What happened

The tariff war between the U.S. and China intensified this week as both sides dug in amid rising fears of a global recession. The Trump administration’s levies on Chinese imports hit a staggering 145 percent, and China countered with levies of 125 percent on U.S. goods. After saying repeatedly there would be no carve-outs, the administration announced an exception for electronic goods including smartphones, laptop computers, and modems, which face only 20 percent tariffs. But Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick then said additional tariffs on electronics would be announced “in a month or two.” President Trump signaled he would also impose new tariffs on semi-conductors and other technologies; he has already imposed stricter limits on the transfer of AI technology to China. The dollar hit a three-year low—dropping 9 percent since January—as investors shed U.S. assets, and U.S. business owners who rely on trade with China were left reeling. “I’m terrified for my business,” said Beth Benike of Busy Baby, a Minnesota company whose products are manufactured in China. “I could lose my home.”

China directed its airlines to halt deliveries of jets ordered from Boeing, the U.S.’s largest exporter, and it suspended exports of the rare-earth minerals and magnets that are critical for manufacturing everything from cars and planes to drones and weapons systems. In a statement read by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, Trump said “the ball is in China’s court” to “make a deal,” but there was no sign China was ready to even initiate talks. America’s tariffs “will backfire,” said senior Chinese official Xia Baolong. “Peasants in the U.S.,” he said, will “wail in front of the 5,000 years of Chinese civilization.”

What the editorials said

If you’re flummoxed by Trump’s tariff policy, “don’t worry,” said the Washington Examiner. “You are not alone.” The president and his team have flip-flopped continually while offering a dizzying range of rationales for the levies and sending mixed signals about future moves. The maybe-temporary turnabout on electronics is just the latest example. To steer Americans through such a trade shift would require a steady hand and clear communication of what’s being done and how it will work. But so far “the only constant” has been “chaos.”

These “monster” tariffs on China are inflicting pain, “yet it’s not Trump’s billionaire chums who are suffering the most,” said the New York Post. It’s ordinary folks, who “make up the backbone of the country and his base.” Mom-and-pop shops that rely on Chinese imports face ruin as they find “their business models unworkable in an instant,” and blue-collar voters will suffer worst from price spikes. If Trump “doesn’t wake up fast to the growing angst,” the fallout will be “deep and lasting.”

What the columnists said

The tariffs’ impact will hit the entire economy, said Dave Lawler in Axios. “The vast majority of the toys, cellphones, and many other products” we buy come from China, and price jumps loom on everything from “fast fashion to gaming consoles.” Chinese President Xi Jinping has no end of ways to inflict damage beyond levying his own tariffs, including export controls, blacklisting individual firms, and the “nuclear option” of selling off China’s vast holdings of U.S. bonds.

And all this for what? We should be “the last country on Earth” to throw a bomb into the world economy, said Rich Lowry in National Review. Despite Trump’s claims we’ve been “ripped off,” America “has thrived in recent decades, while other advanced democracies have fallen behind.” Since 2020 we’ve grown at three times the rate of other G-7 nations, and “our labor productivity has skyrocketed.” It’s insanity “to change the rules in the middle of the game” when you’re many points ahead.

“I’ve never been more afraid for America’s future in my life,” said Thomas L. Friedman in The New York Times. Trump has launched an irrational trade war with no allies, “no serious preparation,” and no understanding of the modern global economy, a “complex ecosystem” where an American-made product can contain Chinese and Mexican parts. This “cruel farce” is “triggering a serious loss of global confidence in America,” with profound implications that will touch every one of us. The rest of the world “is now seeing Trump’s America for exactly what it is becoming: a rogue state led by an impulsive strongman.”

We may have just witnessed “the biggest example of market manipulation in history,” said Sasha Abramsky in The Nation. President Trump’s imposition of huge tariffs on nearly every country in the world had the stock market in a tailspin. But then last week, Trump told his followers on Truth Social “THIS IS A GREAT TIME TO BUY!!!”—just hours before his announcement of a 90-day pause on the tariffs sent the market briefly soaring. “Many, many investors seemed to take note of Trump’s rather open hints” that such a pause was coming. Though there’s “not yet any evidence” of an illegal insider-trading scheme, said Bryan Metzger in Business Insider, Sens. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) are demanding a federal investigation. Others in Congress are calling on any colleagues who followed Trump’s advice “to come clean” now, since the law requires them to disclose stock trades within 30 days in any case. We’ll soon see who profited.

