Connect with us


The World’s Most and Least Peaceful Countries



In mid-2016, the media is full of news of politics, civil wars, terrorism, refugees and asylum seekers, oh – and sport! But peace! What’s that? Peace does exist, actually in most countries of the world, but its not newsworthy, is it!? ‘No news is good news’, so only war, murder, violence in some degree is generally reported – observe the percentage of crime-related items in your news bulletins.

Actually, officially there are no international conflicts taking place at this time, and the Institute of Economics for Peace (IEP) rates the current situation worldwide as the most peaceful time that the world has experienced – ever, in all recorded history.

Surprised? It’s true; the conflicts that make news headlines today are all either civil – a misnomer if ever there was one – or terrorist-inspired, not between countries. (The situation in eastern Ukraine is classified as a civil war, but Ukraine and Russia are a long way down the list of ‘peaceful’ countries.)

The IEP has developed a comprehensive method for measuring the standard of safety when living in over 160 countries around the world, called the Global Peace Index (GPI), uncovering ‘…the relationships between business, peace and prosperity as well as promoting a better understanding of the cultural, economic and political factors that create peace’.

The GPI comprises 23 indicators of the existence of violence or fear of violence, rated on a scale of one, safest, to five – the most dangerous or least safe, enabling an assessment of just how peaceful a country is. Naturally the indicators concentrate heavily on crime, and how it effects the population in general, how safe the people feel in their everyday lives. These range from the level of violent crime – in particular the rate of homicides – the number of police and security officers apparently needed (or afforded), to the percentage of jailed population. Also assessed is the level of political stability, perceived level of corruption, military expenditure as a percentage of GDP, nuclear and heavy weapon capability, to relations with neighbouring countries among others.

In the list of the most peaceful 25 countries in the world, only seven are outside Europe, however, only Russia and Ukraine of European countries are in the 25 most unsafe, least peaceful countries; you will not be surprised at most of the other countries on that list. Interestingly, despite its relative isolation in the world, the USA is listed at 94, heavily weighted down by the level of internal violent crime – which has actually shown a steady improvement in recent years – and so doesn’t appear on either list.

most peaceful countries

The listed score is an average of the 23 assessment criteria, rated 1-5.



Rank Country Rate
1 Iceland 1.148
2 Denmark 1.15
3 Austria 1.198
4 New Zealand 1.221
5 Switzerland 1.275
6 Finland 1.277
7 Canada 1.287
8 Japan 1.322
9 Australia 1.329
10 Czech Republic 1.341
11 Portugal 1.344
12 Ireland 1.354
13 Sweden 1.36
14 Belgium 1.368
15 Slovenia 1.378
16 Germany 1.379
17 Norway 1.393
18 Bhutan 1.416
19 Poland 1.43
20 Netherlands 1.432
21 Spain 1.451
22 Hungary 1.463
23 Slovakia 1.478
24 Singapore 1.49
25 Mauritius 1.503



Rank Country Rate
1 Syria 3.645
2 Iraq 3.444
3 Afghanistan 3.427
4 South Sudan 3.383
5 Central African Republic 3.332
6 Somalia 3.307
7 Sudan 3.295
8 Democratic Rep of the Congo 3.085
9 Pakistan 3.049
10 North Korea 2.977
11 Russia 2.954
12 Nigeria 2.91
13 Ukraine 2.845
14 Libya 2.819
15 Israel 2.781
16 Yemen 2.751
17 Colombia 2.72
18 Lebanon 2.623
19 Mexico 2.53
20 India 2.504
21 Venezuela 2.493
22 Philippines 2.462
23 Chad 2.429
24 Rwanda 2.42
25 Iran 2.409


As the Managing Editor at NetWorthPost, I lead a talented team in delivering compelling content on the lives and achievements of influential figures. With a keen eye for detail and a passion for storytelling, I oversee the production of insightful biographies that resonate with our audience. My role involves not only managing the editorial process but also conducting research, crafting engaging narratives, and ensuring the accuracy and quality of our publications. At NetWorthPost, we strive to provide our readers with in-depth profiles that offer valuable insights into the worlds of business, entertainment, and beyond. Through meticulous research and captivating storytelling, we bring to light the remarkable journeys and successes of individuals who inspire and captivate us.

