Defining Orphaned And Vulnerable Children: Fill & Download for Free

This answer may contain sensitive images. Click on an image to unblur it.It’s a complicated matter but let’s focus on one aspect many people like to ignore since it doesn’t conform to their “Islam bad. Islam evil” world view:The Islamist groups actually provide decent lives to their followers resulting in their spread and rise in popularity. It’s also this that can provide their downfall.Let’s study Hamas briefly before moving onto ISIS.As World Policy explains in an article, Hamas didn’t defeat Fatah in the Gaza Strip because Palestinians are naturally religious violent fanatics but because:Historically, the Palestinian Authority (PA) as led by Fatah (Hamas’ political rival), has failed to effectively provide such services to the Palestinian people in Gaza. Even though the Israeli government has recently eased its blockade on Gaza, Palestinians still face sizeable hurdles to acquire basic resources. Hamas has been able to fill that void so effectively that it is considered one of the reasons that contributed to their victory over the secular Fatah in the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections. Clearly, many impoverished Palestinian people viewed Hamas as a necessary provider for the population, especially given Fatah’s alleged corruption and the region’s dismal economy. This is not to say that all Palestinians support Hamas, as some hate-filled editorials would have the world think.(…)Al-Wafa was widely known as a Hamas institution that provided important and necessary specialized social and medical services. Roy writes in her book, Hamas and Civil Society in Gaza: Engaging the Islamist Social Sector, “By 2007, al-Wafa remained the only facility providing extensive medical care—including psychosocial support and community reintegration programs—for severely disabled Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.” When the PA and other social service networks were unable to provide, Hamas found a way to establish a professional and reputable institution that administered much needed aid to vulnerable Palestinians.Terrorism and Charity: Defining Hamas - World PolicyThe secular PA is widely seen as corrupt even amongst irreligious Palestinians such as Atheists, they’re widely hated. Mahmoud Abbas is on the 13th year of his 4 year term and while a significant portion of the West Bank is impoverished Abbas still finds the money for a new Presidential Palace.Abbas building $13m. presidential palace near RamallahMeanwhile in the Gaza Strip, despite a blockade, Hamas continues to provide social services such as free health care, free therapy, free education, food for the poor and so on. This endears a significant portion of the population to what is essentially an Islamic extremist group.As pointed out by World Policy many Palestinians (especially in the Gaza Strip) desperately depend on Hamas for good lives. Without Hamas they wouldn’t have access to employment, education and medical care.Hamas-run schools in Gaza teach HebrewThis of course also benefits Hamas as it then has unrestricted access to vulnerable sectors of the population such as children or orphans.In Gaza, Al Salah Society's school for 1,000 orphans and other youngsters in the teeming town of Deir al Balah stands in sharp contrast to the crumbling concrete and dusty streets around it, a fenced-in oasis of palms and neat classrooms."Muslims are the best nation created in the world," says a banner hanging outside the school, next to another that says, "Those who learn more earn a higher degree in paradise."Hamas Victory Is Built on Social Work (who knows how many will be future Hamas cadre)While not many Palestinians are thrilled Hamas may incorporate propaganda within school, they have no other choice as their only other option is for their child to be an illiterate 25 year old who can’t count further than 15 as the PA refuses to provide education to the people it’s meant to take care of.So, they make do with what they have. This however does build a sense of loyalty amongst those who depend on Hamas.This is the Islamist model that people conveniently forget.Take ISIS and education, many people found it humorous ISIS was running schools in its territory.A photo taken by the British newspaper The Mirror of an ISIS-produced English textbookHowever this overlooks that a significant portion of the Iraqi and Syrian population supported ISIS precisely because it provided these services. Often better than the Iraqi and Syrian governments!ISIS built a state of administrative efficiency that collected taxes and picked up the garbage. It ran a marriage office that oversaw medical examinations to ensure that couples could have