View this post on the web at [link removed]

In The Dial, Ross Perlin writes [ [link removed] ] of how people behind bots claim to be able to keep endangered languages alive — but insists that that means nothing without “agency and intention.”
“Overheated headlines like ‘Harnessing AI to Preserve the World’s Endangered Languages,’ themselves now often generated by artificial intelligence, promise that this push will help the cause of linguistic diversity. By learning to ‘speak’ these languages, the bots will supposedly ensure their survival, in one form or another, at a time when more and more languages are endangered.” And some — including language activists — do hope that bots might serve as conversation partners and even teachers.
But Perlin pushes back, asking, “are these bots really ‘speakers’ in the first place? And what is lost when we grant them that status, for the sake of convenience or out of desperation?” Perlin takes it further, arguing that “To invoke language when talking about LLMs [large language models] is to misunderstand the nature of language and miss its fundamentally lived and embodied character.” Perlin also notes that bots are recognized as “speakers” while many “Indigenous languages are still ignorantly dismissed as not being ‘proper’ languages.”
If You Read One More Thing: Power Grabbing and Keeping
In a piece republished in English at VSquare, András Szabó, Patrik Galavits, and András Pethő report [ [link removed] ] on how Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has used the economy to amass and hold onto power.
“Orbán has strong ideas on fundamental economic issues, from the car industry to the labor market to vocational training. According to sources who have known the prime minister for a long time, economic policy is another area — like foreign and domestic policy — where he is the government’s main decision maker.” And he apparently has quite a strong handle on the subject matter, though not so strong that holes in his knowledge don’t begin to show to experts, they write: “Although Orbán has made personal efforts to educate himself in economics and is surprisingly familiar with certain technical concepts, the economists who meet with him often notice his shortcomings.”
Orbán has reportedly grown increasingly insistent that his methods of handling and trying to improve the economy are the only methods. Per the authors, “Orbán is not easily persuaded by such arguments based on long-established economic principles. According to one government official, the prime minister tends to give more credit to those who come up with innovative ideas than to those who are more conventional in their economic thinking.” And the fact that the “expansionary” economic model that served him so far may not continue to serve him — or the country — doesn’t appear to be getting through to the prime minister. 
Out of Africa
In Africa Is a Country, Jana Sinker asks [ [link removed] ] why African artifacts are everywhere but in Africa.
Sinker’s introduction of the phenomenon is straightforward: “Through means of colonialism, many residents of African countries were thrust into violence, losing their freedom and lives. Unfortunately, Western countries perpetuate this colonial legacy by proudly displaying the very stolen artifacts that serve as evidence of their colonial crimes. Even as much as 90% of Sub-Saharan Africa’s objects are held outside of Africa.”
However, there is a positive development: “Western institutions begin returning these objects, causing pressure to accumulate for other institutions to follow suit. For instance, more than 1,000 Benin Bronzes have been returned to Nigeria after being in British possession since 1897 after a violent military expedition. … Similarly, on April 20, 2024, the UK decided to return 32 gold and silver artifacts to Ghana looted over 150 years ago from the Asante King during conflicts in the 19th century.” But countless artifacts, Sinker reminds readers, are still housed in Western institutions.
Deep Dive: Women’s Work?
Are women heads of government actually more likely to face corruption charges than their male counterparts because of a deep-seated belief that a woman’s mere presence corrupts public office? That’s what authors Madison Schramm, Alexandra Stark, and Loriana Crasic [ [link removed] ]theorize [ [link removed] ] in their new paper, “‘Back to the Kitchen’: Corruption Charges Against Women Heads of Government,” recently published in the Canadian Journal of Political Science.  
As the authors put it, “While corruption is often described as fraudulent or illegal conduct in academic research, in political processes and in popular use, corruption signifies the erosion or debasing of an entity or body politic.”
That means corruption implies not only specific behaviors but also violations of norms.
“Rather than investigate the relative tendency of women to engage in abuses of office, or the double standards or inconsistent expectations and associated evaluations women face in political life, we focus on the link between gender, perceptions of corruption and long-standing narratives that make women heads of government more vulnerable to accusations,” they write.
