NewzIntel.com

Category: Global

  • MIL-OSI Global: OpenAI’s Strawberry program is reportedly capable of reasoning. It might be able to deceive humans

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Shweta Singh, Assistant Professor, Information Systems and Management, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick

    OpenAI, the company that made ChatGPT, has launched a new artificial intelligence (AI) system called Strawberry. It is designed not just to provide quick responses to questions, like ChatGPT, but to think or “reason”.

    This raises several major concerns. If Strawberry really is capable of some form of reasoning, could this AI system cheat and deceive humans?

    OpenAI can program the AI in ways that mitigate its ability to manipulate humans. But the company’s own evaluations rate it as a “medium risk” for its ability to assist experts in the “operational planning of reproducing a known biological threat” – in other words, a biological weapon. It was also rated as a medium risk for its ability to persuade humans to change their thinking.

    It remains to be seen how such a system might be used by those with bad intentions, such as con artists or hackers. Nevertheless, OpenAI’s evaluation states that medium-risk systems can be released for wider use – a position I believe is misguided.

    Strawberry is not one AI “model”, or program, but several – known collectively as o1. These models are intended to answer complex questions and solve intricate maths problems. They are also capable of writing computer code – to help you make your own website or app, for example.

    An apparent ability to reason might come as a surprise to some, since this is generally considered a precursor to judgment and decision making – something that has often seemed a distant goal for AI. So, on the surface at least, it would seem to move artificial intelligence a step closer to human-like intelligence.

    When things look too good to be true, there’s often a catch. Well, this set of new AI models is designed to maximise their goals. What does this mean in practice? To achieve its desired objective, the path or the strategy chosen by AI may not always necessarily be fair, or align with human values.

    True intentions

    For example, if you were to play chess against Strawberry, in theory, could its reasoning allow it to hack the scoring system rather than figure out the best strategies for winning the game?

    The AI might also be able to lie to humans about its true intentions and capabilities, which would pose a serious safety concern if it were to be deployed widely. For example, if the AI knew it was infected with malware, could it “choose” to conceal this fact in the knowledge that a human operator might opt to disable the whole system if they knew?

    Strawberry goes a step beyond the capabilities of AI chatbots.
    Robert Way / Shutterstock

    These would be classic examples of unethical AI behaviour, where cheating or deceiving is acceptable if it leads to a desired goal. It would also be quicker for the AI, as it wouldn’t have to waste any time figuring out the next best move. It may not necessarily be morally correct, however.

    This leads to a rather interesting yet worrying discussion. What level of reasoning is Strawberry capable of and what could its unintended consequences be? A powerful AI system that’s capable of cheating humans could pose serious ethical, legal and financial risks to us.

    Such risks become grave in critical situations, such as designing weapons of mass destruction. OpenAI rates its own Strawberry models as “medium risk” for their potential to assist scientists in developing chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons.

    OpenAI says: “Our evaluations found that o1-preview and o1-mini can help experts with the operational planning of reproducing a known biological threat.” But it goes on to say that experts already have significant expertise in these areas, so the risk would be limited in practice. It adds: “The models do not enable non-experts to create biological threats, because creating such a threat requires hands-on laboratory skills that the models cannot replace.”

    Powers of persuasion

    OpenAI’s evaluation of Strawberry also investigated the risk that it could persuade humans to change their beliefs. The new o1 models were found to be more persuasive and more manipulative than ChatGPT.

    OpenAI also tested a mitigation system that was able to reduce the manipulative capabilities of the AI system. Overall, Strawberry was labelled a medium risk for “persuasion” in Open AI’s tests.

    Strawberry was rated low risk for its ability to operate autonomously and on cybersecurity.

    Open AI’s policy states that “medium risk” models can be released for wide use. In my view, this underestimates the threat. The deployment of such models could be catastrophic, especially if bad actors manipulate the technology for their own pursuits.

    This calls for strong checks and balances that will only be possible through AI regulation and legal frameworks, such as penalising incorrect risk assessments and the misuse of AI.

    The UK government stressed the need for “safety, security and robustness” in their 2023 AI white paper, but that’s not nearly enough. There is an urgent need to prioritise human safety and devise rigid scrutiny protocols for AI models such as Strawberry.

    Shweta Singh does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. OpenAI’s Strawberry program is reportedly capable of reasoning. It might be able to deceive humans – https://theconversation.com/openais-strawberry-program-is-reportedly-capable-of-reasoning-it-might-be-able-to-deceive-humans-239748

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Did COVID come from an animal market? Here’s what the new evidence really tells us

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Mark Woolhouse, Professor of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, The University of Edinburgh

    The argument about the origins of COVID has always been heated, and nowadays it feels more like a brawl than a scientific debate.

    Some say that ground zero for the pandemic was a live animal market in Wuhan, China. Others argue that SARS-CoV-2 (the coronavirus that causes COVID) leaked from a nearby laboratory that was studying similar viruses. Both are plausible scenarios.

    Proponents of the market hypothesis have been aggressively vocal in recent weeks. In August, an anonymous editorial in a leading medical journal talked about the “hubris needed to underpin alternative hypotheses” and “fanciful ideas … more in keeping with popular movies”.

    A commentary in another journal lamented that scientists were being harassed for rejecting the lab leak hypothesis. With breathtaking hypocrisy, the same commentary then attacked a junior researcher who favours that hypothesis, dismissing her work as “conjecture, correlation and anecdote”.

    We can at least agree that the virus was present in the Wuhan market. Samples collected from market stalls and drains in early January 2020 contain SARS-CoV-2 genetic material. A recent analysis of this material, published in the journal Cell, claimed to show that the common ancestor of the viruses at the market was the common ancestor of the whole pandemic.

    That sounds compelling, until you realise that all of these samples were collected weeks after the pandemic began and none came from a live animal. Unaccountably, no samples were collected before the market was closed and the animals destroyed. Primarily for this reason, most commentators – including me – consider these latest results suggestive but not definitive.

    The lack of samples from animals is a problem. No one believes that this virus originated in Wuhan. The natural reservoirs of SARS-like coronaviruses are horseshoe bats, and no infected colonies have been found within 1,500km of the city.

    So it must have been brought into the market from somewhere. Yet no SARS-CoV-2 has been found along the supply chains for the animals sold there.

    Could a person rather than an animal have brought SARS-CoV-2 into the market in late 2019? That’s entirely possible. Many of the viruses near the base of the SARS-CoV-2 ancestral tree came from people with no links to the market. Several, including a cluster from Guangdong Province, were not even from Wuhan.

    Despite the many uncertainties and unanswered questions, it would be much easier to accept the market hypothesis if the pandemic had begun in one of the hundreds (or possibly thousands – no one seems to know for sure) of other Chinese cities that had similar markets in 2020.

    After all, the 2002 outbreak of the original SARS coronavirus (a very close relative of SARS-CoV-2) began in a market selling civet cats and other animals in, as it happens, Guangdong.

    Yet the epicentre of the COVID pandemic was less than 20 kilometres from China’s pre-eminent coronavirus research lab, the Wuhan Institute of Virology. That is an extraordinary coincidence, and you’d need compelling evidence that the market was the source (or that the lab wasn’t) to dismiss it. The evidence we have simply isn’t that strong.

    That said, there is no evidence – at least, not that the Chinese authorities have shared – that SARS-CoV-2 was present in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, though some closely related viruses were. I cannot know if it was or wasn’t, but it didn’t have to be.

    Scientists from the institute went on coronavirus-hunting expeditions to places such as Guangdong. Scientists from the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention – just a five-minute walk from the market – were making their own expeditions, too. There’s an obvious and plausible alternative route to the first human case.

    Dismissed as a conspiracy theory

    Yet as far back as March 2020, on a bare minimum of evidence, the idea that a lab was involved in any way was already being dismissed as a conspiracy theory.

    Two years ago, one of the most strident proponents of the market hypothesis claimed that his latest research “lays to rest the idea that the virus escaped from a laboratory”. An author of the new analysis in Cell says alternative explanations are “fanciful” and “absurd”.

    Who is all this bombast supposed to win over? Not scientists who can read the research papers, take note of the caveats and make their own judgments. Not politicians who have taken an ideological stance on the issue, particularly in the US. And not the intelligence agencies who many believe are our best hope for getting at the truth.

    I have studied the origins of human viruses for 25 years but, having examined the evidence, I still don’t know how the COVID pandemic began. I do know that the question is important and that debating it should be encouraged, not stifled.

    Mark Woolhouse receives funding from the European Union and the Wellcome Trust. He is a member of the Scottish Government’s Standing Committee on Pandemic Preparedness and has advised the Scottish and UK governments, and the WHO, on pandemic preparedness and response.

    – ref. Did COVID come from an animal market? Here’s what the new evidence really tells us – https://theconversation.com/did-covid-come-from-an-animal-market-heres-what-the-new-evidence-really-tells-us-239533

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why building new towns isn’t the answer to the UK’s housing crisis

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Amrita Kulka, Assistant Professor, Political Economy and Public Economics, University of Warwick

    The UK is aiming to build 1.5 million homes over five years. Nick Beer/Shutterstock

    The UK’s new government is intent on building 1.5 million homes over the next five years. It’s all part of the plan to address the housing supply and affordability crisis.

    Many of these homes are to be built in the form of large communities or new towns of more than 10,000 housing units each. Some English new towns built after the second world war, such as Milton Keynes, Harlow and Basildon, have been successful economically. But the building of new towns has ground to a halt since the 1990s.

    The importance of large developments for housing supply in the UK has increased dramatically in the last 25 years. We have put together new evidence that reveals a significant shift in the source of housing supply. These days, an increasing share of new homes are coming from large developments.

    At the turn of the century, very large developments of at least 500 units made up only single digits of the total percentage of potential housing supply. Today, such developments represent 38% of permitted housing units. These very large projects only made up 0.2% of applications over the 25 years, but make up a disproportionately large chunk of new housing supply.

    This graphic shows the share of permitted new homes from 2000 to 2023 for applications of different development sizes across the UK.

    Proportion of new homes by development size

    Our research, undertaken with the support of our research assistant Alex Gallagher, explores the barriers that developments face in terms of paperwork and waiting time for a decision. We show that the amount of paperwork increases dramatically with the size of the project, going from one application for projects involving one unit, to more than eight applications for projects involving 500 or more units.

    The additional paperwork is generated by things like environmental surveys, infrastructure needs and public utilities.

    Northstowe in Cambridgeshire, which was planned to be the largest new town since Milton Keynes was built in the 1960s, also required funding for local infrastructure. Developers were obliged to contribute more than £120 million, most of which went to the construction of local schools. The development was left in limbo for around four years due to a delay to the expansion of the A14 trunk road, upon which the new town was entirely dependent. It is still not complete, with residents frustrated at the lack of infrastructure.

    In the case of Buckshaw Village, a new Lancashire development built on a former munitions factory, developers had to decontaminate the site. This required a £10.5 million contract to decontaminate more than 850 buildings.

    Of course many of these requirements are necessary, and beneficial for long-term planning. But it demonstrates that building a new town goes far beyond constructing houses.

    Decade-long delays

    In our research we also find that the time taken to reach a planning decision rises dramatically from projects involving one unit to projects involving two to nine units, and keeps rising for larger projects. The average time from the first application to the last decision is just over four years and four months for projects with more than 500 units. But even projects involving just one unit can expect to wait nearly a year.

    For bigger projects, waiting times for a decision are over 11 years in some cases (the most delayed 10%). One example is Ebbsfleet Valley – another newly planned town near London with large potential – which has seen only 4,000 of 43,000 planned homes built since planning began in 1996.

    The time taken for a planning decision plays a role in this delay. The borough councils resolved to grant outline planning permission (which lets a developer know if its plans are acceptable in principle) in 1998, two years after the application was submitted. But outline planning permission was not actually granted until November 2002. And then the need to supply more plans caused further delays, which meant building did not start until 2006 – 10 years after the original outline was filed.

    The long wait times for decisions, added to the fact that bigger developments must file additional applications, mean that housing supply from large projects is slow to be realised.

    These barriers have important implications for developers, which have to weigh the cost savings of large developments against the increased chance of obstacles that these larger developments are likely to throw up. So are new towns the most effective way to build a large amount of housing units in a short space of time?

    New towns are most comparable to the large-scale developments that represent an increasing share of residential units in the UK since the early 2000s.

    While these development schemes can deliver large amounts of housing alongside local infrastructure (at the developer’s expense rather than local government), they are unlikely to do so in the short term as they also face the toughest barriers under planning regulations.

    Therefore, so-called infill developments (that is, new buildings on unused or under-used land) as well as smaller and medium-sized developments, should not be neglected.

    Urban extensions and new neighbourhoods in the sites we’re already living in may provide ways to keep costs and uncertainties of new infrastructure to a minimum – even while planning larger developments or the new towns of the future.

    Amrita Kulka receives funding from Research England.

    Nikhil Datta receives funding from the British Academy, Leverhulme Trust, Economic and Social Research Council, and Research England.

    – ref. Why building new towns isn’t the answer to the UK’s housing crisis – https://theconversation.com/why-building-new-towns-isnt-the-answer-to-the-uks-housing-crisis-238635

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Climate change is easier to study when it’s presented as a game

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Ian Thacker, Assistant Professor of Educational Psychology, The University of Texas at San Antonio

    A playful approach can make the often complicated subject of climate change easier to understand. Victor Habbick Visions/Science Photo Library via Getty Images

    Climate change is among the more difficult but important topics to teach to young people. It involves complicated science and data, and it can be really depressing, given the bleak picture it paints of Earth’s future.

    So how do educators get students more engaged in lessons about climate change? One way that works is to make the lessons into a game.

    As a professor of educational psychology, I conducted an experiment that found that high schoolers are more interested and absorb more information about climate change when it’s presented as a game.

    In the study, 248 high school students throughout the U.S. were randomly assigned to either read a text about climate science or to play a number estimation game – that is, a game in which they guessed 12 numerical facts about climate change. I found that the number estimation game improved high schoolers’ climate change understanding, interest in science and willingness to take actions to help solve climate change.

    For instance, one question asked: “What is the change in percentage of the world’s ocean ice cover since the 1960s?”

    After students submit an estimate, a window pops up showing the true value – a “40% decrease” in the ice cover question. Gold stars appear to indicate their accuracy, as does a short explanation of the true value. The answers also list actions that people can take to address the issue and links to the sources of the information.

    I found that students who played the game had a better understanding than those who did not that there is a scientific consensus around human-caused climate change. Students who played the game also thought the activity was more interesting and reported less boredom. These boosts in positive emotions and motivation were linked to reduced sense of hopelessness about climate change and improved willingness to act on climate change.

    Why it matters

    Climate change is a tricky topic for secondary students to learn. Not only is the science conceptually difficult to comprehend, but it can be psychologically difficult for them to accept and address the looming threat of climate change.

    Compounding this problem, a 2020 report suggests that 20 U.S. states do not address these challenges in their state science standards, as they were found to insufficiently address the scientific climate consensus: that climate change is real, severe, caused by humans, but that there is hope for change. Findings from my study provide some principles for addressing this curricular gap.

    What other research is being done?

    Researchers are actively trying to find approaches that promote accurate climate change education that helps students understand the causes and explores solutions for the challenges ahead.

    One promising approach emphasized in this study, in my prior research and by other researchers, is to present a handful of surprising climate change numbers to students after they estimate them. However, there are several alternative approaches that are also effective. For example, some research found success by breaking down complicated ways to evaluate evidence, while other research engaged students taking photographs of their local environment to depict climate science and reflect on possible solutions.

    What still isn’t known

    One big remaining question is how to encourage teachers to implement effective climate change education in their classrooms. Evidence suggests that teachers sometimes feel pressured to teach to “both sides” of the continuum of climate change perspectives, despite one side having more supporting evidence. Such inconsistent messages can diminish needed urgency and confuse students in the process. I think it’s worthwhile to investigate the specific challenges and rewards that teachers encounter when implementing clear and consistent climate curriculum in their classrooms.

    The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

    Ian Thacker received funding to support this research from the American Psychological Association Division 15 Early Career Research Grant Award.

    – ref. Climate change is easier to study when it’s presented as a game – https://theconversation.com/climate-change-is-easier-to-study-when-its-presented-as-a-game-236544

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Continuing crackdown on churches and NGOs moves Nicaragua further from democracy to authoritarianism

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Richard Wood, President of the Institute for Advanced Catholic Studies, USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

    A man prays at the Metropolitan Cathedral in Managua, the capital of Nicaragua, in August 2022. Oswaldo Rivas/AFP via Getty Images

    The Nicaraguan government recently shut down more than 1,500 nonprofits – many of them civic and religious groups doing humanitarian work in a country long mired in political violence, economic upheaval and social strife.

    The August 2024 closures were the latest in a long-running crackdown on civil society, including religious groups – some of the last influential, independent organizations in the country. That same month, the government revoked churches’ tax-exempt status. Over the past few years, many houses of worship have been closed or had their bank accounts frozen.

    As a sociologist, I have worked with Central American scholars to research the role of religion in public life in Central America, including Nicaragua. Several hundred Catholic figures have been detained in an ongoing crackdown under President Daniel Ortega, now 78, who leads the Sandinista National Liberation Front.

    Sweeping suppression

    Ortega’s FSLN party, as it is known in Spanish, is the authoritarian remnant of the group that led a broad national movement against Anastasio Somoza Debayle’s dictatorship in the 1970s. After overthrowing Somoza in 1979, Ortega and the Sandinistas governed until losing the 1990 election.

    Since Ortega returned to power in the 2006 elections, moderates have fled the FSLN, which since then has used oppression and violence for political and social control. In 2013, the National Assembly removed presidential term limits set by the Nicaraguan constitution.

    In April 2018, Ortega’s regime began targeting student protesters. Since then, hundreds of citizens — religious leaders, university students, academics, journalists and doctors — have been killed or arrested, gone into hiding or been forced to flee the country.

    Ortega’s crackdown has been broad. Universities had their assets confiscated and funding cut, and some have been shut down as the government took control of higher education. Media outlets have been shuttered, and international aid organizations have been expelled.

    Paramilitary police officers and prison guards have been accused of engaging in arbitrary killings and torture. Meanwhile, a record number of refugees are fleeing the country.

    Parishioners attend Mass at St. Agatha Catholic Church in Miami, which has become the spiritual home of the growing Nicaraguan diaspora.
    AP Photo/Rebecca Blackwell

    Silencing churches

    Among the nearly 5,500 nonprofits that closed in Nicaragua between 2018 and 2024 are Catholic, evangelical Christian and historical Protestant organizations, as well as secular humanitarian ones. Of those, 1,650 organizations and churches were shuttered in August 2024, with government officials claiming their closure was due to ties to private enterprises or a lack of financial records.