children. It issued birth certificates — printed on Islamic State stationery — to babies born under the caliphate’s black flag. It even ran its own D.M.V.The documents and interviews with dozens of people who lived under their rule show that the group at times offered better services and proved itself more capable than the government it had replaced.The ISIS Files: When Terrorists Run City HallMembers of ISIS’ security services burn drugs they confiscatedISIS even went so far to provide Sunni Muslims with land for farming and if they couldn’t pay the rent ISIS charged:Sunnis who were too poor to pay the rent upfront were offered a sharecropping agreement with the Islamic State, allowing them to take possession of the stolen land in return for one-third of the future harvest.Same source of aboveSo put yourself in the shoes of a Sunni family in Mosul named the Ayoubs.Hakim Ayoub who has been unemployed for 4 years, has been given a job as a street sweeper by ISIS. He earns a modest salary of $300 a month but is grateful to provide for his family.His wife Hanan, can finally walk around in safety without fear of a bombing or mugging as ISIS’ police force is very aggressive.A street market in Mosul under ISIS’ governance6 year old Layla and her older brother 8 year old Hassan can finally go to school as ISIS builds elementary schools where the Iraqi government never did.Sure they’re being taught math using pistols and bullets, but Hakim and Hanan are glad when Layla comes up excitedly showing off her new skill of counting to 20 which she learned from her ISIS-provided teacher.Which leaves us with their teenage son, Adam who is approached by an ISIS recruiter on the street. Needless to say, Adam doesn’t see ISIS as evil and accepts to become a fighter.2 Syrians in Raqqa look on as an ISIS-appointed clerk handles a case involving inheritance. ISIS also established a court system which many Iraqis and Syrians used.When ISIS offers to pay him $20,000 for a suicide bombing. He accepts that as well, it’s the least he could do for the group that provided his family with a future.That’s what leads to the rise and spread of Islamist groups. It also reveals how to defeat them as Morocco learned.Morocco has no native jihadist groups and it hasn’t had a terrorist attack since 2003. Why?Because after the 2003 bombing the Moroccan State launched a rapid social services program for example, targeting the slums for destruction.It has since rehoused some 1.3m people at estimated cost of 32bn dirhams ($3.4bn) and 52 cities and towns have been declared “slum free”.Subscribe to read | Financial TimesInternational measures of poverty—namely, the proportion of the population living on less than $1 or $2 a day confirms poverty trends in Morocco. The proportion of the population living on less than $1 per day decreased to less than 1 percent from 2 percent a decade ago. The proportion of individuals living on less than $2 per day dropped from 20 to 8 percent at the national level and from 34 to 14 percent in rural areashttps://carnegieendowment.org/files/morocco_poverty1.pdfThus Morocco managed to eliminate the Jihadist threat before it spread by attacking its source: poverty.That’s what causes the rise of Islamic extremism and also what can cause its downfall.How does one end Hamas?Create a competent authority to replace them, one that can provide the necessities Palestinians desire without corruption and inefficiency. As many Palestinians would support such a group if it was available (look no further than Arafat).However that’s too difficult, let’s blame Islam instead.Originally a comment, but I added it to this answer due to some good advice:Are all Islamists just poor Muslims?No, Islamism isn’t just social services but also an ideology, my answer is meant to explain that the bulk of Islamists are merely poor people who like the social mobility, they don’t genuinely care for the ideology.However those from Western countries tend to join because they like the ideology which essentially wishes to recreate an Islamic Golden Age and exact vengeance against those it feels wronged Muslims.Take Al-Qaeda’s threat against India last year:Al-Qaeda vows attack on Hindu outfits involved in killing Muslims, destroying mosquesAl-Qaeda didn’t say “We will attack Hindus until they convert to Islam!” but rather “We will attack Hindus associated with groups that kill Muslims.”This message isn’t for its rank-and-file. Ifran the Pakistani farmer doesn’t care about what’s going on in India while he has an empty stomach.But Affan the Indian-Brit who has started entering political activism and adopted the War against Islam conspiracy theory will appreciate it and join Al-Qaeda despite being middle class and from the UK.

