Latest news with #SebastianGollnow
Yahoo
6 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Berlin authorities to investigate admission issues at Cup final
Police stand in front of the stands with the Bielefeld fans during the German DFB Cup final soccer match between Stuttgart and Arminia Bielefeld at the Olympiastadion. Sebastian Gollnow/dpa The Berlin senate administration is to investigate the incidents at the German Cup final last week following massive accusations from Arminia Bielefeld fans over poorly organized admission controls at the game. However, the authority sees the German Football Federation (DFB) as responsible for the potentially dangerous events. Advertisement "As the organizer of the German Cup final, the DFB is responsible for the security concept," the senate administration said in a statement. "Allegations that there were issues during this year's German Cup final are being evaluated by the Olympiastadion Berlin GmbH and the DFB." Third-division side Bielefeld played their first-ever Cup final last Saturday in Berlin's Olympic stadium against VfB Stuttgart, but were defeated 4-2. Several Bielefeld supporters complained about the chaotic conditions in front of the entrance gates dedicated to them. Thousands of fans had to wait for hours to be admitted and had to stand tightly packed in front of the gates without being able to leave. Advertisement A possible mass panic among the fans was only avoided by their common sense and luck, they said. Bielefeld said of the situation: "It is incomprehensible to us and in no way acceptable that such serious inconveniences occurred at the most important match in the club's history and one of the biggest events in German professional football." The DFB had already apologized for the issues, expressed its dismay and announced that it would investigate the matter. There were no complaints from Stuttgart fans, who had a different dedicated entrance. The German Cup final has been held in Berlin's Olympic stadium since 1985. This year's match was sold out with 74,036 spectators.
DW
23-05-2025
- Business
- DW
German economy in crisis: When will it bounce back? – DW – 05/22/2025
The new German government wants to revive the German economy by introducing an urgent recovery program. However, the crisis is so severe that economic experts see little chance of a rapid upturn. The term recession refers to an economy that is shrinking. This has been happening in Germany for two years now, the only country in the European Union experiencing such a decline. In 2024, more companies closed than in the previous major financial and economic crisis in 2011. High electricity prices have meant that energy-intensive industries have been hit especially hard. In addition, companies are having to close due to a shortage of workers and specialists as society is ageing. Germany's burgeoning bureaucracy is another major factor hampering business. The new government has set out to improve the situation quickly and sustainably. But this will not come about overnight. This is the finding of the Federal Government's economic advisory body. In its spring report, the German Council of Economic Experts spoke of a "period of considerable sluggishness" and practically ruled out a rapid recovery. No longer internationally competitive For 2025, the five economics professors project stagnation, meaning zero growth. In 2026, they see the economy possibly recovering somewhat with one percent growth. However, the experts are far from certain that Germany will be able to get back on track for economic success in the medium and long term. The German economy has become less and less competitive. A decisive factor was Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the halt to Russian gas supplies. The successful German business model of using cheap energy and high engineering skills to manufacture products that are in demand worldwide has been history ever since. The panel of five advisors presented their annual spring study of the German economy Image: Sebastian Gollnow/dpa/picture alliance Donald Trump puts the brakes on German exports On top of this, there are also domestic problems. "Bureaucratic regulations and lengthy approval procedures are slowing down macroeconomic growth," states the report by the economic experts. US President Donald Trump is also having a negative impact. His tariffs are jeopardizing economic growth worldwide, but have particularly negative consequences for the export-oriented German economy. In order to ease the burden on companies, Federal Economics Minister Katherina Reiche wants to introduce a number of initial measures by mid-July. The electricity tax is to be reduced, and the labor market will be reformed, Reiche said at an economic forum last week. Growth is the order of the day, she said, and the government will provide the stimulus, also by lowering corporate taxes. Steep energy costs harm German industry To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video New business models are needed The panel of economic experts is calling on the federal government to take a realistic view of the future. No attempts should be made to save jobs that are not viable in the long term, they