Connect with us

Features

Obama joins Kamala’s campaign trail, boostig her chances

Published

on

Trump secretly sent Putin coveted Covid testing machines at height of shortage – Bob Woodward

by Vijaya Chandrasoma

George Washington’s farewell address delivered at Mount Vernon at the end of his second term in 1796, when he was 64-year-old, “stands today as a timeless warning about the forces that threaten American democracy”.

No president ever wanted to be the president of the United States as passionately as Washington. He deemed the pinnacle of his achievement to be the winning of independence from England and paving the way to the Federal Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, where he sat as its presiding officer till 1787. He most reluctantly accepted the presidency in 1789, and again in 1793. But in 1796, he was firm in his refusal, as he considered the presidency to be just an epilogue to his career, not his greatest achievement.

Washington worried that “party loyalty makes nations weaker, not stronger; that parties fighting for power (disguised as patriotism) serves to distract the public councils and enfeebles the public administration; it enables jealousies and false alarms; kindles the animosity of one party against the other; and foments occasional riots and insurrections. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions”.

The main thrust of his Farewell Address is that “Americans should focus on what’s better for the country, not what’s better for their political party”.

Some 136 years later, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a Democrat, was elected to the presidency in 1932, when America was in the depths of the Great Depression. The progressive policies of his New Deal enabled the nation to successfully navigate the Depression. His second term ended in 1940, when America was on the brink of World War II.

FDR broke the unwritten law set by Washington by running for a third term, defeating Republican Wendell L. Wilkie by a landslide of 449 to 82 electoral votes and a popular vote exceeding four million.

The Republican platform at that time was under the control of the America First Committee (AFC), an isolationist pressure group which was against the United States’ entry into World War II. The AFC, founded by former Republican President Woodrow Wilson after World War II, counted amongst its leaders luminaries like former President Warren G. Harding, Charles Lindbergh and Henry Ford, who were friendly with Hitler and sympathized with Nazi anti-Semitic policies. They were powerful leaders who, in those days, wielded enormous political influence.

AFC was rather like the MAGA (Make America Great Again) cult, founded and led by former President Donald Trump, that controls the Republican Party of today.

Had FDR adhered to the unwritten law after Washington’s Presidency and Republican Wendell Wilkie defeated the Democratic candidate for the presidency in 1940, the AFC, with its pro-Nazi ties and isolationist policies, may have persuaded Wilkie not to have America involved in the European tribal war against Hitler’s Germany.

There is little doubt Great Britain and the allies would have capitulated to Hitler in World War II, without the active participation of the United States.

Pearl Harbor was, according to FDR, “a day that will live in infamy”, that propelled the US to join its European allies in the war against Axis Powers of Germany, Italy and Japan. After the war, America joined the military alliance, formalized as the North American Treaty Organization (NATO), that defeated the Nazi menace of Hitler. NATO has endured as the strongest military alliance in history to this day.

After FDR died in 1945 during his fourth term, the two-term limit for the presidency was ratified by the 22nd Amendment to the constitution in 1951.

As Winston Churchill said, “The farther back you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see”.

I wrote an article during Trump’s presidency, indulging a fantasy that, had the two-term limit remained just an “unwritten law” in 2016, and not a constitutional Amendment, President Obama, who had completed two presidential terms of unparalleled competence, without a shadow of any kind of scandal, may have been persuaded to run for a third term. He had a popularity rating of over 70%, the highest ever for a departing president.

President Obama would not have allowed himself to be diminished by Trump’s Russian connections, his racist taunts and his juvenile nicknames. A man of Obama’s principled stature would have crushed Trump like the criminal moron he is. He would have won re-election for a third term in 2016 by an indisputable landslide, and headed an administration which would have sidestepped the horrors America has endured since Trump came down that golden elevator in 2016, when he announced his candidature for the presidency with a Hitler-like anti-immigrant rant that has polarized the US as never before.

Thanks to the 22nd Amendment, Donald Trump, with a little bit of help from his Russian mentor, Putin, was elected to the White House in 2016, defeating Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton.

In that article, I also expressed my disgust at the policies of the Trump administration, which were intent of subverting all the progressive steps taken by President Obama. Trump kicked off his administration with the colossal lie that the booming economy he inherited from Obama, with 75 weeks of consecutive economic development and the lowest unemployment rate in decades, was his own creation.