Even if insider trading can’t be proved, Trump’s chaotic tariff policy “will inevitably result in a cascade of corruption,” said Fareed Zakaria in The Washington Post. When the economic rules become capricious, the only constant is the need to placate the people in power. “Countries and companies will descend on Washington to cut deals and gain carve-outs, exemptions, and special terms.” For every tariff, there will be tariff waivers for a select few firms—already, Apple has persuaded Trump to pause the tax on smartphones. Our economy will be transformed “from the leading free market in the world to the leading example of crony capitalism.” We saw this in my native Argentina, said Andres Oppenheimer in the Miami Herald, when a populist dictator imposed a protectionist regime. Favored businesses had no incentive to keep prices low or quality high. Inflation and debt skyrocketed, and the once wealthy nation became “an economic basket case.”

The paradigm shift is already underway, said Anne Applebaum in The Atlantic. “Blatant conflicts of interest,” any one of which would have been a scandal for any other president, are routine in Trumpworld. His family’s cryptocurrency business, World Liberty Financial, is transparently “a vehicle for anyone to pay him indirect bribes.” His properties are rented by anonymously owned shell companies. He suspended enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and the Corporate Transparency Act, freeing up companies to launder money and buy off regulators. The state and the economy are slowly being reconfigured “not to benefit Americans but to benefit the president, his family, and his friends.” Only voters can stop it.

Why has China ramped up its exports?

Domestic economic woes have made the world’s largest exporter even more reliant on sending goods abroad. Aiming to offset a major real estate bust, Beijing has made an all-out effort to boost manufacturing in the country. China’s trade surplus hit nearly $1 trillion last year, more than doubling since 2019. State-controlled banks dished out a cool $1.9 trillion to industrial borrowers over the past four years, and even by conservative estimates, China spent more on industrial subsidies than it did on national defense in 2019. New factories come online daily, and upgrades enhance productivity in existing factories. China’s factory output — which now includes electric vehicles, lithium batteries, and renewable energy equipment — is larger than that of the U.S., Germany, Japan, South Korea, and the U.K. combined. Now, as President Trump wages a trade war with Beijing, China won’t be able to easily access its biggest and most reliable foreign market, which means that some $400 billion in cheap goods must be rerouted to other countries. “The real fireworks have yet to begin,” said Michael Pettis, a professor of finance at Peking University.

Has this happened before?

The World Trade Organization officially welcomed China, already the world’s sixth-largest economy, into its fold in 2001. Then-President Bill Clinton was enthusiastic: He believed China’s membership would benefit the U.S. economically while also promoting democratization in China. But rather than usher in political reforms, China’s rise to a global trading behemoth solidified the Chinese Communist Party’s power. In the U.S., meanwhile, there were winners and losers. Consumer prices fell and service sector jobs increased, but the influx of cheap Chinese products has put a significant dent in U.S. manufacturing. Though trade pressure leveled out by 2011, the hardest-hit industries and areas, like the American South, never recovered from declines in wages. Studies on the “China shock” from economists David H. Autor, David Dorn, and Gordon H. Hanson found that trade with China accounted for 1 million manufacturing job losses between 2001 and 2011, and 2.4 million job losses overall. “We didn’t see people picking up and moving to better opportunities, as in historical narratives of U.S. resiliency,” Autor said.

Which countries will be affected?

“The tsunami is coming for everyone,” said Katherine Tai, the U.S. trade representative under former President Joe Biden. The fears of a second, worldwide China shock predate Trump’s tariffs, and the pace of the sequel may be even more rapid than the original shock that hit the U.S. at the turn of the century. Layoffs are already underway in Indonesia’s textile and apparel industry, which saw roughly 250,000 job losses over the past two years, with another 500,000 cuts likely to follow. Other emerging economies like Brazil and India have to compete with China to sell internet cables and electronics. And China’s rapid rise in the car and green-technology industries — China’s BYD is now the world’s biggest maker of electric vehicles — poses a threat to Germany.

How are those countries preparing?