wrote in their report. "An economic policy that aims to stop structural change through subsidies cannot be successful in the long term," said Monika Schnitzer, Chairwoman of the German Council of Economic Experts. Instead, the transition to new business models and professions should be promoted in a targeted manner. The multi-billion-euro financial package launched by the governing center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU)/Christian Social Union (CSU) and the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) is a source of hope. Some €500 billion ($567) are to be invested in the ailing infrastructure over the next twelve years. Money sparks greed "If used correctly, the funds can make Germany fit for the future, with considerable positive growth effects," said economist Achim Truger. However, he added, only if the money is actually spent on investments. New German government weighs hiking minimum wage To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The economists suspect that the ruling parties may use extra funds to finance their election promises, such as an increase in pensions for housewives, agricultural diesel subsidies, and a reduction in the restaurant tax. The economists warn that the €500 billion package must not be misappropriated. Because this much money cannot be spent quickly, the experts do not expect a positive effect until 2026 at the earliest. As the €500 billion fund and the massive increase in defense spending are based on fresh loans, Germany will no longer be able to meet the EU debt targets. This is something the experts have also warned against. Only if Germany manages to modernize itself structurally, the experts say, would such expenditures be justifiable. Many Germans are working part-time Chancellor Friedrich Merz has repeatedly said that people in Germany need to work more. "We cannot maintain prosperity with a four-day week and a work-life balance," he recently told the CDU Economic Council. He called for more flexible working hours and incentives for people to continue working voluntarily beyond retirement age. Economics professor Veronika Grimm said it is right that incentives are needed to increase participation in the labor market. She sees great potential in increasing the participation of women, mainly by improving childcare. But how can this be done if there are too few teachers? Grimm suggests that a shrinking workforce will force an increase in productivity of those who remain. This, she says, is possible through digitalization and a reduction in bureaucracy. Global shipping companies faces twin threats from Trump To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video How to reduce bureaucracy Despite numerous political initiatives, the burden of bureaucratic costs on companies has not yet decreased noticeably. The experts suggest speeding up application and approval procedures, reducing disclosure obligations that companies have towards the state, digitizing public administration, and setting up a standardized nationwide e-government portal. New regulations should be effective and user-friendly. Otherwise, this would only lead to more inefficient bureaucracy. "Between hope and trepidation" is how the Council of Experts described their outlook. And in their press release, the German Chamber of Industry and Commerce wrote: "Time is pressing, companies are ready. Now the politicians have to deliver." This article was originally written in German. While you're here: Every Tuesday, DW editors round up what is happening in German politics and society. You can sign up here for the weekly email newsletter, Berlin Briefing.
DW
22-05-2025
- Business
- DW
German economy: When will it pick up again? – DW – 05/22/2025
The new German government wants to revive the German economy by introducing an urgent recovery program. However, the crisis is so severe that economic experts see little chance of a rapid upturn. The term recession refers to an economy that is shrinking. This has been happening in Germany for two years now, the only country in the European Union experiencing such a decline. In 2024, more companies closed than in the previous major financial and economic crisis in 2011. High electricity prices have meant that energy-intensive industries have been hit especially hard. In addition, companies are having to close due to a shortage of workers and specialists as society is ageing. Germany's burgeoning bureaucracy is another major factor hampering business. The new government has set out to improve the situation quickly and sustainably. But this will not come about overnight. This is the finding of the Federal Government's economic advisory body. In its spring report, the German Council of Economic Experts spoke of a "period of considerable sluggishness" and practically ruled out a rapid recovery. No longer internationally competitive For 2025, the five economics professors project stagnation, meaning zero growth. In 2026, they see the economy possibly recovering somewhat with one percent growth. However, the experts are far from certain that Germany will be able to get back on track for economic success in the medium and long term. The German economy has become less