James Murdoch, Abigail Disney, Mary Trump

Peter Serling/2020 (Trump) ; Celeste Sloman (Disney) ; Getty Images (Murdoch)

Hands up if you had Claudia Conway, the daughter of conservative power couple George and Kellyanne Conway, emerging as a liberal poster child on your 2020 bingo card? Congratulations if you did. As chance would have it, the 15-year-old became as beloved on the left as universal healthcare thanks to a series of videos that she posted on TikTok in which she trolled the Trump administration, at one point urging her followers to leave one star reviews on all of trumps restaurants, hotels and golf courses.

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

The Conways made their eldest daughter delete her social media accounts, but like any tech-savvy teen she figured out a way to outsmart her parents and returned online with a vengeance. It was a public betrayal that Mom and Dad, a political Punch and Judy show for our schismatic times, might have seen coming had they put aside their performative bickering for a minute and paid attention to the culture. After all, hardly a news cycle goes by these days without at least one dynastic turncoat or class defector breaking ranks.

Take Mary Trump, a niece of the president, who set the DC commentariat abuzz, to say nothing of the rest of the country, with the publication this summer of Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the Worlds Most Dangerous Man, a tell-all book about her estranged uncle. Following a series of exposs by members of his inner circle, Marys book, with revelations that range from the innocuous (that the president and ex-wife Ivana gave her a three-pack of underwear for Christmas one year) to the incendiary (he allegedly used his influence to have his sister Maryanne Trump Barry nominated to a position as a federal prosecutor), is seen by many on the right as nothing short of perfidy. One peer, on the other hand, welcomed the infraction.

Abigail Disney shouted into the Twitterverse, If you know Mary Trump, please put her in touch with me!!!

This content is imported from Twitter. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.

Though she has not taken to social media or divulged any family secrets in print, billionaire Christy Walton, who married into the Walton clan (which owns almost half of Walmart), also raised eyebrows earlier this year, when it was revealed that she is a major donor to the Lincoln Project, a super PAC of Republican renegades (whose founders include George Conway) committed to ousting the titular head of their party.

Porter McConnell, the youngest daughter of Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, may be a true apostate. She is not only the Take on Wall Street campaign director at the nonprofit coalition Americans for Financial Reform, she has been a vociferous critic of her fathers policies. At this point shell be lucky if she gets a Christmas card, let alone underwear, from him and her stepmother, Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao.

Theres a long history of the children of the very wealthy getting progressively more progressive. I call it Rockefeller Syndrome.

The children, grandkids, and even great-grandchildren of the very wealthy are getting progressively more progressive, says David Callahan, author of The Givers: Wealth, Power, and Philanthropy in a New Gilded Age and editor of the website Inside Philanthropy. Theres a long history of it. I call it Rockefeller Syndrome.

Callahan is right to point to the idealistic young second- and third-generation donors of the 1960s and 70s who defied their archconservative families. Among them were Alida Messinger, a fourth-generation heiress to the Rockefeller fortune; her ex-husband and former Democratic governor of Minnesota Mark Dayton, an heir to the Target fortune; and Charles Pillsbury, of the foodstuffs juggernaut, who became an antiwar activist in the Vietnam era and later ran for congress as a Green Party candidate. (He lost.) His father George S. Pillsbury, a staunch Republican, finally switched parties at the age of 87 to vote for Barack Obama in 2008.

Everett Collection Inc / Alamy Stock Photo

And while he never had the deep pockets of a Rockefeller, Ron Reagan became a heretic in conservative circles for his outspoken disavowal of the GOP and embrace of atheism.

There were other rich rabble-rousers before them, of course: Nancy Cunard, the turn-of-the-20th-century patron saint of rebel heiresses, who became an ardent antifascist and civil rights activist; author Jessica Mitford, the only red in a family of fascists; and Marion Barbara Joe Carstairs, the granddaughter of Jabez Abel Bostwick, one of the founders of Standard Oil and a devout Baptist.

Joe, who inherited a vast fortune, defied convention throughout her life and enjoyed affairs with Tallulah Bankhead and Marlene Dietrich. When she settled in the Bahamas as the self-styled Queen of Whale Cay, she flouted segregated employment laws that persisted into the 60s.

Slim Aarons

Undeniably, there are more of them today, and they dont adhere to the old rule of appearing in the newspaper only for the big three milestones: birth, marriage, and death. Another beneficiary of Standard Oil money, David Kaiser, great-great-grandson of John D., was a climate change activist and critic of Exxon Mobil until his death at 50 in July.

Also in July, Disney and her brother Tim were among the 83 ultra-affluent signatories of an open letter calling for a permanent wealth tax to help coronavirus relief efforts. But not everyone is as generous with their public statements as they are with their checkbooks. As one radical scion put it, declining a request for an attributable quote, Its 2020regardless of how well intentioned you are, even the most innocuous comment will get you in trouble!

Scroll through the Federal Election Commission filings, however, and there is no shortage of next-gen Pritzkers, Strykers, Gettys, and Simonses donating to candidates who support progressive causes to effect long-term political, societal, racial, and environmental change.

Matt WinkelmeyerGetty Images

Theres even the odd Murdoch in the bunch. James Murdoch, who left one part the family business in 2018 after losing a succession battle worthy of HBO (a tale told in this summers three-part BBC documentary, The Rise of the Murdoch Dynasty), and his wife Kathryn have recently used their considerable wealth to donate to Democratic Senate candidates and create the Quadrivium Foundation, which invests in evidence-based solutions to some of societys most urgent challenges, especially climate change.

The opposite, in other words, of anti-science messaging from Rupert Murdochowned news media outlets, like Fox News and The New York Post. Not surprisingly, the younger Murdoch severed his last formal link to dads News Corp. a week ago by resigning from its board, citing disagreements over certain editorial content published by the companys news outlets and certain other strategic decisions. Rupert responded with a brisk statement of his own, wishing his son the very best in his future endeavors like he was just some rank-and-filer who numbered among his employees. Still, its not like James wont make it to family reunions: he is still a beneficiary of its trust, the New York Times noted.

We are in the middle of a seismic generational transfer of wealth, says Jason Franklin, founder of philanthropic consulting company Ktisis Capital and senior adviser to the Movement Voter Project, which connects individual donors with more than 400 organizations engaged in electoral rights. We are seeing more money come into the hands of younger people who are increasingly connected to the kind of movement conversations that are bubbling up today.

Perhaps none more than Leah Hunt-Hendrix, an Occupy movement activist and the philanthropic powerhouse behind Way to Win, a donor collaborative that transcends candidate races by also funding progressive policies like the Green New Deal and expanding access to the ballot box through structural reforms. The younger generation is more progressive in general, and so it stands to reason that younger donors are too, she says. We have raised $80 million in the last couple of years, and Way to Win and Solidaireanother community of donors that she co-founded, in 2012, to provide resources to social movementsare testament to the fact that theres a set of philanthropists who are willing to dig into the root causes of the problems we face today.

Slaven VlasicGetty Images

Hunt-Hendrix was born into the philanthrosphere. Though she is the granddaughter of Texas oil tycoon and ultraconservative donor Haroldson Lafayette Hunt Jr. (and niece of Nelson Bunker Hunt, who bankrolled a lot of the New Right in the 1970s, including the John Birch Society), she learned at the feet of her mother Helen LaKelly Hunt, who rebelled against her family, decamped to New York, fell in with the womens movement, became friends with Abigail Disney and Gloria Steinem, and founded the New York Womens Foundation and Women Moving Millions. Shes an incredible organizer, says Hunt-Hendrix. I have definitely followed in her footsteps.

As Callahan notes in The Givers, the swelling ranks of capable do-gooder heirs brings to mindand not without a hint of concernthe Guardians in Platos Republic, an unelected elite chosen at birth to serve the common good. But unlike Platos ruling class, who were scrupulously educated to fulfill their obligations, todays genetic lottery winnersespecially those not lucky enough to be guided by parents like Hunt-Hendrixsare increasingly turning for guidance to networks such as One for Democracy, which asks pledgers to donate 1 percent of their assets to democratic efforts, and Resource Generation, which has 600 members, almost all under 35, who come from families with fortunes that put them in the countrys top 10 percent.

Im a huge believer in these networks, says Hunt-Hendrix, who temporarily ditched grad school at Princeton to go to the West Bank after she met an inspiring woman at a Resource Generation gathering. Philosophically, I believe that you become who you surround yourself with, and these networks allow you to surround yourself with people who are on the same path, and share the same values. Its very scary at first, though. Its so strange to look around the room and worry that all we have in common is that we have wealthy parents.

LAURA RICKETTS

INSTRUCTOR: The openly gay daughter of Joe Ricketts, the conservative billionaire who owns the Chicago Cubs.

CASE STUDY: Dad tried to unseat President Obama; Laura was one of Obamas top bundlers.

THE LESSON: Learn to play defenseto cover up for toxic relatives.

PORTER McCONNELL

INSTRUCTOR: Mitch McConnells daughter.

CASE STUDY: The Senate majority leader favors financial deregulation. Porter is campaign director of the coalition Take on Wall Street.

THE LESSON: Time your attacks for maximum impact, like during Senate confirmation hearings.

MARK DAYTON

INSTRUCTOR: An heir to the Target Corporation department store fortune.

CASE STUDY: In the 60s Dayton was a vocal antiwar protester, while his father Bruce sat on the board of directors of Honeywell, a major defense contractor.

THE LESSON: When in doubt, marry a Rockefeller!

ALFRED FORD

INSTRUCTOR: Great-grandson of Henry Ford.

CASE STUDY: Alfred got lost in his own root chakra, changed his name to Ambarish Das, and donated millions to the Hare Krishnas.

THE LESSON: Drive the family even crazier by adopting a spiritual persona. Namaste!

This story appears in the September 2020 issue of Town & Country. SUBSCRIBE NOW

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

This commenting section is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page. You may be able to find more information on their web site.

Original post:

The Rise of the Resistocrats: How Wealthy Scions Are Flocking to the Left - TownandCountrymag.com

After soaring in the polls for months thanks to the government's handling of the pandemic, support for the federal Liberals is now taking a hit from the WE Charity controversy.

