Search

By Mehru Nisa Shahid Climate change is often given significant attention in conversations and tends to be treated as an isolated issue, with little consideration for intersectionality within mainstream discourse. In my observation, the discourse within my country, Pakistan, focuses on various pressing social issues, yet climate change is low on the agenda. The reality is that climate change affects individuals’ daily lives deeply and deserves more attention. In this policy report, I will discuss the impact of climate change on education— a fundamental human right that many worldwide are deprived of, and access remains a significant challenge for many. Education plays a decisive role in empowering individuals by providing them with information and knowledge to improve the world. It has allowed us to learn about climate change and discover practical solutions. Unfortunately, education systems worldwide have been disrupted by climate-related events, such as the floods in Pakistan, severely affecting people's lives. Significance of Education in Addressing Climate Change Education plays a pivotal role in addressing the climate change challenge. It raises awareness regarding the issue and equips individuals with the knowledge necessary to develop solutions. However, our education systems require significant transformation. One major issue is the lack of climate education training for teachers, and another is the absence of adequate representation of climate-related topics within the curriculum. Recognising these challenges, the UN Secretary-General's Transforming Education Summit underscores the need to overhaul education in response to the global climate and environmental crisis. Building on the groundwork laid by Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), the newly established Greening Education Partnership seeks to take cohesive and robust action. It aims to prepare every learner with the knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes required to address climate change and promote sustainable development. The partnership focuses on four action areas: greening schools, learning, capacity, and readiness. Countries are encouraged to embrace at least two of these components by 2030. Empowering Marginalised Communities in the Fight Against Climate Change Furthermore, empowering marginalised communities, particularly gender and ethnic minorities, is crucial to addressing climate change. These communities are often the most affected by climate impacts and possess valuable insights into tackling the issue. Solving climate change cannot be achieved in isolation from addressing concurrent issues like racial capitalism and patriarchy, which hinder the education and empowerment of marginalised individuals. Without addressing these challenges with an intersectional approach, we will continue living in a world marked by cruelty towards humanity and the planet. A Call for Comprehensive Solutions Exploring potential solutions to the educational challenges posed by climate change is crucial. In some regions, the effects of climate change have led to the suspension of education. For instance, in Pakistan, more than 3.5 million children were affected by floods, disrupting their education. Infrastructure damage, longer commutes to school, and uncertainty regarding school reopenings took a toll. The World Bank suggested that Pakistan adopt a resilient education system with district-level planning and disaster response strategies for floods and earthquakes. These are vital policy considerations. However, these policy considerations often overlook the broader context of global climate injustice and the economic and political instability developing countries like Pakistan face. It's essential to consider the historical and political aspects of climate change. Historically, the global north has been the primary contributor to greenhouse gas emissions responsible for climate change, disproportionately impacting the global south. Financial institutions in the global north have long funded carbon-intensive projects and companies contributing to global warming. Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) by the IMF have also been associated with environmental degradation, such as deforestation and air pollution. A recent study in Ghana revealed a substantial increase in deforestation during the post-adjustment period. This highlights how the short-term profitability focus of SAPs has negatively affected forests and contributed significantly to the climate change crisis. All of this underscores that climate change policies cannot be one-size-fits-all solutions. Recommendations for global south countries need to account for the unjust global financial system. Developing countries called for climate justice at COP27, particularly in adaptation, loss, and damage funds. Recognising climate injustice is the first step, and the global north should acknowledge its historical contributions and provide aid to developing countries without onerous conditions. It is then on developing countries to fulfil their responsibilities in addressing climate change. To conclude, the issue of climate change and its link with education show that the climate change crisis can not be solved without considering the societal and global structural inequalities.

By Stathis Poulantzas Positioned in Central Greece, Thessaly, encompassing approximately 14,000 square kilometres, is an agricultural hub, contributing to over a quarter of Greece's grain and a substantial portion of its cotton exports, underscoring its environmental and economic significance to the nation. The recent successive battering by two storms, "Daniel" and "Elias," within a mere month illustrates the alarming acceleration of the global climate crisis, increasingly pressing governments to intensify protective measures against such extreme weather incidents. The Beginning: Storm Daniel’s Devastation To begin with, Storm Daniel caused record-breaking rainfall in Greece on 5-6 September, with a reported 750 mm falling in 24 hours at a station in the village of Zagora. This is the equivalent of about 18 months of rainfall. Many stations in Thessaly, central Greece received 400 to 600 mm of rainfall in 24 hours. The natural catastrophe sadly also resulted in a significant loss of human life, with 17 people killed as a direct effect of the storm. It additionally caused major disasters in neighbouring countries, including Turkey and Bulgaria. But, in the most devastated country of all, Libya, over 10,000 people went missing, entire neighbourhoods in Berna and Al-Bayda disappeared, and communications were interrupted, while electricity fell in large parts of the African state. About three weeks later, a second major storm named “Elias” once more hit Thesally on 27 September. The Greek fire service announced that it had no choice but to move over 3,000 people to protected locations as the weather worsened. Villages experienced flooding, roads were submerged, and schools in many municipalities had to shut down as Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis activated emergency state services and deployed military units to strengthen protections, notably in the northern Thessaly region. To demonstrate the extent of the severity, the European Severe Weather Database (ESWD) reported that a month’s precipitation had occurred in these 24 hours while the storm persisted for a bit more, bringing additional heavy rainfall, hail, and thunderstorms. Environmental and Financial Implications of the Storm Both cases of extreme weather phenomena combined left a significant environmental footprint in the region. More specifically, fruit trees, corn and around a fifth of Greece's cotton crop have been destroyed, and over 200,000 animals and poultry are killed. Additionally, the trees have been infected by bacteria, while most of the water is polluted by numerous chemicals and oil, making the damage further enormous. Most of the crop has been destroyed, and though Greek farmers can replant some crops like cereals and cotton relatively soon, others, such as orchards, cannot easily grow again. In parallel, sheep and goats, which produce most milk for essential Greek products such as Feta cheese and yoghurt, will need more time to be restored. It is worth noting that the environmental devastation has also led to a rapid increase in health problems and sicknesses in Thessaly, for instance, a rise in gastroenteritis and respiratory disease cases. Further, the financial footprint that the storms left is also noteworthy. To showcase the economic consequences of the floods, in the aftermath of just storm “Daniel”, over 70km of roads, 79 bridges and 130 technical works were damaged, whilst issues in the railroad track appeared in 16 points, and around 80 schools were flooded. Academics have estimated that just for the short term, the Greek government will require nearly 5 million euros to resolve the issue. Policy suggestions to be considered by Greece One can understand the urgent need for actions to restore the region and ensure that such a catastrophe cannot be repeated in Thessaly or any other part of Greece. Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis recently announced in a cabinet meeting that “adaptation to the climate crisis is a fundamental priority in all our policies.” He has already reached an agreement with the EU to receive vital funding to help the devastated areas and recently thanked the Union for “offering Greece the highest possible flexibility to absorb European funds to address this huge natural disaster.” But this is not enough. Though in a difficult period from an economic perspective, Greece needs to provide more funds to build a fortified resilience on Thessaly, as well as other regions which could be immediately threatened by such natural catastrophes, on a long-term basis. Some suggestions could involve spending up to 5 billion euros, as suggested, to rebuild any damaged or destroyed infrastructure, ranging from housing to municipality services to roads and health units, and build them with the ability to absorb large amounts of water pressure. Flood control works also need to increase exponentially in mountainous regions, as according to Mr Kimon Xatzibiros, a professor of Environmental Affairs at the University Kapodistrian University of Athens, the country is still 30 years behind in such works. At the same time, the region should be restored as soon as possible, while people should also be incentivised to remain in the area to avoid a large wave of movement towards the big cities, especially Athens (the capital) and Thessaloniki (the second largest Greek city located in the north of the country). That is because, in such a case, many fields will not be restored, and production will suffer from a significant fall, resulting in devastating environmental and financial consequences. Lastly, Greek forces— especially the military— need to be much more prepared with a clear protocol of actions that they should follow, while they should also respond much faster to the following such a dangerous situation.

