MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Argentina's CARI ranked as the highest Spanish language think-tank globally
In the overall listing CARI and CIPPEC from Argentina took the third spot within the Latin American subset of rankings. 
Brazil's Fundação Getúlio Vargas placed 18th globally, taking the best spot for a Latin American organization in the ranking Two of the world’s leading 40 think-tanks are from Latin America, with the top spot in the region going to Brazil’s Fundação Getúlio Vargas. However Argentina's Council for International Relations, CARI, was ranked as the highest Spanish language think-tank on a global scale according to a report from the University of Pennsylvania Lauder Institute.
In the overall listing CARI and the Centre for the Implementation of Public Policies Promoting Equity and Growth (CIPPEC) took the third spot within the Latin American subset of rankings. The report is an elaboration from the Lauder Institute's 'Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program (TTCSP)'.
The institute’s 2014 Global Go To Think Tank Index Report reviewed the 6,618 think-tanks contained in its database as part of an effort to “increase the profile, performance and impact of think-tanks, and to create a transnational and interdisciplinary network of centers' of public policy excellence.”
Placing first globally, as it did last year was the Washington DC-based Brookings Institution. Taking the second place was Chatham House of the United Kingdom and third was the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, also of the United States.
The Fundação Getúlio Vargas of Brazil placed 18th globally, taking the best spot for a Latin American organization in the ranking. Also joining the CARI in the global ranking was the Liberty Foundation, which took the 108th spot.
The annual report, compiled with assistance from more than 1,500 peer institutions and experts from the print and electronic media, academia, public and private donor institutions and governments around the world, ranks the top 150 global think-tanks across four categories: World, Region, Area of Research, and Special Achievement.
Top Comments
Disclaimer & comment rules-
-
-
Read all commentsObviously Penn. University Lauder Institute has no experience of the people in SA: NONE.
Jan 24th, 2015 - 10:26 am 0Think tanks, ones like Chatham House, think about the future. I have yet to meet anybody from Uruguay, TDC and Chile who can think even one step into the future: it’s absolutely pathetic.
If you need convincing just look at ‘No Money Pepe’, TMBOA, DumbAss Dilma and Mami and the rest of the bat shit mad mob.
So we need to realise that Jibber-jabber think tanks are coming from a very low base, very low indeed.
So now these rankings from “Penn Lauder University” are rags with no experience whatsoever.
Jan 24th, 2015 - 01:12 pm 0I'm glad you have finally seen the light. It's what I have been saying all along, your precious rankings you always rave about (when they go against Argentina for whatever reason... how odd), but obviously you are pretty stupid and dull and takes some major dinning to get anything to stick in your sputtering cortical structure.
You Anglos live and die by these rankings and your egos depend on them ranking your anglo orgs high. As I have been telling you, they are basically clueless about the real world.
I'm glad you are now dismissing all those rankings as the maculature that they are. Most everything Anglo is utter shit, because it has never faced a challenge from an impartial ranking.
@2. How long did it take you to think that one up? Must be getting really difficult to hold your head up now that you know that you have a murderer for president.
Jan 24th, 2015 - 03:19 pm 0But let's be straightforward. Rankings are only perceptions. We 'Anglos' know that.
But in head to head confrontations, huge spain, including argieland, has been unable to overmatch tiny little England/Great Britain/United Kingdom. Adequately demonstrated in 1982 when argieland illegally invaded a British territory 415 miles away. British troops, including all equipment, supplies and munitions were despatched from 8,064 miles away.
Unsurprisingly, the argies were beaten shitless. Interesting points in the conflict were that argies committed many war crimes, showed no respect for the homes of the population, set up world records for running (away), lost 2.54 killed for each British serviceman killed, had 11,313 taken prisoner, lost 9 vessels (Britain - 7), lost 100 aircraft (Britain - 35), initially declined to repatriate POWs (unwanted losers) and refused to accept corpses. Although Britain did offer to drive stakes through all their hearts.
This is a REAL ranking, based on actual FACTS. It would seem that there are grades of shit in argieland. How does one rate a 'country' that refuses to take its own rotting corpses back? How about a 'country' that declines to take more than 11,000 of its own citizens back? Would it have been different had they won? Not that they had much chance of that. Perhaps the argies shit in so many Falklander homes when they heard that the Task Force had sailed. Their fate was sealed.
You see, we 'Anglos' are the best there is. Thousands of years of evolution have produced 'Anglos'. What are the alternatives? Chinkys? Russkis? Eyeties? Dagos? Frogs? Where would we rate Scummers (argies and other selected latams)? Peruverts? Bols ups? Urineguayans, Brazil nuts? Equabogdoors?
What a shame that you can't recognise how superior we are. You might be able to learn.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!