But that outbreak-induced polling surge has provided Prime Minister Justin Trudeau with a bit of a cushion one that likelywould still win him an election if one were held today.

That may not be the case for very long if the Liberals can't arrest their slide in the polls, however.

After COVID-19 shut the country down, the Liberals saw their support increase significantly. It rose from just under 30 per cent in early March to over 40 per cent at the beginning of June, according to the CBC's Poll Tracker.

Since then, the Liberals have been dropping.

Four different pollsters have conducted surveys since July 13, when Trudeau first apologized for his failure to recuse himself from the decision to award the WE Charity the contract for a summer student grant program. They've all recorded drops in Liberal support.

Compared to surveys conducted before July3 when the government announced it was dropping its partnership with WE and the ethics commissioner said he was looking into the matter Abacus Data put the Liberals down four percentage points in its latest poll. The Innovative Research Group (IRG) had the Liberals down just a single point, while EKOS Research recorded the Liberals slipping six points.

The most recent survey, by Lger, put the Liberals down five points since the end of June ending a remarkably steady stream of polls showing the Liberals hovering around the 40 per cent mark.

On average, these four pollsters have put the Liberals down four points compared to pre-WE polling. The Conservatives, New Democrats and Bloc Qubcoiseach haveaveraged a gain of one point.

The Poll Tracker which is designed to react more slowly to new trends outside of the urgency of an election campaign has the Liberals down 2.3 points since their peak in early June.

Trudeau's own personal ratings have taken a bigger hit. According to Nanos Research's rolling four-week poll, Trudeau is the preferred choice as prime minister of 34 per cent of Canadians. That's down seven points from mid-June. The Angus Reid Institute (ARI), which pegged Trudeau's approval rating at 55 per cent in May, now puts it at 44 per cent.

It's clear that the WE controversy is at the root of this drop in support for both Trudeau and the Liberals. Among those polled by IRG who said they had read, heard or seen something about the prime minister in recent days, 72 per cent pointed to the WE controversy and among those people, 66 per cent said it gave them a less favourable impression of Trudeau, compared to just five per cent who said it improved their image of him.

While these shifts in public opinion are significant, they nevertheless leave the Liberals in a better position now than they were before the COVID-19 outbreak.

In early March, the Poll Tracker put the Liberals two percentage points behind the Conservatives in national support. The Poll Tracker currently puts theLiberal lead over the Conservatives at10 points. Even the worst recent poll for the Liberals still gave them a lead of three points.

With a 10-point lead, the Liberals would be favoured to win a majority government. But even if that lead was reduced to three points, the party likelywould still win a bigger minority government than the one it currently has(the Liberals lost the popular vote by 1.3 percentage points last October, after all).

Trudeau's own approval had fallen to 33 per cent in ARI's polling in February. It was 35 per cent just before the last election. While the prime minister's latest result of 44 per cent approval is the outcome ofa big reduction over the last few weeks, it's a number Trudeau would have been lucky to get last fall.

The reason that the picture for the Liberals is rosierthan it otherwise mightbe is that the governing party's main opponent is not taking advantage of its current troubles.

The Conservatives have the same level of support in the Poll Tracker now thatthey did when the Liberals were at their pandemic peak. No national poll has awarded them more than 31 per cent support among decided voters in over three months.

Regionally, the party is trailing the Liberals by double digits in the key battlegrounds of Ontario and British Columbia and has less support in Quebec than it did last fall.

The Conservatives' current lack ofa permanent leader undoubtedly is a handicap. Andrew Scheer, who announced in December he would resign once his replacement was chosen, has only become less popular since losing the election in October.

But it's not a given that his replacement will be better placed to capitalize on Liberal woes. Polling by Lger in June found that former cabinet minister Peter MacKay scored no better than a generic Conservative leader. Ontario MP Erin O'Toole, the other front-runner in the party's leadership race, did worse.

The latest survey from IRG found that fewer than 20 per cent of respondents held a favourable view of the two Conservative front-runners. Polls suggest Derek Sloan and Leslyn Lewis, the other two contestants, remain largely unknown to voters.

If the Liberals halt their slide in the polls, they could end the summer in a relatively decent position perhaps a better one than they could reasonablyhave expected to be in at the beginning of 2020.

But how likely is it that the party can stop the bleeding?

According to ARI, just 29 per cent of Canadians see the WE controversy as "overblown" and just 12 per cent believe it is a "simple mistake or error in judgment." The rest are split over whether it was criminal or merely unethical.

How that opinion splitsis important, though. It is predominantly Conservative supporters who see the government's actions as possibly criminal, while it's mostly Liberals and New Democrats who see it as unethical (but not criminal) or a simple mistake.

ARI found that Trudeau's approval ratings have taken the steepest dive among NDP and Conservativevoters. But they are still higher among these groups than they were before the pandemic.

Because of the political capital the Liberals have built up throughtheir handling of COVID-19, the party has a chance to weather this storm. While the Conservatives remain stagnant, the Liberal base is enough to win an election. The supporters they've picked up in the last few months the ones they have not lost because of the WE controversy over the last few weeks give them some wiggle room.

But the pandemic is also far from over and Canadians' views of the federal government's handling of the emergency are dimming. Lger found satisfaction with the government's management of the crisis is down six percentage points since the end of June to 73 per cent. Satisfaction with provincial and municipal handling of the outbreak has dropped just three points over that time.

And more political fallout from the WE controversy is likely; Trudeau will testify at committee on Thursday and the Bloc has announced it might try to force an election in the fall if Trudeau and Finance Minister Bill Morneau do not resign.

Still, despite the hits they've taken, the Liberals would be the favourites to win a snap vote now. But they'll lose that edge if the hits keep coming.

Follow this link:

Polls suggest Liberals would still win an election despite WE controversy but only if the bleeding stops - CBC.ca

Canada's two main federal political parties took in less money from individual donations during the second quarter of this year compared withthe same time in 2018 the last non-election yearas the financial slowdown caused by the COVID-19 pandemic continues.

According to financialreturns released by Elections Canada this week, the Liberals and Conservatives together raised more than$6.2million in donations between April and June of this year, which is almost $3millionless thanthey raised during the same period in 2018.

Donations are always highest during election years, so comparisons with 2019 would not be relevant.

The drop in donations coincides with the period when the economy came to a virtual standstill as Canadians stayed home to help prevent the spread of COVID-19.

The Conservatives led the pack by pulling in donations from individualstotalling more than$3.5millionin the second quarter of 2018. The party also received about$436,000 in transfers from candidates in its ongoing leadership campaign, for a total of just over $4 million. Theparty raised more than$6 millionfrom bothdonations and transfers during the same period in 2018.

The Liberals pulled in $2.6 million in individual donations this year, compared withjust under$3.1 million in 2018.

The three smaller parties,meanwhile, saw theirdonation totals increase compared with2018.

The New Democratic Partyreceived $1.3 million this year compared withjust $872,000 two years ago, while the Bloc Qubcoisreceived $131,000 in donations, up from a meagre $42,000 two years ago.

The Green Party took in more than$633,000 from individuals and more than$87,000 from its leadership candidates for a total of slightly more than $721,000, up from $572,000 two years ago.

The numbers offer the first significant look into how the pandemic has affected the fundraising efforts of federal political parties.

The $8.2million raisedby all parties from individual donations between April and Juneis a slight decrease from the approximately $8.4million they raised during the firstquarter between January and March. A CBC News analysis found that March 2020 when the novel coronavirus began to shut down businesses and schools in Canada appears to have been the worst March for fundraising in Canadasince March 2006.

Parties had to halt their in-person fundraising events in March after the country went into lockdown. Emails and other messages soliciting money from donors were also temporarily suspended or altered to encourage people to pitch in only if they could.

"We know that not everyone is in a position to give right now, and that's OK. Your involvement means the world to our whole team and we're so grateful to have you standing with us no matter what," one Liberal party email sent in May told supporters.

"If you're able, though, please show your support and chip in $5 today to support our progress for Canadians (or whatever amount feels right for you at the moment)."

These messages have shifted in recent weeks to more traditional pushes for support as pandemic restrictions have lifted and businesses have started reopening.

The Conservatives have also begun asking party faithful to chip in to an "early election fund," with the message that the Liberals "could call an election at any time."

Read the original here:

Liberals, Conservatives see drop in donations during height of COVID-19 pandemic - CBC.ca

OPINION: Rogue poll has become something of a buzzword in the last few weeks as National MPs have come to realise that the low 30s is no longer rogue. But was ACT polling at 5 per cent the most roguish element in the latest poll? Im not so sure, given that more than one recent poll had them around 3 per cent. There are surely many dismayed National voters looking for a right-wing alternative at present.

Many National voters are classic liberals. As they see liberal MPs like Amy Adams and Nikki Kaye jump off the sinking National ship and the large religious, conservative faction gain ascendancy present leader excepted they might be thinking ACT is a better fit.

But isnt ACT that tiny party full of gun nuts and obsessed with fringe issues like three strikes and charter schools? Well, yes, but it hasnt always been that way.

Maarten Holl/Stuff

Richard Prebble led ACT to early electoral success, before stepping down in 2004.

In their first election, 1996, ACT gained a whopping 6 per cent of the vote. In the next two elections, it gained over 7 per cent, with nine MPs in 2002. Im seeing a trend here: when Labour is led by a popular leader, ACTs star starts to rise.

READ MORE:* Top five contenders who could join ACT leader David Seymour in Parliament* Empower Tiwai owners to build their own transmission line - then they probably won't need to* The Detail: The two polarising referendums Kiwis will soon vote on

Some of the earlier ACT MPs Derek Quigley, Stephen Franks, Heather Roy, Deborah Coddington, Patricia Schnauer and Ken Shirley spring to mind were intelligent professionals with political experience. Yes, they espoused what I would call heartless social policies, and supported neo-liberal economic policies which benefited the few not the many, but they were consistent and said what they believed.

NZPA

Don Brash, left, and Rodney Hide in 2011, when Brash took over the party leadership from Hide.

The late left-wing commentator Bruce Jesson used to look enviously at ACTs policy-focused operation. What New Zealand needs is an ACT of the Left, he wrote in the 1990s.

And although leader Richard Prebble had been a brawler in the past, he led his MPs well and was popular with them. But in 2003 ACT MP Donna Awatere Huata was charged with fraud. Then, for reasons that I believe have never been properly explained, Prebble stood down.

