The post More than 1.5M Muslims arrive in Mecca for annual Hajj pilgrimage appeared first on News Agency nabakhabar.

The post Culture ministry to commence nationwide tour for true fans of Korea appeared first on News Agency nabakhabar.

Today coincides with the martyrdom anniversary of one of the most significant ideologists of the Islamic Revolution, Morteza Motahari, which is regarded as National Teachers Day in Iran.

The post Iran marks Teachers Day in commemoration of Ayt. Motahari appeared first on News Agency nabakhabar.

Iranians commemorate the National Day of Attar Nishapuri or Neyshaburi, a 12th-century great Iranian poet whose “The Conference of Birds” is a masterpiece illuminating the minds pursuing wisdom.

The post National Day of Iranian poet Attar of Nishapur appeared first on News Agency nabakhabar.

The festival of Nowruz marks the conclusion of an old year and the beginning of a new one, traditionally celebrated on the day of the vernal equinox.

The post Iranians celebrate Nowruz, rebirth of nature appeared first on News Agency nabakhabar.

He promised to improve the Welsh NHS, put green jobs at the forefront of the country’s economic future, build more homes and reliable transport systems, drive up education standards and guide Wales to a more prominent position on the world stage.

Gething, who won with 51.7% of the vote, said: “Today, we turn a page in the book of our nation’s history. A history we write together. Not just because I have the honour of becoming the first black leader in any European country – but because the generational dial has jumped too.

“Devolution is not something I have had to get used to or adapt to or apologise for. Devolution – Welsh solutions to Welsh problems – that’s in my blood. It’s what I’ve always known.”

Gething said the Welsh people were strongest in adversity. He said the NHS had its roots in Wales and it had shown “heroism and solidarity” during the miners’ strike of 1984-5. He said the country fought for the underdog.

He praised his rival for the leadership, Jeremy Miles, for speaking about his struggles as a young gay man and said this would give new confidence to thousands of Welsh boys and girls.

Gething turned quickly to the general election, claiming young people felt weighed down by a Tory party that did not care about its future and that people were exhausted by culture wars.

He said Labour could sweep the Tories out of office. “I know we can win the next general election … We can win if we stand together, linking arms to defeat the narrow forces of division that seek to turn a warm nation cold.”

Keir Starmer, leader of the UK Labour party, said: “Huge congratulations to Vaughan Gething on his election as leader of the Welsh Labour party. His appointment as first minister of Wales, the first Black leader in the UK, will be an historic moment that speaks to the progress and values of modern-day Wales.

“With his many years of experience in the Senedd, I know he will lead a hopeful, ambitious Welsh Labour government, in the face of a tired and failed Tory government in Westminster.

“On behalf of the entire UK Labour party, we look forward to campaigning with Vaughan in this new chapter for Wales, to deliver Labour governments across Britain.”

Gething, who turned 50 on Friday, has a challenging in-tray.

He will have to unite Welsh Labour after a divisive leadership campaign and prepare to lead the party into a general election. He must steer the country through the cost of living crisis and raise standards in health and education at a time of deep budget cuts.

There are also other tricky issues that Drakeford leaves behind, such as the country’s hugely controversial 20mph speed limit and environmental policy reforms that have led to farmers’ demonstrations on the steps of the Senedd.

Gething’s run for leader was hit by revelations that he took £200,000 for his leadership campaign from a company run by a man convicted of environmental offences. Eyebrows were also raised when it emerged that Miles, his only rival, was not eligible for support from Unite because he had not been a lay union official. Gething received the backing, which Miles’s supporters saw as a “stitch-up”. He will have to build bridges with Miles’s backers in the Senedd as a result.

Plaid Cymru’s leader, Rhun ap Iorwerth, said he was concerned about the controversy the campaign had been mired in.

He said: “It is a matter of deep concern that we now have an incoming first minister who before even taking up the highest public office is facing serious allegations and questions about his judgment.

“At the very least, Vaughan Gething should surely return the £200,000 campaign donation which has rightly drawn so much criticism from within his own party and beyond. This is not as good as it gets for Wales.”