and less competitive. A decisive factor was Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the halt to Russian gas supplies. The successful German business model of using cheap energy and high engineering skills to manufacture products that are in demand worldwide has been history ever since. The panel of five advisors presented their annual spring study of the German economy Image: Sebastian Gollnow/dpa/picture alliance Donald Trump puts the brakes on German exports On top of this, there are also domestic problems. "Bureaucratic regulations and lengthy approval procedures are slowing down macroeconomic growth," states the report by the economic experts. US President Donald Trump is also having a negative impact. His tariffs are jeopardizing economic growth worldwide, but have particularly negative consequences for the export-oriented German economy. In order to ease the burden on companies, Federal Economics Minister Katherina Reiche wants to introduce a number of initial measures by mid-July. The electricity tax is to be reduced, and the labor market will be reformed, Reiche said at an economic forum last week. Growth is the order of the day, she said, and the government will provide the stimulus, also by lowering corporate taxes. Steep energy costs harm German industry To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video New business models are needed The panel of economic experts is calling on the federal government to take a realistic view of the future. No attempts should be made to save jobs that are not viable in the long term, they wrote in their report. "An economic policy that aims to stop structural change through subsidies cannot be successful in the long term," said Monika Schnitzer, Chairwoman of the German Council of Economic Experts. Instead, the transition to new business models and professions should be promoted in a targeted manner. The multi-billion-euro financial package launched by the governing center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU)/Christian Social Union (CSU) and the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) is a source of hope. Some €500 billion ($567) are to be invested in the ailing infrastructure over the next twelve years. Money sparks greed "If used correctly, the funds can make Germany fit for the future, with considerable positive growth effects," said economist Achim Truger. However, he added, only if the money is actually spent on investments. New German government weighs hiking minimum wage To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The economists suspect that the ruling parties may use extra funds to finance their election promises, such as an increase in pensions for housewives, agricultural diesel subsidies, and a reduction in the restaurant tax. The economists warn that the €500 billion package must not be misappropriated. Because this much money cannot be spent quickly, the experts do not expect a positive effect until 2026 at the earliest. As the €500 billion fund and the massive increase in defense spending are based on fresh loans, Germany will no longer be able to meet the EU debt targets. This is something the experts have also warned against. Only if Germany manages to modernize itself structurally, the experts say, would such expenditures be justifiable. Many Germans are working part-time Chancellor Friedrich Merz has repeatedly said that people in Germany need to work more. "We cannot maintain prosperity with a four-day week and a work-life balance," he recently told the CDU Economic Council. He called for more flexible working hours and incentives for people to continue working voluntarily beyond retirement age. Economics professor Veronika Grimm said it is right that incentives are needed to increase participation in the labor market. She sees great potential in increasing the participation of women, mainly by improving childcare. But how can this be done if there are too few teachers? Grimm suggests that a shrinking workforce will force an increase in productivity of those who remain. This, she says, is possible through digitalization and a reduction in bureaucracy. Global shipping companies faces twin threats from Trump To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video How to reduce bureaucracy Despite numerous political initiatives, the burden of bureaucratic costs on companies has not yet decreased noticeably. The experts suggest speeding up application and approval procedures, reducing disclosure obligations that companies have towards the state, digitizing public administration, and setting up a standardized nationwide e-government portal. New regulations should be effective and user-friendly. Otherwise, this would only lead to more inefficient bureaucracy. "Between hope and trepidation" is how the Council of Experts described their outlook. And in their press release, the German Chamber of Industry and Commerce wrote: "Time is pressing, companies are ready. Now the politicians have to deliver." This article was originally written in German. While you're here: Every Tuesday, DW editors round up what is happening in German politics and society. You can sign up here for the weekly email newsletter, Berlin Briefing.