Rodney Perkbuster Hide became leader and ACT slumped to 1.5 per cent in 2005. As John Key fever swept the country, ACT gained 5 MPs in 2008, but ACT had changed. It turned to populist policies such as law and order. Thank ACT for the three strikes law which seems to have had little effect on crime and charter schools.

Phil Walter/Getty Images

When John Banks led the party, he found it hard to follow some of its liberal social policies.

But worse was to come. In 2010 MP David Garrett resigned after revelations he had fraudulently obtained a passport in the name of a dead infant. Perkbuster Hide got busted for taking perks, then Don Brash launched a coup and a divided caucus elected him by one vote.

Brash couldnt even get in on the list so John Banks become leader and even right-wing columnists wrote ACT obituaries. Banks and ACT swore by charter schools, but they were an imported irrelevancy. The present Government didnt abolish them, but made them obey the rules that every other school must abide by, and the issue has largely disappeared.

Watching anti-gay Banks having to follow his liberal party line and vote for civil unions was almost as hilarious at watching present leader David Seymour address the media against gun control while the rest of Parliament was voting on the issue. ACT was the party of the 1 per cent in more ways than one.

Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images

Current leader David Seymour has plenty to smile about, according to the latest polls, which could see the party crossing the 5 per cent threshold.

Until last year, that is. Seymour successfully introduced the pro-euthanasia End of Life Choice Bill, which will become law if more than 50 per cent of voters support it in September. Seymour and his small team worked on this difficult issue across party lines for a successful outcome. This is not the David Seymour that venerates charter schools with little compelling evidence, has been a self-confessed lukewarmer on climate change, and provides train-wreck viewing on Dancing with the Stars.

So the question is, if the country elects more than one ACT MP in September, will they be 1996-style discerning classical liberals of ACT One, or the vulgar ACT Two populists from the class of 2008?

Two candidates in the current top six have an interest in firearms hardly the biggest issue facing the nation. Another is focused on disability issues, and one is a musician not your usual ACT candidates, given that charter schools enrolled few students with disabilities, and that ACT wanted to cut virtually all government arts funding not so long ago.

Robert Kitchin/Stuff

Dave Armstrong: While many of us find such policies distasteful, ACT needs only 5 per cent of the country to like it to be relevant in the next Parliament.

If you look at its more recent statements, ACT would whack interest back on student loans, slash benefits to pre-Covid levels, push back Working for Families increases, scrap fees-free tertiary education, scrap government KiwiSaver contributions and eliminate research and development tax credits.

While our prime minister is treating those most affected by Covid with kid gloves, ACT Three, while hardly wearing jackboots, has at least donned the Doc Martens to give those at the bottom a decent jab.

While many of us find such policies distasteful, ACT needs only 5 per cent of the country to like it to be relevant in the next Parliament.

Go here to see the original:

Liberal or populist: Will all be revealed in ACT Three? - Stuff.co.nz

Text Size:A- A+

If Ram is the presiding deity of Ayodhya, then its political god is Lal Krishna Advani. Even though Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah and Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath are lining up for the bhoomi pujan on 5 August.

Actually, a lot of people can claim credit for bringing India to this penultimate step of bhoomi pujan before the grand Ram Mandir is built in Ayodhya Advani, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the Vishva Hindu Parishad, and the Congress. But, most importantly, Indian families.

Undoubtedly, L.K. Advani not only set the ball rolling but also introduced the new language of Hindutva pride in the early 1990s. He single-handedly dismantled the word secularism from Indias aspirational pulpit, and gave it the adjective pseudo. In every stump speech from the rath, he spoke of the historical Hindu wound and made Babri Masjid a buzzword for hate in Indian living rooms.

But Indian family conversations should also be a big claimant for this credit. They kept chipping away at Indias founding narrative template. This is why scholars erred early on by locating the so-called idea of India in saving the Babri Masjid. That idea wasnt demolished at a religious site, it was taken apart brick by brick in our living rooms.

Also read: There are 3 claims to Ayodhya law, memory & faith. Its not a simple Hindu-Muslim dispute

Many in the Indian liberal commentariat have said that the demolition of the Babri Masjid was the biggest blow to Nehruvian ideals. But to invest an old dilapidated mosque with the burden of secularism and an idea of India was never going to fly. First, a religious structure cant be and shouldnt be a site to preserve secularism. Second, and more importantly, many Hindus, over generations, had been taught to view the mosque as a site of historical humiliation. They acted as mnemonic communities (thick-memory communities) self-identifying as wounded.

And that wound, reminded Arun Shourie, was strewn across India, not just Ayodhya. According to a book that he co-wrote Hindu Temples:What Happened to Them which was published much before the demolition in 1990, there are 2,000 mosques that stand on top of demolished temples. The red book listed each of these mosques with name, village and some photographs, and gave intellectual fodder to the Vishva Hindu Parishads campaign in the 1990s that said Hindus are ready to give up their claims over these 2,000 mosques if Muslims would give them the Ayodhya, Varanasi and Mathura sites.

We are deeply grateful to our readers & viewers for their time, trust and subscriptions.

Quality journalism is expensive and needs readers to pay for it. Your support will define our work and ThePrints future.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

I visited a handful of these 2,000 mosque sites back then but found no knowledge, folklore, collective memory, let alone wounds, about demolished temples among local villagers. People did not know or did not care or had just accepted what they had inherited by way of built heritage. Popular memory is constructed through deliberate acts of retelling, which were manifest in Ayodhya, Varanasi and Mathura, but not the 2,000 sites listed in Shouries book.

Here is another way collective memory is shaped. When I visited Ayodhya a few years after the mosques demolition, I saw street vendors selling little black-and-white flip-books with two dozen picture pages. When you flipped the pages fast, you could see in motion how the Babri Masjid was razed to the ground. The last flip-book I had seen in life was one that showed Kapil Devs bowling action in the early 1980s. The Babri flip-book was being sold alongside poster images of Ram, the warrior. There were also books extolling kar sevaks who helped bring the mosque down, sort of like a demolition hall-of-fame. This is how deliberate retelling works. It can keep both wounds and triumphalism alive.

Also read: Why Mathura or Varanasi temple disputes wont go the Ayodhya way

The demolition, however, wasnt the only, or first, or the last act of vandalism against the unique Indian pluralism that Indira Gandhi called a salad bowl. (Canadians say mosaic, Americans use melting pot to describe diversity). The salad bowl had been regularly chipped away long before 1992 in deliberate family oral histories and conversations. In families, the idea of the Muslim as the eternal, unforgivable other was kept alive.

Many parentseven todaytell their children to marry anyone but a Muslim (or some version of that). My own father said this. The marigold flower was not allowed in family prayers because it was associated with Muslims. The flower even has a derogatory Tamil name that refers to it as a Turkish flower. The simple act of banishing a flower keeps the popular memory of Muslim invasion alive. In Tamil and Kannada families, you refer to Muslims not as Muslims but as Turks for the same reason. My father routinely talked about how Muslim neighbourhoods in Madurai were growing (from ten houses at the corner to the entire street now), and how Muslim women no longer wore saris like they did in his generation but had moved on to black burqas.

Casual prejudiced observations and references like these are routinely made in many Hindu families about Muslims (to emphasise what Ashutosh Varshney called their everlasting disloyalty), Christians (over religious conversions) and Dalits (over hygiene). It works the other way too. Many Muslim families also warn their children against marrying a non-Muslim. A converted Pentecostal relative of mine once said to me others wont be saved.

Also read: Ayodhya verdict & Babri demolition confirmed status of Muslims as second-class citizens

The 1992 demolition was no sudden act. All of our family conversations contributed to the pickaxes that hit the mosque in Ayodhya. It is easier to blame politicians for religious bigotry or go to Jantar Mantar with Not In My Name placards, but more difficult to look in the mirror and speak up in our families.

There will be visible triumphalism in the bhoomi pujan event this week. First, history was undone and now it will be corrected. Liberal intelligentsia will mourn and blame politicians and courts. But they will choose to be oblivious to how public history and social memory is constructed. History isnt just the sum of built heritage structures. It is also made up of intangible collective memories the stuff that is not allowed to be disremembered.

A wiser approach for liberals would be to start investing their energies in family oral histories and conversations instead.

Views are personal.

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube & Telegram

News media is in a crisis & only you can fix it

You are reading this because you value good, intelligent and objective journalism. We thank you for your time and your trust.

You also know that the news media is facing an unprecedented crisis. It is likely that you are also hearing of the brutal layoffs and pay-cuts hitting the industry. There are many reasons why the medias economics is broken. But a big one is that good people are not yet paying enough for good journalism.

We have a newsroom filled with talented young reporters. We also have the countrys most robust editing and fact-checking team, finest news photographers and video professionals. We are building Indias most ambitious and energetic news platform. And we arent even three yet.

At ThePrint, we invest in quality journalists. We pay them fairly and on time even in this difficult period. As you may have noticed, we do not flinch from spending whatever it takes to make sure our reporters reach where the story is. Our stellar coronavirus coverage is a good example. You can check some of it here.

This comes with a sizable cost. For us to continue bringing quality journalism, we need readers like you to pay for it. Because the advertising market is broken too.

If you think we deserve your support, do join us in this endeavour to strengthen fair, free, courageous, and questioning journalism, please click on the link below. Your support will define our journalism, and ThePrints future. It will take just a few seconds of your time.

Support Our Journalism

View original post here:

Idea of India wasnt demolished at Ayodhya. That happened in our liberal homes - ThePrint

After many months of campaigning, debating and a delaydue to COVID-19, either John Abbott or Andrew Furey will become Newfoundland and Labrador's new Liberal Party leader Monday night and the province's premier-designate.

It started in February with outgoing Premier Dwight Ball dropping a bombshell announcement of his resignation from the post.

Ball's announcement came amid growing scandals within his caucus such as former Municipal Affairs and Environment Minister Perry Trimper'sinadvertent "very racist"voicemail to Innu Nation stafferDominic Rich, the hiring of Carla Foote without competition to a top job at The Rooms and subsequent investigation into then-Tourism Minister Christopher Mitchelmore's involvement, the hiring ofGordon McIntoshto a $350,000 contract with Nalcor Energy also without competition and thesaga of a harassment claimset forth by then cabinet Minister Sherry Gambin-Walsh which saw the removal ofthen-Liberal MHA Eddie Joyce and cabinet minister Dale Kirby.

