Skip to content

Archive

Tag: British
Amanda McGregor the British consultant who works with Directors and Creative professionals in development, creativity and planning has published an article in ArtLyst titled ‘The Energy Frequency Of Creation In Our Relationship To Art’ in which she states “Our dependency on our relationship to art normally starts at a young age. This is prompted through a need to escape to a world of magic and fantasy and be immersed in our creative flow. The ‘flow’ is the energy frequency of ‘creation’ and expression. Through creating moments with ourselves, we allow a freedom of spirit, peace, our truth to be spoken and our true dynamics of experience to be fully expressed, emotionally, in vision and intellectually. With a conceptual focus in the intellectual pursuit of art, we play with the thoughts and perspectives we create, allowing a connection with a larger picture in creation, to play with the logic, sight, experience and the vision of ourselves and others. However this form of play, can be considered a way of muse, a way of entertaining ones inner muse, it’s a form of being a ‘player’. When we grow up, we may find our inner child is still dominating in this playful muse, at the expense of the responsibilities of adult life. We can be a slave to our desires to be creatively free. To be able to live in the space of preferred existence we enter in to a journey in which we hope the ‘art world’ will meet us. The infrastructure of funding, buyers, curators, artist, critic and gallerists is an eco-system of community designed to help protect the sensitive art world of ‘play’. As an adult some artists may be met with a challenge in finding they are beyond a system of understanding, or process, thereby not necessarily supported by ‘art world’ connections…”  Inspired by Amanda McGregor, Artlyst ow.ly/lE7Pj Image source Twitter ow.ly/lE7yl Conceptual focus in the intellectual pursuit of art (June 23 2013)

 

Amanda McGregor the British consultant who works with Directors and Creative professionals in development, creativity and planning has published an article in ArtLyst titled ‘The Energy Frequency Of Creation In Our Relationship To Art’ in which she states “Our dependency on our relationship to art normally starts at a young age. This is prompted through a need to escape to a world of magic and fantasy and be immersed in our creative flow. The ‘flow’ is the energy frequency of ‘creation’ and expression. Through creating moments with ourselves, we allow a freedom of spirit, peace, our truth to be spoken and our true dynamics of experience to be fully expressed, emotionally, in vision and intellectually. With a conceptual focus in the intellectual pursuit of art, we play with the thoughts and perspectives we create, allowing a connection with a larger picture in creation, to play with the logic, sight, experience and the vision of ourselves and others. However this form of play, can be considered a way of muse, a way of entertaining ones inner muse, it’s a form of being a ‘player’. When we grow up, we may find our inner child is still dominating in this playful muse, at the expense of the responsibilities of adult life. We can be a slave to our desires to be creatively free. To be able to live in the space of preferred existence we enter in to a journey in which we hope the ‘art world’ will meet us. The infrastructure of funding, buyers, curators, artist, critic and gallerists is an eco-system of community designed to help protect the sensitive art world of ‘play’. As an adult some artists may be met with a challenge in finding they are beyond a system of understanding, or process, thereby not necessarily supported by ‘art world’ connections…”  Inspired by Amanda McGregor, ArtlystInspired by Amanda McGregor, Artlyst ow.ly/lE7Pj source Twitter ow.ly/lE7yl

 

Jason Palmer the British Science and technology reporter for the BBC News has published an article titled ‘Antigravity gets first test at Cern's Alpha experiment’, in which he states “Researchers at Cern in Switzerland have tested a novel way to find out if antimatter is the source of a force termed "antigravity". Antimatter particles are the "mirror image" of normal matter, but with opposite electric charge. How antimatter responds to gravity remains a mystery, however; it may "fall up" rather than down. Now researchers reporting in Nature Communications have made strides toward finally resolving that notion. Antimatter presents one of the biggest mysteries in physics, in that equal amounts of matter and antimatter should have been created at the Universe's beginning. Yet when the two meet, they destroy each other in what is called annihilation, turning into pure light. Why the Universe we see today is made overwhelmingly of matter, with only tiny amounts of antimatter, has prompted a number of studies to try to find some difference between the two. Tests at Cern's LHCb experiment and elsewhere, for example, have been looking for evidence that exotic particles decay more often into matter than antimatter. …the LHCb team reported a slight difference in the decay of particles called Bs mesons - but still not nearly enough to explain the matter mystery. One significant difference between the two may be the way they interact with gravity - antimatter may be repelled by matter, rather than attracted to it. But it is a difference that no one has been able to test - until the advent of Cern's Alpha experiment. Alpha is an acronym for Antihydrogen Laser Physics Apparatus - an experiment designed to build and trap antimatter "atoms". Just as hydrogen is made of a proton and an electron, antihydrogen is an atom made of their antimatter counterparts antiprotons and positrons. The trick is not just in making it, but in making it hang around long enough to study it - before it bumps into any matter and annihilates…”  Inspired by Jason Palmer, BBC ow.ly/laBDO Image source LinkedIn ow.ly/laBo8 Bumps into any matter and annihilates (June 11 2013)

 

Jason Palmer the British Science and technology reporter for the BBC News has published an article titled ‘Antigravity gets first test at Cern’s Alpha experiment’, in which he states “Researchers at Cern in Switzerland have tested a novel way to find out if antimatter is the source of a force termed “antigravity”. Antimatter particles are the “mirror image” of normal matter, but with opposite electric charge. How antimatter responds to gravity remains a mystery, however; it may “fall up” rather than down. Now researchers reporting in Nature Communications have made strides toward finally resolving that notion. Antimatter presents one of the biggest mysteries in physics, in that equal amounts of matter and antimatter should have been created at the Universe’s beginning. Yet when the two meet, they destroy each other in what is called annihilation, turning into pure light. Why the Universe we see today is made overwhelmingly of matter, with only tiny amounts of antimatter, has prompted a number of studies to try to find some difference between the two. Tests at Cern’s LHCb experiment and elsewhere, for example, have been looking for evidence that exotic particles decay more often into matter than antimatter. …the LHCb team reported a slight difference in the decay of particles called Bs mesons – but still not nearly enough to explain the matter mystery. One significant difference between the two may be the way they interact with gravity – antimatter may be repelled by matter, rather than attracted to it. But it is a difference that no one has been able to test – until the advent of Cern’s Alpha experiment. Alpha is an acronym for Antihydrogen Laser Physics Apparatus – an experiment designed to build and trap antimatter “atoms”. Just as hydrogen is made of a proton and an electron, antihydrogen is an atom made of their antimatter counterparts antiprotons and positrons. The trick is not just in making it, but in making it hang around long enough to study it – before it bumps into any matter and annihilates…”

 

Inspired by Jason Palmer, BBC ow.ly/laBDO Image source LinkedIn ow.ly/laBo8

Nicholas Robert Hytner the 57 year old British Director of London's National Theatre has been featured in an article by Hannah Furness in the Telegraph titled ‘Talking about the arts in economic terms is 'philistine' and 'self-defeating', critics argue’ Furness states “Responding to a speech by culture secretary Maria Miller, in which she argued arts organisations must make an economic case for funding, directors warned a focus on finances was too “narrow”. Leading figures claim they have already provided convincing evidence for the “enormous” financial benefits of the arts, having put forward the argument “for years”. …Sir Nicholas Hytner, the artistic director of the National Theatre, said the economic argument was "legimate", while pointing out a “contradiction at the heart" of Mrs Miller's speech. “On the one hand she recognises with great eloquence how effective modest arts spending can be as an engine for growth,” he said. “On the other hand what she was preparing us for was a further reduction in investment." He added he was “extraordinarily wary” of all British arts being held up to the example of the profitable London theatres, with a “huge danger” of “splitting” between the South East of England and everywhere else. “Enormous cuts on the scale we have been warned about would have a really, really damaging impact everywhere,” he said. "But the bigger and immediate danger is what’s happening outside London. I would be extremely worried about this sink or swim approach. If I was outside London I would think that was the writing on the wall. “We know the worst case scenario by looking at the consequences of the repeated reduction in funding in the 80s, when 25 per cent of theatres over the whole country closed.”  Inspired by Hannah Furness, The Telegraph ow.ly/kyPya Image source BBC ow.ly/kyPw9 Worried about this sink or swim approach (May 27 2013)

 

Nicholas Robert Hytner the 57 year old British Director of London’s National Theatre has been featured in an article by Hannah Furness in the Telegraph titled ‘Talking about the arts in economic terms is ‘philistine’ and ‘self-defeating’, critics argue’ Furness states “Responding to a speech by culture secretary Maria Miller, in which she argued arts organisations must make an economic case for funding, directors warned a focus on finances was too “narrow”. Leading figures claim they have already provided convincing evidence for the “enormous” financial benefits of the arts, having put forward the argument “for years”. …Sir Nicholas Hytner, the artistic director of the National Theatre, said the economic argument was “legimate”, while pointing out a “contradiction at the heart” of Mrs Miller’s speech. “On the one hand she recognises with great eloquence how effective modest arts spending can be as an engine for growth,” he said. “On the other hand what she was preparing us for was a further reduction in investment.” He added he was “extraordinarily wary” of all British arts being held up to the example of the profitable London theatres, with a “huge danger” of “splitting” between the South East of England and everywhere else. “Enormous cuts on the scale we have been warned about would have a really, really damaging impact everywhere,” he said. “But the bigger and immediate danger is what’s happening outside London. I would be extremely worried about this sink or swim approach. If I was outside London I would think that was the writing on the wall. “We know the worst case scenario by looking at the consequences of the repeated reduction in funding in the 80s, when 25 per cent of theatres over the whole country closed.”