    Catholic media and radio stations, missionary orders and humanitarian groups have been shuttered, too, as Ortega and the vice president – his wife, Rosario Murillo – have sought to eliminate settings where ideas and information freely flow, and people act independently of the government.

    The highest-profile religious leader caught up in the clampdown is Rolando Álvarez, a popular bishop, critic of Ortega, and a prominent Catholic voice of protest. Álvarez was detained in August 2022, accused of “conspiracy and spreading false news,” stripped of his citizenship and sentenced to 26 years in prison.

    Police officers and riot police block the main entrance of a church building in Matagalpa, Nicaragua, in August 2022 to prevent Bishop Rolando Álvarez from leaving.
    STR/AFP via Getty Images

    With international pressure mounting, Alvarez and a group of fellow detained Catholic clergy were released in January 2024 and exiled to the Vatican – where the regime had previously expelled the apostolic nuncio, the pope’s top diplomat in Nicaragua. They are among 245 Catholic figures the country has expelled in recent years. An additional 135 people, including Catholics and evangelicals, were expelled and stripped of their citizenship in September 2024.

    Today, 43% of Nicaraguan citizens identity as Catholics. But that percentage used to be much higher, and the country has deep cultural roots in Catholicism.

    In Nicaragua, as in much of Latin America, the Catholic Church is the most powerful source of social authority and the largest independent institution for public debate. It represents a key channel through which democratic values may take root, grow and thrive – an obstacle, in the regime’s eyes.

    For many years, the church was the only organization to escape Ortega’s grip – but no longer.

    Dangerous path

    I have witnessed firsthand Nicaragua’s shift from a country with promising seeds of democracy to violent autocracy. As civil war raged between the original Sandinista regime and U.S.-backed Contras in the 1980s, I led travel seminars to Nicaragua for faith groups, journalists, congressional aides and university students. I once personally encountered Ortega, serving as translator during a meeting with American journalists when his official translator failed to show up.

    Today, as Ortega continues to consolidate power by crushing opposition, Nicaragua has deteriorated into an oppressive state ruled with an iron fist. This reality reflects broader dynamics globally, from autocratic movements in the U.S. and Western Europe to current regimes in Russia, India, Turkey, Hungary and China.

    Nicaraguan citizens wave from a bus after being released from a Nicaraguan jail and landing in Guatemala City on Sept. 5, 2024.
    AP Photo/Moises Castillo

    Closer to home, Ortega poses a regional threat as a model for other potential autocrats. This is especially the case for neighbors like El Salvador, where President Nayib Bukele – the popular, self-described “coolest dictator” – is going down a similar path of turning the nation into an authoritarian state.

    I have seen Nicaraguans’ generosity and courage in the long fight for liberty and justice. The closure of democratic spaces, civic institutions and humanitarian organizations, along with the suppression of religious freedom, is a glaring sign that the country is being marched toward more oppression and violence – and, as history shows, risks becoming ripe for revolution.

    Only a gradual rebuilding of civil society, I believe, may save Nicaragua from that fate. The tragedy is what Nicaragua could have been: a thriving democratic society, with a commitment to empowering the poor.

    From 1983-1987 and part-time from 1987-1992, Richard Wood worked running travel seminars in Mexico and Central America. From 2010-2012, he received funding from the Center on Religion and Civic Culture at the University of Southern California and The John Templeton Foundation for research collaboration with Central American researchers.

    – ref. Continuing crackdown on churches and NGOs moves Nicaragua further from democracy to authoritarianism – https://theconversation.com/continuing-crackdown-on-churches-and-ngos-moves-nicaragua-further-from-democracy-to-authoritarianism-238178

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What America’s history can teach us about debates on religious freedom and its importance for democracy

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Corey D. B. Walker, Dean and Wake Forest Professor of the Humanities, Wake Forest University

    The decline in church attendance has not resulted in a diminished Christian presence in American public life. selimaksan/E+ via Getty images.

    Supporters of both major U.S. political parties tend to claim their presidential candidate is the “real” Christian or the “better” Christian or just the “true” Christian.

    For a majority of white evangelical protestants, Trump is the good Christian. Christians for Kamala, a newly created group of self-identified Christians who support the Democratic nominee, say that her campaign embodies the “compassionate heart of Jesus and his teachings.”

    Yet, most American adults agree that religion should be separate from government. This widely shared belief is a cornerstone of religious freedom. As a scholar of religious freedom, I have studied the complex and ever-evolving role of religion in American politics. I argue that this election year, while the Christian character of each candidate is discussed everywhere, religious freedom, one of the core freedoms of American democracy, is not.

    The case of Ezra Stiles Ely

    America’s history of religious freedom is filled with stories that are instructive for our current moment. One such instructive lesson comes from the early 19th century.

    The Second Great Awakening was an intense period of religious revival. Evangelical Christians sought to reform American law and politics to reflect what they considered to be true Christianity. According to legal scholar Geoffrey R. Stone, it was at this time the claim that the “United States is a ‘Christian nation’ first seriously took root.”

    Ezra Stiles Ely.
    The New York Public Library digital collections

    A striking figure from the period is the Philadelphia Presbyterian minister Ezra Stiles Ely. On July 4, 1827, the Yale-educated minister delivered his infamous call for “a Christian political party” in the run-up to the 1828 presidential election.

    Ely’s oration, The Duty of Christian Freemen to Elect Christian Rulers, is a 19th-century version of what is today called “Christian nationalism.” In it, Ely lays out his view of a distinctly Christian vision of who should serve as political leaders and how they should govern.

    Before an Independence Day audience in Philadelphia’s Seventh Presbyterian Church, Ely declared, “Every ruler should be an avowed and sincere friend of Christianity. He should know and believe the doctrines of our holy religion, and act in conformity to its precepts.” Ely also advocated for “a new sort of union, or, if you will, a Christian party in politics.”

    Ely closed his sermon by exhorting Christians to “awake … to our sacred duty to our Divine Master; and let us have no rulers, without our consent and cooperation, who are not known to be avowedly Christians.”

    Critiques in defense of religious freedom

    While Ely sought to wed Christianity and American politics, others voices responded against this move. Religious freedom was new for the young nation. Yet, its supporters recognized its importance for American democracy.

    On Feb. 7, 1828, a pamphlet titled Sunday School Union, or Union of Church and State was placed on the desk of each member of the Pennsylvania Senate. The pamphlet contained excerpts of Ely’s speech that advocated the union of Christianity and politics. Ely’s speech was also the subject of debate in several 19th-century newspapers, including the Harrisburg Chronicle and The Pennsylvania Reporter.

    Notable among these voices was Massachusetts-born and Harvard-educated Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story.

    In an 1828 speech delivered in Salem, Massachusetts, Story boldly declared his support for religious freedom. He stated: “Religious freedom is the birthright of man; that governments have no authority to inflict punishment for conscientious differences of opinion; and that to worship God according to our own belief is not only our privilege, but is our duty, our absolute duty, from which no human tribunal can absolve us.”

    “Wherever religious liberty exist,” he argued, “it will, first or last, bring in, and establish political liberty.”

    Politics and American democracy

    America is not the same as at the time of the Second Great Awakening. Yet, the role of Christianity in political life is seemingly as alive as ever.

    The steady decline in church attendance has not resulted in a diminished Christian presence in American public life. The public square still contains powerful appeals to Christianity rather than a shared democratic heritage.

    Former president and Republican nominee Donald Trump recently stated, “We have to bring back our religion. We have to bring back Christianity in this country.”

    Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito has commended the religious convictions of citizens, stating, “People with deep religious convictions may be less likely to succumb to dominating ideologies or trends, and more likely to act in accordance with what they see as true and right. Civil society can count on them as engines of reform.”

    A 2023 survey, in which the nonprofit, nonpartisan research and education organization PRRI interviewed more than 22,000 adults, found that approximately 3 in 10 Americans either supported or held Christian nationalist views. Christian nationalists tend “to see political struggles through the apocalyptic lens of revolution and to support political violence.”

    In my opinion, the linkage of Christianity and politics in the United States undermines American democracy. Amanda Tyler, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty, a prominent public voice, explains how Christian nationalism undermines both Christianity and American democracy. In her 2024 book “How to End Christian Nationalism,” Tyler writes, “Christian nationalism is the greatest threat to religious liberty in the U.S. today, as well as a clear and present danger to our constitutional republic.”

    While debates over the Christian virtues of the candidates may be important for Christian communities, religious freedom is important for American democracy. The response to Christianity and politics is not more Christianity but more democracy. And religious freedom is key.

    Corey D. B. Walker does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. What America’s history can teach us about debates on religious freedom and its importance for democracy – https://theconversation.com/what-americas-history-can-teach-us-about-debates-on-religious-freedom-and-its-importance-for-democracy-238174

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Local government controls your roads, schools and utilities − but that doesn’t mean the US president doesn’t touch your life in important ways

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Zoe Nemerever, Professor of Political Science, Auburn University

    The top of the ticket often gets the most attention. Alex Brandon/AP Photo

    “All politics is local” is a common refrain – and yet, it is also true that the president has some unique powers.

    I am an expert on state policymaking, and I’m teaching presidential politics at Auburn University during this election season. Researching and teaching about both state and national politics has made me keenly aware of the stakes of the different races up and down the ballot this fall.

    Power close to home

    State and local governments shape our daily experiences in practical ways. State governments determine whether residents have access to expanded Medicaid, reproductive care, parental and family leave, and they set the state property, sales and income taxes, which we are all required to pay.

    City councils, county boards and school boards determine the quality of the roads we travel, the selection of books in school libraries and the prices of utilities such as water and sewer service.

    Most Americans will have the opportunity to vote for a variety of state and local elected officials this November. Yet many voters find their attention drawn to a more captivating contest: the presidential election.

    And it is hard to deny that the president has an outsized influence on American public policy.

    Staffing the government

    So what does the president do?

    It’s a busy job, for sure – including tasks such as signing executive orders, making treaties, vetoing or signing congressional bills, acting as the military’s commander in chief, attempting to build public support for their agenda and fundraising for the party.

    But one other big responsibility is often overlooked – that of passing out thousands of positions in the executive and judicial branches.

    The president’s appointment power is an enumerated power, meaning that it is enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.

    As the size of the judiciary and federal bureaucracy has grown over the past century, this presidential power has ballooned to include 4,000 appointments that turn over at the start of every administration. That doesn’t even include the vacancies that arise during the president’s term – for example, when a federal judge retires or dies.

    Perhaps the most well-known presidential appointment power is the power to nominate Supreme Court justices. These nominations tend to be highly political and dramatic affairs. This is due to their irregular and often sudden timing and to the high stakes of lifetime appointments.

    Some presidents don’t get to exercise this supreme power as much as they would like. But they still get to fill many other judgeships across the district courts, appellate courts and other federal courts.

    The Founding Fathers were adamant that the executive appointment power was not unilateral, as evidenced in Federalist Paper 76 penned by Alexander Hamilton. For 1,200 of the most consequential positions, the president nominates individuals, who are then confirmed – or not – by the U.S. Senate.

    The Founding Fathers perceived this as important for preventing the tyranny of a sole actor, which they had just worked so hard to leave behind under English rule.

    Assembling a Cabinet

    Some of the most consequential of these appointments are members of the presidential Cabinet.

    Much like how a head football coach assembles a team of assistants to enact their vision, the president convenes a team of policy champions to lead the 15 executive departments in the federal bureaucracy.

    Each department is run by a “secretary,” nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The president consults with Cabinet members at periodic meetings, but secretaries otherwise enjoy a great deal of autonomy. For this reason, the president tries to pick Cabinet members who share their policy perspective.

    Much of the agenda presidents claim credit for is, in fact, achieved by the Cabinet departments. For example, during the current Biden administration, the Department of Labor increased guaranteed overtime compensation, the Department of Health and Human Services recommended making marijuana a legal but regulated drug, and the Department of Education launched an initiative to tackle the post-COVID surge in chronic absenteeism.

    Cabinet members often fly under the radar of the media, and consequently voters, with a few exceptions. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg had his moment in the headlines earlier in 2024 when he announced a new federal rule that entitles airline passengers to prompt cash refunds when their flights are canceled or delayed. President Barack Obama’s Secretary of Education Arne Duncan was well known for his bus tours promoting the economic value of education. President George W. Bush’s Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice spearheaded the noteworthy 2008 U.S.-India nuclear agreement.

    Crisis manager in chief, ad hoc

    Presidents also have the power to touch voters’ lives in profound ways by serving as a unifying character during national crises, a role that differentiates the president from other elected officials.

    These crises, unforeseen at the time of the election, require the president to swiftly reassure a distressed nation. For example, after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, President George W. Bush delivered an address that acknowledged the grief of Americans while imparting a stern guarantee that the United States would not cower to terrorists. President Donald Trump provided direction for a national response to an unprecedented global pandemic. President Bill Clinton shared heartfelt remarks at the memorial service of those killed in the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. And Obama honored victims of a racially motivated shooting at a church in Charleston, South Carolina.

    Presidential candidates of course cannot campaign on their ability to handle unpredictable, emergent situations. Instead, they talk up personal traits that will equip them to carry the nation through the next four years – whatever that may bring.

    During the recent 2024 presidential debate between Democratic candidate Kamala Harris and Republican candidate Donald Trump, the candidates tried to demonstrate traits such as strength, humor and mental sharpness – all of which would prove invaluable during whatever the next four years throws our way.

    This November, voters will consider a diverse spread of candidates, from city mayor to president, each with important responsibilities.

    National, state and local governments work together to shape our perceptions, good or bad, about the role public policy plays in our lives – and I’d encourage voters to pay attention to candidates at both the top of the ballot and further down.

    Zoe Nemerever does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Local government controls your roads, schools and utilities − but that doesn’t mean the US president doesn’t touch your life in important ways – https://theconversation.com/local-government-controls-your-roads-schools-and-utilities-but-that-doesnt-mean-the-us-president-doesnt-touch-your-life-in-important-ways-237939

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why do people still back Trump, after everything? 5 things to understand about MAGA supporters’ thinking

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Alex Hinton, Distinguished Professor of Anthropology; Director, Center for the Study of Genocide and Human Rights, Rutgers University – Newark

    Supporters watch Donald Trump speak at a rally in Uniondale, N.Y., on Sept. 18, 2024. Spencer Platt/Getty Images

    For many people, especially those leaning left, Donald Trump’s disqualifications to be president seem obvious, prompting some to question: How could anyone still vote for Trump?

    Some of the evidence Trump’s critics cite include his two impeachments, multiple criminal indictments at the state and federal levels and a felony conviction. Opponents also say that Trump is a threat to democracy, a misogynist, racist, a serial liar and a rapist.

    About 78% of Democrats and Democrat-leaning independent voters say that Trump broke the law when he allegedly tried to overturn the 2020 election results. But less than half of Republicans think he did anything wrong.

    I am an anthropologist of peace and conflict, and I have been studying what I call the Trumpiverse since 2015, when Trump descended a golden escalator and announced his candidacy for president. I later wrote a related book in 2021, called “It Can Happen Here.”

    More recently, I have been examining toxic polarization – and ways to stop it. Many efforts to reduce people’s polarized views begin with an injunction: Listen and understand.

    To this end, I have attended Trump rallies, populist and nonpartisan events and meetings where Democrats and Republicans connect and talk. Along the way, I have spoken with Trump supporters ranging from the Make America Great Again, or MAGA, faithful to moderate “hold the nose and vote for him” conservatives.

    And indeed, many on the left fail to understand who Trump voters are and how they vary. Trump’s base cannot simply be dismissed as racist “deplorables”, as Hillary Clinton famously said in 2016, or as country bumpkins in red MAGA hats. Trump voters trend older, white, rural, religious and less educated. But they include others outside those demographic groups.

    Many people have thoughtful reasons for voting for Trump, even if their reasoning – as is also true for those on the left – is often inflamed by populist polarizers and media platforms.

    Here are five key lines of reasoning that, in varying combinations, inform Trump voters’ choice.

    Donald Trump speaks at a rally on July 31, 2024, in Harrisburg, Pa.
    Spencer Platt/Getty Images

    1. Media distortion

    Where those on the left see Trump’s many failings, those on the right may see what some political observers call Trump Derangement Syndrome, sometimes simply called TDS.

    According to this line of argument, the left-leaning media dissects Trump’s every word, and the media then distorts what he says. I have found that some Trump supporters think that people who feed too much on this allegedly biased media diet can get TDS and develop a passionate, perhaps illogical dislike of Trump.

    I have also heard hardcore Trump supporters argue, with no evidence, that such “fake news” media outlets, like CNN, are part of a larger deep state plot of the federal government to upend the will of the people. This plot, according to those who propagate it, includes not just leftists, government bureaucrats and people who claim to be Republicans, but really aren’t, but also people in law enforcement.

    Some Trump supporters also see merit in his contention that he is being wrongly persecuted, just like some see the Jan. 6 defendants being persecuted.

    2. Bread on the table, money in the bank

    “Are you better off than you were four years ago?”

    For many Trump voters, the answer to Ronald Reagan’s famous question is clear: “No.” They accurately remember Trump’s term as one of tax cuts, economic growth and stock market highs.

    It is true that overall employment numbers and average pay went up under President Joe Biden. But for some Trump supporters, that economic boost pales in comparison to the massive surge in inflation during Biden’s term, with prices rising almost 20%. While the inflation rate has recently abated, prices remain high – as voters are reminded of every day at the grocery store.

    Polls also show that Trump has a strong lead over Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris on how they would handle the economy, which is a top concern for voters, especially Republicans.

    3. A border invasion

    Another reason some Americans want to vote for Trump: immigration.

    Like inflation, the number of people illegally crossing the border soared under Biden.

    This massive influx of “illegal aliens,” as Trump calls them, dropped to its lowest level in four years in July 2024. This happened after the Biden administration made it harder for immigrants to apply for asylum at the U.S.-Mexico border, a policy measure that is in line with many Republicans’ approach.

    In 2022, a poll found 7 out of 10 Republicans worried that “open borders” were part of a Democratic plot to expand liberals’ power by replacing conservative white people with nonwhite foreigners.

    Trump has played into some people’s mostly false concerns that immigrants living illegally in the U.S. are freeloaders and won’t assimilate, as illustrated by recent – untrue – allegations that immigrants are eating pets in Ohio.

    In 2022, 82% of Republicans said they viewed immigration as a “very important” issue. Trump continues to tout his proposed solution, which includes shutting the border, building a wall and deporting 11 million immigrants who are living in the U.S. without legal authorization.