Ball was first elected as premier in 2015, and re-elected in 2019.

But either Abbott or Furey will also inherit other problems, such as the province's troubling financial situation, which has since worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the ongoing push to bring theMuskrat Falls hydroelectric project online.

The race for a new Liberal leader began shortly after Ball's resignation in February.Abbott was the first to declare his candidacy for leadership, with Fureyentering the ring not long after.

The whole process came to a halt in late March amid a wave of pandemic-related closures, before starting back up in early June.

Abbott, who is CEO of the Newfoundland and Labrador branch of the Canadian Mental Health Association, has experience in the public sphere after workingtwo stints as deputy minister of health under Ball andformer premier Danny Williams. He hasnever run for public office before this race.

Fureycomes from afamily of long-time politicians. His father, George Furey, is the speaker of the Senate. Furey's uncle,Chuck Furey, is a former provincial cabinet minister.

But the younger Furey, too, has never run for office until now. Anorthopedic surgeon, he founded thehumanitarian group Team Broken Earthand co-founded the Dollar A Day Foundation.

Over the course of the race, Abbott remained on the attack, twice raisingconcerns abouthowFureyformed his contactlist, a list that resulted in a convicted murderer getting an invitation to Furey's campaign launch.

The two men also went to battle over health care, with FureyaccusingAbbott of not doing enough to fix the system while he held hissenior position ingovernment.

Read more aticles from CBC Newfoundland and Labrador

Read more:

John Abbott or Andrew Furey to be named Liberal Party leader - CBC.ca

To hear more audio stories from publishers like The New York Times, download Audm for iPhone or Android.

Anne Applebaums new book, Twilight of Democracy: The Seductive Lure of Authoritarianism, begins cinematically, with a party she threw at a Polish manor house to mark the dawn of the new millennium.

Applebaums husband was then the deputy foreign minister in Polands center-right government; she was a right-leaning journalist who would go on to write a Pulitzer Prize-winning history of the Soviet gulag. Many of the guests came from the cosmopolitan anti-Communist intelligentsia. About half of them, she writes, no longer speak to the other half.

In Twilight of Democracy, Applebaum tries to understand why so many of her old friends conservatives who once fancied themselves champions of democracy and classical liberalism have become paranoid right-wing populists. Were some of our friends always closet authoritarians? she asks. Or have the people with whom we clinked glasses in the first minutes of the new millennium somehow changed over the subsequent two decades?

To Applebaum, todays right, in both America and Europe, has little in common with most of the political movements that have been so described since the Second World War. Until recently, she writes, the right was dedicated not just to representative democracy, but to religious tolerance, independent judiciaries, free press and speech, economic integration, international institutions, the trans-Atlantic alliance and a political idea of the West. What happened?

Like Applebaum, Im astonished to see erstwhile Cold Warriors abase themselves before Vladimir Putin. But I think shes working from a mistaken premise about what once constituted conservatism. Liberal democracy per se was never the animating passion of the trans-Atlantic right anti-Communism was. When the threat of Communist expansion disappeared, so did most of the rights commitment to a set of values that, its now evident, were purely instrumental.

Reading Applebaums book, I kept thinking of an infamous 1981 interview given by the Republican campaign consultant Lee Atwater. In the 1950s, Atwater said, Southern conservatives would just repeat a vile racial slur. By 1968, that hurts you, backfires, he said. So you say stuff like forced busing, states rights, and all that stuff. From there, right-wing politics grew even more abstract, so now youre talking about cutting taxes, and all these things youre talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites, he said.

There were always some American conservatives who really were in it for laissez-faire economics. But its now clear that those conservatives were wrong about their movements animating passion. So too with those on the center-right who thought their comrades were opposed to authoritarianism on principle.

Back when the idea of a President Trump still seemed an absurdist impossibility, the political theorist Corey Robin wrote, in his 2011 book The Reactionary Mind, about the recurring argument that conservatism had slipped its sober mooring to become populist and radical.

He saw this as a misunderstanding of the right. In his view, reaction has always had a revolutionary edge. Conservatism, he wrote, seeks to make privilege popular, to transform a tottering old regime into a dynamic, ideologically coherent movement of the masses. Seen this way, corrupt autocratic populists like Trump and Viktor Orban of Hungary fit quite neatly into the tradition Applebaum was once part of.

In her book, Applebaum explores the purported ideological evolution of the Fox News host and Trump sycophant Laura Ingraham, an anti-immigrant demagogue who has three adopted immigrant children. In the 1990s, Applebaum associated Ingraham with a kind of post-Cold War optimism, an American conservatism that was energetic, reformist and generous.

But its hard to see what was ever reformist, never mind generous, about Ingraham. She first came to public notice as the editor of a conservative college newspaper who sent an undercover reporter to a meeting of a gay student group and published attendees intimate revelations.

Many adults, of course, transcend their college selves, but Ingraham never seemed to. It was 2003, not 2016, that Ingraham complained about police departments, hospitals, courts, schools and government agencies that now prefer hiring multilingual employees owing to the number of illegal and non-English-speaking immigrants in the community. Her conversion to Trumpism doesnt require much explanation.

Im genuinely grateful for the moral courage and concrete political work of anti-Trump conservatives. It cant be easy to break with the politics and the people that have defined ones life. Im aware, too, that the left has its own ingrained pathologies; Applebaums center-right views were shaped by the lived reality of Soviet Communism.

Twilight of Democracy is certainly worth reading. Applebaum has a keen understanding of how conspiracism and corruption intertwine to suffocate democracy. Her description of Polands Law and Justice government, which has put a fantasy at the heart of government policy, helps illuminate the role Trumps obsession with the deep state has played in our own rolling catastrophe.

But theres no mystery in the rights surrender to authoritarianism, because for many of the people Applebaum describes, it wasnt a surrender at all. It was a liberation.

Originally posted here:

Twilight of the Liberal Right - The New York Times

Published: 7/31/2020 11:26:40 AM

In his book, Bias, former CBS news reporter Bernard Goldberg claims that there is a liberal bias in the national news media. He writes The bias Im talking about, by the way, isnt so much political bias of the Democratic-versus-Republican sort. For me that isnt the real problem. The problem comes in the big social and cultural issues abortion, gun control, feminism ,gay rights, the environment, school prayer.

Nowhere in his list do any of the economic and financial struggles of the poor, the near-poor, the lower classes, and the middle classes appear.

He is among a number of conservatives who seem to suggest that the liberals of the 1960s were primarily concerned with the bread-and-butter issues of survival of these groups as well as with expanding the social safety-net federal government programs (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps), while the progressives of 2020 seem to be primarily concerned with the social, identity-politics and culture-wars issues.

To the extent that this is accurate. You can put me down as siding more with the liberals of the 1960s than with the progressives of 2020.

(This letter to the editor is dedicated to the Suffragist Alice Paul.)

Stewart B. Epstein

Rochester, N.Y.

Read more from the original source:

Liberals and progressives - The Recorder

Tasmania's Upper House appears set to be dominated by the major parties for the first time in its history, with new faces looking likely to enter the state's Parliament from the divisions of both Huon and Rosevears.

After a campaign prolonged by the coronavirus pandemic, voters have finally had their say on representation in the Legislative Council seats of Huon, south of Hobart, and Rosevears along the West Tamar in Tasmania's north.

In Rosevears, Liberal candidate Jo Palmer and independent Janie Finlay a former Launceston Mayor were virtually neck-and-neck throughout early counting, before strong performances in Legana and Riverside booths helped push former newsreader Ms Palmer ahead.

Ms Palmer was on 41 per cent of first preference votes at the close of counting on Saturday night, and Ms Finlay behind on 30 per cent, with 63 per cent of votes counted.

The other four candidates in Rosevears all remained in single digits.

In Huon, Labor candidate Bastian Seidel led the counting all night, polling 31 per cent of first preference votes, with 64 per cent of votes counted.

The incumbent, conservative independent Robert Armstrong, overtook Greens candidate Pat Caruana on postal votes to finish the night in second place with 19 per cent, ahead of Mr Caruana's 17 per cent.

Electoral analyst Kevin Bonham posted on his Twitter feed at 1:00am "called. Huon ALP gain".

Earlier, Professor Bonham said it would be "very difficult for the candidates in second place, which is now Finlay and Robert Armstrong in Huon, it's very difficult for them to get up from here".

If the final result is as predicted, there will be no significant change in the make-up of the Legislative Council in terms of progressives and conservatives.

Loading

Dr Seidel would replace the conservative Mr Armstrong for Labor in Huon, but retired progressive Kerry Finch would be replaced by Jo Palmer for the Liberals.

It would also be the first time in its history that party members have outnumbered independents in the Legislative Council, with both Labor and the Liberals adding new members over the past few years.

Labor would end up with five members in the Upper House, and the Liberals three.

"Party representation in the Legislative Council as a percentage was already at an all-time high even before this election, so if the parties win both these seats it will go up to eight out of 15 which will be a majority for the first time," Dr Bonham said earlier on Saturday night.

"It will also be the highest number of party members in the council at one time, there was a time in the old Legislative Council with 19 seats where there were seven party members in."

Final results may not be known until after postal votes close on Tuesday, August 11.

Go here to read the rest:

Independents out, Liberal and Labor in, as Huon and Rosevears voters have their say - ABC News

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The Chinese Communist coronavirus isnt the only epidemic in the land.

Americas news media are suffering mass amnesia, stuffing down a memory hole the extent of destruction from the ongoing Black Lives Matter/Antifa race riots.

Apart from lots of happy stories depicting the whole country kneeling to the BLMs anti-White, Marxist demands, you wont see much about the real costs.

Its gotten so bad that Rep. Jim Jordan, Ohio Republican, unleashed an eight-minute video during a House committee meeting that was grilling Attorney General William P. Barr last Tuesday.

