Author: Selwyn Manning

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Hugh Gusterson, Professor of Anthropology & Public Policy, University of British Columbia

Following horrifying revelations about Jeffrey Epstein’s systematic sexual assaults and trafficking of underage girls, the United States Department of Justice has been forced to publicly release millions of the late sex offender’s emails and texts.

I am an anthropologist of elites who conducted field work among the secretive community of nuclear weapons scientists. The Epstein files opens a window into the even more closely guarded world of capitalism’s 0.1 per cent.

Anthropologists study people through what renowned American anthropologist Clifford Geertz called “deep hanging out” — mingling informally and taking notes on what we see. We call this “participant observation.”

People like Bill Gates and Elon Musk do not welcome anthropologists bearing notebooks. But the Epstein files, where the global elite are talking to each other in private — or so they thought — open a peephole into their world.

---

Read more:
Andrew’s arrest: will anything like this now happen in the US? Why hasn’t it so far?

---

And what do we find there?

On a mundane level, we can see how they spend sums of money most of us can only dream about.

For example, we learn that in 2011, billionaire Mortimer Zuckerman, owner of the New York Post and U.S. News and World Report, spent US$219,000 on his collection of horses, $50,000 on skiing and $86,000 to insure his private art collection.

But the Epstein files are most interesting for what they reveal about a web of gifts, favours and financial transactions that knit together what would otherwise be a disparate sprawl of bankers, developers, tech bros, media personalities and high-profile academics.

A web of gifts and favours

A century ago, French anthropologist Marcel Mauss argued in The Gift that, across cultures, gifts are a way to create relationships of solidarity and obligation.

“No gift is given but in the expectation of a return,” he wrote.

This is evident in Epstein’s relationship with Leon Black, at the time the billionaire CEO of Apollo Global Management and chairman of the Museum of Modern Art in New York.

Epstein claimed his advice on Black’s finances saved the billionaire as much as $2 billion. In exchange, Black steered at least $158 million to Epstein and gave $10 million to one of Epstein’s charities, Gratitude America.

Black then made Epstein a trustee of the Debra and Leon Black Foundation, and Epstein invested in a startup where two of Black’s sons were on the board.

Epstein also helped Black manage his $2.8 billion art collection. He advised on selling individual works at a profit, getting paid by museums for loaning artworks and using art as collateral for bank loans.

Incidentally, one of the lessons I take from this is that billionaires do not look at art the way I do. I may buy (modestly priced) artworks because I like to look at them. Billionaires like Black and Zuckerman see them as investments.

Favours could also be exchanged, zig-zag style, among several people to create network solidarity. Epstein asked Leon Botstein, president of Bard College, to make sure Woody Allen’s daughter was admitted, while also gifting Allen $10,000 worth of shirts and luxury underwear.

Brad Karp, head of the Paul Weiss law firm, asked Epstein if he could intercede with Allen to get a job on his movie set for his son. In turn, Epstein asked Karp for help with a woman’s visa, and Karp steered $158 million from his client, the aforementioned Leon Black, to Epstein.

Collecting academics

When there is an asymmetry among the resources of two people, gifts lead to subordination, not reciprocity. Mauss referred to this as the “poison in the gift.”

We see this in Epstein’s transactions with academics whose research he bankrolled. He collected academics the way his billionaire friends collected artwork — Botstein, president of Bard; Larry Summers, president of Harvard; Lawrence Krauss, celebrity physicist; Dan Ariely, organizational psychologist; and the evolutionary psychologists and biologists Steven Pinker, Robert Trivers, Stephen Kosslyn, Martin Nowak, Joscha Bach and Nathan Wolfe to name a few.

Epstein was drawn to these academics because of his interest in eugenics, which he needed them to legitimize. He thought Black people were intellectually inferior and wondered if they could be improved through genetic modification. In a typo-ridden message, he texted German cognitive scientist Bach:

“Maybe climate change is a good way of dealing with overpopulation.. The earths forest fire… too many people, so many mass executions of the elderly and infirm make sense… if the brain discards unused neurons, why shold society keep their equivalent.”

And he talked about creating new superhumans by seeding batches of women with his own sperm.

After spending days reading Epstein’s messages to his associates, it reveals something essential about the contemptuous way they view the rest of the world.

One of them, lawyer Kathryn Ruemmler, texted Epstein that she would “get gas at a rest stop on the New Jersey Turnpike, will observe all of the people there who are at least 100 pounds overweight … and will then decide that I am not eating another bite of food for the rest of my life out of fear that I will end up like one of these people.”

Hopefully, most of the world is not like them.

Hugh Gusterson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. What the Jeffrey Epstein files reveal about how elites trade toxic gifts and favours – https://theconversation.com/what-the-jeffrey-epstein-files-reveal-about-how-elites-trade-toxic-gifts-and-favours-275727

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Elke Schwarz, Professor of Political Theory, Queen Mary University of London

The very public feud between the US Department of Defense (also known these days as the Department of War) and its AI technology supplier Anthropic is unusual for pitting state might against corporate power. In the military space, at least, these are usually cosy bedfellows.

The origin of this disagreement dates back months, amid repeated criticisms from Donald Trump’s AI and crypto “czar”, David Sacks, about the company’s supposedly woke policy stances.

But tensions ramped up following media reports that Anthropic technology had been used in the violent abduction of former Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro by the US military in January 2026. It was alleged this caused discontent inside the San Francisco-based company.

Anthropic has denied this, with company insiders suggesting it did not find or raise any violations of its policies in the wake of the Maduro operation.

Nonetheless, the US secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, has issued Anthropic with an ultimatum. Unless the company relaxes its ethical limits policy by 5.01pm Washington time on Friday, February 27, the US government has suggested it could invoke the 1950 Defense Production Act. This would allow the Department of Defense (DoD) to appropriate the use of this technology as it wishes.

At the same time, Anthropic could be designated a supply chain risk, putting its government contracts in danger. These extraordinary measures may appear contradictory, but they are consistent with the current US administration’s approach, which favours big gestures and policy ambiguity.

At the heart of the dispute is the question of how Anthropic’s large language model (LLM) Claude is used in a military context. Across many sectors of industry, Claude does a range of automated tasks including writing, coding, reasoning and analysis.

In July 2024, US data analytics company Palantir announced it was partnering with Anthropic to “bring Claude AI models … into US Government intelligence and defense operations”. Anthropic then signed a US$200 million (£150 million) contract with the DoD in July 2025, stipulating certain terms via its “acceptable use policy”.

These would, for example, disallow the use of Claude in mass surveillance of US citizens or fully autonomous weapon systems which, once activated, can select and engage targets with no human involvement.

According to Anthropic, either would violate its definition of “responsible AI”. Hegseth and the DoD have pushed back, characterising such limits as unduly restrictive in a geopolitical environment marked by uncertainty, instability and blurred lines.