Continue Reading
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Billy Ramsey

    May 15, 2016 at 6:23 am

    Why is the United States not rated?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Who ‘Gives’ the Most? Philanthropy Has Several Forms!



Charity or philanthropy usually brings images of financial donations, to a greater (the Bill Gates of the world) or lesser (you and me) degree, each according to her or his means. The majority of celebrities you will read about on this site have their philanthropic activities identified – quite deliberately, as it gives a more complete picture of the individual – usually in terms of finance, and sometimes specific to certain institutions or organisations. Supposing that you don’t have any spare cash, though – what can you still do to assist those who are in much more dire need of support than yourself? You have already started thinking, haven’t you!? So then, who do you think gives the most, identified by country?

‘Charity begins at home’ is an old adage – apparently from the 17th century King James bible – that you could do well to start out with, and which could also well be the motto of the Charities Aid Foundation(CAF). The Foundation is a charity in itself, but also far more than that. It is based in London, and under the patronage of HRH the Duke of Edinburgh endeavours to encourage philanthropy in its various forms, and the work of charitable organisations themselves.

CAF concentrates on three arms of philanthropy – donating money, helping someone you didn’t know who needed help, and volunteering time to a charitable organization.

It does this by:
a. endeavouring to ensure charitable (not-for-profit) organisations are consistently, transparently regulated legally; ie they do what they are designed to do.
b. encouraging people to donate in some way, also offering incentives to do so, eg tax deductability.
c. helping charities to campaign independently.
d. persuading developing economies to adopt philanthropy as part of their culture, society, especially in the middle classes.

So just how successful is the CAF, and more particularly in which areas of the world? CAF does not claim to be directly responsible for the level of philanthropy in any country, but its policies listed above are presented widely to appropriate authorities.

Each year since 2010, the CAF has conducted research into the level of philanthropy in over 140 countries, asking the questions – ‘during the previous month (NOTE!) have you donated money to a good cause, helped a stranger, and/or volunteered your time. “The ‘World Giving Index” averages the responses from these questions, counts the percentages, and hence arrives at the overall score and ranking.

Timing of research can be crucial, for example in Muslim countries around the time of Ramadan the efforts may be more positive. However, for the third successive year, and despite negative publicity regarding treatment of the Rohingya people, Myanmar tops the list, averaging 70% and way ahead of the USA in second place on 61% and Australia on 60%. That over 80% of Myanmar’s population are Theravada Buddhists is believed to be significant, as they traditionally donate regularly to monastic institutions, but topping the giving of money list too. The top five is completed by New Zealand and Sri Lanka, with Iraq tops for helping strangers (81%) and Turkmenistan for volunteering time (60%). CAF remarks that generosity increases in times of adversity, and that for the first time over 50% of all those surveyed worldwide helped a stranger.

Conversely, and disappointingly perhaps, only the UK, USA, Canada, Australia and Indonesia of the Group of Twenty (G20), representing 85% of Gross World Product (GWP), are listed in the top 20 on a five-year average, little changed from previous years.
There are possibly some surprises in the following lists.

Following is a list of the top 20 ranked countries in 2016, courtesy of the CAF.

Rank Country Overall Index % Helping a Stranger % Donating Money % Volunteering Time %
1 Myanmar 70 63 91 55
2 USA 61 73 63 46
3 Australia 60 68 73 40
4 New Zealand 59 61 71 44
5 Sri Lanka 57 61 61 49
6 Canada 56 65 65 38
7 Indonesia 56 43 75 50
8 UK 54 61 69 33
9 Ireland 54 56 66 40
10 UAE 53 75 63 21
11 Uzbekistan 52 67 62 27
12 Kenya 52 70 44 42
13 Netherlands 52 55 66 33
14 Norway 50 52 67 31
15 Turkmenistan 50 49 40 60
16 Malta 49 47 73 28
17 Iceland 49 52 70 26
18 Bhutan 49 52 56 39
19 Kuwait 48 78 48 17
20 Denmark 47 54 62 23


Top 10 Countries by Participation in Helping a Stranger

Rank Country People (%)
1 Iraq 81
2 State of Libya 79
3 Kuwait 78
4 Somalia 77
5 UAE 75
6 Malawi 74
7 Botswana 73
8 Sierra Leone 73
9 USA 73
10 Saudi Arabia 73