By Channon Heenan On 19th May 2023, President Xi Jinping held the first in-person China-Central Asia summit in Xi’an, China. The summit aimed to enhance regional and economic co-operation between the countries of central Asia and China and was widely seen as an opportunity to strengthen ties. Xi Jinping promised to renew infrastructure, deepen trade links and enhance security co-operation in a region that has long been seen as Russia’s backyard. The timing of the summit was intriguing, as it seemed to come at a time when Russia’s own power in the region is waning as a result of the Russo-Ukrainian war and central Asian nations are searching for new sources of investment. Russo-Kazakh Relations The most exemplar shift in policy in Central Asia from a Russian hegemony to a Chinese trajectory is that of Kazakhstan. Ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Kremlin has kept Kazakhstan well within its orbit as Kazakhstan plays a key part of all the regional organisations headed by Russia (such as the Collective Security Treaty Organisation.) Russia wields a significant amount of soft power in the country, and Russian culture permeates throughout. This central Asian nation is an important ally for Moscow, especially as relations with the West have plummeted and sanctions have threatened to put the Russian economy in dire straits. The Kremlin needs a friendly Kazakhstan— it cannot afford for its backyard to become too independent. Indeed, the call by Kazakh President Tokayev for assistance from the Russia-led CSTO in January 2022 to quell an eruption of nationwide unrest has been seen by many as the ultimate act of allegiance to Moscow, showing a submissive Kazakhstan dependent on its neighbour who is all too happy to dominate the relationship if it helps Moscow retain a key partner. The Russo-Kazakh Predicament However, in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Kazakh policy towards Russia has changed drastically. Rather than being dependent on Russia for security matters and allowing Russian domination, Astana has pursued a more independent, multi-vector foreign policy. Kazakhstan has adhered to Western sanctions, which, while not supporting the measures, has not provided Russia with the get-out-of-jail card it so desired by not facilitating a way to circumvent the sanctions. Astana has also refused to recognise the breakaway regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, a move that sparked furore in Moscow. The reasoning behind this change in policy direction is two-fold. Firstly, Russia’s disastrous conduct of the war in Ukraine has starved it of much of its political and military clout in the former Soviet republic, and as such the Russian army is no longer as indomitable as it may once have been. Therefore, the threat of any militaristic counter-measures that could be taken by Russia to a change in Kazakh attitudes has reduced. Secondly, because of this weakening, Kazakhstan can direct more attention to China as a partner in trade and security to encourage more investment, but they have to tread lightly as far as moving away from Moscow is concerned, considering Russia’s willingness to take military action against post-Soviet states that strive too far from its orbit. A Blossoming Partnership Since the launch of the Belt and Road initiative in 2013, which aims to link Europe with China and everywhere in between in a new silk road to increase trade and transport links, a wave of Chinese investment has flooded into Kazakhstan, and in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine the current is stronger than ever, with China pouring billions into the central Asian country, and Xi Jinping first paying a visit in September 2022 then inviting Kazakhstan to the Central Asian Summit in Xi’an, China in May 2023. There exists a myriad of reasons why Xi Jinping wishes to entice Astana into the Chinese sphere of influence, the most important of these being an expansive Chinese economic policy. Due to rapidly expanding domestic energy needs, China has been investing largely in Kazakh energy resources, especially oil – as such China needs a stable Kazakhstan well within its own orbit to ensure it has a steady supply of energy. Kazakhstan, in pursuit of foreign investment following the implementation of its multi-vector foreign policy and a reduction in Russian investment, has bolstered this policy, evidenced by the $24 billion of trade between the two nations in 2022, only $2 billion behind trade between Kazakhstan and Russia. Further, the economic power of China can be seen in its lion’s share of Kazakh exports, claiming the title of Kazakhstan’s largest buyer of exports in 2021, and second only to Russia as a source of imports. Kazakhstan does not plan to stop its economic shift towards China there, with President Tokayev highlighting this renewed Chinese focus by making a promise to target $40 billion in annual two-way trade between the two nations, up from over $31 billion in 2022. In terms of oil, from January 2023, 1.5 million tonnes of oil will be shipped through the Middle Corridor transport route to China – and up to 6 million tonnes annually in the long run which will help to reduce Kazakh dependency on the Caspian Pipeline Consortium going through Russia, a pipeline the Russian side tends to stop when Astana steps out of line. China has signalled a shift in attitude towards Russia as far as Kazakhstan is concerned, with Xi Jinping remarking during the state visit to Astana in September 2022 that China would ‘oppose the interference of any forces’ in the internal affairs of Kazakhstan, a remark that sounds like a warning to Moscow to not destabilise a key energy and trade partner of Beijing, for a destabilised Kazakhstan would threaten both Chinese security and energy imports. While Russia has become less of a military player in the region as its interests are focussed elsewhere, it is worth noting that Xi Jinping pledged Chinese support to enhance the region’s law enforcement and defence capabilities at the China-Central Asia summit, to ‘prevent colour revolutions.’ This is a move that, combined with Chinese investment flooding into Kazakhstan and the predicted shift to the Middle Corridor, as well as the thinly veiled warning to Russia not to meddle in Kazakh internal affairs, appears to be quite the bid to become the new strongman in Russia’s backyard.

By Reuben Bye On September 18, Justin Trudeau, Canada’s Prime Minister, announced that he had seen evidence suggesting that the Indian government was responsible for killing Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Canadian citizen on Canadian soil. He was shot dead by two masked men in his truck outside a Gurdwara (Sikh temple) in suburban Vancouver on June 18 2023. In response to the accusation, Prime Minister Modi declared the allegations “absurd” and “motivated”, and the Indian government has flatly denied any involvement. Hardeep Singh Nijjar and The Sikh State Nijjar was a prominent advocate for an independent Sikh state known as Khalistan in northwestern India. Between 2014 and 2022, he had been accused of multiple terrorist activities by the Indian government, including accusations of leading the Khalistan Tiger Force militants and involvement in killings in India. Nijjar and his lawyers maintained that he was the subject of a smear campaign for political dissent. He claimed to support the Khalistan movement through peaceful means, such as petitions, protests and spreading awareness of human rights abuses against Sikh communities in India. Support for Khalistan was most significant in the 1980s when Sikh militants fought an armed insurgency against the Indian state and have since declined domestically. Amongst the Sikh diaspora, primarily concentrated in Canada, the US, the UK and Australia, support remains significant. This has led to the Indian government accusing foreign governments of not being tough enough on extremist activities, perceiving supporters of this movement as a threat to national security and unity. They have cited lax responses to Khalistani supporters as a potential barrier to good relations. Impact on Indo-Western Relations These new tensions come at a crucial time for Western geopolitical policymakers who view India as a counterweight to China and as America completes its pivot to Indo-Pacific-focused foreign policy. Such accusations put closer economic and security ties with India at risk by forcing Western governments to respond. Should the allegations be false, it would become a serious international embarrassment for the Trudeau government, which is already lagging in the polls with an election on the horizon. But if found to be accurate, the West must find a balance between condemning a gross violation of sovereignty and maintaining good relations with their new partner. At the time of writing, no evidence has been published by Canada, and investigations are ongoing. Such a lack of public evidence is fuelling the idea that this may primarily be an attempt by Trudeau to boost his Liberal Party’s popularity and has been echoed by voices within the ruling BJP party in India and some within the Canadian Conservative opposition. Whilst possible, given the absence of proof, such a theory lacks substance. To levy serious accusations against such a major actor on the world stage is inherently problematic. It risks current and future ties with the planet’s fifth-largest economy (and potential up-and-coming superpower) and entangles Canada’s closest allies. Trade deal negotiations and visa processing for Canadian citizens have been halted, and India has warned its citizens travelling to Canada to exercise caution. Not-So-Perfect Allies Canadian allies— with whom evidence has been shared— have also failed to dismiss the claims. Fellow Five Eyes intelligence network members (USA, UK, Australia and New Zealand) have expressed concern and urged India to engage in the investigation, even if they have stopped short of condemnation. If this was an electoral ploy, then it is doubtful that other governments would risk their strategic ties with India for Trudeau. It has also been confirmed by the American ambassador to Canada that part of the evidence was provided by the USA through the Five Eyes network. While not necessarily confirming the assassination allegations, the combination of real economic cost and wider allied engagement reveals the unlikelihood of vote-grab theories - even if it was, it is yet to show any polling reprieve for the Liberal government. Irrelevant of Nijjar’s killing, the recent spat highlights tensions between India and its Western partners. Western politicians have been eager to overstate their relationship with India— fellow democracies united in a growing rivalry with authoritarian China, a union exemplified by a spate of trade negotiations, Modi’s addresses to the US Congress and the development of the Quad defence partnership. The most profound and stable international partnerships are those based on shared values since states can share long-term visions and build trust. A common threat in the form of China is bound to keep the two close, but a difference in values remains under-recognised. India has long been sceptical of Western claims of global leadership and promotion of liberal democracy, often perceiving the post-war system as one full of neo-colonial dynamics. If the assassination is proven, it would clearly demonstrate a lack of respect for the ‘rules-based international order’ constantly touted by Western leaders. Domestically, too, India does not resemble a liberal democracy. Under the Hindu-nationalist ideology of the BJP, the country has experienced democratic backsliding reminiscent of Hungary or Turkey. India has experienced increased discriminatory policies and a decline in press freedom. At present, it is not the kindred liberal democracy the West may wish to see in either the domestic or international arena. Expectations for the West If Nijjar was assassinated, Western governments would likely be reluctant to react to Canadian concerns due to fears of losing out on lucrative economic cooperation and strategic partnership, but a lack of consequences would encourage future violations of sovereignty, which would undermine international norms. Aggressive Chinese actions will likely cause India and the West to remain close partners, but if the West is serious about upholding its claimed liberal values, it has the prerogative to call out Modi to prevent similar future incidents. Its response is an opportunity to discourage Modi’s more authoritarian instincts by stressing that allies do not kill each others’ citizens as it will hinder relations. If proven, the West should condemn this killing as a gross violation of Canadian sovereignty and highlight the extent to which it values its own principles, even if they are not always shared.