Responsible AI should, they insist, encompass “any lawful use” of AI models by the US military. A memorandum issued by Hegseth on January 9 2026 stated:

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion and social ideology have no place in the Department of War, so we must not employ AI models which incorporate ideological ‘tuning’ that interferes with their ability to provide objectively truthful responses to user prompts.

The memo instructed that the term “any lawful use” should be incorporated in future DoD contracts for AI services within 180 days.

Anthropic’s competitors are lining up

Anthropic’s red lines do not rule out the mass surveillance of human communities at large – only American citizens. And while it draws the line at fully autonomous weapons, the multitude of evolving uses of AI to inform, accelerate or scale up violence in ways that severely limit opportunities for moral restraint are not mentioned in its acceptable use policy.

At present, Anthropic has a competitive advantage. Its LLM model is integrated into US government interfaces with sufficient levels of clearance to offer a superior product. But Anthropic’s competitors are lining up.

Palantir has expanded its business with the Pentagon significantly in recent months, giving rise to more AI models.

Meanwhile, Google recently updated its ethical guidelines, dropping its pledge not to use AI for weapons development and surveillance. OpenAI has likewise modified its mission statement, removing “safety” as a core value, and Elon Musk’s xAI (creator of the Grok chatbot) has agreed to the Pentagon’s “any lawful use” standard.

A testing point for military AI

For C.S. Lewis, courage was the master virtue, since it represents “the form of every virtue at the testing point”. Anthropic now faces such a testing point.

On February 24, the company announced the latest update to its responsible scaling policy – “the voluntary framework we use to mitigate catastrophic risks from AI systems”. According to Time magazine, the changes include “scrapping the promise to not release AI models if Anthropic can’t guarantee proper risk mitigations in advance”.

Anthropic’s chief science officer, Jared Kaplan, told Time: “We didn’t really feel, with the rapid advance of AI, that it made sense for us to make unilateral commitments … if competitors are blazing ahead.”

Ethical language saturates the press releases of Silicon Valley companies eager to distinguish themselves from “bad actors” in Russia, China and elsewhere. But ethical words and actions are not the same, because the latter often entails a real-world cost.

That such a highly public spectacle is happening at this time is perhaps no accident. In early February, representatives of many countries – but not the US – came together for the third time to find ways to agree on “responsible AI” in the military domain. And on March 2-6, the UN will convene its latest conference discussing how best to limit the use of emerging technologies for lethal autonomous weapons systems.

Such legal and ethical debates about the role of AI technology in the future of warfare are critical, and overdue. Anthropic deserves credit for apparently resisting the US military’s efforts to undercut its ethical guidelines. But AI’s role is likely to be tested in many more conflict situations before agreement is reached.

Elke Schwarz is affiliated with the International Committee for Robot Arms Control (ICRAC)

Neil Renic is affiliated with the International Committee for Robot Arms Control (ICRAC)

– ref. Anthropic v the US military: what this public feud says about the use of AI in warfare – https://theconversation.com/anthropic-v-the-us-military-what-this-public-feud-says-about-the-use-of-ai-in-warfare-276999

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Victor (Vik) Pérez, Associate Professor of Practice, Entrepreneurship and Enterprise Hub, Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University

For most of human existence, listening was closely tied to moments that carried meaning, emotion or survival. Nature supplied the backdrop – wind, water, animals – and music surfaced in hunting rituals, healing ceremonies and communal celebrations.

That balance began to shift with the industrial revolution, and the arrival of many loud, unnatural sounds. Today, many people move through the day with a near-constant stream of sounds: playlists for work, ambient study tracks, noise-cancelling headphones on commutes, podcasts on walks, background music for comfort.

Sound is no longer occasional or, for much of the time, collective. It is personal, portable and continuous.

What has changed is not only how we listen, but what listening is for. Many people use sound to manage how they feel and perform – to drown out distractions, stay motivated, reduce stress or make demanding tasks feel easier. Streaming platforms use music labels such as “deep focus” or “workflow” – signalling that these sounds are designed to do something for your mind.

There are upsides to this modern soundscape. In busy workplaces or homes, shaping the auditory environment can restore a sense of control and reduce disturbance – especially from intelligible speech. What we listen to can be a key tool for emotional self-regulation.

But there are downsides too. Continuous audio can crowd out silence, which supports recovery and reflection. What often disappears in a continuous soundscape is not just silence but the space to think. This daily exposure to non-stop music, chat and other sounds may be shaping how you think, decide and cope without you even noticing.

The always-on effect

Neuroscience points not to a dramatic rewiring of our brains through this changing audio experience, but a gradual adaptation. Repeated sound environments shape how attention is allocated, how effort is experienced and how mental states stabilise over time.

Those effects vary, though, depending on the context. Music can support repetitive or low-complexity tasks by increasing engagement and reducing boredom. But when tasks rely on language, problem-solving or new learning, the same music can compete for attention, making sustained thinking feel more effortful.

How listening shapes thinking:

Reviews consistently find that music with lyrics is more likely to interfere with reading, writing and verbal reasoning, and that harder tasks are generally more vulnerable to interference. When sound competes with task demands, it can increase mental effort and fatigue, even if outward performance remains unchanged.

Experimental work suggests higher background sound levels can impair auditory working-memory performance — the capacity to hold and rehearse spoken information while filtering competing sounds. In other words, sound can reshape how thinking is experienced from the inside, long before measurable performance changes become visible.

Because these shifts accumulate gradually, they rarely announce themselves as effects. Instead, they shape mental defaults – how patiently you think, how quickly you judge and how you cope when answers aren’t clear.

Here are some ideas, based partly on my work exploring sound-based cognitive environments and learning readiness, for how to redesign your soundscape before it designs you.

Three principles of audio happiness

A simple principle is to match the sound environment to the kind of thinking you’re doing. Some types of louder sound can support repetitive work, while quieter conditions are often better for reading, writing or analytical reasoning.

While lyrical music is more likely to disrupt reading, writing and analytical work, simpler sound is often safer for language-heavy tasks. By contrast, for repetitive or low-complexity work, self-selected or familiar music may support engagement for some listeners by tuning arousal into a more workable range.

Familiar or self-selected music can sometimes support repetitive work because the brain spends less effort processing novelty. Instead of continuously analysing new sounds, attention can remain anchored on the task itself, helping stabilise alertness during routine activities.

A second principle is self-monitoring. Generic “focus playlist” advice is less useful than paying attention to your own signals: rising distraction, mental fatigue, irritability or the feeling that you are working harder than you should. Audio that boosts energy or enjoyment does not always improve sustained concentration.

When these signals appear, pausing your soundtrack and shifting to a simpler sound environment can help reset your attention balance. Reducing linguistic content, lowering volume or introducing short periods of silence may ease the cognitive load before performance begins to suffer.

Which brings me on to the third principle: protect silence. Quiet time supports neural recovery and internally directed thought – functions linked to default-mode brain activity, when regions linked to reflection, memory integration and future planning become more active.