The video begins with a mashup of a dozen or so reporters and politicians repeating the phrase peaceful protests or peaceful protesters followed by riot footage. The next portion features the widow of slain St. Louis retired police Capt. David Dorn, a father of five who was killed while responding to an alarm at a pawnshop. As she speaks, scenes of mob violence unfold.

The effect is devastating. Which is why the video has come under attack. CNNs Jake Tapper drew some blood, showing that two CNN reporters who use the phrase peaceful protests are taken out of context. Hes right. Both reporters note that while the daytime protests they were covering were peaceful, they were followed by nighttime violence. That part was omitted. Welcome to what happens to conservatives when theyre interviewed by Mr. Tappers network.

But two wrongs dont make a right, and well give you this one, Jake. You had the guts to report how similar editing created the colossal lie that President Trump praised White supremacists in Charlottesville, Virginia, even though he unequivocally condemned them.

However, Mr. Tapper does not dent the Jordan videos powerful message. Extreme media bias pervades riot coverage and political stories. Just Google Trump. The media are really good at covering up what they dont want known. Theyve sugar-coated abortion for decades while serving up the party line about choice. Theyve played down horrific Black-on-Black urban violence, focusing instead on a handful of police brutality cases. Theyre doing the same with the current riots.

If it bleeds, it leads isnt in force now. If Americans actually saw the extent of lawlessness in Democrat-run cities, they might realize whos responsible.

Given the Democrats wink and a nod to the rioters while defunding police, its not a reach to describe BLM/Antifa as the militant wing of the Democratic Party. Those are not Young Republicans out smashing windows, looting stores, burning buildings, beating up people and overturning police cars.

Ive searched in vain for news about the riots overall cost. The media seem profoundly incurious. How many people have been killed? How many police officers have been injured or died? How many businesses have been destroyed? How much will it cost to fix everything thats been broken?

Theres anecdotal evidence. Between May 25 and June 8, at least 17 people were killed in what the media call unrest. More than 700 law enforcers were injured by early June.

Property damage has run into the billions, and were not done yet. Portland continues to simmer, and cities explode nightly, like Richmond this past week.

Looters have struck at least 250 CVS pharmacies and 350 Walgreens nationwide, according to an insurance website. Crime is out of control in several major cities, with Chicago enduring double-digit murder numbers on weekends. In Los Angeles, Democrats plan to cut the police budget by more than $100 million despite homicides rising by 250% in early June.

Since we dont have reliable, comprehensive data, lets go to the nations largest city for a snapshot.

New York Democratic Mayor Bill de Blasio has cut $1 billion from the NYPD budget and disbanded the 600-member plainclothes police unit. Between June 1 and June 30, shootings increased by 130% over June 2019. Murders rose by more than 30%, burglaries increased by 118% and auto thefts rose by 52%.

As for New Yorks finest you know, the guys in blue who ran into the World Trade Center during the 9/11 attacks, most of whom never came out here are some of their costs.

Since May 28, a total of 458 officers of all ranks have been injured, according to spokeswoman Sgt. Mary Frances ODonnell. Seven officers were admitted to the hospital, 303 were treated and released from the hospital, five were treated by EMS and 150 refused medical attention. Forty-seven officers remain out sick due to their injuries.

From May 28 to July 22, 303 NYPD vehicles have been vandalized during the protests, she reported in an email, adding that, 14 vehicles were a total loss due to arson and condemned.

The damage so far is estimated at $996,700.Thats just for the department.

The NYPD has seen a surge in the number of officers filing for retirement, said Sgt. ODonnell.

Well, why not? When you work for a mayor who hates your guts and the media treat you as the bad guys, why risk your life?

As for the rest of us, just because the media have amnesia, we shouldnt forget the real costs of the Democrats experiment in street justice.

Or the ongoing sacrifices of the thin blue line.

Robert Knight is a contributor to The Washington Times. His website is robertHknight.com.

Read the original here:

Liberal media blurs costs and destruction of ongoing Black Lives Matter/Antifa race riots - Washington Times

Hello Krishnaswamy Kasturirangan,

Hope you are doing good and safe during the pandemic. This letter is from a student, who has studied from nursery and is currently pursuing Phd after completing an MPhil, and someone who understands the flaws and changes that the system needs. However, seeing a news story in Press Trust of India, which was published across various news portals on August 1, where you spoke of NEP being a game changer, made me write my concerns to you.

The PTI story quotes you saying, NEP 2020 envisions imparting 21st century and employability skills with no compromise on quality. These tall claims fall flat when one searches the NEP 2020 final document (uploaded by the MHRD) for its position on public funding, social justice and reservation. Public Funding is mentioned twice, Social Justice thrice (if we include Ministry of Social Justice also as a phrase) and surprisingly reservation finds zero mentions. How can a 21st century liberal or multi-disciplinary education policy function or even exist by excluding Dalits, Adivasis, OBCs, PWDs and other marginalised groups?

On the other hand, your claim that the Four Year Multiple Entry/Exit Degree has a lot of opportunities for picking up many types of skills, which can be even used as employment opportunities. This sounds like a very liberal and 21st century idea, but actually means the contrary. The role of education isnt just to provide skills and Universities cannot just be skill training centres. They should be places of higher learning, which includes the skills required for earning employment. As a result of this focus on skill, our Universities and institutions of higher education will reduce the bargaining power of students who will not be allowed to dive deep into a subject of their choice. Instead, they will be sent away with some skill set which the private sector needs to ensure its profits. This philosophy of education is not in the national interest but only in the interest of companies and corporates.

See the article here:

Mr Kasturirangan, you are wrong, NEP is not liberal, it promotes exclusion - National Herald

After months of internal unrest and power struggles between LNP politicians and its senior executives, a new party president will be elected today.

Current president David Hutchinson will formally relinquish the position at this evening's state executive meeting, following sustained calls for his resignation.

Several candidates have been suggested for the role, including former LNP president Gary Spence and vice president of the party Cynthia Hardy.

Mr Spence has extensive election campaign experience and lead the party's headquarters for three years between 2015 and 2018.

He resigned after Labor introduced new state laws on political donations from property developers which Mr Spence said could create a conflict with his background in urban development.

Today LNP Deputy Leader Tim Mander said both Mr Spence and Ms Hardy were "quality candidates" for the role.

"I know those people and both are quality candidates. We are confident we can continue to work close together," he said.

"'We thank Dave for his service, he has said himself it's time to move on.

"The parliamentary wing of the LNP and the organisational wing are absolutely united for one quest and that is to make sure this Labor Government is not elected for another four years."

University of Queensland political scientist Chris Salisbury said it would be interesting to see who took on the role three months out from the state election on October 31.

"If someone like Spence was to takeover again, to me that would signal that it was effectively a continuation of that troubled relationship and indeed of the executive wielding as much, if not more influence over the direction of the party," Dr Salisbury said.

The turmoil started brewing in June, when Mr Hutchinson was accused of leaking internal polling that was critical of Opposition Leader Deb Frecklington, months out from a state election.

The damaging leak prompted Ms Frecklington to publicly call out what she referred to as "back room bullies" within the party organisation.

Several MPs, including federal frontbencher Peter Dutton, also called for Mr Hutchinson's resignation, describing his position as "untenable".

Despite months of mediation meetings between the parliamentary and party wings to resolve the internal friction, Mr Hutchinson emailed party members late last week signalling his intention to resign today.

He said everyone had a responsibility to do everything in their power to ensure an LNP victory at the October state election.

"For some of us, that will mean stepping up into new roles and taking on new responsibilities in the coming months," he said.

"For others, it might mean thinking about whether we are the best people to fill those vital campaign roles, or whether we should allow others to come through.

"There is no member who is exempt from asking himself or herself what our party needs from us at this time, including the leadership."

It is understood the meeting will be held via zoom this afternoon, with an acting president to be selected to lead the party-wing until the election.

The rest is here:

Queensland's Liberal National Party to vote on new president three months out from state election - ABC News

Liberal leadership hopeful John Abbott and the Liberal Party of Newfoundland and Labrador are at odds over how prevalent voting problems are, only three days before the virtual convention that will decide a new leader.

In a media release issued Friday afternoon, Abbott said the party shouldextend the deadline to cast a ballot.

"We are concerned about the votingsystem that the Liberal party is conducting," Abbott told CBC News in an interview shortly after his media release.

Abbott is competing for the job against Andrew Furey, an orthopedic surgeon. The virtual convention to decide the party's next leader, and also premier of the province, is scheduled for Monday.

Specifically, Abbottsaid his campaign staff have heard that registered voters still don't have theirPINs, which are needed to vote. Some are still waiting to get them via email and via the mail,Abbott said. He said because of that,the party should consider extendingthe voting deadline.

"We work from the premise that every registeredvoter has the opportunity, and should have the opportunity to vote. And if there is a delay on behalf of the party, then the voters should not have their vote, potential vote, discounted," he said Friday.

Abbott said the voter helpline that is supposed to help sort these issues out for people, including instructions on how to vote, is "constantly busy" because it's understaffed.

In a statement sent Friday afternoon, Furey's campaign said, "We are hearing from some supporters that they have successfully called the voter helpline to obtain their PIN and were then able to vote. In some cases, supporters have chosen to leave a message with the help centre, and in other cases supporters have chosen to call back at a later time. We continue to offer whatever support we can to registered voters, and understand they are successfully voting throughout the process."

The Liberal Party disagrees with Abbott's portrayal of a problem-plagued voting system, saying the issues he is raising "are isolated, expectedand are being addressed as they arise," according to a statement from Michael King, the party's executive director.

"We have full confidence in the integrity of this process. Both campaigns are on a level playing field," he wrote.

King said more than 15,000 people have already voted out of about 34,000 registered voters.

King said the party is aware that some emails, containing PINs, have bounced back, but, he said, that "is likely due to either a typo from when voters entered their email address when they registered or a data entry issue on the part of either campaign."

Both campaigns have been provided a list of people affected by the bounce-backs so they can follow up with them.

King admitted the helpline was "initially very busy" but said extra staff have been added.

"That process is now working smoothly with plenty of time to vote," King said in the statement.

