Elections
Use of Social Media Platforms in US Elections: A Comprehensive Analysis
Table of Contents
Introduction
Social media platforms have become an integral part of modern political campaigns in the United States. With millions of Americans using social media every day, political candidates have turned to these platforms to reach out to voters, raise funds, and spread their message. The use of social media in US elections has grown significantly over the past decade, and it has had a profound impact on the way campaigns are run.
The evolution of social media in US politics has been rapid and transformative. In the early days of social media, platforms like MySpace and Friendster were used primarily for personal communication and entertainment. However, with the rise of Facebook and Twitter, social media began to play a larger role in political campaigns. Today, social media platforms are used by virtually every political candidate in the United States, from local city council races to presidential campaigns.
Key Takeaways
- Social media has become a critical tool for political campaigns in the United States.
- Social media strategies are constantly evolving, with candidates using these platforms to reach out to voters, raise funds, and spread their message.
- The impact of social media on US elections has been significant, with both positive and negative effects on the democratic process.
Evolution of Social Media in US Politics
Early Adoption and Impact
Social media has become a crucial component of US politics in recent years. The early adoption of social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube by political candidates and parties revolutionized the way they interacted with voters. According to a report by the Pew Research Center, in 2008, only 24% of American adults used social media, and only 10% of them used it for political purposes. However, by 2012, that number had risen to 39%, and by 2020, it had reached 72%.
The impact of social media on US politics was first felt during the 2008 presidential election, when then-candidate Barack Obama used social media to engage with voters and build a grassroots movement. Obama’s social media strategy was groundbreaking at the time, and it helped him to win the election. Since then, social media has become a staple of US political campaigns, with candidates and parties using it to reach voters and mobilize support.
Rise of Social Media Campaigns
The rise of social media campaigns has been one of the most significant developments in US politics in recent years. Social media platforms have become a primary channel for political campaigns to reach voters, with candidates and parties using them to share their message, fundraise, and mobilize support.
In 2016, the Trump campaign used social media to great effect, using targeted ads to reach specific groups of voters and building a massive following on Twitter. The success of the Trump campaign’s social media strategy has led to a renewed focus on social media by political campaigns, with candidates and parties using it to reach voters and mobilize support.
In conclusion, the evolution of social media in US politics has been a game-changer, with candidates and parties using it to engage with voters and mobilize support. The rise of social media campaigns has been particularly significant, with political campaigns using social media to reach voters, fundraise, and mobilize support.
Social Media Strategies in Political Campaigns
Social media has become an integral part of political campaigns in the United States. Candidates and political parties use various social media platforms to reach out to potential voters, engage with them, and raise funds. Here are some of the most common social media strategies used in political campaigns:
Targeted Advertising
One of the most powerful features of social media platforms is their ability to target specific audiences based on demographics, interests, and behaviors. Political campaigns can use this feature to reach out to voters who are most likely to support them. For example, a campaign can target ads to people who have shown interest in a particular issue or who live in a specific region.
Voter Engagement and Mobilization
Social media can be used to engage with voters and mobilize them to take action. Candidates can use social media platforms to share their views on various issues, respond to voters’ questions, and organize events. Additionally, social media can be used to encourage people to vote, provide information on polling locations and hours, and share reminders about important election dates.
Fundraising and Donations
Social media has become an important tool for fundraising and donations in political campaigns. Candidates can use social media platforms to solicit donations from their supporters and provide updates on their fundraising progress. Additionally, social media can be used to organize fundraising events and share information on how donations will be used.
Overall, social media has become an essential tool for political campaigns in the United States. By using targeted advertising, voter engagement and mobilization, and fundraising and donations, candidates and political parties can reach out to potential voters and build support for their campaigns.
Influence and Misinformation
Social media platforms have become a powerful tool in shaping public opinion and influencing elections. Unfortunately, misinformation and fake news on social media have become a significant problem that can erode the public’s confidence in democracy.
Combatting Fake News
One way to combat fake news is through media literacy education. Media literacy education teaches individuals how to identify and evaluate information sources critically. By enhancing their media literacy skills, individuals can recognize fake news and misinformation and avoid sharing it on social media platforms.
Another way to combat fake news is through fact-checking. Fact-checking involves verifying the accuracy and validity of information before sharing it. Social media platforms can provide fact-checking services to their users to help combat the spread of fake news and misinformation.