Andrew RT Davies, the leader of the Welsh Conservatives, said: “Gething has been part of a Labour Welsh government that has presided over record NHS waiting lists, the steepest decline in educational standards in the UK, the highest business rates in Britain, and is committed to the 20mph speed limit.”

The leadership announcement was made in a lecture theatre at sbarc (spark), a new social sciences Cardiff University building in the Welsh capital. Welsh Labour said 57.8% of members voted and 9.4% of affiliates, giving an overall turnout of 16.1%

Jo Stevens, the shadow Welsh secretary, said it was the start of a new era for Labour in Wales and the focus would turn to the general election. She said this was a “once in a generation” opportunity to have a Labour government at both ends of the M4.

There was a standing ovation for Mark Drakeford, who said: “He [Gething] will provide the next generation of leadership for the party and I look forward to campaigning with him to deliver the UK Labour government Wales so desperately needs.”

The post Vaughan Gething to become Welsh first minister after Labour leadership win appeared first on News Agency nabakhabar.

Muslims in Iran are to be united in a ritual of daily fasting from dawn to sunset as the Islamic holy month of Ramadan kicks off. Ramadan is the ninth month of the Islamic lunar calendar; the month cycles through the seasons.

The post Holy month of Ramadan in Iran appeared first on News Agency nabakhabar.

Besides these robust attempts to degrade me, I noticed a consistent infantilization of anyone Black who was “brave” enough to speak up against me. Mind you, this extremely woke listserv was a safe place to voice disdain for anyone who refused to embrace a victim narrative—no bravery required—but in order to abide by that narrative, anyone Black had to be cast as a downtrodden victim punching up and speaking truth to power. Anyone Black except me, of course. For wanting Black students to have the utmost agency and to flourish in today’s society, I, a Black man, was shunned by whites and Blacks alike.

The U.S. is currently celebrating Black History Month, and I’ve been asked to share my thoughts about how this month of celebration aligns with DEI initiatives. The answer to that question depends on the type of DEI. Some DEI initiatives align with the classical liberal values of the civil rights movement, and indeed of America’s founding, such as freedom and equal opportunity for all, regardless of skin color. Other versions of DEI, however, are undergirded by critical social justice (CSJ), an ideology that pits whites and Blacks against each other; whites are perpetual oppressors, and Blacks are perpetually oppressed. This variation of DEI, which I refer to as CSJ-DEI, is the ideology that was on display during the aforementioned listserv debacle. It insists on the perpetual victim status of Black Americans and, in so doing, is ideologically opposed to the celebration of Black Americans because it focuses on their trials, not their triumphs. Black History Month is supposed to be about Black empowerment, but CSJ-DEI depends on Black disempowerment.

One can get the gist of CSJ by understanding its primary tenet: “The question is not ‘did racism take place?’ but rather ‘how did racism manifest in that situation?’” This philosophy assumes that racism is always already a part of any interaction between whites and nonwhites; one just has to find it. Assessing the facts of a particular situation is considered unnecessary, even naive. One need not think when it comes to racial justice; the narrative—the script—does the thinking. Does this lack of agency, this deference of volition to a pre-scripted narrative, sound empowering?

CSJ-DEI is about leaning into to the “downtrodden Black person” narrative, but that narrative does not align with the reality of today’s America. Forget about the growing presence of current or recent Black immigrants and the enhanced socioeconomic status of many Black Americans today. According to the altered reality of CSJ-DEI, Black people must still be seen as irredeemably oppressed. Scholars Julian Adorney and Jake Mackey call this altered reality a “virtuous lie,” defined as “a false or dubious claim that is asserted without qualification because it is thought to advance an ethical agenda.” Exaggerated police statistics and the insistence that Black Americans are still caught in a form of slavery are just the tips of this “virtuous” iceberg.