Read more from CBC Newfoundland and Labrador

Go here to see the original:

Abbott, Liberal Party at odds over voting problems ahead of Monday's convention - CBC.ca

Aug 1st 2020

Letters are welcome via e-mail to letters@economist.com

The Economist missed the point about the Black Lives Matter movement (The new ideology of race, July 11th). You praised Martin Luther Kings vigorous protest and relentless argument, but criticised the methods of todays activists as dangerous, contending that they seek to impose their ideology through intimidation and power. King may have taken issue with your position. In his Letter from Birmingham Jail, written in 1963, King wrote:

I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderatewho is more devoted to order than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cant agree with your methods of direct action; who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another mans freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a more convenient season.

While todays activists should be open to constructive criticism, this is not the most important issue at hand. The Economists line makes clear that it is more interested in maintaining comfort and economic stability rather than achieving change. Its words perpetuate white complacency.

GRIFFIN CONGDONNew Haven, Connecticut

Your leader dripped with establishment anxiety over the growing influence of Black Lives Matter and the broader progressive movement. It reeked of the classic you-cant-say-anything-these-days terror that radiates off those whose intellectual authority is being challenged. Rashad Robinson, president of Colour of Change, perfectly summarises this type of miscalculation: Far too often we mistake presence, visibility and awareness for power. Disappointingly, The Economist fell into this trap, equating the visibility of anti-racist voices in the virtual public sphere with the economic, political and judicial heft of the systems they seek to reform, dismantle and democratise. This false equivalence would be laughable if it wasnt so insulting.

A. MENSAHLondon

* The new ideology of race? The old has never ended. It has been embedded in Anglo-Saxon thinking for centuries. It has justified the invasion and land theft of todays America, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. That land was occupied and owned by Aborigine states, and to clear it, the Anglo-Saxon colonists simply invaded, stole and killed off the Aborigines. Then a whites only policy was instituted and turned into law, such as the Chinese exclusion acts of the early 1900s, and lasted, with Jim Crow laws, into the 1970s. Not to exclude the long-term use of slaves.

So what is new? The draconian suppression of black demonstrators, the exclusion of a growing China, making illegal Chinese advanced technologies that are superior to American ones. Same racial animus, same racial ideology. Only described differently.

HENDRIK WEILERPort Perry, Canada

Although liberalism has given the world theoretically unassailable values such as free speech, it has not been as successful dealing with pervasive social problems. The liberal state of nature and veil of ignorance imagine a society untarnished by politics. Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and even John Rawls claimed to have established that the equality of mankind was determined by our fear of slaughtering each other, God, or rationality.

No one who studies political philosophy takes this exercise in apolitical history at face value. Their conclusions about government are based on a flawed assumption that humans once lived without politics. Social order has always existed, and therefore, so has politics. The assertion that all men are created equal is based on Enlightenment principles that were primarily created to check the power of government and protect property rights. The pursuit of these goals made it possible to ignore social inequality in general and allowed for the hypocrisy of most of the Founding Fathers owning slaves.

As you pointed out, liberal thinkers have always struggled with conceptualising unequal power relationships among groups. Critical theorists, their roots based in Marxism, inevitably face similar challenges when arguments are premised on simplified assumptions. If racism and discrimination are systemic, where do they originate from? Why do they persist, even if no one at an institution holds racist beliefs? And, hardest of all, what about individual rights?

However, it is liberalism that has had centuries to deal with prejudice and the social ills it produces. Thus far, the solutions it has offered are inadequate.

HEATHER KATZAssistant professor of political scienceSouthwestern Oklahoma State UniversityWeatherford, Oklahoma

* What is the point of a theory of justice that is silent on how the actual world is ravaged by injustice? My own view: properly applied, John Rawls clears away the whataboutery and wonkishness to expose our persistent racism as a stunning, continuing injustice. A nail may want a hammer, but we need a lamp to see our work.

V.VM.SCARPATO IIIDenver

* You lamented the disempowerment of individualism. However, American slavery and subsequent institutional oppression did not operate on an individual basis, but by the desire to keep an entire group of people disenfranchised and powerless. Hence, it is impossible to uproot this mentality from the American way of life. Black people decry daily their inability to carry on simply as individuals, a privilege only afforded to white people. But they do recognise that the institutions that shape their lives are fundamentally biased against their group. Data show significant inequalities between the races, and much of black culture has developed as a direct consequence of these inequalities. How can one begin to remedy such differences without considering the historical and ongoing group dynamics?

The truth is that a black person can have individual freedom and the pursuit of happiness only if African-Americans as a group have freedom and the pursuit of happiness. If liberalism cannot incorporate such a moderate idea, perhaps it is time to rethink how progress should be achieved, to dare suggest that another system can give America the life expectancy, material wealth, poverty, literacy, civil rights and rule of law for which you credit liberalism, in addition to the racial equality that has eluded it so far.

PATRICK NTWARIBoston

* The implicit bias trainings I have attended awakened a notion that we all have a demon inside us that distrusts the different borne of millennia of seeking survival and self-defence. This demon cannot be wished away. Instead, focus on what we control and judge accordingly.

Do we really want to be judged for differences we have no control over? It was Martin Luther King who dreamed of the day when his children will live in a country where they will not be judged by the colour of their skin, but by the content of their character. No human being has a choice about which body to be born into. Prejudice on this basis is patently illogical. Rainbow flags and gay-pride parades herald the type differences we do not control. Focus on the important quality we do control, which is our character. May our character exude kindness rather than malevolence.

PETER ROBERTSSeattle

* Imagine a United States where every head of a household with children had a decent full-time job with health insurance. Add this to The Economists good ideas about housing and early childhood (Staying apart, July 11th) and few American children of any race would go hungry or suffer the other ills of desperate poverty. Single mothers would not be exploited in jobs with terrible schedules and working conditions. Todays daunting choice between fighting the coronavirus and creating jobs would be lessened.

More than 40 years ago, President Jimmy Carter introduced the Better Jobs and Incomes Programme. It would have federally financed community jobs to bring about this vision. There are challenges. Meaningful jobs and apprenticeships would need to be created in sectors such as health, energy and the environment. Legislation would have to address geographic differences in the cost of living, unions would have to co-operate, and more. But the challenges are solvable and the benefits substantial.

ARNOLD PACKERFormer assistant secretary of labour in the Carter administration.La Jolla, California

In Who We Are and How We Got Here, David Reich, a population geneticist, related the story of how a piece of his research that identified genetic variants associated with an elevated risk of prostate cancer among men of west African descent led to accusations from some of his colleagues that he was flirting with racism. Critical race theory does not allow for the possibility that racial disparities in health could be caused by something other than systemic racism. If accepted, its assumptions make it nearly impossible to eliminate any racial disparities that have other causes, because the type of intervention required to address a disparity depends on what the disparity is caused by.

JONATHAN KANEFlat Rock, North Carolina

You made a good case for a genuinely liberal approach to race, at a time when the modern left has forgotten what a truly liberal society is. You see what we all see: intellectual rigidity and intolerance of dissent, the fomenting of division, racial obsession replacing colour-blind equality of opportunity, identity politics taking priority over the rights of the individual, all the marks of an authoritarian society, not a liberal one.

Donald Trumps speech at Mount Rushmore was an attempt to address this issue. You say his speech strived to inflame a culture war centred on race, when in fact he was expressing the very concerns you share.

STEVEN VAN DYCKToronto

Congratulations on having the courage to challenge the intellectual hogwash that is the new race and identity politics. Prejudice based on skin colour is among the idiotic of all prejudices and it must be challenged. But to go from there to the construction of a Marxist-derived analysis, this time with white people as the new group to hate instead of the bourgeoisie, is nonsense on stilts. Its intellectual dishonesty is imbued with a Manichean worldview and totalitarian instincts. George Orwell would recognise all the newly woke, self-haters of the academic and cultural elite, who have meekly caved-in to show trial by Twitter.

SIMON DIGGINSRickmansworth, Hertfordshire

* Critical race theory brings to mind one fundamental Marxist concept: that there is no objective truth and each class generates its own truth. Race ideology, just like Marxism, did not take a wrong turn. As somebody who was forced to study Marxism in a communist country, I see a perfect similarity: an ideology pushed by intellectuals with little contact with the real world, no compassion for real people, and fancy concepts leading to the most unfair and sinister consequences. Critical race theory leads by design to intolerance, the silencing of dissenters and polarisation.

ANDREI TUDORANHouston

The hard part of resolving Americas racial economic gap starts with facing the actual history of our country. When I attended high school in California in the 1980s, I learned nothing of the lynchings in the post-Reconstruction era, nor of the Tulsa massacre or other white riots, nor the redlining that prevented black Americans from building home equity. White Americans need to fully reckon with this betrayal of their fellow citizens.

MARK SEAMANNew York

* I fear a bigger problem for the future. I moved to North Carolina during a year when Jesse Helms was running for Senate. His main campaign ad was a set of white hands crumpling a rejection letter, the implication being that a qualified white did not get a job because of affirmative action to help blacks. We must be careful that in trying to improve black lives we do not once again turn it into a fight between blacks and lower-class whites, with rich whites laughing all the way to the bank. Just as in the 1920s the Northern Ireland government broke an attempt to create a united Protestant-Catholic union in the shipyards by promising all Protestants a job, so the people on top in America succeeded once in turning the racial issue into a fight within the lower class.

ALAN LANEAssociate professor of historyBarton CollegeWilson, North Carolina

* The greatest danger to liberalism is not the pantomime villains you boo each week, but rather the choking hypocrisy within its own ranks. Instead of basking in your enlightenment, as individuals you need to petition your local councils for more refugees and disadvantaged people to be housed and schooled in your own communities, whatever the effect on house prices. Stop tilting at Trumpian walls and Orbanite fences, and start addressing the far more formidable and discriminatory socioeconomic barriers that shield you from the adverse side effects of the globalisation and mass immigration that you piously prescribe for others.

ISTVAN SZABOLondon

* I object to your description of the street corner where George Floyd was murdered as shabby. In fact, it is home to several successful small businesses and is neither neglected nor unsafe. Our city has already been maligned enough because of recent events and this incorrect description was unnecessary.

THOM ROETHKEMinneapolis

One cannot easily shake off unwanted associations with partners picked up during a prolonged binge. As you made quite clear, liberalism awoke to find itself in bed with slave-traders and unbridled imperialists. Singing its prelapsarian virtues now, however sweet the tune, will not readily assuage the critics.