The first hint of Trump’s authoritarian ambitions was when he, like other dictators of the 20th century such as Hitler, Stalin and Mao, started calling the press “the enemy of the people”.

He followed through with policies that had the US withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change mitigation, with the moronic claim that climate change, which is even today proving to be the greatest danger facing the planet, is a hoax; by deregulating all the laws against pollution that President Obama had put in place; by pandering to the billionaire class and corporations with huge tax breaks; by polarizing the country by the racist demonization of brown-skinned immigrants; and by disbanding the National Security Council directorate, created by President Obama, charged with preparing for when, not if, another epidemic would hit the nation. This was a facility, initiated with presidential foresight, which would have helped in mitigating the chaos and loss of life when Covid hit the nation in 2019.

Americans realized the magnitude of their mistake and “fired” Trump comprehensively in 2020. President Biden won the presidency with an Electoral College rout of 302 – 236 votes and a record popular majority of over seven million votes.

A defeat which Trump, against all evidence, has still refused to concede, and “fought like hell” with lies, an insurrection and all the criminal weapons available to him and his white supremacist cult. The fight goes on, three years later.

Three long years, during which Trump has been adjudicated a rapist and a fraud, convicted of 34 felonies, awaiting trial on three more trials with 57 more felony charges. Three years when he is, amazingly, not in prison but the Republican candidate for the presidency, in an election he has a real chance of being re-elected as the 47th President of the United States!

This was thanks, of course, to the dilatory tactics employed by the most partisan, corrupt Supreme Court in the history of the nation.

America has less than 30 days to make a decision which ideological path it will choose for the future.

The first choice would be the Democratic Party, led by Vice-President Kamala Harris. The party guarantees a continuance of the democratic process of the constitution created by its Founding Fathers 250 years ago. A path that heeds all the prescient warnings and wisdom contained in the Farewell Address of the Father of the Nation, George Washington.

Vice-President Harris, who has been criticized for “not letting the public to get to know her”, has recently been doing a media blitz. She has appeared on “The Tonight Show with Stephen Colbert”, “The View”, “Call Her Daddy” and many other popular TV shows and podcasts, acquitting herself brilliantly, with compassion and humor. All the while carrying out her executive duties in ensuring that the needs of the victims of Hurricane Helene were being met to the best of the government’s substantial resources.

She has been actively wooing disgruntled Republican voters, with considerable success in attracting many prominent leaders, like the Cheneys, who have already endorsed her. She has also stated that she would have a Republican in her cabinet and has been floating the idea (tongue-in-cheek?) that she may offer Mitt Romney, a previous Republican candidate for the presidency in 2012, the coveted position of Secretary of State in her administration. A strategy which may persuade moderate Republicans disgusted with Trump (and there are millions) who had decided not to vote, to change their minds.

Until last Thursday, Kamala was leading with a razor-thin margin in the battleground states, though it still remains a race too close to call.

Kamala’s odds may have received the expected boost when the most popular Democrat in the nation, former President Barack Obama made a spectacular entry into the campaign trail last Thursday, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. In a riveting speech, he praised Kamala’s record, saying she will be ready to do the job from Day One, which she has proved by a lifetime of public service. He mocked Trump, annihilating him with sardonic humor as only he can, turning Trump’s lies against himself. He granted that the election is tight “because there are a lot of Americans struggling out there”. He said, “What I can’t understand is why anyone would think that Donald Trump (whom he characterized as a ‘whiny and selfish billionaire who only cares about his ego, his money, his crowd sizes and his status’) will shake up things in a way that is good for you”.

President Obama will be on the campaign trail, joined by his equally popular wife, Michelle, till Election Day, which will undoubtedly increase Kamala’s chances of success.

The second choice is the Republican Party led by Trump.

If elected for a second term, Trump will withdraw from NATO and stop all aid to Ukraine, which will enable Putin’s Russia to complete the occupation of a sovereign nation. He will provide all assistance to his equally murderous war criminal buddy, Bibi Netanyahu, to finally complete the genocide of the Palestinian people and establish a one-state solution for the Promised Land. Trump will also set a precedent for other tyrants, that America will only watch, even encourage its new-found allies, while they break international laws and trample the sovereignty of smaller sovereign nations.

