Hi everyone,
We're journalists who recently worked on a story about the latest Poland–Ukraine dispute over WWII memory. While researching it, we realised these topics are incredibly complex and often viewed very differently inside and outside Poland 👉 Read more on: How a Polish-Ukrainian dispute over WW2 spiralled into a tit-for-tat medal spat
We'd genuinely like to learn from people here.
What context do you think international media most often misses when covering Poland's historical relationship with Ukraine? Are there common misconceptions or nuances you wish foreign journalists understood better?
We're asking because we'd like to improve how we cover these issues in the future.
This investigation raises a policy question about accountability, not just destruction. EU taxpayers funded hospitals, desalination plants, schools and other civilian infrastructure in Gaza and the West Bank that EUobserver reports were later bombed, bulldozed or seized by Israel, with no repayment to the EU.
The key issue is incentives: if Brussels limits itself to diplomatic letters while continuing normal relations, what stops the same pattern from repeating during future reconstruction?
It also puts EU governments in a difficult position — funding Palestinian infrastructure, then absorbing the cost when it is destroyed, without imposing financial or political consequences.
People often talk about the importance of community, but communities aren't built through relationships, shared experiences, and a sense that there's a place where you matter. Looking at your own community, what do you think helps people stay connected rather than drift apart?
This post contains content not supported on old Reddit. Click here to view the full post
Hi everyone, this is my Instagram account “elenchusniti” , where I share PSIR/ GS4/ Essay value addition content, in reels I share my own created memes regarding scholars/ geopolitics / philosophers.
Dont even follow, just check it out . Love to hear your opinions.
Two recent studies (in pdf) are pointing at an uncomfortable suspect in falling birth rates: smartphones.
The argument is not that phones are “birth control,” but that they may have changed social behavior: less in-person time, less sex, more time online and more digital substitutes for real-world interaction.
One U.S. study looked at the early iPhone rollout through AT&T coverage and found stronger fertility declines in areas with early iPhone access.
It’s probably not the only factor. Housing, money, work stress and the future all matter too. But it raises a weird question: did the smartphone quietly redesign dating, intimacy and family life?
Some people seem to earn trust almost immediately, while others can be part of our lives for years and never quite get there. It usually isn't because they're the smartest person in the room or the most outgoing. When you think about the people you trust most, what do you think sets them apart?