DW
22-05-2025
- Business
- DW
German economy: When will things pick up again? – DW – 05/22/2025
The new German government wants to revive the German economy by introducing an urgent recovery program. However, the crisis is so severe that economic experts see little chance of a rapid upturn. The term recession refers to an economy that is shrinking. This has been happening in Germany for two years now, the only country in the European Union experiencing such a decline. In 2024, more companies closed than in the previous major financial and economic crisis in 2011. High electricity prices have meant that energy-intensive industries have been hit especially hard. In addition, companies are having to close due to a shortage of workers and specialists as society is ageing. Germany's burgeoning bureaucracy is another major factor hampering business. The new government has set out to improve the situation quickly and sustainably. But this will not come about overnight. This is the finding of the Federal Government's economic advisory body. In its spring report, the German Council of Economic Experts spoke of a "period of considerable sluggishness" and practically ruled out a rapid recovery. No longer competitive internationally For 2025, the five economics professors project stagnation, meaning zero growth. In 2026, they see the economy possibly recovering somewhat with one percent growth. However, the experts are far from certain that Germany will be able to get back on track for economic success in the medium and long term. The German economy has become less and less competitive. A decisive factor was Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the halt to Russian gas supplies. The successful German business model of using cheap energy and high engineering skills to manufacture products that are in demand worldwide has been history ever since. The panel of five advisors presented their annual spring study of the German economy Image: Sebastian Gollnow/dpa/picture alliance Donald Trump puts the brakes on German exports On top of this, there are also domestic problems. "Bureaucratic regulations and lengthy approval procedures are slowing down macroeconomic growth," states the report by the economic experts. US President Donald Trump is also having a negative impact. His tariffs are jeopardizing economic growth worldwide, but have particularly negative consequences for the export-oriented German economy. In order to ease the burden on companies, Federal Economics Minister Katherina Reiche wants to introduce a number of initial measures by mid-July. The electricity tax is to be reduced, and the labor market will be reformed, Reiche said at an economic forum last week. Growth is the order of the day, she said, and the government will provide the stimulus, also by lowering corporate taxes. Steep energy costs harm German industry To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video New business models are needed The panel of economic experts is calling on the federal government to take a realistic view of the future. No attempts should be made to save jobs that are not viable in the long term, they wrote in their report. "An economic policy that aims to stop structural change through subsidies cannot be successful in the long term," said Monika Schnitzer, Chairwoman of the German Council of Economic Experts. Instead, the transition to new business models and professions should be promoted in a targeted manner. The multi-billion-euro financial package launched by the governing center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU)/Christian Social Union (CSU) and the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) is a source of hope. Some €500 billion ($567) are to be invested in the ailing infrastructure over the next twelve years. Money sparks greed "If used correctly, the funds can make Germany fit for the future, with considerable positive growth effects," said economist Achim Truger. However, he added, only if the money is actually spent on investments. New German government weighs hiking minimum wage To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The economists suspect that the ruling parties may use extra funds to finance their election promises, such as an increase in pensions for housewives, agricultural diesel subsidies, and a reduction in the restaurant tax. The economists warn that the €500 billion package must not be misappropriated. Because this much money cannot be spent quickly, the experts do not expect a positive effect until 2026 at the earliest. As the €500 billion fund and the massive increase in defense spending are based on fresh loans, Germany will no longer be able to meet the EU debt targets. This is something the experts have also warned against. Only if Germany manages to modernize itself structurally, the experts say, would such expenditures be justifiable. Many Germans are working part-time Chancellor Friedrich Merz has repeatedly said that people in Germany need to work more. "We cannot maintain prosperity with a four-day week and a work-life balance," he recently told the CDU Economic Council. He called for more flexible working hours and incentives for people to continue working voluntarily beyond retirement age. Economics professor Veronika Grimm said it is right that incentives are needed to increase participation in the labor market. She sees great potential in increasing the participation of women, mainly by improving childcare. But how can this be done if there are too few teachers? Grimm suggests that a shrinking workforce will force an increase in productivity of those who remain. This, she says, is possible through digitalization and a reduction in bureaucracy. Global shipping companies faces twin threats from Trump To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video How to reduce bureaucracy Despite numerous political initiatives, the burden of bureaucratic costs on companies has not yet decreased noticeably. The experts suggest speeding up application and approval procedures, reducing disclosure obligations that companies have towards the state, digitizing public administration, and setting up a standardized nationwide e-government portal. New regulations should be effective and user-friendly. Otherwise, this would only lead to more inefficient bureaucracy. "Between hope and trepidation" is how the Council of Experts described their outlook. And in their press release, the German Chamber of Industry and Commerce wrote: "Time is pressing, companies are ready. Now the politicians have to deliver." This article was originally written in German. While you're here: Every Tuesday, DW editors round up what is happening in German politics and society. You can sign up here for the weekly email newsletter, Berlin Briefing.
