Things to Consider When Hiring Friends

“Hi, my sister told me you worked at this company and I would love to take you to lunch and discuss the administrative assistant role that is currently available.”

“Hey, I saw there is a job I think I’m really qualified for at your company, can you pass my resume along?”

“Hi. I know we haven’t talked in years but I am very interested in the account manager role at your company. I applied for it but I’m not sure if I’m qualified. Are you able to put in a good word for me?”

These were the types of emails, Facebook and LinkedIn messages I would receive on a weekly basis.

I was never in the recruiting or human resources departments. I was an employee at companies that were very reputable. Companies that were extremely sought-after. Companies that were on lists of “Best Places to Work” and “Most Fun Work Environment.”

When “friends” saw that I worked for these companies – they immediately came looking for me to help them get a job.

The cliché phrase, “It’s not what you know, it’s who you know” certainly rings true. It’s hard to acquire jobs by blindly applying on job sites but how does an employee at an existing company handle responding to friends or friends of friends who are interested in working there? What’s an appropriate response?

“I found it helpful to ask the candidate to be specific about why they were interested in working at the company, and their main differentiators as a job seeker. I generally ask what is one facet in their competency area they’d suggest changing, or what’s something they’ve noticed that we as a company could improve upon.” says Brooke German, founder of AREA GREY.

Having the candidate explain why they want to join the company and showcase what makes them different from all other candidates, really puts them on the spot to show their true interest, admiration and connection to the company.

“This tactic of gleaning additional information and requiring a bit more thought from the candidate enables me to separate serious candidates from those less eager and allows me to feel comfortable recommending them to hiring managers if their skill sets are appropriate.” says German.

There are plenty of people who are applying to 25 jobs a week without really paying attention to what the qualifications and requirements are. They see a cool company and want to be in on it.

“I’ve always been very weary of making introductions or recommendations for friends on the job front, because being someone’s good friend does not necessarily give you any indication of their work capabilities, business acumen, etc.” says marketing and communications consultant, Brona Cosgrave. “I always proceed with caution when making an intro to HR, clearly stating the level of my relationship and interaction. I never presume too much, as a bad recommendation can reflect negatively on you too.”

Sam Zises, Founder & CEO of [L]earned Media notes that many companies have referral programs setup, which incentivizes employees to recommend their friends resumes. This often seems worthwhile to employees even if they don’t really know how qualified the candidate is. “If you work at a smaller firm, you may be a bit more hesitant to forward your awkward cousin or younger brother’s resume with the risk that it will reflect poorly on you.” says Sam. “To avoid these circumstances, I often find it best to simply supply that individual with the contact information or job website, and tell them that you’re ‘just not in a position to make a referral’.

When you’re considering submitting a ‘friends’ resume to the hiring manager – consider your relationship to the candidate, how this can reflect on you and if you think it’s really worth the risk.

— 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.

, Things to Consider When Hiring Friends,

PHOTOS: 30 Years Of Great Beer At GABF

It has been 30 years since Charlie Papazian founded the first craft beer-centered Great American Beer Festival (GABF) and beer lovers’ taste buds ha…

Read more: Great American Beer Fest 30th Anniversary, Great American Beer Fest, Great American Beer Fest 2011, Denver News, Beer, Gabf 2011, Beer Brewing, Craft Breweries, Charlie Papazian, Gabf, Colorado Beer, Video, Brewers Association, Home Brewing, Gabf 30th Anniversary, Slidepollajax, Gabf 30, Beer Industry, Microbreweries, Denver Colorado, Craft Beer, Denver News

, PHOTOS: 30 Years Of Great Beer At GABF,

Americans Shun Domestic Beer In Favor Of Crafts, Imports

We’re all beer connoisseurs now.

That’s the takeaway of a recent study of the beer market by research firm Technomic, which showed declining beer …

Read more: Domestic Beer, Budweiser, Craft Beer Sales Growth, Bestselling Beer Brands, Most Popular Beer, Beer Sales, American Beer, Beer, Beer Sales 2011, Beer Industry, Craft Beer, Video, Home News

, Americans Shun Domestic Beer In Favor Of Crafts, Imports,

midotwsm

Friday Talking Points — Ships Leaving A Sinking Rat

We have to admit, we don’t know where we heard that subtitle, and we certainly can’t claim original credit for it. We think we read it in a comment to a Washington Post article, but we’re not certain. In any case, as the stream of Republicans fleeing the Donald Trump candidacy becomes a flood, it does seem the appropriate metaphor to use — the ships are leaving the sinking rat this time, not the other way ’round. We’ll get to all of these amusing developments in the talking points this week, because we’re devoting the entire section to the “Dump Trump” theme this week.

