Source: The Conversation – Canada – By James Horncastle, Assistant Professor and Edward and Emily McWhinney Professor in International Relations, Simon Fraser University
The Nobel Committee has ended months of speculation over the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize winner in selecting Venezuelan politician and activist María Corina Machado. With no obvious candidate this year, analysts spent months debating who should win the prestigious award.
In the end, however, the committee signalled its efforts to uphold the increasingly threatened liberal international order by selecting Machado, one of Venezuela’s key opposition figures and a proponent of democracy.
The politics of the prize
The Nobel Peace Prize, like most international awards, is highly subjective. In some years the winners may appear obvious, such as in 1994 when Yasser Arafat, Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres shared the award for the Oslo Accord, but in other years, it’s not so clear; 2025 is one such year.
In 2025, United States President Donald Trump made a concerted and high-profile push for the award to cement his dubious legacy. Although many people found his demands for the award laughable, there is precedent for politics overstepping the reality of an individual’s contribution.
In the case of Machado, the Nobel Committee chose to endorse both a message as well as actions.
Declining democracy in Venezuela
Democratic rights in Venezuela have declined significantly over the last two decades. Initially, people greeted the election of Hugo Chávez in 1998 as a significant break from the corruption and economic crisis that defined Venezuelan politics in the 1990s. They were wrong.
Once Chávez rose to power, his regime became increasingly authoritarian over time. The complete pivot to authoritarianism in Venezuela, however, happened after Chavez’s death under his successor, Nicolás Maduro, who assumed the presidency in 2013.
By 2016, outside observers argued that Maduro’s efforts to centralize power for himself constituted a “full-on dictatorship.” Despite several nominal elections since that time, Maduro has used a variety of tactics in order to guarantee he and his regime remain in power.
The tactics used by Maduro’s government to suppress the opposition means it requires considerable personal bravery and integrity to challenge the regime. Machado possesses such traits.
She’s faced considerable threats to her life throughout her political career. Starting in 2011, Machado was physically attacked by Chavez supporters. These attacks have escalated since Maduro assumed power.
While many of her fellow politicians have fled the country fearing such threats of violence, Machado has remained in the country and become a symbol of defiance and democracy for the opposition. Even though her centre-right views are not in alignment with much of the Venezuelan opposition’s political stances, she was nevertheless chosen to be the unity candidate in the 2024 Venezuelan presidential election.
Machado’s personal bravery in the face of threats from the Maduro regime also highlights another matter the Nobel Prize committee seeks to highlight: the declining state of democracy at an international level.
In awarding the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize, the committee noted:
“Democracy is a precondition for lasting peace. However, we live in a world where democracy is in retreat, where more and more authoritarian regimes are challenging norms and resorting to violence. The Venezuelan regime’s rigid hold on power and its repression of the population are not unique in the world.”
Mostanalyses suggest that liberal democracy is in decline at an international level. Whether through the development of hybrid regimes or outright authoritarian governments, democracy as both a concept and a practice is under threat.
Trump’s second stint in the Oval Office seems to vividly illustrate this decline. The U.S. president and his supporters have been quite explicit that their priority is “America First.” The U.S., which previously served as a champion of the liberal international order on the global stage, is anything but at the moment.
With the world’s traditional champion of democratic governance in retrenchment, other pro-democracy forces are stepping into the breach — including the Nobel Committee and its selection of Machado for the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize.
James Horncastle does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Since the prize announcement, cheers and excitement have surrounded the home institutions of these laureates in Berkeley, Santa Barbara and New Haven.
The award of this prestigious prize to pioneering research in quantum physics coincides with the 100th anniversary of the birth of quantum mechanics – a revolutionary scientific theory that forms the foundation of modern physics.
Yet numerous aspects of the quantum world have long remained mysterious to scientists and engineers. From an experimental point of view, the tiny scale of microscopic particles poses outstanding challenges for studying the subtle laws of quantum mechanics in laboratory settings.
The promises of quantum machines
Since the closing decades of the past century, researchers around the world have sought to precisely isolate, control and measure individual physical objects, such as single photons and atomic ions, that display quantum behaviors under very specific experimental conditions. These endeavors have given rise to the emerging field of quantum engineering, which aims to utilize the peculiarities of quantum physics for groundbreaking technological innovations.
John Clarke, an emeritus professor of physics at the University of California, Berkeley, speaks on Oct. 7, 2025, at a press conference on the campus celebrating his 2025 Nobel Prize in Physics. Karl Mondon/AFP via Getty Images
One of the most promising directions is quantum information processing, whose goal is to design and implement machines that can encode, process, transmit and detect information in “strange” quantum manners: For instance, an object can be in a superposition of different states at the same time. Distant objects can manifest quantum entanglement – remote correlations that escape all possible classical interpretation. Compared with their conventional electronics predecessors, quantum information machines could have advantages in specific tasks of computation, simulation, cryptography and sensing.
The realization of such quantum machines would require experimenters having access to reliable physical components that can be assembled and controlled on the human scale, yet fully obey quantum mechanics. Counterintuitive as it might sound, can we break the implicit boundaries of the natural world and bring microscopic physical laws into the macroscopic reality?
Quantum mechanics in an electrical circuit
In 1985, the three Nobel laureates – then working in the same research group at the University of California, Berkeley – provided an affirmative answer to the question above. They were studying electrical circuits made of superconductors. Superconductivity is a special state of matter famous for conducting electrical currents without resistance, due to underlying quantum mechanical interactions of electrons at low temperatures. For the first time, the trio observed distinct quantum behaviors of a macroscopic physical variable.
In a superconductor, two electrons bond together to form a Cooper pair. These electron pairs condense into a macroscopic state, which can be described by a collective phase variable shared by all its microscopic constituents. In this state, trillions or more electrons effectively behave like a single entity, resembling the mass collections of atoms that form everyday objects like pendulums or billiard balls.
To observe the quantum mechanical motion of this macroscopic phase variable, the three scientists fabricated a device called the Josephson junction, which consists of two pieces of superconductors separated by an insulator layer thinner than 1/10,000 of a human hair. They discovered that, at sufficiently low temperatures (below −273 degrees Celsius, or −459 degrees Fahrenheit), the phase variable difference across the Josephson junction shows a unique quantum mechanical phenomenon known as quantum tunneling, where an object may escape a barrier without the need to climb over its summit.