But valuing silence does not mean removing sound altogether. Beginning complex tasks in quieter settings, introducing short sound-free intervals between activities, or ending the day without continuous background audio can give the brain space to reset attention and recover from sustained input.

Environmental noise can also influence sleep quality by increasing micro-awakenings and reducing deeper restorative stages, even when people do not fully wake up. Many people use sound to help them sleep, but evidence shows it can have a disruptive effect on sleep quality.

Day or night, the sounds we live with do more than just fill the background. They help shape the mental conditions under which we learn, decide and live.

And that is the perhaps uncomfortable point. If you don’t actively choose your soundscape, someone or something will choose it for you – and your mind may start adapting before you realise it.

Victor (Vik) Pérez does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. What the constant sound of modern life is doing to our minds – https://theconversation.com/what-the-constant-sound-of-modern-life-is-doing-to-our-minds-276486

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Daniel Cueto-Villalobos, PhD Candidate, Sociology, University of Minnesota

I’ve been living in Minneapolis and working on my doctoral dissertation about local religious communities since 2019.

It’s given me a chance to personally witness how the COVID-19 pandemic, the aftermath of the killing of George Floyd by police officers, and the surge in federal law enforcement presence have fostered grassroots networks of what’s known broadly as “mutual aid.”

Simply put, mutual aid is when communities work together to distribute resources people need to survive, whether it’s food, shelter, clothing or help paying bills. Unlike charity or government assistance, mutual aid is decentralized, grassroots-led and not channeled through nonprofits or government agencies.

One reason why mutual aid flourishes in Minnesota is that it has deep roots in the state.

Enduring ‘Operation Metro Surge’

Citing an already prosecuted case of fraud in which some of the perpetrators were Somali American citizens residing in Minnesota, the Trump administration dispatched Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection agents to the Twin Cities in late 2025.

Within weeks, the number of federal agents in what the Department of Homeland Security dubbed “Operation Metro Surge” had topped 3,000, outnumbering those in local police forces and ushering in widespread fear and uncertainty.

Local mutual aid networks quickly mobilized in response to these federal operations. Immigrant advocacy organizations have organized constitutional observer trainings and distributed “know your rights” information on flyers.

As in other cities, including Los Angeles and Chicago, “ICE Watch” volunteers in Minneapolis sound 3D-printed whistles and car horns to alert neighbors during ongoing raids. Constitutional observers document key details and provide support to neighbors.

The participants come from every walk of life.

Churches and sex shops alike have pivoted away from their routines to distribute food, diapers, cash and other household items that immigrant households need. Residents with disposable income have organized targeted “cash mobs” to support struggling local businesses.

Crowd-sourced campaigns have directed rent money to families whose breadwinners are afraid to go to work.

Federal agents have targeted schools and bus stops, apprehending adults and children. Parents and neighbors across the region have begun patrolling school drop-off zones to shield students from federal immigration actions.

---

Read more:
How anti-ICE organising in Minnesota reactivated mutual aid networks started after George Floyd’s murder

---

The North Star State’s heritage

The local grassroots resistance to Operation Metro Surge came as no surprise to me. Mutual aid has deep roots in Minnesota, and this history is closely connected to the violence of European settlement and American expansion.

Minnesota’s harsh winters have always demanded cooperation and neighborliness, not merely as an expression of “Minnesota Nice” – the state’s reputation for a warm, if guarded, way of interacting – but as a survival strategy that predated the first European arrivals in the 17th century.

Generosity, respect and compassion are central values among Dakota and Ojibwe people, Minnesota’s original inhabitants.

From when French fur trappers and Catholic missionaries first made their way to the Great Lakes in the 17th century until the onset of a population boom in the mid-19th century, Indigenous inhabitants sustained relatively stable and mutually beneficial relations with colonial powers.

The North Star State’s Minnesota Nice reputation has long encompassed progressive politics; a polite, if guarded, interpersonal demeanor; and a hearty neighborliness formed out of necessity during frigid winters.

Undergoing demographic changes

After Minnesota gained statehood in 1858, a series of broken treaties, armed conflicts and several laws forced Indigenous people onto reservations, opening up large swathes of land for white settlement. Immigrants from countries like Sweden, Norway and Germany settled in Minnesota in hopes of better opportunities than they had back home. Catholic and Lutheran churches and mutual benefit societies preserved cultural heritage, combated isolation and shaped the new state’s religious culture for generations.

In 1850, 6,100 people lived in the Minnesota Territory. By 1900, the state’s population had reached more than 1.75 million residents, 37% of whom were foreign-born.

Beginning in the 1970s, Minnesota welcomed Somali and Hmong refugees, as well as immigrants from Latin America. Robust social services and Catholic and Lutheran refugee settlement agencies have helped to integrate new arrivals, many of whom fled their countries of origin in response to economic crises and geopolitical instability.

While more than 4 in 5 Minnesotans today are white, the Minneapolis-St. Paul region remains far more diverse in terms of race, religion and national origin.

The seven-county region is 72% white, 10% Black or African American, 8% Asian or Pacific Islander, 7% Latino and just under 1% Native American, according to the 2022 American Community Survey. White people make up just over 50% of the population in both Minneapolis and St. Paul. At just under 20%, Black people constitute a higher share of population in Minneapolis. In St. Paul, about 1 in 5 people are Asian, mainly Hmong and other people of Southeast Asian descent.

Minnesota’s religious landscape is changing too. Since 2000, for example, the share of Muslim Minnesotans has grown from 1% to 3%.

Hmong and Somali Minnesotans play an increasingly prominent role in Twin Cities politics. The Trump administration has harangued the region’s Somali American elected officials, including Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minneapolis, especially during its immigration crackdown.

Welcoming donations

The fatal shooting of Minneapolis resident Renee Good on Jan. 7, 2026, by ICE agent Jonathan Ross further galvanized the local resistance. While it is unclear if Good was acting as part of a local ICE Watch group, attendance at observer trainings increased in the following weeks.

A few weeks after Good died, on Jan. 23, more than 50,000 people marched in frigid weather through downtown Minneapolis to demand “ICE out!”

In what organizers billed “A Day of Truth and Freedom,” over 700 local businesses closed in solidarity. An estimated 100 clergy were arrested outside the city’s airport, where they decried daily deportation flights to detention facilities.

The outrage increased when, the next morning, border patrol officers shot and killed Alex Pretti, a South Minneapolis Veterans Administration nurse who was documenting ICE actions at the intersection of 26th Street and Nicollet Avenue.

In response, local businesses sheltered people from the chemical that agents deployed. Residents of the neighborhood opened warming stations and distributed granola bars, hot water and hand warmers to mourners.

One organizer insisted they were not accepting payments for these goods and services, although donations were welcome.