 

Inspired by Hannah Furness, The Telegraph ow.ly/kyPya Image source BBC ow.ly/kyPw9

Marni Halasa the British lawyer, journalist, and performance artist for Occupy Wall Street in New York City and member of Occupy's Alternative Banking Group, a direct action and seminar group that distributes information to the public, has published an article on Huffington Post titled ‘Show Time! Tripping the Light Fantastic as a Performance Artist for Occupy Wall Street’. Halasa states “My conservative Arab father always told me I had no shame. Little did he know that my insatiable desire to exhibit and entertain as a performance artist would come in handy for Occupy Wall Street. I help the movement spread its message of the 99 percent in a somewhat unique and flamboyant way. Whether I am dressed as Marie-Antoinette, protesting against workers' low wages in front of a Walmart in New Jersey; a police officer during an anti-police brutality march in Union Square; or a dominatrix covered in fake money in front of the Federal Reserve, I am compelled to be a living breathing costumed illustration of my own political beliefs. And mind you -- all of this is done on skates. So why do I risk arrest, brave the sometimes hostile elements and lose sleep over hours of preparation? An obsessive desire for creative self-expression is the obvious reason. The other is that it is my chance to belong to an amazingly purposeful politicized community. When Occupy began, I connected with a group of people who could discuss the complexities and dynamics of wealth, power and social mobility in our society. From them I learned how bankers from HSBC laundered money for the drug cartels and avoided criminal prosecution, why the Dodd-Frank reforms do not go far enough to insure our country's financial stability, and the reasons behind the lack of mobility for the low income. Although these people were for the most part strangers, they charmed me with their warmth, intellect, and uncanny ability to make complex information understandable. They were also keen to make a positive impact. I quickly decided I had to join the Occupy movement...”  Inspired by Marni Halasa, Huffington Post ow.ly/kuGR4 Image source Twitter ow.ly/kuGMQ I help the movement spread its message (May 23 2013)

 

Marni Halasa the British lawyer, journalist, and performance artist for Occupy Wall Street in New York City and member of Occupy’s Alternative Banking Group, a direct action and seminar group that distributes information to the public, has published an article on Huffington Post titled ‘Show Time! Tripping the Light Fantastic as a Performance Artist for Occupy Wall Street’. Halasa states “My conservative Arab father always told me I had no shame. Little did he know that my insatiable desire to exhibit and entertain as a performance artist would come in handy for Occupy Wall Street. I help the movement spread its message of the 99 percent in a somewhat unique and flamboyant way. Whether I am dressed as Marie-Antoinette, protesting against workers’ low wages in front of a Walmart in New Jersey; a police officer during an anti-police brutality march in Union Square; or a dominatrix covered in fake money in front of the Federal Reserve, I am compelled to be a living breathing costumed illustration of my own political beliefs. And mind you — all of this is done on skates. So why do I risk arrest, brave the sometimes hostile elements and lose sleep over hours of preparation? An obsessive desire for creative self-expression is the obvious reason. The other is that it is my chance to belong to an amazingly purposeful politicized community. When Occupy began, I connected with a group of people who could discuss the complexities and dynamics of wealth, power and social mobility in our society. From them I learned how bankers from HSBC laundered money for the drug cartels and avoided criminal prosecution, why the Dodd-Frank reforms do not go far enough to insure our country’s financial stability, and the reasons behind the lack of mobility for the low income. Although these people were for the most part strangers, they charmed me with their warmth, intellect, and uncanny ability to make complex information understandable. They were also keen to make a positive impact. I quickly decided I had to join the Occupy movement…”

 

Inspired by Marni Halasa, Huffington Post ow.ly/kuGR4 Image source Twitter ow.ly/kuGMQ

Daniel Campbell Blight the British writer and curator with a specific interest in the history and theory of photography, and cultural media studies, has published an article in the Guardian titled ‘Writing an artist statement? First ask yourself these four questions’. Blight states “…You can find preposterously complex, jargon-laden artist statements on the websites of galleries and pop-up project spaces all over the English-speaking world. If you don't believe me, join the e-flux mailing list. I regularly visit such exhibition spaces in London and beyond, and read – with total, dulling indifference – the often pompous ramblings of what Alix Rule and David Levine call International Art English. This is a dialect of the privileged; the elite university educated. If you can't write it effectively, you're not part of the art world. If you're already inside but don't understand it, you're not allowed to admit it, or ask for further explanation. This kind of rhetoric relies on everyone participating without question. To speak up would mean dissolving the space between inside and outside: quite literally, the growing boundary between the art world and the rest of society. …The funny thing is, the chat you actually hear at a gallery opening rarely uses this language. …The vocabulary of artspeak is not without meaning, but it has a specific place. Academia is only one part of the art world. My dislike is not for the language of artspeak, more the effect it has on the art industry in its ability to engage with a wider audience. Not to mention what such language does to the reputation of writing in the arts, as well as the wider practice of writing itself. Writing about your work should be an open and compelling activity, not a labyrinthine chore.”  Inspired by Daniel Blight, The Guardian ow.ly/kuGnt Image source Twitter ow.ly/kuFEd Complex jargon-laden artist statements (May 22 2013)

 

Daniel Campbell Blight the British writer and curator with a specific interest in the history and theory of photography, and cultural media studies, has published an article in the Guardian titled ‘Writing an artist statement? First ask yourself these four questions’. Blight states “…You can find preposterously complex, jargon-laden artist statements on the websites of galleries and pop-up project spaces all over the English-speaking world. If you don’t believe me, join the e-flux mailing list. I regularly visit such exhibition spaces in London and beyond, and read – with total, dulling indifference – the often pompous ramblings of what Alix Rule and David Levine call International Art English. This is a dialect of the privileged; the elite university educated. If you can’t write it effectively, you’re not part of the art world. If you’re already inside but don’t understand it, you’re not allowed to admit it, or ask for further explanation. This kind of rhetoric relies on everyone participating without question. To speak up would mean dissolving the space between inside and outside: quite literally, the growing boundary between the art world and the rest of society. …The funny thing is, the chat you actually hear at a gallery opening rarely uses this language. …The vocabulary of artspeak is not without meaning, but it has a specific place. Academia is only one part of the art world. My dislike is not for the language of artspeak, more the effect it has on the art industry in its ability to engage with a wider audience. Not to mention what such language does to the reputation of writing in the arts, as well as the wider practice of writing itself. Writing about your work should be an open and compelling activity, not a labyrinthine chore.”

 

Inspired by Daniel Blight, The Guardian ow.ly/kuGnt Image source Twitter ow.ly/kuFEd

Pauline Rose the British Director of EFA Global Monitoring Report with her expertise themes of governance, marginalization and conflict, has published an article on Aljazeera titled ‘The world's poorest children are paying a high price for scholarships’. Rose states “For many donor countries, a large proportion of "aid" never leaves their country. Spending this money on education in the world's poorest countries could go a long way to giving the 132 million out-of-school children and adolescents the chance for a better future. Our recent policy paper, Education for All is affordable - by 2015 and beyond, shows that the financing gap for achieving basic education has grown by $10 billion in three years and now totals $26 billion per year. This increased finance gap is primarily due to donors failing to increase aid significantly to help developing countries send children to school. This finance gap can be bridged, however, if both developing countries and donors prioritised basic education. Currently, however, donors spend $3.1 billion per year on university students from poor countries to study in donor countries, equivalent to one quarter of total direct aid to education. This money is spent on scholarships and imputed costs (costs incurred by donor-country institutions when they receive students from developing countries). While higher education is undoubtedly important, allocating aid in this way does little to help the world's poorest and most vulnerable children and young people and does little to fill the finance gap. …Donor countries should prioritise basic education by targeting 20 percent of overall aid to education. If they also allocated half of these funds to basic education, we could raise a total of $14 billion. This would go a long way in reducing the current financing gap for basic education. It will be even more vital to ensure aid reaches those who need it most as we approach the prospect of even more ambitious education goals after 2015.”  Inspired by Pauline Rose, Aljazeera ow.ly/kuD1T Image source Twitter ow.ly/kuCVg Children paying high price for scholarships (May 17 2013)

Pauline Rose the British Director of EFA Global Monitoring Report with her expertise themes of governance, marginalization and conflict, has published an article on Aljazeera titled ‘The world’s poorest children are paying a high price for scholarships’. Rose states “For many donor countries, a large proportion of “aid” never leaves their country. Spending this money on education in the world’s poorest countries could go a long way to giving the 132 million out-of-school children and adolescents the chance for a better future. Our recent policy paper, Education for All is affordable – by 2015 and beyond, shows that the financing gap for achieving basic education has grown by $10 billion in three years and now totals $26 billion per year. This increased finance gap is primarily due to donors failing to increase aid significantly to help developing countries send children to school. This finance gap can be bridged, however, if both developing countries and donors prioritised basic education. Currently, however, donors spend $3.1 billion per year on university students from poor countries to study in donor countries, equivalent to one quarter of total direct aid to education. This money is spent on scholarships and imputed costs (costs incurred by donor-country institutions when they receive students from developing countries). While higher education is undoubtedly important, allocating aid in this way does little to help the world’s poorest and most vulnerable children and young people and does little to fill the finance gap. …Donor countries should prioritise basic education by targeting 20 percent of overall aid to education. If they also allocated half of these funds to basic education, we could raise a total of $14 billion. This would go a long way in reducing the current financing gap for basic education. It will be even more vital to ensure aid reaches those who need it most as we approach the prospect of even more ambitious education goals after 2015.”

