# data[].attributes.headline
CO: Chimamanda Adichie's speech on Free speech

# data[].attributes.subject
CO: Chimamanda Adichie's speech on Free speech

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie_ Why books should never be banned _ BBC Sounds (360p)

# data[].attributes.headline
Présentation concours Science Po Mme BAJON

# data[].attributes.subject
Présentation concours Science Po Mme BAJON

# data[].attributes.headline
Etape 1: Sujet 2025 Entrainement à la CE

# data[].attributes.subject
Etape 1: Sujet 2025 Entrainement à la CE

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
activist (noun): someone who actively tries to achieve social or political change, most often by joining an activist group - Even before she joined Greenpeace, Liz was an environmental activist.

advocate (verb): to publicly support something like a policy or plan - Does your party advocate stronger regulation of social media?

ally (noun): countries that have agreed to help each other, especially in a war, are allies - In 2011 the USA persuaded allies like the UK, France and Canada to join them in attacking Libya.

alliance (noun): a formal agreement between two or more countries or political parties to work together in certain ways - NATO is a military alliance that around 30 European and North American countries have joined.

anarchism (noun): the belief that local co-operatives freely established and run by the people they serve work better than centralized governments run by powerful elites and politicians - Kurdish anarchism was developed by Abdullah Öcalan, and he was inspired by Murray Bookchin.

(the) Anglosphere (noun): the UK and countries the UK colonized such as the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand - English is the main language used throughout the Anglosphere.

austerity (noun): a policy of cutting government spending to reduce public debt, with cuts to welfare, health and education often being significant - Is austerity a better way of reducing public debt than raising taxes?

authoritarian (adjective): of governments that demand absolute obedience and will use violence, unjust laws, surveillance, etc to destroy opposition - Authoritarian governments will do anything to stay in power.

autocracy (noun): a country or government that is controlled by a single person - Which of the countries on the Korean peninsula is an autocracy?

autonomous (adjective): able to govern oneself without outside control - Three of our country's regions are autonomous, but the rest are controlled by the central government.

backbencher (noun): a Member of Parliament who isn't a government minister or an opposition leader - The education minister lost his portfolio and became a backbencher again. (also "backbench MP")

bailout (noun): money given to a company, country or an organisation that's in financial trouble - Should governments give bailouts to failing private companies?

ballot (noun): a vote to find out what people think about something - Before going on strike, we held a secret ballot to make sure our members supported it.

battleground state (noun): a state that doesn't always elect the same party's candidate - We spent most of our election campaign in three battleground states. (also "swing state")

bureaucracy (noun): a hierarchy of officials who administer an organisation or a government department - I hate dealing with government bureaucracies.

benefits (noun): welfare payments such as sickness benefits and unemployment benefits - I was out of work, but at least I could get unemployment benefits.

biased (adjective): unfairly favouring or judging someone or something because of personal preference or prejudice - Political parties were biased against women and wouldn't let them run for office.

bill (noun): a document outlining a proposed new law that will be voted on by elected representatives - Do you think the new environmental protection bill will be passed? (also "legislation", "legislative proposal")

bipartisan (adjective): involving two political parties or both sides of a political division - Defence budget increases usually get bipartisan support.

budget (noun): a government's stated projection on income and spending, most often over the coming year - Couldn't the government balance the budget by spending less on weapons and other military stuff?

cabinet (noun): a group of government members who have important jobs like running ministries - The prime minister will announce the new cabinet next week.

candidate (noun): someone who's competing for votes in an election - How many candidates are running in next month's election?

capitalism (noun): an economic system based on privately-owned businesses that have to make a profit to survive - If capitalism isn't regulated, the need to make a profit can lead to mistreatment of workers, consumers and the environment.

caucus (noun): a group of politicians with similar aims or interests - A bipartisan congressional caucus aims to boost trade with China.

citizen (noun): a person with the legal right to live in and be part of a country - If you're a UK citizen you can get a British passport.

civil rights (noun): rights to equal treatment and equal opportunities regardless of one's race, gender, sexual preference, religion, etc - Have you heard Martin Luther King's I Have a Dream civil rights speech?

(the) civil service (noun): government departments and the people who work for them - My father began his career in the civil service before shifting to journalism. (also "the Civil Service")

civil war (noun): a war between different groups or regions in the same country - In the American Civil War, southern states fought for the right to buy and sell people and use them as slaves.

coalition (noun): a government made up of two or more political parties who agree to work together - Will your party join the governing coalition or the opposition?

colonization (noun): the act of invading and settling on lands that don't belong to you - For us indigenous Australians, colonization was the worst thing that ever happened to us. (also "to colonize" (verb) and "colonial" (adjective))

communism (noun): a political system in which a central government makes economic plans and fairly distributes wealth created by workers who produce goods and services - Communism can work in small communities, but it can become authoritarian when used to govern an entire country.

Congress (US noun): the body elected to govern the US at the federal level, consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate - Congress has approved a bill that legalizes same-sex marriage.

conservative (adjective): believing in traditional ideas and values rather than progressive ideas and social change - Aren't right-wing parties more conservative than left-wing parties?

constitution (noun): a document that states the principles and rules that a country's system of government is based on - Human rights are protected in our country's constitution.

constituent (noun): a person who lives and votes in a particular constituency - Before the election, our candidate got to know many of her constituents.

consumerism (noun): the belief that buying material things makes people happy - Is Western-style consumerism the way of the future?

corporate (adjective): relating to big companies and corporations - The corporate sector uses advertising to sell its products to consumers.

corporation (noun): a large company - Corporations have to sell more and more products in order to make bigger and bigger profits.

corrupt (adjective): related to corruption - Since the 2021 coup, corrupt army generals have stolen billions of dollars.

corruption (noun): the dishonest or illegal use of power or authority, usually for money or gifts - How much money does our country lose to corruption every year?

coup d'état or coup (noun): the illegal and often violent overthrow of government, usually by military officers - The coup was carried out by a bunch of greedy, power-hungry generals.

deficit (noun): the amount by which money earned or received is less than the amount spent or owed in a particular period of time - If a government spends 3 trillion dollars and its income is only 2 trillion, its budget deficit is 1 trillion dollars.

demagogue (noun): a political leader who arouses emotions like fear, greed, anger and prejudice to get people's support - The world's most dangerous leaders are fascist demagogues like Hitler and Mussolini.

democracy (noun): a political system in which people choose their own governments by voting in free and fair elections - Some countries are true democracies, but those with rigged elections are fake democracies. (also "democratic" (adjective))

(the) Democratic Party (US noun): one of the two main political parties in the US - The Democratic Party is more likely to adopt progressive policies than the Republican Party. (also "the Democrats")

democratic socialism (noun): a left-wing political philosophy that combines democracy with a highly-regulated market economy, state-run essential services and a state-financed welfare system - Unlike communism, democratic socialism can't produce a one-party state.

depression (noun): the period in a capitalist economic cycle when many banks and companies fail, production falls, unemployment increases and many workers fall into poverty - Even little kids went to bed hungry during the depression. (see also "recession")

dictatorship (noun): an authoritarian government that uses force to hold onto power - At first he was a democratically-elected demagogue, but then he banned elections and established a dictatorship. (Note: a "dictator" (noun) is the person who controls a dictatorship)

diplomacy (noun): the managing of relations between countries - Why aren't we using diplomacy instead of threats of war to resolve our disagreements? (Note: a "diplomat" (noun) is someone who works in the field of diplomacy)

disinformation (noun): deliberately false information that's used to deceive or wrongly persuade people - The USA used disinformation to persuade other countries to join its illegal 2003 invasion of Iraq. (Note: "misinformation" has a similar meaning)

domestic terrorist (noun): someone who violently attacks people or places in their own country for political reasons - SWAT teams in heavy armour used military weapons to arrest a group of domestic terrorists. (also "homegrown terrorist")

draconian (adjective): extremely strict and severe (esp of a law or punishment) - Draconian drug laws meant kids spent years in jail for possessing a little marijuana, and their lives were ruined.

election (noun): a democratic process in which people vote for politicians to represent them in a government - Who are you voting for in the election?

election campaign (collocation): a series of events and advertisements in the run-up to an election that try to persuade people to vote for a particular politician or party - How much will the party spend on the election campaign?

electoral college (US noun): a small group of unelected people in each US state who elect the president and vice-president even though a nation-wide vote has just taken place - In 2016 the electoral college gave Donald Trump the presidency even though he'd lost the popular vote.

empire (noun): all the countries, colonies, overseas lands, etc that a powerful country controls after invading or occupying them - Many countries including Canada, Australia, South Africa, Kenya and Jamaica were claimed by the British empire after being invaded.

endorse (verb): to openly express support for someone or something - The electoral board can't endorse any of the candidates before an election.

equal rights (collocation): the idea that people of all kinds should have the same access to things like education, medical care, police protection, justice, etc - Prisoners, drug users and disabled people still don't have equal rights. (also "civil rights")

(the) establishment (noun): the most powerful and privileged group in a country, most of whom support conservative parties and policies - In British politics, the Tories are seen as the party of the establishment. (also "the Establishment")

exploit (verb): to treat someone or something badly in order to get some benefit for yourself - Workers are still being exploited in these factories. (also "exploitation" (noun))

(the) far left (noun): people of the left who believe radical or extreme forms of social, economic and political change are needed - Some on the far left still believe in taking the revolution to the streets. (also "the hard left")

(the) far right (noun): people of the right with extremely conservative views, some of whom have racist and fascist beliefs of the sort found in Nazi Germany - These days the far right is mostly just a bunch of boys who dress up like fascists in order to shock their parents. (also "the hard right")

fascism (noun): an extreme right-wing dictatorial political system based on racial purity and the violent hatred of racial and other minorities - Fascism is a vile political system that we must stamp out forever.

feminism (noun): a movement for social change that aims to rid society of beliefs and traditions that stop women from having the same rights, powers and opportunities as men - In many countries, feminism is still seen as a threat to traditional male dominance.

federal (adjective): of a central government in a federation, as opposed to governments of individual states - The US federal government is made of up the legislative branch which includes the House of Representatives and the Senate, the executive branch which includes the President and Vice President, and the judicial branch which includes the Supreme Court and other federal courts.

federation (noun): a country made up of several states that have united under a central or federal government - Many of the world's biggest countries are federations, including Russia and the USA.

fiscal (adjective): related to public finances, including the collection of taxes and the spending of government money - The federal government's fiscal policy caused a number of economic problems.

foreign relations (collocation): a country's dealings with other countries, including establishing friendly relationships, negotiating trade deals, arranging scientific and cultural exchanges, etc - Our diplomats are improving foreign relations right across Asia. (also "foreign affairs" and "international relations")

foreign aid (noun): assistance or help given by one country to another, including economic aid, development projects, disaster relief, etc - How much money does your country spend on foreign aid every year?

foreign policy (noun): how a country plans to further its national interests when dealing with other countries and regions - Our foreign policy mustn't damage our relations with our neighbours.

fundraising (noun): trying to get people to give money to a charity or an organization - Lots of people give money to the Greens at their fundraising dinners.

geopolitics (noun): the study of how a country or region fits into the global network of political and economic alliances and rivalries - The main struggle in geopolitics now is between the West and countries the West doesn't trust, like China and Russia.

government (noun): those who govern a country, state or region and make decisions about laws, taxes, budgets, welfare funding, etc - Why does the government spend so much on foreign aid?

head of state (noun): a country's official leader, such as a republic's president or a monarchy's king or queen - The UK's head of state is the king, with the prime minister being the head of government.

(the) House of Representatives (noun): the name of the lower house in certain parliaments like the US Congress and the Parliament of Australia - Is the House of Representatives as powerful as the Senate?

human rights (noun): the rights we all have to be treated fairly and without cruelty or injustice - The arrest and jailing of peaceful protesters is a clear violation of their human rights. (See also "civil rights" and "women's rights")

ideology (noun): a system of beliefs, goals and ethics that form the basis of an economy, a society, a political party, etc - Anti-capitalist ideologies claim that capitalism exploits workers, creates inequality, and puts profits above human and environmental health. (also "ideological" (adjective))

inclusive (adjective): wanting to include people of all kinds, especially those previously excluded from mainstream society - Ireland is much more inclusive these days. (also "inclusivity" (noun))

incumbent (noun): someone holding an official position at a certain time - Most incumbents are elected for a second term.

independent (noun): an elected representative who isn't a member of a political party - More independents were elected this time than ever before.

indigenous governance (collocation): forms of social organization, law and diplomacy that indigenous peoples practiced, many of which were lost after colonization - Luckily some forms of indigenous governance are still passed on by the elders.

inflation (noun): rising prices - The government's doing whatever it can to reduce inflation. (also "inflationary' (adjective))

issue (noun): an important topic that people are discussing, debating or having disputes about - Climate change is an issue that all parties have to have a policy on.

insurrection (noun): a violent attempt to take power from a government - The people who planned the insurrection were arrested and sentenced to death. (also "uprising")

(the) judiciary (noun): the judges and court officials that run trials and issue punishments in a particular country - If the judiciary were independent, would they be jailing peaceful protesters? (also "judicial" (adjective))

junta (noun): a military government that has taken power by force - The junta killed thousands of protesters after staging their coup.

justice (noun): the fair treatment of people of all kinds - Children seem to have a natural sense of justice.

labour (noun): work, especially manual work - Who decides how much our labour is worth? (Note: used in many collocations like "labour law", "labour costs", "forced labour", "child labour", etc.)

(the) Labour Party (noun): the more left-wing of the UK's two main political parties - The Labour Party has always claimed to be the party of the workers. (Note: The equivalent party in Australia is the differently-spelled "Labor Party")

landslide (noun): an election victory in which the winning party wins by a very big margin - Our party has won in a landslide!

law and order (phrase): a situation in which laws and the police are obeyed by nearly everyone - Political parties often promise to improve law and order when campaigning.

leader (noun): a person with enough power, status or charisma to become the head of a country, an organisation, a gang, etc. - Was the leader of your country democratically elected, and did they take power by force?