Lasting harm

The federal government said it had detained over 4,000 people as of Feb. 4. With public pressure welling up, Tom Homan, Trump’s border czar, announced on Feb. 12 that Operation Metro Surge would come to an end.

As of Feb. 25, ICE is less visible in South Minneapolis. But locals across the region are well aware of the ongoing presence in suburban areas, where agents are reportedly using new tactics.

Even if the immigration agents do completely clear out, the damage caused will surely be long-lasting.

Children like 5-year-old Liam Conejo Ramos, who was taken from his suburban Twin Cities home and flown to a detention facility in Dilley, Texas, have received inadequate food and limited access to recreation while held there, according to ProPublica’s investigative reporters. The American Academy of Pediatrics has called attention to the lasting harms of juvenile detention.

South Minneapolis’ Lake Street corridor, home to over 1,000 immigrant-owned small businesses, has lost over US$46 million in revenue since December. Local leaders estimate that the citywide economic damage exceeds $200 million.

But Minneapolis residents are carrying on the state’s long-standing tradition of solidarity through mutual aid.

Daniel Cueto-Villalobos receives funding from the Lilly Endowment.

– ref. Minneapolis united when federal immigration operations surged – reflecting a long tradition of mutual aid – https://theconversation.com/minneapolis-united-when-federal-immigration-operations-surged-reflecting-a-long-tradition-of-mutual-aid-275987

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Kaylin Klie, Associate Professor of Family Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus

In Colorado, from 2016 to 2020, 33 women who were pregnant or had recently given birth died from accidental overdoses. That’s more than died from traditional obstetric complications like infection, high blood pressure or bleeding combined.

More recent data shows an encouraging turnaround. The number of maternal overdose deaths dropped 60%, from 20 in 2022 to eight in 2023. I think one contributing factor might be increased access to naloxone for moms and families across the state.

As a perinatal addiction medicine physician, I specialize in taking care of pregnant people and families impacted by substance use disorder. Part of the care I provide is prescribing or distributing naloxone directly to patients and their family members. Naloxone is an over-the-counter medication that reverses the effects of opioid overdose.

I served as a member and then co-chair of the Colorado Maternal Mortality Review Committee from 2017 to 2023. The committee reviews every death of a person in Colorado that occurs during a pregnancy or within 12 months of the end of a pregnancy. I personally reviewed the records of Colorado mothers who died from overdoses.

In Colorado, unintentional overdose and suicide have been the top two causes of maternal mortality each year since 2016. Nationally, the leading cause of maternal mortality is overdose, followed by homicide and then suicide.

Almost all overdose deaths occur in the community, outside of a medical center: in homes, cars and public places. In almost all circumstances, the review committee determined that if naloxone had been present, there was a good chance the mother would have survived.

Giving naloxone directly to patients and families

In 2023, The Naloxone Project, a nonprofit, started distributing naloxone directly to pregnant and postpartum moms and their families before leaving one of the 48 birthing hospitals in Colorado. The distribution is through a program called the Maternal Overdose Matters Initiative, also known as MOMs. The initiative was in direct response to the number of women dying from overdose during pregnancy or within a year after pregnancy.

The Naloxone Project was started in Colorado in 2021 by an emergency and addiction medicine physician. The project distributes naloxone directly to patients in Colorado hospital emergency rooms at risk for opioid overdose.

To date, The Naloxone Project has distributed more than 2,500 naloxone kits to 107 hospitals to give to patients across the state. The project also works to normalize the conversation about opioid overdose and prevention in health care settings. It’s grown, and now it has chapters in 16 states.

Naloxone can make recovery possible

The American Society of Addiction Medicine defines substance use disorder as “a treatable, chronic medical disease involving complex interactions among brain circuits, genetics, the environment and an individual’s life experiences.” People with the disease of addiction can, and do, recover – but only if they can stay alive to receive the support and treatment they need.

Research shows direct distribution of naloxone to people, families and communities saves lives. Access to naloxone gives people, including Colorado moms, a literal second chance at life.

Naloxone for more than substance use disorder

While people with substance use disorder are at the highest risk for overdose, they’re not the only ones. In 2024 alone, 1,603 people died of accidental opioid overdoses in Colorado.

Prescription opioids, such as oxycodone, hydrocodone and morphine, are commonly prescribed after a surgery, including C-sections. Opioids like these taken at home, even with a prescription, can be a source of accidental overdose. For example, a person prescribed these medicines may take too much at once or have an unexpected interaction with other medications or alcohol.

Accidental overdose also occurs in people the prescription was not intended for. That includes children who find medications in their homes. In Colorado, 17 children died from opioid overdoses in 2024.

Today, parents leaving the hospital with their new baby are given naloxone and education. They learn about safe storage and disposal of medications, how to recognize an opioid overdose, and how to give naloxone in case of emergency. Nasal-spray naloxone, the most common form provided by The Naloxone Project, is safe for all ages, including infants and toddlers.

Naloxone as a standard of care

Caring for people impacted by substance use disorder has convinced me that naloxone has a place in every home, school and workplace in our community.

Recognizing and responding to opioid overdose, including giving naloxone, is now a standard part of Basic Life Support training. Opioid overdose reversal is now seen as a critical, lifesaving skill comparable to CPR. Including this skill in training empowers bystanders to intervene.

For some of my patients, receiving naloxone during an overdose event gave them a chance to seek treatment and enter long-term recovery from substance use. Opioid use disorder treatment includes evidence-based medication for opioid use disorder, such as methadone, buprenorphine or naltrexone, residential or intensive outpatient treatment, individual therapy and peer support services, especially programs designed for pregnant and parenting moms.

How these facets of treatment come together in an individual person’s journey is unique. As much as I seek to individualize treatment plans, naloxone is for everyone. It can build a bridge between despair and hope — life and death — and as the data shows, it might be a part of saving Colorado moms’ lives.

Kaylin Klie receives funding from Colorado State Opioid Response funding. She is affiliated with The Naloxone Project as the Physician Lead for MOMS Plus.

– ref. Fewer new moms are dying in Colorado – naloxone might be one reason why – https://theconversation.com/fewer-new-moms-are-dying-in-colorado-naloxone-might-be-one-reason-why-273761

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Karen Stollznow, Research Fellow of linguistics, Griffith Centre for Social and Cultural Research, Griffith University; University of Colorado Boulder

There’s a common assumption that if someone starts learning a language when they are very young, they will quickly become fluent.

Many people also assume that it will become much harder to learn a language if they start later in life.

Research into language learning shows that how old someone is when they learn a language does matter, but there is no point at which the ability to learn a language switches off.

While a young language learner can more easily acquire a native accent, adults retain the ability to learn new languages well into later life. Anyone can continue to learn and refine their vocabulary and grammar. Other factors, like motivation, can also play a role for learners of all ages.

I am a linguist and the author of a forthcoming book, “Beyond Words: How We Learn, Use, and Lose Language,” which looks at how language is learned, used and lost across a lifespan — and why age alone does not set hard limits on our linguistic abilities.