 

Inspired by Pauline Rose, Aljazeera ow.ly/kuD1T Image source Twitter ow.ly/kuCVg

 

 

Sally Le Page the British student studying Biological Sciences at Oxford University working on evolutionary theory and reproduction has won the Guardian/OUP Very Short Film competition. An article in The Guardian states “Sally Le Page has taken first prize at the Guardian and Oxford University Press (OUP) Very Short Film competition. She was awarded £9,000 towards tuition fees for her minute-long film about evolution in a ceremony at the Guardian's London headquarters. Three runners-up each received a £250 voucher for OUP books. The competition challenged students to make films inspired by the Very Short Introduction book series – no more than 60 seconds long. Thousands of Guardian readers voted to select four finalists, with the judging panel deciding the winner. Chair of the Judges, Judy Friedberg, the Guardian's universities editor, said: "All those that were selected for the final 12 were excellent and I'd like to congratulate everyone who made the cut on their talent and skill. "Sally Le Page's film on evolution is an energetic and uplifting piece, with strong use of typography and great communication skills. In fact, Sally would make a wonderful TV presenter." After winning the prize, Sally said: "I wanted to make my film about evolution because life is the most interesting thing in the universe – and we can't understand life without understanding evolution. Most people know what evolution is, but not how important it is. And that's what I wanted to get across in my video." Sally, a third-year biology student at Oxford, is set begin a PhD in evolutionary theory later this year. She said: "When I was little I spent all my time in the garden playing around with frogs or watching David Attenborough programmes on TV. Increasingly, evolution is being threatened by creationism – and that's threatening biology. So it's important that we have an understanding of what it is."  Inspired by Sally Le Page, The Guardian ow.ly/jBeYg Image source Twitter ow.ly/jBeXE Evolution is being threatened by creationism (April 27 2013)

 

Sally Le Page the British student studying Biological Sciences at Oxford University working on evolutionary theory and reproduction has won the Guardian/OUP Very Short Film competition. An article in The Guardian states “Sally Le Page has taken first prize at the Guardian and Oxford University Press (OUP) Very Short Film competition. She was awarded £9,000 towards tuition fees for her minute-long film about evolution in a ceremony at the Guardian’s London headquarters. Three runners-up each received a £250 voucher for OUP books. The competition challenged students to make films inspired by the Very Short Introduction book series – no more than 60 seconds long. Thousands of Guardian readers voted to select four finalists, with the judging panel deciding the winner. Chair of the Judges, Judy Friedberg, the Guardian’s universities editor, said: “All those that were selected for the final 12 were excellent and I’d like to congratulate everyone who made the cut on their talent and skill. “Sally Le Page’s film on evolution is an energetic and uplifting piece, with strong use of typography and great communication skills. In fact, Sally would make a wonderful TV presenter.” After winning the prize, Sally said: “I wanted to make my film about evolution because life is the most interesting thing in the universe – and we can’t understand life without understanding evolution. Most people know what evolution is, but not how important it is. And that’s what I wanted to get across in my video.” Sally, a third-year biology student at Oxford, is set begin a PhD in evolutionary theory later this year. She said: “When I was little I spent all my time in the garden playing around with frogs or watching David Attenborough programmes on TV. Increasingly, evolution is being threatened by creationism – and that’s threatening biology. So it’s important that we have an understanding of what it is.”

 

Inspired by Sally Le Page, The Guardian ow.ly/jBeYg Image source Twitter ow.ly/jBeXE

Anne Marie Waters the British journalist activist for secularism, public ownership, civil liberties, and the power of the people to hold the state to account has published an article at the National Secular Society titled ‘Sharia Law and Free Speech’ in which she states “…There exists in Britain a network of sharia family 'courts'. They are the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal and the Islamic Sharia Council. The former operates under the powers of the Arbitration Act, and the latter is a registered charity. They both operate a system of family law which is expanding and has created a parallel legal system on family matters for Muslims. It is taking us to an increasingly divided and fractured society where application of the law is subjective and based on personal belief. The men who run these bodies are real charmers – they believe men should be able to rape and beat their wives. They believe a woman's word is worth only half of a man's, and they believe children are the property of their fathers… Some women are beginning to speak out against these 'courts' and the stories they tell are more and more disturbing. Women are being seriously abused here and we have to say so – while we're still allowed. …Talking about the sharia system in Britain is not an easy thing to do, but the brilliant Atheist, Secularist and Humanist (ASH) societies keep marching on regardless. …For the record, I have nothing against Islam per se. I would never ever object to or try to prevent Muslims practicing their religion. But when any practice is an abuse of human rights, it must be opposed by those of us who believe in human rights. I'm not against sharia family law because it's got anything to do with Islam, I'm against it because it abuses human beings, especially women…. and I insist upon my right to say so.”  Inspired by Anne Marie Waters, National Secular Society ow.ly/jBd4h Image source Twitter ow.ly/jBd3S I insist upon my right to say so (April 22 2013)

 

Anne Marie Waters the British journalist activist for secularism, public ownership, civil liberties, and the power of the people to hold the state to account has published an article at the National Secular Society titled ‘Sharia Law and Free Speech’ in which she states “…There exists in Britain a network of sharia family ‘courts’. They are the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal and the Islamic Sharia Council. The former operates under the powers of the Arbitration Act, and the latter is a registered charity. They both operate a system of family law which is expanding and has created a parallel legal system on family matters for Muslims. It is taking us to an increasingly divided and fractured society where application of the law is subjective and based on personal belief. The men who run these bodies are real charmers – they believe men should be able to rape and beat their wives. They believe a woman’s word is worth only half of a man’s, and they believe children are the property of their fathers… Some women are beginning to speak out against these ‘courts’ and the stories they tell are more and more disturbing. Women are being seriously abused here and we have to say so – while we’re still allowed. …Talking about the sharia system in Britain is not an easy thing to do, but the brilliant Atheist, Secularist and Humanist (ASH) societies keep marching on regardless. …For the record, I have nothing against Islam per se. I would never ever object to or try to prevent Muslims practicing their religion. But when any practice is an abuse of human rights, it must be opposed by those of us who believe in human rights. I’m not against sharia family law because it’s got anything to do with Islam, I’m against it because it abuses human beings, especially women…. and I insist upon my right to say so.”

 

Inspired by Anne Marie Waters, National Secular Society ow.ly/jBd4h Image source Twitter ow.ly/jBd3S

Peter Frankopan the British historian and Director of the Oxford Centre for Byzantine Research has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘The Byzantine empire's own 'eurozone' crisis offers a lesson for the EU today’, in which he states “…the Byzantine empire has the distinction of being one of the very few realms to survive for more than a millennium, from the foundation of Constantinople in 330 to its fall in 1453. …Like the EU, the Byzantine empire was a multilingual, multi-ethnic commonwealth that spread across different climates and varied local economies, ranging from bustling cities to market towns, from thriving ports to small rural settlements. Not only that, but it also had a single currency – one, furthermore, that did not fluctuate in value for centuries. Contrary to popular opinion expressed on an almost daily basis in the House of Commons, where MPs queue up to describe over-regulation or over-complex legislation as "Byzantine", the Byzantine empire was in fact a model of sophistication – particularly when it came to the sorts of areas where the EU has been found wanting. Unlike the European Union, Byzantium was not riddled with inefficiency and disparity when it came to tax: profits could not be parked in a more attractive region, thereby undermining the empire's structure. Government in Byzantium was lean, simple and efficient. …If Eurocrats could learn from the structure of the empire, then so too could they benefit from looking at how it dealt with a chronic recession, brought on by the same deadly combination that has crippled western economies today. In the 1070s, government revenues collapsed, while expenditure continued to rise on essential services (such as the military); these were made worse by a chronic liquidity crisis. So bad did the situation become that the doors of the treasury were flung open: there was no point locking them, wrote one contemporary, because there was nothing there to steal. Those responsible for the crisis were shown no mercy…”  Inspired by Peter Frankopan, The Guardian ow.ly/j4uLh Image source Twitter ow.ly/j4vh6 Byzantine lesson for the EU today (April 6 2013)

Peter Frankopan the British historian and Director of the Oxford Centre for Byzantine Research has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘The Byzantine empire’s own ‘eurozone’ crisis offers a lesson for the EU today’, in which he states “…the Byzantine empire has the distinction of being one of the very few realms to survive for more than a millennium, from the foundation of Constantinople in 330 to its fall in 1453. …Like the EU, the Byzantine empire was a multilingual, multi-ethnic commonwealth that spread across different climates and varied local economies, ranging from bustling cities to market towns, from thriving ports to small rural settlements. Not only that, but it also had a single currency – one, furthermore, that did not fluctuate in value for centuries. Contrary to popular opinion expressed on an almost daily basis in the House of Commons, where MPs queue up to describe over-regulation or over-complex legislation as “Byzantine”, the Byzantine empire was in fact a model of sophistication – particularly when it came to the sorts of areas where the EU has been found wanting. Unlike the European Union, Byzantium was not riddled with inefficiency and disparity when it came to tax: profits could not be parked in a more attractive region, thereby undermining the empire’s structure. Government in Byzantium was lean, simple and efficient. …If Eurocrats could learn from the structure of the empire, then so too could they benefit from looking at how it dealt with a chronic recession, brought on by the same deadly combination that has crippled western economies today. In the 1070s, government revenues collapsed, while expenditure continued to rise on essential services (such as the military); these were made worse by a chronic liquidity crisis. So bad did the situation become that the doors of the treasury were flung open: there was no point locking them, wrote one contemporary, because there was nothing there to steal. Those responsible for the crisis were shown no mercy…”

 

Inspired by Peter Frankopan, The Guardian ow.ly/j4uLh Image source Twitter ow.ly/j4vh6

 

 

Anatole Kaletsky the British journalist and economist named Newspaper Commentator of the Year in the BBC’s What the Papers Say awards, and has twice received the British Press Award for Specialist Writer of the Year, has published an article on Reuters titled ‘The age of austerity is ending’ stating “Whisper it softly, but the age of government austerity is ending. It may seem an odd week to say this, what with the U.S. government preparing for indiscriminate budget cuts, a new fiscal crisis apparently brewing in Europe after the Italian election and David Cameron promising to “go further and faster in reducing the deficit” after the downgrade of Britain’s credit. But politics is sometimes a looking-glass world, in which things are the opposite of what they seem. …in Italy, Britain and the rest of Europe, this week’s events should help convince politicians and voters that efforts to reduce government borrowing, whether through public spending cuts or through tax hikes, are both politically suicidal and economically counterproductive. In Italy, and therefore the entire euro zone, this shift is now almost certain. After the clear majority voted for politicians explicitly campaigning against austerity and what they presented as German economic bullying, further budget cuts or labor reforms in Italy are now off the agenda, if only because they would be literally impossible to implement. If Angela Merkel demands further budget cuts, tax hikes or labor reforms as a condition for supporting Italy’s membership of the euro, a majority of voters have given an unequivocal clear answer: Basta, enough is enough. Most Italians would rather leave the euro than accept any further austerity – and if Italy left the euro, total breakup of the single currency would follow with an inevitability that might not apply if the country exiting were Greece, Portugal or even Spain. …Things may not look that way just yet, but the age of fiscal austerity should soon be over.”  Inspired by Anatole Kaletsky, Reuters ow.ly/iuA5T Image source Twitter ow.ly/iuz0F The age of austerity is ending (March 26 2013)