But first, we’ve got to get through the weekly news wrap-up and our awards. Let’s start with our sitting president, whose job approval poll numbers are now solidly above 50 percent for the first time since his second inauguration. Barack Obama went to Canada this week, and while he was there he gave a speech to their legislature. He was wildly cheered as he spoke, in one case even prompting a chant of “Four more years!” from the Canuck politicians (who admittedly may be a little fuzzy on the whole Twenty-Second Amendment thing…). Canadian overenthusiasm aside, though, it is now indisputable that America’s standing with the world has improved dramatically ever since Barack Obama took office.

June is Supreme Court decision month, and there was quite a bit of action, even from an incomplete bench. This is going to be a strong argument to motivate Democrats this fall, because if the Senate keeps stonewalling Obama’s pick, the next president’s going to get a SCOTUS nomination on her first day in office.

Split 4-4 decisions aside (since they’ll doubtlessly return to the court once it is full again), there was a lot of good news for women’s rights last week. Texas got smacked down for passing laws they swore up and down were “out of concern for women’s health” but which were really designed to close every abortion clinic possible. The justices saw through all the pious pseudo-concern for women’s health and by a 5-3 vote tossed the laws out. This could (if Obama or Clinton get their pick through, eventually) become a 6-3 majority for the pro-choice faction, it’s worth noting.

While the abortion ruling garnered more headlines, the Supreme Court also quietly scored a victory against the abuse of the concept of “freedom of religion” when they refused to take up a case from Washington state. Cases need at least four votes to even be heard by the high court, which means Kennedy sided with the liberals to reject it. Washington passed a law that mandated all licensed pharmacies in the state stock and provide emergency contraceptives (the “morning-after pill”). Individual pharmacists could still refuse to serve a customer if they had religious objections, but (importantly) every pharmacy always had to have at least one pharmacist present who was willing to dispense the medication. In other words, when religious objection can be dealt with without any added burden to the customer then that’s fine; but no customer can be turned away or referred to another pharmacy instead, because that does add a substantial burden to the customer. If you want to be a licensed pharmacy in the public marketplace, then you’ve got to serve all the public’s needs, no matter what you personally believe. One pharmacist sued, and lost at the appellate level. The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the case means the Washington law stands — another important victory for women’s rights.

Pharmacies are licensed and regulated by the state, but some of these “religious freedom” attempts are a lot broader. So it was also heartening to hear that a federal court has thrown out Mississippi’s “turn away the gays” law, passed to give legal protection to anyone refusing a marriage license or any other services for “religious reasons.” The judge tossed the laws out for being in violation of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Look for this case (or one like it) to eventually make it to the Supreme Court in the next few years, but for now it’s good to see judges even in the Deep South doing the right thing.

Let’s see, what else? The Pentagon is now going to let transgendered troops serve openly and even allow their insurance to cover all their medical needs. Perhaps not as gigantic a step forward as the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” but a milestone nonetheless.

Hillary Clinton surprised some people last weekend, when she joined the New York City gay pride parade, near our country’s newest National Monument, the Stonewall Inn. She walked with the marchers for four blocks, reportedly. Hillary had a pretty good week all around, starting with what one reporter called “the most excited crowd I’ve yet seen at a Clinton rally,” when she appeared onstage with Senator Elizabeth Warren (in matching blue jackets, even!). Warren is now openly campaigning to be Hillary’s veep choice, it seems obvious. So far, she’s been doing a pretty impressive job, especially seeing how easily she manages to get under Donald Trump’s skin. Also on some people’s possible list for Hillary’s veep is none other than Senator Al Franken, but we already wrote about this earlier this week, for anyone interested. In other veep-related news, Al Gore’s daughter Karenna was arrested at a protest over an oil pipeline in Boston. Gore’s reaction was (naturally) that he was very proud of his daughter.