Regulation and Oversight
Regulation and oversight of social media platforms can also help combat the spread of fake news and misinformation. Governments can pass laws and regulations that hold social media platforms accountable for the content shared on their platforms. Platforms can also implement policies and procedures that help identify and remove fake news and misinformation.
It is essential to strike a balance between regulating social media platforms and preserving freedom of speech. Regulating social media platforms too heavily can stifle free expression, while failing to regulate them can allow the spread of harmful content.
In conclusion, the use of social media platforms in US elections has both positive and negative effects. While social media can be a powerful tool for shaping public opinion, it can also be used to spread misinformation and fake news. Combatting fake news and regulating social media platforms are essential steps to ensure that social media platforms are used responsibly and ethically.
Future of Social Media in Elections
Emerging Technologies and Platforms
As technology continues to evolve, new social media platforms and technologies are emerging, which could have a significant impact on future elections. For example, blockchain-based voting systems could provide a secure and transparent way to conduct elections, while augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) could revolutionize political campaigning by allowing candidates to interact with voters in new and immersive ways.
Another emerging technology is generative AI, which can create highly realistic and convincing fake videos, images, and audio. This technology could be used to spread disinformation and propaganda during election campaigns, making it more difficult to distinguish between real and fake content.
Predictions and Trends
Looking ahead, it is likely that social media will continue to play a prominent role in US elections. According to a report by Princeton University, social media platforms such as Twitter have already had a significant impact on election outcomes. The report found that Twitter lowered the Republican vote share in the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections, but had limited effects on Congressional elections.
One trend that is likely to continue is the use of microtargeting, which allows political campaigns to target specific groups of voters with tailored messages. This approach has been used successfully in recent elections, but has also raised concerns about the potential for political polarization and the spread of disinformation.
Overall, while social media platforms and technologies will continue to evolve, it is clear that they will remain a key factor in US elections. As such, it is important for policymakers, technology companies, and the public to work together to ensure that these platforms are used in a responsible and transparent manner, and that the integrity of the electoral process is protected.
Discover more from The Monitor
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Analysis
Global Right-Wing Leaders Rally Behind Viktor Orbán as Hungary’s Pivotal 2026 Election Looms
The spectacle was unmistakable: a carefully choreographed campaign video featuring a who’s who of international right-wing politics, each leader speaking directly to Hungarian voters with a singular message—reelect Viktor Orbán. Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, France’s Marine Le Pen, Argentina’s Javier Milei, Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu, and Germany’s Alice Weidel appeared alongside a roster of populist figures spanning continents, delivering what amounts to the most coordinated international endorsement campaign for a sitting European leader in recent memory. The video, released as Hungary’s April 12, 2026, parliamentary election enters its decisive phase, arrives at a moment of acute vulnerability for Orbán—trailing in polls, buffeted by economic stagnation, and facing the most serious electoral challenge of his fourteen-year tenure.
This unprecedented mobilization of global populist heavyweights reveals more than campaign theatrics. It exposes the architecture of an international movement that has quietly matured from ideological affinity into operational alliance, with Orbán positioned as its elder statesman and symbolic anchor. Yet paradoxically, this display of external support underscores a deeper anxiety: that the Hungarian strongman who once seemed politically invincible now requires rescue from abroad.
Table of Contents
The Video: A Roll Call of Populist Power
The endorsement video reads like a directory of contemporary right-wing ascendancy. Giorgia Meloni, Italy’s prime minister and leader of the post-fascist Brothers of Italy party, praised Orbán’s “courage” in defending national sovereignty. Marine Le Pen, whose National Rally has become France’s dominant opposition force, lauded his resistance to Brussels’ overreach. Javier Milei, Argentina’s anarcho-capitalist president whose chainsaw-wielding campaign style captivated global libertarians, hailed Orbán as a kindred spirit in the fight against “progressive elites.”
Benjamin Netanyahu’s participation carries particular weight, given Israel’s traditionally cautious approach to European domestic politics. His endorsement signals both personal friendship with Orbán and calculated alignment with European leaders willing to buck the pro-Palestinian sentiments gaining traction in progressive circles. Alice Weidel, co-leader of Germany’s surging Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), which recently polled second nationally, brings the endorsement full circle to the heart of the European Union.