    People attend a Donald Trump rally in Uniondale, N.Y., on Sept. 18, 2024.
    Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

    4. A proven record

    Some Trump voters simply compare the records of Trump and Biden-Harris and find that the tally tilts firmly toward Trump.

    And it’s not just about the economy and immigration.

    There were no new wars under Trump. Biden-Harris, in contrast, are saddled with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Israel’s invasion of the Gaza Strip. Trump supporters’ perception is that American taxpayers foot a large portion of the bill, even though other countries are also giving money to Ukraine, and Israel is actually buying weapons from the U.S.

    I have found that Trump supporters also think he is better suited to deal with the rising power and threat of China.

    5. The MAGA bull in a china shop

    While some Harris supporters lament Trump’s destruction of democracy and decency in politics, I have found that Trump voters see a charismatic MAGA bull in a china shop.

    It is precisely because Trump is an unrelenting pugilist, or a fighter – as he showed when he raised a fist after the assassination attempt against him in July – that he should be elected, his supporters believe.

    Some even view him as savior – who will save the U.S. from a “radical left” apocalypse.

    For such Trump stalwarts, MAGA is not simply a slogan. In the Trumpiverse, it is a movement to save an America that is on the brink of failure.

    Alexander Hinton receives funding from the Rutgers-Newark Center for the Study of Politics and Race in America.

    – ref. Why do people still back Trump, after everything? 5 things to understand about MAGA supporters’ thinking – https://theconversation.com/why-do-people-still-back-trump-after-everything-5-things-to-understand-about-maga-supporters-thinking-239031

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What is ‘dark money’ political spending, and how does it affect US politics?

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Emily Lau, Staff Attorney, State Democracy Research Initiative, University of Wisconsin-Madison

    Where exactly did this money come from? Manuel Augusto Moreno/Moment via Getty Images

    Every campaign season brings renewed attention to the amount of money influencing American politics, and who is spending it, and for what purposes. In particular, people are concerned about what is called “dark money.” For instance, recent media coverage has pointed to escalating dark money spending on both the Democratic and Republican sides.

    The term sounds scary and raises the specter of shadowy people manipulating the nation’s politics. As a researcher who studies the American democratic system, I think it’s worthwhile to unpack what dark money is, what concerns it raises and what might be done to address it.

    Unidentified political donors

    When people talk about dark money, they’re usually referring to money spent on elections that comes from sources that cannot be identified.

    Federal and state laws impose some limits on contributions and require some political contributions and expenditures to be publicly disclosed. Candidates for federal office, for example, must report their campaign donors to the Federal Election Commission. The FEC makes these reports available to the public.

    Likewise, super PACs – groups permitted to spend unlimited amounts on independent electoral advocacy – must also report some information about donations, such as the identities of and amounts given by people who donate more than US$200 in a year.

    But campaign finance disclosure laws have gaps.

    Federal law, for example, allows certain entities – most notably nonprofits designated as “social welfare” organizations or trade associations under Sections 501(c)(4) and 501(c)(6) of the tax code – to raise and spend large sums on electoral advocacy without disclosing their donors.

    A CBS News investigation into dark money in U.S. politics.

    Another dark money pathway involves making donations to super PACs through shell companies, which are companies set up for the purpose of hiding the financial activities of other people or groups – in this case, political contributions. Although super PACs are legally required to report who they received the contributions from, if the funds come from shell companies, the super PACs may not know and are not required to disclose where the money actually came from. That information remains hidden from public view.

    A lack of donor transparency raises multiple concerns. Voters may have a harder time assessing the validity of political messages or discerning whether candidates may be beholden to certain interests. Regulators and watchdogs can have trouble detecting illegal activity, such as campaign spending by foreign nationals. And unscrupulous people and groups can spread misinformation or destructive rhetoric without being identified or held accountable.

    Undisclosed political expenditures

    While discussions of dark money usually focus on where it comes from, the term can also describe a lack of transparency about where it goes.

    Under federal law, campaign committees must report their direct disbursements, such as payments to vendors or consultants. These vendors and consultants, however, sometimes function as pass-through entities that receive campaign funds and then purchase undisclosed goods and services. And any of these recipients can be set up as shell companies, making the flow of funds even more difficult to track.

    For instance, Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and the Democratic National Committee faced FEC complaints for failing to disclose indirect payments made through the campaign’s law firm to researchers who compiled a dossier on Donald Trump’s Russia ties. The Clinton campaign and the DNC paid a fine to settle the matter without conceding wrongdoing.

    But enforcement can be difficult. In 2020, a watchdog group filed an FEC complaint alleging that Trump’s reelection campaign directed hundreds of millions of dollars to a pass-through entity in an improper effort to hide its expenditures – which included payments to top advisers and family members that, by law, would have otherwise been disclosed. The FEC dismissed the Trump complaint in 2022 when commissioners deadlocked 3-3 on whether to pursue it.

    As with a lack of donor disclosure, a lack of expenditure disclosure can deprive voters and regulators of valuable information. Lack of transparency can also invite questionable campaign practices, such as using donated funds in ways that enrich candidates, campaign staff or their associates.

    It can be hard to determine who is really behind shell companies and campaign donors.
    nicodemos/E+ via Getty Images

    Stalled federal reforms

    Proponents of greater campaign finance transparency have had little success pressing federal lawmakers and regulators to address dark money.

    Since 2010, congressional Democrats have been introducing legislation known as the DISCLOSE Act. Among other requirements, it would make dark money groups reveal major donors and restrict the use of shell companies to conceal donors’ identities. While versions of the bill have passed the House, they have repeatedly stalled in the Senate. Opponents maintain that these measures would infringe people’s privacy rights and chill constitutionally protected speech.

    Advocates have also made minimal headway persuading Congress or federal agencies to adopt new disclosure regulations or tighten enforcement.

    The FEC, which has an even partisan split among its six commissioners, has often been unable to get a majority to agree to take action. And the FEC’s most notable recent decisions have been to loosen, rather than tighten, campaign finance rules. Congress has barred the Securities and Exchange Commission from establishing new political spending disclosure rules for public companies, although some companies self-report more than the law requires.

    States’ efforts to curb dark money

    Dark money is also an issue in state and local elections. The strength of state and local transparency laws varies. Because these elections typically receive less attention and scrutiny than federal elections, money sometimes flows even more opaquely.

    Unlike the federal government, a number of states and localities have bolstered their disclosure rules in recent years. Arizona, California, Colorado, New Jersey and Washington, for example, have passed new laws requiring more donor information, including about the original sources of funds that are transferred between multiple groups before being spent on electioneering.

    Meanwhile, states such as Iowa, Massachusetts and Texas have adopted laws requiring campaigns to provide details about how consultants and vendors spend the campaign’s funds.

    Even in these states, disclosure gaps remain. The reality is that efforts to improve transparency can seem like a game of whack-a-mole: Each new round of regulations tends to generate new workarounds. But the experiences in these states and elsewhere may offer models and lessons for other jurisdictions.

    The current Supreme Court has given mixed messages about campaign finance transparency.
    Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States

    Constitutional questions

    Beyond the political challenge of getting stronger transparency regulations adopted, proponents of such measures also face potential constitutional challenges by opponents of disclosure.

    In multiple cases, including the 2010 Citizens United v. FEC ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected First Amendment claims brought by political spenders who wished to conceal their identities. In that case, the court observed that transparency helps the electorate “make informed decisions and give proper weight to different speakers and messages.”

    However, the Supreme Court has also recognized a right to engage in anonymous political speech. And in recent years, the court’s conservative supermajority has become somewhat more skeptical of disclosure rules, including in a 2021 case, Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta, which overturned a state law requiring charities to identify major donors. In her dissent, Justice Sonia Sotomayor warned that the court’s argument could be applied to campaign finance disclosure regulations.

    Therefore, even if public momentum builds for stronger transparency regulations, the Supreme Court could stand as an obstacle to such reforms.

    Emily Lau does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. What is ‘dark money’ political spending, and how does it affect US politics? – https://theconversation.com/what-is-dark-money-political-spending-and-how-does-it-affect-us-politics-236294

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Can you change your personality? Psychology research says yes, by tweaking what you think and do

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Shannon Sauer-Zavala, Associate Professor of Psychology & Licensed Clinical Psychologist, University of Kentucky

    Making a personality change could help you live the life you want. lechatnoir/E+ via Getty Images

    Have you ever taken a personality test? If you’re like me, you’ve consulted BuzzFeed and you know exactly which Taylor Swift song “perfectly matches your vibe.”

    It might be obvious that internet quizzes are not scientific, but many of the seemingly serious personality tests used to guide educational and career choices are also not supported by research. Despite being a billion-dollar industry, commercial personality testing used by schools and corporations to funnel people into their ideal roles do not predict career success.

    Beyond their lack of scientific support, the most popular approaches to understanding personality are problematic because they assume your traits are static – that is, you’re stuck with the personality you’re born with. But modern personality science studies find that traits can and do change over time.

    In addition to watching my own personality change over time from messy and lazy to off the charts in conscientiousness, I’m also a personality change researcher and clinical psychologist. My research confirms what I saw in my own development and in my patients: People can intentionally shape the traits they need to be successful in the lives they want. That’s contrary to the popular belief that your personality type places you in a box, dictating that you choose partners, activities and careers according to your traits.

    What personality is and isn’t

    According to psychologists, personality is your characteristic way of thinking, feeling and behaving.

    Are you a person who tends to think about situations in your life more pessimistically, or are you a glass-half-full kind of person?

    Do you tend to get angry when someone cuts you off in traffic, or are you more likely to give them the benefit of the doubt – maybe they’re rushing to the hospital?

    Do you wait until the last minute to complete tasks, or do you plan ahead?

    You can think of personality as a collection of labels that summarize your responses to questions like these. Depending on your answers, you might be labeled as optimistic, empathetic or dependable.

    Research suggests that all these descriptive labels can be summarized into five overarching traits – what psychologists creatively refer to as the “Big Five.”

    As early as the 1930s, psychologists literally combed through a dictionary to pull out all the words that describe human nature and sorted them in categories with similar themes. For example, they grouped words like “kind,” “thoughtful” and “friendly” together. They found that thousands of words could be accounted for by sorting them between five traits: neuroticism, extroversion, conscientiousness, agreeableness and openness.

    Personality traits can be sorted into the ‘Big Five’ categories. They describe how you act but not necessarily the essence of who you are.
    Whale Design/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    What personality is not: People often feel protective about their personality – you may view it as the core of who you are. According to scientific definitions, however, personality is not your likes, dislikes or preferences. It’s not your sense of humor. It’s not your values or what you think is important in life.

    In other words, shifting your Big Five traits does not change the core of who you are. It simply means learning to respond to situations in life with different thoughts, feelings and behaviors.

    Can you change your personality?

    Can personality change? Remember, personality is a person’s characteristic way of thinking, feeling and behaving. And while it might sound hard to change personality, people change how they think, feel and behave all the time.

    Suppose you’re not super dependable. If you start to think “being on time shows others that I respect them,” begin to feel pride when you arrive to brunch before your friends, and engage in new behaviors that increase your timeliness – such as getting up with an alarm, setting appointment reminders and so on – you are embodying the characteristics of a reliable person. If you maintain these changes to your thinking, emotions and behaviors over time – voila! – you are reliable. Personality: changed.

    Data confirms this idea. In general, personality changes across a person’s life span. As people age, they tend to experience fewer negative emotions and more positive ones, are more conscientious, place greater emphasis on positive relationships and are less judgmental of others.

    There is variability here, though. Some people change a lot and some people hold pretty steady. Moreover, studies, including my own, that test whether personality interventions change traits over time find that people can speed up the process of personality change by making intentional tweaks to their thinking and behavior. These tweaks can lead to meaningful change in less than 20 weeks, instead of 20 years.

    Identifying patterns that your thoughts frequently fall into can be the first step toward making a change.
    Maskot via Getty Images

    Cultivating personality traits that serve you best

    The good news is that these cognitive-behavioral techniques are relatively simple, and you don’t need to visit a therapist if that’s not something you’re into.

    The first component involves changing your thinking patterns – this is the cognitive piece. You need to become aware of your thoughts to determine whether they’re keeping you stuck acting in line with a particular trait. For example, if you find yourself thinking “people are only looking out for themselves,” you are likely to act defensively around others.

    The behavioral component involves becoming aware of your current action tendencies and testing out new responses. If you are defensive around other people, they will probably respond negatively to you. When they withdraw or snap at you, for example, it then confirms your belief that you can’t trust others. By contrast, if you try behaving more openly – perhaps sharing with a co-worker that you’re struggling with a task – you have the opportunity to see whether that changes the way others act toward you.

    These cognitive-behavioral strategies are so effective for nudging personality because personality is simply your characteristic way of thinking and behaving. Consistently making changes to your perspective and actions can lead to lasting habits that ultimately result in crafting the personality you desire.

    Shannon Sauer-Zavala receives funding from that National Institute of Mental Health to support her research.

    – ref. Can you change your personality? Psychology research says yes, by tweaking what you think and do – https://theconversation.com/can-you-change-your-personality-psychology-research-says-yes-by-tweaking-what-you-think-and-do-237190

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: America is increasingly dependent on foreign doctors − but their path to immigration is getting harder

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Selma Hedlund, Postdoctoral Associate at Center of Forced Displacement, Boston University

    For immigrant doctors, the path to permanent residency is fleeting and far from guaranteed. Stefano Spicca/iStock via Getty Images

    The COVID-19 pandemic exposed a pressing issue: The U.S. health care system is increasingly dependent on immigrant physicians, but it’s becoming harder for aspiring ones to work and settle in the U.S.

    Today, 1 in 4 doctors are foreign-born, international medical graduates. Their numbers are even larger in underserved areas – essentially, low-income, more rural parts of the country where many American doctors don’t want to work.

    This immigrant workforce is key to offsetting a dire physician shortage. The need for more doctors is due, in part, to America’s growing and aging population; U.S.-born doctors’ unwillingness to move to poorer and more rural areas; and U.S.-born doctors’ lack of interest in going into primary care, which can be less lucrative and prestigious than other areas of medicine.

    As a result, immigrant doctors have become indispensable in hospitals and clinics across the nation. But while they’re in demand, more and more foreign doctors are starting to see the immigration process as a risky endeavor.

    During the COVID-19 pandemic, I wrote my dissertation about how immigrant physicians navigate the U.S. immigration system and foreign licensing procedures. My interviewees described how a combination of stricter immigration policies and more competition for residency spots have made the U.S. a less feasible destination.

    Visa vicissitudes

    U.S. visas can be categorized into two categories: immigrant and nonimmigrant. Nonimmigrant visas, such as tourist, student or exchange visitors visas, prohibit holders from having what’s called “immigrant intent,” meaning that they don’t plan to use their visas to permanently stay in the U.S.

    In order for immigrant doctors to be licensed to practice in the U.S., they need to complete licensing exams. They also need to obtain clinical experience in the U.S. This can be completed while on a tourist visa or a student visa, which are relatively easy to obtain.

    However, all immigrant physicians – even if they’re certified specialists in their home country – need to get accepted into and complete a U.S. residency program in order to practice in the U.S. as specialists. These are intensive, supervised training programs that can last up to seven years.

    Nonetheless, a majority of immigrant doctors in the U.S. will complete their American residencies on nonimmigrant visas, even though by this point in the process they quite clearly have immigrant intent.

    It wasn’t always this way.

    There’s a special work visa called the H-1B that allows for both immigrant and nonimmigrant intent. A few decades ago, many immigrant physicians entered residency programs that sponsored H-1B visas, which served as stepping stones to green cards.

    But drastic restrictions to the number of people admitted into this visa program, coupled with cuts in graduate medical education funding, have directed most foreign-born doctors to what’s called a J-1 exchange visitors visa.

    Challenges of working in underserved areas

    The J-1 not only explicitly prohibits immigration intent, it also requires that doctors return to their home country for at least two years upon completing American residency training.

    Foreign-born doctors nonetheless pursue the J-1 because there’s the opportunity to obtain a waiver, with limited slots that will allow them to remain in the U.S. and adjust to an H-1B visa. If selected for the waiver program, they must commit to a minimum of three years of service in a designated medically underserved area in the U.S.

    Through a special waiver, immigrant doctors can work at rural hospitals that are underfunded and understaffed.
    Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images

    While this system can offer short-term relief to physician shortages, it can also lead to exploitation.

    As one interviewee told me, “We hear very scary things about the J-1 waiver. The employers can take advantage and make you work more and pay less.”

    For the duration of the waiver program, immigrant physicians have minimal ability to change employers without violating the conditions of the waiver – and their path to immigration. Underserved areas are often understaffed and underresourced, which can make for stressful working conditions.

    Forced to go above and beyond

    The challenges don’t end with the visa process. There are financial burdens as well.

    International medical graduates often spend tens of thousands of dollars to pay for U.S. medical licensing exams, multiple visa applications, international travel and lodging, residency and green card applications.

    They also spend months in unpaid positions in hospital settings to gain the U.S. clinical experience that’s required to apply for residency. Then, in order to match into residency, immigrant physicians typically need to outperform their American peers on exams. They also need to have more prestigious research qualifications and stronger recommendation letters. Still, immigrant doctors are more likely to match into less competitive residency programs.

    While interviewing immigrant physicians, many testified to the competition getting steeper in recent years.

    “I told a friend, if you don’t have scores in upper 90s in all the exams and you’re not a green card holder, don’t even bother,” an Indian physician who immigrated 20 years ago explained to me. “It’s so tough.”

    Stuck in limbo

    Over the course of my research I noticed a trend: Many international medical graduates will come to the U.S. on student visas to pursue U.S. graduate degrees in health-related fields, such as public health, before they even start the licensing process. This helps them get their foot in the door into a very complicated immigration system and build a stronger resume as they prepare for residency applications. It’s also another expensive investment.

    But even those who match into and complete residency won’t necessarily be able to stay and work in America.

    Those with positive experiences from working in underserved communities often struggle to remain in their positions after their waiver contracts are fulfilled because of the green card backlog.

    The average immigrant’s wait time for a green card has doubled since the national quota system was introduced in the early 1990s.

    By 2018, an applicant had to wait an average of 18 months to get approved for their green card and another five years and eight months to receive it. The COVID-19 pandemic introduced new barriers and delays.

    Indians, one of the biggest nationalities among immigrant physicians, have the longest wait times under the current system, sometimes waiting up to a decade to obtain the security of permanent residence. Among the 1.8 million cases currently stuck in the employment-based green card backlog, 63% are Indian nationals.

    A pending green card application is often formally considered abandoned if the applicant leaves the country, preventing people from visiting loved ones abroad for years.

    No fix on the horizon

    Despite frequent calls for change and reform, these bottlenecks continue to adversely affect both patients and doctors.