MATTHEW KAPSTEINDirector of studies, emeritusPractical School of Advanced StudiesParis

* Letters appear online and in app only

This article appeared in the Letters section of the print edition under the headline "On race and liberalism"

Read more:

On race and liberalism - Letters to the editor | Letters - The Economist

BILL BLACK

The decision to investigate the mass-shooting tragedy via a joint independent review had a very short life.

The affected families and communities had been calling for months for a public inquiry, which would have greater independence and the ability to compel witnesses to provide written or oral evidence, and to supply relevant documentation when asked.

Nevertheless, the provincial and federal governments announced the weaker review process. It would be less independent of government, which would have both the interim and final reports to consider before they would be shared with the public. The documents and other evidence they received were to be kept confidential.

To make matters worse, they attributed the choice to exclude the full participation of the families on the theory that it would protect them from further trauma. They had no reason to believe that was what the families wanted, and would have learned that if they bothered to ask.

When announcing the review, Attorney General and Minister of Justice Mark Furey confidently asserted that: the government of Nova Scotia is committed to ensuring that they, and all Nova Scotians, get the answers they deserve. We have heard the calls for an independent and impartial review into why and how this happened, and for timely recommendations that will make our communities safer. This joint review will achieve these outcomes.

This confidence was misplaced, as he must have known. There were demonstrations by the affected families and their supporters, and widespread media criticism. Over the weekend, five Liberal members of Parliament from Nova Scotia broke ranks and joined the criticism of their own government.

When that happened, Furey decided to abandon ship:

I have heard from family members and many Nova Scotians who are opposed to a joint review of the tragic events of April 18 and 19 and would prefer a joint public inquiry ...

If the federal government agrees to a joint public inquiry where federal agencies including the RCMP, Canada Border Services Agency, Criminal Intelligence Services Canada, Canadian Firearms Registry and the Public Alert Ready System will participate and offer testimony, I will support that and so will our government.

A few hours later, Bill Blair, his federal counterpart, fell in line. There will be a full inquiry after all. In response, Furey provided the following statement:

We heard overwhelmingly from families, survivors and Nova Scotians on the importance of a public inquiry regarding the tragic events of April 18 and 19. Our government wanted an inquiry from Day 1, but we also needed the federal government at the table. I am pleased that the federal government now supports a joint inquiry.

That is different from the deferential tone of Premier Stephen McNeil in May: There will be a review, Im sure. Its our belief that the national government will lead that as they see fit (and) we as a provincial government will provide the support where we can.

If they were unhappy with the review format, why didnt Furey and McNeil say so a week ago?

More to the point, what were the federal Liberals thinking? They should have known that the review announcement was going to be unpopular. Why would they make it worse by providing a rationale that was transparently false?

Being forced unwillingly into an inquiry will reinforce suspicions that they have something to hide. Families will be watching like hawks to see if either government fails to provide any evidence requested by the inquiry.

Other collateral damage is the loss of caucus discipline. That wall having been breached, there will likely be other occasions.

This continues a pattern that so far has mostly revolved around Justin Trudeau. His initial responses on awkward questions on free vacations from the Agha Khan (He is a close family friend ), SNC-Lavalin (The Globe and Mail story that there was pressure on Jody Wilson-Raybould is false ...), and the failure to recuse himself on the WE contract (I needed to be there because I know so much about the topic ) all fell apart under scrutiny, but not before making a bad situation worse.

It is hard to know whether the miscue around investigating the Portapique tragedy was just a bad day at the office, or reflects a persistent Liberal belief that they can bamboozle Canadians.

RELATED:

See the original post:

BILL BLACK: Review vs. inquiry why did the Liberals get it wrong the first time? - TheChronicleHerald.ca

Philippe J. Fournier: While the Liberals still hold a solid lead over the Conservatives, a host of new polls shows the party beginning to shed support

While many Canadians are taking much needed time off from work and/or their pandemic routines, the news cycle out of Ottawa has not slowed down one bit. The WE Charity stories alleging potential conflicts of interest with the Prime minister and Bill Morneau, the minister of finance, appear to be evolving daily.

One question on the mind of many is whether Canadians are actually paying attention. (And do they care?) No fewer than four new federal polls were published in the past week to measure the impressions of Canadians:

We add these latest figures to the 338Canada model and present today this updated electoral projection. All federal polls are listed on this page. For details on the 338Canada methodology, visit this page.

The Liberal Party remains on top of voting intentions with an average of 37 per cent nationally, seven points ahead of the Conservatives at 30 per cent:The NDP has remained remarkably stable throughout the spring and summer and currently stands at 17 per cent. The Greens and Bloc are at 7 per cent each (the Bloc stands at 30 per cent in Quebec).

The regional breakdown of support still heavily tilts towards the Liberals: The LPC leads by an average of 23 points in Atlantic Canada, by six points in Quebec (over the Bloc), and by 11 points in Ontario. Additionally, the LPC currently leads a tight race in British Columbiasix points over the Conservatives and only 10 points over the NDP.

As for the Conservatives, they remain comfortably in the lead in Alberta and in the Prairies.

Here is the progression of national voting intentions since January 2020. We see the Liberals and Conservatives in a statistical tie throughout winter, and the Liberals taking the outright lead from April to July:

Has the pandemic/CERB bump in the polls come to an end for the Liberals? It certainly is a plausible hypothesis at this point in time, and we will know more in the coming weeks, but once again we must use caution with summer numbers, as several Canadians are on vacations and fewer voters usually pay attention to the news. Nevertheless, it appears the Liberals have indeed shed some support of late.

For the Conservatives, while they could rejoice in seeing their main rival slide for the first time since early spring, these latest numbers show the CPC has remained stuck at the 30 per cent mark (or below) since April. In short, the latest Liberal misfortunes have not yet translated into additional Conservative support. The new leader of the CPC will be elected in the second half of August, so it will be interesting to see what kind of bumpif at allthe CPC gets then.

In the national seat projection, the 338Canada model has the Liberals winning an average of 177 seats, just above the 170-seat threshold for a majority at the House of Common. Notice however that the confidence intervals show the real possibility of the LPC falling into minority territory.The Conservatives win an average of 102 seats. According to these numbers, the best-case scenarios for the Conservatives would have them win around 125 seats, slightly above their 2019 election result of 121 seats. The Bloc, NDP and Greens all remain close to their 2019 election results.

From a purely political point of view, every sitting government in Canada has enjoyed surging support and increasedsatisfaction level to some extent since the COVID-19 pandemic reached Canadas borders. The federal Liberals were no exception. But as the pandemic goes from a public health crisis to a financial one with billions and billions of dollars of projected deficits, which governments across the country will keep voters on their side to weather the storm ahead? And will the WE Charity stories coming out on an almost-daily basis of late further hurt the Liberals in the eyes of voters?

This falls parliamentary session should be interesting to say the least.

For complete numbers of this 338Canada federal projection, including regional and district-level projections, visit 338Canada.

Read the original here:

338Canada: The end of the Liberals pandemic bump - Maclean's

Ted Hsu, the former MP for Kingston and the Islands, is to seek the Liberal nomination for the 2022 provincial election.Julia McKay/Kingston Whig-Standard/Postmedia NetworkJulia McKay / Julia McKay/Kingston Whig-Standa

KINGSTON Former Kingston and the Islands MP Ted Hsu left politics five years ago to focus on his family.

But when he announced he would not seek re-election in the 2015 federal election, Hsu left the door open to making a return to elected office some day.

That day is today.

Hsu is to announce Thursday that he plans to seek the Liberal nomination for the 2022 provincial election.

And it was his daughters and their growing concern about the problems of the world climate change, economic upheaval and international tensions who motivated him to go back to politics.

When I talked to my daughter, shes in high school, I feel that her generation is pessimistic and that makes me kind of sad, Hsu said in an interview Wednesday.

I have a few good years left in me and I have the experience and energy so I am just gong to do a little bit. Im motivated in wanting to address the pessimism of my daughters generation.

Hsu represented Kingston and the Islands in the House of Commons from 2011 to 2015 as an opposition Liberal MP.

He worked as the Ontario Liberal caucus and critic for economic development in Ontario, post-secondary education, and science and technology and was named Parliamentarian of the Year in 2013.

Since leaving politics, Hsu has kept a low profile but his interest in politics remained.

Last year he co-chaired, along they Kingscourt-Rideau Dist. Coun. Mary Rita Holland, the mayors task force on housing.

That experience, he said, provided a good view of how provincial government affects the lives of people.

The provincial government regulates and funds big parts of the provinces economy, such ashousing,environmental standards,economic competitiveness,health care and education and improving those sectors will put Ontario in a better place to tackle other challenges, he said.

There are big challenges in the world and we need people with expertise to who want to attack the things people are worried about, he said.

Hsu said the current provincial Progressive Conservative governments two years in office are looked at they have to be divided in two distinct parts separated by the beginning of the pandemic.

Hsu said before the pandemic struck, many of the governments policy decisions and budget cuts that were not very well thought through.

During the pandemic, the government has made the right moves by taking the threat seriously and following the advice of public health experts, he added.

What the pandemic did show was how important it is for politicians to interact with health officials, scientists, economists and other experts, and to listen to their advice, something Hsu said will become even more critical in the coming few months as the economy begins to reopen.

Now it becomes tricky, he said. I dont really want to knee-jerk critical if I have not been in the room and seen all the moving parts. I just hope they take the advice of the experts.

Hsu joins former MPP Sophie Kiwala in seeking the nomination. Prior to winning the 2014 election, Kiwala worked in Hsus constituency office.

More:

Former Kingston MP Ted Hsu to seek provincial Liberal nomination - The Kingston Whig-Standard

Liberalism is facing its greatest crisis in decades, in part because western governments have failed to uphold their values and Donald Trump has damaged the wests moral authority, according to a new Lowy Institute paper.

The scathing assessment, published on Wednesday, is accompanied by a call for countries including Australia to work towards a more inclusive order driven by a common imperative in meeting 21st-century challenges such as climate change, pandemic disease and global poverty.

Dr Bobo Lo, a non-resident fellow at the Lowy Institute in Sydney and a former deputy head of mission at the Australian embassy in Moscow, writes that the coronavirus pandemic has thrown a harsh spotlight on the state of global governance.