Matteo Salvini, Italy’s deputy prime minister and Meloni’s coalition partner, Andrej Babiš of the Czech Republic’s ANO movement, Herbert Kickl of Austria’s Freedom Party, and Janez Janša, Slovenia’s former prime minister, rounded out the European contingent. Even Switzerland’s Christoph Blocher and Brazil’s Eduardo Bolsonaro joined the chorus, transforming what might have been a regional political gesture into a statement of global right-wing solidarity.
Orbán’s Domestic Quagmire: The Rise of Péter Magyar
The irony is sharp: as international allies queue to endorse him, Orbán faces unprecedented domestic erosion. Recent polling shows his Fidesz party trailing the upstart Tisza Party, led by Péter Magyar, a former government insider turned crusader against systemic corruption. Magyar’s emergence represents something Orbán’s fragmented opposition coalition never achieved: a credible, charismatic alternative who speaks the language of patriotic conservatism while denouncing the kleptocratic apparatus Fidesz has constructed.
Magyar, once married to former Justice Minister Judit Varga, possesses the insider credibility to make accusations stick. His allegations—that Orbán’s circle operates a sophisticated patronage network siphoning EU funds, that judicial independence has been systematically dismantled, that media pluralism exists only in name—resonate because they come from someone who witnessed the machinery firsthand. Tisza’s polling surge to 30-35% represents the most serious electoral threat Orbán has faced since consolidating power in 2010.
Economic headwinds compound Orbán’s troubles. Hungary’s inflation rate, though moderating from its 2022-23 peaks, remains among the EU’s highest. The forint’s persistent weakness against the euro erodes purchasing power for ordinary Hungarians, belying Orbán’s promises of prosperity. Brussels’ decision to freeze billions in EU funds over rule-of-law concerns has starved public services and infrastructure projects, making the government’s corruption vulnerabilities tangible in citizens’ daily lives.
The Populist International: Ideology Meets Infrastructure
The endorsement video is not merely symbolic—it reflects an increasingly institutionalized network. Orbán has methodically constructed what amounts to a populist international through formal and informal channels. The annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) meetings in Budapest have become pilgrimage sites for American and European right-wing figures. The Mathias Corvinus Collegium, Orbán’s lavishly funded conservative think tank and university, trains cadres across Europe in populist political methodology.
This network operates on shared ideological pillars: skepticism of supranational governance, hostility to liberal immigration policies, defense of “traditional” social values against progressive “gender ideology,” and a revisionist historiography that emphasizes national grievance over continental cooperation. Yet beneath ideological coherence lies pragmatic calculation. Orbán’s Hungary offers a laboratory for democratic backsliding wrapped in electoral legitimacy—a model that tantalizes leaders who seek expanded executive power while maintaining democratic façades.
The financial dimensions merit scrutiny. Orbán’s government has channeled contracts and favorable policies toward ideologically aligned businesses, creating an ecosystem where economic interest and political loyalty intertwine. This template attracts international allies not merely for its ideas but for its demonstration that populist governance can be materially rewarding for loyalists—a lesson not lost on leaders navigating their own patronage networks.
Geopolitical Stakes: Ukraine, Brussels, and the Future of European Cohesion
Hungary’s election transcends domestic politics, carrying implications that reverberate through European and transatlantic relations. Orbán has positioned himself as the EU’s primary internal disruptor on Ukraine policy, repeatedly blocking or delaying aid packages and sanctions against Russia. His maintained relationship with Vladimir Putin, including continued energy imports and diplomatic engagement, makes him Moscow’s most valuable asset within the European Union’s institutional architecture.
A Magyar-led government would likely normalize Hungary’s stance toward Kyiv and Brussels, removing a persistent irritant in EU decision-making. Yet Orbán’s retention would signal something more consequential: that populist disruption, even when economically costly and diplomatically isolating, remains electorally viable within the EU framework. This would embolden similar forces across the continent, from the AfD’s ambitions in Germany to Vox’s influence in Spain.
The rule-of-law dispute encapsulates deeper tensions about European integration’s trajectory. The European Commission’s activation of conditionality mechanisms to freeze Hungarian funds represents an unprecedented assertion of supranational authority over member state governance. Orbán frames this as vindication of his Brussels-as-imperial-overlord narrative; Magyar presents it as the natural consequence of systemic corruption. The election becomes a referendum on whether European voters prioritize sovereignty narratives or institutional accountability.