Yahoo
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Why I'm Resigning from the NSF and Library of Congress
Alondra Nelson, while serving as Director of Science and Technology Policy for the White House, attends a meeting of G7 science ministers on June 13, 2022, in Frankfurt, Germany. Credit - Sebastian Gollnow—Today, I am resigning from the National Science Board and the Library of Congress Scholars Council. Even as the White House threatens the foundational tenets of constitutional democracy and continues to slash funding for essential social services, it is tempting to hope that the public institutions charged with promoting and protecting knowledge will, nevertheless, soldier on with their mission. I did. Since January 2025, scientists and librarians, program officers and policy analysts at the National Science Foundation, the Library of Congress, and other federal offices and agencies have focused on their work, despite an increasingly hostile political environment. We've also seen civil servants fired and accused of not making the mark, vendors's contracts ignored, and grants and fellowships cancelled. Perseverance has its limits. The erosion of these institutions' integrity—and the growing realization that it is impossible to fulfill their missions in good faith—has made the cost of continuing untenable. This is why I must step away from my work with two federal institutions I care deeply about. In both these roles, over the past few years, I've been asked to serve on diverse bodies that offer guidance about how the Executive and Legislative branches can be stewards of knowledge and create structure to enable discovery, innovation, and ingenuity. In the instance of the National Science Board, this ideal has dissolved so gradually, yet so completely, that I barely noticed its absence until confronted with its hollow simulacrum. I have encountered increasing barriers to the exercise of honest counsel. These repeated obstacles of procedural circumvention, particularly insidious to those of us who have long advocated for more democratic and inclusive knowledge systems, represent not just personal frustration, but institutional regression. Freedom of expression is not merely an abstract principle, or even a constitutional right, but a practical necessity for meaningful advisory work. In Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, published as short stories in the late 1940s and as a novel in 1953, warned not only of the destruction of books, but of a society in which people had lost the desire to read them. The parallel today is not only the administration's effort to destroy and suppress knowledge, but also the institution's willingness to accept the cultivated irrelevance of it—a challenge that undermines any serious effort to conduct research, inform policy, or guide public institutions. The National Science Foundation (NSF)—established as an independent agency through the National Science Act of 1950 and marking its 75th anniversary this week—traces its roots to Vannevar Bush's landmark report, 'Science, the Endless Frontier,' addressed to President Harry S. Truman. But we might also see the establishment of this premier research institution as reflecting a response to fears depicted by Bradbury. The NSF can be understood not only as a catalyst of scientific promise for national purpose, but also as a guarded response to fears about centralized control over knowledge and thought, shaped by the dark shadows of the Third Reich and the emerging Red NSF's investments have shaped some of the most transformative technologies of our time—from GPS to the internet—and supported vital research in the social and behavioral sciences that helps the nation understand itself and evaluate its progress toward its democratic ideals. So in 2024, I was honored to be appointed to the National Science Board, which is charged under 42 U.S. Code § 1863 with establishing the policies of the Foundation and providing oversight of its mission. But the meaning of oversight changed with the arrival of DOGE. That historical tension—between the promise of scientific freedom and the peril of political control—may now be resurfacing in troubling ways. Last month, when a National Science Board statement was released on occasion of the April 2025 resignation of Trump-appointed NSF Director Sethuraman Panchanathan, it was done so without the participation or notice of all members of the Board. Last week, as the Board held its 494th meeting, I listened to NSF staff say that DOGE had by fiat the authority to give thumbs up or down to grant applications which had been systematically vetted by layers of subject matter closed-to-the-public deliberations were observed by Zachary Terrell from the DOGE team. Through his Zoom screen, Terrell showed more interest in his water bottle and his cuticles than in the discussion. According to Nature Terrell, listed as a "consultant" in the NSF directory, had accessed the NSF awards system to block the dispersal of approved grants. The message I received was that the National Science Board had a role to play in name only. This episode reflects a deeper concern: the erosion of meaningful guidance. I was still free to discuss my concerns at the board meeting, but it was increasingly clear that it was just a performance without any impact. The advisory body had been transformed into a ceremonial assemblage. Consultation occurred without consequence. When grant applications are vetoed and whole organizations restructured, the freedom to speak becomes meaningless when disconnected from the possibility of being of this is threatened by the creeping normalization of authoritarian approaches to knowledge management and academic freedom. The National Science Board has not been disbanded like so