Furthermore, the team exposed the Josephson junction to microwave electromagnetic radiation whose frequency is close to that of Wi-Fi signals. They measured energy levels of the circuit at discrete, or quantized, values, which are usually present only in microscopic atoms and molecules. The device used in these experiments can thus be referred to as an “artificial atom” – namely, an electrical circuit with atom-like properties, which is at once macroscopic in size, adjustable in design, and quantum mechanical in nature.
Implications and outlooks
The groundbreaking works by Clarke, Devoret and Martinis have had many profound impacts. On the fundamental level, they suggested that distinct quantum phenomena – once thought to exist only at the microscopic level – can actually manifest at much larger physical scales. In the meantime, the invention of superconducting artificial atoms has opened brand-new avenues toward building useful quantum machines with advanced engineering techniques.
Based on these discoveries, researchers – including these Nobel Prize recipients and their research groups – have made significant achievements in constructing prototype quantum computers using superconducting quantum circuits in the decades since. The elementary device unit that makes up these information processors is the superconducting quantum bit, or “qubit” for short. Each superconducting qubit is an artificial atom containing one or more Josephson junctions. Its quantum state can be precisely prepared, manipulated and measured by experimenters. The perfection and integration of superconducting qubits are among the state-of-the-art challenges in quantum information technology.
2025 Nobel laureate John Martinis discusses the roadmap of building a quantum computer at the 2016 Adiabatic Quantum Computing Conference in Los Angeles.
The 2025 Nobel Prize for physics recognizes original investigations in the intersection of basic and applied sciences. The prize recipients tested profound quantum mechanical hypotheses through clear and rigorous experimentation.
From those artificial atoms have emerged the audacious efforts and rapid progress in building practical quantum information machines. The combination of pure intellectual inquiries and engineering advancement has been shaping this interdisciplinary field since its creation.
This Nobel Prize is therefore a tribute to the three inventors of superconducting quantum circuits, whose inquisitive minds, broad visions and adventurous attitudes represent the true scientific spirit and will continue to inspire future generations.
Zhixin Wang does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
El viernes 10 de octubre a las 23.59 acaba el plazo para que los accionistas de Banco Sabadell acudan a la opa del BBVA, declarada hostil por la directiva de la entidad catalana. El Gobierno de España, en el Consejo de Ministros del 24 de junio de 2025 y tras someter la operación a consulta pública, autorizó la oferta bajo condiciones estrictas para proteger el interés general. En consecuencia, la opa podrá ejecutarse siempre que al menos el 50 % de los accionistas del Sabadell la acepten.
En septiembre de 2025 el BBVA mejoró su oferta, elevando su valor inicial en un 10 %. La propuesta es mayoritariamente en acciones: por cada 4,83 títulos del Sabadell se ofrecería una acción de nueva emisión del BBVA, con un pequeño ajuste en efectivo para redondear el canje. Por su parte, el Consejo del Banco Sabadell ha mantenido la recomendación a sus accionistas de rechazar la oferta, argumentando que la valoración es insuficiente y que el valor real del banco es significativamente superior al ofertado.
Ahora mismo existe una gran incertidumbre sobre el desenlace. Tras el vencimiento del plazo, los resultados definitivos se publicarán el 17 de octubre a través de la CNMV.
Se barajan tres escenarios posibles:
La aceptación supera el 50 % del capital: la opa prosperaría y la fusión se realizaría bajo los términos acordados y las condiciones impuestas por el Gobierno.
Se sitúa entre el 30 % y el 50 %: la normativa exige al BBVA lanzar una oferta adicional obligatoria en efectivo por el resto del capital no aceptado, sin poder ofrecer un precio inferior al de la oferta inicial.
La aceptación es inferior al 30 %: la opa se considerará fallida y no se producirá la fusión.
El escenario intermedio, entre el 30 y el 50 %, es considerado el más probable . El desenlace dependerá de la capacidad del BBVA para convencer a un número suficiente de accionistas del Sabadell.
Riesgo fiscal para los aceptantes
Existe un riesgo fiscal para los residentes en España: si la opa no supera el 50 %, quienes hayan aceptado podrían verse obligados a tributar por las plusvalías al no cumplirse la neutralidad fiscal prevista.
Desde el punto de vista económico, de salir adelante la opa la entidad resultante vería mejoradas la eficiencia operativa (gracias a las economías de escala), aumentaría su rentabilidad por las sinergias (o sea, el valor de la empresas resultante de la fusión es mayor que el valor individual de las empresas fusionadas) y reforzaría la posición competitiva internacional del BBVA. Pero por otro lado, incrementaría el riesgo sistémico derivado del tamaño del banco resultante y reduciría la competencia, al concentrarse buena parte del mercado financiero español en tres grandes entidades (CaixaBank, Banco Santander y BBVA).
Objetivo de Europa: bancos más grandes y solventes
Desde la crisis de 2008, tanto el Banco Central Europeo como la Comisión Europea impulsan un modelo bancario basado en la consolidación y la solvencia. El objetivo es contar con menos bancos, pero más grandes y sólidos, con supervisión centralizada por parte del BCE y de la Autoridad Bancaria Europea y avanzar hacia un mercado bancario único que resista mejor a las crisis financieras.
Uno de los fines es competir con los gigantes estadounidenses y asiáticos. Sin embargo, la Unión Europea aún carece de un auténtico “campeón bancario continental”, y operaciones como la de BBVA–Sabadell se interpretan como pasos intermedios hacia integraciones transnacionales futuras.
No obstante, este modelo también presenta riesgos estructurales: mayor exposición al riesgo sistémico –las entidades “demasiado grandes para caer” (too big to fail) que ya vivimos durante la crisis de 2008–, dependencia del BCE como garante de estabilidad y pérdida de la diversidad financiera local, que cumple funciones económicas y sociales esenciales.
Esta opa representa una respuesta adaptativa a un entorno cada vez más complejo, marcado por márgenes estrechos, competencia digital y presión regulatoria. Pero también implica una reducción de la diversidad, un debilitamiento de la descentralización y una pérdida de raíces locales dentro del sistema financiero español.
En breve conoceremos el desenlace, que marcará un nuevo capítulo en la reconfiguración del sistema bancario español y, posiblemente, en la propia arquitectura financiera europea.
