canada Rupert Murdoch News Corp. CEO and chair USA Elon Musk PayPal, SpaceX, and Tesla Motors founder USA Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan Foreign minister UAE Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan Abu Dhabi crown prince UAE Ali al-Naimi Minister of petroleum Saudi Arabia Hiroaki Nakanishi Hitachi president Japan Nam Jae-joon National Intelligence Service chief South Korea Janet Napolitano Homeland security secretary USA Óscar Naranjo National security advisor Mexico Hassan Nasrallah Hezbollah secretary-general Lebanon Marty Natalegawa Foreign minister Indonesia Mohammed bin Nayef Interior minister Saudi Arabia Benjamin Netanyahu Prime minister Israel Maite Nkoana-Mashabane Foreign minister South Africa Indra Nooyi PepsiCo CEO and chair USA Phebe Novakovic General Dynamics CEO and chair USA Christian Noyer Bank of France governor France Barack Obama President USA Michelle Obama First lady USA Frances O'Grady Trades Union Congress general secretary Britain Mullah Mohammed Omar Taliban leader Afghanistan Keith O'Nions Imperial College London rector Britain Itsunori Onodera Defense minister Japan Amancio Ortega Inditex founder Spain George Osborne Chancellor of the Exchequer Britain Paul Otellini Intel CEO and president USA Michael Otto Otto Group chair Germany Ricardo Paes de Barros Secretary of strategic affairs Brazil Larry Page Google CEO USA Tamir Pardo Mossad director Israel Park Geun-hye President South Korea Park Won-soon Seoul mayor South Korea Antonio Patriota Foreign minister Brazil Nikolai Patrushev National Security Council secretary Russia Enrique Peña Nieto President Mexico Yves Perrier Amundi CEO France Stefan Persson H&M chair Sweden Navi Pillay U.N. high commissioner for human rights South Africa François-Henri Pinault Kering CEO and chair France Juan Carlos Pinzón Defense minister Colombia Georges Plassat Carrefour CEO France Vladimir Potanin Interros owner Russia Scott Powers State Street Global Advisors CEO and president USA Sunil Prabhu Mumbai mayor India Vladimir Putin President Russia Yusuf al-Qaradawi Sunni cleric Egypt Thomas Rabe Bertelsmann CEO and chair Germany Bertrand Ract-Madoux Army chief of staff France Baba Ramdev Hindu spiritual leader India Rafael Ramírez PDVSA president Venezuela Anders Fogh Rasmussen NATO secretary-general Denmark Sumner Redstone Viacom and CBS chair USA Olli Rehn European Commission finance minister Finland Harry Reid Senate majority leader USA L. Rafael Reif MIT president USA Stephen Rigby National security advisor Canada Rebecca Rimel Pew Charitable Trusts CEO and president USA Georgina Rinehart Hancock Prospecting chair and director Australia Brian Roberts Comcast CEO and chair and NBCUniversal chair USA John Roberts Supreme Court chief justice USA Virginia Rometty IBM CEO, chair, and president USA Kenneth Roth Human Rights Watch executive director USA Dilma Rousseff President Brazil David Rubenstein Carlyle Group co-CEO USA George Rupp International Rescue Committee CEO and president USA Bader al-Saad Kuwait Investment Authority managing director Kuwait Alfredo Sáenz Banco Santander CEO Spain Joseph Safra Grupo Safra chair Brazil Atsuo Saka Japan Post Holdings CEO Japan Sheryl Sandberg Facebook COO USA Norio Sasaki Toshiba president Japan Yasuhiro Sato Mizuho Financial Group CEO and president Japan Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Saud King Saudi Arabia Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud Crown prince Saudi Arabia Saud bin Faisal bin Abdulaziz Al Saud Foreign minister Saudi Arabia John Sawers Secret Intelligence Service chief Britain Paolo Scaroni Eni CEO Italy Wolfgang Schäuble Finance minister Germany Gerhard Schindler Federal Intelligence Service president Germany Dieter Schwarz Schwarz Group owner Germany Igor Sechin Rosneft president and chair Russia Pierre Servant Natixis CEO France Sri Sri Ravi Shankar Hindu spiritual leader India Mohamed Raafat Shehata General Intelligence Service chief Egypt Abdul-Aziz al-Sheikh Grand mufti Saudi Arabia Salil Shetty Amnesty International secretary-general India Sergei Shoigu Defense minister Russia Faisal Al Shoubaki General Intelligence Department director Jordan Radoslaw Sikorski Foreign minister Poland Anton Siluanov Finance minister Russia Mehmet Simsek Finance minister Turkey Manmohan Singh Prime minister India Carlos Slim Helú Grupo Carso founder Mexico Yngve Slyngstad Norges Bank Investment Management CEO Norway James Smith Thomson Reuters CEO and president USA Stephen Smith Defense minister Australia Sergei Sobyanin Moscow mayor