Mao’s China was, by design, a country in permanent crisis; from the earliest days of Communist governance, Mao unleashed wave after wave of struggle. The Chinese people would never be permitted to rest on their achievements. The destiny Mao prescribed for them was to purify their society and themselves through virtuous exertion. Henry Kissinger.Over the past 70 years the Chinese Communist Party has adopted several strategies appropriate to its stage of growth and development and everyone has struggled to implement them. The first, pure Communism, was successful and grew the economy by 6.2% per year for 25 years (compared to America’s 3.8% during that period)–despite an America food and technology embargo. Both the Great Leap and the 10 year Cultural Revolution were highly successful in meeting their designer’s goals, despite what we read in our media.China’s success threatened the West and made it increasingly vulnerable to an atomic attack and invasion (the US government regularly discussed both) so, as Deng Xiaoping told the UN in 1974, China would adopt a new strategy of opening up to capitalismin order to further accelerate its growth rate “Otherwise,” he said, “China will be bullied”. Western media immediately proclaimed the triumph of Capitalism but the Chinese people retained ownership and control of all the essential and most profitable elements of their economy, like banking, insurance, communications and energy. Those gigantic corporations (the biggest, most profitable in the world) are paying for all the new low-income housing you see in every city. Communism hasn’t gone away.Deng’s policy will achieve its economic goal in 2020 when China will militarily dominate Asia and the West Pacific (in reality, it already does) and its economy will be almost 50% bigger than America’s.Deng also also set an internal goal: for China to become a xiaokang society by 2020. Our media did not report that, perhaps because they didn’t understand it and, indeed, most Chinese hardly noticed. But the government went to work immediately and Deng’s internal goal, the creation of a xiaokang society, will be reached in 2020. Every Chinese leader from Mao to Xi has reaffirmed it and it’s finally happening.In 2011 Prime Minister Li defined xiaokang as a society in which everyonereceives an education,has paid employment,has more than enough food and clothing,has access to medical services,has old-age support,has a home and a comfortable life.The government is putting the final touches on the xiaokang program right now: urban poverty was eliminated in 2016 and rural poverty will be gone by December, 2020. This will put China into the top 20% of countries in the world:A new policy will be announced at the Party’s centennial celebration on June 1, 2021, after all the xiaokang stats have been verified. We know the economic component of the new policy because Deng set that, too: ‘moderate prosperity’ by 2030 , a lifestyle better than South Korea’s and a GINI better than Japan’s.The internal goal is for China to become a datong society–the full realization of the Great Way as Confucius described it 2,500 years ago. Mao and every Chinese president has reaffirmed it as China’s goal. (The goal is even repeated in Taiwan’s anthem. Maybe they can do it together?).Achieving datong will require a Cultural Revolution, a moral revolution that calls on every Chinese (not just the hard-working government) to abandon old habits acquired during the century of humiliation. No more offering bribes, no more cheating, no more selfishness, nor more dirtiness, no more crime…China will start looking like a mix of Japan, Singapore, Switzerland and, of course, China. People will discuss their own behavior and their personal responsibility to each other and to society at large. Billionaires will probably be expected to set an example, which should be interesting. It will be a very big deal and a very big struggle–but not the sort of physical struggle we’ve known in the past. It’s the cooperative, moral transformation of an entire nation. The National Development and Reform Commission is working very hard on developing details of program (and probably checklists: the NDRC loves checklists with bullet points) and no doubt President Xi is reading the drafts.Mr. Xi, who gained and lost a great deal in the last Cultural Revolution, will announce the datong program and probably set some intermediate goals (as Deng did when he set the xiaokang goal). It will be the most momentous day since 1949, when China stood up, because it will reaffirm China’s commitment to serve as a moral example for the world.The man responsible for this is not Mao or Deng or President Xi but everyone’s favorite shengren, Confucius. Here’s how he envisioned datong and xiaokang:“Ah, the practice of the Great Way, the Duke of Zhou and illustrious men of the Three Dynasties–I shall never know them in person yet they inspire my ambition! When the Great Way was practiced the world was shared by all alike, junzi were promoted to high office, men practiced good faith and lived in affection. They did not regard as parents only their own parents, or as sons only their own sons. The elderly enjoyed dignified lives, young adults had proper employment, children were educated and widow and widower, orphaned and sick alike received proper care. Men had their work and women their hearths. They hated waste yet did not hoard things for themselves; they wanted their energies fully used, but not for private ends. Therefore evil plotting was prevented and thieves and rebels did not appear so that, at night, people could leave their outer gates unbolted. That was the age of datong, of Grand Unity.“But these days people can barely remember the Great Way and private families own everything. Everyone has forgotten the common good and they regard as parents only their own parents, as sons only their own sons and employ goods and labor for purely selfish ends. Offices are granted by law, not merit, and the elite use walls and moats for security. The government enforces affection between father and son, peace between brothers and harmony between husband and wife, and uses social institutions to organize farms and villages. This has lead to intrigue, plotting and people arming themselves. This is an age of xiaokang, of Lesser Prosperity”.When you can wander through any Chinese town at night and see everyone’s outer gates unbolted, you’ll know they’ve reached datong and China is once again the leading civilization on earth. Won’t that be fun?

Okay. I have time for a brief tirade.I hate American politicians as a group. I hate the Democrats. I hate the Republicans. What a venal little elite! That one cocksucker in a country of well over 300,000,000 can decide to keep the Senate from voting on anything except judicial appointments is disgusting. That behavior would (will?) be no less disgusting in a Democrat than it is in Moscow Mitch.The idea here is that we elect representatives. It may technically be true that, once elected, representatives have a mandate, and are no longer beholden to the wishes of voters (except insofar as voters can—sometimes, if the gerrymandering permits—vote unrepresentative representatives out of office). These fuckers have the power, even the legal freedom, to indulge their venality and pander and use their offices to enrich themselves while the planet burns and people starve. Republicans and Democrats have this power.They should not use this power thus. But if corruptio optimi pessima, what can we say of corruptio pessimi? So what dictates my vote has really nothing to do with party. What I look to are the constituencies politicians have to pander to in order to retain their position. And the people I am concerned about are the vulnerable, the humble, the poor, the struggling, the suffering, and the meek. One might remonstrate: what about white working-class voters? They belong to these groups. I agree. And they too are my neighbors. But they have become remarkably bellicose and disagreeable as a bloc. They do not, on the whole, make common cause with the others who suffer. They make others in malo of them. Some call themselves Christians and spout casuistry about why family separation and concentration camps for migrant kids or arbitrary elimination of medical deferral for sick children are justified. They invoke the law, or the nation, or sometimes a notion of “purity” a noble country nonetheless rooted in conquest, genocide, slavery, and treason—not just life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness—should not proclaim. Some people will justify Ken Cuccinelli’s butchery of Emma Lazarus’ poem, so that the “wretched refuse” for whom America affords a “golden door” may only enter, despite being refuse, on the condition that they not become a “public charge.” Meanwhile the spending spree on cruelty and vanities has produced debt and deficits in the trillions. But somehow those people, the widow, orphan, and stranger the “Christians’” Bible talks about—they don’t matter. They’re not worth the expense.Ah, you say. You’re picking on Trump and Cuccinelli. You’re a Dem, a libtard. But I’m not a Dem or a liberal. At the end of the day it appears that, whatever my metaphysics, I am some sort of Christian. I care about suffering a lot more than profits, a lot more than statistics, and a great deal more than the application and slack-jawed worship of laws. Aristotle once argued that no law universally applied could be just; circumstances have to affect judgment and application. This is tied to his view that equity, not equality, defines the just.The Democrats are the only members of that swinish caste, the political caste, who owe