Faced with the greatest emergency since the second world war, nations have regressed into narrow self-interest, Lo writes in the paper titled Global Order in the Shadow of the Coronavirus: China, Russia, and the West.

The concept of a rules-based international order has been stripped of meaning, while liberalism faces its greatest crisis in decades.

The actions of Donald Trump, in particular, have undermined transatlantic unity, damaged the moral authority of the west and weakened global governance

Lo argues that even though western leaders blame global disorder on an increasingly assertive China and disruptive Russia, the principal threat lies closer to home because governments have failed to live up to the values underpinning a liberal international order.

This failure, he says, has been compounded by inept policymaking and internal divisions.

The actions of Donald Trump, in particular, have undermined transatlantic unity, damaged the moral authority of the west and weakened global governance.

The paper portrays Trump as openly contemptuous of norms under the rules-based order but it also cites the 2003 invasion of Iraq under George W Bush as the most notorious instance of Washington deciding it would not be bound by supranational rules.

In recent years, it says, the US has moved to withdraw from major accords such as the Paris climate agreement and trashed deals the US initiated such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Iran nuclear agreement giving Beijing and Moscow all the justification they need to indulge in their own considerable sense of self-entitlement.

In setting out the case that liberalism is retreating around the world, the paper cites the rise of illiberal democracy in European Union member states Hungary and Poland and the increasing strain on international agreements as some countries abuse or withdraw from them.

Lo, a former head of the Russia and Eurasia program at Chatham House in London, says authoritarian regimes have become more numerous and repressive, with Xi Jinpings China and Vladimir Putins Russia just the most conspicuous examples of a larger trend.

His paper emphasises that with the world in the midst of the worst crisis of international leadership since the 1930s, the issue is not simply Trump but a collective failure that cuts across continents and systems of governance.

The very notion of moral authority is imperilled. Truth has become almost entirely subjective, giving way to narratives. The old cold war confrontation between capitalism and communism may have gone, but in its place are new ideological conflicts, both internationally and within nations.

Lo accuses western policymakers and thinkers of being in denial about the values, norms and institutions of liberalism being in crisis wrongly believing that normal service can be restored with adjustments, such as a change of US president, more transatlantic unity, getting tough on China, and accommodation with Russia.

Lo instead calls for a fundamental rethinking of global governance, with the future being a more inclusive and flexible order. America will remain the leading power in the world for at least the next decade, he says, but US global leadership in its post-cold war form is over.

The paper suggests multilateral organisations will become more important and governments should build their capacity, starting with the chronically under-resourced World Health Organization.

It argues the evolution of global governance will bring greater input from middle-level powers, such as Australia, and smaller states, while also featuring greater involvement of business, civil society organisations and private individuals.

Governments should also be receptive to new regional and global mechanisms, leading eventually to a network of interlocking structures that helps us tackle key priorities, be it climate change, security in the AsiaPacific and Europe, or addressing the infrastructure deficit in Eurasia and Africa.

Sounding the alarm over stalled action to deal with the climate crisis, the paper says the economic downturn prompted by the pandemic had led to misguided moves to drop or weaken carbon emission and other environmental standards when nothing could be more short-sighted.

Lo argues while coronavirus is seen as the most immediate peril facing humanity, the threat of climate change is even larger and more devastating in its consequences both now and in the longer term.

Yet most governments (not least Australia) have ignored, denied, or minimised its importance; made half-hearted and wholly inadequate commitments to cut carbon emissions; played for time they do not have; and shifted responsibility onto others.

Go here to read the rest:

Liberalism is facing a crisis and it's a cop-out to blame China and Russia, analyst claims - The Guardian

Although struggling recently to cope with the global COVID-19 pandemic, universities have long been important institutions not only in the West but internationally.

How long? No direct link exists between todays universities and either the Academy of Plato or the Lyceum of Aristotle. Instead, the origins of the modern university lie in the medieval period.

The term universitas itself seems to have been coined in Italy, in connection with the establishment of what is still known today as the University of Bologna. Focused initially on civil and canon law and featuring teachers recruited from the areas lay and ecclesiastical schools, Bologna is often considered the oldest continuously-functioning degree-granting institution of higher education in the western world. Its official seal features not only its name and the traditional year of its founding (1088) but the motto Alma mater studiorum (Nourishing mother of studies) and, of course, we still use the phrase alma mater in connection with schooling to this day.

Basic studies at Bologna and at subsequent medieval universities focused initially on the arts, and specifically upon the threefold Trivium from which we derive our word trivial of rhetoric, grammar and dialectic (or logic). Thereafter followed the quadrivium of astronomy, arithmetic, geometry and music. Together, these were regarded as the seven liberal arts liberal because mastery of them was thought to equip a person to be free. But the real glory of the medieval university came in the specialized higher studies of medicine, theology and law by which was intended both civil law and ecclesiastical or canon law.

The overtly religious character of the second oldest Western university, the University of Paris, is clearer than that of Bologna. Perhaps already in the sixth century, monks and nuns taught classes in so-called monastic schools or cathedral schools. Founded in 1150, the University of Paris appears to have grown directly out of the cathedral school of Notre Dame, and it was officially recognized by Pope Innocent III in 1215. For many generations, it has also been called the Sorbonne, which is, strictly speaking, the name of its medieval theological college.

The oldest institution of higher learning in what is today the English-speaking world is the University of Oxford. Its founding date is unclear teaching in Oxford is attested at least as early as 1096 perhaps because there wasnt a single, specific founding. But when, in 1167, King Henry II banned English students from attendance at the University of Paris because of his war with Louis VII of France, Oxford really took off. Its Latin motto, visible on its arms or seal, is the opening words of Psalm 27, Dominus Illuminatio Mea (The Lord is my light).

In the midst of violent altercations between students and ordinary citizens in Oxford, though town and gown frictions were common wherever medieval universities were established, and often still are a number of faculty and students found refuge in Cambridge, where Englands second-oldest university was founded in 1209. Astonishingly, Oxford and Cambridge became so powerful that no additional English universities were permitted to compete with them or even to exist until the early 19th century. The University of St. Andrews was established in 1413 but St. Andrews is a city in Scotland.

The oldest institution of higher education in the United States was founded in 1636 and named after an English-born Cambridge-trained minister named John Harvard (1607-1638) who had been serving in the Colonies and whose will bequeathed half of his money and his entire library to the newly-founded school. Newtowne, Massachusetts, accordingly (and ambitiously) changed its name to Cambridge. In its early years, Harvard College served principally to train Unitarian and Congregational clergymen.

Yale University, founded in 1701, was also intended to train Congregational ministers; initially, its curriculum focused entirely on theology and the biblical languages (such as Latin, Greek and Hebrew). Its seal still reflects its roots, with the motto Lux et Veritas (Light and Truth) displayed beneath a book bearing the Hebrew words Urim ve-Tummim (roughly Lights and Perfections). Like Harvard, Yale has an important divinity school.

Established by Presbyterians in 1746, Princeton University was, once again, initially created to train men for the ministry. And still today, the very influential Princeton Theological Seminary autonomous but closely related, having been founded by the Universitys eighth president in 1812 sits nearby.

Some question whether religiously oriented colleges and universities are fully legitimate. For most of the history of higher education, however, there was no other kind.

Daniel Peterson teaches Arabic studies, founded BYUs Middle Eastern Texts Initiative, directs MormonScholarsTestify.org, chairs interpreterfoundation.org, blogs daily at patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson, and speaks only for himself.

See more here:

How trivia, alma mater, liberal arts and religion are tied to the medieval roots of modern higher educa - Deseret News

Today is the Islamic festival of Bakra Eid where thousands of cattle, goats and buffaloes specifically are slaughtered by pious Muslims as an offering to Allah. For the entire duration of the festival and the build-up to it, you probably did not read any preachy articles from the Left media or even the righteous Liberals who during every Hindu festival, tell Hindus what they should or should not do to uphold the collective morality of the country.

From preaching to save milk during Mahashivratri to saving the water bodies during Ganesh Chaturthi, to caring about pollution on Diwali to talking about saving water on Holi Hindus have seen it all. In fact, recently Holi was equated withterrorismand fake story aboutsemen filled balloonswas propagated. Media and the celebs are pushing the bar higher every year.

The very same celebrities and media go completely silent during any Islamic festivals. Well, not completely silent. They wish the Muslims of India and of the entire world. Hope that peace prevails and that all of the rest of us learn the principles of sacrifice, brotherhood and devotion from the Islamic festival.

But have you ever wondered how would the media and these very liberals who hold sanctimonious placards at the drop of a hat react if Eid was a Hindu festival? What if everything else was constant the festival, the Qurbani et al and just the religion had changed? Would the Liberals still be talking about peace and brotherhood? Or would their reaction be completely different?

Here are 10 images that show how the Liberals would have reacted had Eid been a Hindu festival:

What would PETA and Prashant Bhushan be doing if Eid was a Hindu festival? Surely, running to the court.

And Bengal?

When there is a scope for Hindu shaming, Swara Bhaskar would surely not be left far behind.

If Eid was a Hindu festival, Barkha Dutt would surely be interviewing Asaduddin Owaisi of AIMIM.

If the Liberals had the chance to shame Hindus on a festival where Hindus went around slaughtering thousands of animals, it would be quite a surprise if the media and their favourite Hinduphobes would not have branded Hindus are terrorists.

And, of course, the portal that turned Holi in a terrorist attack with children being the terrorist would have gone hammer and tongs against the Hindus.

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation would have condemned Hindu Nationalists and passed a resolution to ban the festival.

And, of course, no Hindu shaming event would be complete till the secularist would invoke Jinnah and justify the partition See? This is why Muslims did not want to live with Hindus! Ram Guha would certainly be the best person to give a whole new meaning to the Shaheen Bagh slogan Jinnah wali Azadi.

Disclaimer: I wish Happy Eid to everyone! This article is just to show how the liberal crowd is as bigoted as people they brand as bigots, and how their preaching and disdain are reserved for only one community. I wish no ill will to anyone or wish to offend any sensibilities, except theliberal kind.

Read more:

If Bakra Eid was a Hindu festival: 10 images that tell the tale of how liberal media and celebs would have reacted - OpIndia