    While the current model has its benefits, it also reflects a trend in which much-needed immigrant professionals live in prolonged, demoralizing uncertainty. Work visas have been subject to increasing cuts and restrictions in recent years under both the Trump and Biden administrations. Conditions will likely worsen if Trump returns to office: The “Muslim ban” he enacted in 2017 adversely affected many immigrant doctors and their patients, and his calls for increased vetting will likely exacerbate existing barriers to legal immigration.

    A paradox has emerged: While the U.S. says it wants to attract and retain world class talent, its byzantine immigration system continually discourages potential hires.

    The doctors I interviewed gave a variety of reasons for wanting to work in the U.S., including better lifestyles and opportunities for professional development. But the complexity and sheer unwieldiness of the U.S. visa regime is causing the nation to lose skilled professionals to other countries with more streamlined processes.

    Selma Hedlund does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. America is increasingly dependent on foreign doctors − but their path to immigration is getting harder – https://theconversation.com/america-is-increasingly-dependent-on-foreign-doctors-but-their-path-to-immigration-is-getting-harder-229980

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Diet-related diseases are the No. 1 cause of death in the US – yet many doctors receive little to no nutrition education in med school

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Nathaniel Johnson, Assistant Professor of Nutrition and Dietetics, University of North Dakota

    Nearly 60% of respondents to one medical school survey said they received no nutritional education at all. Peter Dazeley/The Image Bank via Getty Images

    On television shows like “Grey’s Anatomy,” “The Resident” and “Chicago Med,” physicians seem to always have the right answer.

    But when it comes to nutrition and dietary advice, that may not be the case.

    One of us is an assistant professor of nutrition and dietetics; the other is a medical student with a master’s degree in nutrition.

    Both of us understand the powerful effects that food has on your health and longevity. A poor diet may lead to cardiovascular disease, diabetes, obesity and even psychological conditions like depression and anxiety. Diet-related diseases are the leading causes of death in the U.S., and a poor diet is responsible for more deaths than smoking.

    These health problems are not only common and debilitating, but expensive. Treating high blood pressure, diabetes and high cholesterol costs about US$400 billion per year. Within 25 years, those costs are expected to triple, to $1.3 trillion.

    These facts support the need for physicians to give accurate advice about diet to help prevent these diseases. But how much does a typical physician know about nutrition?

    The deficiencies in nutrition education happen at all levels of medical training.

    What doctors don’t know

    In a 2023 survey of more than 1,000 U.S. medical students, about 58% of respondents said they received no formal nutrition education while in medical school for four years. Those who did averaged about three hours of nutrition education per year.

    That is woefully short of the goals set by the U.S. Committee on Nutrition in Medical Education back in 1985: that med students should receive a total of 25 hours of nutrition education while in school – a little more than six hours per year.

    But a 2015 study showed only 29% of medical schools met this goal, and a 2023 study suggests the problem has become even worse – only 7.8% of med students reported 20 or more hours of nutrition education across all four years of med school. If this is representative of medical schools throughout the country, it has happened despite efforts to bolster nutrition education through numerous government initiatives.

    Not surprisingly, the lack of education has had a direct impact on physicians’ nutrition knowledge. In a study of 257 first- and second-year osteopathic medical students taking a nutrition knowledge quiz, more than half flunked the test. Prior to the test, more than half the students – 55% – felt comfortable counseling patients on nutrition.

    Unfortunately, this problem is not limited to U.S. medical schools. A 2018 global study concluded that no matter the country, nutrition education of med students is insufficient throughout the world.

    Bringing nutrition education back

    Even though evidence suggests that nutrition education can be effective, there are many reasons why it’s lacking. Medical students and physicians are some of the busiest people in society. The amount of information taught in medical curricula is often described as overwhelming – like drinking out of a fire hose.

    First- and second-year medical students focus on dense topics, including biochemistry, molecular biology and genetics, while they learn clinical skills such as interviewing patients and understanding heart and lung sounds. Third- and fourth-year students are practicing in clinics and hospitals as they learn from physicians and patients.

    As a result, their schedules are already jammed. There is no room for nutrition. And once they are physicians, it gets no better. Providing preventive care including nutrition counseling to patients would take them more than seven hours per week – and that’s not counting the time they would have to spend on continuing education to keep up with new findings in nutrition science.

    On top of that, the lack of nutrition education in medical schools has been attributed to a dearth of qualified instructors for nutrition courses, as most physicians do not understand nutrition well enough to teach it.

    Ironically, many medical schools are part of universities that have nutrition departments with Ph.D.-trained professors; those academicians could fill this gap by teaching nutrition to medical students. But those classes are often taught by physicians who may not have adequate nutrition training – which means truly qualified instructors, within reach of most medical schools, are left out of the process.

    This doctor said he learned virtually nothing about nutrition in medical school.

    Finding the right advice

    The best source of nutrition information, whether for medical students or the general public, is a registered dietitian, certified nutrition specialist or some other type of nutrition professional with multiple degrees and certification. They study for years and record many practice hours in order to give dietary advice.

    Although anyone can make an appointment with a nutrition professional for dietary counseling, typically a referral from a health care provider like a physician is needed for the appointment to be covered by insurance. So seeing a physician or other primary care provider is often a step before meeting with a nutrition professional.

    This extra step might be one reason why many people look elsewhere, such as on their phones, for nutrition advice. However, the worst place to look for accurate nutrition information is social media. There, about 94% of posts about nutrition and diet are of low value – either inaccurate or lacking adequate data to back up the claim.

    Keep in mind that anyone can post nutrition advice on social media, regardless of their qualifications. Good dietary advice is individualized and takes into account one’s age, sex, goals, body weight, goals and personal preferences. This complexity is tough to capture in a brief social media post.

    The good news is that nutrition education, when it occurs, is effective, and most medical students and physicians acknowledge the critical role nutrition plays in health. In fact, close to 90% of med students say nutrition education should be a mandatory part of medical school.

    We hope that nutrition education, after being devalued or ignored for decades, will soon be an integral part of every medical school’s curriculum. But given its history and current status, this seems unlikely to happen anytime soon.

    In the meantime, those who want to learn more about a healthy diet should meet with a nutrition professional, or at the very least read the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans or the World Health Organization’s healthy diet recommendations.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Diet-related diseases are the No. 1 cause of death in the US – yet many doctors receive little to no nutrition education in med school – https://theconversation.com/diet-related-diseases-are-the-no-1-cause-of-death-in-the-us-yet-many-doctors-receive-little-to-no-nutrition-education-in-med-school-236217

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Kenya’s whistleblowers are key to fighting corruption: how a new law could protect them

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Gedion Onyango, Research Fellow, Firoz Lalji Institute for Africa, London School of Economics and Political Science

    Kenya has published a draft bill outlining protections for whistleblowers. Long in the making, the Whistleblower Protection Bill 2024 could help to encourage disclosures in a country where 86% of the respondents to a 2023 survey feared what might happen to them if they reported corruption cases. Gedion Onyango, who researches public accountability reforms, anti-corruption and whistleblowing reforms, sets out what protections are needed and how to change public mindsets.

    What is whistleblowing?

    Whistleblowing is disclosing information about behaviour or misconduct that could harm the public interest – the overall welfare of a society.

    Whistleblowing is primarily associated with disclosing corruption in state institutions. Because the private sector has become a partner in public service and national development processes, emerging laws like Kenya’s whistleblower protection bill and existing ones like Botswana’s Whistleblower Protection Act 2016 have been designed also to expose activities of companies and institutions that directly affect public affairs.

    Several key conditions must be met for whistleblowing to be effective.



    Read more:
    Corruption in South Africa: would paying whistleblowers help?

    Firstly, the society needs to broadly agree on what misconduct is. People should feel obliged to flag and address wrongdoing, and know what is expected when such information is disclosed. Essentially, the disclosure must be made in good faith.

    Secondly, there must be an authority that is expected to and is willing to take action after receiving such information.

    Thirdly, clear procedures or legal processes should be in place for receiving the information and determining the truth.

    The person disclosing the information must find it easy to report, besides having sufficient evidence to support their claims. A thoroughly bureaucratic way of receiving information about wrongdoing is more likely to intimidate and discourage potential whistleblowers.

    Fourthly, a system should be in place to reward individuals who disclose wrongdoing. This could involve recognising their contribution to society or providing financial incentives, often a percentage of money recovered in cases of corruption and asset recovery. Not all countries have this provision. But having such a reward is not always enough. This has been shown in Nigeria, where whistleblowing is declining despite the reward of 5% of recovered funds.

    Finally, there needs to be trust in the authority and the process for it to work.

    Why the focus on whistleblowers?

    Whistleblowers are important sources of information about misconduct, dishonesty and unethical behaviour that would otherwise remain concealed from the public. They are critical in promoting human rights, fighting corruption and addressing governance misconduct and inequalities.

    Many infamous scandals around the world have been brought to light by individuals who disclosed the wrongdoing. These include Kenya’s Anglo Leasing scandal.

    Whistleblowing is essential to ethical public leadership. It is no accident that many developing countries are now enacting laws to encourage and protect whistleblowers. With new laws in Kenya, whistleblowers would no longer have to primarily defend themselves against non-disclosure clauses that outlaw disclosures of a potential wrongdoing. Whistleblowers have previously been targeted by public organisations for releasing information in an unprocedural manner.

    You want to blow the whistle. What next?

    Potential whistleblowers can use internal or external mechanisms to disclose wrongdoing. The choice of mechanism will depend on the whistleblower’s confidence or history with these mechanisms.

    Studies have shown that internal whistleblowing is less desirable, and most whistleblowers prefer anonymous external whistleblowing channels that could prompt an investigation by an authority.



    Read more:
    South Africa’s corporate whistleblowers don’t get enough protection: what needs to change

    What protections should whistleblowers expect?

    Effective whistleblower protection mechanisms include protecting the identities of whistleblowers until the responsible authority has checked that there was wrongdoing.

    Whistleblowers should be protected from retaliation or harm, including social victimisation, physical attacks and disciplinary actions.

    The law should ensure that an insider whistleblower, such as an employee, is protected from being intimidated, disciplined or removed from their position. This should be for a long enough time (for example, at least five years), even if the case ultimately collapses, as often happens.

    In other words, the person should be protected from any loss, including damages that would affect their mental health or their job. This is typical of legislation globally.

    In today’s age of social media, the laws against defamation should be applied strictly to guard against online harassment.

    What would a forward-looking whistleblower policy look like?

    It’s important that whistleblower protection policies are understood and accepted by everyone. The process should start with extensive consultation. It should involve authorities such as religious groups, traditional leaders and government administrators at the lowest levels.

    Including whistleblowing in the country’s school, college and professional curriculum would increase awareness and improve social acceptance.

    It’s often the case that whistleblowers are seen as betrayers or snitches rather than as courageous defenders of public interest and ethical members of society. The reward system for whistleblowers should be included in prestigious national honours such as the Presidential Award.

    Gedion Onyango receives funding from ESRC. He is also affiliated with Afrobarometer East Africa

    – ref. Kenya’s whistleblowers are key to fighting corruption: how a new law could protect them – https://theconversation.com/kenyas-whistleblowers-are-key-to-fighting-corruption-how-a-new-law-could-protect-them-239647

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: South African women face exclusion from society due to gender-based violence – how they’re fighting back

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Amanda Gouws, Professor of Political Science and Chair of the South African Research Initiative in Gender Politics, Stellenbosch University

    When South Africa became a democracy in 1994, a primary goal was to grant citizenship rights to all its people, in particular, to give the majority black South Africans rights they had been denied during colonialism and apartheid. This included the right to vote.

    Apartheid segregated the population into ethnic groups. All but people classified as white were stripped of their rights. The 1996 constitution conferred upon citizens civil liberties such as the right to vote, movement, association and free speech as well as substantive rights such as access to land, health, education and employment.

    But, as I argue in the Palgrave Handbook of Gender and Citizenship, full citizenship is about more than a legal status that grants rights. Full citizenship also means being able to fully participate in a society.

    Based on my research into South African politics and gender politics over the past three decades I argue in a recent chapter that women in South Africa don’t enjoy full citizenship because they face endemic gender-based violence.

    Sexual violence against women has become normalised in South Africa. Everyday spaces are filled with violence, as indicated by the South African Police Service’s quarterly crime statistics.

    I conclude in the book chapter that people who feel excluded turn to protest to claim their rights as citizens. In doing so they become activist citizens.

    Acts of citizenship can occur in many different places – on streets, in courts, at borders, or even through media. They can happen on different scales, from local community action to international movements. These acts may involve protests, organising campaigns, or using digital media to spread awareness. People engaging in these acts might demand a wide range of rights, including political, social, sexual, ecological, or cultural rights.



    Read more:
    Gender apartheid: oppression of women should be made a crime against humanity – feminist academic explains why

    While legal frameworks to enhance citizenship have changed over the past 30 years in South Africa, deep-seated inequalities and exclusions persist. Law reform cannot address high levels of unemployment (that need to be rectified through economic growth), neither can it address poverty that is endemic because of the legacies of apartheid, such as the exclusion from decent education and health care.

    Acts of citizenship – whether through protest (such as service delivery protest), art, or everyday actions – continue to play a crucial role in expanding the boundaries of who is considered a citizen and what rights citizens can claim.

    By understanding citizenship as something that is actively performed and claimed, rather than simply granted, society can better appreciate the ongoing struggles for equality and recognition.

    Acts of citizenship

    Emotions play a significant role in these citizenship actions, a concept known as “affective citizenship”. Expressions of fear, happiness, loneliness, anger, or grief can all be part of how people assert their rights and demand recognition. These emotional displays can be disruptive or more conventional, but they all focus on exclusions from citizenship.

    Some acts of citizenship involve a “politics of refusal” – rejecting unfair conditions or norms. This refusal can expose hidden issues within citizenship, such as specific forms of gendered violence or discrimination. By disrupting “business as usual”, these acts force society to confront uncomfortable truths.

    It’s important to note that acts of citizenship aren’t always large-scale or dramatic. They can also involve everyday actions that challenge norms or assert rights in smaller ways. What matters is that these acts transform the actors from passive subjects into active citizens claiming their rights.

    Examples include the #EndRapeCulture campaign of 2016, when women protested against pervasive sexual violence on university campuses. At the same time, transgender students also protested against marginalisation.

    Both groups of students used naked protests to show their refusal to be treated as though they were not citizens. Through their campaign, the students rejected behaviour and attitudes that normalise sexual violence on campuses.

    Women students disrupted public spaces by protesting topless or in their underwear, sometimes brandishing sjamboks (plastic whips). These actions expressed anger at university authorities’ failure to address sexual violence. The activists were refusing to be treated as though they were not citizens.

    By using their bodies in these acts of citizenship the protesters made visible the rage many South African women feel about sexual violence committed with seeming impunity. They highlighted how women’s bodies are vulnerable to violence due to neglect by authorities in implementing their own laws, such as the Sexual Offences Act and the Domestic Violence Act.



    Read more:
    Victory for women’s rights in Ghana as affirmative action law is passed – what must happen next

    For its part the Trans Collective, a group of transgender students at the University of Cape Town, used a provocative art intervention to highlight the erasure or the making invisible of transgender experiences within the broader student movement during the same 2016 period.

    They smeared red paint on photographs at an exhibit about student activism and used their naked, paint-covered bodies to block the entrance of the art gallery at the university to force visitors to confront the physical reality of how transgender rights are often “trampled” or ignored, even within progressive movements.

    Impact

    Acts of citizenship – whether through naked protests, art interventions, or other forms of activism – serve multiple purposes:

    • They make visible groups and issues that are overlooked or deliberately ignored.

    • They challenge conventional understandings of how citizens should behave or what citizenship looks like.

    • They create new spaces for political action and discourse.

    • They force society and authorities to confront uncomfortable truths about exclusion and violence.

    • They assert the agency of marginalised groups in defining and claiming their rights.

    Amanda Gouws receives funding from the NRF through her SARChI Chair in Gender Politics.

    – ref. South African women face exclusion from society due to gender-based violence – how they’re fighting back – https://theconversation.com/south-african-women-face-exclusion-from-society-due-to-gender-based-violence-how-theyre-fighting-back-237493

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Ontario’s closure of youth detention facilities has not resulted in more support for young people

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Jessica Evans, Assistant Professor, Criminology, Toronto Metropolitan University

    The closure of youth detention centres is a positive development. However, without adequate investment in community organizations that serve youth, it is a move set up to fail.
     (Shutterstock)

    The Ontario government said it would save $40 million per year by closing 26 youth detention centres in 2021, with promises to use those savings to support community services for youth.

    Framed as a cost-savings strategy aligned with the objectives of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, the money saved through the closures would be reinvested in community-based services and alternatives to youth detention.

    Since these closures, however, there has been no government reporting on where or when this $40 million will be reinvested. Meanwhile, organizations that serve youth report ongoing resource constraints.

    The closure of youth detention centres is a positive development. However, without adequate investment in community organizations that serve youth, it is a move set up to fail.



    Read more:
    Ontario closes half of its youth detention centres, leaving some young people in limbo

    Youth detention in Ontario

    Between 2018 and 2022, youth imprisonment numbers fell by around 50 per cent in Ontario. That continued a longer trend which has seen youth detention numbers fall by over 85 per cent over a 25-year period from 1997 to 2022. There has also been a recent uptick in youth imprisonment numbers, increasing from 9,654 in 2021-22 to 10,960 in 2022-23.

    Currently, Ontario’s youth prisons are at overcapacity, and the Sudbury youth detention centre is set to close next year.

    Several of the 26 youth detention centres that were closed were situated in northern Ontario. The Ontario Ombudsman, Nishnawbe Aski Nation and Grand Council Treaty #3 have said the abrupt closures would disproportionately impact Indigenous youth in detention.

    A CBC News report on overcrowding in Ontario’s youth detention centres.

    Community organizations overwhelmed

    We have examined the annual reports for 2019-24 from 46 organizations serving youth in the justice system from Kenora, Thunder Bay and Kingston where a significant number of the youth detention closures occurred.

    While many community organizations believe closing detention centres is a good long-term decision, there are many immediate concerns. We found consistent reporting of limited funding to support all youth in need.

    Organizations are impacted by record-high numbers of youth seeking access to services, with some organizations seeing a significant increase in the number of youth accessing their services — especially mental health programs. This has resulted in some organizations increasing the hours and days they are open to accommodate as many youth as possible, while also balancing staff burnout.

    Organizations did not report any substantial increase in funds from the government due to the closure of youth detention centres. Some noted challenges around fundraising, as many events were put on hold during the pandemic. This has resulted in organizations being unable to hire new staff or increase their services. In some cases this has also led to staff layoffs.