Most are implementing at least some safeguards. Brazil now has a 35 percent tariff on Chinese fiber-optic cables, while Chinese textile imports face a 200 percent tariff in Indonesia. Mexico is reviewing its tariffs on China, and India has launched a probe into the dumping of Chinese goods, from solar cells to aluminum foil. Thailand and Malaysia have slapped sales taxes on lower-priced imported goods. The situation presents a conundrum for developing countries, though, since China, seeking to exert its geopolitical influence, often invests heavily in their infrastructure. Blocking imports, therefore, isn’t easy. “Do you really want to complain over shoes when someone’s building you a port?” asked Deborah Elms, the head of trade policy at the Asia-based Hinrich Foundation, a research firm.

Could China’s domestic market be an outlet?

While there have been some signs this year that Chinese consumer spending could be on the upswing, domestic demand still isn’t strong enough for the overflow of goods produced. Consumption accounts for only 53 percent of China’s GDP, well below the global average of 72 percent. Previously, there weren’t many signs that the government was interested in redirecting its investments from manufacturing industries to boost consumer spending, but Beijing is starting to turn its attention to people’s wallets. The government has announced stimulus plans, with consumer loans and vehicle trade-in payments, among other enticements. Now, in light of Trump’s tariffs, economists are urging the CCP to do even more, but there may not be a quick-fix policy solution.

Will tariffs really shield the U.S.?

Trump waged his trade war based on America’s trade deficit with China, but bilateral trade data aren’t always the best indicators of the overall trade relationship between two countries. In the past, China has skirted U.S. tariffs by offshoring manufacturing to countries like Vietnam. Even before the current trade war, Chinese manufacturers had already been moving operations offshore, with Chinese automakers opening or planning plants in Hungary, Turkey, and Thailand. Chinese manufacturers see the factories as insurance against U.S. trade barriers, and also a way to build local goodwill. Those factories, which often rely on parts made in China, provide a way for China’s industries to ship goods to the U.S. at lower tariff rates. There may be little anyone can do to reduce China’s hold on the global market, except for China itself, and that will require a major transformation of domestic economic policy that will focus less on increasing output and more on increasing domestic demand.

Why don’t China’s consumers buy more?

China hasn’t really recovered from the Covid pandemic. After Deng Xiaoping launched China’s shift to a socialist market economy in the post-Maoist era in the 1970s, the country’s living standards consistently improved. But the stringent lockdown, which wasn’t lifted until 2022, halted momentum, as did the real estate crisis. Youth unemployment remains elevated after hitting an all-time high of 21.3 percent in June 2023. Now frugality is the norm, as pessimistic Chinese households brace for another crisis. People have always tended to save their money in China, but reluctance to spend is even more prevalent now, including among Millennial and Gen Z consumers who hold stable jobs with decent pay. China’s weak social safety net also makes households wary about long-term security. “When people feel safe about their retirement life and feel safe about their financials after some major events like illness,” said Xu Tianchen, a China analyst at the Economist Intelligence Unit, “then I think they’re definitely going to be more willing to spend.”

President Trump “fired a warning shot from the edge of autocracy” last week, said Thom Hartmann in The New Republic. The U.S. moved much closer to becoming a “police state” when Trump signed executive memoranda directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate public comments made by two former officials: Christopher Krebs, a former top cybersecurity official in the first Trump administration who debunked baseless claims that the 2020 election was stolen, and Miles Taylor, a former Homeland Security official who wrote an anonymous newspaper column and book criticizing Trump. They’re “public servants whose only crime” was speaking truth to power—but a vengeful Trump now wants them prosecuted to send “a chilling message to current and future whistleblowers: ‘Cross me, and you’ll pay.'” Trump is no longer simply “using the justice system to reward friends” as he did when he pardoned Jan. 6 rioters this year, said Mona Charen in The Bulwark. Ominously, he has targeted individuals he views as enemies. In Krebs’ case, he has ordered the Justice Department to scour his tenure in government to find some form of misconduct. In the infamous words of Lavrentiy Beria, Stalin’s hatchet man: “Show me the man, and I will find the crime.”