Jorge Hernando Cuñado no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.
María Corina Machado, en 2014.Carlos Díaz/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY
Nacida en Caracas en 1967, ingeniera industrial, cofundadora de Súmate y exdiputada, María Corina Machado se formó políticamente en la intersección entre integridad electoral, ciudadanía activa y democracia con libertades políticas y económicas para todos.
Sobre esa base, y apoyada en una amplia plataforma cívica, obtuvo el 22 de octubre de 2023 una victoria abrumadora en la primaria opositora, lo que legitimó su liderazgo al frente del movimiento democrático. Pese a ello, en 2024 fue inhabilitada por el gobierno, contraviniendo el espíritu del Acuerdo de Barbados.
Sin embargo, se mantuvo en la ruta electoral apoyando con generosidad y entrega máxima la candidatura unitaria de Edmundo González Urrutia.
Las presidenciales de 2024 –marcadas por graves irregularidades– concluyeron con la proclamación oficial de Nicolás Maduro, mientras la oposición afirmó, con actas en mano, la victoria de González Urrutia. Varios gobiernos reclamaron verificación y Estados Unidos reconoció a González como “presidente electo”.
En ese contexto, Machado y su equipo han afrontado persecución. Desde el 9 de enero de 2025, tras una detención seguida de liberación en circunstancias opacas, ella ha tenido que resguardarse. Aun así, no habilitó salidas insurreccionales: sostuvo la verdad electoral, preservó la organización social y escaló la presión diplomática.
Esa combinación –voto, calle no violenta y diplomacia– es el corazón estratégico que hoy explica este reconocimiento a través del Nobel de la Paz.
¿Dónde está hoy Venezuela?
Hoy, el país vive un agravamiento de la suspensión del Estado de derecho, que se viene arrastrando desde la llegada de Chávez al poder, en 1999, y se ha acentuado progresivamente desde el ascenso de Maduro en 2013. Instituciones capturadas, resultados disputados y nunca auditados, coerción selectiva, tejido social exhausto.
La documentación de 2024–2025 sobre violaciones de derechos humanos en el contexto electoral deja poco margen de duda. Sin embargo, persiste un sustrato ciudadano reacio a ceder su voz. En este paisaje, el liderazgo de Machado –de facto y moral– ha operado como columna vertebral de la resistencia cívica, a pesar de detenciones, exilios y amenazas.
A pesar de todo, octubre de 2025 será, para la memoria colectiva venezolana, un mes de señales. El 19 de octubre, el Vaticano canonizará al doctor José Gregorio Hernández y a la madre Carmen Rendiles, los dos primeros santos de un país profundamente creyente. También en octubre, y por sorpresa, Venezuela celebra que a una mujer venezolana se le haya concedido el Nobel de la Paz (Baruj Benacerraf, nacido en Caracas, obtuvo el de Medicina en 1980). No se confunden los lenguajes –fe y política– pero se reflejan en el espejo de una misma ética de servicio al país y a sus ciudadanos a través de valores espirituales como la resiliencia, la constancia, la templanza y la fidelidad a la verdad.
El cruce de símbolos recuerda que la grandeza nacional no siempre se mide en conquistas materiales.
Efectos geopolíticos y domésticos
El reconocimiento reconfigura incentivos en tres planos:
Eleva el costo reputacional de quienes intentan normalizar el autoritarismo venezolano.
Endurece la condicionalidad de cualquier negociación: el estándar ya no es “diálogo por el diálogo”, sino verificación, cronograma, cumplimiento y retorno a la democracia.
Empodera a la diáspora como actor diplomático y económico con una narrativa transversal –no partidista– que articula libertad, democracia y derechos humanos.
Hacia adentro, el Nobel consolida una doble legitimidad del liderazgo de Machado: de origen, por su investidura cívica y la victoria en la primaria, y de ejercicio, por su negativa a trivializar la violencia y su papel en la unificación opositora. Cada intento de criminalizarla chocará con un blindaje simbólico global.
Hacia afuera, se robustece su capacidad de interlocución con gobiernos y organismos: deja de ser “oposición local” para convertirse en referente normativo hemisférico sobre cómo se defiende la democracia en contextos cerrados y altamente represivos como el venezolano.
Asimismo, el lauro facilita en Washington, Europa y la región –tanto para los gobiernos como para los parlamentos– un marco más nítido para calibrar decisiones inteligentes que faciliten la transición democrática.
La propia Machado ha pedido mayor acción frente al endurecimiento del régimen, la represión y el control institucional. El premio reconoce su autoridad moral para plantearlo sin que se desdibuje el carácter pacífico de su estrategia, y aumenta los costos para los normalizadores del autoritarismo dentro y fuera de Venezuela.
Una lectura personal
Hemos sido testigos, a través de los años, del crecimiento como líder de María Corina Machado en medio de un ambiente muy hostil. Su mérito no es la infalibilidad –nadie la tiene–, sino la voluntad de aprender y persistir: abandonar maximalismos, tejer alianzas, aceptar el escrutinio, resistir tentaciones de violencia y mantener la brújula moral cuando otros la pierden y los incentivos colocados por el régimen han empujado a muchos liderazgos al despeñadero.
María Corina Machado se enfrenta a Chávez en 2012 en el Congreso de Venezuela.
Por eso este Nobel trasciende lo personal y la reconoce como el eje de unidad y coordinación entre actores democráticos pero dispersos –líderes políticos y sociales, iglesia, academia, empresa, aliados democráticos– en torno a una agenda común: unas elecciones con resultados legítimos, el retorno a la democracia y la búsqueda de una salida que minimice daños y garantice el futuro del país.
El Nobel de la Paz 2025 no resuelve la transición, pero recalibra el tablero. Cuando un país contempla, en el mismo mes, la canonización de sus dos primeros santos y el reconocimiento global de quien encarna su lucha cívica, no asiste a un milagro fortuito: renace la esperanza al comprobar que la templanza también mueve montañas. El premio a María Corina Machado no concluye el camino, lo ilumina.
Benigno Alarcón no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.
The ongoing federal shutdown has resulted in a pause on regular government data releases, meaning economic data has been in short supply of late. That has left market-watchers and monetary policymakers somewhat in the dark over key indicators in the U.S. economy.