    Investing in community

    Deinstitutionalization refers to the period when institutions that housed or confined people with mental, cognitive, intellectual and physical disabilities were shut down, and people were released to live in communities.

    However, this process is often not met with sufficient funding for social supports. Inevitably, more people struggling with mental health end up in hospital emergency departments and in conflict with the law. This shift in responsibility has been referred to as transinstitutionalization.

    We have written about these trends in Ontario following the 2021 youth detention centre closures. Many of the young people in these centres struggle with mental health issues, neurodivergence and addictions.

    Significant investments in community supports are needed. Otherwise, many youth will continue to be funneled into other institutions, including hospitals and adult prisons.

    Since 2009, Ontario has seen a significant increase in hospital emergency room visits for mental health or substance-related concerns, especially among 14–21 year olds. Mental illness and drug dependence are some of the most prevailing health problems for criminalized Canadians. In a study of 1,770 young people in Québec, researchers found those struggling with alcohol or drugs and familial problems are more likely to face re-imprisonment.

    The Brookside Youth Justice Centre in Cobourg, Ont., was among the facilities the provincial government closed in March 2021.
    (Infrastructure Ontario)

    Helping youth in detention

    In 2023, a justice centre was opened in Kenora, and in 2024, funding was announced for child and youth mental health in Ontario. Yet, more support is needed. In many northern, rural and remote communities, services for children and youth with intensive needs simply do not exist.

    Youth face a number of additional barriers accessing support and treatment. These include long wait lists, overemphasis on illness-based and medical models, fragmented services, lack of developmentally and culturally appropriate services, and support that fails to consider the preferences and perspectives of youth and families.

    Strains on youth community supports are also felt in other provinces. Researchers interviewed youth justice community workers in Alberta who reported inadequate funding with impacts on resources for youth, including psychological support and the ability for staff to give enough attention and time to youth. Conditions also lead to staff burnout and exit from the sector altogether.

    The move to shift youth in the justice system away from confinement and towards community is a positive one. However, without investment in community-based service providers to support youth being transitioned out of custodial settings, it is unlikely that youth will thrive.

    Such failures are likely to increase acute mental health crises and demands on ambulatory care within general medicine and psychiatric hospitals. These gaps are also likely to increase the number of youth who will come into conflict with the criminal legal system as adults.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Ontario’s closure of youth detention facilities has not resulted in more support for young people – https://theconversation.com/ontarios-closure-of-youth-detention-facilities-has-not-resulted-in-more-support-for-young-people-238748

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: War affects girls and boys differently: what we found in our study of children in the DRC

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Roos van der Haer, Assistant professor of International Relations at the Institute of Political Science, Leiden University

    War has become a regular part of life for many children. Millions are victims and witnesses to the horrors of war. Recent estimates by researchers at the Peace Research Institute Oslo show that one in six children globally lives in a conflict zone, and Africa has the highest number of conflict-affected children.

    Many children are forced to become child soldiers. In other cases, such as during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, violence is aimed at children.

    In recent years, researchers from various fields have been studying the impact on children of growing up in war zones. Psychologists, for example, have been researching how conflict affects children’s mental health and behaviour. Economists have examined, among other issues, how growing up in these environments can limit future earning capabilitites. Other scholars have investigated how war shapes the long-term (political) attitudes of these children.

    Despite this growing body of research, we – a group of researchers who look into the causes and consequences of armed conflict for children – spotted two key gaps.



    Read more:
    Why some rebel groups force kids to fight: it depends on how they are funded

    First, much of the literature treats children’s experiences as if they were the same across different contexts. Few studies have considered the distinct experiences of girls as soldiers or how these differ from boys’ experiences.

    Second, while some research does explore these gender differences, it often focuses only on what happens during the conflict. It doesn’t consider how these experiences affect social relationships when the conflict ends. This is despite scholars and policymakers highlighting that girls’ experiences in war are fundamentally different from those of boys due to their different status and role in society.

    To address these gaps, we conducted an exploratory study from 2018 to 2019 on the experiences of boys and girls during conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). We studied how these gendered experiences might have affected their social relationships after the war. We interviewed 315 children aged between 12 and 18, with different levels of exposure to conflict. This included 186 respondents who had been involved in armed groups.

    Our recently published analysis revealed, as expected, that many children had witnessed or experienced various conflict-related events during their life-time. Most children reported seeing homes and property destroyed, and many had witnessed people being beaten or tortured by armed forces. Fewer children reported being sexually assaulted or raped or injured by weapons such as gunshots or stabbings, though sadly these were not rare occurrences either.

    We found that boys were generally more exposed to conflict than girls. This difference is largely due to boys being more involved with armed groups and more likely to perpetrate violence.

    These experiences of conflict can have lasting effects on children’s relationships with their families, friends, teachers and other important social groups. These connections are crucial for a child’s development and wellbeing.

    The differences between how boys and girls are affected are important considerations in building appropriate and effective psychosocial support programmes, with tools that address gender-specific needs in conflict or post-conflict situations.

    The study

    We gathered information from 315 structured interviews with Congolese children. Some of these boys and girls had been actively involved with armed groups in the eastern provinces of the DRC, while others had less direct exposure to the conflict.

    Conflict and human rights violations are widespread in the DRC. World Vision has called the decades-long conflict in the country “one of the worst child protection crises in the world”. Further, in a recent UN report on children and armed conflict, 3,377 verified grave violations against children in the DRC were identified. Of these, 46% involved the recruitment of children – some as young as five – by armed forces or groups.

    To examine how the armed conflict has affected Congolese boys and girls, we collected data between 2018 and 2019 in the South Kivu province of eastern DRC. We selected our participants with the help and consent of five local child protective organisations.

    Our analysis first explored what the boys and girls had experienced during conflict. Then we associated these gendered experiences with differences in social behaviour. We looked at whether there were gender differences in the children’s key relationships with family, friends (and other social groups) and their teachers.



    Read more:
    War devastates the lives of children: what the research tells us, and what can be done

    First, we found that war disrupted the family’s ability to provide safety and security, and both children and their caregivers might suffer from the emotional and psychological toll of the conflict. Our study found that girls tended to have a stronger relationship with their family and caretakers compared to boys after conflict. This aligns with previous research suggesting boys may face more challenges in maintaining family relationships. This is particularly the case for those that were active as child soldiers.

    Second, our analysis found that boys tended to have more diverse friendship networks than girls, even when comparing former boy soldiers to girl soldiers. Friendships are vital for a child’s wellbeing. Strong and diverse friendships are linked to better mental health, tolerance and understanding.

    Lastly, we looked at how gender and war experiences might affect relationships between students and teachers. Armed conflict can have devastating effects on the educational attainment of children. Education, however, supports war-affected children and adolescents in several important ways. Structured school rules, regulations and activities establish a sense of normality, which is crucial to the healing process and wellbeing of children. Overall, the children interviewed had a very positive view of their schools or training programmes. They felt safe, enjoyed spending time with their classmates and viewed their teachers as helpful and caring. However, girls – especially former girl soldiers – were significantly more likely than boys to report that their teachers were sympathetic and supportive.

    Why the findings matter

    Our research is one of the first to highlight significant differences in how boys and girls experience war, and how these experiences shape their social relationships.

    Addressing the differences in the needs of boys and girls after conflict not only improves their wellbeing, but is also likely to positively affect entire households, post-conflict regions and post-conflict countries. While our study sheds light on these differences, more research is needed to understand them in greater depth and, most importantly, to explain why they occur.

    Are these differences the result of psychological trauma, behavioural changes, or specific events that happened before or during the conflict? Moreover, we know very little about the long-term effects of war exposure – do these differences fade over time, or do they persist? And how can communities play a role in helping children to overcome these challenges? Do we also observe these differences in other conflicts at other periods?

    Understanding these differences is key for policymakers working to develop effective support programmes. Developing and increasing the availability of gender-responsive approaches can help strengthen the resilience of children after conflict. It may also work to strengthen their agency and resilience before conflict.

    We would like to thank the Gerda Henkel Stiftung for their extensive support of this research.

    Kathleen J. Brown does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. War affects girls and boys differently: what we found in our study of children in the DRC – https://theconversation.com/war-affects-girls-and-boys-differently-what-we-found-in-our-study-of-children-in-the-drc-238789

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Ludwig: in this comic BBC detective drama, puzzles are key to solving a murder – and understanding other people

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Deborah Klika/Klikova, Academic Portfolio Lead in Film & Television Production, University of Greenwich

    “It makes no sense. It’s impossible to solve” – so decries John “Ludwig” Taylor (David Mitchell) when trying to solve a murder using puzzle techniques in the new six-part BBC detective series, Ludwig.

    Each week puzzle designer John uses his skill to solve a crime. The show, also starring Anna Maxwell Martin, is guided by the thematic question: “how do we solve life’s puzzles?”

    John’s twin brother James (also portrayed by Mitchell) has suddenly gone missing. Enlisted by his sister-in-law Lucy (Maxwell Martin) to help find James, John reluctantly moves in with her and her son, leaving behind his ordered and self-contained (but lonely) world. Lucy wants John to pose as his brother to get some information from James’ office about a case that he was working on, which she suspects is related to his disappearance.

    What begins as a benign task very quickly escalates into John taking on James’ role as DCI James Taylor with Cambridge’s Major Crime Squad. John is swept along to crime scenes wherein he proceeds to solve murders using various puzzle techniques: logic puzzles, spot the difference, coincidences (three to be statistically relevant) and even reverse chess (where maths, probability and reason are used to determine prior moves in the middle of a chess game).

    The situation creates a bind plot. John wants the love of a family – specifically James’ family – but if he finds James, he will lose the “family” he has found. He is caught between his want (to have a family and Lucy) and his flaw (to learn to engage with people and the world).

    In my research, I posit that the bind plot is more prevalent in comedy than in drama. The tension between the want and the flaw is what underpins the comedy.

    John is navigating life on two levels: as an imposter detective and as a lonely man with signs of neurodiversity, such as an inability to understand and express feelings, and the need to follow certain rules. This results in misunderstanding and confusion for some of those around John, but not for John himself.

    The trailer for Ludwig.

    This duality is a common technique in comedy writing. As comic writer Steve Kaplan notes in The Hidden Tools of Comedy (2013), comedy emerges in the gap between the wavy-line character (the confused one) and the straight-line character (with a fixed view on life).

    What is interesting in Ludwig is John’s character arc. He begins as a straight-liner, but both his interactions with Lucy and her determination to find her husband force him to question his own life. His increasing confusion about, and interaction with, other people result in him becoming a wavy-line character.

    In my book Situation Comedy, Character, and Psychoanalysis (2019) I label the straight-liner as “echo characters”. That’s because they echo the unconscious fear of the main character, while maintaining their own fixed view of the world. It is because the main character is unconscious of this behaviour in themselves that such characters become “trapped” in their dynamic.

    These kinds of relationships define the sitcom. Think Phoebe in Friends, who echoes Rachel’s fear of commitment. In the first episode of Friends, Rachel is a runaway bride and Ross is recovering from a failed marriage, setting both these characters up as commitment-phobic. Phoebe, however, embraces life and all its alternatives, no matter how kooky or off-beat.

    Moss in The IT Crowd, echoes in a different way. His attention to detail and focus are the antithesis of Roy’s approach to work and Jen’s lack of knowledge of anything to do with IT. Roy fears work and Jen fears being exposed as ignorant, making Moss their perfect echo character.

    Maintaining the pretence

    The challenge for Ludwig’s head writer and creator, Mark Brotherhood, is to ensure that John can keep up the pretence of being his twin brother, while at the same time ensuring the pretence is believable.

    Brotherhood’s previous credits (Father Brown, Death in Paradise, Benidorm and Mount Pleasant) have shown his ability to merge genres such as crime and drama with comic moments.

    Set-ups such as characters having recently joined the crimes unit (who did not know James), and fleeting interactions with other characters (who do know James), save John from exposure. But they also distract the audience from the central question – “why don’t other people see that John is a different person?”. Instead we are drawn into the world of puzzles and how they can help solve crimes – and maybe help us solve problems in our own lives.

    Dramatic irony enables the audience to be in on the conceit. We know John is not James, but we also know that John is a puzzle master, and we revel in his ability to solve crimes. However, being in on the deception prompts the question: what will happen when John is exposed?

    In the vein of Poirot or Miss Marple, John is dedicated to solving murder through reasoned logic as well as increasingly astute observations of human behaviour – something he has avoided until now.

    Ludwig is an engaging (and at times puzzling) drama with comic moments, governed by a thematic premise – to understand puzzles is to understand life.


    Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

    Deborah Klika/Klikova does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Ludwig: in this comic BBC detective drama, puzzles are key to solving a murder – and understanding other people – https://theconversation.com/ludwig-in-this-comic-bbc-detective-drama-puzzles-are-key-to-solving-a-murder-and-understanding-other-people-239626

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: The rise of the ‘megapub’: is bigger really better?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rachael. E. Rees-Jones, Lecturer in Strategy, University of South Wales

    shutterstock niksdope/Shutterstock

    Wetherspoons has unveiled its latest venture at London’s Waterloo Station – a vast new pub called The Lion & The Unicorn. This so-called “Superspoons” is part of a growing trend in the UK’s hospitality industry, where ever-larger venues are reshaping traditional experiences.

    With its prime location and expansive layout of 5,000 sq ft and almost 600 seats, the venue’s opening marks what some business commentators are describing as the dawn of the “megapub” era, where bigger seems to mean better for chains like Wetherspoons.

    Megapubs are designed to offer more than just a quick pint. These vast, multi-purpose venues aim to cater to a variety of needs throughout the day, from morning coffee and business lunches to evening meals and live entertainment. The inclusion of extensive seating, diverse menus and designated zones for different activities – such as socialising or working on a laptop – aim to attract a broad range of customers.

    By offering an all-in-one experience, they are deliberately designed to stand apart from the traditional pub model. And they are positioning themselves as destinations rather than typical pubs.

    True to Wetherspoons’ business model, the new megapub promises competitive prices on food and drink, which may make it an attractive option for budget-conscious customers. By offering a variety of experiences under one roof, megapubs are attempting to tempt customers inside with convenience, variety and affordability all in one package, while also feeling part of a community.

    What could it mean for the hospitality sector?

    One major concern over the onset of the megapub is the potential impact on smaller, independent pubs and restaurants. Over the last ten years, pubs have been closing at an alarming rate, as publicans struggle with rising supply costs and overheads. A growing number of young people are also choosing to abstain from alcohol. Such factors have reduced the demand for traditional pubs.

    Megapubs, with their size and pricing power, could exacerbate these challenges by drawing customers away from independent venues that struggle to compete on price or scale. This may be especially true of those relying on niche markets or unique experiences.

    While it is still early days, and the effects of the megapub are yet to unfold, experts are already questioning whether this could change the way we socialise. By combining affordability with a range of amenities, megapubs like the new “Superspoons” may set new expectations for what a pub experience should be. Instead of visiting multiple locations for different activities, people may prefer to spend their leisure time in a single, multi-functional venue where they can socialise, dine and work.

    Wetherspoons is not the only company experimenting with this new model. Across the hospitality and retail sectors, businesses are increasingly seeking to create more versatile spaces to attract a broader customer base.



    Read more:
    Youth drinking is declining – myths about the trend, busted

    So, could we see more companies following Wetherspoons’ lead? Given the current economic conditions, where many consumers are tightening their belts, it seems probable. This could be the beginning of a long-term shift towards larger, multi-functional venues. Of course, it may just be a temporary response to the challenges of the present market.

    Economically, this concept appears to be well-suited to the financial challenges and uncertainty of our current times, as increasingly isolated people look for cost-effective ways to dine and socialise. Offering both affordability and a wide range of options, these venues could thrive during economic downturns by drawing in budget-conscious consumers.

    Whether you’re a fan of the traditional pub or intrigued by new concepts like the “Superspoons”, it’s clear that the way we socialise is evolving. As hospitality businesses continue to push boundaries, we may see a significant change in how we spend our leisure time and money.

    Rachael. E. Rees-Jones does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. The rise of the ‘megapub’: is bigger really better? – https://theconversation.com/the-rise-of-the-megapub-is-bigger-really-better-238629

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: His Three Daughters: an honest reflection on death and the meaning of family

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Shelley Galpin, Lecturer in Culture, Media and Creative Industries, King’s College London

    How do you communicate death? This is the question posed towards the end of His Three Daughters – a rather audacious move considering that it revolves around the last days of a father whose titular daughters have all gathered to be present for his passing.

    Set almost entirely within the apartment that is home to dying Vincent and daughter Rachel, the film captures a palpable sense of claustrophobia. Here, controlling, uptight Katie (Carrie Coon playing the modern-day equivalent of her character from The Gilded Age), emotional Christina (Elizabeth Olsen) and slacker Rachel (Natasha Lyonne) are unwillingly thrown together, all with their own personal but conflicting senses of duty to their father.

    With its restricted setting and small cast of characters, the film by writer and director Azazel Jacobs, risks feeling stagey at times, as the small dramas play out in the crucible of the apartment. However, the striking camera work, in which the three women are frequently shot in direct, single mid-shots, almost as if they are talking heads in a documentary, creates an uncomfortable sense of isolation.

    The family dynamics are immediately clear. Katie and Christina have moved into Rachel’s home and have instantly dominated the space. Katie doesn’t attempt to conceal her judgment of weed-smoking, professional gambler Rachel, literally forcing her out of her own home in order to smoke. Frequently, scenes play out for some time before it’s clear that Rachel is even in the room. This is due to the fragmenting camera work that creates a confessional tone but denies the intimacy of showing the sisters together – an intimacy it is clear these women so desperately crave.

    The character work is not subtle. Katie’s obsession with obtaining a “do not resuciate” form for her dying father is controlling bordering on the macabre. Her turning to alcohol while still pouring judgment on Rachel’s substance use highlights her hypocrisy, while also hinting that these two apparently different women have more in common than it would seem.

    Despite Christina’s self-appointed role as peacemaker and emotional support, she also uncomfortably goes along with Katie’s exclusionary behaviour. The two sisters occasionally fall into their own (slightly bizarre) language, and routinely refer to Rachel as “she”. As the film progresses the reason for this is gradually revealed, with the title taking on extra resonance when it becomes clear that Rachel is Vincent’s step-daughter.

    At its heart, the film is an exploration of family, blended or otherwise. Through the laboured task of attempting to write a eulogy for their father, the three women realise that despite coming from the same home, their experiences of it have been very different.

    The character arcs, as each wrestles with the person they have become and the past that made them that way, are not original, with the emotional journeys following well-trodden tracks. However, the cast give it their all. Natasha Lyonne is excellent as the silent heart of the family and Elizabeth Olsen captures Christina’s suppressed fragility nicely. Carrie Coon also fulfils her role in the mismatched triumvirate well, suitably scary as the micro-managing Katie, although the role hardly feels like a stretch for her considerable talents.