 

Anatole Kaletsky the British journalist and economist named Newspaper Commentator of the Year in the BBC’s What the Papers Say awards, and has twice received the British Press Award for Specialist Writer of the Year, has published an article on Reuters titled ‘The age of austerity is ending’ stating “Whisper it softly, but the age of government austerity is ending. It may seem an odd week to say this, what with the U.S. government preparing for indiscriminate budget cuts, a new fiscal crisis apparently brewing in Europe after the Italian election and David Cameron promising to “go further and faster in reducing the deficit” after the downgrade of Britain’s credit. But politics is sometimes a looking-glass world, in which things are the opposite of what they seem. …in Italy, Britain and the rest of Europe, this week’s events should help convince politicians and voters that efforts to reduce government borrowing, whether through public spending cuts or through tax hikes, are both politically suicidal and economically counterproductive. In Italy, and therefore the entire euro zone, this shift is now almost certain. After the clear majority voted for politicians explicitly campaigning against austerity and what they presented as German economic bullying, further budget cuts or labor reforms in Italy are now off the agenda, if only because they would be literally impossible to implement. If Angela Merkel demands further budget cuts, tax hikes or labor reforms as a condition for supporting Italy’s membership of the euro, a majority of voters have given an unequivocal clear answer: Basta, enough is enough. Most Italians would rather leave the euro than accept any further austerity – and if Italy left the euro, total breakup of the single currency would follow with an inevitability that might not apply if the country exiting were Greece, Portugal or even Spain. …Things may not look that way just yet, but the age of fiscal austerity should soon be over.”

 

Inspired by Anatole Kaletsky, Reuters ow.ly/iuA5T Image source Twitter ow.ly/iuz0F

Suzanne Goldenberg the British environment correspondent based in Washington DC, award winning writer and author of Madam President, about Hillary Clinton's historic run for White House, has published an article on Mother Jones titled ‘Billionaires Secretly Funded Vast Climate Denial Network’ referring to how  the conservative dark-money group ‘Donors Trust’ contributed huge sums to battle against climate-change science. Goldenberg states “Conservative billionaires used a secretive funding route to channel nearly $120 million to more than 100 groups casting doubt about the science behind climate change … helped build a vast network of think tanks and activist groups working to a single purpose: to redefine climate change from neutral scientific fact to a highly polarizing "wedge issue" for hardcore conservatives. The millions were routed through two trusts, Donors Trust and the Donors Capital Fund, operating out of a generic town house in the northern Virginia suburbs of Washington, DC. Donors Capital caters to those making donations of $1 million or more. …By 2010, the dark money amounted to $118 million distributed to 102 think tanks or action groups which have a record of denying the existence of a human factor in climate change, or opposing environmental regulations. The money flowed to Washington think tanks embedded in Republican party politics, obscure policy forums in Alaska and Tennessee, contrarian scientists at Harvard and lesser institutions, even to buy up DVDs of a film attacking Al Gore. The ready stream of cash set off a conservative backlash against Barack Obama's environmental agenda that wrecked any chance of Congress taking action on climate change. Those same groups are now mobilizing against Obama's efforts to act on climate change in his second term. A top recipient of the secret funds … put out a point-by-point critique of the climate content in the president's State of the Union address.”  Inspired by Suzanne Goldenberg, Mother Jones ow.ly/i0XBB Image source YouTube ow.ly/i0ZjU Wedge issue for hardcore conservatives (March 13 2013)

 

Suzanne Goldenberg the British environment correspondent based in Washington DC, award winning writer and author of Madam President, about Hillary Clinton’s historic run for White House, has published an article on Mother Jones titled ‘Billionaires Secretly Funded Vast Climate Denial Network’ referring to how  the conservative dark-money group ‘Donors Trust’ contributed huge sums to battle against climate-change science. Goldenberg states “Conservative billionaires used a secretive funding route to channel nearly $120 million to more than 100 groups casting doubt about the science behind climate change … helped build a vast network of think tanks and activist groups working to a single purpose: to redefine climate change from neutral scientific fact to a highly polarizing “wedge issue” for hardcore conservatives. The millions were routed through two trusts, Donors Trust and the Donors Capital Fund, operating out of a generic town house in the northern Virginia suburbs of Washington, DC. Donors Capital caters to those making donations of $1 million or more. …By 2010, the dark money amounted to $118 million distributed to 102 think tanks or action groups which have a record of denying the existence of a human factor in climate change, or opposing environmental regulations. The money flowed to Washington think tanks embedded in Republican party politics, obscure policy forums in Alaska and Tennessee, contrarian scientists at Harvard and lesser institutions, even to buy up DVDs of a film attacking Al Gore. The ready stream of cash set off a conservative backlash against Barack Obama’s environmental agenda that wrecked any chance of Congress taking action on climate change. Those same groups are now mobilizing against Obama’s efforts to act on climate change in his second term. A top recipient of the secret funds … put out a point-by-point critique of the climate content in the president’s State of the Union address.”

 

Inspired by Suzanne Goldenberg, Mother Jones ow.ly/i0XBB Image source YouTube ow.ly/i0ZjU

John J Studzinski the British American Banker and vice chair of Human Rights Watch, serving on many prestigious bodies councils and arts institutes has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘Germany is right: there is no right to profit, but the right to work is essential’ highlighting the strength of Germany lies in its medium-sized manufacturing firms, whose ethos includes being socially useful. Studzinski states “People talk too much about the economy and not enough about jobs. When economists, academics and bankers are allowed to lead the debate, the essential human element goes missing. This is neither healthy nor practical. Unemployment should be our prime concern. Spain, with youth joblessness close to 50%, is in the gravest crisis, but there is hardly a government on the planet that is not wondering what it can do to guide school-leavers into work, exploit the skills of older workers, and avoid the apathy and alienation of the jobless, which undermines not just the economy but also the social fabric. There may be no definitive answer but, over the past half-century, Germany has come closest to finding it. Its postwar economic miracle was impressive, but its more recent ability to ride out recessions and absorb the costs of reunification is, perhaps, even more remarkable. …Germany's resilience springs from the strength of its medium-sized, often family-owned manufacturing companies, collectively known as the Mittelstand, which account for 60% of the workforce and 52% of Germany's GDP. …There is no right to make a profit, and profit has no intrinsic value. But there is a right to work, and it is fundamental to human dignity. Without an opportunity to contribute with our hands or brains, we have no stake in society and our governments lack true legitimacy. There can be no more urgent challenge for our leaders. The title of the next G8 summit should be a four-letter word that everyone understands – jobs.”  Inspired by John Studzinski, The Guardian ow.ly/hMIcU Image source HRW ow.ly/hMIbg No right to profit but right to work is essential (March 2 2013)

 

John J Studzinski the British American Banker and vice chair of Human Rights Watch, serving on many prestigious bodies councils and arts institutes has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘Germany is right: there is no right to profit, but the right to work is essential’ highlighting the strength of Germany lies in its medium-sized manufacturing firms, whose ethos includes being socially useful. Studzinski states “People talk too much about the economy and not enough about jobs. When economists, academics and bankers are allowed to lead the debate, the essential human element goes missing. This is neither healthy nor practical. Unemployment should be our prime concern. Spain, with youth joblessness close to 50%, is in the gravest crisis, but there is hardly a government on the planet that is not wondering what it can do to guide school-leavers into work, exploit the skills of older workers, and avoid the apathy and alienation of the jobless, which undermines not just the economy but also the social fabric. There may be no definitive answer but, over the past half-century, Germany has come closest to finding it. Its postwar economic miracle was impressive, but its more recent ability to ride out recessions and absorb the costs of reunification is, perhaps, even more remarkable. …Germany’s resilience springs from the strength of its medium-sized, often family-owned manufacturing companies, collectively known as the Mittelstand, which account for 60% of the workforce and 52% of Germany’s GDP. …There is no right to make a profit, and profit has no intrinsic value. But there is a right to work, and it is fundamental to human dignity. Without an opportunity to contribute with our hands or brains, we have no stake in society and our governments lack true legitimacy. There can be no more urgent challenge for our leaders. The title of the next G8 summit should be a four-letter word that everyone understands – jobs.”