Instead, the strategies learners use, the outcomes they achieve most easily, and how others judge their progress can all change over time.

How age shapes language learning

Someone’s age can influence their language learning ability in a variety of ways.

Scientists sometimes talk about sensitive periods, or an early development window in which the brain is especially receptive to certain kinds of input.

When it comes to language, babies and children are particularly sensitive to the sound patterns of speech. They can also pick up on subtle phonetic distinctions that adults struggle to perceive or reproduce.

This helps explain why children who grow up bilingual often sound native in both languages. Accents, more than vocabulary or grammar, are where age-related differences are most pronounced.

Sensitive periods are found in other animals, too, especially birds, which have an early sensitive period for learning their species-specific song from an adult tutor.

After this window closes, learning a new language is still very much possible. But it usually takes more conscious effort and practice.

Studies also show that children exposed to a second language early, roughly before puberty, are more likely to develop nativelike pronunciation and intonation.

Brain imaging research shows that people who learn two languages early in life tend to process both languages in the same parts of the brain. Those who learn a second language later often use slightly different brain areas for each language.

In practical terms, early bilinguals are more likely to switch between languages effortlessly. Later learners may have to more consciously work through their second language, especially at first.

Benefits to learning a language as an adult

Pronunciation is only one part of language proficiency. Adults bring their own strengths to the task.

Unlike young children, adult learners already have a fully developed first language. They also have skills in reasoning and pattern recognition, as well as an awareness of how language works.

This allows adults to learn in a more deliberate way, as they study grammar rules and consciously compare languages. Adults are also more likely to rely on deliberate strategies, such as memorization, to learn a language.

In classroom settings, adults often outperform children in early stages of learning, particularly in reading and writing.

Language learning never truly stops. Even in adulthood, people continue to develop and refine their first language, shaped by their education, work and social environment, and how they use it day to day.

While it may be harder for adults to acquire a nativelike accent later in life, the good news is that grammar, vocabulary and fluency remain well within reach for most adult learners.

Benefits of learning a language as a kid

Children, meanwhile, tend to learn languages implicitly, through immersion and interaction, often without conscious attention to rules.

Social and emotional factors also play a major role in successfully learning a language.

Children are generally less self-conscious than adults and more willing to take risks when speaking.

Adults, by contrast, are often acutely aware of mistakes and may hesitate to speak for fear of sounding foolish or being judged.

Research consistently shows that being willing to communicate is a strong predictor of success in learning a new language. Anxiety, inhibition and negative feedback from others can significantly slow progress, regardless of age.

Accent, bias and social pressure

Other factors, like social pressure and discrimination, matter as someone tries to learn a new language.

Research into language and identity shows that listeners frequently associate accented speech with lower intelligence or competence, despite there being no connection between accent and cognitive ability.

Non-native speakers often experience stigmatization, discrimination and prejudice from native speakers.

This bias can discourage adult learners and reinforce the false belief that successful language learning means sounding native.

Motivation and aptitude matter, too

Motivation is another key factor that affects learners of all ages.

People learn new languages for many reasons: a new country, work, school, relationships or interest in another culture.

Research distinguishes between the different reasons people learn a language. Some are practical, like advancing a career or passing a test. Others are personal, such as wanting to connect with a community, culture or family.

Learners who feel a strong personal or emotional connection to the language are more likely to keep going even when it gets difficult, and they often reach higher levels of fluency than those without this connection.

Other people have a natural aptitude for learning a language and can pick it up easily. Perhaps they quickly notice sound patterns, or they can remember new vocabulary after hearing it once or twice.

Language aptitude is different from intelligence and varies from person to person. Aptitude makes success in learning a language more likely, but it doesn’t guarantee it.

Learners with average aptitude can still become very proficient in new languages as adults if they have consistent exposure, practice and motivation.

Different ages, different strengths

So is it better to learn a second language as a child or as an adult? Research suggests the more useful question is which aspects of language learning, such as pronunciation, fluency or long-term mastery, matter most.

Learning a new language early makes it easier to sound like a native speaker and to use the language smoothly, without having to think about the rules.

Learning that language later in life draws on adult strengths, such as planning, problem-solving and focused practice.

Ultimately, some people pick up languages quickly while others struggle, regardless of how old they are.

Beliefs about language learning shape education policy, parenting choices and how multilingual speakers are treated in everyday life.

When adults are told they’ve missed their chance to learn a language, many never bother to try. When foreign accents are treated as flaws, capable speakers can be unfairly discriminated against.

In fact, research shows that learning a language is possible at any age – it’s a lifelong, achievable journey, rather than a race against the clock.

Karen Stollznow does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. It’s never too late to learn a language – adults and kids bring different strengths to the task – https://theconversation.com/its-never-too-late-to-learn-a-language-adults-and-kids-bring-different-strengths-to-the-task-276583

Source: The Conversation – USA – By R. Alexander Bentley, Professor of Anthropology, University of Tennessee

In graduate school, my experimental archaeology professor told a student to create a door socket – the hole in a door frame that a bolt slides into – in a slab of sandstone by pecking at it with a rounded stone. After a couple of weeks, the student presented his results to the class. “I pecked the sandstone about 10,000 times,” he said, “and then it broke.”

This kind of experience is known as individual learning. It works through trial and error, with lots of each. Also known as reinforcement learning, it is how children, chimpanzees, crows and AI often learn to do something on their own, such as making a simple tool or solving a puzzle.

But individual learning has limits. No matter how much someone experiments through trial and error, improvement eventually hits a ceiling. Humans have been throwing javelins for a few hundred thousand years, yet performance has largely plateaued. At the 2024 Olympics in Paris, the gold medal javelin throw was about 5% shy of Jan Železný’s 1996 record. The level of expert play in the strategy game Go was essentially flat from 1950 to 2016, when artificial intelligence changed the equation.

Throughout humanity’s existence, these limits on individual learning have not applied to technology. Since IBM’s Deep Blue defeated world chess champion Garry Kasparov in 1997, supercomputers have become a million times faster – and now routinely outperform humans in chess and many other domains.

Why is technological improvement so different? My work as an anthropologist on cultural evolution and innovation shows that, unlike individual performance, technology advances through combination and collaboration. As more people and ideas connect, the number of possible combinations grows superlinearly. Technological innovation scales with the number of collaborators.

My new book with anthropologist Michael J. O’Brien, “Collaborators Through Time,” reveals these patterns across human existence. It traces how 2 million years of technological traditions progressed through collaboration among specialists, across generations and with other species.

Expertise has been the key. Because traditional communities know who their experts are, specialization and collaboration have consistently underpinned human success as a species.

I’d summarize our insight into how technology keeps advancing as TECH: tradition, expertise, collaboration and humanity.