    In answer to the question of how one communicates death, the film proposes that this is most effectively done through absence. In one of the more “on the nose” moments this is unnecessarily stated through the sisters’ dialogue. Infinitely more effective, though, is the film’s conceit of having the father almost entirely off-screen, both dominant and absent at the same time.

    Yet this absence also manifests itself in the sister’s relationships with each other, as they frequently comment that each other’s lives are “not my business” and converse as you would with a vague acquaintance. Ultimately, the film is a refreshingly downbeat and honest reflection on the nature of families, and what being part of a family even means when all members have matured into diverse and full adult lives.

    When the inevitable finally happens, the film attempts a brave rug pull with real emotional heft. Characters, and viewers, are left reflecting on what it really means when the time, which had felt like it could go on forever, finally runs out. Although it is sometimes a little heavy-handed, His Three Daughters will get you at the end, which, given the film’s subject matter, feels entirely fitting.


    Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

    Shelley Galpin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. His Three Daughters: an honest reflection on death and the meaning of family – https://theconversation.com/his-three-daughters-an-honest-reflection-on-death-and-the-meaning-of-family-239664

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Exploding pagers and walkie-talkies are a reminder of how easily your devices can be hacked – here’s how to make sure they are safe

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Nick Hajli, AI Strategist and Professor of Digital Strategy, Loughborough University

    Quality Stock Arts/Shutterstock

    The recent attacks on walkie-talkies and pagers in Lebanon have highlighted the hidden vulnerabilities in everyday technology. These incidents underscore the need for individuals to understand the potential risks associated with their devices and to take proactive steps to protect themselves in an increasingly digital world where safety can be compromised.

    Research shows that many people have significant concerns about security and privacy as technology advances. Statistics reveal an alarming rise in cyber threats and privacy breaches, underscoring the urgency of addressing these issues. According to IBM, the average cost of a data breach worldwide reached US$4.88 million (£3.65 million) in 2024, demonstrating the severe consequences of technological vulnerabilities.

    So, are our smartphones and devices truly safe? With numerous reports of data breaches and privacy violations linked to technological development – especially concerning artificial intelligence (AI) – the recent attacks in Lebanon raise new concerns about the security of technology in an era where AI introduces complex challenges.

    The pressing question for consumers is whether any of our devices can genuinely be deemed safe. If Israel can launch such an attack (and it has not confirmed it was behind the device attacks – but neither has it denied widespread reports insisting it was) other states may very well follow suit.

    The Lebanon device attacks should serve as a crucial wake-up call regarding the vulnerabilities in devices we often take for granted. Part of the challenge lies in the less discussed impact of AI, which can track, analyse, and act on information in ways that pose risks to privacy and security. While AI brings substantial benefits to society, it also creates complex challenges, particularly in terms of democratic integrity and personal safety.

    As technology increasingly becomes an indispensable part of our everyday lives – through smartphones, tablets, and smart home devices – it’s really important to understand the risks associated with our dependency on this tech. There are some practical steps that we can all take to enhance our security and take control of our digital lives.

    What you can do

    1. Be careful who you buy from: One critical lesson is to be mindful of where you purchase your products. As technology advances, consumers often turn to price comparison apps to find cheaper options. But these less expensive products frequently originate from distant countries with complex supply chains. For example, in 2020, it was revealed that some Huawei and ZTE devices used in telecom infrastructure contained back doors, which led to allegations of espionage and resulted in some countries banning or limiting their use.

    It’s worth thoroughly researching the manufacturer before making a purchase. Before buying, check reviews and security certifications, and find out if the company has a history of security breaches or privacy concerns. Ensuring the manufacturer is reputable adds an extra layer of protection.

    It’s vital to ensure the security of your mobile device is not compromised.
    OLE.cnx/Shutterstock

    2. Understand potential risks: Older devices, such as pagers, often lack modern security features such as regular updates, making them more vulnerable to interception. Additionally, recent advances in AI raise concerns about the security of newer devices. For instance, AI algorithms used in smart home devices can learn user patterns and behaviours.

    If these devices are compromised, hackers could use this information to orchestrate targeted attacks or gain unauthorised access to homes. It’s crucial to assess the risks associated with both old and new technologies – and if you think them unsafe, it’s best to just not use them.

    3. Update devices regularly: Ensure you regularly update your software and firmware to benefit from the latest security patches. Stick to devices that are still supported by their manufacturers, as unsupported devices may stop receiving vital security updates, leaving them vulnerable.

    4. Keep your eyes on your tech: Anyone who is able to gain physical access to your device could tamper with it. Always store your devices securely when not in use, minimising the risk of unauthorised access.

    5. Stay informed on cybersecurity issues: Keep yourself updated on the latest cybersecurity threats and learn how attackers exploit various technologies. Familiarise yourself with basic defensive practices, such as using strong, unique passwords and enabling two-factor authentication. Remember that many modern devices are interconnected, making them potential gateways for attacks. For example, a compromised smartphone could potentially infect your laptop or other devices on the same network.

    Exercise caution with smart devices such as speakers, cameras, and wearables by ensuring they are properly configured, using encrypted connections, and limiting unnecessary data sharing.

    By taking these steps, you can enhance your security and navigate the complexities of our technology-driven world with greater confidence.

    Nick Hajli does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Exploding pagers and walkie-talkies are a reminder of how easily your devices can be hacked – here’s how to make sure they are safe – https://theconversation.com/exploding-pagers-and-walkie-talkies-are-a-reminder-of-how-easily-your-devices-can-be-hacked-heres-how-to-make-sure-they-are-safe-239657

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: ‘Russians at War’ documentary: From the Crimean to the Iraq War, soldier images pose questions about propaganda

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Martin Danahay, Professor, English Language and Literature, Brock University

    A British publisher commissioned photographs of the army in the Crimean War to be used as the basis for oil paintings. Cornet Wilkin, 11th Hussars, by Roger Fenton. (Roger Fenton/Library of Congress)

    Questions surrounding the film Russians at War linger following controversy surrounding it at the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF).

    TIFF faced protesters at a Sept. 17 screening of the “first person” documentary by Russian Canadian filmmaker Anastasia Trofimova. The festival had “paused” public screenings following an earlier media and industry screening, as festival staff reported receiving “significant threats” to festival operations and safety. Protesters said the film was pro-Russian propaganda.

    Trofimova told CBC her film was an attempt to humanize Russian soldiers as a way to combat further anger and violence.

    I have not seen the film, but as a researcher who has long examined the ambiguous meanings of soldier images, I’m not surprised the film has been criticized as propaganda. In my book War without Bodies: Framing Death from the Crimean to the Iraq War, I examined how images that omit their political context can be viewed as implicitly supporting the war effort.

    First photographs: Crimean War

    This ambiguity can be found in the first photographs of the British army at war. These were taken by photographer Roger Fenton during the 1853-56 Crimean War, in which British, French and Ottoman military attacked Russia and besieged Russian forces on the Crimean Peninsula.

    Fenton was commissioned by a Manchester, U.K. publisher, Thomas Agnew and Sons, to photograph the British army in Crimea, focusing on officers and any other participants he found interesting.

    His photographs were to be used as the basis for oil paintings by the artist Thomas Barker. The publisher didn’t reproduce photographs, but made them into woodcuts or as source material for paintings.

    Fenton also photographed the landscape and foreign fighters like French Zouaves — French military units originally formed from the Zouaoua Berber tribe from the coastal mountain Djurdjura region of North Africa after the French invaded and conquered Algeria — but the majority of his subjects were British officers.

    Shared social class

    Fenton wasn’t commissioned by the government, but he had a letter of introduction from Prince Albert, husband of Queen Victoria. He was of the same social class as the officers he photographed, and dined with high-ranking officers such as Lord Raglan.

    Fenton’s photographs gave the appearance of a competent and functioning military led by skilled officers. Photographs such as one taken of Cornet Wilkin looking smart and capable on his horse suggest the traditional posed style of military portraiture seen in commissioned tribute paintings.

    The photograph His Days’ Work Over: Lieut.-Colonel Hallewell and Servant shows a reclining officer being waited on by his manservant. The image indicates the class status of the officer and depicts leisure rather than war.

    ‘His Days’ Work Over: Lieut.-Colonel Hallewell and Servant,’ photograph by Roger Fenton.
    (Library of Congress)

    The Cookhouse of the 8th Hussars similarly shows a group of cavalry with one reclining and others grouped around a man serving food.

    ‘The Cookhouse of the 8th Hussars,’ photograph by Roger Fenton.
    (Library of Congress)

    The photograph omits any visual evidence that would acknowledge that these are the survivors of an infamous British military blunder, the Charge of the Light Brigade, where cavalry were mistakenly ordered to charge directly at Russian artillery and suffered disastrous casualties.

    Long exposure, composed photographs

    Fenton could not photograph combat given the amount of time needed to capture an image using the wet collodion process, which required a long exposure.

    He could, however, have documented other aspects of the situation in Crimea which were covered by reporter William Howard Russell, who Fenton also photographed in 1855.

    Russell’s dispatches on the terrible conditions suffered by British troops and the ravages diseases like cholera combined with letters published by the soldiers caused a scandal in Britain. These reports led to the downfall of a government and to Florence Nightingale organizing a cohort of nurses to tend to the sick and wounded.

    Russell’s reporting revealed what was omitted from Fenton’s photographs of the war. The photographs served as the first demonstration of how such images could present positive images of war that belied the reality of death and suffering.

    Fenton’s photographs indirectly supported the war effort by showing only positive images of individual soldiers.

    Vietnam, Iraq War

    Media coverage of the American war in Vietnam, often referred to as the “first television war,” is often credited with turning public opinion against the conflict.

    Images of dead soldiers and civilians were transmitted to the viewing public. The “Saigon execution” photograph of a man being shot in the head was particularly shocking.

    To avoid mages such as this, according to Jessica M. Fishman, a behavioural scientist who has examined how media censors and displays the dead, major networks like CNN, Fox News and NBC largely followed an informal agreement to avoid showing graphic images of dead American soldiers during the Iraq War. In addition, reporters were embedded in military units and formed close relationships with the troops who were the subject of their reports.



    Read more:
    Three images that show wartime photographs can have greater impact than the written word

    The result was sanitized coverage of the war which, at least initially, helped maintain public support for the conflict. Images of drone strikes in particular suggested that the military was using precision weapons and “surgical” strikes that did not include civilian casualties.

    Just as reporting by Russell contradicted Fenton’s images of a competent military, photographs of the torture of prisoners in Abu Ghraib prison by American solders in 2004 helped change public perception of it as a “just war.”

    Trust with soldiers, personal ties

    Trofimova, in an interview with CBC, said she does not support the war and wanted to break stereotypes of Russian soldiers as motivated by hate.

    She pointed out that Russia has conscription and that many soldiers may have been drafted and are not supportive of the war. She also stated that she had no support from the Russian government and gained access to soldiers because she built up trust with them.

    The parallels with Fenton are instructive because he did not have support from the British government, and relied on personal connections to obtain his portraits.

    Excluding crucial information

    As with Fenton, the image of the Russian army conveyed by the interviews with soldiers may be as significant for what it leaves out about the war as much as what it tells us about them as individuals.

    When the CBC interviewer asked Trofimova about a statement made by a Russian soldier that they were incapable of committing war crimes, which Tromifova did not correct,
    she replied that “once you start trying to make this an analytical documentary that is going to provide you with stories that you have not documented yourself, then this becomes something else.” In March 2024, the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine announced it had new evidence Russian authorities have committed violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law, and corresponding war crimes.



    Read more:
    Putin’s war on history is another form of domestic repression

    Both Fenton’s photographs and a documentary that focuses on Russian soldiers’ perspectives exclude crucial information that would help lead the viewer to question the conduct of the war or how it is being justified.

    Martin Danahay receives funding from Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council

    – ref. ‘Russians at War’ documentary: From the Crimean to the Iraq War, soldier images pose questions about propaganda – https://theconversation.com/russians-at-war-documentary-from-the-crimean-to-the-iraq-war-soldier-images-pose-questions-about-propaganda-239340

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Can cryptocurrencies ever be green?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jean Bessala, Lecturer in Finance, Salford Business School, University of Salford

    Mabeline72/Shutterstock

    Cryptocurrencies have been condemned over their environmental record at a time when
    traditional investments have been rapidly moving towards greener environmental, social and governance (ESG) values. So how long will it be until crypto earns its green credentials?

    Green investments are assets like bonds that pay for projects with positive environmental and social outcomes. Green bonds for example, contribute to cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, an increase of renewable energy capacity and uptake in clean transport infrastructures.

    Crypto investments on the other hand are widely seen as environmentally unfriendly, mainly because of crypto mining and the huge energy it demands. Mining in the context of crypto refers to a mechanism called “proof of work” (POW) where crypto “miners” use specialised computers to solve complex mathematical equations to secure transactions and create new coins. This is where the energy use comes in.

    Agencies and organisations like the International Energy Agency and the United Nations have raised concerns about the effects of crypto mining – particularly Bitcoin, the best-known crypto asset.

    The environmental footprint of crypto

    The United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health estimated that in 2020-2021, Bitcoin networks had significant carbon, water and land footprints. Bitcoin’s carbon footprint was equivalent to burning 38 billion tonnes of coal, while its water footprint (mainly used for cooling systems) would have met the domestic water needs of more than 300 million people in sub-Saharan Africa.

    The Cambridge Blockchain Network Sustainability Index puts the electricity consumption of Bitcoin networks above those of several developed countries, including Norway and Sweden. For investors who are serious about achieving ESG goals, this aspect of crypto would likely be a deal-breaker.

    It is also made difficult by the lack of regulations around crypto activities. After years of being on the fringes of financial markets and being considered a “get-rich-quick” venture, crypto investments are becoming mainstream. But there is still little regulation to protect investors and ensure participants adopt practices that are in line with ESG values.

    Sceptics point out the major issues plaguing these markets including the use of cryptocurrencies and platforms for money-laundering, scamming, and price manipulation.

    So it is certainly hard to make a green case for crypto. But at the same time, it would be misleading to look only at one side of the coin. The fact is that crypto has a challenging but reachable path towards being widely accepted as green.

    Decarbonising the crypto industry

    First and foremost, the industry itself has recognised the need to change practices and processes to become more sustainable. In 2021, a significant number of players in the crypto industry signed the crypto climate accord (CCA) with the long-term target of decarbonising the global crypto industry by 2040.

    The CCA set two interim objectives. The first was the development of standards and technologies to have 100% renewably powered blockchains as soon as 2025. The second aim states that signatories should achieve net-zero emissions from electricity consumption by 2030.

    Recent developments in technology suggest the industry has started putting plans into action, with the appearance of sustainable tools and infrastructures.

    Several companies such as Mara and Argo are working on technologies like energy-efficient immersion cooling systems that significantly reduce the energy consumption required for mining.

    When cryptocurrency Ethereum changed its processes, it cut its energy use by close to 100%.
    rafapress/Shutterstock

    These companies are also developing systems that can recycle heat produced by digital assets and from data centres, and redirect it to provide energy to communities. The implementation of these technologies is facilitated by the relative mobility of crypto miners and the opportunities that some governments and regions offer to them.

    In addition, the crypto industry has seen the emergence of self-proclaimed environmentally friendly cryptocurrencies, such as Cardano public blockchain and Powerledger. These currencies use a less energy-intensive mechanism called “proof-of-stake” (POS) rather than POW.

    Unlike POW, POS miners must stake their holdings (the amount of cryptocurrency) when validating and verifying transactions and records. So if a miner tries to falsify records, they could potentially lose their stake. The process removes the need for the complex computer calculations and so cuts the energy use dramatically. In fact, in 2022, the cryptocurrency Ethereum transitioned from POW to POS, reducing its energy consumption by nearly 100%.

    The path towards green crypto is being eased by institutions like the Financial Stability Board, which is taking steps to provide frameworks for understanding, compliance and achievements of ESG goals and values.

    Together, these elements could open the door to a future where conscious investors can take a chance on cryptocurrencies.

    Jean Bessala does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Can cryptocurrencies ever be green? – https://theconversation.com/can-cryptocurrencies-ever-be-green-238359

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: A Soldier’s Journey: new first world war memorial in Washington revitalises classic image of the ‘American doughboy’

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Alice Kelly, Assistant Professor of Literature and History, University of Warwick

    America’s inaugural national memorial marking the first world war was unveiled this month in Washington DC, on the birthday of war commander General John J. Pershing – 106 years after the end of the war. We don’t often get to see a new memorial to a century-old war, especially one that has been deliberately designed in a century-old style.

    Its sculptor, Sabin Howard – who was recently referred to as a “self-appointed bulwark against the scourge of modern art” – rejects the vogue for abstract commemorative art seen in memorials such as Maya Lin’s Vietnam Veterans Memorial (1982). The centrepiece of the new memorial is Howard’s 58-foot panoramic sculpture, A Soldier’s Journey. Five connected scenes tell the story of an American everyman who enlists as a volunteer, fights in Europe, then returns home.

    The 38 realist figures were painstakingly sculpted from costumed models before being cast in 25 tonnes of weather-resistant bronze. Howard wanted to “tell a story” about the first world war and how it affected Americans, to make the conflict more visible to viewers today and in the future.

    In an episode of Cheers from 1983, when a first world war veteran comes into the bar, Coach asks: “Is that the war with Clark Gable or Gary Cooper?” I’m not sure American knowledge of the war has come much further in the past 40 years.

    In every other participating nation, the centenary of the war was marked by a pageant of commemorative activity – think of the 5 million people who went to see the ceramic poppies at the Tower of London. But in the US, despite having a culture of venerating veterans, the first world war is notoriously a “forgotten” war. It tends to be overshadowed by the civil war on one side, and the second world war on the other.

    Perhaps this blindspot is because the American experience of the first world war was much shorter. For the US, it lasted just 19 months from the declaration of war in April 1917 to the signing of the armistice in November 1918. And the fighting – as the song goes – was “over there” rather than on the home front, as it was in Europe. American losses, although high at 116,516 men (plus several hundred women who lost their lives while serving as nurses), were much lower than those of European nations. Britain, for example, lost 880,000 servicemen – 6% of the adult male population at the time.

    But the role this war played in the development of the “American century” is incomparable. The first world war destabilised the European powers – already in imperial decline – to the extent that the US grew to become the pre-eminent financial and military power after the war.