Movies are considered as the visual representation of the world that we are living in. No one dislikes watching movies. But do we understand one thing that the audience gets so much engaged in a particular story that they forget the real world? The audience seems to be in a fantasy world where even if the movie shows a controversial story or a morally incorrect plotline, people seem to be okay with it. None of the stories exist in a vacuum and it is the utmost responsibility of the filmmaker, directors, and producers to show something legal, relevant, and acceptable by the audience at large. However, they struggle to strike that balance. Starring Rani Mukherjee and Shadaab Khan in Raja ki Aayegi Baraat directed by Ashok Gaikwad in 1997, this movie was a super hit and was accepted by a wide audience. There was no question raised regarding the story of the movie and how did the filmmaker think of producing such movies. The movie showed the lead hero Shadaab Khan as Raja who is a rapist. He rapes Mala cast by Rani Mukherjee. However, the court ordered Mala to marry Raja. This is a very false representation of the court shown where a vague judgment is given. The same situation and same sort of story were shown in the movie "Benaam Badsha" starring Anil Kapoor and Juhi Chawla. Anil Kapoor as Deepak grows up abandoned and rapes Jyoti portraying Juhu Chawla on her wedding day. However, to a great surprise, Jyoti tries to reform him and as a result, decides to move in with him. Marital rape is something that is still largely untouched by the filmmaker. There are other controversial movies like Provoked and Saath Khoon Maaf which portrayed sexual violence in marriage. Raja ki Aayegi Baraat and Benaam Badshah portrayed an unacceptable story. The place where victims and accused come and seek their trials and bails, how can such movies show that justice has given the order to marry the rapist's victim. To everyone's surprise, the movie portrayed the victim to be agreeing to the fact of marrying her rapist. There was one more South Indian hit movie that was dubbed and remade in Bollywood known as "Tejaswini" which portrayed a similar situation. The question which arises is why didn't these movies show the rigorous punishment of the rapists? Why didn't the filmmaker show the victory of the victim who fought amongst the odds and her rapist leads to imprisonment? The answer to this is we are only focussing on why and not how laws have been amended and repealed. We must agree to the fact that movies in the 70s,80s, and 90s cannot be similar. Controversies and questions might have been raised at that time but as technology is increasing, the mindset of people is changing and movies at present times are quite different and even portray a very strong meaning. Legal Actions Before beginning, the law says "Sex by husband is not rape, it does not matter if it is without consent or forcefully". The word marital rape is having sexual intercourse with own spouse without consent or by compelling or danger. Section 375 of the Indian Penal code is rape. According to the Indian penal Code, marital rape constitutes a punishment of up to 15 years. Marital rape may not have a specific place in the legislature, but IPC has not excluded marital rape from its definition of rape as said in Article 145. Rape along with spousal rape is very much illegal and constitutes 8 years of punishment. There should be an extra-legal step if the rapist agrees to marry the victim which has no specific mention in law till now. Role of Media and Entertainment laws As movies play a very important part in my life, so do the media and entertainment laws. Under Article 19 (1) (A) Film laws in India, such kinds of films should be banned. It guarantees freedom of speech and expression as extended to the press. Thus it is regulated under this constitution. It even falls under the censorship of films as the movies portrayed something offensive. The role of these laws is to protect the freedom of expression, media freedom, and technical standards. Section 4 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 is the procedure to examine the film before the release. Every movie should be checked along with the storyline before the release. The movies must be made in a way that conveys a positive message and a moral value to be remembered for the rest of life. If any wrong is shown as it was in Raja ki Aayegi Baraat and Benaam Badshah, such movies should have a legal injunction. There might not be any specific section under media or entertainment laws but the Indian Penal Code, Copyright play a very important part. Under the Cinematograph Act, 1952, a person who is found guilty of a violation for exhibiting movies that can violate someone's rights is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 3 years, or with a fine which may extend to Rs. 1/-lakh, or with both. The Broadcasting Agency should also note or take care about such stories which are portrayed in the movies. Section 5 of the Cinematograph Act gives guidance in certifying films that can be released and shown to the audience. Even the central government has the right to suspend films if it is a violation. Then why not such films? It might be because at those times, there were no strict laws or differences in mindset or people were very less concerned about such things shown in movies and analyzing them with reality. Conclusion Provoked and Lipstick under my Burkha are such movies that showed the ill sides and horror abuse of marital rape where it is merely not a crime in India. Marital rape though constitutes a crime but does not have a mention in the constitution. And this is the advantage which is taken by those criminals in finishing the life of a victim. Any husband can rape a wife who is above 15 years old, then what laws would help her? How will she come out from the dark web? To sum up, such movies must be created which portray the rape victim as fearless and bold and coming out of such thing. The movies must be made in comparison to the old blockbuster hits which showed a wrong thing and hence should portray the victim as a fighter. Law is blind and so are the filmmakers. It's high time now for the legislature to make a strict section particularly for marital rape otherwise such kinds of movies would come out and it must be agreed that it is such a disrespectful thing even for justice as the movies portrayed courts giving this kind of unfair order. 32 countries of the world have not yet criminalized marital rape, amongst which one of them is India. The thing doesn't end here. There have been petitions filed to make marital rape an offense but no actions were taken. A woman filed a petition in 2015, to declare marital rape an offense, but the apex court stated: "law should not change for one woman". In the case of Arnesh Kumar vs the State of Bihar, the court stated that if marital rape is criminalized, the social and family life system will be collapsed. Even if remedies are available for women, marital rape should be criminalized and made a criminal offense such as in countries like Belarus, Belgium, Bhutan, Bhutan, Bulgaria, etc. The UN Committee too recommended that the goverment should criminalize marital rapes.