The other big positive news for Clinton was when Trey Gowdy had to sheepishly admit that while he had compiled an 800-page report after wasting $7 million on his investigation, that all he had to offer up on Benghazi was a big fat nothingburger. After the ninth full investigation, there was simply no new facts to uncover. No smoking guns, no scandals, no conspiracy theories confirmed. Nada. Zip. The big goose egg. Shinola.

Of course, that was before Clinton’s husband hopped on Loretta Lynch’s plane (which we’ll get to in a moment), but in a week that will end in literal fireworks the last (one hopes) Benghazi investigation of all time turned out to be nothing but a dud. Republican conspiracy theorists weren’t happy at this fizzle, but then they never seem to be happy about much of anything, so that’s not really news.

Bernie Sanders is actually making a goodly amount of progress in getting his planks into the Democratic Party platform document. This is good news for all concerned, since his planks are important ones to progressives, and since he’s making good on his pledge to fight for his issues. Maybe the Democrats can achieve unity by the time their convention starts, who knows?

News from the Trump campaign this week included the teaser that Chris Christie is being vetted as a possible veep candidate. Maybe all that standing-around-like-a-zombie-hostage stuff is going to pay off for Christie! Hey, maybe he’ll even swing New Jersey, as Garden State voters flock to an opportunity to get him out of their governor’s office….

Trump gave another one of those “Hey everyone, look at me, I’m using the TelePrompTer and staying on script!” speeches this week, where he outlined his views on trade. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce immediately reacted in horror to the direction Trump is leading the GOP in, because Trump’s anti-NAFTA, anti-T.P.P., anti-free-trade positions truly frighten them. We’ll have much more on the subject of conservatives and Republicans fleeing the Trump trainwreck later in the program, however.

One cheerful sign from the Senate campaign trail is that Republicans might just have already given up on two of their incumbent senators. In one of those noticeable-in-its-absence stories, it seems very little money has been earmarked for advertising in Wisconsin (for Ron Johnson) and zero money in Illinois (for Senator Mark Kirk), by both the party and by a super PAC formed to focus on Republican Senate races. Or “winnable Republican Senate races,” to be more accurate. If the GOP money bails on Illinois and Wisconsin, that is two out of the four seats Democrats will need to regain control of the Senate again, so this could be good news. It is early, though, and more ads could be purchased later (just to keep things in perspective).

Recreational marijuana legalization ballot initiatives in California and Arizona are moving forward. California’s qualified for the ballot and the signatures were turned in for Arizona’s, which means citizens in up to eight states may get the chance to vote this November on permanently ending the War On Weed.

And finally, just for fun, Washington (District of Columbia) is considering a name change, should their decades-long push for statehood ever become reality. The new moniker they chose was “New Columbia,” but it didn’t exactly go over all that well. So the Washington Post is helping out by providing a forum for other suggestions. Part of the problem is that many like the label “DC” and they’re already puzzled over how their postal addresses would look in the future, since North Carolina already has a lock on “NC.” This led to suggestions like “District Commonwealth,” but that seems to be counterintuitive for a new state. Of course, being the internet, there were some highly amusing entries as well, such as “Doris (I like the name Doris)” submitted by (you guessed it), “Doris.” One canny entry was “Reagan (it might win over one or two Republicans),” but our favorite was either “Waist (It’s inside the Beltway)” or (down in the comments) “Area 51.” Heh. If you’ve got a better idea what D.C. should call itself if it ever achieves statehood, head on over and share your suggestion!

 

Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week

Republicans in the Senate tried to sneak through a bill that would have let the F.B.I. search everyone’s browser history without having to get a warrant before doing so. If you didn’t hear about this, you’re not alone, because it wasn’t exactly a big news story or anything. The frightening part is how close it came to pass — it essentially failed by one vote to gain the 60-vote threshold to move forward.

One Democratic senator bravely fought against it and stood up for the Bill of Rights. Which is why this week’s Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award goes to Senator Ron Wyden from Oregon.

The provision was introduced by John McCain and Richard Burr, and apparently snuck under the radar of many senators. As Wyden explains:

A conservative came up to me and said, “Do you think people know that under this [bill], without any court approval the government can get people’s browsing history?” I said, “I don’t think most of the Senate knows that.”

Interesting that “a conservative” was the one to bring it to Wyden’s attention. Perhaps Rand Paul had a word in his ear or something? One can only speculate….