Krebs and Taylor are “minor characters from Season 1 of The Trump Show,” said Nick Catoggio in The Dispatch. So why target them? It signals there are no insignificant critics, and that if you cause this president “any trouble, you too should sleep less soundly at night. No one is safe.” The ball is in Bondi’s court, said Elie Honig in New York. An ethical attorney general would not proceed without “predication” of a crime, but despite assurances during her Senate confirmation hearing that she would uphold the Justice Department’s independence, Bondi has shown “she’s in the bag for Trump.” Unlike her predecessor, Bill Barr, who “ignored Trump’s public pleas” to arrest enemies, Bondi will vigorously investigate. And even if she can’t bring charges or make them stick, Krebs and Taylor could face staggering legal fees, searches of their phones and computers, intrusive interviews of friends and colleagues, and damage to their careers.

Trump broke a promise by “siccing” Bondi on Krebs and Taylor, said The Wall Street Journal in an editorial. He “campaigned on ending lawfare” and in January signed an executive order squashing “the ‘weaponization’ of government.” So much for that. Now he’s “doing precisely what Democrats did to him.” The hypocrisy doesn’t end there, said Aaron Blake in The Washington Post. Trump says Taylor is “guilty of treason,” accusing him of exposing classified conversations. But after his first term, Trump was indicted for “taking and resisting returning” more than 100 classified documents, and stashing them in a bathroom at Mar-a-Lago.

The attack on Krebs and Taylor ushers in “phase two” of the second Trump presidency, said David A. Graham in The Atlantic. “Phase one” featured the Elon Musk–led purge of federal agencies. That was done in the name of cost cutting, but the Department of Government Efficiency’s work also reduces the number of “long-time professionals” who might “stand in the way of” Trump’s retribution mission. To advance that mission, Trump fired career Justice Department attorneys who might object to political prosecutions, and punished and neutered law firms that have represented Trump critics. Now in phase two, critics will taste his vengeance. For Trump, “revenge isn’t just a welcome adjunct to controlling the levels of government.” It’s the whole point of his second term.

China has upped the ante in its trade war with the United States. Beijing last week imposed export controls on “rare earth” minerals, key elements in the production of technology for your kitchen, car, high-tech military weapons and more.

“Everything you can switch on or off likely runs” on the minerals, said Thomas Kruemmer, director of Ginger International Trade and Investment, to BBC News. One of the rare earths, Neodymium, is used in “loudspeakers, computer hard drives, EV motors and jet engines.” Others are used to “manufacture television and computer screens.” The minerals are “abundant” in nature, said the BBC, but they are they are “very hazardous to extract.” And right now, China has a “near monopoly” on the market.

What did the commentators say?

The export blocks could “cause shutdowns in automotive production,” said the Financial Times. They also “threaten Washington’s military primacy,” said Chatham House, a British think tank. The minerals are critical in the production of the F-35 fighter, as well as “robotics, drones, electric vehicles, and touch screens.” The trade war could end up giving Beijing a “crucial strategic advantage in long-term U.S.–China competition for military and technological supremacy.”

President Donald Trump may think “he’ll find alternative sources of rare earths,” said Nicholas Kristof at The New York Times. It will be difficult: America relies on China for 72% of its rare earth metals supply. And ramping up domestic production will not be easy either. Rare earths are “polluting to mine and process,” which is why it can take “nearly three decades to get permission to open and operate a rare-earth mine in America.” That gives the United States a steep challenge. Trump’s trade war “seems destined to fracture our alliances and magnify American weakness.”

Could the trade war lead to a shooting war? “It is worth remembering how World War II began in the Pacific,” said James Stavridis, a retired Navy admiral, at Bloomberg. Nearly a century ago, trade sanctions “cut off Japan from vital resources” like steel, oil and rubber. Pearl Harbor was the culmination of “economic disputes and provocative steps.” Beijing’s decision to block rare earth exports could be a new “indicator of impending conflict.”

What next?

The challenges are immediate, while any potential solutions are off in the future. “Trump is trying to clear the way” for new U.S. mines, said The Associated Press, but any new home-grown operation is “years away.” There is a single American mine for rare earth minerals, and its executives are fielding phone calls “from anxious companies” following China’s announcement. The effects of the export block “have been immediate,” said Matt Sloustcher, a spokesperson for MP Materials. Existing stockpiles should keep American manufacturers operating for now, said the AP, but “shortages may emerge later this year.”

Divorce isn’t how anyone imagines their marriage journey will end. Nevertheless, it is the outcome for more than 600,000 American couples per year. As anyone who has been through the painful process can attest, it is much more complicated than packing your bags and leaving, often requiring courts, lawyers, mediators and staggering amounts of cash. How long has the institution of divorce been around?