It was an open secret that Trump had a “special relationship” with Putin during his presidency. Who can forget his near-treasonous performance after the Helsinki Summit in 2018, when he stood onstage with Russian President, Vladimir Putin, and accepted the former KGB officer’s lies that Russia had not interfered in the 2016 election. A direct betrayal of all 17 of the US intelligence agencies, which had unanimously confirmed Russia’s interference.

The Washington Post revealed, according to a book entitled “War” by legendary journalist, Bob Woodward, to be released next week, that “As the Coronavirus tore through the world in 2020, and the United States and other countries were confronted with a desperate shortage of tests to detect the illness, Trump secretly sent a package of coveted Covid tests to Vladimir Putin for his personal use”.

The book also claims that Trump has had a continuing relationship with Putin since he left the White House in 2021; that Trump has had several private telephone conversations with Putin, and allegedly continues to share America’s top-secret information with the nation’s top adversary and his long-time puppet-master.

Trump has been predictably politicizing the hurricane, spreading lies that the administration is failing in its efforts to look after the affected citizens in North Carolina, Georgia and other states hit by Helene. Downright lies, which were immediately denied by all the Governors of the affected states, Republican and Democrat. Vicious lies that Republicans like Trump and Vance spew for political gain, although they know these lies put desperate peoples’ lives in danger. And they don’t care.

When Kamala heard about these lies, she threw up her hands in the air, and said, “Have you no empathy, man!”. No. He doesn’t. None. Except for himself.

The future of the nation in a Republican administration is clearly outlined in the conservative Heritage Foundation creation of the 925-page document, “The Project 2025 – Mandate for Leadership”. In essence, Authoritarian Governance for Dummies.

Whether Kamala Harris wins with a slight majority, which is what the polls predict today, or, as is my fervent hope, the undecided and moderate Republican voters finally come to their senses and give her an indisputable majority, Trump will still never concede.

In the event of a close election, there is the possibility that the aforementioned partisan Supreme Court would overturn the results of a few swing states with small Democratic majorities, and award the presidency to Trump.

The only certainty after the November 5 election is that there will be violence, which will make the January 6, 2021 insurrection look like a walk in the park.

Fortunately, President Biden will be the incumbent Commander-in Chief after the election. He will order the full might of the federal law enforcement and military forces to quell any violence. He will also ensure that the constitutional transfer of power, as mandated by the will of the people, will be upheld.

If Trump wins the election, or is fraudulently awarded the presidency, then America would have made its decision. To abandon democracy and embrace the ideology of an authoritarian kleptocracy, with a Mad King at the helm, supported by a bunch of white supremacist neo-Nazis calling the shots.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Features

Eastern University and the making of a culture of peace

Published

on

by Jehan Perera

There is an important change in the way peace is being understood in Sri Lanka. The notion that peacebuilding is not simply the responsibility of governments, politicians and peace organisations, but is also a responsibility of educational institutions, appears to be permeating the consciousness of at least a section of the academic community. This was visible on International Peace Day at an event held at Eastern University by the Faculty of Health-Care Sciences. The event was unusual not least because the medical and nursing faculty of the university had decided that peacebuilding was relevant to its academic and professional responsibilities.

Peacebuilding has too often been treated as something undertaken after conflict, when the fighting has stopped and the immediate task is to rebuild relationships between communities. But peace cannot be sustained by governments and peace organisations alone. If it is to become long lasting, the values and practices of peace have to become part of the institutions through which a society educates its younger generations. Universities and other educational institutions are therefore important to peacebuilding. They are among the places where the foundations of a culture of peace can either be built or neglected.

The experience of the Faculty of Health-Care Sciences at Eastern University provides a practical example of what this can mean. Led by its Dean, Prof Thillainathan Sathaananthan, the faculty organised an event which went beyond the ordinary academic scope of a medical faculty. University academics are experts in writing project proposals and applying for research grants. On this occasion, the members of the Faculty of Health-Care Sciences used those skills to apply for a UNESCO grant that they won to conduct an International Peace Day event. The significance lies less in the Rs 200,000 grant than in the decision to use the university’s institutional capacity and resources to invest in peacebuilding. The event at Eastern University needs to be understood as more than a successful university programme. It represents a possible paradigm shift in peace thinking.