(the) Leader of the Opposition (noun): the leader of the parties that didn't have enough seats in parliament to form the government - The Leader of the Opposition accused the Prime Minister of being corrupt. (also "minority leader")

left-wing (adjective): believing that power and wealth should be shared fairly and that services like health care and education should be free - Most countries in South America have left-wing governments at the moment. (also "of the left", "leftist", "progressive" and "liberal")

legislation (noun): a law or a set of laws - New legislation on the clearing of forests was passed in parliament today. (also "to legislate" (verb) and "legislative" (adjective))

legislative agenda (noun): new laws that a party or politician promises to introduce - The government's tertiary education bill was part of its legislative agenda.

liberal (US adjective): supporting the fair sharing of power and wealth and strong protection of human rights, civil liberties and freedom of speech - My grandfather has become more liberal the older he gets. (also "progressive")

liberal democracy (noun): a democratic, market-based political system in which human rights, civil liberties and basic freedoms are constitutionally-protected - India, Brazil, Japan and South Africa are among the many countries now seeing themselves as liberal democracies. (Note: don't confuse with the idea of "social democracy" in which capitalism gradually shifts towards socialism)

libertarian (adjective): believing that personal freedom should only be subject to minimal government control - My uncle says he's libertarian, but he does exactly what he's expected to do.

lobby (verb): to try to get a politician or government to do something for you, such as change a regulation that harms your business - If we elect someone, shouldn't they put our interests ahead of the companies that lobby them? (also "lobbyist" (noun))

lower class (noun): the social class that poor people with low status belong to - Lower-class people are looked down on by just about everyone. (also "the lower classes" and "working class")

lower house (noun): another name for the House of Representatives (US) or the House of Commons (UK) - How many parties won seats in the lower house in last year's election? (Note: the opposite of "upper house")

mainstream (adjective): considered normal due to widespread acceptance in society - Why don't mainstream media like CNN and the BBC fact-check government claims?

market economy (noun): an economy in which the forces of supply and demand determine prices and wages - We have a market economy, but the government adjusts prices and wages as necessary. (also "free market economy")

meritocracy (noun): a system in which a person's talents and achievements determine their position, income and status instead of their social class, race or gender - It's fairer than it was fifty years ago, but it still isn't a true meritocracy.

middle class (noun): the social class between the lower classes and the upper classes - I'm glad I was born into the middle class.

midterms (short for "midterm elections") (US noun): the election of a certain number of seats around halfway through the term of office of a president or government - The Democrats could lose their Senate majority in the next midterms.

military dictatorship (noun): an authoritarian government run by military officers who took power by force - How many people has the military dictatorship tortured and killed in order to stay in power? (also "military regime")

moderate (adjective): not considered extreme or unreasonable - We might get elected if we advocate moderate tax increases.

monarchy (noun): a country in which the head of state is a king or queen - France used to be a monarchy, but the French Revolution put an end to that.

nation (noun): an individual country made up of people from one or more ethnic groups who live together under one government - Many African nations are trading with Asia these days. (also "nation state")

National People's Congress (noun): the national legislature and supreme state authority of the People's Republic of China - Most of the nearly 3,000 delegates to the National People's Congress are elected by local people's congresses.

national security (noun): a nation's efforts to protect its territory and people - There are better ways to protect national security than spending a fortune on weapons.

nationalize (verb): to transfer a privately-owned company or industry to state ownership and government control - The government has had to nationalize essential utilities like water and power again.

neoconservative (adjective): related to the militaristic conservatism adopted by the US Republican Party from the 1980s to the 2000s that led to several failed wars - Why hasn't neoconservative US president George W Bush been put on trial for starting illegal wars? (Note: often abbreviated to "neocon")

neo-Nazi (noun): a member or supporter of any group that promotes white supremacy, violent attacks on minorities or mass murder of the sort Nazi Germany committed - My brother says he joined the neo-Nazis because he was lonely and they made him feel good about himself.

nominee (noun): someone who is nominated for a political position, a job or an award of some sort - For the first time ever the Republican Party's nominee for president is Asian.

oligarchy (noun): a small group of powerful people who control a country, an organization or an industry - She must've been put in power by the oligarchy that really runs the country. (Note: an "oligarch" (noun) is a member of an oligarchy)

(the) opposition (noun): politicians who sit in parliament but aren't part of the party or coalition in power - The leader of the opposition has blamed the prime minister for wrecking the country's economy.

oppression (noun): the cruel and unfair treatment of people - The refugees are fleeing political oppression in their own country. (also "oppressive" (adjective) as in "He fled his country's oppressive rulers.")

overthrow (verb): to force a leader or a government to give up power - The government was overthrown by an invading army.

parliament (noun): all the people elected to make or change a country's laws - The Green Party won six seats in parliament this time.

patriarchy (also The Patriarchy) (noun): a society or political system ruled by men - Feminists speak about how oppressive the patriarchy has always been.

patriotism (noun): love of one's country and the willingness to fight and die for it - Right-wing demagogues know how to turn feelings of patriotism into hatred of foreigners.

patriot (noun): someone with an extreme love of their own country, often combined with an extreme distrust or fear of foreign countries and people - Were those who attacked the US Capitol in 2021 loyal patriots or the brainwashed puppets of a power-hungry demagogue?

platform (noun): the policies of a political party or an independent candidate, esp as expressed during an election campaign - If a party's platform includes raising taxes, it's unlikely to win an election.

plutocracy (noun): a country or government controlled by the wealthy, either directly or indirectly - After gaining independence from our colonial masters, we became a plutocracy rather than a proper democracy.

policy (noun): a plan that a political party or a government department promises to put into action - The Republican Party says it's developing a new education policy.

political correctness (noun): the effort to challenge language and acts that express dislike or prejudice towards people of certain races, genders, ethnicities, sexual preferences, etc. - Some conservatives see political correctness as a threat to their right to be prejudiced.

political science (noun): the study of politics and systems of government - My political science course covers comparative politics, international relations and political theory.

politician (noun): a person who is elected to represent voters in a democracy - Most people around here don't trust politicians.

politics (noun): the ways power is gained, held, used and lost in a particular society - We got into politics to make the world a better place, not to make money.

politicize (verb): to use an event or an issue to change public opinion on a political party or politician - The gun lobby says anyone who expresses shock at mass shootings is politicizing them to help anti-gun politicians.

poll (noun): a survey in which many people are asked for their opinion on something - According to the latest poll, over 60% of voters intend to vote for the opposition party.

polling booth (noun): a place in which people can cast their vote in an election - Privacy is ensured in a polling booth, so nobody will know who you've voted for.

populism (noun): a political movement that targets the votes of ordinary working people by using emotive language and pretending to share their pain and frustration - A billionaire got elected by using the tricks of populism to convince millions of workers that he was one of them.

populist (adjective): related to politicians who claim to share the frustrations and anger of ordinary workers in order to get their votes - Populist politicians can turn a crowd of normal people into an angry mob. (also "populist" (noun) means someone who uses populist techniques to win votes)

prejudice (noun): a deep-seated bias against, and dislike of, a particular group of people, most often based on their race, ethnicity or sexual preference - Where did this prejudice against people with dark skin come from in the first place?

president (noun): the political leader and head of state of a republic - The French president is meeting the British prime minister next month.

prime minister (noun): the person who leads a parliamentary government - The prime minister lost the support of her own party, so they replaced her with another one.

private enterprise (noun): an economic system in which privately-owned companies create and market products and services in order to make a profit - Private enterprise works best if regulations prevent companies from exploiting their workers, damaging the environment and minimizing their taxes. (also "free enterprise")

privatize (verb): to sell a government-owned company and allow it to become a profit-seeking privately-owned company - After the government privatized our state-owned power plants, electricity prices went way up.

progressive (adjective): promoting changes in society that make life better and fairer for everyone - The Greens always have the most progressive policies. (see "liberal")

propaganda (noun): biased information that's meant to make a country, government or political system seem better or worse than it really is - Authoritarian governments use state media to spread their propaganda.

public opinion (noun): the opinions and views of the majority of people in a particular society - If your policies don't take public opinion into account, you won't win the election.

racism (noun): the belief that people of some races are better than those of other races - Can we really understand the pain that racism causes if we haven't experienced it ourselves? (also "racial prejudice")

ratify (verb): to make an agreement official by signing a document or voting to confirm it - The trade deal wasn't ratified until each country's leader had signed it.

reactionary (adjective): highly conservative and automatically reacting against progressive change in society - My uncle bored everyone to death with all his reactionary nonsense.

rebel (verb): to oppose or reject something you're expected to support - Some MPs are rebelling against their party's tax cuts. (also "rebel" (noun), as in "James was a young rebel who often got into trouble.")

real wages (noun): the true value of wages in terms of what you can buy with the money you've earned - If inflation rises but your wages don't, your real wages fall even if you're getting as much as before.

recession (noun): a period when a country's economy does badly, with falling productivity and rising unemployment - I lost my job during the recession and couldn't even pay my rent. (also see "depression")

referendum (noun): a national poll in which everyone can vote on an important issue such as a constitutional change - Have you thought about which way you'll vote in the referendum?

reform (noun): a change that improves an existing situation, such as a legal reform, educational reform, economic reform, etc. - Left-wing people want taxation reform that increases the tax that big companies pay.

representative (noun): a person who's chosen or elected by one or more people to make choices or act for them - The candidate that most of us voted for is our new representative. (see also "House of Representatives")

republic (noun): a country with an elected head of state, usually a president - The referendum shows that most of us want to live in a republic instead of a monarchy.

Republican Party (noun): the more conservative or right-wing of the two main political parties in the US - The Republican Party usually gets more votes in rural areas than the Democratic Party. (also "the GOP")

revolution (noun): a successful uprising by many people that overthrows a political or economic system and replaces it with their preferred system - The communist revolution in Cuba overthrew the right-wing government established after the coup in 1952.

rig (verb): to make something like an election, a sporting event or an exam unfair by giving one side or one person an unfair advantage - After losing, the former president falsely claimed the election was rigged.

(the) right (noun): conservative political parties or people who oppose progressive reforms - Which group wants taxes for the rich increased, the left or the right?

right-wing (adjective): of conservative people and organizations that oppose regulating business, giving welfare to the poor, reforming institutions, etc. - Which news organizations are the most right-wing?

run for office (phrase): to join a list of electoral candidates and campaign for votes - I ran for office because I wanted to make things better.

safety net (noun): help that a government gives to people in difficulty, including housing for the poor, medical care for the sick and financial help for the unemployed - Luckily our country has a good safety net for those who need it.

seat (noun): a position in something like a house of parliament, a company board, a jury, etc. - How many seats did your party win in the last election? (Note: in politics, there are seats in parliament, in Congress, in the House of Representatives, in The Senate, etc.)

senate (noun): the upper house of the two-house parliament in countries like the US, France, the Philippines, Brazil and Argentina - Legislation has to be passed by the senate before it becomes law.

senator (noun): a member of a senate - Julia has been a senator since 2020.

social justice (noun): the idea that everyone should have the same rights and opportunities regardless of their class, race, religion, gender or sexuality - Social justice legislation has begun to reduce inequality for some groups. (Note: a "social justice warrior" is someone who fights for social justice)

social welfare (noun): support that a government provides to people in need - Countries that spend lots of money on social welfare are sometimes called welfare states.

socialism (noun): a political and economic system that ensures that a country's wealth is shared fairly and that essential services are provided by the government instead of profit-seeking companies - Is socialism fairer than capitalism?

state (noun): 1. a country and its government's administration 2. one region of a country with its own state legislature, laws and elected representatives - One of the world's most powerful states¹ is the United States² of America.

(the) State Duma (noun): the lower house of the two-house Federal Assembly of Russia - All the elected members of the State Duma serve for a period of five years.

statesman (noun): an experienced political leader who is respected for his understanding and wisdom - We desperately need more great statesmen like Nelson Mandela. (Note: the female equivalent is "stateswoman")

strike (noun): a time during which workers stop working to force employers to improve their pay or working conditions - Railway workers are going on strike next week if they don't get a pay rise.

surplus (noun): a situation in which a government spends less than the amount it receives as revenue during a certain period - This year's surplus will help reduce the deficit that's built up over the years.

terrorism (noun): the use of extreme violence such as shooting and bombing to achieve political goals - Terrorism of the sort that the US experienced on September 11 is very unusual. (Note: a "terrorist" is someone who's involved in terrorism)

trade union (noun): an organization of workers that tries to improve members' pay and working conditions - Right-wing governments often pass laws that limit the power of trade unions. (also "union")

(the) Treasury (noun): a government department that takes care of public money and oversees taxation, treasury accounts and national budgets - One of the Treasury's jobs is to produce and issue the nation's banknotes and coins.

tyranny (noun): a brutal government that uses violence and fear to control its own people - The people couldn't stand living under a tyranny any longer. (Note: a "tyrant" is the person who controls a tyrannical state)

unemployed (adjective): out of work, or not having a job - My brother has been unemployed for months.

unionize (verb): to organize a group of workers doing the same type of work into a trade union - The government made it illegal for workers to unionize.

(the) United States Capitol (noun): the building in Washington, D.C. in which the US Congress meets - I could hardly believe it when the United States Capitol was attacked by the president's own supporters. (also "The Capitol" or "the Capitol Building")

upper class (noun): the social class with the highest status and the most money and power - He speaks like someone from the upper class, but he's really from the working class. (Note: the opposite of "lower class" or "working class")

upper house (noun): the smaller house of a two-house parliament, often called the Senate, that reviews legislation passed by the lower house - Did you know the UK has an unelected upper house called the House of Lords?

veto (verb): to use official power or authority to stop something from happening - In some countries the head of state can veto legislation.

vote (verb): to show which person you want to win an election, most often by marking a piece of paper or using a voting machine - Have you decided who you're going to vote for in the election yet?(also "vote" (noun) as in "How many votes did the Liberal Party win by?")

wedge issue (US noun): a divisive issue that a political party uses to draw supporters from another party - The Republican Party has made gun control a wedge issue to attract traditional Democrat voters.

welfare state (noun): a state that takes care of the welfare of its citizens by providing free health care, free education and benefits to the elderly, the disabled, the unemployed and others needing support - People in welfare states like Sweden and Norway don't have much to worry about, do they?

Western (adjective): of European countries and places that Europeans took from indigenous people, such as the USA, Canada and Australia - Even though they're in Asia, settler Australians say they live in a Western country. (also "The West")

(the) White House (noun): a building in Washington D.C. in which US presidents live and work while in office - The West Wing of the White House is where the US president's "Oval Office" is located.

white privilege (noun): the privileges that white people in some countries have simply because of their skin colour - Racism will continue until the reality of white privilege is acknowledged.

white supremacy (noun): the racist belief that white people are superior to black people and should have power over them - White kids are being targeted by websites promoting white supremacy. (also "white supremacist" (noun) as in "Have you ever met a white supremacist?")

women's rights (noun): rights for women that are equal to those of men, including equal pay - Our panel on women's rights will discuss equal educational and employment opportunities for women.