The Broader Meaning: Populism’s Resilience Test
The 2024-25 period witnessed populism’s mixed fortunes globally. Donald Trump’s return to the U.S. presidency energized right-wing movements worldwide, providing psychological momentum and validating anti-establishment messaging. Yet populist forces also faced setbacks: the AfD’s electoral ceiling in German regional elections despite polling gains, National Rally’s failure to convert parliamentary strength into governmental power in France, and Brexit’s lingering economic hangovers tempering enthusiasm for EU exits elsewhere.
Orbán’s election represents a critical test case. He pioneered the populist playbook in the EU context—using democratic mechanisms to concentrate power, controlling media landscapes while maintaining nominal pluralism, rhetorically defying Brussels while materially benefiting from EU membership. His potential defeat would suggest this model’s limits: that economic underperformance and corruption exposure eventually erode populist support regardless of cultural warfare’s intensity.
Conversely, his survival would demonstrate populism’s resilience even under adverse conditions. If Orbán can weather economic stagnation, credible corruption allegations, and a charismatic challenger while trailing in polls, it suggests that identity-based political mobilization and nationalist messaging possess deeper roots than critics acknowledge. The international endorsements, rather than appearing as foreign interference, might resonate with voters receptive to framing the election as civilizational struggle between globalist elites and national sovereignty defenders.
Campaign Dynamics: Domestic versus International Frames
Magyar’s campaign strategically reframes the contest away from Orbán’s preferred culture-war terrain. Rather than engaging grand debates about European identity or migration, Tisza emphasizes bread-and-butter concerns: healthcare system dysfunction, education funding, infrastructure decay, and the tangible costs of diplomatic isolation. Magyar’s messaging resonates particularly with younger voters and urban professionals who experience Orbán’s Hungary as opportunity constraint rather than cultural preservation.
The international endorsements risk reinforcing Magyar’s narrative that Orbán prioritizes global populist celebrity over Hungarian citizens’ welfare. Yet they also provide Fidesz with powerful visual content demonstrating that Hungary “matters” on the world stage—an appeal to national pride that has traditionally resonated with Orbán’s rural and older base. The competing frames—cosmopolitan disruption versus patriotic perseverance—will largely determine whether the endorsements help or hinder.
Fidesz retains formidable structural advantages despite polling deficits. The electoral system’s design favors larger parties through winner-take-all constituencies. State media saturation ensures Orbán’s message dominates in regions with limited independent journalism access. Campaign finance disparities are staggering, with Fidesz outspending all opposition forces combined by orders of magnitude, much of it from sources connected to government-friendly businesses.
Forward Outlook: What Orbán’s Fate Signals
The April 12 election’s outcome carries diagnostic value for populism’s trajectory in established democracies. An Orbán victory, particularly from a polling deficit, would suggest that incumbency advantages, message discipline, and structural control can overcome economic underperformance and corruption exposure. It would embolden international allies in the video to believe similar resilience awaits them during future challenges.
A Magyar victory would represent populism’s perhaps most significant electoral reversal in a major European state since Brexit. It would demonstrate that insider-turned-reformer candidates who credibly promise to dismantle corrupt systems while maintaining conservative cultural stances can fracture populist coalitions. The implications would extend beyond Hungary: opposition forces from Poland to Italy would study the Tisza playbook for replicability.
The geopolitical ramifications extend to Washington, Moscow, and Brussels. A Tisza government would likely reorient Hungary toward mainstream EU positions on Ukraine, potentially breaking the current pattern of unanimous-vote obstruction. It would remove a key Putin ally from within Western institutional architecture, though Hungary’s continued dependence on Russian energy ensures complete realignment remains distant. For the European Commission, it would vindicate the rule-of-law conditionality mechanism as an effective lever for promoting democratic standards.
Yet declaring outcomes prematurely risks analytical error. Fidesz has repeatedly defied polls and predictions, engineering victories through superior organization, strategic messaging adjustments, and effective base mobilization. The international endorsement video itself represents sophisticated campaign tactics—generating global media coverage, reinforcing supporter commitment, and framing the election in maximalist terms that could drive turnout.
Conclusion: A Referendum on Populist Governance
The parade of international leaders endorsing Viktor Orbán illuminates populism’s evolution from insurgent force to networked governance model. What began as disparate national reactions to globalization and cultural change has matured into a transnational movement with shared strategies, mutual support networks, and coordinated messaging. Orbán’s centrality to this ecosystem—as pioneer, mentor, and symbolic anchor—makes his electoral fate consequential far beyond Hungary’s borders.