Traditions and expertise – the critical foundation

The longest technological tradition documented by paleoanthropologists was the Acheulean hand axe. The multipurpose stone tool was made by our hominin ancestors for almost a million years, including some 700,000 years at a single site in eastern Africa. People produced Acheulean tools through techniques they learned, practiced and refined across generations.

Later, small prehistoric societies of modern humans thrived on millennia of specialized knowledge, such as music, thatched roofs, seed cultivation, burying dead bodies in bogs, and making millet noodles and even cheese suitable for interring with mummies.

As early as 22,000 years ago, communities near the Sea of Galilee stored and used more than a hundred plant species, including medicinal plants. Shamans – ritual experts in medicinal knowledge and caregiving – helped their groups survive. Archaeological evidence from burial sites suggests these specialists were widely revered across thousands of years: One shaman woman was interred with tortoise shells, the wing of a golden eagle and a severed human foot in a cave in Israel.

Collaboration – knowledge spanning time and place

Traditional expertise alone does not advance technology. Technological progress occurs when different forms of expertise are combined.

The wheel may have emerged from copper-mining communities. One expert sourced copper from the Balkans, another transported it, another smelted it. By about 4000 B.C., additional specialists cast copper into an early wheel-shaped amulet: shaping a wax model, encasing it in clay, firing it in a kiln, pouring molten metal into the mold, then breaking the mold away.

Transport technologies reshaped ancient product networks. As communities across Eurasia and Africa built wheeled vehicles and ships, and raised domesticated horses and other pack animals, collaboration expanded across continents. Maritime and overland trade linked blacksmiths, scribes, religious scholars, bead makers, silk weavers and tattoo artists.

Expertise was often distributed between cities and their hinterlands, with cities functioning as hubs in cross-continental product networks. In ancient Egypt, no single community could produce a mummy. Mummification experts at Saqqara drew on a continental network that supplied oils, tars and resins, combining these materials with specialized techniques of antisepsis, embalming, wrapping and coffin sealing.

Around the world, states and empires – from the Indus Valley Civilization to the Vikings, Mongols, Mississippians and Incas – expanded these networks, serving as hubs that coordinated the exchange of raw materials, specialized knowledge and finished products. These exchanges could be highly specific: Chinese porcelain was shipped exclusively to 12th-century palaces in Islamic Spain via Middle Eastern traders who added Arabic inscriptions in gold leaf.

The scale has changed, but the structure has not. Today, within a global product space, an iPhone is assembled from a distributed network of specialized expertise and facilities.

Humanity – social learning

Today, AI may disrupt the millennia-long pattern of technological advancement through TECH. Most large language models generate statistically common responses, which can flatten culture and dilute expertise and originality. The risk grows as untapped high-quality training data – our reservoir of expertise – becomes scarcer.

This creates a feedback loop: Models trained heavily on low-quality content may degrade over time, with measurable declines in reasoning and comprehension. Some scientists now warn that humans and large language models could become locked in a mutually reinforcing cycle of recycled, generic content, with brain rot for everyone involved. The dystopian extreme is AI model collapse, in which systems trained heavily on their own output begin to produce nonsense.

Brain rot is one reason some AI pioneers now question whether large language models will achieve human-level intelligence. But that, I think, is the wrong focus. The key to continually improving AI models is the same one that has sustained human expertise for millennia: keeping human experts in the loop – the E in TECH. Thanks to a kind of “pied piper” effect, an informed minority can guide an uninformed majority who copy their neighbors.

In a classic experiment, guppies, following their neighbors, ended up schooling behind a robotic fish that guided them toward food. A recent study showed that traffic congestion eases when autonomous vehicles make up as little as 5% of cars on the road. In both cases, a small, informed minority reshaped the behavior of the whole system.

Like humans, large language models are social learners, and the learning can go in either direction. Designers can increase the likelihood that models continue to improve by ensuring they incorporate the accumulated lessons of human expertise across history. In turn, this creates the conditions for people and models to learn from one another.

In the 2010s, DeepMind’s AlphaGo rediscovered centuries of accumulated human Go knowledge through individual learning, then went beyond it by crafting strategies no human had ever played. Human Go masters subsequently adopted these AI-generated strategies into their own play.

Well-trained large language models can likewise summarize vast bodies of scientific information, help talk people out of conspiracy thinking and even support collaboration itself by helping diverse groups find consensus. In these cases, the learning flows both ways.

From Acheulean hand axes to supercomputers, human innovation has always depended on tradition, expertise, collaboration and humanity. If AI is tuned to find and trust expertise rather than dilute it, it can become humanity’s next great technology – on par with ancient writing, markets and early governments – in our long story as collaborators through time.

R. Alexander Bentley does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Will AI accelerate or undermine the way humans have always innovated? – https://theconversation.com/will-ai-accelerate-or-undermine-the-way-humans-have-always-innovated-272246

Source: The Conversation – Africa (2) – By Mohib Abderrahim, Chercheur en Préhistoire et conservateur principal des Monuments et Sites, Institut national des Sciences de l’Archéologie et du Patrimoine in Rabat

Could a Moroccan cave hold a crucial piece of the puzzle of human origins? Hominin fossils dating back 773,000 years discovered in the country are bringing new evidence to the debate about the last common ancestor of present-day humans (Homo sapiens), Neanderthals and Denisovans. The discovery points to a long evolutionary history in north Africa, much earlier than modern Homo sapiens. It also supports Africa’s central role in the major stages that shaped the human species.

Abderrahim Mohib is a prehistoric archaeologist, heritage curator, and associate professor and researcher at the National Institute of Archaeological Sciences and Heritage in Rabat. He’s one of the authors of a recent study that explains the significance of the discovery.

---

What did you discover and why does it matter?

Excavations have been underway since 1994 in the Hominid Cave at the Thomas Quarry I, south-west of the city of Casablanca in Morocco. A research programme called Prehistory of Casablanca working at the site is led by Morocco’s National Institute of Archaeological Sciences and Heritage and the French Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs.

The team has unearthed hominin fossils along with thousands of animal remains and around 300 artefacts made of quartzite and flint. The site looks like it was a den for large carnivores. This is supported by a hominin femur showing bite marks from a large carnivore, likely a hyena.

In addition to the femur, the set of hominin remains includes a nearly complete adult jaw, half of another adult jaw, a young child’s jawbone, cervical and thoracic vertebrae, and several teeth.

This discovery is significant. It sheds new light on a key period in human evolution. Fossils from this period are very scarce in Africa, Europe and Asia. These remains help document little-known populations between early Homo species and the more recent lineages. They are the oldest hominin fossils ever found in Morocco with a clear and reliable date.

In addition, the site is adjacent to another, older, site named Unit L in the same quarry. This site covers more than 1,000 square metres and dates back to 1.3 million years ago. It documents the oldest human occupation in Morocco. It is linked to the Acheulean material culture in north-west Africa.

How old are these early humans and how did you date them so accurately?

These fossils found in Casablanca were dated to around 773,000 years, using palaeomagnetism, the study of the Earth’s ancient magnetic field.