(the) working class (noun): people from the lowest and least powerful social class, most of whom have low-paying jobs and don't own property - In Britain, most punk bands were from the working class. (also "lower class" and "the proletariat")

xenophobia (noun): a strong dislike or fear of people from other countries, including immigrants - He says he's patriotic, but it's more like xenophobia. (also "xenophobic" (adjective) as in "White supremacists are xenophobic.")

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This glossary covers terms that can be used when talking or writing about politics and related topics, with definitions and example sentences.

# data[].attributes.headline
HOT!!! Grammar review and interactive activities

# data[].attributes.subject
HOT!!! Grammar review and interactive activities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Complete list of B2 grammar contents

This is a list of all the grammar topics covered in level A1. But if you want to learn B2 grammar, we recommend studying the topics in the order that they appear in: Grammar points " B2 Grammar lessons and exercises.

Past tenses

Future

B2 Future forms - expressing future time
B2 Other ways to express future - be about to, be due to, etc.
B2 Future in the past

Modals, the imperative, etc .

B2 Modal verbs - permission, obligation, prohibition, necessity
B2 Speculation and deduction - modal verbs and expressions
B2 Verbs of the senses
B2 Get - different meanings

Conditionals, if, wish, etc.

B2 All conditionals - mixed conditionals, alternatives to if, inversion
B2 Mixed conditionals - If I were you, I wouldn't have done it
B2 Wish, rather, if only, it's time - unreal uses of past tenses
B2 Unless, even if, provided, as long as, etc. - other expressions in conditionals

Passive

B2 Distancing - expressions and passive of reporting verbs
B2 Passive verbs with two objects

-ing and the infinitive

B2 Verb + object + infinitive/gerund - verb patterns
B2 Gerunds and infinitives - complex forms

Articles, nouns, pronouns, and determiners.

B2 Reflexive and reciprocal pronouns
B2 Generic pronouns - common-gender pronouns
B2 Compound nouns and possessive forms
B2 Possessive 's with time expressions - Two hours' walk

Relative clauses, relative pronouns and adverbs

B2 Relative clauses - defining and non-defining

B2 There and it - preparatory subjects

Auxiliary verbs

Adjectives and adverbs

B2 Inversion with negative adverbials - adding emphasis

Conjunctions and clauses

B2 Clauses of contrast, purpose, reason and result
B2 Discourse markers - linking words
B2 Participle clauses

Word order

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Table of grammar contents - B2 - Test-English

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Check out our complete list of grammar contents for level B2. In this list you will find the links to all the grammar lessons. In each grammar lesson there are at least three exercises and a complete explanation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Our long-running series of topical discussion and new vocabulary, brought to you by your favourite BBC Learning English presenters.

From the archives

All 6 Minute English programmes pre-September 2014 can be found here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our long-running series of topical discussion and new vocabulary, brought to you by your favourite BBC Learning English presenters. All 6 Minute English programmes pre-September 2014 can be found here.

# data[].attributes.body
mrsbajon@yahoo.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
As Brazil bans Elon Musk’s X, who will speak up for free speech?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Free expression has become a culture war, and those who should defend it are staying quiet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Skip to main content

Filed under:

There are so many ways to make a difference, even when your time is tight.

Understand the news with

Today, Explained

Listen now in app or on public radio

Chaos at OpenAI

It's been a wild few days at OpenAI, whose board fired CEO Sam Altman on Friday only to rehire him late Tuesday. Vox reporter Sigal Samuel explains what happened at the company behind ChatGPT - and what it tells us about the future of AI.

The Latest

Filed under:

A comprehensive guide to the basics of the world's most controversial conflict.

Subscribe Now

Barack Obama on AI, free speech, and the future of the internet

President Obama sits down with The Verge's Nilay Patel

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Vox is a general interest news site for the 21st century. Its mission: to help everyone understand our complicated world, so that we can all help shape it. In text, video and audio, our reporters explain politics, policy, world affairs, technology, culture, science, the climate crisis, money, health and everything else that matters.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Que vous vouliez enrichir votre vocabulaire pour voyager bientôt, ou réussir votre prochaine dissertation en anglais, cette liste de vocabulaire anglais vous donne l'essentiel pour développer votre expression écrite.

Structurer un texte : liste de mots anglais

Furthermore : de plus

In addition : de plus

Moreover : de plus

Besides : par ailleurs

Likewise : de même manière

Indeed - In truth : en effet

In fact : en fait

Also : aussi

As well : également

Foremost : avant tout

First, Second, Third, Finally

Firstly, Secondly, Thirdly

→ 50 mots de liaison en anglais

Donner un exemple : liste de mots anglais

For example : par exemple

For instance : par exemple

In particular : en particulier

Particularly : particulièrement

Specifically : spécifiquement

To illustrate : pour illustrer

To demonstrate : pour démontrer

Cause : liste de mots anglais

Since : puisque

Because : parce que

Because of : à cause de

Due to : à cause de

For : car

For the reason that : pour la raison que

As : comme

Whereby : par lequel

Conséquence : liste de mots anglais

Accordingly - because of the reason given

Consequently : en conséquence

Hence : d'où

So : donc

Therefore : par conséquent

Thus : ainsi

Thusly - In the way indicated

Thence - From that fact or reason or as a result

Therefrom - From that circumstance or source

Thereof - Of or concerning this or that, From that circumstance or source

Corollary - A practical consequence that follows naturally, " blind jealousy is a frequent corollary of passionate love "

Conclusion : liste de mots anglais

Eventually : finalement (attention aux faux amis : eventually signifie bien " pour finir, finalement, enfin ", et non " éventuellement ").

For the aforementioned reasons : pour les raisons déjà mentionnées

For the aforementioned reasons, there is no doubt that

To sum up the foregoing,

Given these facts : compte tenu de ces faits

In conclusion : en conclusion

In closing : en conclusion

To conclude : pour conclure

Décrire et illustrer : liste de mots anglais

vivid

portray

depict

exhibit

illustrate

expose

present

paint a portrait

limn - Trace the shape of, make a portrait of

delineate

represent

demonstrate

constitute - Form or compose

embodied - (adj) Expressed by

embody - (v) Represent or express in tangible form

embodiment

Prouver : liste de mots anglais

· manifest - Provide evidence for; stand as proof of
· attest - Provide evidence for
· testify - Provide evidence for
· certify - Provide evidence for
· endorse, indorse - Give support or one's approval to
· shew - Establish the validity of something, as by an example, explanation or experiment
· establish
· instance - (v) Clarify by giving an example of
· exemplify - (v) Clarify by giving an example of

Comparer : liste de mots anglais

· Whereas
· In comparison
· In contrast
· However
· Although
· On the other hand
· Likewise
· Similarly
· But
· Yet
· Withal - Despite anything to the contrary (usually following a concession)
· Withal - Together with this
· Nevertheless - Despite anything to the contrary
· Nonetheless - Despite anything to the contrary
· Notwithstanding - Despite anything to the contrary
· Even so - Despite anything to the contrary
· All the same - Despite anything to the contrary

Le temps : liste de mots anglais

· After
· Before
· Currently
· During
· Eventually
· Finally
· First, Second, etc.
· Formerly
· Immediately
· Initially
· Lastly
· Later
· Meanwhile
· Next
· Once
· Previously
· Simultaneously
· Soon
· Subsequently
· Subsequent - Following in time and order
· Hitherto, Heretofore - Used in negative statement to describe a situation that has existed up to this point or up to the present time, "The sun hasn't rose hitherto."
· In due time
· Henceforth

Ce qui est certain : liste de mots anglais

· Truly
· Sincerely
· Genuinely
· Surely
· Rightfully
· Absolutely
· Indubitably
· Certainly
· Without doubt
· Needless to say

Ce qui est possible : liste de mots anglais

· Most likely
· More likely
· Possibly
· Probably
· Dubitable - Open to doubt or suspicion
· Dubious - Distressed with uncertainty or doubt

Résumer : liste de mots anglais

· Overall
· To summarize
· In summary
· To sum up
· Paraphrased
· Briefly
· In brief
· Summing up
· To put it briefly
· précis - A sketchy summary, Make a summary (of)
· synopsis - A sketchy summary
· aperçu - A short synopsis

A condition que : liste de mots anglais

· provision, proviso - A stipulated condition
· stipulate - Specify as a condition or requirement in a contract
· given
· if
· whether
· whenever
· when
· while
Deuxième partie de notre liste de 300 mots pour enrichir son vocabulaire en anglais.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
300 mots de Vocabulaire anglais - partie 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Que vous vouliez enrichir votre vocabulaire pour voyager bientôt, ou réussir votre prochaine dissertation en anglais, cette liste de vocabulaire anglais vous donne l'essentiel pour développer votre expression écrite.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Inclusive Minds is a collective for people who are passionate about inclusion, diversity, equality and accessibility in children’s literature, and are committed to changing the face of children’s books.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
ecently it was announced that the novels of Roald Dahl, the notoriously bigoted but gifted and enduringly popular children's author, had been edited to eliminate words, phrases and sentiments that readers might find upsetting.

Novels such as The Witches, Matilda, and James and the Giant Peach have been cleansed of negative references to a character's appearance, race or gender. "Enormously fat" had been changed to "enormous", "mothers" and "fathers" to the more gender-neutral "parents". The adjective "black" was eliminated, even in reference to objects. Jokes were explained, passages modified to assure the reader that Dahl's snarky humor was all in good fun.

Dahl died in 1990. The changes were made by his estate in partnership with Inclusive Minds, an organization that promotes diversity in books for children. Plans were made to market the doctored books as providing a more reader-friendly experience. Parents could replace their "nasty" old copies of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory with a "nicer" edition.

Just to be clear: I think it's wrong to rewrite the words of an author, living or dead, without the author's permission. Writers work hard to get their sentences right. Maybe Dahl preferred the sound of "enormously fat" to the sound of "enormous". Writers are grateful when a friend or an editor spots factual mistakes, repetitions, typos. There's a great quote from Isaac Babel: words go into hiding on the page and you can no longer see them.

Rewriting Dahl, after his death, is a minimalist version of painting clothes on the bodies in the Sistine chapel

Suggestions for improvement are welcome, in a book's larval stage. But going in there and mucking around without permission should be the eighth deadly sin. Not to compare The BFG with Michelangelo's masterpiece, but rewriting Dahl, after his death, is a minimalist version of painting clothes on the bodies in the Sistine chapel.

If the writer has used language that has, for all the right reasons, gone out of use, it's important to tell young readers that people used to say things and think about other people in ways that were wrong. We no longer use those words, we no longer subscribe to those stereotypes. If Dahl says a character is ugly, it's a teachable moment. By the time kids are old enough to read these books, they have probably heard the word ugly, possibly even said it. We can talk about the word and its uses (oil spills are ugly, right?) and the pain it can inflict. But should we pretend the word never existed?

Let's not ask if "enormous" is really less hurtful than "fat". Is it less cruel for the schoolyard bullies to call a child enormous? Let's ignore the question of whether a child will become a bully, a misogynist, a racist or a serial killer after reading a Roald Dahl novel. If I were looking for where trouble starts, I'd check the families before the bookshelves.

Oh, and let's not ask what children actually like. Lately, in our town, the first-graders were begging to go see the horror film M3GAN. Children aren't stupid. They know when something seems preachy and false. They can spot a euphemism miles away. One reason they enjoy Dahl's novels is because they are subversive, siding with the kids in that primal rebellion: the children versus the grownups.

A sentence was added to The Witches - who are revealed to be bald beneath their wigs - explaining that there are many reasons why a woman might wear a wig, and that it's not a bad thing. It's the kind of sentence that loses readers. When you're reading to a group of kids, you can watch their attention drift away and never come back.

And where will all this end? If children are traumatized by the word ugly, how will they feel at the end of Hans Christian Andersen's The Red Shoes, when the little girl gets her feet chopped off as the only cure for obsessive dancing? What about the fairy tales or myths in which children are cooked and served to their unsuspecting parents? Let's change the ethnicity of Shylock, of Oliver Twist. Othello will be tricky. Those axe murders of the old women in Crime and Punishment might need another look.

Disney has rewritten fairy tales and children's classics, rarely for the better. But we expect the film to diverge from the original. The book is still the book - or should be.

(Full disclosure: I've watched the 1996 film version of Matilda probably 15 times, with two generations of kids. It is one of my favorite films. I also liked the musical.)

Fortunately, the announcement of the Dahl revision generated considerable heat from some of the writer's notable fans - among them British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak. The plan was reworked, and the books will continue to be available in the familiar versions, bad words and all. Cue the sigh of relief. A plot to saddle an author with an unwanted co-author has been foiled. For now.

What was behind it, anyway? Several writers, among them Christian Lorentzen and Lincoln Michel, have pointed to that rarest of motives: money. The tidying up of Dahl's work was a kind of rebranding, a marketing ploy designed to protect valuable intellectual property, and a wise move for Netflix, which has acquired the rights to Dahl's work. That seems likely, but there is also the fact that someone recognized a market for the retrofitted model, a demographic likely to spring for the "healthier" product.

This kind of revision mirrors, in many ways, the educational theories of Ron DeSantis and the extreme right

Perhaps this seems too far a reach. But it's occurred to me that this kind of revision - rewriting a published work to reflect and enforce certain assumptions about what young people should be protected from - mirrors, in many ways, the educational theories of the Florida governor, Ron DeSantis, and the extreme right.

Although far apart on the political spectrum, both groups of censors - let's call them that - pursue tighter control over what kids read, often at the expense of truth. Both are attempting to edit and revise history. With their animosity toward critical race theory, the hard right would essentially like to deny that slavery existed. No reason to feel guilty! The changes that almost altered Dahl novels would have had young readers believing that people never said fat or ugly. People were always kindly and nice, just as they are today.

We don't want our children and grandchildren exposed, before they need to be, to the horrors of the not-nice world. But we also don't want them to get accustomed to being lied to. Why not trust our kids with the truth?