    The sacred and the dead

    The first world war hasn’t always been forgotten in the US. Indeed, in the 1920s and ’30s, American commemoration of the war was at its most “supercharged”, as scholar Steven Trout has shown. The Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Arlington National Cemetery, Virginia, was interred in 1921 – a commemorative form borrowed from Europe after the first “unknowns” were interred in London and Paris in November 1920.

    Arlington is now the site for national memory of all wars, woven into the fabric of US political life. The recent controversy over a confrontation between Donald Trump staffers and cemetery officials demonstrates its continuing role in ensuring the sacred place of war dead in American culture.

    Across the nation, Americans have sought to remember their war dead in myriad forms, including memorial halls, parkways, plazas, opera houses, arches, gymnasiums, parks, trees and bell towers. There were so many memorials erected in New York City in the 1920s and ’30s – including parks, sculptures and the planting of memorial trees – that after the second world war, New York City’s commissioner for parks and recreation, Robert Moses, effectively banned new monuments being built, considering them “monstrosities”.

    Many memorials are still peppered across America, hidden in plain sight but instantly recognisable, even if viewers don’t know the context. The Spirit of the American Doughboy, designed by sculptor E.M. Viquesney and copyrighted in 1920, features a “doughboy” (recruit) holding his rifle with fixed bayonet and a grenade in his other hand – deliberately echoing the Statue of Liberty.

    ‘American doughboy’: a memorial to the Americans who served in the first world war, designed by E.M. Viquesney.
    Rosemarie Mosteller/Shutterstock

    Advertised as an affordable tribute that could be bought by towns as their local memorial, there are currently 135 originals and replicas on public display across the US. I find it impossible not to think of those doughboys when I look at the soldiers in Howard’s memorial.

    Commentators may well criticise Howard’s figurative sculpture as old-fashioned, but the debate over appropriate memorial forms and the question of “taste” is not new. In fact, it was a very live debate in the first world war’s immediate aftermath.

    In attempting to correct the historical omission of a national memorial, it seems appropriate that Howard’s figurative sculpture looks like – and recalls – first world war sculpture of the time.

    Will it earn the war its place in American memory that it deserves? I’m not sure. But in giving old form to an old war, it will make it visible to generations of Americans unfamiliar with it – and help the rest of us remember it anew.

    Alice Kelly does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. A Soldier’s Journey: new first world war memorial in Washington revitalises classic image of the ‘American doughboy’ – https://theconversation.com/a-soldiers-journey-new-first-world-war-memorial-in-washington-revitalises-classic-image-of-the-american-doughboy-239757

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: UK oil and gas workers risk becoming the ‘coal miners of our generation’

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Freddie Daley, Research Associate, Centre for Global Political Economy, University of Sussex

    Grangemouth oil refinery is set to close in 2025 with the loss of 400 jobs. orxy / shutterstock

    At the end of September, the UK’s last remaining coal power plant, Ratcliffe-on-Soar in Nottinghamshire, will be retired. The closure of the plant should – and will – be celebrated by environmentalists, as the move away from coal has made Britain’s electricity much cleaner over the past decade. It is on this basis that the UK claims climate leadership.

    In the 1950s, coal provided the overwhelming majority of British energy, and as recently as 2012 it still generated 40%. By 2022, it was less than 2%. In a month’s time, it will be zero.

    Phasing out coal was a brutal and profound process. Organised labour was decimated, entire regions were forced into decline, and communities were left with sustained economic, social and health problems. The towering ghosts of power stations like Ratcliffe-on-Soar will haunt Britain’s ongoing effort to phase out North Sea oil and gas and replace it with clean energy.

    Towering ghosts: Ratcliffe-on-Soar power station.
    The Exposure / shutterstock

    And we are witnessing this haunting in real-time. After the Labour government announced its plans to end new licenses for oil and gas in British waters – necessary to meet the Paris Agreement – workers and trade unions feared history would repeat itself in terms of job losses and blighted communities.

    The general secretary of Unite, Sharon Graham, noted that without a more thorough plan, the policy risked creating “the coal miners of our generation”. A recent motion at the Trades Union Congress (TUC) gathering in Brighton called for no ban on oil and gas licensing before a fully funded jobs guarantee is agreed. The motion narrowly passed.

    Workers and unions are demanding a “just transition” from polluting industries into the clean industries of the future. But to achieve this, the UK government must learn from what happened with coal.

    Many places still rely on oil and gas jobs

    Although oil and gas are not as embedded throughout British life as coal once was, there are many settlements and larger areas still dependent on energy jobs. Grangemouth in central Scotland is a good example. In November 2023, the owner, Petroineos, announced plans to close the town’s oil refinery in 2025, bringing a century of production to an end at the cost of 400 jobs.

    Even if the UK government did issue new oil and gas licences, the North Sea faces structural decline. Production peaked around the turn of the century. Since 2014, as many as 200,000 jobs have been lost either offshore or along the supply chain onshore.

    From gas to wind?

    Planning for the end of fossil fuels is therefore an urgent endeavour. The dominant strategy for protecting skilled jobs is to transition workers into the industries set to replace North Sea production: wind energy and other low-carbon technologies.

    However, though Britain has developed a large wind power sector, it remains a major importer of turbines. Domestic manufacturing makes only a small contribution, and developers are not required to use British-made turbines or other parts, despite the jobs this would create.

    This has left Grangemouth workers discontented. When one of us (Ewan Gibbs) and Riyoko Shibe interviewed young refinery workers at Grangemouth earlier this year, many commented that there were relatively few jobs in renewables. When jobs were visible on LinkedIn and comparable job sites, one told us that “you’ll see there’s a big difference in terms and conditions”.

    Wind farms are relatively easy to run once installed, so most jobs are in building them.
    Kevin Shipp / shutterstock

    In its current form, the UK wind industry will find it hard to provide the types of secure ongoing employment that oil and gas historically has. Most jobs are in the construction and maintenance of wind farms, with the latter threatened by automation. Without public investment and a targeted industrial policy, Britain will remain a net importer of wind technology, and the phasing out of North Sea oil and gas will prove costly in job terms.



    Read more:
    Grangemouth job losses are a stark reminder of the cost of a greener industrial future

    More investment needed

    Britain’s lack of state intervention is not the norm. After all, more than half of British wind farms are state-owned, though less than 1% are owned by the UK government. Swedish, Norwegian, French, Irish and German state-owned entities are major players, but the biggest is Denmark’s Ørsted, a former oil company turned renewables giant which is mostly state-owned. In the UK’s most recent offshore wind auction, 70% of the projects were awarded to Ørsted.

    The newly launched Great British Energy could give the state a foothold in the North Sea once more. This publicly owned company plans to focus on domestic manufacturing and will invest in ports and other infrastructures to “unlock strategic bottlenecks”.

    But if such projects are to be meaningfully incorporated into a just transition, they will need to offer continuity and security to oil and gas workers. As one Grangemouth worker put it, referring to his colleagues facing the choice of either remaining unemployed locally or relocating to use their skills:

    They’re moving to the Middle East, they’re moving to the north-east of Scotland. They’re moving offshore, they’re moving to the Shetlands, and therefore it’s not a just transition, in my view, if we’re moving to these jobs.

    Another worker highlighted the risks that Grangemouth could join the coalfields in becoming “stranded” communities:

    We’ve got a community that’s been built round the site, we’ve got skills and we’ve got people that work there, we’ve got the infrastructure there – why should we not have these jobs when the time comes to move to these industries? Why can we not have it at Grangemouth?

    Britain’s push to phase out oil and gas is urgent and necessary, but it cannot follow the same trajectory as Britain’s exit from coal – lessons must be learned. The opportunities presented by the transition away from fossil fuels will only be fully realised if workers are at its centre.

    Freddie Daley receives funding from UKRI for the SUS-POL project at the University of Sussex, which explores fossil fuel phase-outs around the world. Freddie also campaigns on demand reduction with Badvertising.

    Ewan Gibbs received funding from a British Academy Wolfson Fellowship that supported this research (grant number: WF21210099).

    – ref. UK oil and gas workers risk becoming the ‘coal miners of our generation’ – https://theconversation.com/uk-oil-and-gas-workers-risk-becoming-the-coal-miners-of-our-generation-239262

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Keir Starmer’s party conference speech – what he said and what it meant

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ben O’Loughlin, Professor of International Relations, Royal Holloway University of London

    Prime Minister Keir Starmer was under immense pressure to announce some big policies in his 2024 party conference speech. Those who felt the agenda had been captured by stories of scandal and discontent in Number 10 saw a major new offering as a potential way to distract. But Starmer chose a different path – one that he overtly described as the more difficult one.

    This, for him, is not about policies. Starmer is offering Britain a choice about how it thinks about politics. In his speech, he rejected what he called a politics of “easy answers” offered in the “cowardly fantasy” of populists. He asked the British public to ignore the “whims of Westminster” that see a politician stirring uproar to hide their lack of action.

    Looking back at the last government, he said: “Take Rwanda, a policy they knew from the beginning would never work, was never supposed to work. £700 million of your money, frittered away on something that was never a credible option because politically it was an easier answer.”

    Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

    Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.

    What is required is for politicians to address difficult challenges directly, not duck them, he said, adding: “If this path were popular or easy we would have walked it already.” The public must therefore be prepared to debate difficult challenges. This is a difficult version of politics.

    Will people like it?

    Easy-answers politics is quick and based on the performance of utter certainty. X is wrong, Y will fix it. If government doesn’t do Y, it is betraying the country. A flight to Rwanda will solve global migration patterns caused by climate, conflict and the way the world economy works. We don’t want to even think about climate, conflict and the way the world economy works. This is how Starmer characterised the Conservative government of the last 14 years.

    Take the rough with the smooth

    Starmer is offering a performance of seriousness and trying to create an expectation he will deliver a serious politics. He called this a “renewal” because Britain has done serious politics before, generations ago, and it is in British people’s blood: “We will turn our collar up and face the storm,” he said. British people will all contribute, all participate in that renewal, because “this is a country with fairness in the water”.

    This entails being open to debate with other citizens who we disagree with, in a spirit of collective endeavour, not self-interest. You want security? Prisons may be built near you, he said. You want cheaper electricity? Then we’ll build pylons overground. You want government to have some control in the immigration process? We’ll make it function properly. But you must accept that in that fair and proper process, some people will be granted asylum. Agree to disagree, but, more fundamentally, agree that disagreement is OK, because we are equal citizens.



    Read more:
    Know your place: what happened to class in British politics – a new podcast series from The Conversation Documentaries

    The British public must be persuaded to trust this government and this renewal project because they understand government not as aloof partying liars. Look to my government, Starmer said, to see politicians in service to the country of Britain and the British “working people”. But for government to show it thinks it is in the service of the public, it struck me that it can’t be accepting free tickets to watch Arsenal.

    Do we have a narrative yet?

    Starmer addressed the question of whether he has a story to tell about the country. Since he came to government, it has felt as though he lacks one. He said Britain’s dilemma is “our story is uncertain. Hope is beaten out of us.”

    Yet the world thinks of Britain as a great nation, he said, of scientific genius, the industry of its working people, and pragmatism about the complexity of global relations. He said this shows Britain was capable of writing “our own story and that of the world”. He called for Britain to do this again.

    For this to happen, citizens need to be able to see a connection through time. It begins with the government saying it is serious and trustworthy. Then, at a certain point in time, the public needs to be able to look back and see the actions that government has taken. Finally, at a later time, citizens decide whether they’ve seen the results of those actions in their lives.

    This is how the story of a nation is built. But it is where enormous patience is needed. And while his narrative was more successful than previous attempts, there was a piece missing from the puzzle. Will building prisons or electricity pylons provide conditions that allow companies to create economic growth?

    This is not a fully coherent story based on a clear plan – at least not one that has been made public. It is more a wager Starmer is calling on Britons to make. Bet now, and wait. And that’s a lot to ask.

    Ben O’Loughlin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Keir Starmer’s party conference speech – what he said and what it meant – https://theconversation.com/keir-starmers-party-conference-speech-what-he-said-and-what-it-meant-239766

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Hockey in Canada: Can it still bridge divides in an era of political polarization?

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Joseph Dick, PhD Student in Sport Management, University of Guelph

    Contemporary ice hockey was pioneered in Canada, and the sport has historically been watched and played by Canadians. (Shutterstock)

    Hockey has played a significant role in shaping Canada’s culture and identity over the years. As sport scholar Tony Patoine once put it, “hockey has become more than a simple pasttime: it is a true Canadian tradition, a quasi-religion.”

    This deep attachment to the game is reflected in Bill C-212, which acknowledges hockey as Canada’s official winter sport. Modern ice hockey was, after all, pioneered in Canada, where it has historically been watched, played and been perceived as a unifying force that transcends linguistic and ethnic divides.

    Despite these perceptions, however, we question the strength of such unification potential amidst recent changes to hockey culture. Can hockey continue to unify all of Canada?

    ‘Communitas’

    Hockey’s purported sense of unity closely relates to the concept of “communitas,” coined by anthropologist Victor Turner, which describes the strong bonds of comradery that form between members of a group — and sometimes between members of disparate groups — where rank and status disappear.

    However, not everyone experiences this sense of unity equally. Since social groups establish behaviours required for group membership, those who don’t align with these norms may feel excluded.

    Former Hockey Night in Canada commentator, Don Cherry, was once praised for upholding values characteristic of hockey, including the promotion of violence, hyper masculinity and an overall adherence to “ideas of loyalty, fraternity, and mutual respect.” These values, once normalized within the hockey community, shaped how both players and fans were expected to act.

    But as the game continues to evolve and these values are increasingly considered archaic and out of sync with the broader political culture fostered within Canada, we as Canadian sport and political science researchers, respectively, question if hockey still provides that sense of communitas for all of Canada.

    Hockey in French Canada

    Although Canadians often view hockey as a monolithic, universally adopted sport across Canada, a closer look reveals patterns of non-uniformity. Nowhere are such differences more apparent than in the historical development of the sport in Québec versus the rest of Canada.

    As historian Emmanuel Lapierre wrote, “French Canadians appropriated hockey in their own manner and used it to tell a story about themselves,” a story that is, like the province of Québec itself, unique within the Canadian federation.

    For much of Canadian history, Anglophone hockey players represented the in-group, while Francophone hockey players were often seen as outsiders. In the 1950s, for example, Francophone players in the NHL believed they were treated more harshly when it came to suspensions and fines.

    Québec society, during this time, faced an endemic struggle of oppression against an Anglophone-dominated society controlled by the Catholic Church. Francophone resistance to this was linked to the Richard Riot that occurred during the 1954-55 NHL season.

    Maurice Richard scoring his 500th goal on Oct. 19, 1957. At the time, he was the first and only professional NHL player to achieve such a feat.
    (Wikimedia Commons)

    After Montreal Canadiens’ player Maurice “Rocket” Richard was suspended from the playoffs in March 1955 for punching an official, a massive riot broke out among fans. They raged through downtown Montréal, targeting Anglophone-owned buildings. This riot became a symbol of Francophone resistance to Anglophone dominance, serving as a stepping stone towards the Quiet Revolution and renewed French Canadian nationalism.

    This, in turn, strengthened the sense of unity around hockey in Canada. Francophone hockey players began to be viewed as more equal to, and at the very least not controlled by, Anglophone players. Hockey was used to forge a sense of communitas amongst French Canadians, serving as a transcendent unifier in Canada.

    But that was then, and it occurred within the context of a province historically rich with connections to French Canadian culture, where hockey’s unification potential was, therefore, heightened. Does this similar sense of communitas still exist in the rest of Canada with respect to hockey? Or has the sport’s ability to unite the nation become weakened in an era of unprecedented political polarization?

    Hockey today

    Hockey fandom remains strong in Canada, with about 31 per cent of Canadians still following the sport — the highest of any sport in the country. This is re-enforced by the recent success of the Professional Women’s Hockey League and the near-record Canadian viewership of the most recent Stanley Cup finals.

    However, hockey participation has seen a notable decline, dropping 33 per cent since its peak in 2010 amidst high participation costs. Additionally, Hockey Canada has been accused of fostering a culture of misogyny and sexual assault.



    Read more:
    Hockey Canada scandal highlights toxic masculinity in sports

    In 2023, Hockey Canada’s former CEO acknowledged the need to address racism, sexism, and other forms of discrimination in hockey culture. “Each topic, or part of culture that we’re trying to get at, that will determine who the audience is as we move forward,” he said.

    As hockey navigates these changes, it must adapt to the growing emphasis on equity, diversity and inclusion, alongside the impacts of an increasing immigrant population and the globalization of the game.

    This evolution could mean the demise of “traditional” hockey values, and perhaps that is a good thing: misogynistic, “rock ‘em and sock ’em” mentalities don’t align with the values of a modern liberal democracy like Canada.

    Still, for communitas to transcend division, hockey must also find a way to bring traditional fans along, who may have enjoyed the undertones of violence and masculinized definitions of loyalty, fraternity and respect, without alienating them.

    Where should hockey go now?

    Hockey’s role as a unifying force in Canada is well established. Not only is it still Canada’s official winter sport, but as outlined above, it has also served as a unifier for French and English Canada. Hockey has, moreover, unified Canadians during other key moments, such as Canada’s victory over the USSR in the 1972 Summit Series, which symbolized democracy’s triumph over communism.

    However, hockey’s role as a unifying force has diminished over the years. For many Canadians, hockey is no longer “the best game you can name,” as Stompin’ Tom Connors once sang.

    If hockey is to maintain its historic place as a contributor to Canadian nationalism and communitas, the sport must evolve. While some traditional values — such as teamwork, loyalty and respect — should be preserved, outdated notions like hyper masculinity and aggression no longer align with today’s values.

    As Canada changes, so too must hockey. Canadian hockey culture and policies must better adapt to meet contemporary Canadian values like diversity and inclusivity.

    The question for Canadians isn’t just the future of hockey, but what can unite us in today’s world. Communitas need not be confined to hockey, let alone a sport. Hockey has traditionally filled this unification role, but if it fails to keep up, what will take its place?

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Hockey in Canada: Can it still bridge divides in an era of political polarization? – https://theconversation.com/hockey-in-canada-can-it-still-bridge-divides-in-an-era-of-political-polarization-238277

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: How professional sports leagues that embrace social justice causes could influence politics

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Noah Eliot Vanderhoeven, PhD Candidate, Political Science, Western University

    Given that 77 per cent of people in Canada and 57 per cent of people in the United Kingdom watch a sports team regularly — compared to the 60 per cent of people who turn out to vote in Canada and the U.K. — it’s clear sports has an important and persistent influence on people’s lives.

    Sports can serve as a beacon to provide societal leadership or reflect changes in wider society in significant ways. A historic example would be how the integration of sports leagues in North America paralleled the Civil Rights Movement.

    But how can sports influence politics today?