 

Inspired by John Studzinski, The Guardian ow.ly/hMIcU Image source HRW ow.ly/hMIbg

Guy Ryder the 57 year old British Director General of the International Labour Organization (ILO) and former General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), a leading figure in the Global Call to Action Against Poverty (GCAP) has published an article on Aljazeera titled ‘One idea the world has not tried’ claiming that setting job creation as a number one goal would be a sustainable way out of the economic crisis. Ryder states “We have spent the past five years trying to jump start the global economy. After a promising start, we now seem to be heading in the wrong direction. …Some 200 million people worldwide are out of a job. …Young people are particularly hard hit. Close to 75 million 15-24 year olds are unemployed. Many of them experience long spells of unemployment right from the start, or leave the labour market altogether, often losing their professional and social skills and missing out on on-the-job experience. …There is one idea we have not tried: making job creation our number one priority. We have talked about it, but haven't really acted on it. … when people have no jobs or are forced to work in poverty, there is less growth, less security and less human and economic development. Add to this the growing income and social inequalities within and across countries, and what you get is a recipe for economic, political and social instability. A shift to inclusive and sustainable development will not be possible if millions of people are denied the opportunity to earn their living in conditions of equity and dignity. That is why our efforts to achieve inclusive, equitable and sustainable development must be anchored in decent jobs. And why it's time to redouble them now.”  Inspired by Guy Ryder, Aljazeera ow.ly/hnKgB Image source Facebook ow.ly/hnKwk One idea the world has not tried (February 15 2013)

Guy Ryder the 57 year old British Director General of the International Labour Organization (ILO) and former General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), a leading figure in the Global Call to Action Against Poverty (GCAP) has published an article on Aljazeera titled ‘One idea the world has not tried’ claiming that setting job creation as a number one goal would be a sustainable way out of the economic crisis. Ryder states “We have spent the past five years trying to jump start the global economy. After a promising start, we now seem to be heading in the wrong direction. …Some 200 million people worldwide are out of a job. …Young people are particularly hard hit. Close to 75 million 15-24 year olds are unemployed. Many of them experience long spells of unemployment right from the start, or leave the labour market altogether, often losing their professional and social skills and missing out on on-the-job experience. …There is one idea we have not tried: making job creation our number one priority. We have talked about it, but haven’t really acted on it. … when people have no jobs or are forced to work in poverty, there is less growth, less security and less human and economic development. Add to this the growing income and social inequalities within and across countries, and what you get is a recipe for economic, political and social instability. A shift to inclusive and sustainable development will not be possible if millions of people are denied the opportunity to earn their living in conditions of equity and dignity. That is why our efforts to achieve inclusive, equitable and sustainable development must be anchored in decent jobs. And why it’s time to redouble them now.”

 

Inspired by Guy Ryder, Aljazeera ow.ly/hnKgB Image source Facebook ow.ly/hnKwk

George Joshua Richard Monbiot the 50 year old British writer known for his environmental and political activism. Initially trained in Zoology, Monibiot joined the BBC Natural History Unit as a radio producer, making natural history and environmental programmes, before working as a current affairs producer and presenter. Working independently as an investigative journalist his activities led to his being made persona non grata in seven countries and being sentenced to life imprisonment in absentia in Indonesia. Monibiot has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘If you think we're done with neoliberalism, think again’, claiming the global application of a fraudulent economic theory brought the west to its knees, yet for those in power, it offers riches. Monbiot states “How they must bleed for us. In 2012, the world's 100 richest people became $241 billion richer. They are now worth $1.9 trillion: just a little less than the entire output of the United Kingdom. This is not the result of chance. The rise in the fortunes of the super-rich is the direct result of policies. Here are a few: the reduction of tax rates and tax enforcement; governments' refusal to recoup a decent share of revenues from minerals and land; the privatisation of public assets and the creation of a toll-booth economy; wage liberalisation and the destruction of collective bargaining. The policies that made the global monarchs so rich are the policies squeezing everyone else. This is not what the theory predicted. …The remarkable growth in the rich nations during the 50s, 60s and 70s was made possible by the destruction of the wealth and power of the elite, as a result of the 1930s depression and the second world war. Their embarrassment gave the other 99% an unprecedented chance to demand redistribution, state spending and social security, all of which stimulated demand. Neoliberalism was an attempt to turn back these reforms. Lavishly funded by millionaires, its advocates were amazingly successful – politically. Economically they flopped.”  Inspired by George Monbiot, The Guardian ow.ly/hfJpW Image source Slim Virgin ow.ly/hfJmS Done with neoliberalism, think again (February 11 2013)

George Joshua Richard Monbiot the 50 year old British writer known for his environmental and political activism. Initially trained in Zoology, Monibiot joined the BBC Natural History Unit as a radio producer, making natural history and environmental programmes, before working as a current affairs producer and presenter. Working independently as an investigative journalist his activities led to his being made persona non grata in seven countries and being sentenced to life imprisonment in absentia in Indonesia. Monibiot has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘If you think we’re done with neoliberalism, think again’, claiming the global application of a fraudulent economic theory brought the west to its knees, yet for those in power, it offers riches. Monbiot states “How they must bleed for us. In 2012, the world’s 100 richest people became $241 billion richer. They are now worth $1.9 trillion: just a little less than the entire output of the United Kingdom. This is not the result of chance. The rise in the fortunes of the super-rich is the direct result of policies. Here are a few: the reduction of tax rates and tax enforcement; governments’ refusal to recoup a decent share of revenues from minerals and land; the privatisation of public assets and the creation of a toll-booth economy; wage liberalisation and the destruction of collective bargaining. The policies that made the global monarchs so rich are the policies squeezing everyone else. This is not what the theory predicted. …The remarkable growth in the rich nations during the 50s, 60s and 70s was made possible by the destruction of the wealth and power of the elite, as a result of the 1930s depression and the second world war. Their embarrassment gave the other 99% an unprecedented chance to demand redistribution, state spending and social security, all of which stimulated demand. Neoliberalism was an attempt to turn back these reforms. Lavishly funded by millionaires, its advocates were amazingly successful – politically. Economically they flopped.”

 

Inspired by George Monbiot, The Guardian ow.ly/hfJpW Image source Slim Virgin ow.ly/hfJmS

Rebecca Johnson the British internationally-recognized expert on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, Co-Chair of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), has published an article on the IPS News Service titled ‘Changing the Game to Achieve Nuclear Disarmament’. Johnson states “Recent initiatives by the [ICAN], the Red Cross and a growing number of governments have begun to arouse global interest in the humanitarian effects of nuclear weapons. …Norway’s Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide invited all United Nations governments to send senior officials and experts to participate in an international conference on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons on March 4-5, 2013, in Oslo. The aim of the conference is “to provide an arena for a fact-based discussion of the humanitarian and developmental consequences associated with a nuclear weapon detonation…” This conference aims to bring together not only scientists and doctors to talk about the immediate blast, flash-burns, fires and radiation that would incinerate and contaminate millions, but also agencies that deal with refugees, food insecurity and the medical needs of millions of homeless, starving people… The nuclear free countries have to stop behaving like passive supplicants, giving veto powers to their nuclear-armed neighbours. Unlike traditional arms control, humanitarian disarmament approaches recognise that everyone has the right and responsibility to take steps to prevent the use of nuclear weapons. The best way to do this is to ban and eliminate nuclear weapons. Once the nuclear-free countries acknowledge their own power and responsibility, they will find that a nuclear ban treaty can be far quicker and simpler to achieve than they thought. By changing the legal context, such a treaty would be a game changer, draining power and status from the nuclear-armed governments and hastening their understanding of their own security interests, increasing the imperative for concerted nuclear disarmament rather than perpetual proliferation.”  Inspired by Rebecca Johnson, IPS News ow.ly/hhTX1 Image source nobelforpeace-summits ow.ly/hhTNo Changing game to achieve nuclear disarmament (February 10 2013)Rebecca Johnson the British internationally-recognized expert on nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, Co-Chair of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), has published an article on the IPS News Service titled ‘Changing the Game to Achieve Nuclear Disarmament’. Johnson states “Recent initiatives by the [ICAN], the Red Cross and a growing number of governments have begun to arouse global interest in the humanitarian effects of nuclear weapons. …Norway’s Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide invited all United Nations governments to send senior officials and experts to participate in an international conference on the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons on March 4-5, 2013, in Oslo. The aim of the conference is “to provide an arena for a fact-based discussion of the humanitarian and developmental consequences associated with a nuclear weapon detonation…” This conference aims to bring together not only scientists and doctors to talk about the immediate blast, flash-burns, fires and radiation that would incinerate and contaminate millions, but also agencies that deal with refugees, food insecurity and the medical needs of millions of homeless, starving people… The nuclear free countries have to stop behaving like passive supplicants, giving veto powers to their nuclear-armed neighbours. Unlike traditional arms control, humanitarian disarmament approaches recognise that everyone has the right and responsibility to take steps to prevent the use of nuclear weapons. The best way to do this is to ban and eliminate nuclear weapons. Once the nuclear-free countries acknowledge their own power and responsibility, they will find that a nuclear ban treaty can be far quicker and simpler to achieve than they thought. By changing the legal context, such a treaty would be a game changer, draining power and status from the nuclear-armed governments and hastening their understanding of their own security interests, increasing the imperative for concerted nuclear disarmament rather than perpetual proliferation.”

 

Inspired by Rebecca Johnson, IPS News ow.ly/hhTX1 Image source nobelforpeace-summits ow.ly/hhTNo

Nick Cohen the British journalist, author and political commentator has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘Secular Britain is ruled by religious bureaucrats’ asking why is the church still such a force in our society when most of us disregard its clerics' teachings? Cohen states “The number of people who say they have no religion jumped from 15% in the 2001 census to 25% in 2011. If the remaining 75% were believers, this leap in free-thinking would be significant but not sensational. But those who say they are religious are not faithful to their creeds, or not in any sense that the believers of the past would have recognised. Church attendance is in constant decline. Every year that passes sees congregations become smaller and greyer. As striking as the fall in religious observance is the public's near total disregard for the teachings of the clerics and prelates, who could once claim to be society's moral guides. …When millions of people tell the census takers they are "Christians", therefore, they are muttering the title of a childhood story they only half remember. What is more, their spiritual "leaders" know it. …I can see no way of proving that allowing free debate proves happiness. It may well be that people are happier when their illusions and taboos remain intact. But if you prevent challenges to their beliefs, you are not treating them as adults; you are patting them on the head and saying that they cannot handle robust debates – infantilising them, in short. What applies to individuals applies to countries. Facing up to the truth about religious decline, and adapting our institutions accordingly, will doubtless cause pain to some. But it will allow Britain to become an honest and grown-up country that meets the first requirement of maturity by seeing itself as it is.” Inspired by The Guardian ow.ly/gpMLI image source Twitter ow.ly/gpMKT Britain is ruled by religious bureaucrats (January 2 2013)

Nick Cohen the British journalist, author and political commentator has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘Secular Britain is ruled by religious bureaucrats’ asking why is the church still such a force in our society when most of us disregard its clerics’ teachings? Cohen states “The number of people who say they have no religion jumped from 15% in the 2001 census to 25% in 2011. If the remaining 75% were believers, this leap in free-thinking would be significant but not sensational. But those who say they are religious are not faithful to their creeds, or not in any sense that the believers of the past would have recognised. Church attendance is in constant decline. Every year that passes sees congregations become smaller and greyer. As striking as the fall in religious observance is the public’s near total disregard for the teachings of the clerics and prelates, who could once claim to be society’s moral guides. …When millions of people tell the census takers they are “Christians”, therefore, they are muttering the title of a childhood story they only half remember. What is more, their spiritual “leaders” know it. …I can see no way of proving that allowing free debate proves happiness. It may well be that people are happier when their illusions and taboos remain intact. But if you prevent challenges to their beliefs, you are not treating them as adults; you are patting them on the head and saying that they cannot handle robust debates – infantilising them, in short. What applies to individuals applies to countries. Facing up to the truth about religious decline, and adapting our institutions accordingly, will doubtless cause pain to some. But it will allow Britain to become an honest and grown-up country that meets the first requirement of maturity by seeing itself as it is.”