By Will Allen It seems like a given rule that presidents are expected to seek re-election. There are just six examples of incumbent presidents who haven’t run for a second term – which makes it a highly unusual exercise to even question whether the incumbent should run again. However, America isn’t sticking to this time-honoured rule with Joe Biden, who is still yet to announce his re-election bid (although it appears imminent). Just about everyone has an opinion, and surprisingly many – even those in his own party – are stating Biden shouldn’t run. Personally, I am not one of those people. I think the debate over Biden and his now impending re-election bid have gotten out of hand. Biden should run again because, well, he’s the president and he’s doing a good job. There are of course cases where presidents should not run for re-election. The most obvious case to argue against the incumbent’s re-election is if they are deeply unpopular, which of course Biden is not. Tracking Biden in the polls reveals that he is by no means a wildly popular president. But critically neither is Biden wildly unpopular – according to Fivethirtyeight’s aggregate of approval ratings from various pollsters, approval of Biden sits at around 43%. That figure isn’t terrific, it is a lower rating than the last three presidents to get re-elected. But the metric isn’t something we should be running to to discredit the current president’s electability. Biden’s approval rating currently is higher than Ronald Reagan’s was at this point in time and Reagan went on to win his re-election bid – so why can’t Biden? And we should also acknowledge that Biden’s approval rating has been on the move – with Biden steadily becoming more popular since last summer. His approval gap has narrowed from a +19.0 to +7.8, which should encourage democrats that the president definitely isn’t out of the running. Critics should also be mindful of what they are asking for – a democrat who isn’t Joe Biden. Let’s say they get what they want, who would they want as a nominee instead of the president? The options are seemingly endless, and a viable candidates simply won’t emerge until the day Biden ever said he wasn’t running – which presents a problem. Do they want his vice president Kamala Harris? How about Pete Buttigieg, Gavin Newsom, or some other centrist? What about a progressive like Elizabeth Warren armed with plans? In the end it appears the answer would most likely be Kamala Harris, but this only invites the same questions that critics are posing to Biden – her polling isn’t strong. In fact, it’s currently weaker than the man they don’t want to run again in 2024. However, this problem isn’t just specific to Harris, most of the polling shows that the slew of potential democratic candidates are weaker than Biden. Democrats should also fear a replacement because it means navigating an open primary – an event that would be a disaster. Primaries at the best of times are time consuming, extremely expensive, and exhaustive to the party apparatus. Holding one a mere handful of months out from the 2024 election is not a smart move if you are concerned with winning a gruelling general election, let alone a brutal Senate map. A primary to replace Biden would undoubtedly draw candidates from far and wide into the race, inviting a set of brutal debates that will fracture what is currently a united party under Biden’s leadership. A primary then will divert the party’s attention and money from doing the very thing Biden’s chief critics want – winning the presidency. Aside from party politics, Biden also has a record to run on in 2024. In his first two years, despite the frequent infuriating actions of some within his party, Biden passed a lot of legislation – and by a lot I mean a heck of a lot. Biden kicked off his presidency with the American Rescue Plan, which laid the groundwork for the country’s strong economic progress since emerging from the pandemic in 2021. In his first two years in office Biden has overseen the creation of 12 million jobs, more than any president created in a full four-year term. Unemployment is at historic lows, job hiring remains persistently strong and the United States has managed, against all odds, to avoid a deeply damaging recession many economists predicted – in large part due to the strength of the ARP that Biden championed. The American Rescue Plan also included provisions like the expanded child tax credit, which slashed child poverty by 30%. We should all give credit where credit is due, and Biden deserves a lot of credit for the economic outlook that presents itself today. Biden has also passed a lot more than just the American Rescue Plan. He eventually signed a second transformational reconciliation package into law, the Inflation Reduction Act – which pumps billions of dollars into investing in the fight against climate change. The legislation also cut the costs of prescription drugs for those on Medicare. If you need an idea of just how powerful this provision has been, just look to the fact it has since pushed the largest producers of insulin to finally cut costs for every American, not just those on Medicare. Aside from these truly historic bills, Biden has signed bipartisan legislation on infrastructure, gun control reform and science funding to counter the rise of China in strategic sectors. When held up by congress Biden hasn’t sat idly by, he’s picked up his pen and signed countless executive orders. These orders tackle issues such as gun violence, reproductive rights and of course student debt forgiveness. Despite debt cancelation being held up in litigation, Biden has still managed to do things such as increase the maximum value of Pell Grants. As it stands his legislative record is one of the most transformational in recent history – and as one democratic strategist stated, “If any other president had his record of accomplishments, this wouldn’t even be a question”. Of course, Biden’s record isn’t perfect, there was Afghanistan, the most recent go-ahead for the ‘Willow’ project in Alaska and other blunders. But critics should again be mindful that no president’s record is perfect, and on balance Biden’s makes him a remarkably successful president. However, America’s chief concern over whether Biden should run again stems from the fact he’s 80, an octogenarian. This is of course entirely fair to question to level – should the oldest president ever elected (who is only getting older) seek a second term? After all, the presidency is not an easy job, it’s gruelling. It’s a job which demands the president’s full attention every hour of every day for four long years – Biden’s age brings into question whether he can handle such a job. By the end of a second term Biden would be well into his 80s (86), an age which calls into question a whole range of things such as physical fitness, mental decline, even that of death. Death and mental decline are notattractive things, and it’s not easy to rebut them because they are not trivial things at all. The best we can say is that Biden remains in remarkably good health (according to his White House doctor he has remarkably low levels of cholesterol and shows no signs of mental decline). There are also no signs of earlier brain aneurysms making any reoccurrence, despite what his critics say. As a result, we can only rest on the advice and findings Biden’s doctor gives to the president – which currently make the case he is fit to run. If signs of mental decline were to set in, which we can only ever speculate about, the line at which intervention occurs is not a clear cut one which presents a difficulty. There is however, the 25th Amendment, which provides a backstop against the overarching danger mental decline presents in a president. As it stands the amendment looks like it won’t ever be needed. Yet it remains there for Kamala Harris, his much younger vice president, to become acting president if such a scenario ever unfolds. In a perfect world, it might be healthy for democrats to continue airing out questions over whether Biden should run – that time is however up. Democrats need to put this question to rest. If they want to win in 2024, Biden is quite simply the best shot they have at retaining the presidency. Despite qualms about his age, he has a commanding legislative record to sell and a united party to help him – they should let him run.