Russia Michael Sommer Confederation of German Trade Unions president Germany Masayoshi Son SoftBank Mobile CEO Japan George Soros Soros Fund Management chair USA Sterling Speirn Kellogg Foundation CEO and president USA Richard Stearns World Vision president USA Peer Steinbrück Social Democratic Party leader Germany Randall Stephenson AT&T CEO and chair USA John Strangfeld Prudential Financial CEO and chair USA Megawati Sukarnoputri Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle chair Indonesia Bandar bin Sultan General Intelligence Presidency chief Saudi Arabia Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr. New York Times Co. chair USA William Swanson Raytheon CEO and chair USA Sushma Swaraj Bharatiya Janata Party opposition leader India Alwaleed bin Talal Kingdom Holding Co. chair Saudi Arabia Ahmed al-Tayeb Grand sheikh of al-Azhar Egypt Johannes Teyssen E.ON CEO and chair Germany Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabr Al Thani Foreign minister Qatar Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani Emir Qatar Thein Sein President Burma Peter Thiel PayPal co-founder USA David Thomson Thomson Reuters chair Canada Shirley Tilghman Princeton University president USA Rex Tillerson Exxon Mobil CEO and chair USA Héctor Timerman Foreign minister Argentina Robert Tjian Howard Hughes Medical Institute president USA Alexandre Tombini Central Bank of Brazil governor Brazil Akio Toyoda Toyota CEO Japan Miguel Ángel Treviño Morales Zetas drug cartel leader Mexico Richard Trumka AFL-CIO president USA Kazuhiro Tsuga Panasonic president Japan Kevin Tsujihara Warner Bros. Entertainment CEO USA Yoshinobu Tsutsui Nippon Life Insurance president Japan Donald Tusk Prime minister Poland Luis Ubiñas Ford Foundation president USA Hiroo Unoura Nippon Telegraph and Telephone CEO Japan Alisher Usmanov Investor Russia Herman Van Rompuy European Council president Belgium Viktor Vekselberg Renova Group chair Russia Luis Videgaray Finance minister Mexico Antonio Villaraigosa Los Angeles mayor USA Ignazio Visco Bank of Italy governor Italy Peter Voser Royal Dutch Shell CEO Switzerland Abu Musab Abdel Wadoud al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb emir Algeria Jimmy Wales Wikipedia founder USA Peter Wall Chief of general staff Britain S. Robson Walton Walmart chair USA Wan Qingliang Guangzhou Communist Party secretary China Wang Yi Foreign minister China Wang Yilin CNOOC chair China Nick Warner Australian Secret Intelligence Service director-general Australia Rick Warren Evangelical pastor USA John Watson Chevron CEO and chair USA Jens Weidmann German Federal Bank president Germany Bob Weinstein Weinstein Company co-chair USA Harvey Weinstein Weinstein Company co-chair USA Justin Welby Archbishop of Canterbury Britain Guido Westerwelle Foreign minister Germany Guy Weston Garfield Weston Foundation chair Britain Meg Whitman Hewlett-Packard CEO and president USA Joko Widodo Jakarta governor Indonesia Steve Williams Suncor CEO and president Canada Oprah Winfrey Harpo Productions and Oprah Winfrey Network CEO and chair USA Martin Winterkorn Volkswagen CEO Germany Penny Wong Finance minister Australia Carolyn Woo Catholic Relief Services CEO and president USA George Wood Assemblies of God general superintendent USA Nasir al-Wuhayshi al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula emir Yemen Xi Jinping President China Xu Qiliang Central Military Commission vice chairman China Moshe Yaalon Defense minister Israel Yang Jiechi State councilor China Yi Gang Foreign exchange reserves administrator China Ismet Yilmaz Defense minister Turkey Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono President Indonesia Yun Byung-se Foreign minister South Korea Syed Hashim Raza Zaidi Karachi administrator Pakistan Lamberto Zannier Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe secretary-general Italy Ayman al-Zawahiri al Qaeda leader Egypt Dieter Zetsche Daimler CEO Germany Zhang Jianguo China Construction Bank president and executive director China Zhang Yuzhuo Shenhua Group CEO and president China Zhou Jiping China National Petroleum Corp. and PetroChina chair* China Zhou Xiaochuan People's Bank of China governor China Helen Zille Democratic Alliance leader South Africa Robert Zimmer University of Chicago president USA Mark Zuckerberg Facebook CEO and founder USA Jacob Zuma President South Africa http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/04/29/the_500_most_powerful_people_in_the_worldhttp://www.forbes.ru/news/238657-prezident-lukoil-stal-samym-vliyatelnym-v-mire-rossiyaninom