 

Inspired by The Guardian ow.ly/gpMLI image source Twitter ow.ly/gpMKT

Piers Stefan Pughe-Morgan, known professionally as Piers Morgan, the 47 year old British journalist and television host working in the United States is the subject of a petition to the Obama Administration to deport him back to Great Britain for Attacking 2nd Amendment. In the wake of the December 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting Morgan criticised American gun laws when interviewing Larry Pratt on his gun control views, calling him a "stupid man" and "a dangerous man espousing dangerous nonsense" after Pratt argued that the best way to combat crime in the USA was to have more guns. The petition at this time has gathered 88,485 signatures, exceeding the 25,000 threshold which requires a response from the White House. Tommy Christopher in a Mediate article titled ‘Anti-Piers Morgan Petitioners Are A National Embarrassment’ states “This is why we can’t have nice things. A little over a year ago, the White House announced an innovative way for Americans to engage with their government by creating online petitions that the White House would have to respond to if enough signatures (25,000) were gathered. One consequence of the “We the People” program, however, is that a relatively small number of Americans now have the ability to shame the entire nation before the world, as is the case with the gun-loving morons… While obvious, it should be noted that Piers Morgan is “attacking” and “targeting” with speech, an activity that, if memory serves, is addressed somewhere in that Amendment-thingy. It might even be somewhere near that 2nd Amendment, I’ll have to check. That First Amendment also protects the right of these 82,000 people to be idiots in public, but that doesn’t mean the rest of us have to be happy about it. What these petitioners have done is tell the world that when Americans don’t like your ideas, they try to get the government to silence you. It’s true that these people represent a mere fraction of a fraction of our population, but the petition amplifies their voices well beyond what they could ever have hoped for.” Inspired by Tommy Christopher ow.ly/gpLjV image source Facebook ow.ly/gpLiT Dangerous man espousing dangerous nonsense (December 31 2012)

Piers Stefan Pughe-Morgan, known professionally as Piers Morgan, the 47 year old British journalist and television host working in the United States is the subject of a petition to the Obama Administration to deport him back to Great Britain for Attacking 2nd Amendment. In the wake of the December 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting Morgan criticised American gun laws when interviewing Larry Pratt on his gun control views, calling him a “stupid man” and “a dangerous man espousing dangerous nonsense” after Pratt argued that the best way to combat crime in the USA was to have more guns. The petition at this time has gathered 88,485 signatures, exceeding the 25,000 threshold which requires a response from the White House. Tommy Christopher in a Mediate article titled ‘Anti-Piers Morgan Petitioners Are A National Embarrassment’ states “This is why we can’t have nice things. A little over a year ago, the White House announced an innovative way for Americans to engage with their government by creating online petitions that the White House would have to respond to if enough signatures (25,000) were gathered. One consequence of the “We the People” program, however, is that a relatively small number of Americans now have the ability to shame the entire nation before the world, as is the case with the gun-loving morons… While obvious, it should be noted that Piers Morgan is “attacking” and “targeting” with speech, an activity that, if memory serves, is addressed somewhere in that Amendment-thingy. It might even be somewhere near that 2nd Amendment, I’ll have to check. That First Amendment also protects the right of these 82,000 people to be idiots in public, but that doesn’t mean the rest of us have to be happy about it. What these petitioners have done is tell the world that when Americans don’t like your ideas, they try to get the government to silence you. It’s true that these people represent a mere fraction of a fraction of our population, but the petition amplifies their voices well beyond what they could ever have hoped for.”

 

Inspired by Tommy Christopher ow.ly/gpLjV image source Facebook ow.ly/gpLiT

David Lister the British Arts Editor for The Independent and Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, has published an article in The Independent titled ‘The Turner Prize and its judges have painted themselves into a corner’. Lister states “I have never fully "got" the Turner Prize. This week, as every year, it certainly made a stir and found an interesting winner in Elizabeth Price, a 45-year-old video artist formerly of the eighties pop band Talulah Gosh (I must have been washing my hair during their 15 minutes of fame, because I can't recall them at all). But with or without memories of Talulah Gosh, the Turner Prize, presented by the statutory celebrity, this year Jude Law, proved again one of the biggest and glitziest events in the arts calendar. …It has a mission. Other arts awards don't. The Oscars and Baftas don't have a stated purpose to encourage people to debate and love film. The Comedy Awards don't solemnly claim that their objective is to get the populace discussing what makes them laugh. But the Turner Prize comes with a mission statement. It professes that it is, "intended to promote public discussion of new developments in contemporary British art". …two of the four on this year's shortlist were video artists, the third was a performance artist, and the fourth an artist who drew with a hint of excrement. There was no painter. I suspect that there is still puzzlement in public understanding about video art, just as I suspect there is still puzzlement over why painting is the poor relation in contemporary art. How helpful it would have been this week if the chair of the Turner Prize judges, Penelope Curtis, the head of Tate Britain, had "promoted public discussion of new developments in contemporary art" by addressing that publicly. Is there a crisis in British painting, Penelope? Does that make you sad, as the head of one of the most famous homes of painting in the world? Sure, let's have the parties, and the prizes presented by actors. But let's have the real discussion too. Remember that mission statement.” Inspired by The Independent ow.ly/gdKYA image source Twitter ow.ly/gdKW3 Turner Prize judges painted selves into a corner (December 28 2012)

David Lister the British Arts Editor for The Independent and Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, has published an article in The Independent titled ‘The Turner Prize and its judges have painted themselves into a corner’. Lister states “I have never fully “got” the Turner Prize. This week, as every year, it certainly made a stir and found an interesting winner in Elizabeth Price, a 45-year-old video artist formerly of the eighties pop band Talulah Gosh (I must have been washing my hair during their 15 minutes of fame, because I can’t recall them at all). But with or without memories of Talulah Gosh, the Turner Prize, presented by the statutory celebrity, this year Jude Law, proved again one of the biggest and glitziest events in the arts calendar. …It has a mission. Other arts awards don’t. The Oscars and Baftas don’t have a stated purpose to encourage people to debate and love film. The Comedy Awards don’t solemnly claim that their objective is to get the populace discussing what makes them laugh. But the Turner Prize comes with a mission statement. It professes that it is, “intended to promote public discussion of new developments in contemporary British art”. …two of the four on this year’s shortlist were video artists, the third was a performance artist, and the fourth an artist who drew with a hint of excrement. There was no painter. I suspect that there is still puzzlement in public understanding about video art, just as I suspect there is still puzzlement over why painting is the poor relation in contemporary art. How helpful it would have been this week if the chair of the Turner Prize judges, Penelope Curtis, the head of Tate Britain, had “promoted public discussion of new developments in contemporary art” by addressing that publicly. Is there a crisis in British painting, Penelope? Does that make you sad, as the head of one of the most famous homes of painting in the world? Sure, let’s have the parties, and the prizes presented by actors. But let’s have the real discussion too. Remember that mission statement.”

 

Inspired by The Independent ow.ly/gdKYA image source Twitter ow.ly/gdKW3

 

Mary Louisa Toynbee, known as Polly Toynbee the 65 year old British journalist, writer and President of the British Humanist Association has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘Atheists are better for politics than believers’. Toynbee states “'If you're not religious, for God's sake say so," we implored, and many did. Over a quarter of the population registered as non-believers: more might have done were the census question unambiguous about whether it meant cultural background or personal belief. …Some religions argue they have a God-given right not to be caused offence, to give legal weight to fatwas against those who offend their prophets. But in the rough and tumble of free speech, no one can be protected against feeling offended. …the charge that without God, unbelievers have no moral compass. Hitler and Stalin were atheists, that's where it leads. We can ripost with religious atrocities, Godly genocides or the Inquisition, but that's futile. Wise atheists make no moral claims, seeing good and bad randomly spread among humanity regardless of faith. Humans do have a hardwired moral sense, every child born with an instinct for justice that makes us by nature social animals, not needing revelations from ancient texts. The idea that morality can only be frightened into us artificially, by divine edict, is degrading. …there is enough wonder in the magical realms of human imagination, thought, dream, memory and fantasy where most people reside for much of their waking lives. There is no emotional or spiritual deficiency in rejecting creeds that stunt and infantalise the imagination. Liberated by knowing the here and now is all there is, humanists are optimists, certain that our destiny rests in our own hands. That's why most humanists are natural social democrats, not conservatives.” Inspired by The Guardian ow.ly/gdC1F image source Wikipedia ow.ly/gdBLx Atheists are better for politics than believers (December 24 2012)

Mary Louisa Toynbee, known as Polly Toynbee the 65 year old British journalist, writer and President of the British Humanist Association has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘Atheists are better for politics than believers’. Toynbee states “’If you’re not religious, for God’s sake say so,” we implored, and many did. Over a quarter of the population registered as non-believers: more might have done were the census question unambiguous about whether it meant cultural background or personal belief. …Some religions argue they have a God-given right not to be caused offence, to give legal weight to fatwas against those who offend their prophets. But in the rough and tumble of free speech, no one can be protected against feeling offended. …the charge that without God, unbelievers have no moral compass. Hitler and Stalin were atheists, that’s where it leads. We can ripost with religious atrocities, Godly genocides or the Inquisition, but that’s futile. Wise atheists make no moral claims, seeing good and bad randomly spread among humanity regardless of faith. Humans do have a hardwired moral sense, every child born with an instinct for justice that makes us by nature social animals, not needing revelations from ancient texts. The idea that morality can only be frightened into us artificially, by divine edict, is degrading. …there is enough wonder in the magical realms of human imagination, thought, dream, memory and fantasy where most people reside for much of their waking lives. There is no emotional or spiritual deficiency in rejecting creeds that stunt and infantalise the imagination. Liberated by knowing the here and now is all there is, humanists are optimists, certain that our destiny rests in our own hands. That’s why most humanists are natural social democrats, not conservatives.”