Fortunately, the University of Michigan’s Surveys of Consumers is unaffected by the impasse in Washington and released its preliminary monthly report on Oct. 10, 2025; the final read of the month will be released in two weeks.
The Conversation U.S. spoke with Joanne Hsu, the director of the Surveys of Consumers, on what the latest data shows about consumer sentiment – and whether the shutdown has left Americans feeling blue.
What is consumer sentiment?
Consumer sentiment is something that we at the University of Michigan have measured since 1946. It looks at American attitudes toward the current state of the economy and the future direction of the economy through questions on personal finances, business conditions and buying conditions for big-ticket items.
Over the decades, it has been closely followed by policymakers, business leaders, academic researchers and investors as a leading indicator of the overall state of the economy.
When sentiment is on the decline, consumers tend to pull back on spending – and that can lead to a slowdown in the economy. The opposite is also true: High or rising sentiment tends to lead to increased spending and a growing economy.
How is the survey compiled?
Every month, we interview a random sample of the U.S. population across the 48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia. Around 1,000 or so people take part in it every month, and we include a representative sample across ages, income, education level, demography and geography. People from across all walks of life are asked around 50 questions pertaining to the economy, personal finances, job prospects, inflation expectations and the like.
When you aggregate that all together, it gives a useful measure of the health of the U.S. economy.
What does the latest survey show?
The latest survey shows virtually no change in overall sentiment between September and October. Consumers are not feeling that optimistic at the moment, but generally no worse than they were last month.
Pocketbook issues – high prices of goods, inflation and possible weakening in the labor market – are suppressing sentiment. Views of consumers across the country converged earlier in the year when the Trump administration’s tariffs were announced. But since then, higher-wealth and higher-income consumers have reported improved consumer sentiment. It is for lower-income Americans – those not owning stock – that sentiment hasn’t lifted since April.
In October, we also saw a slight decline in inflation expectations, but it remains relatively high – midway between where they were around a year ago and the highs of around the time of the tariff announcements in April and May.
Has the government shutdown affected consumer sentiment?
The government shutdown was in place for around half the time of the latest survey period, which ran from Sept. 23-Oct. 6, 2025. And so far, we are not seeing evidence that it is impacting consumer sentiment one way or another.
And that is not super-surprising. It is not that people don’t care about the shutdown, just that it hasn’t affected how they see the economy and their personal finances yet.
History shows that federal shutdowns do move the needle a little. In 2019, around 10% of people spontaneously mentioned the then-shutdown in the January survey. We saw a decline in sentiment in that month, but it did improve again the following month.
Looking back, we tend to see stronger reaction to shutdowns when there is a debt ceiling crisis attached. In 2013, for example, there was a decline in consumer sentiment coinciding with concerns over the debt ceiling being breached. But it did quickly rebound when the government opened again.
Whether or not we see a decline in sentiment because of the current shutdown depends on how long it lasts – and how consumers believe it will impact pocketbook issues, namely prices and job prospects.
Joanne Hsu receives research funding from NIA, NIH, and various sponsors of the University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers.
Los líderes de la oposición venezolana María Corina Machado y Edmundo Gonzales Urrutia saludan durante un acto en Caracas el 30 de julio de 2024.Jonathan Mishkin/Shutterstock
Ser galardonado con un Premio Nobel nunca es un suceso trivial. Los laureados, en ciencia o literatura, se inscriben automáticamente en la historia como referentes de su disciplina.
Sin embargo, cuando el galardón recae en la mención de la paz, adquiere una resonancia distinta: eleva al reconocido a la categoría de símbolo viviente y universal de las causas más nobles de la humanidad. Al recibirlo, personalidades internacionales como Theodore Roosevelt, la madre Teresa de Calcuta, Martin Luther King Jr., Lech Walesa, Desmond Tutu, y Mijaíl Gorbachov, o, más específicamente en el ámbito latinoamericano, Óscar Arias, Rigoberta Menchú y Juan Manuel Santos, a pesar de que sus acciones se circunscribieron a conflictos regionales, alcanzaron una dimensión moral global. Lo mismo ha ocurrido con organizaciones como el Comité Internacional de la Cruz Roja, la ONU o sus agencias ACNUR y UNICEF.
María Corina Machado, Premio Nobel de la Paz 2025
Conceder a María Corina Machado (1967), líder de la oposición venezolana, el Premio Nobel de la Paz 2025 se inserta precisamente en esta tradición. La acción reconocida por el Comité de Oslo se desplegó en el contexto de una lucha política interna, tal como, de manera similar, sucedió en 1991 con la birmana Aung San Suu Kyi, también laureada por su lucha no violenta por la democracia y los derechos humanos de su país.
Portavoz del Comité Noruego del Nobel anunciando la concesión del premio a María Corina Machado el 10 de octubre de 2025. Fuente: The Nobel Prize, YouTube.
La motivación explícita del Comité al premiar a Machado ha sido reconocer su labor de mantener “viva la llama de la democracia en medio de una creciente oscuridad”. Esta declaración validó de manera contundente la lucha pacífica y la resistencia civil de la líder opositora venezolana. El premio no solo es un espaldarazo incalculable a esta luchadora por la democracia, sino que funcionaría como un poderoso catalizador en el tablero geopolítico latinoamericano, redefiniendo la narrativa regional sobre la paz, la democracia y la soberanía.
Históricamente, en América Latina el concepto “paz” se ha asociado, sobre todo, a la firma de acuerdos de cese al fuego o al fin de conflictos armados (como en el caso de Colombia).
El Nobel a María Corina Machado, sin embargo, amplía esta concepción, alineándola con la visión esencial de Alfred Nobel: a saber, la paz como la ausencia de opresión y el triunfo de los derechos humanos y la democracia. El Comité de Oslo declara, sin ambages, que la lucha por la democracia es intrínseca a la búsqueda de la paz en regímenes autoritarios.
Este premio establece un nuevo paradigma de liderazgo opositor en la Latinoamérica. La lucha de Machado, basada en la resistencia persistente y no violenta, se convierte en un símbolo y referente ineludible para movimientos y líderes que emprenden luchas por la democracia en otros países de la región. El Nobel legitima a los movimientos cívicos como actores claves en la construcción de la paz en el hemisferio, demostrando que la firmeza democrática puede obtener el más alto reconocimiento mundial.