Some Democrats voted for this measure who had voted against allowing the N.S.A. to collect bulk metadata from phone records last year. They may not have even been aware exactly what it was they were voting for, which is why Wyden is now pressuring them to rethink their stance, since the issue will likely be brought up again for future votes.

For remaining vigilant (with the help of an unnamed conservative, to be fair) against those who would wish to water down the Bill of Rights even further, we have to say that the choice of Senator Ron Wyden for Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week was an easy one to make.

[Congratulate Senator Ron Wyden on his Senate contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week

We’ve got two very obvious winners of this week’s Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award. Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch showed an astounding amount of bad judgment this week, on an airport tarmac.

Bill apparently was bored hanging around the airport, and noticed another security detail nearby. When he found out Lynch was also waiting in a plane, he decided he’d do the neighborly thing and drop by for a casual chat. Lynch let him onto her plane and they chatted for 20 or 30 minutes. Then Bill went back to his own plane, and they both took off for their respective destinations.

Now, this wouldn’t normally be all that big a deal. An ex-president meets with the current A.G., who is from his own party. Nothing but simple courtesy among like-minded politicians.

That would be true, of course, if several other things weren’t true as well. Bill’s wife, of course, is under investigation by the F.B.I. Whenever they get around to finishing their work, they will report to the Justice Department. Lynch runs the Justice Department, and has the final say-so on what happens after the F.B.I. hands in their recommendation. And, to top it all off, Hillary is running for president.

These dots aren’t all that hard to connect, in fact. The picture they draw is a giant “STOP” sign — as in, “this is a very bad idea, politically.” The optics are terrible. Even Lynch admitted the next day: “I certainly wouldn’t do it again.” Former president meets with A.G. weeks before she’ll have to decide whether or not to indict his wife? In the midst of a presidential campaign? It’s a no-brainer, really — that meeting should not have happened. At the most, Lynch should have appeared at the door of her plane, shaken his hand in full view of everyone, then immediately directed him back down the stairs and turned around to go back inside her plane. Bill Clinton never should have knocked on her plane’s door in the first place — he bears more blame for this idiocy than she does, in fact.

Now, we do take Lynch at her word that all they did was chat about their grandkids and other personal trivia. And to her credit, the next day Lynch swore she wasn’t even going to be an active part of the process — she had long intended to just follow whatever recommendation was in the report. This is all to the good, and restores a great deal of her credibility.

Even so, she never should have agreed to meet Clinton, and he really should have known better than to even instigate the impromptu meeting. He’s a better politician than this, to put it bluntly.

For even raising the appearance of impropriety and raising the question of bias over what is already going to be a pivotal moment for Hillary Clinton’s campaign, both Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch have more than earned this week’s awards for Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week. Seems like the Big Dog needs to be on an even-shorter leash out on the campaign trail. Team Hillary should take note.

[Contact Attorney General Loretta Lynch on her official contact page, to let her know what you think of her actions. President Bill Clinton is a private citizen, and our policy is not to provide contact information for such.]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 398 (7/1/16)

Before we begin with our “Dump Trump” theme, we have to draw attention to a leaked memo from the Republicans. It’s an opposition-research memo on the six top vice-presidential picks Hillary Clinton could make, in essence. It lists possible tactics for attacking each, and suggests talking points to use if they are chosen. It’s a preview of what all Republicans will be saying about these choices, should any of them become Clinton’s running mate.

It’s a narrowly-focused professional version (from the other side) of what we attempt to do here each week, which is why we thought it was interesting enough to point out. It also shows that professional talking points are crafted to contradict themselves, in order to appeal to everyone with at least one message they may agree with. When talking about Tim Kaine, for instance, the document makes the argument that he’s been ineffective at all his political jobs, and then goes on to suggest:

Politically, there will be dual narratives to push: firstly, that Kaine’s selection will upset the Sanders wing of the party for not being liberal enough (see above); secondly, that Kaine’s selection makes the ticket more liberal than the electorate. Given his career trajectory from ACLU lawyer, Kaine is also a hyperactive partisan, once going so far to as to [sic] call Republicans “mosquitos.”

Got all of that? Kaine has never gotten anything done, but at the same time he’s a super-duper-hyper partisan who calls Republicans nasty names and should be feared. Also, he’s either not liberal enough or perhaps too liberal — take your choice. The whole document [PDF] is a fascinating one for anyone with a strong enough stomach to study the mechanics of talking point creation.

This week, for us, was a fairly easy one in the talking point creation department. Trump just keeps right on being Trump, and more and more Republicans are realizing that he’s never going to change even if they can force him to give the occasional speech from a TelePrompTer. So, once again, it’s “shooting fish in a barrel” season (a season which might last right up to November, we hasten to add). Enjoy.

 

1
   #SleazyDonald

You just can’t make this stuff up, folks!

“I see Donald Trump hired a new communications guy this week. I guess after he fired his campaign manager, he decided it was time to staff up. I’ve heard he’s been having problems getting people to work on his campaign, since some Republican political operatives fear for their own future careers. Even the ones Trump has managed to hire seem to despise him. His new communications guy had to quickly delete a whole bunch of tweets he had written during the primary season with the prominent use of the hashtag ‘#SleazyDonald.’ So I guess Trump’s not being too picky about who he’ll hire, because at this point he probably can’t afford to be.”

 

2
   Half the GOP base

A rather stunning statistic, and one that needs pointing out.

“Did you see the new poll that shows that half of Republican voters — not the general electorate, but just Republicans, mind you — wish they had a different nominee than Donald Trump? That’s pretty jaw-dropping, at this stage of the campaign. We’re only weeks away from the Republican National Convention, and over half of their voters would really like to see a different guy on the ballot. Trump also got very low marks on intelligence, honesty, and whether or not he’s ‘obnoxious.’ Once again — this is how majorities of Republican voters feel about their party’s presidential nominee.”

 

3
   Former RNC leader praying for a miracle

This one’s a direct quote, because it pretty much speaks for itself. This is from an extraordinary article from Marc Racicot, a former head of the Republican National Committee, explaining why he cannot endorse Donald Trump:

[Donald] Trump has demonstrated neither the aforementioned qualities of principled leadership, nor offered any substantive or serious conservative policy proposals consistent with historical Republican Party platform positions. Both, in my humble view, are indispensable preconditions to his selection as the Republican candidate for the office of president of the United States. As a result, I cannot endorse or support Trump for president. And I offer my prayer for a second miracle in Cleveland.

 

4
   The list grows longer every week

We’ve spent previous weeks listing prominent GOP stalwarts who have dumped Trump, but now there’s a handy reference!

“The Washington Post has begun a list — which they swear they’ll be updating regularly — of all the prominent Republicans who have not only said they won’t support Donald Trump as their party’s nominee, but have publicly thrown their support to Hillary Clinton instead. This is an astounding development, as I can’t recall another time when such respected party stalwarts have not just refused to endorse their own candidate for president, but actually crossed the aisle to support the other party’s candidate. This sort of thing just doesn’t normally happen, folks. And it’s not just one or two — the Post will be keeping track of the entire list of Republican Party bigwigs (and little-wigs) who are now supporting Clinton over their own party’s candidate.”

 

5
   Or you can just leave the party entirely…

This wasn’t exactly that surprising if you’ve read anything he’s written over the past year on Donald Trump, but still….

“Conservative columnist George Will has now not only said he won’t support Donald Trump’s candidacy, he’s actually so disgusted by the prospect that he has publicly left the Republican Party altogether. That’s right — George Will is no longer a registered Republican. Will has always been an establishment Republican, well-ensconced in what passes for the inside-the-Beltway conservative intelligentsia. So his defection is all the more notable, although how influential it might be remains to be seen. Somehow I can’t see a whole lot of Trump followers making it through many George Will columns. But you can at least hope that other conservatives with a strong sense of conscience will follow Will as he exits the Republican Party. Trump now leads the GOP, and Trumpism is now Republicanism. If you can’t deal with that, then maybe it’s time to follow George Will’s lead, instead.”

 

6
   The Mexican Air Force?

We couldn’t resist this one, the best “Trumpism” of the week, hands down.

“Donald Trump, while campaigning in New Hampshire, was in the midst of his usual anti-Mexico rant when he spotted a plane overhead. His reaction? I quote: ‘That could be a Mexican plane up there — they’re getting ready to attack!’ Seriously, that’s what he said. His paranoia seems to have reached new heights if he thinks the Mexican Air Force had somehow infiltrated not just across the border we share, but deep into New England — just to personally attack him. And this is the person the Republican Party wants to have his finger on the nuclear button? Really?”