Origins of an idea

Divorce, like marriage, has been part of human society since antiquity. Certain Greek states “permitted both husband and wife to call for and effect a divorce,” and later, “divorces became very common” in the latter stages of the Roman Empire, said the University of Chicago. Yet “throughout most of history there was a strong taboo against couples splitting up, in large part because “it was the woman who was branded most harshly” if a marriage collapsed, said JSTOR Daily. In the past, “murder, bigamy, desertion and a host of other social practices” were used as an end-run around the official termination of a marriage, said the Journal of Modern History.

The modern concept of divorce is often traced to the efforts, beginning in 1527, of British King Henry VIII to annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon so that he could marry Anne Boleyn. He got what he wanted, but change for the masses came slowly. “When a divorce law was finally enacted in 1857, and the “floodgates” were opened, the number of divorces in English history stood at a mere 324,” said Smithsonian Magazine. But the Anne Boleyn affair is responsible for introducing the “historically unprecedented idea that marriage should be based on love and mutual affection,” said Family Process.

The U.S. lagged behind the U.K. in terms of liberalizing its divorce regime. “For most of U.S. history, getting a divorce was difficult,” said The Conversation, and many states “banned it entirely, while others permitted it only under limited circumstances.” Deep into the 1890s, “ending a marriage was social anathema — and virtually impossible legally,” in many states, said The Washington Post. Other states allowed divorce “only in cases where adultery could be proven,” which was always a difficult task.

From a taboo to a fundamental (and still controversial) right

The restrictiveness of those rules became more and more incompatible with equal rights for women and social understandings about individual liberty as the 20th century progressed and women gained other fundamental rights, including suffrage. Reformers in the U.S. began to push for what they called “no-fault divorce,” which could be obtained “without anyone having to allege or prove that one party’s behavior is to blame,” said CNN. The first state to legalize no-fault divorce was California under Governor Ronald Reagan.

The journey from traditional divorce laws to no-fault divorce was a “long road” that wound its way through one state legislature after another until the final state to embrace the practice, which was “New York, in 2010,” said JSTOR Daily. The introduction of no-fault divorce laws in the United States also revolutionized the practice and made it much more common.

Unsurprisingly, “the soul-mate model was much more likely to lead couples to divorce” because “those who felt they were in unfulfilling marriages also felt obligated” to split up rather than endure, said National Affairs. No-fault divorce laws have always been a target of criticism for conservatives, and the divorce rate did indeed more than double as no-fault divorce became the law in more and more states. But “it has declined in recent decades,” rather than continuing to increase, said the National Center for Family & Marriage Research.

The proliferation of no-fault divorce was accompanied by a “decrease in female suicide,” as well as a “decrease in domestic abuse of wives” and a “decrease in homicide of women by intimate partners,” said NPR. That may be why “nearly 70% of divorces are initiated by women,” said the Post. But divorce’s benefits and availability can make it “easy to forget just how difficult and traumatic divorce can be for children,” said Psychology Today. While “Republican Party platforms in Texas and Nebraska were amended in 2022” to call for the abolition of no-fault divorce, no state has yet moved to end the practice, said the The Associated Press.

Maybe you have already dipped your toe into the alphabet soup of possibilities for retirement savings and felt overwhelmed. Or perhaps you do not know much about your retirement savings account options beyond the 401(k) plan offered by your employer — and have ended up just defaulting to that.

In either case, it is helpful to have an understanding of what your choices are to save up for your eventual retirement. That way, you can better select the retirement plan that will work for you — or even get strategic by mixing and matching.

What are the different retirement account options?

The two primary types of retirement accounts you may encounter are 401(k) plans and individual retirement accounts (IRAs). “The main difference between 401(k)s and IRAs is that 401(k) plans are offered through an employer and have larger contribution limits,” and a 401(k) plan may also include an employer match, said Investopedia.

But even between those two types there are a number of subtypes. For instance, there is the Roth 401(k) or Roth IRA, wherein the accounts are funded with post-tax dollars, as opposed to the pre-tax money put into traditional 401(k)s and IRAs. Meanwhile, if you are “self-employed or do non-traditional work such as freelancing or temporary work,” you might explore a Solo 40(k), a SEP IRA or a SIMPLE IRA, said NerdWallet.