En el plano diplomático, el galardón obliga a replantear la política de neutralidad que han mantenido algunos gobiernos latinoamericanos. Los líderes que se autodenominan democráticos se enfrentan al trance de tomar una posición más clara: ignorar la lucha de una persona galardonada con el más alto premio por su labor en pro de la paz y la democracia resultaría impresentable. Si se materializa este cambio de actitud, la premiación podría generar una reagrupación de fuerzas diplomáticas en la región, sumando esfuerzos para aislar y presionar a gobiernos autoritarios.
Un Nobel que visibiliza la crisis política de Venezuela
Si bien el premio no ofrece una solución inmediata a la crisis política venezolana, sí la internacionaliza a un nivel sin precedentes. La relevancia que a nivel regional y mundial alcanza la figura de Machado hace extremadamente dificultoso excluirla de futuras negociaciones. El galardón la inviste como la figura más representativa de las fuerzas opositoras de Venezuela. Su liderazgo, respaldado por la autoridad moral del Nobel, se vuelve central para cualquier solución de transición, forzando a los actores regionales a asumir un papel más activo y menos complaciente en la búsqueda de una salida democrática y pacífica.
El Nobel de la Paz a María Corina Machado es, además de un reconocimiento personal, una categórica declaración política importante para la comunidad internacional. Se ha resaltado que la verdadera paz reside en que haya diversas voces en el ejercicio de la democracia y no un silencio impuesto a la fuerza.
Este premio resalta que la paz se liga ineludiblemente con la libertad, ofrece un símbolo de resistencia a los ciudadanos y desafía a los gobiernos de la región a honrar el compromiso con los valores democráticos que juraron defender.
Tulio Ramírez no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.
Source: The Conversation – (in Spanish) – By Carmen Beatriz Fernández, Profesora de Comunicación Política en la UNAV, el IESA y Pforzheim, Universidad de Navarra
Al conceder a María Corina Machado el Premio Nobel de la Paz 2025 no solo se reconoce su liderazgo y su coraje civil, también se rinde homenaje a la irreductible tozudez democrática del pueblo venezolano. En un país donde el autoritarismo ha intentado cerrar todas las puertas a la participación política, Machado ha demostrado que siempre existen ventanas por donde colar la democracia. Este reconocimiento –ha sido elegida entre 338 nominados al premio en 2025– celebra no solo su trayectoria, sino también la persistencia de millones de ciudadanos que se niegan a rendirse.
Kristian Berg Harpviken, director del Comité Noruego del Nobel, durante la llamada telefónica en la que anunció a Machado la concesión del premio. Fuente: The Nobel Prize, YouTube.
En 2002 fundó Súmate, una ONG dedicada a garantizar elecciones libres y transparentes. Desde entonces, Machado ha realizado una labor esencial en un contexto en el que los obstáculos ponen en duda la relevancia del voto. Pero justamente frente a ese desencanto, ha mantenido viva la idea de que el voto, cuando se defiende colectivamente, puede tener una fuerza transformadora.
Esa convicción se puso a prueba en las primarias opositoras de octubre de 2023, organizadas de forma independiente, sin apoyo del Consejo Nacional Electoral. Más de 2,25 millones de venezolanos participaron, dentro y fuera del país, y Machado obtuvo una victoria arrolladora: 93 % de los votos. Ese resultado consolidó su liderazgo y demostró que, pese a la represión, la sociedad civil aún podía organizar procesos transparentes y participativos. Fue una gesta cívica que marcó un punto de inflexión en la historia reciente de Venezuela.
Sin embargo, el régimen respondió con su habitual recurso: la inhabilitación política, esperando tal vez que la frustración derivara en violencia. Pero ocurrió lo contrario: Machado optó por la serenidad y la estrategia. Impedida de competir en las elecciones presidenciales de 2024, impulsó una salida estratégica: apoyar a Edmundo González Urrutia como candidato de unidad. Fue, de nuevo, la muestra de su inteligencia política y su compromiso con una transición democrática.
Durante la campaña, miles de voluntarios, de todos los partidos políticos, se desplegaron en unidad como observadores ciudadanos para documentar las actas electorales y proteger el voto. En esa elección del 28 de julio de 2024, Venezuela entera fue testigo de un acto de resistencia democrática sin precedentes. A pesar de la represión, el miedo y la censura, los ciudadanos acudieron a las urnas con una determinación que asombró al mundo.
Según los resultados reales, verificados por múltiples observadores independientes a partir de más del 83 % de las actas electorales, Edmundo González Urrutia ganó con cerca del 67 % de los votos. Una ventaja de más de 35 puntos porcentuales, y más de cuatro millones de votos, que el régimen desconoció al manipular el conteo oficial. El Consejo Nacional Electoral no fue capaz de presentar resultados itemizados, como sí lo hizo el comando de campaña de González Urrutia, pero el resultado electoral había sido escrupulosamente documentado.
Con la proclamación fraudulenta de Nicolás Maduro como ganador, el mensaje quedó claro: el camino electoral, tal como se conocía, quedaba cerrado y votar dejó de tener sentido en Venezuela. El régimen convirtió el sufragio en una coreografía del poder para simular normalidad democrática y la abstención del 85 % en el proceso parlamentario de 2025 simbolizó ese vacío político.
Machado encarna, además, una transformación de género y liderazgo en América Latina. La presencia de mujeres en la política regional ha desafiado estructuras de poder históricamente masculinas. En ese sentido, su liderazgo se suma a una nueva generación de mujeres latinoamericanas que, más que ocupar espacios, han creado nuevos modos de hacer política, basados en la empatía, la organización ciudadana y la defensa ética del voto.
Pero el reconocimiento del Nobel trasciende la figura de Machado y es un premio a la resiliencia colectiva de millones de personas que explica por qué se rebelan democráticamente los venezolanos y siguen creyendo que la democracia vale la pena.
La esperanza de un futuro diferente
Hoy, cuando en buena parte del mundo se erosionan las instituciones liberales, en Venezuela está en juego no solo la libertad del país, sino la credibilidad del sistema democrático frente al autoritarismo del siglo XXI.
Por eso, del bonito e inspirador discurso que explica las razones por las que María Corina Machado se hizo merecedora del Premio, este párrafo es clave:
“Ha demostrado que las herramientas de la democracia son también herramientas de la paz. Encarnan la esperanza de un futuro diferente, uno en el que se protejan los derechos fundamentales de los ciudadanos y se escuchen sus voces. En este futuro, las personas finalmente serán libres para vivir en paz”.