The sediments in Grottes à Hominidés have recorded changes in the Earth’s magnetic field. With very high-resolution sampling (every 2cm) we were able to identify the last geomagnetic reversal from a reverse polarity (Matuyama) to a normal polarity (Brunhes). This means that we have identified a period when the Earth’s magnetic field flipped. And that is a natural event that serves as a marker for dating geological and archaeological layers.

---

Read more:
The whole story of human evolution – from ancient apes via Lucy to us

---

This reversal is a very solid and widely accepted chronological marker. What is extraordinary is that our fossil remains date precisely to the time of the reversal. This offers one of the most reliable datings of hominin fossils from the Pleistocene era (starting about 2.58 million years ago and often called the “Ice Age”). These data are consistent with the geological setting and palaeontological remains.

How does this change our understanding of modern human evolution?

The Casablanca fossils come from a time when Homo erectus spread out of Africa. It was also a time when older groups of hominins like the Australopithecus and Paranthropus died out.

In terms of shapes and features, the fossils show a mix of archaic traits typical of Homo erectus and more advanced traits closely related to Homo sapiens. They also fill an important gap in the African fossil record. Palaeogenetic data suggest a split between the African lineage to Homo sapiens and the Eurasian lineages that later produced the Neanderthals and the Denisovans.

The unique combination of primitive and more evolved features suggests that these individuals were in a population that lived close in time to this split.

---

Read more:
Morocco dinosaur discovery gives clues on why they went extinct

---

This Moroccan population can be described as having advanced traits of Homo erectus. It has more evolved traits than older Homo erectus fossils found in Africa and Asia. But it lacks the full modern features seen in Neanderthals or anatomically modern Homo sapiens.

Until now, the fossils of Homo antecessor unearthed at the Gran Dolina site in Atapuerca, Spain were the only ones to show Homo sapiens-like traits. The fossils from the Grotte à Hominidés offer a new perspective.

They open up the possibility of an evolutionary link with the oldest known Homo sapiens fossils – those from Jebel Irhoud in Morocco, dated to around 315,000 years ago. These discoveries help clarify the emergence of the Homo sapiens lineage while reinforcing the idea that its deep roots are African.

So, based on their mix of archaic and derived traits, these finds support the deep African roots of Homo sapiens but also point to an African population close to the split between Eurasian and African lineages in the Middle Pleistocene.

Why is north Africa, and Morocco in particular, so important?

North-west Africa, along with east and southern Africa, represents one of the key regions where we currently have a new window into the evolution of Pleistocene hominins. The Mediterranean Sea likely acted as a major biogeographical barrier. It contributed to the divergence between African and Eurasian populations.

---

Read more:
Giant sea lizards: fossils in Morocco reveal the astounding diversity of marine life 66 million years ago, just before the asteroid hit

---

The Sahara desert’s size changed over time. It probably shaped how African populations were structured. The Moroccan fossils confirm how ancient and deep our species’ roots are in Africa. They highlight the key role of north-west Africa in the major stages of human evolution.

Mohib Abderrahim is Researcher in Prehistory and Chief Curator of Monuments and Sites, National Institute of Archaeological Sciences and Heritage in Rabat.

– ref. Morocco: ancient fossils shed light on a key period in human evolution – https://theconversation.com/morocco-ancient-fossils-shed-light-on-a-key-period-in-human-evolution-275099

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By James Trapani, Associate Lecturer of History and International Relations, Western Sydney University

After toppling Venezuela’s leader earlier this year, the Trump administration has turned its sights on Cuba. The near-total blockade of the island is now posing the greatest challenge to the government since the Cuban missile crisis in 1962.

Cuba is quickly running out of oil, creating a dire political and economic crisis for the island’s 11 million residents.

US President Donald Trump’s embargo has prevented any oil tankers from reaching the island for months. A ship carrying Russian fuel is now reportedly on the way to the island to attempt to break the blockade, but the US has seized other ships that have previously tried.

The Trump administration has also threatened tariffs on any nation that tries to send Cuba fuel, putting Latin American leaders in an uncomfortable position. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has called out the embargo as “very unfair”, but she’s been careful not to antagonise Trump by putting an emphasis on the Cuban “people”, not the government.

This is not the first time the US has isolated Cuba, or coerced Latin American leaders to take part. Cuba has been under a US embargo for the past 66 years, which has stunted its economy and caused widespread human suffering.

The island has always found a way to get by, but can it survive this new round of American pressure?

Animosity grows in the 1950s

The Cuban Revolution caught the United States by surprise in 1959. During the Cold War, the US had supported dictatorships in Latin America, such as Cuba’s Fulgencio Batista, with political, financial and military support, creating widespread anti-US activism across the region.

After coming to power, revolutionary leader Fidel Castro instituted modest reforms to land tenure and infrastructure to support the impoverished people. Then-US President Dwight Eisenhower opposed these moves because of their impact on US commercial interests on the island. This opposition turned into a US embargo of Cuban sugar imports in 1960.

In response, Castro looked to the Soviets as an export alternative. Eisenhower retaliated by refusing to ship oil to Cuba, leading Castro to sign an oil deal with the Soviets and eventually nationalise American and British refineries. In 1961, Castro declared his adherence to “Marxism-Leninism”.

Castro and Cuba were hugely popular throughout Latin America. When the Cuban military defeated the CIA-trained force of exiled Cuban fighters at the Bay of Pigs in 1961, Castro was lauded for standing up to the US, though few knew of the military and intelligence support coming from the Soviets.

And when President John F. Kennedy began the campaign to remove Cuba from the Organisation of American States (OAS) in 1961, most Latin American democracies moved to block it.

To bring those leaders to his side, Kennedy used a carrot-and-stick approach. He proposed an “alliance for progress” to meet the “basic needs of the [Latin] American people for homes, work and land, health and schools”. But his government also passed the Foreign Assistance Act, which established a total blockade of the island and prohibited US aid to any country providing assistance to Cuba.

The OAS removed Cuba as a member the following year and, in 1964, voted to embargo all trade to Cuba, except food and medicine.

Life under the embargo

The embargo prevented Cuba from reaching the modern technological age. Instead, it existed in socialist bubble, emphasising the care of its people over economic development.

Nonetheless, Cuba’s Cold War economic growth was comparable to its neighbours. In 1970, the nominal GDP per capita for Cuba was US$645 (A$900), slightly lower than Mexico and about double the Dominican Republic. By 1990, it was US$2,565 (A$3,600), about 80% of Mexico’s and more than triple the Dominican Republic’s.

Cuba was not industrialised, but the country did reach full literacy before any other Latin American nation and extended health care to all Cubans. Cuba then exported its teachers and doctors throughout Latin America, and beyond.

However, life on the island was still difficult, especially after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

With no clear replacement for Soviet imports and subsidies, the economy began to buckle. From 1990 to 1994 (a time known as the “Special Period”), food production decreased by 40%, leading to food rationing, malnutrition and other health issues.