    Similar to supporting a political party, sports fandom aids in the formation of social identity. This happens when people look to form attachments with other individuals who they believe are similar to them in some way to cultivate positive self-esteem.

    Men’s professional sports teams have historically engaged with certain political causes, namely the military and law enforcement, while neglecting others, such as the plight of marginalized members of local communities. Sports engagement with the military has been shown to boost military enrolment and support for government spending on the military in peace times.

    Women’s professional sport, meanwhile, has drawn positive attention through its engagement with marginalized community members. The Women’s National Basketball League, for example, has engaged with the LGBTQ+ community to create safe fan spaces for the league.

    Men’s sports protests

    My preliminary research into these issues has shown that in men’s professional sports, there has often been hostility towards the introduction of newer, more inclusive causes into sporting events. In the National Hockey League, for example, some players refused to participate in Pride Night events on religious grounds.

    Former professional quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s non-violent protest of police brutality in the United States resulted in his exile from the National Football League for the apparent “distraction” it created. A crucial element of the backlash against Kaepernick was allegations by conservatives that he disrespected the military and the American flag.

    Former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick (7) and outside linebacker Eli Harold (58) kneel during the playing of the national anthem before an NFL football game against the Atlanta Falcons in Atlanta.
    (AP Photo/John Bazemore)

    The power of this backlash was surprising given that in the U.S., Democrats and Republicans are equally likely to be avid sports fans, with no meaningful differences in the strength of their fandom. However, Republican sports fans tend to be more vocal about what causes should receive representation in sports.

    Essentially, that means those who say athletes should “stick to sports” or “shut up and dribble” aren’t suggesting they don’t want any politics in sports. What they’re really saying is that they don’t want to see political views they oppose being represented in professional sports.

    The patriotic causes that have routinely been championed by sports leagues and used for nation-building, such as the military, are viewed as apolitical and therefore appropriate in sports settings. Conversely, messages that are critical of a country or focus on historic inequalities have been deemed “inappropriate” and are excluded by sports because of potential fan backlash.

    Can sports influence politics?

    More recently, however, sports leagues and teams have begun to engage with social justice causes, such as LGBTQ+ rights in the U.K., Canada and the U.S..

    These causes also include Indigenous rights and anti-racism messaging.

    As sports organizations adapt to changing social norms and embrace newer social causes, they hold tremendous potential to impact political attitudes. They can showcase the acceptance of marginalized groups in previously hostile spaces, and provide valuable representation.

    Furthermore, sports fandom identity has been shown to hold a strong psychological connection that can create feelings of inclusion which, in turn, can boost self-esteem.

    This is why athletes make easy role models for children, and why watching sports events is a valued leisure activity for many people of all ages. Finally, sports fandom can also teach people how to cope with negative emotions or feelings of disappointment over time through emotional regulation.

    How sports could influence attitudes

    The representative and psychological value of sports fandom suggests sport is an understudied area of political science, one I hope to build on in my future research.

    For example, we do not yet fully understand the impact that sports teams holding Pride Nights has on attitudes towards the LGBTQ+ community.

    Nor do we know how soccer clubs in England, as local symbols of a migrant workforce, may impact immigrant attitudes.

    Finally, we do not know why certain women’s national soccer teams, like Canada, have been successful in protesting for equal pay while others, like the Spanish team, have failed.

    Sport could have a valuable role to play in unpacking these political questions about protest and identity — and represents an exciting emerging research area in political behaviour.

    Noah Eliot Vanderhoeven does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. How professional sports leagues that embrace social justice causes could influence politics – https://theconversation.com/how-professional-sports-leagues-that-embrace-social-justice-causes-could-influence-politics-239266

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Lebanese civilians are fleeing the south, fearing an Israeli invasion − a look back at 1982 suggests they have every reason to worry

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Mireille Rebeiz, Chair of Middle East Studies & Associate Professor of Francophone & Women’s, Gender & Sexuality Studies, Dickinson College

    Israeli soldiers in armored vehicles drive through a Lebanese village in 1982. Bryn Colton/Getty Images

    Lebanese families have been fleeing the country’s south in the thousands amid escalating tensions and an Israeli bombardment that has so far killed hundreds.

    Their fear, echoed by many onlookers, is that Israel will accompany the airstrikes with something that has the potential to have far worse consequences: a ground invasion of south Lebanon.

    The rational behind such a move, from the Israeli government’s perspective, is that a ground offensive may be its best chance to push Hezbollah fighters beyond the Litani River in the middle of the country. This would achieve an Israeli war goal of securing its northern borders and allowing an estimated 60,000 residents who have been forced to flee northern Israel to go back to their homes.

    Irrespective of motive, a ground invasion and potential occupation is more than wild speculation. Israel has placed thousands of soldiers on standby close to the Lebanon border for such an eventuality.

    Nor is such a move without precedent.

    As a scholar of Lebanese history, I know Israel and Lebanon have been here before. In 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon in the middle of the latter’s civil war, imposing a siege on the capital Beirut. The results were catastrophic for the whole region. Not only did the ground invasion result in the death of thousands of civilians, the occupation of Lebanon plunged an already fragile nation into lasting political and economic chaos and led to the birth of Hezbollah, the very group that threatens northern Israel today.

    Refuge and armed resistance

    The Israeli invasion of Lebanon in June 1982 had its roots in the Palestinian–Israeli conflict, much as the fighting between Hezbollah and Israel does today.

    The creation of the state of Israel in 1948 was accompanied by the Nakba, or “catastrophe,” for the Palestinians. In the violent birth pangs of a Jewish state on land inhabited by, among others, Arab populations with deep ancestral ties to villages, more than 750,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled.

    Many refugees entered Lebanon, where in 1964 the Palestine Liberation Organization was born. By the mid-1970s, the armed resistance group had recruited and trained over 20,000 fighters who actively participated in launching attacks on Israel from Lebanese soil.

    By 1982, Lebanon was already seven years into its civil war, with violence flaring between Lebanese Christians and Lebanese and Palestinian Muslims. On June 6, 1982, Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon, a future leader of the country, launched Operation Peace for Galilee and invaded Lebanon with the purpose of eliminating the PLO.

    More than 40,000 Israeli troops with hundreds of tanks entered Lebanon from three points: by land across the border into south Lebanon; by sea from the coast of Sidon; and by air as the Israeli forces bombed the Beqaa Valley, Beirut and its Palestinian refugee camps.

    For two months, Beirut was under siege, with water and electricity cut off. As a result of the heavy bombardment and lack of access to basic needs, an estimated 19,000 Lebanese, Syrian and Palestinian civilians and combatants died, of which 5,500 were civilians from West Beirut.

    The Lebanese authorities appealed to the United States, France, Italy and the United Kingdom for help. These countries formed the multinational peacekeeping force, which was designed to restore peace in Lebanon, assist the Lebanese armed forces and evacuate PLO fighters to Tunisia.

    By August 1982, the multinational force had successfully relocated PLO fighters and began pulling out of Lebanon. They were called back, however, as violence flared.

    After the assassination of Lebanese President-elect Bashir Gemayel on Sept. 14, 1982, the Christian Phalangist militia entered the two Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila and killed over 2,000 Palestinian civilians. The Israeli government later set up the Kahan Commission of Inquiry to look into the killings, which concluded that Israel was indirectly responsible for the massacres.

    The birth of Hezbollah

    All of this history remains relevant to the current situation in the region. Israel’s invasion and occupation of Lebanon, its siege on Beirut and the massacres that followed all led to the birth of Hezbollah.

    While members of Lebanon’s marginalized Shiite community in the south had long sought to mobilize through pan-Arab political parties and militias, it was Israel’s invasion that galvanized members of the community to ultimately create Hezbollah in 1985. As former Israeli Defense Minister and Prime Minister Ehud Barak noted in a 2006 interview: “It was our presence there that created Hezbollah.”

    Israel’s invasion also soured Lebanon’s relations with the West. Many Lebanese and Palestinian Muslims considered the multinational force – especially the United States – to be a failure and even an accomplice to Israel.

    From 1982 onward, Americans and other Westerners became a target. In the following decade, more than 80 Americans and Europeans were taken hostage by Hezbollah fighters. Some were tortured for months; others died in custody.

    And on Oct. 23, 1983, a terrorist attack targeted the American barracks in Beirut, killing over 300 people, including 220 Marines, 18 sailors and three soldiers. Minutes later, a second suicide attack killed 58 French paratroopers. The Islamic jihad claimed responsibility for the two attacks; some of its members are thought to be among those who officially founded Hezbollah in February 1985.

    Aiding Hezbollah recruitment

    Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon failed to accomplish its goals of stemming attacks on Israel from southern Lebanon. If anything, it had the opposite effect by turning many Lebanese against Israel and creating the conditions in which Hezbollah could recruit.

    Although Israel retreated from Beirut in August 1982, it continued to occupy south Lebanon until 2000. During that period it unlawfully detained many Lebanese suspected of resisting the Israeli occupation. Some were detained without charges in inhumane conditions, while others were illegally transferred into Israel.

    The debris at the site of an overnight Israeli strike in the southern Lebanese village of Akbiyeh on Sept. 24, 2024.
    Mahmoud Zayyat/AFP via Getty Images

    With such a backdrop, Hezbollah’s legitimacy in the eyes of many Lebanese grew – as did its support. So much so that in 1989, at the end of the Lebanese civil war, the authorities signed an agreement that, although not referencing Hezbollah directly, asserted Lebanon’s right to resist the Israeli occupation in the south.

    This clause was interpreted by Hezbollah as legitimizing its armed fight against occupation.

    After occupation ended in 2000, Hezbollah had to reinvent its role, claiming that it would continue fighting against Israel until the liberation of the disputed Shebaa Farms, the Golan Heights and occupied Palestine.

    In 2006, Hezbollah entered Israeli territory for the first time, killing three soldiers and kidnapping two, demanding the release of Lebanese prisoners in exchange. In retaliation, the Israel Defense Forces attacked Lebanon by air, sea and land, with Israeli ground forces entering Lebanon and carrying out a number of operations on Lebanese territory. A subsequent war saw no such prisoner swap but resulted in the deaths of about 1,100 Lebanese civilians and 120 Israelis, mostly soldiers.

    History repeating?

    Until Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, there had been hopes that decades of hostilities between Lebanon and Israel could be on the cusp of turning. In October 2022, Lebanon and Israel signed a maritime border agreement brokered by the U.S – interpreted as the beginning of normalizing relations between two countries technically at war.

    But the magnitude of the human crisis in Gaza and the series of events that followed in Lebanon have ended such hopes for now. Hezbollah’s vow of solidarity with Hamas has resulted in a running series of tit-for-tat attacks with Israel that have escalated over the past year.

    The attack using booby-trapped pagers that targeted Hezbollah fighters and killed several civilians across Lebanon on Sept. 17, 2024, has set off a chain of events that have now seen nearly 500 Lebanese killed and Hezbollah extend the geographical scope of its missile attacks in Israel. Its long-range ballistic missiles can reach 250-300 kilometers (155-186 miles) and have reached Haifa and the city’s Ramat David Airbase.

    The next step in this deadly escalation could well be a ground invasion. But in 1982, such an operation resulted only in catastrophic results for all concerned – and set in place the conditions for decades of hostilities across the Lebanon-Israel border. A similar offensive today would almost certainly have similar results – especially for the people of Lebanon.

    Mireille Rebeiz is affiliated with American Red Cross.

    – ref. Lebanese civilians are fleeing the south, fearing an Israeli invasion − a look back at 1982 suggests they have every reason to worry – https://theconversation.com/lebanese-civilians-are-fleeing-the-south-fearing-an-israeli-invasion-a-look-back-at-1982-suggests-they-have-every-reason-to-worry-239653

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Know your place: what happened to class in British politics – a new podcast series from The Conversation Documentaries

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Laura Hood, Host, Know Your Place podcast, The Conversation

    Even in the 21st century, social class is a part of being British. We talk of living in a post-class era but, in reality, our backgrounds affect our life chances and even just the way we interact with each other. We have a sense of our own class and make assumptions about others with class in the back of our minds.

    In a recent documentary about their rise to fame, David and Victoria Beckham squabbled about the latter’s claim to come from a working class family. She was derided across the internet for the claim, too.

    Is Victoria Beckham working class? You may scoff at the very thought. But then consider when she stopped being working class and you start to see the problem. If a wealthy British person who owns her own business is not working class, when did she cease to be so? Are her parents still working class if she is not?

    For much of the 20th century, class identities were clearer. There was also a strong, clear relationship between class and political preference. After all, one of the two main parties was established explicitly to represent the labour movement. It was loudly and proudly a political manifestation of the working class.

    There were of course exceptions but, by and large, if someone knew your class, they could make a fairly safe guess as to how you would vote. That is no longer true.

    This is what I’m exploring in a new podcast series Know your place: what happened to class in British politics on The Conversation Documentaries. Listen to the trailer now ahead of the series launch on October 7.

    Over the course of five episodes, I’ll be speaking to leading politics experts across the UK to find out why Labour can no longer take the working class vote for granted but also why the Conservatives can’t either.

    We’ll find out the truth behind the Liberal Democrats’ “Gail’s strategy” to capture the middle classes. We’ll explore how class is even defined in the 21st century and pinpoint when it stopped being the case that your background shaped your politics.

    And as the UK ushers in ostensibly the most working-class parliament that has been seen in years, we’ll investigate what difference it makes when people from working-class backgrounds hold the levers of power.

    Follow The Conversation Documentaries to listen to Know Your Place: what happened to class in British politics from October 7. The Conversation Documentaries, formerly called The Anthill, is the home for in-depth documentary podcast series from The Conversation.

    Know Your Place: what happened to class in British politics is produced and mixed by Anouk Millet for The Conversation. It’s supported by the National Centre for Social Research.

    Newsclips in the trailer from Keir Starmer, ITV News, PoliticsJOE and Angela Rayner MP.

    Listen to The Conversation Documentaries via any of the apps listed above, download it directly via our RSS feed or find out how else to listen here.

    Know Your Place: what happened to class in British politics is supported by the National Centre for Social Research.

    – ref. Know your place: what happened to class in British politics – a new podcast series from The Conversation Documentaries – https://theconversation.com/know-your-place-what-happened-to-class-in-british-politics-a-new-podcast-series-from-the-conversation-documentaries-239451

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Sri Lanka’s new leftist president marks departure from political family rule

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Amalendu Misra, Professor of International Politics, Lancaster University

    Sri Lanka has sworn in 55-year-old leftist politician Anura Kumara Dissanayake as its new president. There was no clear winner after the first round of votes from Saturday’s election had been counted. But Dissanayake, who is commonly known by his initials AKD, emerged victorious after a count of the second-choice votes.

    His election is something of a watershed. It was the first time since Sri Lanka gained independence in 1948 that the presidential race was decided by a second round of counting after either of the top two candidates failed to win the mandatory 50% of the vote. And it was also the only time that voters have elected a candidate who does not belong to the country’s traditional ruling elite.

    Sri Lanka has long been held in the tight grip of a handful of powerful political families. The Rajapaksa dynasty, for example, had dominated Sri Lankan politics for well over two decades before mass protests over a severe economic crisis unseated the country’s leader, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, in 2022.

    AKD’s campaign rhetoric centred largely around corruption as the key culprit in the economic woes facing the country. Previous governments have been linked not only to corruption, but also to human rights abuses and the military’s encroachment on the civilian space. Persuaded by his logic of openness and transformation, voters saw AKD as an opportunity to change Sri Lanka’s stale political system.

    Following his election, AKD declared in characteristic Marxian mode: “This victory belongs to all of us.” Assuaging the demands of the masses for change will be a priority.

    Voters have chosen a new president for the first time since mass protests unseated Sri Lanka’s leader in 2022.
    Color Collector / Shutterstock

    AKD comes from a strong leftwing ideological background. He leads a political outfit called the Janatha Vimukti Peramuna (JVP), which is by no means a heavyweight party. It has only three members in the country’s 225-member parliament, and does not come with an attractive pedigree.

    The JVP is seen in Sri Lanka as a fringe reactionary party due to its involvement in violent insurrections and targeted assassinations that left thousands dead in the 1980s. Given Sri Lanka’s fractious ethno-nationalist politics, how the JVP and its new national leader carry the masses forward on a national regeneration project would be anybody’s guess.

    But AKD has shown himself to be aware of the underlying tensions in the country and, since becoming the JVP’s leader in 2008, has apologised for the party’s past violence. In his swearing-in speech, AKD declared: “We need to establish a new clean political culture … We will do the utmost to win back the people’s respect and trust in the political system.”

    The road ahead

    There are several critical challenges that AKD needs to face head on – the most important of which concerns the country’s failing economy. After all, it was acute economic hardship that drove the citizenry to vote for political change.

    In the past, a substantial portion of whatever Sri Lanka managed to procure through its two main sources of income, tourism and remittances sent home by citizens living abroad, went towards settling its external debts. However, these earnings were hit badly by the pandemic and the country’s economic woes spiralled out of control.

    The rate of inflation soared and dwindling reserves of foreign currency resulted in acute shortages of essential goods and services. Then, in May 2022, Sri Lanka defaulted on its foreign debt for the first time in its history.

    This scenario quickly led to a national emergency. Faced with the most devastating economic crisis since independence, a countrywide uprising (colloquially known as the aragalaya) ousted Gotabaya Rajapaksa from office.

    The removal of Rajapaksa secured an uneasy peace, and things have since tentatively improved on the economic front. Ranil Wickremesinghe took over as the interim president in 2022 and his administration managed to secure a loan worth US$3 billion (£2.2 billion) from the International Monetary Fund.

    The economy now appears to be on a slow path of recovery. It is expected to grow in 2024 for the first time in three years, supported by a narrower trade deficit and growing remittances.

    Sri Lanka’s interim president, Ranil Wickremesinghe, has congratulated Dissanayake on winning the election.
    Ruwan Walpola / Shutterstock

    AKD is aware of the enormity of the burden he carries. As he admitted while accepting the role of president: “I have said before that I am not a magician – I am an ordinary citizen. There are things I know and don’t know. My aim is to gather those with the knowledge and skills to help lift this country.”

    His pro-working class and anti-political elite campaigning without doubt made AKD popular among youth, and helped him secure victory. But his ideology may well be at odds with the foreign lenders who have kept the economy afloat for past two decades.

    Sri Lanka’s new president faces a precarious balancing act to satisfy both a population high on hopes of populist subsidies and the demands of external lenders to tighten the country’s belts.

    Amalendu Misra is a recipient of British Academy and Nuffield Foundation Fellowships.

    – ref. Sri Lanka’s new leftist president marks departure from political family rule – https://theconversation.com/sri-lankas-new-leftist-president-marks-departure-from-political-family-rule-239631

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –