from the world's big
Pew Research Center data shows that most people think diversity improves lives in their countries.
Does diversity improve lives?<p>The center surveyed more than 28,000 peoples across Columbia, India, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Tunisia, Venezuela, Vietnam, South African, and the Philippines on their opinions of diversity within their borders. These countries were chosen based on their middle-income status, differing degrees of technology ownership, and high levels of migration (internal or external).</p><p>The survey asked respondents how they viewed increasing numbers of other races, religions, and nationalities and what effect that had on the quality of life in their countries. Additional questions were tailored to a country's unique demographics and circumstances.</p><p>For example, respondents in the Philippines were asked how favorably they viewed Muslims and Christians, while Tunisians were asked about Sunnis and Shiites. Others, such as Mexico and Lebanon, were asked about asylum seekers fleeing to their countries.</p><p>Pew found that "[a]cross the 11 countries surveyed, more said their countries are better off thanks to the increasing number of people of different races, ethnic groups, and nationalities who live there." A minority said the increase made no difference, and an even smaller minority said their country was worse off.</p>
Testing tribalism<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzQwODQyMy9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NzIwODg3N30.vO03jZ1PziezobG9vuLqDI64jiu_93HJ-7prbrE9Enk/img.jpg?width=1245&coordinates=0%2C215%2C0%2C91&height=700" id="63e80" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="e05016b95976d40d499a0820b055e74b" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="crowd of Syrian refugees" />
Lebanon and Jordan took in millions of Syrian refugees during the civil war, helping to explain their complex relationship with diversity in their borders.
Getting used to each other<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="cdee76bef43c85ed51018f8b6d8c0690"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7cmEwt4gxbc?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>So, what leads to improved views of multiculturalism? According to Pew's data, those with the most positive views on racial, ethnic, and religious diversity were those who interacted most with these groups. More contact equaled more positive views.</p><p>In all of the countries, younger adults were more likely to interact with people of different backgrounds, and except for Jordan, they also held more favorable views of others. The same held true for those who attained higher levels of education. </p><p>This data mirrors another Pew survey in which researchers asked Americans their views on increased racial and ethnic diversity.</p><p>Around 58 percent of Americans said increasing numbers of diverse people would make the United States a better place to live. Only 9 percent said it would make the country worse, while 31 percent said it didn't make a difference. Opinions were split along partisan lines, with more Democrats viewing the statement favorably than Republicans. </p><p>But like the 11 emerging countries, Americans varied by age and education, too. Fifteen percent of respondents 65 and older believed growing multiculturalism made the U.S. worse—the highest of any age group. And 70 percent of college graduates saw diversity in a positive light, compared to 45 percent of those with a high school diploma or less school.</p><p>The survey's complete results can be found <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/06/16/attitudes-toward-diversity-in-11-emerging-economies/" target="_blank">here</a>, while the survey on American attitudes on diversity is <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/06/14/most-americans-express-positive-views-of-countrys-growing-racial-and-ethnic-diversity/" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
A future toward acceptance<p>These data suggest that the world hasn't succumbed to a <a href="https://bigthink.com/videos/tribalism-politics" target="_blank">new era of tribalism</a> and hate. Far from it. The beliefs of cosmopolitanism and ethics of diversity are, in fact, spreading across many of the world's emerging countries and will likely increase as <a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/11/15/668106376/generation-z-is-the-most-racially-and-ethnically-diverse-yet" target="_blank">subsequent generations</a> become more educated and integrated. That progress may be uneven, but it's real and measurable.</p><p>An appreciation of, even desire for, diversity won't end the tragic events that generate eye-catching headlines, but it can make our shared futures more manageable. As Kwame Anthony Apiah wrote in his book "Cosmopolitanism: Ethics in a World of Strangers": "I am urging that we should learn about people in other places, take an interest in their civilizations, their arguments, their errors, their achievements, not because that will bring us to agreement, but because it will help us get used to one another."</p>
Despite potential good intentions, interventionist policies are often viewed by classical liberals as violations of individual freedoms.
- Intervention covers a range of activity broader than just war. Some interventions have more humanitarian aims, such as disaster relief and development aid.
- Oftentimes, the drive behind many instances of intervention involves some form of political, economic, or social outcome.
- There are important questions to consider regarding knowledge, goals, incentives, and unintended consequences. The answers to these indicate whether an intervention is necessary and appropriate.
Technology best serves the user when organic development combines necessity with collective values.
- How are global innovators overcoming the inequality that is forged in the technologies of Silicon Valley?
- Ramesh Srinivasan, a professor at UCLA, points to examples of indigenous communities in Mexico that have created their own cell phone networks, as well as groups in Ghana and Nairobi that recycle discarded devices from the West to make entirely new technologies.
- These groups have successfully decentralized technology governance by using their resources and upping the ante on creativity and innovation.
Budget cuts to pandemic preparedness put us all at risk.
- There is no way to completely stop a pandemic from coming, says former United Nations medical officer and a key player in the World Health Organization's (WHO) smallpox eradication program in South Asia, Larry Brilliant. Being prepared and having a good public health infrastructure are necessary to reduce impact.
- Pandemics like ebola are more likely to start at the edges of poor countries, away from the main hub and away from major cities, but without isolation and containment protocols they can and will grow.