Institutional Commitment

The Peace Day event obtained the support of the university administration, including Vice Chancellor Prof P Peratheepan, and reached out to secondary schools in the vicinity to mobilise their attendance. The event itself was meticulously organised. There were cultural items including traditional and modern dance and song in the three languages, performed by combinations of solo, duet and multiple singers, dancers and actors drawn in part from nearby secondary schools. There was a panel discussion by senior academics on the general theme of peacebuilding and how to prepare for it. A discussion among the students followed, where each student spoke on behalf of a religion that was not theirs. This is significant because peacebuilding cannot remain an idea discussed by specialists at conferences. It has to become part of the way institutions educate and prepare people for life in a plural society.

The Faculty of Health-Care Sciences at Eastern University has provided a model through its Peace Medicine course modules that were introduced to the curricular as a compulsory core course over 10 years ago. Two senior academics, Dr Kuveriel Eliyas Karunakaran and Dr Thillainathan Sathaananthan, have written a book on “Peace Medicine- A Health Care Concern” that was published five years ago. Its Peace Medicine Module integrates principles of medical ethics, compassion, equity, social justice and community engagement into health education and practice. In his introduction, former Vice Chancellor of Eastern University, Prof T Jayasingam noted “This book is an introduction to a theme which had already been operating in the Faculty of Health Care Sciences as a course.”

Doctors, nurses and health workers know better than anyone the harm that war and violence does. They are the people who treat the wounds and trauma that violence leaves behind. In a hospital, a patient is not asked what their religion or ethnicity is before they are treated. Health care is one of the places where peace is practised every day. The Faculty has therefore found a way of connecting its professional responsibilities with the wider social responsibility of peacebuilding. The question is whether this experience can be replicated throughout the country, at universities and at other educational institutions, so that peacebuilding becomes part of the consciousness of education itself. If that happens on a sufficient scale, it can begin to generate a culture of peace that becomes increasingly difficult to reverse.

Local Action

The Eastern University event corresponded closely to the United Nations theme for this year’s International Day of Peace, “Invest in Peace – For Everyone, Everywhere, Every Day”, which honours the “everyday architects of peace”, people driving local action, laying the groundwork for stability and building lasting peace from the ground up. The emphasis on investment is important. An investment means that something is put in: time, courage and resources. There is no more violent conflict in Sri Lanka today. But the absence of war does not automatically produce a culture of peace. The factors that fed the country’s conflict have not disappeared from the world. Racism, corruption and the violation of laws and human rights are the raw materials of conflict. So too are unresolved grievances, discrimination and the failure to recognise the suffering of others.

A country that does not deal with its past does not escape it. The past can return in the next generation. This is why the experience of Eastern University needs to be replicated countrywide, both at universities and at other educational institutions. The objective should not be to turn every academic discipline into peace studies. Rather, peacebuilding needs to become part of the consciousness of education itself. Eastern University shows that a medical faculty can develop Peace Medicine. A law faculty can examine the relationship between justice, rights and peace. Faculties of education can prepare teachers to work in diverse communities, while the humanities and social sciences can examine the different narratives through which communities understand their histories. Every institution can find its own way of making peacebuilding relevant to what it teaches.

Sri Lanka has had many declarations, pledges and programmes in the past. What matters is whether these produce changes in behaviour and institutional practice. Peacebuilding requires confronting difficult issues rather than avoiding them. It requires respect for different identities, but also engagement across those identities. It requires dealing with grievances in the present while also addressing unresolved issues from the past. It requires truth, accountability, reparations and guarantees of non-recurrence. It requires people to learn that the rights of another community do not diminish their own rights. The International Peace Day event at Eastern University was evidence of a change in the way at least some academics in a part of the country deeply affected by war are thinking about their responsibilities. Peace needs to be invested in and the most important investment will be in the minds of those who will inherit the future.

Continue Reading

Features

Quality assured education commodities

Published

on

by Ahilan Kadirgamar

I have always noticed the little paper tags that are inside the packaging of some products that say quality assured or quality control. I often wonder who might have checked the product and stamped that tag, but I also forget the tag soon enough. Decades later, when I entered academia, I was taken aback by the emphasis placed on quality assurance in our universities. It is not something that could be forgotten and done away with; the entire university system is obsessed with quality assurance.