Roald Dahl wrote books powered by imagination and wit, alive with characters who stay with us. That's why he's still read with such pleasure. Like most of us, he was far from perfect. But he had stories he wanted to tell us, novels he labored to write in his own words and in his own particular way.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Yes, Roald Dahl was a bigot. But that's no excuse to re-write his books | Francine Prose

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The changes go beyond removing one or two offensive words - they're hamfisted and tin-eared exercises in bowdlerism

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Elon Musk's Neuralink implants brain chip in first human

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
AI could 'supercharge' election disinformation, US official says | BBC News

# data[].attributes.body
Tremplin Concours Sciences Po Tout en un 2024

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rushdie Defends Charlie Hebdo, Free Speech

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
I'm part of Windrush and am returning to Jamaica after 50 years

# data[].attributes.body
"As a woman with an opinion and the fearlessness to voice that opinion, it gets very tiring when the only retort is to tell me how irrelevant I am. I am relevant because I exist, and because I am a human being. No one is irrelevant. And no one can take away my voice."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | The Worst Midnight Email From the Boss, Ever

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Musk is pushing a prepandemic mind-set that some bosses may long for but many employees are determined never to go back to.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Twitter is facing fresh uncertainty amid a growing exodus of top management and reports that mass layoffs and major changes to the platform could be coming within days.

The company's advertising and marketing chiefs have recently announced their departures, as well as the chief people and diversity officer, the general manager for core technologies, the head of product and vice-president of global sales. Last week, Elon Musk fired the CEO, Parag Agrawal, the chief financial officer, Ned Segal, and the legal affairs and policy chief, Vijaya Gadde, shortly after taking over the company.

Sarah Personette, the chief customer officer and ad boss who had said she was looking forward to working with Musk, tweeted on Tuesday that she had resigned, adding to advertisers' uncertainty over how the social media company will change under its new owner.

Dalana Brand, the chief people and diversity officer, announced on Tuesday in a LinkedIn post that she had also resigned last week. The general manager for core technologies, Nick Caldwell, confirmed his departure on Twitter, changing his profile bio to "former Twitter exec" by Monday night.

The chief marketing officer, Leslie Berland, Twitter's head of product, Jay Sullivan, and its vice-president of global sales, Jean-Philippe Maheu, have also left, a person with knowledge of the matter told Reuters. It was not immediately clear whether they quit or were asked to leave.

Reports about job cuts have swirled since even before Musk officially took over. The latest report from Bloomberg said on Wednesday that Twitter's new billionaire owner would cut about 3,700 jobs - amounting to half of Twitter's workforce, in order to reduce costs, and would also ask workers to return to the office. The outlet further reported that Musk planned to start charging for Twitter "blue check mark" verification by next week.

Multiple employees told Reuters they continue to receive little communication about the future of the company. Twitter cancelled a check-in call last week as well as an all-staff meeting that was scheduled for Wednesday.

Meanwhile, Musk's team plans to meet with advertisers in New York next week as the company's increasingly skittish customers raise alarms about the potential for harmful content to appear next to their ads.

Hateful content has risen dramatically since Musk's takeover. Use of the N-word has increased by nearly 500% on Twitter, according to the Network Contagion Research Institute, which identifies "cyber-social threats".

A coalition of more than 40 advocacy organizations including the NAACP and Free Press sent an open letter to Twitter's top 20 advertisers on Tuesday, asking them to pull their ads if Musk guts content moderation on the platform.

Mediabrands, a unit of ad holding company IPG, has advised its clients to pause advertising on Twitter for the next week until the company gives more details about its plans to protect trust and safety on the platform, Reuters reported, according to a source familiar with the matter. IPG works with major advertisers such as Coca-Cola.

Musk has attempted to reassure advertisers. "Twitter's commitment to brand safety is unchanged," he tweeted on Monday.

He previously said he would reverse Twitter's ban on Donald Trump, who was kicked off because of concerns he could incite further violence after the insurrection at the US Capitol last year. But this week, Musk indicated that no banned accounts would be reinstated until at least after the US midterms.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Twitter exodus: company faces murky future as top managers flee the nest

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Twitter is facing fresh uncertainty amid a growing exodus of top management and reports that mass layoffs and major changes to the platform could be coming within days. The company's advertising and marketing chiefs have recently announced their departures, as well as the chief people and diversity officer, the general manager for core technologies, the head of product and vice-president of global sales.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Inside Twitter as 'mass exodus' of staffers throws platform's future into uncertainty | CNN Business

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Was there a Twitter exodus or just a Twitter pause? Did it even matter? New data takes a look at how a range of "Twitter alternatives" have fared in the months following Elon Musk's acquisition of the popular microblogging network, now that the burst of new installs driven by his takeover has tapered off. The data indicates that many apps continue to grow to a lesser degree while other apps have seen growth decline. But it also shows that Twitter itself was never significantly impacted, at least in terms of new app installs.

Downloads, of course, are only one window into the overall picture. But it's a measurement that can be assessed independently, using third-party data, instead of relying on companies to report their own metrics - many of which don't.

Interest surrounding a group of Twitter alternatives began in late October, when the Tesla and SpaceX exec Elon Musk officially closed on his $44 billion Twitter acquisition. Continual chaos on the microblogging site has been the rule ever since. Amid controversial policy decisions and overnight changes, some subset of the Twitter audience decided to exit to other sites to get their social fix - or at least experiment with different options for a time.

By November, Twitter alternatives like Mastodon as well as established social platforms like Tumblr were seeing rapid and sizeable increases in both downloads and active users, reports found.

Now that the dust has settled - well, Twitter is still chaotic, but we're used to it now, I suppose - - it's worth checking back in to see how some of these Twitter alternatives are doing today.

The data, curated for TechCrunch by app intelligence firm data.ai, is not a comprehensive look at the full Twitter alternative app landscape. For obvious reasons, it doesn't take into account some of the buzzy but yet-to-publicly-launch apps that have raised funding for their Twitter-like experiences, such as Post, T2 and Spill. For the same reason, it does not include Bluesky, the decentralized alternative Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey has in the works. A few smaller apps and Trump's Truth Social are also not included.

However, the firm did take a look at some of the more formidable challengers for Twitter users' attention, including the Fediverse-connected app from Mastodon and others.

Recently, a Wired report indicated that Mastodon's growth spurt was over, as active users had declined by over 1 million. They suggested that many Mastodon newcomers decided the app was not a viable Twitter replacement. The platform had grown over two months to 2.5 million monthly active users, up from 380,000, the report noted, but it dropped down to 1.4 million active users in January. However, as Techdirt's Mike Masnick pointed out, the Fediverse as a whole - that is, the group of interconnected servers where Mastodon along with other apps reside - had grown from 600,000 active users in the pre-Musk era to now around 2.6 million. Hardly a slump, he said.

Data.ai's analysis of worldwide app installs across iOS and Android also indicates Mastodon's app is still growing, though to a lesser degree.

Its installs are down quite a bit from November's peak of 2.9 million monthly downloads. It still managed to gain 180,000 new installs in January - that's 169,000 more installs than it had in September 2022. Sure, it's not enough to topple Twitter by any means, but it's not yet in decline. (Of course, we understand that app downloads don't equate to active users, as Mastodon's first-party data shows. Downloads are only a signal of user interest, but many apps never make it beyond the first launch, if they are opened at all.)

Mastodon's mobile traction is more complicated as there's a wide and growing ecosystem of third-party clients for users to try, in addition to the web. One popular alternative to Mastodon's official app is Ivory, the newly launched client from Tapbots, whose Twitter app Tweetbot was killed by Musk's Twitter API changes. Ivory is only a few weeks old, so it's not a fit for this analysis, but it may have siphoned off some of Mastodon's downloads for a brief period during its launch. To date, Ivory is nearing 100K installs, data.ai's early estimates indicate.

While Mastodon continues to hang in there, other Twitter alternatives have seen their download growth stall or slow.

Reddit and two more politicized alternatives, Tribel and GETTR, have seen download growth decline since September 2022. Reddit's downloads dropped by 20,000 since September, while left-wing Tribel and right-wing GETTR's downloads declined by 36,900 and 42,000, respectively.

To be fair, Reddit is still a massive app, adding a whopping 4.2 million new installs in January, down from the 4.7 million it had during November's peak. For this reason, it's not clear that Twitter's chaos had much impact on its growth or decline, beyond perhaps a slight uptick in installs as people decided to spend their free time elsewhere for a bit.

Tribel and GETTR, meanwhile, are not faring as well. The former saw only 1,100 total new installs in January, while the latter saw 48,000.

That 48,000 is far more than Hive, another Twitter alternative that quickly gained traction after Musk's Twitter takeover.

The social app is more of a cross between Myspace, Twitter and Instagram, and appealed to a young audience. Hive soon found itself in the top 20 on the U.S. App Store in November after seeing a million signups, it claimed at the time. But Hive later had to shut down for an extended period to rewrite its software in the wake of serious privacy and security concerns.

Data.ai's figures seem to support Hive's claims of a November boost, however, as it saw 1.1 million new installs that month, up from just 300 (!!) the month before. Hive is still growing, though only slightly. It had 10,700 more installs in January than it did in September 2022 - but that's only because it had just 300 installs that month (as it did in October).

Two other apps that many believed would benefit from Twitter's upheaval were Tumblr and Discord.

As it turns out, Twitter's changes didn't seem to play a role in the latter's growth or decline. In fact, Discord installs dropped from 8.3 million in October 2022 to 8.0 million in November, even as the other apps were booming. It then grew installs again to 8.5 million in December and to 9.7 million last month. Similar to Reddit, this movement doesn't seem to reflect either a bump from a Twitter exodus or a drop from newcomers who later abandoned the service. Discord is fine on its own.

Tumblr's figures are more interesting, though. The company itself reported having gained some traction from the Twitter exodus. Automattic CEO Matt Mullenweg - whose company acquired Tumblr from Verizon in 2019 - told The Atlantic that Tumblr's iOS downloads were up 62% the week after Musk took over Twitter.

Looking at iOS and Android data combined, as data.ai's figures do, there's definitely a November bump to be seen. Tumblr gained 880,000 new downloads in November, up from 450,000 and 500,000 in September and October, respectively. That trend has normalized since, though Tumblr is still slightly higher than the prior baseline, with 510,000 December installs and 480,000 in January. The company also made waves in November, when Mullenweg announced Tumblr would soon add support for ActivityPub, the decentralized social networking protocol powering the Fediverse.

Finally, as for Twitter...have you heard the expression "any press is good press?"

It seems Twitter has benefited from the increased attention - or the rubbernecking, perhaps.

Worldwide mobile app installs are up by 3.7 million in January compared with September 2022. Notably, Twitter installs didn't decline in November. Instead, it gained new downloads even as some of its users seemingly left for other apps. In other words, any Twitter exodus may have been offset by new Twitter arrivals. Active user data would tell a better story here, but Twitter is no longer a publicly traded company and it's not clear that Musk is analyzing user data as Twitter had before, which would allow for a direct comparison. But his claims of a burst of November signups could be directionally true, as the month saw higher app installs than October.

Data.ai found that Twitter grew from 16.6 million installs in October to 18.6 million in November as Musk took over, then dropped in December to 16.9 million. Last month, it again jumped back to 18.6 million installs. That means it has the same 24.8% download growth rate it had in November.

The broader set of Twitter alternatives, meanwhile, grew downloads by 35.6% in November and this dropped to 8.1% in January.

As it turns out, there's no real winner yet in terms of Twitter alternatives.

Larger apps like Reddit, Discord and Tumblr continue to have sizable user bases and will continue to grow, but they haven't exactly picked off a chunk of Twitter's user base for themselves. Smaller apps have either floundered or returned to normal.

If anything, the biggest boost to the wider ecosystem hinges on new user awareness of the Fediverse and Mastodon, even if the app hasn't transformed into a dominant force. Fediverse growth could ultimately be a trend that plays out over a longer period of time than just a few months post-Twitter acquisition, as more apps join the decentralization movement.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Is the 'exodus' over? Here's how Twitter alternatives have fared since Elon Musk's acquisition

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
New data takes a look at how a range of "Twitter alternatives" have fared in the months following Musk's acquisition of the popular microblogging network.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Collapse, stagger or thrive? What next for the Commonwealth?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Born from the ashes of empire, the Commonwealth has a new head but can it find a new role?, asks Race Correspondent Nadine White

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
ur ancestors were better prepared for moments like this. The inevitable corollary of having witnessed the longest reign in British history is that only a tiny fraction of us have any memory of a monarch's passing - and such memories that do exist are faded, unreliable, childhood recollections.

The events of the coming days and weeks will be nothing like the royal events we do have experience of - mainly weddings and jubilees. The nation has entered a period of genuine trauma, one that will be punctuated by a series of unfamiliar rituals that, behind closed doors, have been years in the planning.

Whatever your attitude towards hereditary monarchy as an institution, it is simply not possible to be a disinterested bystander. There is no opt-out. Britain is a nation now instantly changed, both in mood and material terms - our national anthem is now suddenly God Save the King and a new head will soon be appearing on our banknotes, coins and stamps.

Although profound to us, the coming changes will be modest in historic terms. When the first Elizabeth died in 1603 the monarch of another nation, King James VI of Scotland, crossed the border and was installed on the throne. Most people regarded that settlement as a blessing, having feared the death of their Virgin Queen might plunge England into chaos or spark a war of succession.

Princess Elizabeth and Prince Philip on a Commonwealth visit to Kenya, 1952, the day before she found out her father had died. Photograph: Keystone/Getty Images

Three-and-a-half centuries later, at the time of Elizabeth II's coronation, the Labour leader and former prime minister Clement Attlee expressed his hope that what the British people were witnessing, through the thick glass screens of their flickering black-and-white televisions, was "the beginning of a new Elizabethan age no less renowned than the first". That second Elizabethan age is now over and its conclusion coincides with another of history's terminus moments.

Many of the most profound changes that are now likely to follow the passing of Queen Elizabeth II will take place beyond our shores and, in many ways, those changes are already under way.

After news of the Queen's passing was sent to the prime minster by her private secretary, Sir Edward Young, the next step in the protocol dictated that the global response centre at the Foreign Office informed representatives of the other 14 nations of which the Queen is head of state. Next to be informed were the remaining nations of the Commonwealth, the institution that became the great passion of the Queen's life and reign.

It was always fitting that a monarch for whom the Commonwealth came to mean so much became Queen while overseas, in a British colony. That colony, the Kenya of 1952, was then dominated by around 10,000 Europeans who controlled the government, the economy and the best land, particularly in the so-called "White Highlands" in the centre of the country.

The Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William on their royal visit to the Caribbean. Photograph: Tim Rooke/Rex/Shutterstock

Kenya's break from the empire, which took place over the years immediately after the Queen's accession, was to be among the most violent in Britain's long march from imperial greatness, a stuttering, involuntary journey that began with the independence of India in 1947.