According to Grand View Research, the global AI market size is predicted to reach $1,811.8 billion by 2030, up from $136.6 billion in 2022 with a CAGR of 38.1%. While there are many misconceptions regarding AI and the potential developments that it may lead to, it is essential to analyse the reasons for many companies investing in this technology. A study by IBM found that at present approximately 77 per cent of companies are either using AI or exploring AI for further research into implementation. This editorial piece aims to explore the debate surrounding the fear as a consequence of artificial intelligence and provide the argument that it generates a net positive result. Origins of Artificial Intelligence Criticism of AI is not new, it has been the case since its advent in the 1940s. Alan Turing was the first to implicitly evoke the idea of machines improving and modifying their own program under his stored-program concept. The famous “Turing Test” conducted in 1950, was essential in understanding intelligent behavior. In his paper, Turing described the experiment as an imitation game, whereby the computer must provide answers that closely resemble that of a human being. With an interrogator present in a separate disclosed room, they were required to distinguish between the human and computer subjects solely on the responses received to a set of posed questions. Scientists to date debate whether passing the Turing test should be considered the perfect tool for computers exhibiting “intelligence.” The term “Artificial Intelligence” was then coined in 1955 by John McCarthy, a computer and cognitive scientist. He would later rightly be known as the father of artificial intelligence for also developing the first computer language for symbolic computation, used in a multitude of areas within the field of AI. The period between 1974 to 1980, however, was shadowed as the “AI Winter” due to governments' collapse in funding. This was spurred by the culmination of the oil crisis along with the loss of faith in AI, as it failed to meet expectations. Use-Cases and Benefits At present with greater infrastructure, AI can be used for task expedition, improved coordination, and feed into the demands of a new leisure society. The impact can be observed in various value chains within businesses including manufacturing, retail, education, and healthcare. For example, Mckinsey Global Insititute Analysis observed that the current use-case of AI as a prediction tool through machine learning has led to a 13 per cent improvement in EBIT for manufacturing. This was mainly achieved by automating the procurement processes and using AI for better R&D procedures. AI also consequently contributed to enriching the overall user experiences by reducing costs, which resulted in less levied burdens on the market prices. In this particular case, fuel savings were boosted by 12 per cent through the employment of optimized flight routes for transportation. In healthcare, an AI software developed by researchers at Houston Methodist Research Institute, increased accuracy to 99 per cent and speed by 30 times, more than that of a human doctor in reviewing mammograms. The Chair of the Department of Systems Medicine and Bioengineering at the institute said, “This software intelligently reviews millions of records in a short amount of time, enabling us to determine breast cancer risk more efficiently using a patient's mammogram.” This is crucial because as per the American Cancer Society, in reality, a high number of diagnoses can yield false-positive results. Therefore the use of AI in such situations can avoid patients from undergoing unnecessary invasive procedures or biopsies. Healthcare in the near future will need to cope with the increasing workforce demands, and maintain a level of sustainability. By 2030, there would be a shortfall of an estimated 10 million physicians, nurses, and midwives globally over the same period, mostly in low- and lower-middle-income countries, according to the World Health Organization. Such gaps can be met with the adoption and scaling of AI solutions to reduce hours spent on administrative or routine tasks. Companies, including Content Technologies and Carnegie Learning, are examples of AI deployment in education. These digital platforms are constructed to use the individualised learning approach and to add customisations at par with the students’ respective understanding levels. With greater advancements in this tech, such tailored styles could become the norm, especially aiding those with undiagnosed learning disabilities. In 2015, John F. Pane and his colleagues at RAND Corp. found that 11,000 students at 62 schools had greater gains in mathematics and reading when they used individualised learning plans (ILP), as compared to others in a more traditional setting. While this remains to be the most comprehensive study to date, with more concentration on AI technology, barriers can be eliminated for rounded research to further understand such benefits. Through video and image analytics, criminal justice can be improved by providing investigative assistance. Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), a deep learning algorithm, is developed to increase accuracy in image classification. Apart from facial recognition, forensic laboratories can use AI in DNA testing to process degraded evidence after long periods of time. Recently, Forensic and National Security Science Institute (FNSSI) professors, Micheal Marciano and Jonathan Adelman were the first to invent a novel hybrid machine learning approach (MLA) that provides high-confidence results. Internet companies like PayPal have also relied on AI for identifying fraud attempts by training their algorithms to detect anomalies in patterns or new patterns. Addressing Concerns As the decision-making role of AI increases within institutions, there is a fear surrounding the accompanied risks. Even with more complex programs, the data often reflects past inequities thereby causing interferences through unwanted biases. A study conducted by Joy Buolamwini and Timnit Gebru at MIT concluded that facial analysis tech has a lesser success rate with minorities, especially women, due to a lack of available training data. However, progress is being made to rectify such system errors through either pre-processing or post-processing techniques. For example, Silvia Chiappa, a research scientist at DeepMind, developed a path-specific counterfactual method that takes into account the effect on outcomes due to sensitive attributes. Governing bodies such as the European Commission proposed the Artificial Intelligence Act in 2021, to introduce a safety framework and to prevent any unethical prejudices. Fear stemming from the advancement in AI can be attributed to the myth of catastrophic superintelligence, usually due to the media consumed. The human-like qualities instill the misconception that it may one day replace mankind, however, these are purely irrational and impractical in the real world. AI can be considered a disruptive technology, only in the progressive sense as it streamlines processes and provides greater efficiency within organisations.

By Evie Taylor The start of the 2020s provided an opportunity for newly invigorated efforts to combat the climate crisis. The 2015 Paris Agreement, borne out of COP21, highlighted the years preceding 2030 as a vital period for environmental protection, signalling this time as the last opportunity to prevent the planet from reaching a number of tipping points that would cause irreparable environmental damage. The annual COP meetings have facilitated the platform for a united global response to climate change, giving political leaders no excuse to avoid collaborative action. Yet the political response to this global emergency to date has been characterised by greenwashing, empty promises and insufficient targets. The first three years of this decade have starkly exposed that those figureheads around the world who possess the greatest power to influence climate policy are determined to avoid accountability: either denying the gravity of the crisis as explained by scientists, or concerning themselves only with performative action, to give the public impression that they care, without actually having to make the sacrifices necessary to protect the planet. The greenwashing at COP27 proved that the greatest shared concern amongst those with the most power to introduce change (specifically political leaders of Global North countries and the bosses of companies emitting the highest levels of pollution) is avoiding accountability, rather than actually working towards constructive change. If we look at those people in positions with the most power to incite environmental policy changes, there is little hope for 2023 to be the year in which the world rallies together to take urgent action. But, fortunately, beyond the people in power who are burying their heads in the sand as we rocket towards climate disaster, there is a rapidly growing movement of people turning their climate anxiety into climate action. When we look outside of the sphere of political inaction, we find real evidence of community networks being forged around the world, rallying together to combat the climate crisis. Whilst these communities are composed of people from all generations, they are overwhelmingly being led by young activists, who are recognising and exposing the insufficient action that is being taken on a governmental level. Gen-Z are taking on the responsibility of spearheading campaigns for change and their efforts are quickly gaining momentum. Based on the environmental track record of this generation to date, we can anticipate that 2023 will see an inspiring surge in youth-led climate activism. It should come as no great surprise that many Gen-Z youth are feeling overwhelming anxiety about the environment, as the climate crisis has rapidly accelerated during their lifetimes. They have not grown up with the privilege that older generations have had of being able to exploit the planet, burning through fossil fuels, and accumulating masses of non-recyclable waste, without worrying about how this will impact their futures. People born in the late 1990s and 2000s are becoming acutely aware that global leaders are underdelivering on already lacklustre climate goals, knowing that it is not our current political leaders and big-business CEOs who will bear the brunt of the climate crisis. Younger generations are already experiencing the worst effects of the climate crisis because of the uncertainty it casts over their futures. There is little to no support for young people, to help them manage this anxiety, with school curriculums still tending to only offer a brief address of the topic in geography or science class. According to a 2021 investigation into climate anxiety, published in The Lancet Planetary Health journal, 75% of young people in the US identify their worry about climate change as between moderate to extreme. Meanwhile a 2019 poll by the Washington Post found that just 14% of teenagers reported being given the chance to learn about climate solutions in school. Similarly, in the UK, Save the Children reported that 70% of children feel anxiety about environmental damage. The rise of social media in the 2010s, combined with the lack of education in schools, gave way to what has become commonly known as ‘climate doomism’, as the sharing of an overwhelming amount of information on what is a pretty bleak reality gave young people little reason for hope for the future. However, recent years