Virtuous lies are anything but virtuous in these situations, but they show up in traditionally virtuous places, such as scholarly journals. In the scientific journal Cell, prominent scientists insist that the Black individuals among their ranks “continue to suffer institutional slavery.” In addition, a philosophy professor argues that the “years 1492 and 1619 and 1857 and 1955 are still now” and insists she means this in “a meaningful, non-metaphorical sense” (my emphasis). The absurdity of these statements is matched, if not eclipsed, only by the fact that these authors were confident their arguments would be taken seriously. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was emboldened enough to say that a false narrative is acceptable if it feels “morally right”; to insist on facts is to be misguided.

Black History Month is too good for CSJ-DEI. It is about the celebration of figures in Black history who beat seemingly insurmountable odds. It is about figures like educator Mary McLeod Bethune, lawyer Samuel J. Lee, congressman Josiah T. Walls and many others of whom most are unaware. I firmly believe that these figures would scoff at CSJ-inspired ideas such as equitable math, the demonization of debate and the violence of teaching Standard English to Black students.

The misalignment of Black History Month with CSJ-DEI is exemplified by one of the most consistently celebrated figures of Black history: Frederick Douglass. As a slave, Douglass taught himself to read even though it was illegal. He had to be astute enough to be autodidactic and clever enough to do it without getting caught. When he escaped into the free states, he rose to become the most sought-after orator of the 19th century. Douglass’ life is an implicit counterargument to the CSJ-DEI narrative: If Douglass could accomplish this as a slave two centuries ago, what excuses do Black people have for embracing victimhood today, in a truly free society of which Douglass could only dream?

Ultimately, CSJ-DEI not only counters the spirit of Black History Month, but it insults the figures celebrated during that month. To pretend things are just as bad now as they were throughout American history is to disrespect the accomplishments of Black Americans. Black Americans today are here and thriving precisely because of their power and ability to rise above adverse circumstances. To insist we remain disempowered at all times is risible at best.

The post We Are Too Good for DEI appeared first on News Agency nabakhabar.

A Look at the Trends

Gallup’s invaluable trends about willingness to vote for different groups of qualified people provide an important anchor for this discussion. Today, more than 85% would vote for a qualified woman—the same goes for someone who is Black, female, Hispanic, Catholic or Jewish. Of the groups Gallup has inquired about over time and updated recently, only one, a socialist, still faces majority opposition, but it is a bare 51%.

In a 1979 poll, Gallup used a different approach and asked whether a woman, Black person or Jewish person had a chance of being elected by the year 2000. Fewer people thought any of these groups had an excellent or good chance than said they themselves would vote for such a candidate. Only a third thought a woman would have an excellent or good chance by the year 2000, while 37% gave that response about a Black candidate, 40% about a Jewish candidate and 59% about a divorced candidate. To understand possible resistance to certain kinds of candidates and candidate behaviors, pollsters now ask about not only respondents’ personal preference, but also what they think their neighbors or fellow citizens would do. Many Americans give what they believe is the socially correct response when asked about their own views, while their “neighbors’” response may reveal more accurate sentiments.

But what about a candidate’s past or present behavior or morality? Unlike the Gallup battery discussed above, trends don’t exist for most of these kinds of questions. I found only two extensive batteries of questions that allow for comparisons, one from 1979 and the other from 1996.

The 1979 poll is now 45 years old, and we have changed our minds about many things. Back then, seven in 10 Americans, for example, said they would object strongly if a presidential candidate smoked marijuana occasionally. National support for legalizing marijuana hit 70% in a 2023 Gallup poll. A majority of Republicans and people over age 55 supported legalization. That doesn’t mean most Americans would endorse occasional use by a presidential candidate today, especially as only 17% admitted to Gallup in 2023 that they used marijuana. But I wonder if you would find 70% of the population objecting strongly.

Other behaviors were less objectionable in 1979. Thirty-eight percent said they would object strongly if the candidate was not a member of a church, 36% if he used tranquilizers occasionally, 33% if he used profane language in private, 30% if he had seen a psychiatrist, 21% if he wore jeans occasionally in the White House, 17% if the candidate were divorced and—get this—14% if he had a cocktail before dinner. It’s hard to imagine a pollster even asking most of these questions today (but I wish one would).