Yet this very international prominence highlights populism’s central paradox. Movements that derive legitimacy from defending national sovereignty and opposing globalist elites now depend on cross-border coordination and external validation. The endorsement video intended to project strength instead reveals anxiety—the recognition that domestic achievements alone may not suffice, that external reinforcement becomes necessary when local support erodes.
Hungary’s April 12 election will not definitively settle populism’s future, but it provides a crucial data point. Whether voters prioritize cultural preservation narratives over economic performance and institutional accountability will signal how durable populist governance models prove when confronted with their own contradictions. The world’s right-wing leaders have placed their bets on Orbán; Hungarian voters will render the verdict on whether that gamble pays dividends or accelerates decline.
Discover more from The Monitor
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Analysis
2025 Elections Shockwaves: How Global Leadership Is Shifting Overnight
Table of Contents
Introduction
The 2025 elections reshaped global leadership overnight, sparking political power shifts, economic uncertainty, and new geopolitical trends.
The 2025 elections have unleashed a wave of uncertainty and transformation across continents. From Washington to Warsaw, Delhi to Dakar, voters have spoken — and the verdict is shaking the foundations of global leadership. Overnight, the balance of power has shifted, alliances are being tested, and economies are bracing for impact.
This isn’t just another election cycle. It’s a political power shift of historic proportions, one that raises urgent questions about the resilience of democracy, the trajectory of international relations, and the economic impact of elections on everyday lives.
🌍 Global Election Highlights
United States: Democracy in Crisis
The US 2025 elections were the most polarizing in modern history. Record voter turnout reflected both hope and anxiety. Yet the results underscored a democracy in crisis, with deep divisions across race, class, and ideology. The new administration faces a daunting task: restoring trust in institutions while navigating a fractured Congress.
For global observers, the U.S. remains a bellwether. Its leadership choices reverberate through NATO, trade agreements, and climate commitments. The question is whether Washington can still project stability in a world increasingly skeptical of American consistency.
Europe: Populism vs Integration
Across Europe, elections revealed a tug‑of‑war between populist nationalism and pro‑integration forces. In France, populist candidates surged, while Germany’s coalition government struggled to maintain unity. The European Union now faces existential questions: will it strengthen its collective identity or splinter under nationalist pressures?
The implications for world leaders 2025 are profound. A weakened EU could embolden Russia, destabilize NATO, and undermine global efforts on climate and trade.
Asia: Rising Powers, Shifting Alliances
India’s elections highlighted the tension between rapid economic growth and democratic resilience. With a youthful electorate demanding jobs and transparency, the government faces pressure to deliver reforms while balancing regional security challenges.
Meanwhile, Japan and South Korea recalibrated their foreign policies, signaling new geopolitical trends in the Indo‑Pacific. China, watching closely, continues to expand its influence through trade and technology, intensifying the US‑China rivalry that defines this era.
Africa: Continental Awakening
Africa’s elections in Nigeria, South Africa, and Kenya underscored the continent’s growing importance. Citizens demanded accountability, economic opportunity, and stronger institutions. The African Union now faces the challenge of balancing sovereignty with collective strength, particularly in trade and security.
For global leadership, Africa is no longer a passive player. Its demographic boom and resource wealth make it central to the future of international relations.
🔎 Leadership Changes & Geopolitical Consequences
The political power shift of 2025 is not just about who won or lost. It’s about how leadership transitions ripple across borders:
- US‑China rivalry intensifies, with both nations vying for technological, military, and ideological dominance.
- Europe’s fragile unity raises questions about NATO’s future role and the continent’s ability to act collectively.
- Middle East elections recalibrate oil diplomacy, impacting energy markets and reshaping alliances.
- Latin America sees a surge in reformist leaders promising economic revival but facing institutional hurdles.
These shifts redefine international relations, forcing nations to reconsider alliances, trade strategies, and security commitments. The overnight reshaping of global leadership is both exhilarating and alarming.
💰 Economic & Social Ripple Effects
Markets in Flux
The economic impact of elections is already visible. Stock markets reacted with volatility, reflecting investor uncertainty. Wall Street, Frankfurt, and Tokyo all saw sharp swings as traders recalibrated expectations.