The "wind of change" that eventually brought about the end of British rule in Kenya was already blowing when Elizabeth II came to the throne. Within a decade of her coronation not just Kenya but also Sudan, Malaya, Ghana, Somaliland, Nigeria, Cyprus, Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica, Tanganyika, Zanzibar, Sierra Leone, Kuwait and Uganda had all achieved independence.

Today, 70 years later, another wind is being felt across the Commonwealth; a mass awakening to the realities and legacies of imperialism and slavery. New scholarship and new debates around history are changing attitudes in many of the 54 "independent and equal nations" of the Commonwealth - countries that are collectively home to 2.5 billion people, most of them not white and 60% of them under the age of 29.

Yet this shift of consciousness, that has long been bubbling under the surface, had not, until recently, been recognised nor understood within the walls of Buckingham Palace. The catastrophic tour of the Caribbean undertaken by the Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge in March of this year starkly revealed the great gulf that exists between the monarchy and many of the people of that Commonwealth - particularly the young.

The tour was described by Palace insiders as a "charm offensive". By its conclusion, there had been little in the way of charm but no shortage of offence. Historians might well look back at that tour as the first portent of the age in which we now find ourselves; the post-Elizabethan age.

Little about William and Kate's Caribbean tour - the fruit, it is said, of years of careful preparation - would have felt out of place in any number of the tours made by the late Queen in the first decades of her reign. And therein lies the problem.

While the palace has clung to tradition - the 1960s Land Rover used by the Queen on her trip to Jamaica half a century ago, preserved and polished like a holy relic - the world has changed. That such a tour and the images that flowed from it were thought appropriate, in the age of Black Lives Matter, the felling of colonial-era statues and the Windrush scandal, indicates an institution out of step. However as long as British politicians continue to nurse puerile dreams of Empire 2.0 and "buccaneering Britain", the monarchy can hardly be singled out for being trapped in their delusions.

In the early 21st century, there are some aspects of the past that can no longer be avoided or papered over, even by monarchs. In the 1950s, little was known and little had been written about Britain's involvement in the Atlantic slave trade and slavery. Now that history is out of the bag, taught in schools in Britain and, more importantly, in the Caribbean. What that history reveals is that the monarchy itself, not just the British state, has a moment of reckoning ahead of it as three monarchs - Elizabeth I, Charles II and James II - were directly involved in the trade in enslaved Africans and two others, George III and William IV, defended the system. Another royal tour of the Caribbean and Americas, the site of 13 of the Commonwealth's 54 nations, feels unimaginable until Britain and its head of state are able to confront these realities. Judging by recent speeches, King Charles III seems to grasp these realities.

The great opportunity that was gifted to the monarchy, and that many hoped would enable it to perform the cultural equivalent of a "great leap forward", was the marriage of Prince Harry to Meghan Markle; a woman whose presence and voice had the potential make the monarchy feel more fit for the 21st century and enable it to look more like modern Britain and the modern Commonwealth. But Meghan was slaughtered by the sharks of the British tabloid press and Harry has become - literally - the prince across the water.

It is perhaps testimony to the enormous respect in which Elizabeth II was held that the coming wave of challenge and reassessment was partially postponed until after her passing. The decision by Barbados, last November, to become a republic is a sign that the pressure for change is now reaching a critical moment. There is no escape from history for either the new monarch or the Commonwealth, the institution the late Queen did so much, for so long, to hold together.
David Olusoga is an Observer columnist, professor of public history at Manchester University and a broadcaster and documentarian

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
David Olusoga on the Queen, the Commonwealth and the monarchy's future

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ur ancestors were better prepared for moments like this. The inevitable corollary of having witnessed the longest reign in British history is that only a tiny fraction of us have any memory of a monarch's passing - and such memories that do exist are faded, unreliable, childhood recollections.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
King Charles has hailed the "extraordinary potential" of the Commonwealth and spoken of the "imperative to act" on its ideals to improve the lives of its 2.6 billion people, in his first Commonwealth Day message as monarch.

Delivered from the great pulpit at Westminster Abbey, Charles recalled his mother's "particular pride" in Commonwealth Day, and said: "The Commonwealth has been a constant in my own life, and yet its diversity continues to amaze and inspire me."

He told the 2,000-strong congregation of senior royals, politicians and dignitaries: "It's near boundless potential as a force for good in the world demands our highest ambition; its sheer scale challenges us to unite and be bold."

Members of the royal family including the Prince and Princess of Wales gathered with the king inside the abbey, which in two months' time will host the coronation.

Delivering the address in person from the abbey marked a departure from previous messages from Queen Elizabeth II, which were traditionally pre-recorded.

This year's Commonwealth Day theme is "forging a sustainable and peaceful common future", although it comes at a time when the royal family has enjoyed anything but a peaceful time because of turbulent relations with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

The Commonwealth Day service of 2020 was the last time the couple appeared in public with the royal family before their departure from the UK.

The Sussexes have yet to confirm whether they will attend the coronation on 6 May but have received email correspondence about it from Charles's office.

King Charles III and Camilla, the Queen Consort meet with choristers after the Commonwealth Day service at Westminster Abbey. Photograph: WPA/Getty Images

Charles was made head of the 56-nation Commonwealth after his mother successfully lobbied for him to take on the role.

During Monday's service, a Commonwealth flag for peace was carried in the procession of Commonwealth members' flags to mark 2023 as the Commonwealth year of peace. The service included musical performances from the saxophonist YolanDa Brown, the West End stars Roshani Abbey and Nuwan Hugh Perera, and the all-female Amalgamation choir from Cyprus.

In his address. Charles noted: " This week marks the 10th anniversary of the charter of the Commonwealth, which gives expression to our defining values: peace and justice; tolerance, respect and solidarity; care for our environment and for the most vulnerable among us.

"These are not simply ideals. In each lies an imperative to act, and to make a practical difference to the 2.6 billion people who call the Commonwealth home."

skip past newsletter promotion
Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you through the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion

He continued: "Ours is an association not just of shared values but of common purpose and joint action. In this we are blessed with the ingenuity and imagination of a third of the world's population, including one and a half billion people under the age of 30.

"Let ours be a Commonwealth that not only stands together but strives together, in restless and practical pursuit of the global common good."

Afterwards, Charles, Camilla, the Queen Consort and the attending members of the royal family entertained the Commonwealth secretary general, high commissioners, foreign affairs ministers and other members of the Commonwealth community at a Buckingham Palace reception.

Commonwealth Day was an occasion of particular pride for my beloved mother, the late queen - a treasured opportunity to celebrate our Commonwealth family, to whose service she dedicated her long and remarkable life.

In succeeding Her Majesty as head of the Commonwealth, I draw great strength from her example, together with all that I have learned from the extraordinary people I have met throughout the Commonwealth over so many years.

The Commonwealth has been a constant in my own life, and yet its diversity continues to amaze and inspire me. Its near boundless potential as a force for good in the world demands our highest ambition; its sheer scale challenges us to unite and be bold.

This week marks the 10th anniversary of the charter of the Commonwealth, which gives expression to our defining values: peace and justice; tolerance, respect and solidarity; care for our environment and for the most vulnerable among us.

These are not simply ideals. In each lies an imperative to act, and to make a practical difference in the lives of the 2.6 billion people who call the Commonwealth home.

Whether on climate change and biodiversity loss, youth opportunity and education, global health, or economic cooperation, the Commonwealth can play an indispensable role in the most pressing issues of our time. Ours is an association not just of shared values but of common purpose and joint action.

In this we are blessed with the ingenuity and imagination of a third of the world's population, including one and a half billion people under the age of 30. Our shared humanity contains such precious diversity of thought, culture, tradition and experience. By listening to each other, we will find so many of the solutions that we seek.

This extraordinary potential, which we hold in common, is more than equal to the challenges we face. It offers us unparalleled strength not merely to face the future, but to build it. Here, the Commonwealth has an incredible opportunity, and responsibility, to create a genuinely durable future - one that offers the kind of prosperity that is in harmony with nature and that will also secure our unique and only planet for generations to come.

The myriad connections between our nations have sustained and enriched us for more than seven decades. Our commitment to peace, progress and opportunity will sustain us for many more.

Let ours be a Commonwealth that not only stands together but strives together, in restless and practical pursuit of the global common good.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
King Charles hails 'extraordinary potential' of Commonwealth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
King Charles has hailed the "extraordinary potential" of the Commonwealth and spoken of the "imperative to act" on its ideals to improve the lives of its 2.6 billion people, in his first Commonwealth Day message as monarch.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Queen Elizabeth II was the queen of 15 countries

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What does ‘defund the police’ mean and does it have merit?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rishi Sunak: what challenges await Britain's new PM?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
f Rishi Sunak becomes prime minister, it will be first time in history that the occupants of No 10 Downing Street will be richer than the monarch in Buckingham Palace - and at a time when millions of Britons are struggling with a cost of living crisis.

Sunak and his wife, Akshata Murty, are sitting on a combined fortune of about £730m - roughly double the estimated £300m-£350m wealth of King Charles III and Camilla, Queen Consort.

Sunak, who earlier this year became the first frontline politician to ever be included in the Sunday Times Rich List of the UK's wealthiest people, will also almost rival the King in terms of numbers of official residences.

The former chancellor, who is vying with Boris Johnson and Penny Mordaunt to become Conservative party leader and prime minister, owns a portfolio of four properties spread across the world and valued at more than £15m.

Sunak, his wife and two daughters, Krishna and Anoushka, spend most of the week at their five-bedroom mews house in Kensington, west London, which is estimated by estate agents to be worth more than £7m.

Rishi Sunak's constituency home at Kirby Sigston in North Yorkshire. Photograph: Richard Saker/The Observer

At the weekends they retreat to a Grade II-listed Georgian manor house in the picturesque village of Kirby Sigston in his Richmond constituency in North Yorkshire. The house, which the couple bought for £1.5m before he was elected as an MP in 2015, is now worth more than £2m and has been transformed into something of a wellness retreat with a £400,000 indoor swimming pool, gym, yoga studio, hot tub and tennis court.

Soaring energy costs mean it could cost more than £14,000 a year to heat the 12-metre by 5-metre pool - almost six times the average family's energy bill.

That fortune - and Sunak's clumsiness in flaunting it - has some people asking if he is too rich to understand the day-to-day struggles of voters. Ashley Blakely, a waitress and coordinator of the Darlington People's Assembly, said it aggravated her that Sunak had "so much money to throw thousands on heating his pool and having parties when there are single parents, pensioners and working families who will freeze this winter".

Rachael Maskell, Labour MP for nearby York, has said his new pool showed that he couldn't be "more out of touch" and "as far as most people are concerned, Rishi Sunak is living on another planet".

Austin Gordon, manager of Richmondshire Leisure Trust, which runs a charity public swimming pool in nearby Richmond, said the soaring cost of energy meant its continued operation was a daily fight. "It's hard to criticise someone for spending money how they choose to," he said. "But we are struggling to keep a pool that serves thousands of local people open."

Carmel Carrick, who runs Zetland Winestore in Northallerton, the closest town to Sunak's house, said she thought Sunak should be selected to become the next PM. "Everything he predicted has pretty much happened," she said. "He warned that tax cuts would lead to rate rises. I think he knows what's what and will do a good job."

Carrick, 54, who has met Sunak several times when he has opened events in the town, said he was "a lovely guy" who had done a lot for local people and businesses. Asked about his wealth, she said: "In this world there are people with money and people without. You can't hold it against him, but you can ask that he runs a government that looks after people."

Carrick said she worried that the government has not done enough for people who are struggling with the cost of living crisis and energy bills. "As much as everyone says we're all in it together, we're not really, are we?" she said. "We have people on the streets thinking how are they going to get through the winter."

Gary Stevenson, a multimillionaire trader turned inequality campaigner, recently visited a food bank in Northallerton to highlight the inequality in Sunak's constituency. He said most people using the service didn't seem to be aware of just how rich their MP - and potential PM - is.

"People have got so much going on with their own lives, it's hard for them to know just how insanely rich their MP is," he said. "He is arguably the richest person to ever to sit in parliament, and as chancellor he oversaw the biggest increase in inequality ever."

Stevenson said he did not think that being very rich should exclude someone from being prime minister, but he said that Sunak's wealth could quickly become a flashpoint if he became prime minister and oversaw an expected "broad collapse in living standards".

Sunak's wealth - most of which comes from his wife, who is the daughter of an Indian software billionaire - was a regular talking point during the last leadership campaign and it is likely to become so again next week. His £450 Prada loafers and £180 smart coffee mug fuelled criticism that the former Winchester college pupil is out of touch.

In a podcast with the Telegraph this summer, Sunak, who made his money at investment bank Goldman Sachs and hedge funds TCI and Theleme Partners, said he was not afraid to answer questions about his fortune.

"I actually quite welcome it, to be honest," he said. "It is the opposite of annoying. Very few people bring it up with me. While I was chancellor I did town hall [meetings] very regularly with members of the public ... virtually nobody asked me about it."

However, he has repeatedly refused to answer questions about exactly how much money he has or where it is invested. Revelations that Murty claimed non-domicile status, allowing her to avoid UK tax on the £11.6m in annual dividends she collects from her father's software company Infosys, dogged him through the leadership campaign.

Sunak says he doesn't think voters care that he wore a bespoke £3,500 Henry Herbert suit or Prada shoes while touring a building site during the campaign. "Values are what are important, what I'm wearing is irrelevant to all of that."

As well the Yorkshire mansion and the Kensington mews house, the Sunaks own a flat on Old Brompton Road in west London for visiting family, and a Santa Monica beach penthouse valued at £5.5m, which the property developer describes as having "stunning views of the Santa Monica mountains" and where you "wake up to the sound of waves crashing against the shore".

However, if he wins the leadership contest - and he is the bookies' favourite to do so - Sunak plans to move back into the flat above No 10 where he lived as chancellor until a few months ago. "It would be a bit odd to not just go back there because all the wallpaper that we did is still up in that flat. That's where Margaret Thatcher lived, and that always gives me goosebumps every time."

This article was amended on 22 October 2022. An earlier version incorrectly referred to "King Charles II".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Does Rishi Sunak's £730m fortune make him too rich to be PM?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
f Rishi Sunak becomes prime minister, it will be first time in history that the occupants of No 10 Downing Street will be richer than the monarch in Buckingham Palace - and at a time when millions of Britons are struggling with a cost of living crisis.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Britain's Next Prime Minister

Rishi Sunak's ascent to the prime minister's office is a significant milestone for Britain's Indian diaspora. But for many, his immense personal wealth has made him less relatable.