Beginning with the staff induction programme, quality assurance is drilled into the newly recruited lecturers. It is the norm, not seen as doing any harm and only trying to improve quality. It is accepted as given, and not questioned. Quality Assurance Cells and Committees are omnipresent and hover above the Departments and, at times, even the Faculty Boards. Quality Assurance reviews are feared by the Deans and Vice Chancellors. University life itself seems secondary to the rule of quality assurance. What do we make of this system of quality assurance and what are its implications for our university system?

Corporate speak

Universities globally have been going through major changes with neoliberal education policies. In many countries, universities increasingly became corporatised to be run like businesses in the 1980s. As state support for universities declined, cost cutting became the norm. They started hiring adjunct or part-time staff. Many public non-fee levying universities around the world began to charge fees. Decade by decade, tuition fees became more and more exorbitant, forcing students to take student loans. The total student debt in the United States now stands at close to US$ 2 trillion; which is about 20 times the GDP of Sri Lanka. As the higher education landscape transformed in the West, university administrations began to recruit Presidents, Vice Chancellors and administrative officials with corporate backgrounds and experience.

Such corporatisation of universities in the West has since been imported into countries like Sri Lanka, introducing a new corporate vocabulary, including quality assurance, graduate competencies, programme outcomes, intended learning outcomes, etc. University teaching has become secondary to documenting so-called outcomes. The teacher-student relationship, the environment of the lecture hall and even administering the university have been over-determined by the processes of ensuring quality. How did such major changes come about in such a short time? Indeed, academics of just two generation ago, would never have heard of these terms and processes in the Sri Lankan university system.

World Bank Trojan horse

Since the early 2000s there have been a number of World Bank projects that have drastically changed the character of Sri Lankan universities. Quality assurance as a central agenda within universities, and many other changes to the working of our universities, came through these World Bank initiatives. The Improving Relevance and Quality of Undergraduate Education (IRQUE) project and Higher Education for the 21st Century (HETC) project were two such earlier projects that set up the Quality Assurance and Accreditation Unit (QAAU) under the University Grants Commission (UGC) and established systematic quality assurance reviews for state universities. The public often thinks these are grants from the World Bank to modernise our universities. However, they are not grants but loans.

The most recent such project, Accelerating Higher Education Expansion and Development (AHEAD) is a US$ 100 million loan from the World Bank implemented from 2018 to 2023, which consolidated the quality assurance structures from the earlier projects. Furthermore, these projects are implemented with tremendous arrogance, prioritising their implementation over all other concerns in the universities, when the project over six years for example accounts for just one fourth of our budget allocation for universities this year.

The AHEAD project drastically changed course curricula, sought to increase student enrolment in science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM) disciplines, commercialise the university research agenda and create university-business linkages. All of this was pushed to supposedly help us face development challenges. We have heard the ideological attack on our universities and even students claiming they are “unemployable graduates”. These changes to our higher education system were supposedly going to create jobs and increase employment.

The irony of the AHEAD project is that just as it was ending in 2023, apparently after having reached its targets, the Sri Lankan economy was collapsing. The World Bank often gets the direction of causality wrong. It is the economy that creates jobs for graduates, and not the training or kind of graduates that create jobs. It is decades of World Bank policies, and those of its ideological twin the IMF, that have led to such high youth unemployment, not only in Sri Lanka but also in many other countries in the global South.

Sri Lanka entered an IMF agreement in March 2023 and started a new Country Partnership Framework with the World Bank in June 2023. These programmes have little to say about, and actively discourage, government initiatives that aim to create an industrial policy or an employment creation policy. Instead, they push for austerity measures, which not only restrict the allocation for education among other sectors, but also end up contracting the economy to the detriment of increasing employment. Their goal is the commercialisation of higher education, to make universities into businesses and run them like factories.

In this context, the ideology of quality assurance is powerful. The International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO), whose different standards are necessary for marketing, is the institution that came up with the concept of “quality assurance”. It promoted quality assurance as a process of identifying defected products. Therefore, when the World Bank promotes this conceptual framing, our students are, in fact, seen as products on the assembly line, with quality assurance processes aiming to prevent the release of defected products from the university system. For the US$ 100 million we borrowed for the AHEAD project and the many more million dollars in similar World Bank projects, there is no evidence of increased employment of graduates.