 

Inspired by The Guardian ow.ly/gdC1F image source Wikipedia ow.ly/gdBLx

Will a continent turn its back on democracy (December 21 2012) Will a continent turn its back on democracy (December 21 2012)

Antony James Beevor the 65 year old British historian and author has published an article in The Prospect titled ‘Will a continent turn its back on democracy?’ Beevor states”…We again face the danger of a world depression and we are beginning to see mass unemployment in some countries, especially in southern Europe. Last year, Giles Paxman, the British ambassador in Madrid, pointed out how remarkable it was that despite the terrifying levels of youth unemployment in Spain, there had been an astonishingly low level of social disorder. The demonstrations of the “Indignados,” the young Spaniards who have taken to the streets to protest against austerity measures and unemployment, have been passionate but not violent. His theory is that the memory of the horrors of the Spanish civil war is acting like a nuclear threat in the background. He may well be right. Greece also suffered from a civil war, and although there have been a considerable amount of violent protests in Athens, folk memory is likely to hold the country back from outright conflict. …What are the dangers and threats to parliamentary democracy in Europe? Can the fundamental contradictions in the euro project be overcome? The dynamic of the moment seems to be that political integration must be drastically accelerated to make up for the flagrant paradoxes that existed from the euro’s very foundation and were scandalously ignored. The same foreign minister argued to me last autumn that the economic situation was so grave that Europe must adopt a presidential system with direct elections. That idea is now becoming general currency in top European circles. Economic and political control would be drastically centralised with virtually no accountability. This would be nothing less than an elective dictatorship bringing with it the threat of nationalism, the very thing the European project intended to avoid.”

 

Inspired by The Prospect ow.ly/g2byK image source Twitter ow.ly/g2bw0

These will become subjects of the privileged (December 17 2012) These will become subjects of the privileged (December 17 2012)

Elizabeth Price the 46 year old British artist and former member of indie pop bands having been awarded the Turner Prize for her video trilogy, the first video artist to win for over a decade. The jury “admired the seductive and immersive qualities of Price’s video trilogy, which reflects the ambition that has characterised her work in recent years. They were impressed by the way Price creates a rhythmic and ritualistic experience through her film installations combining different materials and technical vocabularies from archival footage and popular music videos to advertising.” Charlotte Higgins in a Guardian article states “Were she starting out now, her career in art – one that has just been crowned by her winning this year’s Turner prize – would be impossible, Elizabeth Price has said. The artist, who was awarded the £25,000 prize on Monday, criticised the government’s introduction of the Ebacc qualification in schools. …Price, who attended a comprehensive school in Luton before studying art at the University of Oxford, where she also now teaches, criticised the withdrawal of state funding for humanities and arts at universities. The result, she said, is that “these will become the subjects of the privileged, and history-writing and novel-writing and art-making and poetry-writing will become homogenous in terms of class and social background”. Her career – making video art whose value in the commercial world is insufficient to support her – has been possible only because of publicly funded arts institutions, she said. “If you look at my CV, just about everything I have done has come through a publicly funded institution; it is a career entirely built on that sort of support.” It would never have happened without the “generous opportunities I’ve had through education and public funding”.

 

Inspired by Charlotte Higgins ow.ly/g205S image source deskarati ow.ly/g20A0

Oligarchs and dictators are not cool (December 9 2012) Oligarchs and dictators are not cool (December 9 2012)

Sarah Thornton the British Canadian writer and sociologist of culture, writing principally about art, artists and the art market, has detailed a list of the top ten reasons from potentially ‘hundreds’ of reasons for her decision to quit the art market beat. Blouin Artinfo has reprinted two of the reasons, being (A) It enables manipulators to publicize the artists whose prices they spike at auction. Tightknit cabals of dealers and speculative collectors count on the fact that you will report record prices without being able to reveal the collusion behind how they were achieved. …It’s a shame when good artists’ careers are made volatile by speculation.  And (B) Oligarchs and dictators are not cool. I have no problem with rich people. (Some of my best friends are high net worth individuals!) But amongst the biggest spenders in the art market right now are people who have made their money in non-democracies with horrendous human rights records. Their expertise in rising to the top of a corrupt system gives punch to the term “filthy lucre.” However, the astronomical prices paid by these guys do have a positive trickle-down effect. When they buy a Gerhard Richter for $20m, the consignor of the painting will likely re-invest some of their profit in younger art (particularly if they are American and keen to defer capital gains tax). These Russian, Arab and Chinese collectors bring liquidity to the art world and allow more artists, curators and critics to make a living in relation to art.”

 

Inspired by Blouin ArtInfo ow.ly/fKgvH image source ow.ly/fKgrd

Figures I make always resist all classifications (December 8 2012) Figures I make always resist all classifications (December 8 2012)

Bharti Kher the 43 year old British Indian contemporary artist whose work encompasses painting, sculpture and installation has been profiled by Carla Raffinetti in an article published on Artlyst titled ‘Bharti Kher’s Surreal World Of Cyborgs Bindis And White Elephants’. Raffinetti states “Bharti Kher’s is one of India’s best-known contemporary artists. …Although the artist was born and bred in England, she settled in India permanently in 1992 after meeting her future husband there, the Indian artist Subodh Gupta.  As the daughter of first generation Indian immigrants to the UK, Kher’s work explores themes of identity and belonging, of being of Indian descent but of not quite being Indian, of being raised in Great Britain but not being quite British either. Kher’s world is a place where all metanarratives have broken down.  Her work collages an uneasy mix of socio-cultural memes together.  As an Indian insider-outsider, Bharti Kher questions cultural and social rules through her art.  Taking her own disjointed identity as a starting point, Kher’s work walks the tightrope between ancient Indian customs juxtaposed with modern Western values.  Outside of the narrow frame of Asian art, her work serves more broadly as a metaphor of the multiple meanings that can be ascribed to an object or a situation, depending on its context. … whilst Kher delves into her ethnicity for imagery, she does not do so exclusively, preferring an approaching that is more culturally ambiguous.  Says the artist, “The figures I make always resist all classifications of class, race, time – they could be anybody at any time.”

 

Inspired by Carla Raffinetti ow.ly/fKfP6 image source Arken ow.ly/fKfKN

IMF agrees with europe's anti-austerity protests (December 3 2012) IMF agrees with europe’s anti-austerity protests (December 3 2012)

Andy Robinson the 52 year old British Economics journalist has published an article in The Nation Magazine titled ‘Even the IMF Agrees with Europe’s Anti-Austerity Protests’. Robinson states “At its semiannual meeting in Tokyo … the IMF announced that the austerity packages applied throughout southern Europe since 2009 have been counterproductive, undermining economic growth and increasing rather than bringing down public debt ratios. Greece provides ghastly proof of the failed logic of the euro orthodoxy. After three years of shock therapy, the Greek economy is in depression and will have shrunk by more than 22 percent at the end 2013, the IMF warns. Employment in Greece has fallen to 1980 levels, and Greek debt dynamics have only deteriorated. Public sector debt has soared from 144 percent of GDP in 2010 to 170 percent, and unless the official lenders agree to take a haircut in a controlled restructuring of debt—as private lenders did earlier in the year—Greece may be forced to leave the euro. “The IMF has admitted the blunder, but tell that to the Greeks,” said Zoe Lanara, international relations secretary of the Greek General Confederation of Labor… overzealous fiscal adjustment cripples an economy, driving down tax revenues, forcing up welfare costs and causing more debt problems. While labor unions and sections of the European left have expressed concern at the impact of austerity on growth since the very beginning, “a year or so ago, most finance ministers didn’t even know what fiscal multipliers were,” said Terrence McDonough, a Marxist economist at the National University of Ireland.”

 

Inspired by The Nation ow.ly/fKcxM image source PressEurop ow.ly/fKcqo

All created an atmosphere of despair (December 2 2012) All created an atmosphere of despair (December 2 2012)

Muhammad Abdul Bari the 59 year old British Bangladeshian secondary school teacher has published an article on Aljazeera titled ‘Israel’s scorched earth policy in Gaza could prove fatal’ discussing how the US and other western governments have failed to publicly criticise Israel for its iron-fist policy on Palestine. Bari states “Beyond Gaza, the situation in historic Palestine is not much different. Israeli land grabbing, illegal settlements and ethnic cleansing in occupied territories, forced removal of families from their homes, the increasing refugee problems, massive unemployment, daily humiliation of Palestinian people in the crossings, the erection of the “apartheid wall” – have all created an atmosphere of despair. As in its 2009 operation, Israel is trying to match its overwhelming military might with its superior media outreach in the western world. As a result, and due to what seems to be America’s depressingly unquestioned support for Israel, many in the West buy in to the Israeli narrative claiming Hamas as a “terrorist” organisation. Sadly, people have a short memory. They forget that Hamas, for all its flaws, formed the legitimate Palestinian government after winning an internationally-accepted election in 2006. The fear of being accused as anti-Semitic has inhibited many in the West from publicly criticising Israel’s historic injustice to the Palestinians. Some try to be ambivalent; in order to prove their neutrality, the only thing they do is offer some advice to Israeli and Palestinian politicians to sort out the mess on the negation table. However, an overwhelming majority of people in the Muslim world and many in Asia, Africa and Latin America consider Israel a Pariah state, supported by the world’s sole superpower, the United States. Many consider Israel as a Goliath when it comes to the Palestinian people.”