Send any friend a story
As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month. Anyone can read what you share.

Give this article Give this article Give this article

Celebrating Diwali in Webley, northwest London, on Monday. As many as 1.5 million people of Indian descent live in England and Wales, making them the largest ethnic group after white Britons. Credit... Andrew Testa for The New York Times

LONDON - In northwest London, home to one of Britain's largest Hindu communities, celebrations for Diwali, a festive holiday, were well underway on Monday. Children tossed small fireworks that popped as they slammed into the sidewalk. Bright lights strung across the street twinkled overhead. Families bought sweets and candles.

But many who were gathered with their families said that they suddenly had something new to celebrate - the news that Rishi Sunak, the eldest son of a doctor and pharmacist of Indian descent, will become prime minister, the first person of color to hold Britain's highest political office.

Britain is home to a vibrant and diverse community of people with roots in India, which it ruled as a colony for nearly a century before India won independence in 1947. As many as 1.5 million people of Indian descent live in England and Wales, making them the largest ethnic group after white Britons.

That makes Mr. Sunak's triumph a significant milestone for Britain's Indian diaspora, whose long struggle against racism and prejudice is rarely a prominent issue in British politics.

"We are so proud and happy," said Hemal Joshi, 43, who lives in northwest London with his wife and son. "I've got so many messages from India already. So he has a lot of expectation now from all over the world. Let's see what he will do."

Mr. Sunak, 42, has always expressed pride in his Indian roots, and he regularly points to his upbringing as the son of immigrants. But he has not put his heritage at the center of his political message, focusing instead on his experience in finance, and the British news media has not dwelled on his ethnicity.

Instead, it is Mr. Sunak's elite education and extreme wealth that have drawn scrutiny - and become something of a political liability in a society famously divided by tensions over class.

Mr. Sunak is also a practicing Hindu, and when he took his oath of office as a member of Parliament, he did so on the Gita, a book of Hindu scripture. As chancellor of the Exchequer, he celebrated Diwali, known as the festival of lights, by putting lights outside his official residence at 11 Downing St.

"We are very proud and very excited, being Hindus from India," said Priya Gohil, who was just leaving the temple with her family in the borough of Harrow after offering Diwali prayers. "It's just very relatable."

What was less relatable to many was the air of privilege attached to him.

Mr. Sunak attended the elite Winchester College, a private boarding school in Britain, then went to Oxford University and Stanford. He made a fortune in finance, working for Goldman Sachs and two hedge funds before his political career began. He is also married to Akshata Murty, the daughter of one of India's wealthiest men.

Skepticism about his wealth has followed him throughout his bid for the leadership of the Conservative Party, though many of his predecessors have also come from privileged backgrounds. The issue remains resonant even after he emerged on Monday as the winner of the contest to lead the country.

"I think it's great that we have a person of color as the prime minister for the first time," said Shivani Dasani, 22, who was leaving a temple in northwest London. But she added, "He's a rich, upper-class man, so he can't speak for the entire community in that way."

Those concerns persisted beyond London's Indian communities. In some neighborhoods, many people were too busy finishing the workday to even know that Mr. Sunak had been chosen as prime minister. But those who did cited Mr. Sunak's sizable wealth as one of the only things they knew about him, even as they hoped he would address the problems of inflation and soaring housing prices.

"He won't know how normal people live - the working class," said Samuel Shan, who was sweeping the floor near his fruit and vegetable stall at a market in Dalston, a diverse neighborhood that has become more gentrified in recent years. "We'll see what he can do for us."

Brano Gabani, a council worker originally from Slovakia, laughed humorlessly as he noted that he had "no choice'' in the selection of Mr. Sunak. He said he did not know enough about the incoming prime minister's character to assess him. But, like many others, he pointed to slow wage growth and the rising cost of living as major issues.

"Every month we lose salary; we are more poor," he said. "I want to see him doing something, something for English people."

Narendra H. Thakrar, the chairman of the Shri Sanatan Hindu Mandir Temple in the Wembley area of London, said he believed that Mr. Sunak was the right man to steer the nation during a time of uncertainty, and that his appeal transcended any particular ethnic or religious community.

"There are many difficulties this country is facing at the moment economically, and I think that Rishi Sunak is the right person to take over as prime minister," he said. "He has proved himself to be a good chancellor, and let's hope he will do justice to the country. I am sure he will."

As he stood alongside the tan, intricately carved sandstone temple on Monday, Mr. Thakrar rejoiced in the confluence of the Diwali holiday and Mr. Sunak's victory, calling it "a great day." Mr. Sunak, he said, was "a devout Hindu and he loves his community."

Around the same time, India's prime minister, Narendra Modi, was congratulating Mr. Sunak and describing the Indian community in Britain as a "living bridge" between the two nations.

Dr. Zubaida Haque, the former executive director of the Equality Trust, a British charity, said that the pride Mr. Sunak's victory might inspire needed to be placed in context. While representation matters, "that doesn't mean that Britain has great social mobility," she said, pointing to his wealthy upbringing.

"It's still a great achievement that Rishi Sunak will get the top job in this country, but let's not pretend that racial inequality is no longer a barrier," she said.

Ms. Dasani, who was at the temple in Wembley with her family, expressed a similar sentiment, saying she believed that the earlier leadership race lost by Mr. Sunak brought to light "a lot of racism that still exists in the U.K."

She said she felt that people questioned his Britishness in a way they never did with his white counterparts.

Ms. Dasani also cited Conservative Party policies that she said were hostile to immigrants and asylum seekers. Human rights groups, for example, condemned a policy initiated under Mr. Johnson aimed at sending some refugees arriving in Britain to Rwanda.

But she said she still believed that having broader cultural representation on such a prominent stage could have a positive effect on the national psyche.

"I think there is a worry among South Asian people in the U.K. that if we are too loud about our culture people will see us as not properly British," she said. "So I think it is a good thing that he is so open about his culture and his religion."

Dr. Halima Begum, chief executive of Runnymede Trust, a research institute focusing on racial equality, called Mr. Sunak's triumph a defining moment.

"It is a poignant and symbolic moment for a grandchild of the British Empire to take up the highest office of the land," she said.

Still, Dr. Begum said that she hoped Mr. Sunak would put his skills as former chancellor to use to address problems affecting minority ethnic groups in Britain, including inflation and rising interest rates that have driven up household mortgages.

"The rest of the British public will be looking at what immediate actions Sunak will take to weather the storm," she said.

Mujib Mashal contributed reporting from New Delhi.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sunak's Ascent Inspires Pride in Indian Community

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Britain's Next Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's ascent to the prime minister's office is a significant milestone for Britain's Indian diaspora. But for many, his immense personal wealth has made him less relatable. Send any friend a story As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month.

# data[].attributes.body
the shortest-serving prime minister in British history

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Liz Truss stands down as UK prime minister

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Joe Biden, America's president, urged Israel's prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, to extend a four-day truce with Hamas, which is due to end on Monday, to allow for the release of more hostages...

Israeli forces killed eight Palestinians in the occupied West Bank...

Nearly 100 people died as a result of flooding in Somalia, according to the country's news agency...

China's industrial profits rose 2.7% year on year in October, marking a third consecutive month of growth...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Economist | World News, Economics, Politics, Business & Finance

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Authoritative global news and analysis. Offering fair-minded, fact-checked coverage of world politics, economics, business, science and tech, culture and more

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
ur ancestors were better prepared for moments like this. The inevitable corollary of having witnessed the longest reign in British history is that only a tiny fraction of us have any memory of a monarch's passing - and such memories that do exist are faded, unreliable, childhood recollections.

The events of the coming days and weeks will be nothing like the royal events we do have experience of - mainly weddings and jubilees. The nation has entered a period of genuine trauma, one that will be punctuated by a series of unfamiliar rituals that, behind closed doors, have been years in the planning.

Whatever your attitude towards hereditary monarchy as an institution, it is simply not possible to be a disinterested bystander. There is no opt-out. Britain is a nation now instantly changed, both in mood and material terms - our national anthem is now suddenly God Save the King and a new head will soon be appearing on our banknotes, coins and stamps.

Although profound to us, the coming changes will be modest in historic terms. When the first Elizabeth died in 1603 the monarch of another nation, King James VI of Scotland, crossed the border and was installed on the throne. Most people regarded that settlement as a blessing, having feared the death of their Virgin Queen might plunge England into chaos or spark a war of succession.

Princess Elizabeth and Prince Philip on a Commonwealth visit to Kenya, 1952, the day before she found out her father had died. Photograph: Keystone/Getty Images

Three-and-a-half centuries later, at the time of Elizabeth II's coronation, the Labour leader and former prime minister Clement Attlee expressed his hope that what the British people were witnessing, through the thick glass screens of their flickering black-and-white televisions, was "the beginning of a new Elizabethan age no less renowned than the first". That second Elizabethan age is now over and its conclusion coincides with another of history's terminus moments.

Many of the most profound changes that are now likely to follow the passing of Queen Elizabeth II will take place beyond our shores and, in many ways, those changes are already under way.

After news of the Queen's passing was sent to the prime minster by her private secretary, Sir Edward Young, the next step in the protocol dictated that the global response centre at the Foreign Office informed representatives of the other 14 nations of which the Queen is head of state. Next to be informed were the remaining nations of the Commonwealth, the institution that became the great passion of the Queen's life and reign.

It was always fitting that a monarch for whom the Commonwealth came to mean so much became Queen while overseas, in a British colony. That colony, the Kenya of 1952, was then dominated by around 10,000 Europeans who controlled the government, the economy and the best land, particularly in the so-called "White Highlands" in the centre of the country.

The Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William on their royal visit to the Caribbean. Photograph: Tim Rooke/Rex/Shutterstock

Kenya's break from the empire, which took place over the years immediately after the Queen's accession, was to be among the most violent in Britain's long march from imperial greatness, a stuttering, involuntary journey that began with the independence of India in 1947.

The "wind of change" that eventually brought about the end of British rule in Kenya was already blowing when Elizabeth II came to the throne. Within a decade of her coronation not just Kenya but also Sudan, Malaya, Ghana, Somaliland, Nigeria, Cyprus, Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica, Tanganyika, Zanzibar, Sierra Leone, Kuwait and Uganda had all achieved independence.

Today, 70 years later, another wind is being felt across the Commonwealth; a mass awakening to the realities and legacies of imperialism and slavery. New scholarship and new debates around history are changing attitudes in many of the 54 "independent and equal nations" of the Commonwealth - countries that are collectively home to 2.5 billion people, most of them not white and 60% of them under the age of 29.

Yet this shift of consciousness, that has long been bubbling under the surface, had not, until recently, been recognised nor understood within the walls of Buckingham Palace. The catastrophic tour of the Caribbean undertaken by the Prince William and the Duchess of Cambridge in March of this year starkly revealed the great gulf that exists between the monarchy and many of the people of that Commonwealth - particularly the young.

The tour was described by Palace insiders as a "charm offensive". By its conclusion, there had been little in the way of charm but no shortage of offence. Historians might well look back at that tour as the first portent of the age in which we now find ourselves; the post-Elizabethan age.

Little about William and Kate's Caribbean tour - the fruit, it is said, of years of careful preparation - would have felt out of place in any number of the tours made by the late Queen in the first decades of her reign. And therein lies the problem.

While the palace has clung to tradition - the 1960s Land Rover used by the Queen on her trip to Jamaica half a century ago, preserved and polished like a holy relic - the world has changed. That such a tour and the images that flowed from it were thought appropriate, in the age of Black Lives Matter, the felling of colonial-era statues and the Windrush scandal, indicates an institution out of step. However as long as British politicians continue to nurse puerile dreams of Empire 2.0 and "buccaneering Britain", the monarchy can hardly be singled out for being trapped in their delusions.

In the early 21st century, there are some aspects of the past that can no longer be avoided or papered over, even by monarchs. In the 1950s, little was known and little had been written about Britain's involvement in the Atlantic slave trade and slavery. Now that history is out of the bag, taught in schools in Britain and, more importantly, in the Caribbean. What that history reveals is that the monarchy itself, not just the British state, has a moment of reckoning ahead of it as three monarchs - Elizabeth I, Charles II and James II - were directly involved in the trade in enslaved Africans and two others, George III and William IV, defended the system. Another royal tour of the Caribbean and Americas, the site of 13 of the Commonwealth's 54 nations, feels unimaginable until Britain and its head of state are able to confront these realities. Judging by recent speeches, King Charles III seems to grasp these realities.

The great opportunity that was gifted to the monarchy, and that many hoped would enable it to perform the cultural equivalent of a "great leap forward", was the marriage of Prince Harry to Meghan Markle; a woman whose presence and voice had the potential make the monarchy feel more fit for the 21st century and enable it to look more like modern Britain and the modern Commonwealth. But Meghan was slaughtered by the sharks of the British tabloid press and Harry has become - literally - the prince across the water.

It is perhaps testimony to the enormous respect in which Elizabeth II was held that the coming wave of challenge and reassessment was partially postponed until after her passing. The decision by Barbados, last November, to become a republic is a sign that the pressure for change is now reaching a critical moment. There is no escape from history for either the new monarch or the Commonwealth, the institution the late Queen did so much, for so long, to hold together.
David Olusoga is an Observer columnist, professor of public history at Manchester University and a broadcaster and documentarian

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
David Olusoga on the Queen, the Commonwealth and the monarchy's future

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ur ancestors were better prepared for moments like this. The inevitable corollary of having witnessed the longest reign in British history is that only a tiny fraction of us have any memory of a monarch's passing - and such memories that do exist are faded, unreliable, childhood recollections.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
fter the funeral of Queen Elizabeth, what's in store for post-Elizabethan Britain? Whatever you think of the institution of monarchy in a democracy, there must be huge respect for her 70 years of dedicated service as an impartial head of state and a unifying figure in Britain and beyond. Yet so much of what she represented is now in doubt.

She stood for the almost paradoxical unity of four nations in a single nation, the United Kingdom. But now the Scots are quite likely to leave the British union in order to rejoin the European one. Northern Ireland increasingly sees its future with the Republic of Ireland, as a kind of informal member of the European Union. Even if Britain doesn't go all the way back to being just England and Wales, it will need a constitutional reordering.

She represented continuity, security, certainty. But Britain today faces a cost of living crisis, a soaring national debt, a probable recession and a chronic productivity problem, and it faces them under an inexperienced prime minister, Liz Truss, with a largely untried cabinet. Not much certainty there. Despite Truss's trademark optimism, 69% of those asked in a recent opinion poll said Britain is "in decline".

The Queen commanded global attention and respect. In fact, for many decades she was probably the most famous woman in the world. An estimated 1 billion people watched her cameo appearance with James Bond at the 2012 London Olympics. On the news of her death, Nasa tweeted: "As we join the planet in marking her passing ...". Some of this magic rubbed off on the UK, the state she embodied. But after Brexit, Britain's international standing and influence is at a new low.

She smoothed the transition from empire to Commonwealth and, for the UK, from imperial great power to middle-sized Euro-Atlantic power. But several of the former colonies and dominions of which she was still head of state are actively considering dispensing with the services of her successor, King Charles III. One expert on the Commonwealth even suggests that there may be a " rush for the door ". Charles III will also face growing calls to acknowledge and atone for the harms done by that empire.

More serious than any potential loss of those largely symbolic overseas offices is the geopolitical uncertainty about Britain itself. In 1962, Dean Acheson, a former US Secretary of State, famously quipped that Britain had "lost an empire and not yet found a role". Forty years later, at the time of the Queen's golden jubilee in 2002, it was possible to believe that Britain had finally found that role. Somewhat in the spirit of today's French president, Emmanuel Macron, it was a case of "as well as and". Britain would be firmly anchored both in Europe and in the Anglosphere. It would have a special relationship with the US, but also with countries such as France, Germany and Poland.

Few outside Britain think it has a clear and strong strategic position today. This is the tragedy of my country: to have found a post-imperial role and then to have lost it again. Since the vote for Brexit in 2016, the UK has descended from a hapless but still relatively pragmatic Conservative prime minister (Theresa May) to a parody of Winston Churchill (Boris Johnson) and thence to a parody of Margaret Thatcher (Liz Truss). The proportion of grandiose bluster has increased as that of fact-based realism has declined. There's a lot of waffle about "global Britain"; nobody knows what it means.

Yet if the wall-to-wall British coverage of the obsequies for Elizabeth II has had an element of psychological escape from current woes, some of the foreign coverage has exaggerated the weakness behind the pomp and circumstance. This country still has great strengths. Many observers suggested that, after Brexit, Britain would be hopelessly divided between two hostile tribes, remainers and leavers. The national unity around the NHS during the Covid pandemic, and now in mourning for the Queen, suggests otherwise. Looking at the faces of this week's grieving crowds and, for that matter, at those of the new cabinet (with no white man in any of the four great offices of state), you see that Britain has accommodated the diversity that flows from immigration better than most other European democracies. Britain has great scientists and universities, some of the world's best media (as well as some of its worst), creative industries, financial services and tech.

Last week's seamless, almost simultaneous transition to both a new head of state and a new prime minister suggests a constitutional democracy in decent shape. Despite some speculation to the contrary, I see no reason to believe that King Charles will be anything but a dignified, restrained head of state. If the Truss government makes a mess of things, as it probably will, we will vote them out at the next election, likely to be in 2024. Unlike in the hyper-polarised United States, no one will seriously question whether this was a free and fair election. (Not even our Official Monster Raving Loony party will chant "Stop the steal", let alone brandish automatic rifles.) A better proportion of realism to rhetoric will be restored.

Post-Elizabethan Britain is in for some very difficult times in the 2020s. But, to invoke that most British of consolatory phrases, which one feels the Queen herself must have used now and then: it could be worse.

Timothy Garton Ash is a Guardian columnist

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Post-Elizabethan Britain faces a diminished and difficult future - but don't count it out | Timothy Garton Ash

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
fter the funeral of Queen Elizabeth, what's in store for post-Elizabethan Britain? Whatever you think of the institution of monarchy in a democracy, there must be huge respect for her 70 years of dedicated service as an impartial head of state and a unifying figure in Britain and beyond.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Thousands of people waited in line - a very long line - to pay homage at the coffin of the queen, who will lie in state until her funeral on Monday.

Send any friend a story
As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month. Anyone can read what you share.

Video

Thousands of people weaved through a line that stretched more than three miles long overnight to see the coffin of Queen Elizabeth II lying in state in Westminster Hall. Credit Credit... James Hill for The New York Times

LONDON - It was just after 2 in the morning when the couple from Bristol joined the end of the line, snaking beside the dark, rippling waters of the River Thames and through the hushed streets of London to see the queen for the last time.

Joining the line of people waiting to see the coffin of Queen Elizabeth II, lying in state in Westminster Hall, was not for the faint hearted. In conversations across Britain, it is simply "The Queue," no further description needed. On Wednesday night, and into Thursday morning, it was three miles long and ever-moving, with projected waits as long as 30 hours, officials warned initially, making it a feat of endurance, an all-night and all-day marathon.

But Tracy Withers, who had started the journey from Bristol in western England at 10 p.m. on Wednesday, said that eventually getting to the finish line would make the wait worthwhile. "This is something that we're not ever going to see again," she said. She wanted, she said, to say goodbye.

The people in the line, thousands and thousands of them, had come from nearby, from London and surrounding counties, and from places far from the capital, like Lancashire in the northwest of England. Some came with their families, lugging chairs and wearing padded coats to ward off a fresh nip in the air. Others came alone, some in suits so they could head straight to the office in the morning.

But early Thursday, all were in the dark waiting, and waiting - and waiting - in what was likely to be the longest line of their lives, to pay their respects to the queen.

Image

Waiting along the Thames on Wednesday. There are plans for a line up to 10 miles long. Credit... James Hill for The New York Times

With hours to burn, and not much sleep to be had, the mood in many stretches of the line was one of good-humored resignation and even camaraderie. Queue buddies befriended each other and shared bags of potato chips, or more adult refreshments like cans of gin and tonic. Along the route, which took on a ghostly sheen under the moon, cafes opened their doors past their usual hours to serve those waiting - though there were lines, of course, for them as well. And with the background of floodlit landmarks like St. Paul's Cathedral across the river, many were clearly enjoying the view.

The queen's coffin will be on view in Westminster Hall until Monday, when a state funeral will be held. To get to the hall, mourners have to join a line that stretches along the South Bank of the Thames, past St. Paul's Cathedral, the Millennium Bridge, Southbank Center and London Bridge.

There are plans for the line to loop inside Southwark Park, in South London, accommodating a length of up to 10 miles; the government has said it will turn people away once it judges that they will not have time to reach the coffin. In the meantime, it is releasing live updates on the length of the line, warning people to prepare for overnight waits and to bring food and drink. Public toilets, drinking water stands and first-aid stations have been set up for the occasion.

Inside Westminster Hall later on Thursday, a ceaseless flow of people filed silently past the queen's coffin, some wiping tears from their eyes or comforting companions, others turning and bowing as they took one last look at the scene before exiting.

The only noise was the occasional cry of an infant and the sound of soldiers' boots on the stone floor when the uniformed honor guard changed shifts.

Helen Wilson, who flew in from Belfast Thursday morning, said that her waiting time had been cut to around three hours because of a disability, but that she would have waited longer.

"It's been a long day but I was so pleased to be able to say farewell to Her Majesty," she said.

In the line overnight, everyone had their own reasons for joining the shuffling procession. But many expressed similar sentiments: a desire to honor the queen; the need to express, somehow, the loss and grief they felt; a sense of being part of a moment bigger than themselves.

"It's a privilege to be here," said Allie Davis, who had been waiting for about an hour. In that time, Ms. Davis and a friend, who had traveled from Surrey, south of London, had already bonded with a mother and daughter from Lancashire beside them. When she finally got to the end, to the coffin, she said, she would probably cry her eyes out.

On Wednesday night, and into Thursday morning, the line was three miles long and ever-moving, with officials warning initially that waits might be as long as 30 hours. Credit... James Hill for The New York Times

"We're not here for the monarchy - we are here for her, " said Sujata Mahendran, about four hours into her wait, referring to Elizabeth. Ms. Mahendran had watched the royal procession earlier that day taking the queen from Buckingham Palace to Westminster Hall, which had given her with a sense of national pride. "It's being British. That's us, isn't it?" she said, adding, tongue-in-cheek: "We do queue very well."

As the hours dragged on, rumors rippled down the line over the question that had been consuming everyone: How long, exactly, was the wait? Six hours, people had heard, or no, at least 12 - or was it, perhaps, two hours a mile?

The Overnight Wait to See the Queen

Isabella Kwai 📍Reporting from London

At one cafe, where some people sat slumped in chairs, Reena Mehmi was buying cappuccinos for her family while her father held her place in line. "We made a spontaneous decision to come," she said, adding that the family had driven down from Bedford, north of London, at around 7 p.m. Wednesday. Everyone was feeling a bit tired, she said, but thought it was better to come overnight rather than risk an even longer wait the following day.

"I keep saying to the kids, 'We're part of history - you'll never get this opportunity again,'" she said. She added that she remembered a visit to Bedford by the queen, who greeted people in the pouring rain so, "Why should the cold stop us?"

Todd Sinclair, a Canadian who had come with two friends after dinner, said he had also lined up in the middle of the night to see Elizabeth's mother lying in state in Westminster Hall after her death in 2002, and felt compelled to come again when the queen died.

The queen's lying-in-state at Westminster Hall, in the Palace of Westminster, on Thursday. Credit... Andrew Testa for The New York Times

"When she died, it hit me - I was unmoored," he said.

He described the awe he had felt in 2002, at the grandeur and solemn atmosphere in Westminster Hall at the time. "I'm not religious or necessarily a monarchist, but I went: Wow," he said. He wanted to share that experience with his friends, he said.

His friend Victoria Koene, who was visiting London from Toronto, said she had more complicated feelings about the monarchy. But, she conceded, it was quite an experience to be in London, being part of a historic occasion. There was one problem, though: "We already ate all the snacks."

As she neared a checkpoint under the towering wheel of the London Eye, workers began to hand out pink wristbands to let people leave the line briefly and keep their place. "Pink! She liked pink," said Ms. Mahendran, somewhat wistfully.

At 4 in the morning, the weariness became more apparent in some stretches of the line. A mother cradled a baby, looking into the distance. People covered yawns, and someone grumbled that people were pushing in. "It's too early," one man sighed. A woman spoke of runner's exhaustion: "This is like a 5k."

Simon Waters, from Southampton, on the south coast of England, joined the line with his family at 8 p.m. on Wednesday. Almost nine hours later, on Thursday morning, he walked into Westminster Hall to see the queen's coffin, with the crown placed on top of it.

"You can't just describe it," he said. It had been a long wait, he added, but Mr. Waters looked very much awake. "It's unbelievable."

Behind him, a bakery started opening its doors. Soon the sun would rise over the line of people filing beneath it. It would still be some time before the couple from Bristol would reach the front - and in the meantime, more people would join The Queue.

Stephen Castle contributed reporting.

The Overnight Wait to See the Queen

Isabella Kwai 📍Reporting from London

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'We're Part of History': An Overnight Wait to Bid Farewell to Queen Elizabeth II

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Thousands of people waited in line - a very long line - to pay homage at the coffin of the queen, who will lie in state until her funeral on Monday. Send any friend a story As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Queen Elizabeth II, the world's longest-serving head of state who led her subjects for more than seven decades, has died at the age of 96.

Her extraordinary reign, which began in 1952, spanned 15 British prime ministers and 14 U.S. presidents. She inherited the throne of a country almost broken by the legacy of war, and remained upon it through a time of epochal change both for the U.K. and the world.

The Queen had taken a step back from some royal duties in the months leading up to her death, including missing the State Opening of Parliament in May and the thanksgiving service at St. Paul's Cathedral during the celebration of her Platinum Jubilee in June. Although the Queen was well enough to preside over the appointment of Liz Truss as Britain's Prime Minister on Tuesday, she had to do so from her Balmoral estate in Scotland instead of Buckingham Palace, where such appointments are traditionally done.

The news of the monarch's deterioration on Thursday was quickly followed by reports that her family, including her son Prince Charles and grandsons, Prince William and Prince Harry, had gathered in Balmoral to be with her.

The Queen had remained a stoic, almost timeless figure in the public's eye, carrying out her royal duties despite the inconvenience of advancing age and when her private life was in turmoil.

When Elizabeth took the throne, the U.K. was the seat of an Empire that straddled the globe. Today, Britain is a smaller player on the world's stage, but the Queen remained the sovereign leader of 15 nations-including Australia, Canada, and New Zealand-and head of a Commonwealth of more than 50 nations. She traveled the globe as an ambassador for British achievements, acts of charity, and values. She was also devoted to upholding the " special relationship" between the U.K. and the U.S., engaging with every president from Harry Truman to Joe Biden over a period of more than 70 years.

The world changed while Elizabeth was Queen in profound ways, but many saw her as a steadfast rock of patriotic duty. As her grandson Prince William wrote in the preface to a 2015 biography: "I think I speak for my generation when I say that the example and continuity provided by the Queen is not only very rare among leaders but a great source of pride and reassurance ... I am privileged to have the Queen as a model for a life of service to the public."

Born an heiress

Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor was born by cesarean section at 2:40 a.m. on Apr. 21, 1926. She was an heir to the throne, but third in the line of succession. Her father, Prince Albert-"Bertie" to friends and family-was the second son of the reigning monarch, King George V. His older brother, David, known by his royal appellation Edward of Wales, was first in line to the throne. But he was also single, childless, and already rumored to have little interest in inheriting his father's crown and the duties that went with it.

The early life of Princess Elizabeth was chronicled with zeal both by the British press and in the former colonies. "The water was from the River Jordan," TIME reported of the elaborate christening pageantry staged in the private chapel at Buckingham Palace. Sir Winston Churchill first met Elizabeth at Balmoral Castle in 1928, when she was two, and proclaimed that he saw in her "an air of authority and reflectiveness astonishing in an infant."

No one in all the realm was more enamored with the young Elizabeth than its monarch, who gave her the place of honor on his lap when they rode through the streets of London in his royal stretch Daimler. "No one else except the Queen rides out so often with the king," TIME reported. Left, not ungladly, out of the spotlight was Lilibet's father-the ever-reticent in public, self-deprecating Bertie, who once told reporters, "My chief claim to fame seems to be that I am the father of Princess Elizabeth."

Her reign as only child ended at age four, in 1930, with the birth of her sister, Margaret Rose, at Glamis Castle in Scotland, their mother's ancestral home. The girls romped together on the palace grounds and royal country estates, played with their terrier puppies and corgis-Elizabeth's lifelong favorite. They also stabled, cared for, and learned to train a royal succession of pet ponies, and shared the same nannies and governesses.