Depending on where you work, you might have access to other options, such as a 457(b) or the 403(b). A 457(b) is “for employees of state and local governments as well as some tax-exempt organizations,” while a 403(b) may be an option “if you work for a nonprofit or tax-exempt organization,” said U.S. News & World Report.

How can you decide what retirement plan is right for you?

“In many cases, you simply won’t have a choice of retirement plans,” said Bankrate. Rather, you will “have to take what your employer offers,” whether that is a 401(k) or a 403(b).

Still, there may be some decisions left in your hands, such as whether to opt for a traditional or a Roth plan. This choice effectively comes down to whether you would rather pay taxes now or later, which largely depends upon whether you expect your tax bracket to be higher now or when you withdraw funds in retirement.

Other factors to take into consideration include eligibility requirements (not all plans are accessible to everyone) and annual contribution limits. You might also take a look at what types of investments are available through various plans.

Can you use more than one type of retirement savings account?

This is definitely possible — though keep in mind you will generally just have access to one employer-sponsored plan at a time.

A common combination for retirement savings is a 401(k) and an IRA. For example, “you could contribute up to the maximum employer matching amount for a 401(k) and then contribute to an IRA,” said Investopedia. Or, you might contribute to both a Roth IRA and a traditional IRA to balance out the tax benefits of each.

Any vacation can be a getaway. But to truly get away from it all, consider heading to one of these remote properties. The long journey is merely an opportunity to dream about what awaits when you arrive.

Apatoa Beach & Garden Village, French Polynesia

Raiatea is considered the cradle of Polynesian culture. It is a sacred, remote island in French Polynesia that is filled with lush vegetation and a turquoise lagoon — a diver’s delight. In the southwest corner of Raiatea, tucked amid coconut groves, is the secluded Apatoa Beach & Garden Village. It is a place to return to nature, with bungalows that open up to the water and plants. Some bungalows have private swimming pools, but all have terraces and decks that offer great views and the perfect space to read or nap.

Botánika Osa Peninsula, Costa Rica

Botánika Osa Peninsula sits on a “more rugged slice of Costa Rica,” Condé Nast Traveler said, one that is still pristine due to its isolation. The biodiverse region’s ecological wonders — the rainforests and beaches of Corcovado National Park, the tropical fjord Golfo Dulce and wildlife like scarlet macaws and squirrel monkeys — draw visitors, and Botánika Osa Peninsula, “discreetly tucked among tangles of greenery,” blends in perfectly. Discover the flavors of Costa Rica with a private coffee tasting and cacao ceremony.

Casa Palopó, Guatemala 

The drive from Guatemala City to Casa Palopó takes about four hours, and along the way, “congested streets give way to lush rural vistas,” Travel and Leisure said. Once a private home, this colorful boutique hotel is filled with contemporary and Indigenous art and has majestic views of Lake Atitlán and its three surrounding volcanoes. Activities are on the relaxing side, with the hotel offering guests painting and meditation kits and lessons on the art of tortilla-making.

Eremito Hotel, Italy

The name says it all. “Eremito” is Italian for “hermit,” and you will feel like one after a few nights here. A former monastery, Eremito is now a “digital-detox” hotel, WWD said, with no internet service or televisions. The property, designed for solo travelers, is 40 minutes from the nearest town and is surrounded by a protected nature reserve. Homemade pasta is served in a cozy stone restaurant, which, like the rest of the hotel, is illuminated by candlelight.

Oil Nut Bay, British Virgin Islands

Getting to Oil Nut Bay on Virgin Gorda is a beautiful adventure. Fly to Tortola, then take a private boat or helicopter to the island resort where villas “cling to hillsides and grace sandy shores,” Travel and Leisure said. The 400-acre property sits on a “spectacular” stretch of land, with guests able to enjoy “exquisite dining options” and the “intimate” overwater Sundara Spa.

Somewhere Only We Know Resort, Thailand

There is privacy, and then there is Somewhere Only We Know (SOWK) Resort privacy. This luxe, all-inclusive retreat on Ko Pha Ngan is spread across three secluded beaches, which are surrounded by six other secluded beaches. They take “IYKYK” to heart, with no signs or logos to be found — even the address listed online isn’t totally accurate.