have seen an increasing level of self-awareness amongst young people that this doomism is not constructive, and thus a shift towards taking to social media to self-educate and empower themselves by sharing information that can help to inspire action. University of Bath environmental psychologist, Professor Lorraine Whitmarsh has identified a link between climate concerns and taking effective action, highlighting that angst and uncertainty is being channelled into an innovative force for good. Californian Gen-Z climate activist, Zahra Biabani, who uses her online platform to spread climate optimist content that bridges the doomist “gap between education and action” explains that “climate education can be debilitating without a form of encouragement to act, especially when we see what’s going on in the world, and how it’s going to get worse”. Zahra claims that many young people are motivated to work to save the planet, not accept its demise. Young environmental leaders like Zahra are forging a new and empowering path for Gen-Z to follow, recognising the reality of the crisis but also looking for hope, to inspire change. Aside from using their voices to protest against government inaction and expose the political and business leaders who are fueling greenwashing, reports show that Gen-Z are also making lifestyle changes more rapidly than other age demographics, like turning plant-based at a rate that is faster than any other generation. Whilst change could be actioned much more easily by those in positions of economic and political power, positions which are overwhelmingly made up of a much older demographic, the reality is clear that this simply is not happening. Gen-Z are learning that festering in the anxiety caused by this inaction does not change anything. They are actioning a bottom-up response to a global issue, taking responsibility for an issue created by the generations that preceded them. Greta Thunberg arguably represents the figurehead for Gen-Z climate action, after her ‘School Strikes for Climate’, which she began undertaking in 2018, aged just 15, gained global traction. Thunberg founded Fridays for Future, moving her individual school strike into a worldwide endeavour. By November of 2019, over 17,000 students from 24 different countries had participated in school strikes for climate. She famously addressed world leaders at the United Nations, giving a damning speech about their present inaction, really highlighting that today’s youth are shouldering the burden of the climate crisis. Thunberg has made no secret of her fear and anxiety surrounding the climate crisis. But rather than let herself become paralysed by that fear, she has drawn global attention to the realities that politicians around the world have consistently tried to underplay. This global attention has both held leaders to account and inspired other young people to make their own environmental initiatives. 12 year old Lilly, who spoke to BBC Newsround, described being inspired to start Lilly’s Plastic Pickup after watching a video of one of Greta Thunberg’s speeches. Lilly said: “I realised we can’t just keep on naming dates when we can stop it. No, we have to stop it now”. The ripple effect of Greta Thunberg’s activism is being felt among young people like Lilly, who are not just taking onboard her speeches but actually using this information to enact changes in their own circles. Gen-Z activism has also emphasised the reality that current leaders in the Global North do not want to confront: the climate crisis is not just a future issue, it is causing devastation right now, which is overwhelmingly impacting people who have been historically exploited by groups who hold more power than them. This is due to an array of different identity factors, but primarily race, nationality and socio-economic status. The term ‘intersectionality’ is becoming a buzz-word for younger generations, used to understand and explain how the interaction of different identity factors culminates to dictate a person’s privilege. Gen-Z climate activism has not just focused on the concerns of those in privileged positions, whose voices are typically the most likely to be heard. As we move into a new year, we confront the reality that the time left to change the course of the climate crisis is rapidly dwindling away. But where there is fear, there is also hope. Younger generations are stepping up to the plate and undertaking the work that politicians are refusing to do. Knowing that their future depends on climate action, Gen-Z are not going down without a fight.

By Kavisha Manoj Despite the deep entrenchment of neoclassical economics, the past 2 decades have seen a variety of alternative economic theories in public discourse. Among them, is ‘Doughnut Economics’ theorised by Kate Raworth, which tries to fundamentally change the way economics is framed and its priorities. Currently, GDP (Gross Domestic Product) growth is viewed as the ultimate aim of every economy and is strongly associated with a measure of welfare and development. Instead, Raworth contends that thriving should be the main goal of policymakers, in a way that is distributive and regenerative. This theory tries to combine two of the fundamental issues with the current global order: unsustainability and inequality. The ‘doughnut’ name comes from this diagram aimed to aid the visualisation of her aims. Since human beings rely on the environment for essentials, there is a minimum environmental burden on the environment to sustain humanity. This constraint forms the inner ring within which there are people living in unequal and unfavourable conditions. The outer ring is the ecological ceiling on planetary pressure beyond which it is unsustainable and harming our ecosystems. Raworth argues that by this definition it would change our classification of development. By this logic, we would all be developing countries as we would either be trying to improve our human welfare or reduce our environmental footprint. This might be a more beneficial way of thinking as often times ‘developed’ countries relegate the responsibility of reducing carbon emissions to ‘developing’ countries, for whom it might be necessary to sustain a standard of living for their human development. The inner ring, also called the social foundation, consists of 12 aspects of life everyone should have access to and includes basic needs like food, water, and housing as well as social institutions like networks, political voice, and peace. I also think the model is more inclusive of all types of environmental degradation instead of a sole focus on climate change by including less spoken about issues like ocean acidification and nitrogen and phosphorus loading. It might seem difficult to imagine this being embedded into UK policy, however, as this is not necessarily a new theory but instead a new framework of ensuring that economic policy lends itself to human betterment within planetary boundaries. Even harder is it to imagine policymakers willing to enact measures that would mainly affect the party donors and wealthy associates who are tied to unsustainable business practices. Whilst there is a general agreement on the need for sustainable development and elevating the social foundation of the country, recent policy decisions seem at odds with these ideals. Recent COP27 resolutions from the UK have widely been seen as lacking ambition and not nearly enough to combat growing concerns and social foundations also appear to have been infringed upon. Most importantly, the cost-of-living crisis has led to a growth in the number of people facing food insecurity and fuel poverty and the government’s anti-striking and protest legislation can also be seen as eroding our political voice. Doughnut Economics being a new framework indicates that it would need to be enacted through structural changes in the decision-making process, through an evolved criteria for successful policies and would likely require bipartisan support. It also cannot be a one-off policy decision and would require a long-term focus on changing what economics is seen to mean and would need to remain a priority for successive governments. Furthermore, there have been discussions on the possible scale of adopting this model, as it is a relatively new addition to the growing field of alternative economic models, it has only been partially trialled in individual cities with varying success. It might, therefore, be an exceptionally large step forward to envision it being part of national-level frameworks in the near future. Amsterdam became the first city to formally implement Doughnut Economics in 2020 and continue to lead the way in its innovation. However, there has been criticism as the numerous initiatives appear fragmented and most do not develop after the initial stage of discussion. The model also has been used by the Cornwall Council to some success but there are major doubts if this can be expanded upon due to different local contexts and political leanings. However, the main merit of this book – I would argue – is not necessarily a detailed alternative to our current systems. Instead, it is the critique of mainstream and foundational economics which can compel individuals to demand more inclusive and representative ways of understanding the world. Her book details a critique of homo economicus – the rational economic man – which is based on Adam Smith’s ideas on self-interested and completely rational individuals. This essentially ignores non-financial motivations and emotions and has been criticised by other successful economists including Ostrom, Sen and Schumacher. The expanding field of rethinking economics has also led to the expansion of feminist economics which aims to recognise the unvalued and undervalued work of women into the economic system. Marçal’s renowned book ‘Who Cooked Adam Smith’s Dinner?’ sheds light on the blind nature of theorising as Smith ignored the unpaid and unvalued care work from his mother which allowed him to dedicate more time towards his academic inclinations. Interestingly, psychologists have found that we take into account notions of justice in our decision-making process from the age of 7, and so perhaps this outdated and restrictive model of economics does have a small audience after all! The case of the care industry is also worthy of particular attention as the unpaid care work of millions is often unpaid, and therefore does not contribute to GDP, illustrating Raworth’s argument that societies can thrive independently of growth instead of growth being the ultimate deciding factor. In conclusion, it is easy to see that the Doughnut Economics model is still at the grassroots level and this early phase has meant that its partial implementations have not necessarily been a wholehearted embracing of its ideals. Instead, for this new framework to succeed on the national level, there needs to be more attention from businesses, technology developers, entrepreneurs, and governments. However, even without widespread implementation, this model has a lot to offer in the smaller stages. On an individual level, this forces us to recognise the economic agents mainstream discussions ignore and to build a stronger foundation for our idea of economics to include goods and services which do not have an attached value. More attention to the field of alternative economics would allow for the way economics is taught to change. Instead of environmental economics being an optional module in virtually all universities, it should be taught as a design fault instead of an unexpected externality.