Commodity fetishism

Over a century and a half ago, Karl Marx critiqued the economic analysis prevalent at that time that associated some inherent or monetary value for commodities without considering the social relations that underlie the production of those commodities. Marx called this commodity fetishism. Furthermore, he theorised that such commodity fetishism was also a reason for the alienation of human beings from the world. If our labour and what we produce is seen devoid of the social relations that underlie them, we lose our connection with the people and the world. In this process we become alienated from what we produce and the world.

We are now in a world where our students themselves are fetishised as commodities for the market. Universities are no longer communities concerned about knowledge and human growth, but mere factories producing commodities, which have to be produced without defects to be marketed. In this way, quality assurance has become the cause for the alienation of students, academics and our universities themselves, from the larger relationship with our economy and society.

Our university system does need reform. It is grossly underfunded and not providing the financial support and facilities for our students. Universities have become hierarchical spaces without the academic freedom and democratic ethos necessary for producing knowledge. Academics and students need to engage more with their communities to make their learning and research meaningful, not to mention their contribution to and integration with society. However, when it comes to even questions of governance and regulation of the universities, such concerns are merely reduced to improving quality. In our contemporary times, this singular focus on quality assurance, as opposed to addressing the larger structural issues, is crippling our universities. There may be no way out, but to put back quality assurance where it started, those little tags on goods, to perhaps be noticed but quickly forgotten.

Ahilan Kadirgamar is a political economist and Senior Lecturer, University of Jaffna.

(Kuppi is a politics and pedagogy happening on the margins of the lecture hall that parodies, subverts, and simultaneously reaffirms social hierarchies)

Continue Reading

Features

Thailand’s biggest new global star …

Published

on

The entertainment scene, globally, is agog with excitement, and, why not!

Yes, a new global star has emerged … from Thailand, and she hit the headlines by winning America’s Got Talent.

Rattikarn Amloy, known to millions by her stage name Nene Royal, was crowned the winner of America’s Got Talent (AGT) Season 21 at the live finale at Pasadena Civic Auditorium, California, taking home the USD 1 million grand prize.

The 16-year-old rocker, from the holiday island of Phuket (I’ve been to Phuket, courtesy Tourism Authority of Thailand), has struck a power chord around the world, and is the first Thai national ever to win the hit NBC show.

She beat nine other finalists, including runner-up magician Geno Ploeger, after a blistering final performance.

Nene’s story is pure rock and roll fairy-tale. She says she picked up a guitar at age seven, fell in love at the first chord, and taught herself mostly by watching videos online. That dedication earned her a music scholarship to Kajonkiet International School Phuket.

Her audition at America’s Got Talent — a swaggering, shredding rendition of The Cranberries’ classic ‘Zombie’ — exploded online, amassing over 200 million views across AGT’s platforms, more than any act this season.

She kept wowing: ‘Hysteria’ by Muse, then ‘Black Hole Sun’ by Soundgarden which earned her Spice Girl Mel B’s Golden Buzzer, sending her straight to the live shows.

For the final, she unleashed ‘Seven Nation Army’ by The White Stripes. Judge Howie Mandel shouted: “You should win. Give her the million, America.” Mel B praised her “mysterious, mystical stage presence”.

And for the grand finale, she lived every teen rocker’s dream — performing on stage, alongside US rock giants Linkin Park.

When host Terry Crews announced her as winner, the teenager collapsed to the stage floor in tears. “I’m very happy and you know I’m emotional right now,” she said.

And Thailand erupted. Her school held watch parties, posting: “You did it, congratulations, champion. We are so proud of you.”

Even Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul sent a personal congratulation. He had earlier hosted Nene at Government House in July, where she played guitar while he sang a Thai rock song. His office said her talent “brought pride to Thai people.”

Corporate Thailand also rallied behind her — Charoen Pokphand Foods, owned by billionaire Dhanin Chearavanont, even rented a giant billboard in Times Square, New York, to cheer her on.

With her blistering guitar solos, rock-ballad shrieks and fearless spirit, little Nene Royal has just become Thailand’s biggest new global star.

What’s more, this amazing teenager will be bringing her powerful vocals, guitar skills and signature rock-metal style to the stage, as opening act, before one of the world’s biggest rock bands, America’s Avenged Sevenfold, in Singapore, on 13 October.

Unfortunately, we are still to see a local artiste, grab the spotlight, on a global scale … like Thailand’s Nene.

Yes, they do shine, but mostly on social media, and that, too, with the aid of AI (Artificial Intellegence).

Continue Reading

Trending