Once you finally arrive at the site, there is one more thing left to do: take a five-minute hike to your phenomenal villa (staff will carry your bags). SOWK allows a maximum of six guests at a time and works with each in advance to plan a tailor-made itinerary and immersive excursions.

Xigera Safari Lodge, Botswana

Xigera Safari Lodge is multi-faceted, “as much an art gallery as a top-tier hotel, in one of the wildest, most beautiful parts of Africa,” The Telegraph said. Sitting on the western edge of the Moremi Game Reserve in a prime location above floodplains, the lodge offers “unhindered views” of wildlife passing. The animals are viewed from both outside on the deck and in your art-filled suite festooned with original works by contemporary African artists. Daily game drives, stargazing and bush walks are also part of the Xigera experience.

‘Pope Francis’ greatest achievement was emphasizing mercy’

Austen Ivereigh at Time

Pope Francis’ “legacy was his insistence” on mercy, says Austen Ivereigh. What “truly made Francis different from his predecessors was the bold, radical way he sought to put mercy.” He “understood that we are living through what he called a ‘change of era,’ in which faith is no longer primarily inherited through law, culture, and tribal identity.” Francis “made clear it is no longer enough to stay in the abstract, at the level of ideals and generalities.”

Read more

‘What it means to tell the truth about America’

Clint Smith at The Atlantic

The “history inside” the National Museum of African American History and Culture “still reverberates through our country,” says Clint Smith. It is “impossible to understand the contemporary landscape of social, political, and economic inequality without understanding the forces and events that served as its catalysts.” This is the “exact sort of story that Trump and many of his allies would like to excise from museums, classrooms, and every other realm of American life.”

Read more

‘Oklahoma City bombing was 30 years ago, but there are still lessons to learn today’

Kari Watkins and Dr. Susan Chambers at USA Today

The Oklahoma City National Memorial & Museum is a “testament to our commitment to transforming tragedy into a force for good,” say Kari Watkins and Dr. Susan Chambers. While the “mission is to remember those who were killed, those who survived and those changed forever, it’s also to educate visitors about the impact of violence and offer comfort, strength, peace, hope and serenity.” These “words remind us that building, maintaining and programming the memorial and museum, does not diminish the tragedy.”

Read more

‘Democrats are choosing ideology over electability’

Nafees Alam at The Kansas City Star

The Democratic Party “stands at a pivotal moment,” says Nafees Alam. It has “embraced a host of progressive causes — abortion rights, expansive immigration policies, and LGBTQ+ inclusion, to name a few.” This “often places them on the minority side of issues where public opinion leans heavily the other way.” If Democrats “hope to reclaim electoral dominance and preserve a balanced political system, they must learn to say ‘no’ to some of their more divisive positions.”

Read more

What happened

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shared detailed, sensitive plans for an imminent attack on Yemen with a second Signal group chat that included his wife, brother and personal lawyer, The New York Times and other news organizations reported Sunday.

The new revelations capped a “month of total chaos at the Pentagon,” newly departed Hegseth spokesperson John Ullyot said Sunday in an essay at Politico.

Who said what

Hegseth posted “essentially the same attack plans” in the newly uncovered group text as he had shared with Trump’s top national security officials at “roughly the same time” on March 15, the Times said. Unlike the “Signalgate” group, some of the 13 participants in Hegseth’s “Defense | Team Huddle” chat had no “apparent need to be given real-time information” on a forthcoming strike on the Houthis, and this time Hegseth “used his private phone, rather than his government one.”

Along with Hegseth’s wife, Jennifer, and brother Phil — a Pentagon liaison with the Homeland Security Department — the group chat included top Hegseth aides Dan Caldwell, Darin Selnick and Joe Kasper. Caldwell, Selnick and a third top Pentagon aide, Colin Carroll, were escorted out of Pentagon last week and fired on Friday, accused of leaking unauthorized information — a charge they denied in a statement on Saturday.

What next?

Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) asked the Pentagon inspector general’s office to “include this latest incident in its ongoing investigation of Mr. Hegseth’s mishandling of classified information.” Other Democrats called for his ouster. Given the “dysfunction” and “disarray under Hegseth’s leadership,” Ullyot said at Politico, it’s “hard to see” him “remaining in his role for much longer.”