Cryptocurrency & Alternative Economies
In regions where trust in government is low, cryptocurrency adoption surged. Citizens sought alternatives to unstable currencies, signaling a broader shift toward decentralized finance.
Trade & Supply Chains
Global trade faces recalibration. Tariffs, sanctions, and new trade blocs are reshaping supply chains. Nations are rethinking dependencies, particularly on energy and technology.
Social Movements
Beyond economics, social movements gained momentum. Climate activists, digital rights advocates, and youth organizations are demanding accountability from newly elected governments. Their influence is reshaping policy agendas, proving that elections are not just about ballots but about voices amplified through protest and digital platforms.
📰 Expert Commentary
As a columnist observing these tectonic shifts, one cannot ignore the irony: while voters seek stability, their choices often unleash unpredictability. The 2025 elections remind us that democracy, though imperfect, remains the most powerful instrument of change.
Yet, the pace of transformation raises urgent questions. Can institutions withstand the pressure of rapid political turnover? Can economies adapt to sudden shifts in policy direction? And can global alliances survive the strain of competing national interests?
The overnight reshaping of global leadership is a reminder that in today’s interconnected world, no election is local anymore. Every ballot cast in one nation reverberates across borders, influencing trade, security, and even cultural narratives.
Conclusion
The 2025 elections shockwaves are far from settling. What we are witnessing is not just a change of faces but a redefinition of power itself. From Washington to Beijing, Brussels to Brasília, the future of governance, economics, and diplomacy hangs in the balance.
The world must now ask: are we prepared for the consequences of this political power shift, or are we simply reacting to them? The answer will define the next decade of international relations and the trajectory of global stability.
Discover more from The Monitor
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Economy
The Economic Consequences of Elections: A Perspective from Nedbank
Introduction
Elections are an integral part of any democratic society, providing citizens with the opportunity to choose their leaders and hold them accountable for their actions. However, the focus on elections can often divert attention from other pressing issues, such as fixing the economy.
In a recent statement, the Nedbank chief, Mike Brown, expressed concern that the upcoming elections could take the focus off fixing the economy, which is a cause for concern for many South Africans. In this article, we will delve deeper into the economic consequences of elections and the implications for South Africa.
The Economic Consequences of Elections
Elections can have significant economic consequences, both in the short and long term. In the short term, elections can lead to increased uncertainty, as investors and businesses may hold back on making decisions until the outcome is clear. This uncertainty can lead to a decrease in investment, which can negatively impact economic growth.
In the long term, elections can lead to policy changes that can have significant economic consequences. For example, if a new government comes into power with a different economic policy, this can lead to changes in regulations, taxes, and other economic factors that can impact businesses and investors. This can lead to a decrease in confidence in the economy, which can further impact investment and economic growth.
Nedbank’s Perspective
Nedbank, one of South Africa’s largest banks, has expressed concern that the upcoming elections could take the focus off fixing the economy. Mike Brown, the Nedbank chief, has stated that “the focus on the election could distract from the need to address the structural issues that are holding back the economy.” This is a concern shared by many South Africans, who are worried about the country’s economic future.
Structural Issues in the South African Economy
South Africa’s economy has been struggling for some time, with high levels of unemployment, low economic growth, and a large budget deficit. These structural issues are complex and require significant attention and effort to address. However, the focus on elections can divert attention from these issues, making it difficult to make progress in fixing the economy.
Conclusion
Elections are an important part of any democratic society, but they can also have significant economic consequences. The focus on elections can divert attention from other pressing issues, such as fixing the economy. As the Nedbank chief has pointed out, this can seriously affect South Africa’s economic future. Attention must be given to these structural issues, regardless of the outcome of the elections. Only then can South Africa hope to achieve sustainable economic growth and development.
Discover more from The Monitor
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
-
Featured5 years agoThe Right-Wing Politics in United States & The Capitol Hill Mayhem
-
News4 years agoPrioritizing health & education most effective way to improve socio-economic status: President
-
China5 years agoCoronavirus Pandemic and Global Response
-
Canada5 years agoSocio-Economic Implications of Canadian Border Closure With U.S
-
Democracy4 years agoMissing You! SPSC
-
Conflict5 years agoKashmir Lockdown, UNGA & Thereafter
-
Democracy4 years agoPresident Dr Arif Alvi Confers Civil Awards on Independence Day
-
Digital5 years agoPakistan Moves Closer to Train One Million Youth with Digital Skills