María Corina Machado representa la certeza de que la libertad no se negocia, que la democracia no se improvisa y que el futuro no pertenece a quienes imponen silencio, sino a quienes persisten en hablar cuando todos callan. Este Nobel es una reivindicación histórica: la de un país que, contra todo pronóstico, sigue creyendo que su destino está en las urnas, no en las armas.
Carmen Beatriz Fernández no recibe salario, ni ejerce labores de consultoría, ni posee acciones, ni recibe financiación de ninguna compañía u organización que pueda obtener beneficio de este artículo, y ha declarado carecer de vínculos relevantes más allá del cargo académico citado.
La France connaît sans doute sa plus grave crise institutionnelle depuis l’instauration, en 1958, de sa Constitution actuelle.
Suite à la dissolution surprise prononcée par le président de la République Emmanuel Macron en juin 2024, trois gouvernements se sont succédé avant d’être renversés. Le dernier en date, dirigé par le premier ministre Sébastien Lecornu, n’aura tenu qu’à peine 14 heures après la démission de celui qui était jusqu’alors ministre des Armées.
Ayant officiellement remis sa lettre de démission ce lundi, Sébastien Lecornu a toutefois été mandaté par le président de la République pour mener d’ultimes négociations avec les différents groupes politiques dont il a rendu compte mercredi lors d’une intervention télévisée. Le premier ministre a ainsi annoncé qu’un successeur sera désigné d’ici vendredi par le chef d’État.
Le moment est d’autant plus critique que ces ultimes tractations se déroulent à l’ombre de deux spectres qui, s’ils venaient à se réaliser, plongeraient davantage le pays dans la tourmente.
D’un côté, celui d’une nouvelle dissolution, essentiellement réclamée par le Rassemblement national, parti d’extrême droite. À l’autre extrémité de l’éventail, le parti de la France insoumise réclame quant à lui la destitution du Président.
Cet appel a trouvé écho dans les rangs mêmes des formations politiques apparentés au bloc présidentiel. C’est ainsi que ce mardi, Édouard Philippe, premier ministre d’Emmanuel Macron de 2017 à 2020 et président du groupe Horizons (centre droit), appelait le président à programmer une élection présidentielle anticipée. Ce désaveu s’ajoute à celui d’un autre soutien historique et ancien premier ministre macroniste, Gabriel Attal, lequel déclarait qu’il ne « comprenait plus » les décisions du chef d’État.
Des accusations de trahison qui se multiplient
Plusieurs causes profondes pourraient être avancées pour expliquer ce maelstrom institutionnel et politique : fragmentation et polarisation durables du paysage politique national, absence de majorité politique, primauté des logiques partisanes sur la responsabilité gouvernementale…
Pourtant, Emmanuel Macron semble figurer au premier rang des coupables de cette crise inédite. Parmi les arguments mobilisés par ses accusateurs, l’idée qu’il aurait « travesti » les institutions de la Ve République. C’est le sens des propos d’Édouard Philippe tenus mardi dernier :
En France, le garant des institutions est le Président de la République […] Quand on est chef de l’État, on ne les utilise pas pour déminer je ne sais quoi ou à sa convenance personnelle. On ne se sert pas des institutions, on les sert.
L’ancien premier ministre dénonce ainsi une forme de dévoiement institutionnel susceptible d’engendrer une « crise politique délétère pour le pays ».
Les pratiques institutionnelles, ou l’art de dépasser la Constitution
Ces critiques illustrent un phénomène particulièrement présent dans la vie politique française : les interactions entre, d’un côté, les institutions et, de l’autre, les pratiques qui en découlent.
Cette dialectique a donné lieu à une littérature particulièrement féconde dans le champ de la science politique. Les approches dites néo-institutionnalistes s’intéressent ainsi aux rôles des institutions, entendues comme un ensemble de règles, de normes et de principes formels socialement reconnus, qui organisent et contraignent le comportement des acteurs. Dans la continuité de cette perspective, le « tournant pratique » en relations internationales explore la manière dont les acteurs, par des pratiques informelles, s’aménagent des libertés d’action dans un contexte formel et contraignant.
Cela permet de comprendre comment les acteurs institutionnels, en premier lieu le président de la République, vont exploiter les interstices du texte de la Constitution de 1958 pour servir des objectifs politiques. Cette dialectique entre la lettre du texte et les interprétations qui en découlent était précisément pensée par le Général de Gaulle, l’architecte du texte constitutionnel, pour qui : « Une constitution, c’est un esprit, des institutions, une pratique ».
L’histoire de la Ve République regorge ainsi de pratiques qui, sans être expressément prévues dans le texte, se sont imposées durablement au point de produire des effets aussi contraignants que la règle écrite. La plus emblématique de ces pratiques est le concept de « domaine réservé », qui confère au chef d’État la compétence exclusive dans la conduite des affaires étrangères.
La nomination d’un premier ministre de droite à l’origine de la crise politique
C’est ainsi que certaines pratiques émergentes, si elles semblent admises sur le plan institutionnel, se heurtent dans le champ politique à une intense contestation.
Déjà des milliers d’abonnés à l’infolettre de La Conversation. Et vous ? Abonnez-vous gratuitement à notre infolettre pour mieux comprendre les grands enjeux contemporains.
Tel a été le cas au lendemain des élections législatives en juillet 2024. La coalition des forces de gauche réunies sous la bannière du Nouveau Front populaire est arrivée en tête du scrutin avec une majorité relative de sièges obtenus, tandis que le Rassemblement national a obtenu une majorité de suffrages. Le président Macron a choisi néanmoins de nommer comme premier ministre Michel Barnier, issu d’un parti, Les Républicains, qui ne figurait qu’en quatrième position.
Pourtant, la pratique institutionnelle qui prévalait jusque-là voulait que le président nomme un premier ministre issu des rangs de la force arrivée en tête des élections législatives. Cette pratique n’est toutefois pas inscrite dans le texte constitutionnel : l’article 8 indique en effet simplement que le « président de la République nomme le premier ministre ». Emmanuel Macron a dès lors saisi cette brèche pour échapper à une pratique dont l’application aurait desservi ses objectifs politiques.