 

7
   Tramps Against Trump

We, as usual, saved the best one for last. The only really shocking thing about this is that it was originally a Canadian idea (it was originally “Sluts Against Harper”) — we knew they were friendly up there, but this friendly?

“A group calling itself ‘Tramps Against Trump’ is offering up an unusual incentive to vote against Donald Trump. While they aren’t specifically for any candidate, if you send their site a selfie with proof that you just voted — and swear you voted against Donald Trump — then they’ll send you a naked photo. Their spokesperson, who goes by the name Jessica Rabbit, explained: ‘In the past we had Rock the Vote and other ways to get the vote out, but what do young people like now? They like naked people on the internet. So, we’re using naked people on the internet to make a change and get people excited about something.’ Hey, whatever works! She’s right about one thing — naked people on the internet are indeed quite popular, from what I hear (ahem). I’m not sure it’s entirely legal, but it certainly is a creative new use of social media in the realm of American politics, that’s for sure.”

 

Chris Weigant blogs at:

ChrisWeigant.com

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Full archives of FTP columns: FridayTalkingPoints.com

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank

 

— 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.

, Friday Talking Points — Ships Leaving A Sinking Rat,

Weekend Roundup: Present at the Unraveling

“Present at the Creation” was the title Dean Acheson, the famed American secretary of state from 1949-1953, gave to his memoir, which recounts the vision and construction of the post-World War II institutions of global order such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the trade-opening precursor to the World Trade Organization, and NATO that followed on the heels of the United Nations. In that same era, French diplomat Robert Schuman, considered “the father of Europe,” planted the seeds of European integration that have grown for the last several decades into a club of 28 countries with a population of 500 million. Both efforts, aimed at extinguishing the nationalism and protectionism seen as the root cause of world war, fostered the era of globalization now coming to an end. Brexit, like the Trump campaign in the U.S. and the rise of the anti-European Union right on the European continent, marks an historic turn of the tide. Today, we are present at the unraveling of those grand institutions that have outlived their capacity to deliver inclusively and lost the allegiance of their publics.

“Brexit is another demonstration,” Craig Calhoun, director of the London School of Economics, writes, “that the big global institutions built in the wake of World War II are no longer able to maintain global order.” Popular anger targeted distant and seemingly unaccountable cosmopolitan elites in charge of those institutions for failing to address pressing concerns over immigration and economic dislocation that are part and parcel of interdependence. “Brexit is a rejection of ‘Cool Britannia,’ the 1990s branding of a cosmopolitan, creative and united Britain as a part of a happy vision of globalization,” Calhoun cuttingly quips.

The global order now waning has been the springboard for China’s dramatic rise in recent decades. Writing from Beijing, He Yafei worries now that Brexit is only “the first wave of deglobalization” that will “rebalance in the domestic and EU-wide political landscape in favor of those anti-globalization and anti-EU forces.” He might add the U.S. as well where Donald Trump this week lashed out at China and trade deals as the cause of America’s woes.

The great historical question is what comes next — a return to nationalism or a leap forward toward responsive new institutions with the capacity and competence to forge a deeper, more inclusive integration that can actually solve the problems at hand? Perpetual suspension in the purgatory between these historic options only fuels highly polarized discontent.

Former German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer puts his finger squarely on the key contradiction behind chaos in Europe: for all the populist anger against “Brussels,” the reality is that nation-states still run the show — not least his own country whose insistence on protracted austerity policies in financially troubled southern Europe has destabilized politics there. “The EU institutions are blamed for all kinds of problems: globalization, immigration, welfare cuts and Thatcherism, youth unemployment, lack of democracy, and much more,” he writes from Berlin. “In fact, by preventing the EU from addressing these issues, the national governments — helpless to tackle them effectively on their own — have made these problems worse.” Also writing from Germany, Green activist Sven Giegold emphasizes Fischer’s point. “Like the amputations practiced in medieval medicine,” he says, “Brexit is not a cure. In the face of global challenges, European nation-states cannot secure self-determination and stability on their own. Cooperation with the European Union would make nation-states less vulnerable.”