Top 10 Countries by Participation in Donating Money

Rank Country People (%)
1 Myanmar 91
2 Indonesia 75
3 Australia 73
4 Malta 73
5 New Zealand 71
6 Iceland 70
7 UK 69
8 Norway 67
9 Netherlands 66
10 Ireland 66

Top 10 Countries by Participation in Volunteering Time

Rank Country People (%)
1 Turkmenistan 60
2 Myanmar 55
3 Indonesia 50
4 Sri Lanka 49
5 USA 46
6 New Zealand 44
7 Philippines 42
8 Kenya 42
9 Honduras 41
10 Ireland 40
Continue Reading


Fascism/Racism in the Modern World



The word ‘fascism’ is bandied around a lot these days – especially in the democratic western world – but in most cases without many people who use it knowing what the word really means, by whom it was coined and why, and what it described, and should still describe. ‘Racism’ is a rather more obviously defined.

A simple definition of ‘fascism’ is provided by the authoritative Oxford English Dictionary: “an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.’

‘Racism’ is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as – “Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior” Alternatively – “The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.”

Of course these definitions automatically throw up questions regarding the use and definitions of other words, but firstly how, when and where did the word ‘fascism’ originate, and secondly, does anyone on the world stage qualify as a fascist or racist based on these definitions?

Although Roman in origin, the word ‘fascism‘ (actually ‘fascismo’) was first applied in modern history to the manifesto developed by Giovanni Gentile and adopted by Benito Mussolini in Italy in the years after World War One, and in broad outline signified a subservience of the individual to the state, in the supposed  pursuit of collective strength. To satisfy this aim, elements of nationalism (especially culture and race – hence racism), totalitarianism and statism (state regulation of life), autocracy and militarism (power invested in a strong leader) were of paramount importance.

Most importantly though, as an ‘enemy’ was necessary to demonstrate and perpetuate the superiority of this philosophy, the basic objective of fascism was specifically anti-capitalism (the ‘liberals’), and to combat communism/socialism, so being propounded as a middle-way between what were seen as two very extreme ideologies.

One can readily see that parts of fascist philosophy can be applied to various groups and individuals in the world today, but almost never in totality. In particular, comparisons with the worst individual proponents of fascism in the 20th century and their regimes – Mussolini (Italy), Hitler (Germany) and Franco (Spain) – do not bear anything more than a cursory inspection; the total collapse of their regimes was indicative of the abject failure of the philosophy – negative, abhorrent, insulting, demeaning. One could also theorise that the philosophy was also a useful vehicle for the personal self-aggrandisement of the leaders mentioned.

Interestingly, ‘liberals’ are actually ‘right wing’ conservatives, against both radical change and increased governmental control while supporting the rights of the individual, whereas ‘left wing’ communist philosophy – while not exactly as has been implemented in various countries around the world – seeks power through the collective strength of individuals. Fascism promotes the power of the state, but essentially controlled by a strong leader.

(In the pre-revolutionary French parliament, aristocratic liberal/conservatives sat on the right of the chamber, and commoners, socialists on the left.)

In modern politics, anyone who expresses opinions further to the right of normal conservative policy seems to be branded fascist and/or racist. How do some stand-up to this accusation?

In France, Marie Le Pen succeeded her father Jean-Marie Le Pen as president of the National Front (FN) party in 2011 – even including ‘national’ in the name of a party is enough to raise the ire of the opposition. However, Le Pen has also been a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) since 2004. She has partly moderated the stance of her father, and has even expelled members directly accused of racism, neo-Nazism (or petainism), anti-semitism, and has embraced such policies as same-sex couples being allowed civil union. None of these points indicate the philosophy of a fascist.

In the UK, until 28 November 2016, Nigel Farage was the leader of the UK Independence Party (UKIP), also an MEP since 1999, and is labelled ‘fascist’ partly because he was a member of the Conservative Party, but resigned because his views are further to the right in political philosophy. As the name of the party he lead suggests, he was a strong proponent of the UK leaving the EU, which has been interpreted as him being anti-free movement within Europe, therefore anti-immigration– or at least tightly controlled, although his wife is German – and by extension ‘racist’. Farage has protested against ‘Romanians (possibly) living next door’ to him, and slated (most) Muslims as wanting to take over the country. By definition, there are elements of a racist philosophy in his remarks, but to label him a ‘fascist’ ignores the absence of other elements necessary to establish the point. (There is no reason to think that UKIP policies will change under a new leader.)