By Drishti Patel As a society, due to the advances in medical research and technology, it is inevitable that we are able to better identify and label our problems and symptoms. Good, right? We are becoming more aware and educated about the way that the human body works, scientifically, giving a reason for the way that the body functions. Whilst this is something that is exciting and intriguing for all, with the chance to build on our knowledge and help ourselves, it is becoming more and more common that we, as individuals, are becoming more hyperaware of ourselves and our health. In fact, we are now using social media and online sources to help us diagnose ourselves, focusing on small and minute problems we may notice. These, whilst on the surface, seem like really small issues, are having a massive effect on the healthcare system itself and individuals too. With the pressure growing on the NHS, the added fears of patients generally, continue to add more weight to the waiting lists for diagnosis. With the lack of staff within the NHS system, it continues to grow further and further, leaving many vulnerable and helpless. Let us begin by discussing the effect that hyperawareness has on one’s health in the UK. It is common that approximately 1 in 20 people have some type of anxiety difficulty at any one time in terms of health anxiety. This is rising as we talk due to the reliance that people have on Dr Google which has increased because of the lack of comfort individuals have felt in seeing a GP or the need to seek comfort as soon as possible to feel relief. With Google being at the tip of our fingertips, it is one of the easiest ways to find all sorts of information without leaving your comfort zone. However, due to the vast amount of information available, it only goes to show the most common to the rarest types of illnesses, leaving many questioning and doubting their well-being, leaving many spiralling, worrying about their health and then prospering to worry and anxiety. With the adaptation of online consultations (especially the heavy reliance on this during the pandemic and even post-COVID-19), and long waiting lines to see the GPs alone, online consultations with Dr Google have become one way in which people have been able to find some peace and autonomy in being able to care for themselves as well as find the ‘answers’ straight away. This is surely not too bad and we can all think of a time when we have found comfort in researching a certain thing to gain clarity and some relief. However, the complete reliance on and full belief in online information has a massive impact on individuals. These tend to cause a lack of trust in medical staff due to the reliance on these platforms which, in some cases, leave patients thinking that the healthcare professionals are lying to them. Nevertheless, Dr Google is not the only devil out there that continues to sell these horrifying dreams to patients. As we have entered the age of social media (or at least the expansion of social media use), we see the mass use of TikTok and Instagram and the growing audience they have. The New York Times found that people are using the TikTok app as a search engine, trying to build more knowledge and see the different opinions on the topics they want to find out more about. Medical students, surgeons and other professionals are also sharing information on the human body and well-being with their audience, feeding the viewers sometimes with more ‘signs’ to look out for and making individuals hyperaware of their bodies. Seems like a good idea, people becoming aware of many health conditions like Jameela Jamil sharing her own experiences and spreading awareness of Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) has helped to make people more aware and mindful that some struggles are not as easily displayed or explained. Similarly, the awareness that has been built for ADHD and trying to understand the neurological disorder has helped many get diagnosed and understand behaviours better. Notwithstanding, with this, you have content creators creating challenges like ‘put your fingers down if…’ that tend to describe or present vague symptoms that may be experienced by patients, planting a seed of doubt in people’s minds and then leading to the cycle of doubt and spiralling (in some cases) where individuals are either convinced and see their GPs for more information on these issues. The concern is not that we are becoming more caring with our bodies, but it is the fact that there is a growing pattern of self-diagnosing and not believing the medical professionals, making it difficult for the services trying to provide healthcare. A personal account shared by Ibrahim Mohamed, also known fondly online as Ibz Mo, about his ADHD diagnosis shared that the waiting list for being diagnosed was over two years and ended up going private. For many, paying a large sum for a diagnosis is something that they cannot afford, which further disadvantages some. In most cases, it continually leads to affecting the ability of the quality of work that can be done by the individual. There is a growing ‘fashion’ of self-diagnosing due to the growing impact that social media is having on individuals. Social media is great for starting or expanding conversations and exposure so that these areas have more support and the wider society is more aware. Dr Nighat Ariff has been creating more awareness in the area of female Healthcare, especially in reducing the stigma around female reproductive healthcare and well-being. Similarly, with the rise of Dr Karan Raj on Tiktok, now Instagram is something that has helped bust myths, help the consumer to understand the inner work of surgeons and also help with tips and tricks on what to look out for. Most importantly, these doctors continuously work hard to make sure that information that we consume is accurate as possible and backed with evidence. The most recent example of this was the reply that Dr Raj got on the anti-choking device, which was gaining lots of attraction but does not have much evidence to back that it was a good enough device to help. Instead, Dr Raj, went on to research, prove that it was an unsafe device and instruct his viewers on how to safely help someone choking. Overall, it is more about the nature of the way that hyperawareness of health is becoming more trending. The use of social media, the amplification of fears and the overuse of generic and very vague health information are leading to panic for many young and old people. There is a middle ground. The use of these platforms is not a massive issue but making sure that there is more fact-checking being done to make sure that ‘challenges’ are not becoming one of the reasons for the increase in the waiting lists, but giving a chance for all of us to get good care through the NHS, that are already stretched thinly and need all the help they can possibly get.

By Gokul Krishnakumar In early December 2022, Peru woke to a direct address from its leftist President, Pedro Castillo, who proclaimed a national emergency and proposed to replace the Congress with an ‘exceptional emergency government’. This event, described as a ‘self-coup’, sparked the current Peruvian crisis which has resulted in the deaths of at least 40 protestors at the hands of Peruvian state forces. In response to this address, the Peruvian Congress convened an emergency session and impeached Castillo with an overwhelming majority after failing to do so in their previous two attempts. This was accompanied by resignations from Castillo’s cabinet, his arrest and detainment on charges of ‘rebellion and conspiracy’ and culminated in Dina Boluarte, Castillo’s First Vice President, being appointed as the new President by the Congress. In response to this, protestors took to the streets demanding Boluarte’s resignation, a new constitution, Castillo’s release, and the dismissal of the Peruvian Congress. Many mainstream outlets have characterized this as a conflict triggered by power struggles between the legislature and executive. However, such a reading of events obscures other significant factors and depoliticizes this crisis to a degree by enabling the proliferation of simplistic narratives which lay the blame of triggering the crisis at Castillo’s feet and paint him as a corrupt individual who sought to hold on to power via a ‘self-coup’. However, such readings obscure the racial politics and class politics at play and above all the major role played by an increasingly obstructionist Peruvian Congress dominated by the Right and led by Fujimoristas. The modern-day Peruvian Congress’ legitimacy lies in the 1993 constitution drafted by a Constituent Assembly dominated by Fujimoristas after opposition parties boycotted elections to the body to protest Alberto Fujimori’s self-coup. This constitution did not legally change the relationship between the executive, judiciary and legislative sections of the government. However, Fujimori bent these institutions to his will by stacking the judiciary with loyalists who would not oppose his increasingly brutal and authoritarian policies and also by converting the Fujimorista controlled Congress into a rubber stamp institution that approved these policies that were justified as either being necessary for development or to suppress the Shining Path insurgency. Fujimori’s particular brand of constitutional authoritarianism was also used to force through devastating neoliberal reforms. After Fujimori’s fall in 2001, the far-right Fujimoristas lost control of the Congress. However, under the leadership of Keiko Fujimori, Alberto Fujimori’s daughter, the Fujimoristas reorganised under the banner of a new political party (Popular Force) and clawed back their majority in the Parliament in 2016. They reverted to using the Congress as a tool to re-establish their supremacy in Peruvian politics by launching impeachment proceedings against the incumbent President. While the Fujimoristas pioneered the use of impeachments, they weren’t the only party that utilised them as it became an acceptable way to remove an executive that the legislative did not favour for both legitimate and illegitimate reasons. However, Fujimoristas have either supported impeachment attempts or used them to obtain political concessions. This cycle of impeachments resulted in the Peruvian Congress losing legitimacy in the eyes of the public and this sentiment sparked massive protests in 2020 after the Congress impeached a president who had initiated popular political reforms. The leftist president Pedro Castillo and the current right-wing dominated Congress took power in the first elections held