Writing from the dispassionate distance of New Delhi, Dhruva Jaishankar views Brexit as “the first major casualty of digital democracy.” “Social media, rather than creating connections with people who possess differing points of view and ideologies,” he observes, “tends to reinforce prejudice.” Rather than being a force for consensus, the widespread use of social media during the Brexit debate spread misinformation and myths, feeding “polarization and gridlock.” Writing from Paris, philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy, too, sees Brexit as a victory “not of democracy[,] but of demagogy.”

This week’s horrific suicide attack at Atatürk Airport in Istanbul is yet another indication of how post-World War II institutions have outlived their purpose in the face of new realities. NATO, the defense alliance rooted in the Cold War that ties together Turkey with European states that have also recently been subject to terrorism, is a complete mismatch with the security challenges confronting these countries today. Writing from Istanbul, Behlül Özkan sees the main target of the so-called Islamic State as Turkey’s secular democracy because it is the opposite of its idea of a caliphate. Turkish novelist Kaya Genc relates the enveloping mood after the series of recent attacks. “Istanbul as a bridge of cultures belonged to the noughties: the 2010s is the decade of ruptures.”

WorldPost Middle East Correspondent Sophia Jones reports personal stories from on the ground in Istanbul about how local residents are reaching out to help the victims and follows the investigation by authorities into Islamic State suspects from post-Soviet states. Dean Obeidallah is upset that the American media does not give the same attention to terror attacks in Muslim-majority places like Istanbul as it does to similar attacks in Paris or Brussels.

india 4

Digging for water in India’s devastating drought. © Vivek Singh

While headlines from London and Istanbul grip the global attention, a drought in India affecting a staggering 330 million barely registers. Reporting exclusively for The WorldPost from Bundelkhand, a vast rural landscape in north-central India, photojournalist Vivek Singh chronicles the life and death struggle for drops of water in striking black and white images that convey the desperation leading to farmer suicide and mass migration in the country. “As the crisis deepens,” Singh says, “the country that celebrated the 1960s agricultural revolution and a resulting boom in production of food grains is now seeing its farmers dying in debt and despair.”

In our continuing series on Africa and China presented by Eric Olander and Cobus van Staden, a Nigerian living in Guangzhou asks, “why are Chinese people so racist towards black people?” The two also look at how Chinese ivory smugglers in Namibia are affecting that southern African nation’s efforts to curb the illegal trade.

In a thoughtful riposte to a recent interview with “Sapiens” author Yuval Harari in The WorldPost, neuroscientist Antonio Damasio explains why we creative humans can’t accept an algorithmic account of human life based only in intellectual processes. “The history of human cultures,” he writes, “is in good part a narrative of our resistance to native algorithms by means of inventions not predicted by those algorithms.” No algorithm could have designed the cultivated beauty of these Japanese gardens and landscapes captured by the sensitive aesthetic of photographer Hidenobu Suzuki. Finally, our Singularity series this week profiles a robot that can wash your dishes.

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 the National Editor at the Huffington Post, overseeing The WorldPost and HuffPost’s editorial coverage. Charlotte Alfred and Nick Robins-Early are World Reporters. Rowaida Abdelaziz is Social Media Editor.

CORRESPONDENTS: Sophia Jones in Istanbul

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 Khanna are 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 the Advisory 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.

, Weekend Roundup: Present at the Unraveling,

2016-07-01-1467416091-3679985-IndependenceDayarticlepic-thumb

The Surprising Facts Of Independence Day

2016-07-01-1467416091-3679985-IndependenceDayarticlepic.jpg

Photo courtesy of Joel L. A. Peterson

America may not have legends regarding kings and royalty, but we do have many myths about our nation’s birth — especially its very birthday.

We all think we know the story of the Declaration of Independence; that it was signed on July 4th, 1776, giving birth to our nation. But like so many things that we think we know to be true, many of us are wrong.

The truth and the facts may surprise you.

When was the real Independence Day?
John Adams wrote in a letter, “People in every Colony of the 13, have now adopted it, as their own Act…The Second Day of July 1776, will be the most memorable Epocha, in the History of America.”

What?? July 2nd is Independence Day?

Well, technically — meaning actually in fact — yes.