Finally, following what has been described as the most acrimonious US presidential election campaign ever, as of November 2016 Donald Trump has become the president-elect. Many of his remarks during the campaign were directed against minorities, religions, women, Mexicans specifically, while others were very pro-US isolationism in regard to trade and security especially, suggesting deep suspicion of other countries’ intentions. However, his wife is from Slovenia, and his first wife was from what is now the Czech Republic, so to label him ‘racist’, much less ‘fascist’, is to ignore most of the definition.

The one political philosophical element which binds all these three personalities together could be more accurately described as ‘nationalism’ – love for and defence of their respective countries, however controversial this attitude might seem to others. While this could be accepted as one element of fascism, in itself it is not sufficient to identify the person as ‘fascist’, or their political philosophy as ‘fascism’. Their collective problem is possibly not so much what they say, but how they say it – how they express themselves, which under the scrutiny and reporting of the media today, has clearly caused them a great deal of trouble in negative publicity.

In particular, the impression is that they are very intolerant of any other point of view to theirs, which suggests that they could have very significant problems if/when head of state!

Of course there are several other politicians in Europe in particular who have been labelled fascist, racist, nationalist, isolationist or similar. Most seem simply to be craving the independent status that existed in their country – in some cases for a relatively short period of time – prior to them joining the European Union (so-called), and it spreading its wings and dominating the legal as well as the trade and security elements of the constituent countries. However, there are other countries apparently still anxious to join the Union – definitely food for (deeper) thought by those countries which are already members!

In other parts of the world, people in less democratic countries may well live in fascist-type situations without realising it, or calling it something else, and perhaps tolerating their situation simply because it has improved somewhat from that of former regimes.

Regardless, calling anyone ‘fascist’ requires careful analysis that the definition applies, and equally a comparison in depth with those in history who developed and adopted the philosophy. Libel and slander can be serious charges to defend themselves against, for those who casually use the words against another!

Continue Reading


Luxury2 days ago

Serena Williams Takes Home $426,000 After Winning Rogers Cup

Serena Williams is still one of the most feared female tennis player on the planet. Just last week, Serena continued...

Luxury2 days ago

$8637 Per Hole So Far For Tiger Woods

The news that Padraig Harrington created $8637 per hole so far this season is fairly astounding. It is a man...

Entertainment2 days ago

Grey’s Anatomy Recap: Richard Makes A Shocking Confession

It’s all aboard the battle bus for almost all of the physicians at Gray Sloan Memorial. From babies to examinations,...

Celebrity Money2 days ago

Charlie Sheen Gives $12000 for Paparazzi Funeral

Former Two and a Half Men star donated $12,000 for the funeral expenses of the paparazzo who was killed while...

Beauty2 days ago

Lohans Half Sister Spends $25000 on Surgery to Look like Lindsay Lohan

How much would it cost to appear just just like Lindsay Lohan? Lindsay’s halfsister, Ashley Horn, invested $25,0000 on plastic...

Biographies2 days ago

Top 10 Biggest Economies in the World 2013

They are the world-wide economic heavyweights this year, estimated to be having the current largest economies on the planet. Here’s...

Companies2 days ago

BlackBerry Expected to get $500 Million Tax Refund

BlackBerry is poised to get a huge tax break. Within the 2nd quarter of FY 2014, BlackBerry posted a tax...

Biographies2 days ago

Cristiano Ronaldo buys $1.3 Million Ferrari

Ferrari, the topnotch auto company in Italy, has declared that 499 LA Ferrari models seen in state were sold-out. But,...

The Biggest2 days ago

The Biggest Shipping Companies in the World

Shipping is an extremely vital industry that most people are not aware of. Perhaps you have wondered how exotic fruits...

Biographies2 days ago

10 Poorest Cities in North America

Its economic recovery is taking a very long time, what with all of the other hurdles the nation and the...