Une partie de la crise institutionnelle que connait actuellement la France trouve probablement sa justification dans cette obstination du président de la République. La nomination vendredi d’un premier ministre issu des forces de gauche signifierait toutefois que cette pratique émergente et contestée aura fait long feu.
Wassim Tayssir a reçu des financements de l’Université de Montréal
Lisa Cook, a Federal Reserve governor, is also being investigated by the Department of Justice for allegedly making false statements when applying for a mortgage. Members of Donald Trump’s Cabinet are accused of similar wrongdoings. Could any of these people go to prison?
Mortgage fraud is not a new problem. Subprime mortgage fraud fueled the 2008 financial meltdown, when large numbers of very risky mortgages defaulted. Mortgage fraud was also a key feature of the savings and loan crisis in the 1980s.
Mortgage applications are very long, so there’s plenty of opportunity to make mistakes. Plus, they require borrowers to declare that everything is “true, accurate, and complete.” Misrepresentation can trigger potentially large civil and criminal penalties.
As a business school professor, I was curious how many people are convicted of mortgage fraud today. After all, relatively few people went to jail for fraudulent loans back in 2008. Since most mortgage fraud violates federal law, I looked at more than a decade of federal conviction data. What I found was clear: Almost no one has gone to federal prison recently for lying on a mortgage application.
What is mortgage fraud?
Mortgage fraud is when someone intentionally misrepresents facts in order to obtain a property loan. People can lie about many things on a mortgage application, such as their income, assets or employment status, or whether they will occupy the home being purchased or rent it out.
However, very few people are convicted of federal mortgage fraud. Just 38 people in the country were sentenced for such crimes in 2024, and among that small group, four of the convicted got no prison time. A year earlier, just 34 people were convicted and seven avoided prison.
Three thousand people are a tiny fraction of mortgages issued. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau estimates that almost 100 million new mortgage loans were written to purchase or refinance a home over the past 12 years. For those who like precision, 3,000 is only 0.003%.
The Sentencing Commission’s files also offer insight into who gets convicted of mortgage fraud. Three-quarters were men. More than 90% were U.S. citizens. The typical person convicted of mortgage fraud is a man in his late 40s with an associate degree, the data suggests.
The real penalty
While the maximum penalty is 30 years, almost no one serves that long a sentence. In 2024, the maximum sentence handed out was just 10 years. Since 2013, 15% of those convicted got no jail time. The average sentence for people who did get jail time was 21 months, which is less than two years behind bars.
Fines are also much lighter in practice than the maximum $1 million penalty. In 2024, the maximum fine passed down was a quarter-million dollars. Since 2013, the average person convicted of mortgage fraud paid a fine of less than $6,000, with over half of all those convicted paying no fine at all.
Now not paying a fine or only paying a small one doesn’t mean there’s no financial penalty. The courts required most of those convicted to make restitution. In 2024, half of all people convicted had to pay at least a half-million dollars to reimburse their victims, such as lending companies. Over the dozen years I looked at, the average person convicted paid $2 million in restitution for their misdeeds.
More lightning strikes than convictions
It’s impossible to know how common mortgage fraud really is. Some mortgage applications are rechecked in a “post-closing audit.” However, these audits happen within 90 days after the mortgage money is disbursed. Beyond that window, if a loan is paid back on time and without problems, there’s little incentive for a bank or mortgage service provider to recheck an applicant’s information.
What is clear is that while millions of mortgages are written each year, only a tiny fraction of mortgage recipients go to jail for fraud. One way to put this tiny fraction into perspective is to compare it with the National Weather Service estimates of the approximately 270 people hit by lightning yearly. Last year, lightning hit over seven times more people than the federal government convicted of mortgage fraud.
Years ago, I filled in a mortgage application to buy a home. I was consumed with dread wondering if any application mistake would result in my being sent to jail. After looking at the mortgage fraud conviction data, I should have been more worried about being hit by lightning.
Jay L. Zagorsky does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Julie Dobrow, Distinguished Senior Lecturer of Child Study and Human Development, Tufts University
Native American children ride bikes near the cemetery at Wounded Knee, the site of the Dec. 29, 1890, massacre of Sioux tribal members.Richmatts/iStock via Getty Images
Goodale, born in 1863 to a family claiming Puritan roots, grew up on a farm in a remote part of western Massachusetts. In 1858, a baby first named Hakadah, later called Ohíye S’a, who then became widely known as Charles Alexander Eastman for most of his adult life, was born near Redwood Falls, Minnesota. A Wahpeton Santee Dakota, he fled to Manitoba, Canada, with tribal members during the 1862 Dakota War between the U.S. military and several bands of Dakota collectively known as the Santee Sioux.
In December 1890, the two unexpectedly met each other while working at the Pine Ridge Agency in the newly declared state of South Dakota. Even more improbably, they fell in love.
Just weeks later, booming Hotchkiss rifles 15 miles away signaled the start of the Wounded Knee Massacre. Federal troops ended up killing at least 250 Lakota Sioux men, women and children; the traumatic event, historian David Martínez writes, sparked “the abrupt transformation of Indian nations from geopolitical powers … to symbols of conquest.”
It also transformed Goodale and Eastman’s nascent relationship: They resolved to marry and to work together for Native American causes.
Wounded Knee, however, would also prove an unfortunate metaphor for their marriage.
I came to understand that their marriage failed not only because of interpersonal tensions and a clash of values, but also because of some of the ways in which ideas about gender, race and Indigenous identity were rapidly changing in the U.S.
From writer to teacher
At 13, Goodale started publishing poetry in St. Nicholas Magazine, a popular children’s periodical. Her poems generated attention from the press, in addition to fan mail from notable men of letters, including Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. By the time she was 20, she had published five books.
Elaine Goodale Eastman in 1890, when she worked as the Supervisor of Education for the Dakotas. South Dakota Historical Society
But because poets without family fortunes needed other means to support themselves – and because women in the late 1800s had few career options – Goodale turned to teaching. She accepted a job at Virginia’s Hampton Institute, a boarding school that was founded to teach newly emancipated Black students. It later became part of the government’s program to assimilate Native Americans.
Goodale became convinced that Indigenous children would benefit more from schools in their own communities, rather than at government- or church-run boarding schools. She traveled to the Dakota Territory and opened a day school. She also turned from poetry to prose, documenting her observations of “Indian life and education” in dozens of articles.