And while benevolent sexism might actually help women when they’re running for office, good old fashioned sexism can be a setback once they arrive and face political setbacks and political reality. “In other words, women's perceived incongruity with the highest office will not be a constant, but rather conditional, and articulated through and reified by allegations of corruption.”
The authors use cross-national data to show how formal corruption charges are "significantly more likely" to target women executives "than their male counterparts."
The data set had 2,119 leader observations. Of 68 women leader observers, 14 cases were women who had faced or were facing corruption charges. By comparison, there were 2,051 male leader observations, but 37 cases of men charged with corruption. As the authors point out, “Even if there is an underlying gender bias in the corruption coding, it would have to be quite large to explain the findings described below.”
They also look at specific cases — Brazilian President Rousseff and Turkish Prime Minister Çiller — to show what a powerful role gendered discourse plays in motivating suspicion and driving public sentiment. In both cases, they found, gender "profoundly" influenced the charges, adding that "perceptions of women as out of place in, and potentially dangerous to, the office of head of government increased their vulnerability to the charges."
The authors assert their findings are a substantial contribution to literature on gender, leadership, and politics of corruption, writing: “This research is critical to our understanding of politics in a world where more women are breaking the highest glass ceiling by becoming heads of government.” (One might add that it is also important in places where perceptions of women are part of the reason that they are not yet head of government or state).
They suggest that future research like analysis of the content of media coverage of women leaders can even further test and improve their explanations and understanding. They also encourage future researchers to look at different levels of government and across socio-cultural contexts.
Show Us the Receipts
Diwash Gahatraj asked [ [link removed] ] what Bhutan’s mindfulness city will mean for the region’s displaced Lhotshampa community. “The upcoming Gelephu Mindfulness City (GMC) is a major project designed to position Bhutan as a bridge connecting South Asia with Southeast Asia,” wrote Gahatraj. However, “only time will tell if this also signals an invitation to the 6,300 remaining Lhotshampas in the camp in Nepal and the 113,000-strong Lhotshampa diaspora. The displaced community, especially those living in exile for decades, feels anxious and left out as their former home undergoes rapid development.” For some, the project means opportunity; to the Lhotshampa, it “heightens their longing for repatriation and the fear of being permanently excluded from Bhutan’s future.” 
Daniel Ofman reported [ [link removed] ] on a rally in Berlin attended by Russian opposition leaders and thousands of their supporters. “It was organized by some of the most-prominent leaders of the Russian opposition in exile, including Ilya Yashin, Vladimir Kara-Murza, and Yulia Navalnaya. This was among the most-significant opposition rallies outside of Russia since the Kremlin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Participants chanted, ‘Russia without Putin’ — encapsulating one of their main messages: to end Russian President Vladimir Putin’s reign.’” Navalnaya, widow of the high-profile Russian dissident Alexei Navalny, told the crowd, “We need to come and fight against this war that Putin started with Ukraine. We need to remind others and remember about the political prisoners. We need to come out for those people in Russia who can’t come out to the streets … we need to come out for those who are in prison, and for those who have been killed.”
Sushmita Pathak looked [ [link removed] ] at why Indian men are fighting for Russia in Ukraine. “Ninety-one Indians have been duped into joining the Russian army, according to the Indian government. These men, as well as thousands of others from Nepal and Sri Lanka, went to Russia in search of greener pastures. Their stories reveal a human trafficking network that’s been feeding off of economic despair in South Asia.” The story of men looking for work and instead being sent to the frontlines is a deadly one: “Eight Indians and over 40 Nepalese have died fighting on Russia’s side.”
Well-Played
Gandalf at the protest [ [link removed] ].
Bring back morning announcements [ [link removed] ].
Seinfeld’s Alison Roman era [ [link removed] ].
Same as it ever was [ [link removed] ].
In a way, yes [ [link removed] ].
That’s that … mayor espresso [ [link removed] ].
Critical State is written by Emily Tamkin with Inkstick Media.
The World is a weekday public radio show and podcast on global issues, news, and insights from PRX and GBH.
With an online magazine and podcast featuring a diversity of expert voices, Inkstick Media is “foreign policy for the rest of us.”
Critical State is made possible in part by the Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Unsubscribe [link removed]?