- According to Brilliant, budget cuts and poor decision making by government in the past has crippled pandemic prevention efforts in time of crisis. That's something that we can not let happen again.
Answer: When 22 men make more money than all of the women in Africa, an Oxfam study says absolutely.
- Worldwide, women and girls contribute an estimated $10.8 trillion to the global economy for care work that they are not paid for.
- Women around the globe do more than 75 percent of all unpaid care work.
- Women make up only 18 percent of cabinet ministers around the world and 24 percent of parliamentarians.
Gender, division of labor, and pay<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMjY2MTQyNy9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxOTU5NjI4N30.g0sjLCM4n0GvUA0C4E1ptf4dWk6ZD5xn2mGbWZGKDVs/img.jpg?width=980" id="846f9" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="da5f2848d995b014a380687f202c428e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Source: Time to Care Report, Oxfam<p>Women and girls worldwide contribute an estimated $10.8 trillion to the global economy that they are not paid for. They collectively spend 12.5 billion hours per day on unpaid care work. Care work includes occupations like child care, healthcare work, teaching, and domestic labor. Though this kind of work is often left out of national economic equations, the monetary value of it is triple the worth of the global tech industry, according to an Oxfam report. Women around the globe, particularly those who live in poverty, do more than 75% of all unpaid care work. Despite its social importance and economic value, this labor is <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/10/why-gender-and-income-inequality-are-linked/" target="_blank">persistently</a> undervalued and taken for granted by governments and companies around the world. </p><p>It manifests in different ways. In the United States, <a href="https://time.com/longform/teaching-in-america/" target="_blank">teachers</a>, nurses, child social workers, <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/11/childcare-workers-cant-afford-childcare/414496/" target="_blank">day care workers</a>, and other "care" jobs, which have been historically dominated by women, are underpaid. Furthermore, on an average day, women in the U.S. spend nearly 40 percent more time on unpaid care, like household duties, than men. Zoom out to a global scale and these issues are magnified in less wealthy nations like Africa where women aren't paid at all for this work. They end up trapped in poverty, unable to get an education and achieve financial security. They are also barred from government positions in which they can influence social and economic policy.</p>
Economic and political inequality<p>Though men around the world are certainly suffering under the widening income gap and facing poverty, there is clearly a systemic gender disparity when most billionaires are men and most of the people occupying the lowest paid or unpaid jobs are women. Globally, men own more than 50% more wealth than women, and they also control government and economic decisions that could fix this system. Women make up only 18% of cabinet ministers around the world and 24% of parliamentarians. </p><p>The result has been a global economy designed by men, for men, that undervalues work done primarily by women, and especially marginalized women in already economically disadvantaged nations. </p><p>"When 22 men have more wealth than all the women in Africa combined, it's clear that our economy is just plain sexist," Oxfam GB's chief executive <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/africa-wealth-inequality-oxfam-study-davos-latest-tax-a9290791.html" target="_blank">Danny Sriskandarajah said</a>.</p><p>He noted that if world leaders care about reducing poverty and inequality, they need to invest in public services like care that make life less grueling for people with care responsibilities and hold back women and girls. Yet, closing the growing wealth gap is not on the top of the agenda of most world leaders. In fact, many of them continue to facilitate policies that widen it, such as tax cuts for billionaires, cuts in public spending, and privatization.</p>
We need solutions now<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMjY2MTQ1My9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1MTI0OTA1N30.Y4_QVRte-3FejugjwZWY1GDzHSP6HFu2H4p0IiiRA8o/img.png?width=980" id="1d35b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="5dfbac298423083ef84ae718fdae6c5c" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Source: Time to Care Report, Oxfam<p>What it boils down to is a gendered discrimination of values in which neoliberal economic values are prioritized above social values like education and healthcare. The Oxfam report warns that aging populations, cuts in public spending, and the climate crisis will exacerbate gender-based economic inequality. Part of the solution is taxing the wealthy and learning to value care. </p><p>"Getting the richest 1% to pay just 0.5% tax on their wealth – just on their wealth, not their income – would create enough money over the next 10 years to pay for 117m jobs, in education, health and elderly care," said Katy Chakrabortty from Oxfam GB.</p><p>When we invest in social values, women are helped economically, but everyone reaps the benefits. Caregiving is going to be more valuable than ever in the next ten years. It's estimated that by 2030, 2.3 billion people will be in need of care. That's 200 million up from 2015 according to the Oxfam report. Part of this has to do with the climate crisis, which is deeply entangled with issues of human care. Over the next five years, it's estimated that 2.4 billion people will be living with water shortages. Already, women and girls are disproportionately affected by this because they need to walk further to find water to nourish their communities, adding to their unpaid workload. </p><p>By thinking beyond profit and choosing to invest in water, infrastructure, and child and health care, governments can improve quality of life and liberate laborers from hours of work per day. As of now, many of them are only bolstering a system under which billions of people, disproportionately women, are suffocating under the mass of concentrated wealth held by a small group of men who grow richer and richer. </p><p><a href="https://ousweb-prodv2-shared-media.s3.amazonaws.com/media/documents/FINAL_bp-time-to-care-inequality-200120-en.pdf" target="_blank">Read the report here.</a></p>