Protests broke out across the island in 1994 and some 35,000 Cubans fled on boats for Florida.

Cuba and the US after the Cold War

However, the end of the Cold War brought newfound sympathy and assistance from Cuba’s neighbours. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, for example, provided Cuba with oil in exchange for Cuban doctors.

Then, in 2009, the OAS voted to readmit Cuba and allow for regional trade and tourism again.

US President Barack Obama followed suit in 2014, saying the US embargo of Cuba had “failed”.

His administration then initiated what would become known as the “Cuban thaw”. Then-President Raul Castro visited Washington in 2015 and, the following year, Obama became the first US president to visit Cuba since 1928.

Obama did not end the embargo, but he did open the door to US tourism, providing a lifeline for Cuba’s economy.

Why is Trump punishing the island again?

Now, Trump is reimposing the Cold War-era embargo on the island and ramping up the pressure on President Miguel Díaz-Canel’s government.

The White House claims Cuba presents an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to the United States, saying the island is cooperating with “dangerous adversaries” on intelligence activities, chief among them Russia and China.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has condemned Trump’s embargo, saying “we do not accept anything like this”.

If Russian oil makes it to Cuba, more aid could follow. If that eventuates, the US will have invited Russia into its backyard again, laying the foundation for another Cold War-style stalemate, with the Cuban people once more trapped in the middle.

James Trapani does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Cuba has survived 66 years of US-led embargoes. Will Trump’s blockade break it now? – https://theconversation.com/cuba-has-survived-66-years-of-us-led-embargoes-will-trumps-blockade-break-it-now-276065

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Simon Theobald, Research Fellow, University of Oxford; University of Notre Dame Australia

As Iranian and US diplomats meet in Geneva for crucial negotiations to avoid a potential war, opposition groups in exile are sniffing an opportunity.

The Islamic Republic faces its greatest political crisis since its inception. US President Donald Trump is threatening an imminent attack if Iran doesn’t capitulate on its nuclear program. And anti-regime protesters continue to gather, despite a brutal government crackdown that has killed upwards of 20,000 people, and possibly more.

Talk of a future Iran after the fall of the Islamic regime has grown increasingly fervent. And buoyed by cries heard during some of the protests in Iran of “long live the shah” (the former monarch of Iran), the voices of royalists in the Iranian diaspora are everywhere.

But is a return of the shah really what Iranians want, and what would be best for the country?

What are the monarchists promising?

Iran’s monarchy was ancient, but the Pahlavi dynasty that last ruled the country only came to power in 1925 when Reza Khan, a soldier in the army, overthrew the previous dynasty.

Khan adopted the name Pahlavi, and attempted to bring Iran closer to Western social and economic norms. He was also an authoritarian leader, famous for banning the hijab, and was ultimately forced into exile by the British following the Anglo-Soviet invasion of Iran in 1941.

His son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, attempted to continue his father’s reforms, but was similarly authoritarian. Presiding over a government that tolerated little dissent, he was ultimately forced out by the huge tide of opposition during the Islamic Revolution of 1979.

---

Read more:
How Iran’s current unrest can be traced back to the 1979 revolution

---

Now, the exiled crown prince, 65-year-old Reza Pahlavi, is being touted by many in the diaspora as the most credible and visible opposition figure to be able to lead the country if and when the Islamic Republic collapses.

Pro-monarchy groups such as the US-based National Union for Democracy in Iran (NUFDI) have become vocal supporters of Pahlavi.

In early 2025, the NUFDI launched a well-coordinated and media savvy “Iran Prosperity Project”, offering what the group claimed was a roadmap for economic recovery in a post-Islamic Republic Iran. Pahlavi himself penned the foreword.

Then, in July, the group released its “Emergency Phase Booklet”, with a vision for a new political system in Iran.

Although the document is mostly written in the language of international democratic norms, it envisions bestowing the crown prince with enormous powers. He’s called the “leader of the national uprising” and given the right to veto the institutions and selection processes in a transitional government.

One thing the document is missing is a response to the demands of Iran’s many ethnic minority groups for a federalist model of government in Iran.

Instead, under the plan, the government would remain highly centralised under the leadership of Pahlavi, at least until a referendum that the authors claim would determine a transition to either a constitutional monarchy or democratic republic.

But students of Iranian history cannot help but note echoes of the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini had promised a more democratic Iran with a new constitution, and without himself or other clerics in power.

After the revolution, though, Khomeini quickly grasped the reigns of power.

Online attacks against opponents

Pahlavi and his supporters have also struggled to stick to the principles of respectful debate and tolerance of different viewpoints.

When interviewed, Pahlavi has avoided discussing the autocratic nature of his father’s rule and the human rights abuses that occurred under it.

But if Pahlavi tends to avoid hard questions, his supporters can be aggressive. At the Munich Security Conference in February, British-Iranian journalist Christiane Amanpour interviewed the crown prince.

After the interview, Amanpour’s tough questions resulted in an explosion of anger from his supporters. In a video that has been widely shared on X, royalists can be seen heckling Amanpour, saying she “insulted” the crown prince.

In online forums, the language can be even more intimidating. Amanpour asked Pahlavi point-blank if he would tell his supporters to stop their “terrifying” attacks on ordinary Iranians.

While saying he doesn’t tolerate online attacks, he added, “I cannot control millions of people, whatever they say on social media, and who knows if they are real people or not.”

---

Read more:
The rise of Reza Pahlavi: Iranian opposition leader or opportunist?

---

Do Iranians want a monarchy?

As I’ve noted previously, the monarchist movement also talks as though it is speaking for the whole nation.

But during the recent protests, some students could be heard shouting: “No to monarchy, no to the leadership of the clerics, yes to an egalitarian democracy”.

The level of support for the shah within Iran is unclear, in part because polling is notoriously difficult.

A 2024 poll by the GAMAAN group, an organisation set up by two Iranian academics working in the Netherlands, attempted to gauge political sentiment in Iran. Just over 30% of those polled indicated Pahlavi would be their first choice if a free and fair election were held.

But the poll doesn’t indicate why people said they wanted to vote for him. It also showed just how fragmented the opposition is, with dozens of names getting lower levels of support.

The future of Iran is very unclear at the moment. Even if the Islamic Republic were to be dislodged – a very big “if” – the transition could very well be chaotic and violent.

Would Pahlavi make a good leader? For many critics, his behaviour, and that of his supporters, call into question the royalists’ promises of a more liberal and tolerant Iran.

Simon Theobald receives funding from the University of Oxford and the University of Notre Dame Australia.

– ref. Iran’s exiled crown prince is touting himself as a future leader. Is this what’s best for the country? – https://theconversation.com/irans-exiled-crown-prince-is-touting-himself-as-a-future-leader-is-this-whats-best-for-the-country-276629