The Continental Congress voted on July 2nd, 1776 to approve an earlier motion, put forth by Richard Henry Lee, which called for the colonies to declare their independence from Great Britain. Richard Henry Lee was a delegate from Virginia and he had made this motion on June 7th, 1776.

That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States

But there was strong debate when the motion was put forth and the vote was postponed. A committee of five, which included Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, was appointed to draft a document that might explain and support the pending, postponed motion.

Declaration of Independence
Historians concur that Thomas Jefferson wrote the first draft of the Declaration of Independence in June 1776. This was the document, requested by the Continental Congress of the five-man committee, that would support and explain Lee’s pending motion, if passed. Lee’s actual motion was:

“Resolved: That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.”

After further revisions by the Committee of Five (as they’ve come to be called), Jefferson’s revised draft document was submitted to Congress and read on June 28th. Based on the arguments set for in the Committee of Five’s document, Lee’s motion was adopted on July 2nd, with only the colony of New York abstaining.

But the draft document supporting and declaring the adoption of Lee’s motion was not accepted. Revisions were proposed and drafted during the 3rd and 4th of July, 1776.

nine voted in favor

Publish or perish
What we now know as The Declaration of Independence was formally submitted to Congress late afternoon on July 4th, 1776 and Congress approved the document (nine voted in favor, two — Pennsylvania and South Carolina — voted No, Delaware was undecided, New York abstained) and directed that it be authenticated and printed by John Dunlap of Philadelphia, a publisher.

“And that copies of this declaration be sent to the several assemblies, conventions and committees, or councils of the continental troops; that it be proclaimed in each of the United States, and at the head of the army.”

Dunlap carried out these instructions and dated the printed The Declaration of Independence. Dunlap placed the words, “In Congress, July 4, 1776” in large type at the very top of this first printed version of The Declaration.

Thus July 4th became the date that the public saw and remembered to this day. So even though our nation was actually born on July 2nd, its first printed birth certificate was published and dated July 4th.

The Declaration wasn’t even signed by the members of Congress until August 2nd, 1776. This is the document — with all the signatures, especially the big one by John Hancock — that most people think of as The Declaration.

In Congress, July 4, 1776

The pen is proved again to be mightier than the sword
The facts have dimmed and perished from the public mind. And myths and legends have taken their place.

The American Revolution began with the battles at Lexington and Concord on April 19, 1775. Our nation was legally born on July 2nd, 1776 and the British finally surrendered on October 19, 1781.

But the date of publication of a piece of paper that has come to be called The Declaration of Independence is what survives and is now legally Independence Day in America.

But one seemingly mythic fact is surprisingly true: both John Adams and Thomas Jefferson died on the same day — July 4th, 1826 — the 50th anniversary of Dunlop’s dating and printing of The Declaration of Independence.

Like and share this article via Facebook, Twitter, or LinkedIn.

Joel L. A. Peterson is the national award-winning author of the novel, “Dreams of My Mothers” (Huff Publishing Associates, March, 2015).

— 1st Place Winner, 2015 Readers’ Favorite National Book Awards (Gold Award)

“Compelling, candid, exceptionally well written, Dreams of My Mothers is a powerful read that will linger in the mind and memory long after it is finished. Very highly recommended.” — Midwest Book Review

Learn more about the author and his book at Dreamsofmymothers.com and on Facebook

— 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.

, The Surprising Facts Of Independence Day,

Craft Brewers Feel Growing Pains Of Industry Boom

It seems even people who get to brew delicious beer for a living can have a bad day at work.

Craft brewers across America were frustrated this week…

Read more: Homebrewing, Great American Beer Festival, Small Batch Beer, Brewers Association, Craft Brewing, Craft Beer Brewers, Craft Beer Industry, Colorado Beer Festival, Microbrews, Beer, Beer Industry, Small Breweries, Craft Breweries, Craft Beer, Small Business News

, Craft Brewers Feel Growing Pains Of Industry Boom,

India Mandelkern: Herbal Brews Get Back To Their Roots

Herbal beers are thus vestiges of an age in which beer was consumed for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.

Read more: Food Trends, Taste, San Francisco Food Trends, Beer, Drinking, Alternative Medicine, History, Sage, Food and Drink, Health, Nature, Food, Beer Industry, Medicine, San Francisco, Food History, Craft Beer, Taste News

, India Mandelkern: Herbal Brews Get Back To Their Roots,