By the time she came to Pine Ridge Agency, the administrative offices at the Oglala Lakota Indian Reservation, she had been appointed the first supervisor of education for the Dakotas.
The ideal ‘assimilated Indian’
Ohíye S’a’s early years were marked by family trauma and U.S. government policies aimed at seizing land and displacing and assimilating Native people. His mother died shortly after he was born, and during the Dakota War it was widely believed that his father and brothers had perished. His grandmother and uncle raised him until his mid-teenage years.
Charles Eastman was often praised in the press for his academic accomplishments – and his willingness to assimilate. Wikimedia Commons
In 1873, the 15-year-old was surprised to discover that his father was, in fact, alive. Jacob Eastman had taken a European-American name and converted to Christianity. He was convinced that only a formal English-language education could provide a path forward for Native people.
His white mentors saw Eastman – the only Native person in his class at either institution – as the ideal “assimilated Indian.” His achievements often appeared in newspapers with headlines like “He’s a Winner: Sioux Indian Who Got a Boston University Degree,” an allusion to the fact that “Ohíye S’a” translated to “winner.”
It isn’t clear whether Eastman ever thought of himself in that way. But throughout his life, he straddled the world in which he was raised and the one in which he was educated. His first job, as agency physician at Pine Ridge, placed him at the nexus of these two cultures.
An unlikely pair, a media sensation
After the shots rang out near Wounded Knee Creek, Eastman’s medical education was put to the test. Called into service as a nurse, Goodale also tended the wounded and dying in the makeshift hospital at a nearby church.
Six months later, Elaine and Charles were married in New York City in June 1891, much to the consternation of her family.
The couple’s nuptials appeared in hundreds of newspapers, partially due to the rarity of an interracial marriage in the 19th century. Much of the coverage was rife with racist stereotypes.
The Watertown Times in New York proclaimed, “Poetess Marries a Big Injun’”; the San Francisco Examiner ran a front-page story declaring “Fair Bride of An Indian: Elaine Goodale Weds the Red Man of Her Choice.”
Sometimes, articles focused on Charles’ educational background, often misrepresenting it by suggesting he had attended Cornell, Harvard or Yale. He was referred to as a “specimen,” with racialized language discussing his physical attributes: “He is of medium height … with all the peculiarities of his people in his features. His eyes are small and glittering, his face and nose are broad and his cheek bones very pronounced,” according to the San Francisco Examiner.
This type of media coverage – highlighting the differences between Elaine and Charles’ backgrounds, while pointedly describing Charles in stereotyped ways – would dog them throughout their marriage.
Professional travails, personal problems
Charles attempted to set up his own medical practice in St. Paul, Minnesota. But white patients proved reluctant to see “an Indian doctor,” while Native patients were hesitant to patronize a physician dispensing unfamiliar medicines. The practice failed.
Financial pressures increased over the next decade as Elaine and Charles became parents of six children. They moved frequently: Charles took on a series of jobs, including recruiting for the YMCA, lobbying on behalf of the Santee Sioux, and working as an “outing agent” at the Carlisle Indian Industrial School, which involved finding summer placements for Native students with white families in a further attempt to Americanize them.
Because Charles left behind few personal papers, it’s difficult to know if he believed in this program. But it’s easy to see how it could have created an identity crisis of sorts.
At other points in his life, Charles seemed to put his Dakota identity front and center. For example, he was one of the co-founders of the Society of American Indians, an organization that worked on behalf of self-determination for Native Americans. He even served as its president in 1918. Meanwhile, his wife remained a staunch believer in assimilation.
At Elaine’s urging – and likely, under her editorial stewardship – Charles began publishing stories and then books about his “Indian Boyhood.” While Elaine continued writing and was able to publish a few books, his literary career took off and hers stalled out.
A signature from a copy of one of Charles Eastman’s books, in which he uses both his Christian name and his Native American name, Ohíye S’a. Wikimedia Commons
Even their children weren’t spared from the headlines. An article in the St. Paul Globe wrote, of one of the Eastman children, “… the child had not inherited any of the attractiveness of the mother. It was a veritable old squaw miniature.”
In her personal writing, Elaine never acknowledged her children as biracial. The public stereotyping and private dismissal of the Eastman children’s identities were undoubtedly another stressor in an already-stressed marriage.
Pictures worth a thousand words
After many moves, the Eastmans landed in Amherst, Massachusetts. But Charles did not stay put, embarking upon a vigorous new career on the lecture circuit.
He became one of the best-known Native Americans of his era, as well as one of the most photographed.
Charles Eastman alternatively posed in Western dress and traditional Sioux regalia. Amherst College
Sometimes Charles chose to appear in a Victorian suit and cravat. Other times he posed in traditional Sioux regalia. Often the coverage of his talks focused more on what he was wearing than the content of his lecture. Historian Kiara Vigil suggests that Charles knew that his dress functioned as an advertisement for his work, arguing that his choice of attire was strategic: “Eastman’s ability to dress up as an Indian, or not, enabled him to address diverse audiences and their expectations.”
He was away from home more than he was present, further fueling Elaine’s resentment. In personal letters, she described her bitterness at Charles leaving the children and household to her sole care, and her belief that he was reinforcing the gender roles she’d railed against. While she certainly understood that his posing in buckskin and feathered headdress was good marketing, she probably never realized what reclaiming his Indigenous identity meant to Charles; she, too, thought of him as the product of successful assimilation.
It all falls apart
The personal and professional pressures on the Eastmans continued through the early years of the 20th century.
Elaine and Charles separated in 1921, though they never formally divorced.
I’ve been interested in the Eastmans and their unlikely marriage since I first learned of it years ago. As I pieced together parts of this complex relationship, I became convinced that while their compelling story reveals much about late 19th and early 20th century America, it’s also a story for today.
At a time of profoundly unsettling controversies around race, immigration and identity, the marriage of Elaine Goodale and Charles Eastman underscores why it can be so challenging for people from different backgrounds to truly understand each other.
But their story – how their mutual commitment to improve life for Native American people brought them together, how their quest to educate the nation about a marginalized people gave them purpose, and the ways in which they melded the personal and the political – also suggests the importance of trying.
Julie Dobrow does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
.jpg){kind=link}