 

Inspired by Aljazeera ow.ly/fuNhQ image source Facebook ow.ly/fuNMd

I didn't realise how predatory he was (November 19 2012) I didn’t realise how predatory he was (November 19 2012)

Celia Paul the 53 year old British Indian painter who she was taught by Lucian Freud, becoming his muse and having his child named Frank Paul, who is also an artist.  In an interview with Matilda Battersby for The Independent Paul speaks about the effect their relationship had on her own work. Battersby states “Lucian Freud said it was “like walking into a honey pot” when he first saw Celia Paul’s paintings. What Paul, who met Freud as her tutor at the Slade in 1978, didn’t realise then, but laughs wryly at now, is that the sweet thing he was taken with was her 18-year-old self, as much as her artwork. “I really didn’t know anything about his womanising,” Paul says. “I didn’t realise how predatory he was.” She later discovered that he’d taken the job as visiting tutor at the famous London art school because his relationship at the time was going wrong and “he wanted to find a new girlfriend”. The teenage Paul was caught in Freud’s spell; and a potent one it proved. …”I was really quite disturbed by his predatoriness. It felt quite complicated, because obviously I was compelled by his art, which I admired so much.” But the 55-year-old Freud, whose mesmerising qualities had at that point already earned him 13 acknowledged children, won Paul over. It took several months for them to become lovers, and two years for Freud to paint Paul. But she would become a significant muse for him in the early 1980s.”

 

Inspired by Matilda Battersby ow.ly/fmFrE image source Cassone ow.ly/fmFk0

You've got about a minute to impress (November 14 2012) You’ve got about a minute to impress (November 14 2012)

Lenny Henry the 54 year old British actor, writer, and comedian has been profiled by Megan Connor for The Guardian in an article titled ‘This Much I Know’. Henry states “If you’re a famous comedian you’ve got about a minute to impress on stage. You get a clap at the beginning and “My mum used to like you!” and then there’s nothing to do but roll your sleeves up. A TV talent show changed my life [Henry won New Faces in 1975 with his impression of Stevie Wonder]. It took me from being a nobody in Dudley, where I was a welder, to being recognised on the street. Nowadays people have to go to Edinburgh for years to get noticed, and that is a shame. Of course there’s Britain’s Got Talent, but I think we need a more regular platform where people can perform in a non-competitive way. …Shakespeare has changed me. I was sad that I never got to grips with him at school, so when I was asked to play Othello it was like someone opening a door to something I’d never been involved with. I can feel him in my veins now. I tend to put things in boxes. I have to do one project at a time now, because I have been a workaholic, and that can lead to a nervous breakdown. …I will always remember a time in the 50s when we lived in a bedsit. There was me in a cot, my sister in a campbed, and my parents in a bed next to me, and I will never forget feeling the heat from a parafin lamp on my face.”

 

Inspired by Megan Conner ow.ly/f5riy image source Facebook ow.ly/f5ran

Syria artists in a time of revolt (October 30 2012) Syria artists in a time of revolt (October 30 2012)

Jane Ferguson the British Freelance Journalist currently with Aljazeera has published an article titled ‘Portrait of Syria artists in a time of revolt’ discussing how artists who fled the country had experienced “torture” by security forces but are still intent on continuing their work. Ferguson states “Many of them [Artists] have been detained, beaten and disappeared by the government for focusing their talents on the ugliest of truths around them. In times of war, writers, painters, filmmakers and photographers often mirror its horror. We now look upon great works such as Pablo Picasso’s Guernica and Ernest Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls, with nostalgia – neatly cleansed of the terror that inspired them. Fast forward a generation and works born from the Syrian revolution will likely be part of our contemporary art world. But first Syrian artists must survive, and to do that many have fled the country. Filmmaker Firas Fayyad tried to board a flight from Damascus Airport last November. … they put a bag over his head, threw him into a car, and drove him to the first of a series of underground detention centres where he said he was beaten and interrogated repeatedly for four months. …After his release in March, Fayyad knew he was being watched, and could be arrested again at any time. He left the country on foot. …He is now working to challenge the Assad government as an exiled activist, even though the once peaceful rebellion has transformed into an increasingly violent civil war.”

 

Inspired by Aljazeera ow.ly/eIYPC image source Linkedin ow.ly/eIYiU

Must put the marginalised at the centre (October 25 2012) Must put the marginalised at the centre (October 25 2012)

Pauline Rose the British Director of the EFA Global Monitoring Report and former Senior Policy Analyst with the GMR team has published an article on Aljazeera titled “’Education First’ must put the marginalised at the centre” stating there is a need to draw attention to unacceptable levels of education inequality across countries and between groups. Rose states “Goal-setting often leads to attention being paid to low-hanging fruit – those easiest to reach, making it possible to show progress most quickly. Unfortunately, in education, this approach has left 61 million children – many of them poor, girls and those living in remote rural locations – missing out on the push towards getting all children into school by 2015. It is welcome that one of the three areas being addressed by the UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, in his new global initiative launched on September 26, 2012, “Education First” is putting every child into school. To achieve this important intention, future goals and any discussions of a post-2015 agenda must include equity-based targets so that the marginalised benefit from progress. This is a remediable injustice and one which we must all work to resolve. …Some children or young people may have been disadvantaged by more than one factor in their access to school. …A key reason for the likely failure to reach the 2015 deadline of the six Education for All goals is because marginalised have not been given enough attention.  For this reason, education goals set after 2015 must include equity-based targets.”

 

Inspired by Aljazeera ow.ly/ezw0M image source Twitter ow.ly/ezvYT

A Potential Piece of Yellowism (October 21 2012) A Potential Piece of Yellowism (October 21 2012)

Vladimir Umanets the 26 year old Russian founder of ‘Yellowism’ has been arrested by British police for the graffiti damage caused to a Mark Rothko painting at the Tate Modern. In an article by John Fahey & Ellen Branagh published in The Independent, states “The wording on the bottom-right corner of the piece appears to read: “Vladimir Umanets, A Potential Piece of Yellowism. “Umanets said “Some people think I’m crazy or a vandal, but my intention was not to destroy or decrease the value, or to go crazy. I am not a vandal.” Umanets, who studied art, is one of the founders of “Yellowism”, which he describes as… “Yellowism is not art, and Yellowish isn’t anti-art. It’s an element of contemporary visual culture. It’s not an artistic movement. It’s not art, it’s not reality, it’s just Yellowism. It can’t be presented in a gallery of art, it can be presented only in Yellowistic chambers. The main difference between Yellowism and art is that in art you have got freedom of interpretation, in Yellowism you don’t have freedom of interpretation. Everything is about Yellowism – that’s it. I am a Yellowist. I believe what I am doing and I want people to start talking about this. It was like a platform. I don’t need to be famous, I don’t want money, I don’t want fame, I’m not seeking attention. Maybe I would like to point people’s attention on what it’s all about. What is Yellowism? What is art? It’s good people are shocked about what happened. No one is realising what actually happened, everyone is just posting that the piece has been damaged or destroyed or defaced. “But I believe that after a few years they will start looking for it from the right angle. So that’s why I did it. I believe that from everything bad there’s always a good outcome so I’m prepared for that but obviously I don’t want to spend a few months, even a few weeks, in jail. But I do strongly believe in what I am doing, I have dedicated my life to this. To be honest, I do believe I increased the value. It seems probably ridiculous for someone but I do believe in this. I didn’t decrease the value, I didn’t destroy this picture, I put something new.”

 

Inspired by John Fahey & Ellen Branagh ow.ly/eofzx image source Huff Post ow.ly/eofWN

Perfectly easy way to rescue newspapers (October 16 2012) Perfectly easy way to rescue newspapers (October 16 2012)

David Leigh the 66 year old British journalist, author and the investigations executive editor of The Guardian is the subject of an article by Dan Hind on Aljazeera titled ‘Reincarnating the newspaper industry’. Hind states “…Leigh set out what he called a “perfectly easy way to rescue newspapers, ensure media plurality and monetise the web” – add a £2 ($3.2) monthly levy on broadband fees and thereby raise around £500 million ($807 million) a year. The money would then be distributed to news operations “according to their share of UK online readership”. …Revenues from print sales are in steep decline, he said, and paywalls won’t work in the UK, because of the BBC. …The lean pickings from web advertising on a free newspaper site will only pay for a fraction of the high-quality investigative journalism that commercial newspapers generate. We’ll just get the timid BBC on the one hand, and superficial junk on the other.” …here’s what I see as the main problem with Leigh’s suggestion. The distribution mechanism he proposes will not serve the stated aim. …While some good investigative journalism does appear in British newspapers, it accounts for only a tiny fraction of content as a whole. Much more space is given to celebrity gossip, chitchat from Westminster, lifestyle features, sports coverage, scare stories about immigrants, half-baked nonsense about the economy and similar “superficial junk”. …Leigh’s levy would go to those news operations with large online readerships, regardless of the amount of “high-quality investigative journalism” they commissioned and published. This will tend to reward, and preserve, incumbency.”

 

Inspired by Dan Hind ow.ly/emq5i image source Twitter ow.ly/emq1Y

Rss Feed Tweeter button Facebook button Technorati button Reddit button Myspace button Linkedin button Delicious button Digg button Flickr button Stumbleupon button Newsvine button Youtube button