after these protests. Castillo defeated Keiko Fujimori by a wafer-thin margin which Fujimori sought to call into question by raising allegations of electoral fraud. When this attempt failed, the Right led by the Fujimoristas began a concerted effort to remove Castillo by attacking him from multiple fronts. The assault began during the election campaign as corporate media groups in Peru that are allied to Fujimori and control most media outlets in the country launched a racist smear campaign (terruqueo – often used against indigenous Peruvians by the Right) against Castillo seeking to falsely link him to communist insurgents. After Castillo became President, the media sharpened their attack by seeking to discredit ministers appointed to his Cabinet using largely the same tactics. The media worked largely hand in glove with the Right which moved to censure targeted ministers in the Congress. These attacks paralysed Castillo’s efforts to rule as he cycled through 78 ministers for 19 posts in 16 months constantly moderating as he shifted closer to the right in an effort to stave off the attack. In addition to this, the judiciary opened multiple investigations against Castillo and members of his family accusing them of various forms of corruption. Furthermore, the Congress also blocked multiple legislations sent for approval to the Congress which sought to implement policies targeting the upliftment of the poor. Last but not least, Fujimoristas used their tried and tested tactic of impeachment with the third such attempt succeeding as it prompted Castillo to launch his self-coup, which ultimately secured Congress an overwhelming majority to dismiss him. During this process, a politically immature Castillo saw his approval ratings plummet and even faced widespread protests in early March 2022 in response to the aforementioned alleged corruption charges. However, as the Congress impeached a President that symbolically represented the marginalised, many leftist and indigenous grassroots movements rallied to his cause. Boluarte, who has been described as a political opportunist, has since allied with the Right and unleashed state police forces on the protestors. They have sought to suppress these protests by resorting to indiscriminate violence. In the space of a little less than two months, state police have massacred protestors in Juliaca and Ayacucho. Most of those murdered by state forces have been individuals hailing from poor Indigenous communities. This has resulted in Peru’s top prosecutor’s office launching inquires to investigate allegations of genocide levied against Boluarte’s government. Boluarte’s has responded to these protests by stubbornly declaring that she will not tender her resignation but has agreed to move elections up from 2026 to 2024. Protestors have begun marching on Lima in an effort to force immediate elections as they believe that the rich mestizo and white Peruvian elite (who support Boluarte and the right) centred around urban Peru have largely been able to ignore the protests by and massacres of poor indigenous protestors from rural Peru. Boluarte and her allies in government have resorted to the terruqueo strategy to discredit protestors and have claimed that they are being funded by ‘foreign’ forces. However, polls conducted show that Boluarte only has 28% approval in Lima while those ratings fall to a shocking 9% in rural Peru. Furthermore, Boluarte has become increasingly isolated in Latin America as many leaders have thrown their support firmly behind Castillo or the protestors with largely right wing governments supporting Boluarte’s government. The current President and her cabinet have little legitimacy to rule while the Congress had an approval rating of just 18% even prior to the protests. Therefore, for democracy to return to Peru, it is necessary for Boluarte to begin acceding to the demands of the protestors. This is crucial as the thoroughly reviled Congress has already begun the process of drafting bills that target indigenous communities in Peru and attempted to oppose limited reforms aimed at advancing election dates even while it has a disapproval rating of 88%. In addition to this, only if the violence ends can the investigations into human rights violations demanded by the UN take place. It is morally impermissible for an executive and legislative so thoroughly reviled by its people to claim to represent them even as it violently suppresses protests against it. It is incumbent on the international community to facilitate the return of democracy in Peru by listening to the voices of the marginalised who have led protests calling for a more inclusive form of democratic governance.

By Ananya Sreekumar On 7th December 2022, German Special Forces, in tandem with regional Police forces, conducted raids across the country and arrested twenty-five people for plotting a coup against the state. They were primarily members of the Reichsburger movement, while some were members of fringe neo-nazi groups. The plot involved executing or exiling current leaders, deliberately damaging an electricity grid, and using military-grade weapons to overthrow the German government. This group of far-right ex-military figures was led by "Prince Heinrich XIII", a 71-year-old Austrian disgraced aristocrat of the former German royal house of Reuss. They aimed to re-establish a German Empire in the tradition of the German Reich by instigating a civil war so that they could take power. This is just the beginning of one of the most outlandish coup plot(s) in recent history. So what is the Reichsburger movement? Reichburger, translated to “citizens of the Reich, “ consists of far-right extremists who cannot swallow the tough pill that the German Reich ended in 1945. They are anticonstitutionalists and revisionists who reject the modern German state and constitution. Naturally, they’re staunch conspiracy theorists and believe in QAnon. This American political conspiracy theory revolves around manufactured claims made by ‘Q’, who generally villainises anyone that challenges Donald Trump and heroises his power. Most members of the Rechsburger did not pay taxes in revolt against the government. While others printed their own counterfeit currency and attempted to issue driving licenses like a band of delinquent high schoolers. The group rejects Germany’s current government as puppets of the “deep state”. Interior Minister Nancy Fraeser said the culprits embraced a fallacy based on conspiracy, were connected by a disdain for democracy and were convinced that Germany’s current constitution is invalid. They cannot fathom that Germany is a legitimate Federal Republic and that democracy is the reigning ideology, not monarchy— unsurprising when their leader is a bumbling old aristocrat. Funnily enough, the group had already begun formulating a leadership cabinet, and members had been selected to operate as the new health minister, justice minister and other such roles, with Heinrich slated to play the leader. However, it is to be noted that most of the Reichsburgers do not want to reinstate the Third Reich. Much like dear old Kanye West and other ultra-right German groups, they are staunchly antisemitic and share the belief that the Nazis received too much heat in general public opinion. Still, they worship the Kaisers, not Hitler. They wish for Germany prior to 1918— the heyday of authoritarian leader Otto Von Bismarck, Chancellor of the German Empire. It sounds ridiculous that a bevvy of conspiracy theorists yearning for the days of Bismarckian Germany could threaten the current administration so much that the German Special Forces felt the need to intervene. However, audacious their plot may seem, they are not to be trifled with. Reichsburger’s followers are heavily armed with ties to the military and law enforcement. They also have connections to members of the far-right Alternative fur Deutschland party— a party with seats in almost all state parliaments and the federal parliament. Hence, the idea of them taking hold of the Bundestag is not that far-fetched. Although their plotting was all for nought, this episode exposes the menace of far-right extremists in Germany today. How much of a threat is far-right extremism to Germany? Germany is ahead of the United States (the bar is that low) in tackling right-wing extremists from within by funding research, sophisticated intelligence operations, and civic agencies. The coalition government under Olaf Scholz has upped the ante compared to Angela Merkel’s conservative administration. However, critics say this is too little too late. In 2019, Germany recorded over fifteen times as many far-right attacks as it had in 1990, which only increased. Germany did miss the mark as it has historically been fixated on left-wing extremism despite right-wing-extremist crimes being exceedingly worse and more extensive. Research conducted by The Washington Post shows that most political parties, especially the centre-right, minimise threats from far-right organisations. While centre-left parties fare better, it’s not a significant difference, and they do discount left-wing extremism. This shows that political parties are influenced by ideology and are partisan in circumstances where they ideally should not be– public safety and safeguarding the democratic process. Similarly, government institutions that are meant to be politically neutral think of intelligence agencies and civil services and downplay far-right extremism when they operate under centre-right interior ministers. Their reports do not invoke as much alarm as they should regarding far-right organisations’ nefarious and dubious behaviours. This behaviour allows extremism to run amock and pervade the nation like toxic gas. Where do we go from here? While Scholz has highlighted right-wing extremism as a primary concern, it seems as if the problem has already reached the point where it is getting out of hand. Earlier this month, a 75-year-old woman, dubbed ‘Terror Granny’ by German media, was arrested along with her co-conspirators to overthrow the government. This time the plot involved hiring an actor to impersonate the Chancellor and address the public through a TV speech claiming he has been deposed. You truly cannot make this up. The Grandpa’s and Granny’s of Germany are taking their nostalgia and xenophobia a bit too seriously. In all seriousness, such attempts to depose the government, while unbelievable, are grave threats when the perpetrators have access to military-grade weapons. How has it gotten to this point? How did Merkel’s administration ignore such a pervasive national security issue? Many questions remain.