their seats to constituents who require at least some public commitment to ethical norms that should be self-evident: psychological torture of any child is wrong, for example. That I vote Democrat has to do with the likelihood that there will be less cruelty and more mercy and loving-kindness in public policy when that party’s douchebag is in office. I’d like to see the two-party system swept away and replaced by something more parliamentary. I will not live to see it. But I can’t vote for the party that substitutes commitments to insentient things for working to ease the real sufferings of sentient beings.Does this confirm Jonathan Haidt’s much-bruited contention that lefties only value “care,” and not, say, “loyalty” or “sanctity”? I don’t think so. Loyalty is a virtue I prize; but in politics at present it is either absent or extorted by a president who thinks he’s Vito Corleone. Sanctity is something of which I have an acute sense; but then, the linkage between care and sanctity is evident in most sacred traditions. (This is not the place for it, but I might go on to point out that Haidt, that progressive doyen of the right, grounds his whole enterprise on a theory of confirmation bias that applies to him and his peers no less than to those he studies, and which poses a methodological problem for him that I am not at all convinced he ever solves.)Jonathan Haidt is neither here nor there. I care about human (and nonhuman) suffering. I also care about decency, about kindness. I vote for the asshole whose constituents want more of those things, and for more people. If Francis of Assisi were on offer, I’d vote for him instead.If the executive can rob the military for an expensive vanity project, we can spend money to cushion the sufferings of others. Perhaps we can’t legislate morality, but that does not excuse us for abandoning common decency. I say of the law what Jesus said of the Sabbath: that it was made for man, not man for it.Those turd-words, Democrat and Republican, are not as powerful as this question seems to suggest, at least not to me. It’s not like I’m a Yankee fan and will always root for the Red Sox to lose. Not at all. Everyone on both teams is someone’s son or daughter. Flags and fields and uniforms have no subjectivity and cannot suffer or weep. My neighbor, whomever he voted for, can. If my neighbor is in pain and I can help, I want to help. When I was in need, some of my neighbors helped me. Theist or atheist, Democrat or Republican, I saw the face of the living God in each of them. (As Bob Marley sang: “Almighty God is a living man.”)Right now I am watching the Bahamas. The footage is unbearable. What will happen? Did our present president do well by Puerto Rico when it got hit? And as badly hit as it was, was it hit this badly? Will this matter as much as tweeting defensive falsehoods about meteorological predictions for Alabama, just to avoid the dreaded words “I was mistaken”?I don’t know how much active love there is among politicians. I know that it is only seeing active love at work in the world that keeps me from wishing us all off the earth right now, before one more asshole can shoot one more child. I do what I can with terrible choices, hemmed in by people who place too little premium on love and too much on freedom from its demands. Many conservatives also see care as a positive value; the libertarians seem to laud care, as long as it’s purely optional. The underlying supposition is often either that ordinary people will provide care without being coerced, or that they have every right not to provide care and if that means others suffer cruelly, oh well. Legally, they are right. Ethically? I have my doubts. It vexes me to be an atheist who takes Jesus seriously and doesn’t hide behind Paul, who was not Jesus, or behind the cant of theologians far removed from their alleged master. I think taking care of one another is an ethical imperative. I think we could, collectively, make a world in which everyone was rich enough to have no complaints—or at least, we could work toward that end, acknowledging that utopia is always unachievable.I don’t vote for parties or for politicians. I vote from an uncomfortable place indeed. I am given two piles of more or less diseased shit and have to find a way to vote meaningfully for “love thy neighbor as thyself,” understanding my “neighbor” to be everyone whatsoever. That makes me a bleeding-heart liberal, some will say. But verily I tell you: I learned this from listening to my father read the Gospels to me when I was four and five years old. I don’t need the myth to adopt the ethics. I take the man at his word, and fail miserably to live up to it every day—but I do also try, every day. And the day my vote is determined by a party label rather than an orientation toward my fellow creatures, put a bullet in my head.