In 1996, in a poll sponsored by Knight Ridder, Princeton Survey Research Associates asked a question about deal-breakers but gave people a much longer list. More than half said they could not vote for a candidate who had been a member of a white supremacist group (75%), failed to pay his income tax (70%), had friends suspected of being involved in organized crime (66%), used illegal drugs within the past few years (65%), burned a flag during an anti-war demonstration (58%), favored interests of big money donors (55%), had been investigated for corrupt business practices (55%) or practiced homosexuality (51%). People were split on a presidential candidate who had told racist jokes (49% said this would be a deal-breaker). A majority, 58%, said they could overlook a presidential candidate’s past extramarital affairs, his cheating on coursework in college (61%) and, just barely, a candidate who avoided the draft (51%).

An American Enterprise Institute colleague once compared running for president to hiring a plumber. People don’t want to hear about the plumber’s problems with his wife or his kids, he said; they just want the plumbing problem fixed. So, too, with Americans’ responses to many questions about a presidential candidate’s personal life. The personal does not appear to be as political as feminists told us in the 1970s. Many Americans also appear ready to give a candidate a pass for some youthful behaviors. All of us make foolish mistakes, and we appear willing to forgive.

But this doesn’t apply across the board. Americans in 1996 were less likely to give more serious infractions a pass. Thus, most Americans said that being a member of a white supremacist group, failing to pay income taxes, having friends who were close to organized crime and using illegal drugs in the past few years were too serious to be overlooked. Two-thirds said they would not vote for a candidate who lied about what his policies would be if elected.

In 1972, Democratic candidate George McGovern selected Thomas Eagleton as his running mate. Eagleton withdrew his name after reports surfaced that he had been treated for clinical depression. In 1987, Joe Biden ended his presidential campaign after videos leaked by a rival Democratic contender surfaced comparing a speech of his to one by British Labour leader Neil Kinnock. And Bill Clinton—well, Clinton’s large and small missteps—dented but did not diminish his political success. Neither of these issues—a candidate’s mental health, charges of plagiarism—seems relevant this year. But are there other possible deal-breakers Americans might have this year?

Lessons for Today?

In many respects, the 1976 and 1996 questions are simply interesting artifacts from bygone presidential elections. Each campaign is unique. Age didn’t appear to be a significant concern in 1979 and 1980, when pollsters asked about Ronald Reagan’s age (69 in 1979). Nor was it a concern when he was 73 and ran for reelection. But the new Gallup poll asks about willingness to vote for a qualified candidate over the age of 80, and two-thirds said they could not vote for that candidate. This finding should make the Biden campaign more than a little nervous.

In recent weeks, pollsters have begun to explore attitudes about a possible Trump conviction. The questions are hypothetical, but the different approaches the pollsters are using may give us some indication of how people see this issue. Sixty-five percent of voters in the Iowa Republican caucuses said they would consider Donald Trump fit for office even if he were convicted. Fifty-four percent of those who voted in the New Hampshire primary gave this response. But self-declared independents there didn’t agree.

In Gallup’s new poll, two-thirds said they would not vote for a person charged with a felony, and, separately, 70% said that about a person convicted by a jury. The January Harvard/Harris poll found that registered voters would still vote for Donald Trump over Joe Biden if Trump were convicted of a crime related to his handling of classified documents (53% to 47%), and separately, if he were convicted of a crime relating to the Georgia case (51% to 49%). But Biden topped Trump barely (51% to 49%) if Trump were convicted of a crime related to January 6. The new late January-early February NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll finds Biden and Trump closely matched among registered voters. But Biden opens up a six-point lead if Trump is convicted of a crime. Of course, attitudes may change as trials ensue and we get closer to November. Still, these new findings should make the Trump campaign nervous as well.

Polls from the past can’t tell us what will matter most to voters this fall, but they do provide some hints of what resonates and how that has changed over time. In this sense the polls are palimpsests, revealing new attitudes where traces of the old can be seen.

The post Turning Mr. Right Into Mr. President appeared first on News Agency nabakhabar.

The Iranian president stressed the need to learn about and introduce Iranian tourist attractions by the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO).

The post Raeisi calls on UNWTO to introduce Iran tourist attractions appeared first on News Agency nabakhabar.