many other statutorily established, independent agencies in the federal government. But preservation of form provides little consolation when function has been strategically neutralized, mirroring the backsliding that scholars have thoroughly documented: maintaining legitimacy for institutions that no longer honor their founding purposes. This hollowing out is not just about governance in the abstract, it has material consequences for which research questions get asked, which datasets get produced, which knowledge gets produced, and which perspectives shape our understanding of pressing societal challenges. It has consequences for the integrity of knowledge itself. The second institution from which I am departing is also demonstrating symptoms of democratic decay. In 2023, I was appointed by the Librarian of Congress to the Scholars Council, which advises the Kluge Chairs program, the Kluge Prize for the Study of Humanity, and other library programming intended to get ideas out of the stacks and into society by 'reinvigorat[ing] the interconnection between thought and action,' 'bridging the divide between knowledge and power,' and 'narrow[ing] the gap between thinkers and doers.'Last week, the Librarian of Congress, Dr. Carla Hayden, was summarily dismissed via an email addressed to 'Carla' from a White House HR administrator. The Trump Administration claimed that she was fired for 'things she had done at the Library of Congress in the pursuit of DEI and putting inappropriate books in the library for children.' It is true that Hayden was repeatedly on record as saying the Library should be for all Americans. And it is false that the Library, which is intended to hold all books published in the United States, lends books to children. The ouster of Hayden is part of a broader pattern of political targeting of women and Black public servants across the federal government. Dr. Carla Hayden was a leader in the digitization of libraries and a steadfast advocate for their public mission. Her dismissal signals more than a routine personnel shift—it reflects a deeper contest over who controls the curation and dissemination of knowledge in the digital age. That contest became even more apparent two days later, when the Trump Administration fired her direct report, Shira Perlmutter, the Register of Copyrights. Perlmutter's office had just released a report concluding that while generative AI poses novel challenges to copyright law, these could be addressed through voluntary licensing and market-based solutions—rather than statutory changes to the fair use doctrine. At a time when questions about AI and intellectual property are front of mind, the Library of Congress's oversight of the U.S. copyright system is more consequential than ever. The steady accumulation of procedural adjustments, each seemingly minor, stand to systematically and collectively alter the purpose and impact of our institutions. The dismissal of Hayden, who took the helm of the Library of Congress with a vow to extend its resources to all of us, represents not merely a personnel change but a statement about what kind of knowledge stewardship is deemed acceptable. To watch these changes unfold without naming them for what they are is to participate in a collective amnesia about how knowledge infrastructures shape power relations. Like the shopkeeper in an authoritarian society described by Vaclav Havel in his essay 'The Power of the Powerless,' who participates in his own oppression through small daily acts of complicity, placing a party slogan in his window not out of conviction but out of habit. To remain on advisory boards that have been stripped of meaningful advisory function is to become that shopkeeper, to lend legitimacy to a process that has been systematically then, is the responsible course of action? For me, the answer now lies in refusal, the withdrawal of participation from systems that require dishonesty as the price of belonging. My resignation represents such a refusal, not a surrender of responsibility but an assertion of it. This is not to condemn those who remain. There is value in continued presence, in bearing witness, in working for reform from within. But there comes a point when presence itself becomes an endorsement, when working within the system becomes indistinguishable from working for it. In her Nobel lecture in 1993, the writer Toni Morrison observed: "Oppressive language does more than represent violence; it is violence; does more than represent the limits of knowledge; it limits knowledge. Whether it is obscuring state language or the faux-language of mindless media; whether it is the proud but calcified language of the academy or the commodity driven language of science; whether it is the malign language of law-without-ethics, or language designed for the estrangement of minorities, hiding its racist plunder in its literary cheek—it must be rejected, altered and exposed." The aim of my resignation is to break free of powers that seek to limit knowledge and silence voice. To signal that certain boundary lines have been crossed. To insist that advisory roles must expand knowledge and be more than appendages to predetermined decisions. I follow political economist Albert O. Hirschman, in his seminal work Exit, Voice, and Loyalty, who offered a framework for understanding responses to institutional decline. Exit (leaving) and voice (speaking up) need not be mutually exclusive strategies. My resignations are both, an exit that amplifies the voice of others. By departing these advisory roles, I aim to speak more clearly in my own language about what they have become and what they ought to be. This is not an abandonment of loyalty to these institutions' missions, but rather, its highest expression. Contact us at letters@