In January 1936, upon the death of Lilibet's grandfather George V, her uncle David became King Edward VIII. Almost immediately, his eldest niece and all the royal family became prime players in a 20th-century succession drama that, though bloodless, proved riveting to a worldwide audience. Edward's tumultuous 10-month reign as king ended on Dec. 10, 1936, when he scandalized the world by abdicating the throne to marry the twice-divorced American socialite Wallis Warfield Simpson. "I always told those idiots not to put me in a golden frame," he said. Young Lilibet was only 10 when she learned she would one day become queen after her father's death.

Princess in wartime

Elizabeth was barely a teenager when, on Sept. 3, 1939, Britain declared war on Nazi Germany. The war's threat had already thundered throughout Europe, and soon the kingdom Elizabeth would one day rule, along with much of the rest of the world, was engulfed in war. Less than a year later, Hitler entered Paris and promised to make Britain his next conquest. Soon the Blitz-day and night Luftwaffe bombing raids that rained fire and terror over London, Liverpool, and other cities throughout England-was at full roar.

And so the Princess spent her teens knitting socks for British soldiers, collecting tinfoil, and rolling bandages for the war effort. She would send portions of her five-shilling weekly allowance to emergency child welfare funds, wear secondhand clothes, adhere to the war rations diet dictated for all Britons, and live frugally despite being a teenage princess and heir to the British throne.

Even as bombs fell on Buckingham Palace-it was hit nine times, including once in September 1940, but the King and Queen managed to escape unharmed-the royal couple refused entreaties to abandon London and evacuate Princess Elizabeth and Princess Margaret to Canada. "The children won't go without me," said the Queen. "I won't leave without the King. And the King will never leave."

The King's decision to remain in England for the duration of the war, enduring its deprivations along with his subjects, endeared him to the beleaguered nation. But it also made the likelihood that Elizabeth might suddenly be called to the throne in the event of her father's death seem palpable.

The future monarch began her public life with her first live BBC radio broadcast in October 1940. Displaying poise and pluck, she addressed the tens of thousands of children who were evacuated from their homes and separated from their families at the height of the Blitz. "My sister, Margaret Rose, and I feel so much for you as we know from experience what it means to be away from those we love most of all," she said in a clear voice that offered a hint of the calm and compassion that many would come to admire.

When in 1944 she reached military age at 18, Elizabeth joined the Auxiliary Territorial Service, one of the wartime women's units. She spent three weeks at the Mechanical Transport Training Center, where she trained as a mechanic and truck driver. The labor left her covered in grease and grime and not a little well-earned pride. "Everything I learnt was new to me-all the oddities of the insides of a car," she told a friend. "I've never worked so hard in my life!"

And she never partied so hard as she did a fortnight after her 19th birthday when, on May 8, 1945-Victory in Europe Day-she joined the ecstatic and rowdy street celebrations that swept London following Germany's surrender. After standing in uniform on the balcony at Buckingham Palace to greet cheering crowds alongside the King, Queen, and Prime Minister Winston Churchill, she, her sister, a group of friends, and a few guardians linked arms and ran among the crowds that surged through the city. For two nights in a row she "walked simply miles," she wrote in her journal, "ate, partied, bed 3am!" These were, she would say 40 years later, among "the most memorable nights of my life."

Royal wedding

It wasn't long after the war that the young princess turned her mind to thoughts of marriage. Years before, Elizabeth had visited a naval college at Dartmouth where she had been greeted by a towering 18-year-old cadet.

Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark was born on the Greek island of Corfu on Jun. 10, 1921, nephew of King Constantine of Greece and distant relation to Britain's Queen Victoria. As his family drifted apart he was sent, at the age of nine, off to England to live with his grandmother, the widow of the great British naval commander and German prince Louis Alexander Mountbatten. He was schooled in England, Germany, and Scotland, and became a fine young athlete-as Elizabeth would note to her governess, Crawfie, on that trip to Dartmouth: "How good he is, Crawfie. How high can he jump!"

Elizabeth corresponded with Philip throughout the war, and after its end the prince was placed on shore duty at a naval base on England's south coast. He often made the 100-mile trek to London in his small black MG, frequently stopping at Buckingham Palace to have dinner with Elizabeth and her younger sister, Margaret. Their friendship grew into a romance. Elizabeth was delighted. Her father George? Not so much-at first. "His loud, boisterous laugh and his blunt, seagoing manners...irritated the gentle king," TIME reported in 1957. Despite that chill, Elizabeth and Philip decided to marry after a short stay with her family at Balmoral Castle in the summer of 1946. The king's lack of enthusiasm for Elizabeth's beau-an attitude sparked, in part, by his concern over how the people of Britain would take to a foreign-born prince marrying the heiress to the throne-frustrated the princess. "There was many a tense moment for George as Elizabeth moped about in tearful martyrdom while her mother and grandmother, the doughty old Queen Mary, fought her battle for her. At last, George decided that the young couple (she was 20, he 25) should wait six months to make sure of each other," noted TIME.

There were obstacles to overcome, but none insurmountable. Philip became a British citizen, and public opinion polls showed that a majority of the nation's populace favored his marrying the princess. The official announcement did not come until Jul. 9, 1947, followed by the couple's introduction at a Buckingham Palace garden party. The wedding took place that November, on the 20th. Philip had converted from Greek Orthodoxy to Anglicanism, avoiding one social problem before the ceremony, and Elizabeth's father made the former member of the Greek and Danish royal families a British royal duke, the Duke of Edinburgh, to be called His Royal Highness, or simply Prince Philip.

As Elizabeth made her way to Westminster Abbey in the royal coach on her wedding day, thousands cheered from the neighboring sidewalks of London. Celebrations erupted throughout the globe, from Paris to Panama, from Shanghai to Manhattan-where thousands got out of bed at 6 a.m. to listen to the ceremony broadcast on the radio. Dignitaries-five kings, six queens, Prime Minister Clement Attlee, Winston Churchill-were in attendance. All of Britain celebrated, many seeing the wedding as a beacon of hope in the post-World War II recovery period.

The Coronation

On Feb. 5, 1952, Princess Elizabeth went to bed in a tree hut nestled in Kenya's Aberdare National Park and awoke the next day as the Queen of England. She was unaware of her new position, for news of the death of her father, King George VI, had not yet reached that outpost of the British Empire. That afternoon, at a lodge, Philip received a phone call informing him of George's death. The prince took his bride down to a nearby river's edge and relayed the news. Shaken, but in full command of herself, Elizabeth returned to the lodge on Philip's arm and began making arrangements for the long trip home.

Elizabeth arrived at London's airport the following morning. Churchill was there to greet her, along with a small group of privy councilors-advisers to the monarchy. That night she rested; the next day she signed the oath of accession before the Privy Council, and an hour later her accession was formally proclaimed. In the months that followed, there was no hurry to arrange her formal coronation-she was already, technically, the Queen. So Elizabeth and the Palace allowed the focus to stay on King George and his 16 enormously popular years on the throne, and let the nation's sadness ebb.

The official ceremony finally took place on Jun. 2, 1953, a day chosen in hopes of sunny spring weather. This being London, however, the nation settled for a traditional gray morning. At 11 a.m., a joyous fanfare of trumpets announced the arrival of Her Majesty. "Vivat Regina Elizabetha! Vivat! Vivat! Vivat!" shouted the Queen's Westminster Scholars as she walked up the aisle, her long crimson train borne by six maids of honor. The Archbishop of Canterbury proceeded to ask Elizabeth if she would govern her people according to their laws and customs, execute law and justice in mercy, and maintain the laws of God. She knelt, kissed the Holy Bible before her, and swore to do so, "so help me God." Finally, he held aloft the Imperial State Crown for all to see, then placed it on Elizabeth's head. Cheers of "God Save the Queen" filled the Abbey as trumpets blared; outside, and across the British Empire, bells pealed and cannons roared.

The traveling Queen

As well as the constitutional duties Elizabeth fulfilled as Britain's head of state and the head of the Church of England, she spent long sections of the following decades traveling the world as her nation's goodwill ambassador. The November after her coronation she embarked on a 45,000-mile tour of the British Commonwealth, presiding over state balls, garden parties, luncheons, banquets, and other occasions. Among her stops: Libya, Australia, Fiji, New Zealand, Jamaica, Uganda, and the Pacific island of Tonga, where she enjoyed the company of Queen Salote Tupou, who had traveled to London months before to witness Elizabeth's coronation. She did not return to London until May 15, 1954, almost six months after she departed.

In the fall of 1957, Elizabeth and Philip spent six days in New York City, Washington, D.C., and parts of Virginia, where they celebrated the 350th anniversary of the founding of Jamestown, the first British colony in America. In Washington, they were guests of President Dwight D. Eisenhower-a friend since his days in London as Supreme Allied Commander during World War II-for four nights at the White House. At the president's state dinner, Elizabeth praised Washington as "so often a focus for the aspirations of the free world." Later, Vice President Richard Nixon hosted a luncheon at the Capitol, and Elizabeth sought to see how the average American enjoyed life, attending a football game at the University of Maryland and stopping in a Giant supermarket after the game.

Clearly, the travel bug had bitten. In 1961, Elizabeth visited India, and at the Ramlila Grounds near Old Delhi, a quarter of a million people came to see her speak. In the city of Jaipur, the Maharajah offered her a ride on a ceremonial elephant. Though the trip was a success for Elizabeth, it also put the Indian government on edge-they viewed such a display of colonial pageantry as undermining the country's fledgling independence. Philip also drew negative publicity when official photos emerged of a tiger he'd killed on a hunt with the Maharaja. An Indian government spokesperson called the act "astonishing," while the British tabloid The Daily Mirror condemned the royals for not recognizing "the modern enlightened view on the killing of animals for pleasure."

In Ghana that same year, Prime Minister Kwame Nkrumah told the Queen, "The wind of change blowing through Africa has become a hurricane." (Ghana had declared independence from the British Empire in 1957, though the legacy of colonialism still hangs over the country.) Tanzania would declare independence later that year, joined by Kenya in 1962, and a series of other African nations throughout the 1960s.

In 1965, Elizabeth embarked on an 11-day tour of West Germany, the first state visit by a reigning British monarch since Edward VII paid his last call on Kaiser Wilhelm II in 1909. The trip came a full two decades after the end of World War II, amid fears of lingering resentment between the U.K. and Germany. But those fears were misplaced. The Queen and German chancellor Ludwig Erhard said all hostility between their countries had been healed in the 20 years since the war. It ended in triumph, with crowds cheering and chanting "Elizabet, Eliz-a-bet!" as she placed a wreath on a Beethoven monument near the Bonn city hall.

Family trouble

All that traveling would put a strain on her family. That five-and-a-half-month world tour following her coronation took place when Charles was five and Anne only three-but the children were left behind. They did chat with their traveling mother by radiotelephone. But this would go on to be characteristic of Elizabeth, who always tended to make work her priority.

Years later, in 1994, Prince Charles would allow his authorized biographer to disclose that the prince felt "emotionally estranged" from his parents, who were "unable or unwilling" to offer the affection he craved as a young man. Close friends found the Duke's behavior "inexplicably harsh" and called his manner toward Charles "very bullying." His mother, the Queen, seemed "detached." Elizabeth and Philip were reported to be hurt by this disclosure. Publicly, only Philip would comment, "We did our best." But Princess Anne, the couple's daughter and Charles's younger sister, exercised less restraint-and in the process defended Elizabeth from rumors that she was remote and uncaring as a mother. "I simply don't believe that there is any evidence whatsoever to suggest that she wasn't caring," she said in 2002. "It just beggars belief. We as children may have not been too demanding, in the sense that we understood what the limitations were in time and the responsibilities placed on her as monarch in the things she had to do and the travels she had to make. But I don't believe that any of us, for a second, thought she didn't care for us in exactly the same way as any other mother did."

Yet even Anne might have acknowledged a warmth that was sometimes wanting on her part later in life-when a little more compassion, a little more kindness, might have been called for.

The early 1990s would bring all kinds of personal problems to the fore-most notably in 1992, which the Queen famously described in a speech as an "annus horribilis" (horrible year). This was the year when her second son, Andrew, separated from his wife, Sarah; when daughter Anne divorced her husband, Mark Phillips; when her son Charles and his wife, Diana, increasingly became a tabloid issue; and when public concern grew about the cost of the monarchy and who would pay to repair Windsor castle, which caught on fire that year.

The damage was significant. The Nov. 20 fire-on the Queen's 45th wedding anniversary-gutted the northeast corner of the castle, parts of which were more than 900 years old. It took 250 firefighters 15 hours to bring it under control. The state apartments, used for high-level official entertaining, did not have a sprinkler system, and in the end more than 100 rooms, covering an area of 1.7 acres, were damaged.

When British citizens learned that they were about to foot the bill for repairs to Windsor Castle-to the tune of up to $78 million-they grumbled. Elizabeth rectified the issue by volunteering to pay income and capital gains tax from her private investments. It hurt, but not too much: Her net worth remained at about $500 million.

But these were simply matters of state. It was matters of the heart that caused greater grief for Elizabeth-particularly the travails of Charles and Di.

Their courtship and 1981 marriage captivated the nation, if not the world. No less an authority than the Archbishop of Canterbury proclaimed, "Here is the stuff of which fairy tales are made: the prince and princess on their wedding day." But infidelity would intrude on both sides, and the ability to maintain even the pretense of marriage for the sake of appearances became impossible. On Aug. 24, 1992, the transcript of a phone conversation between Diana and a close friend was published in The Sun tabloid, with Diana describing life with Charles as "real torture," and saying she had caught the Queen Mother watching her " with a strange look in her eyes." Diana and her young sons, William and Harry, continued to reside at Kensington Palace, while Charles's relationship with Camilla Parker Bowles was parsed by the tabloid press. The Prince and Princess of Wales officially separated on Dec. 9.

Diana's decision to grant an interview to the BBC on Nov. 20, 1995, in which she confessed that she had been unfaithful to Charles, had upset the royal family and Queen Elizabeth in particular. (Of course, Charles had admitted his own infidelity on a TV documentary the previous year, as Diana noted in the interview, referring to Camilla Parker Bowles, "There were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded.") Within a month, the Queen wrote to both Charles and Diana, urging them to agree to an early divorce. Buckingham Palace released a statement saying Charles favored the divorce, but there was no official word from Diana. In February 1996-more than a year before Diana, her romantic partner Dodi Fayed, and driver Henri Paul died in a car crash while being pursued by the paparazzi-she finally released her own statement saying she was ready to divorce too. Elizabeth's reaction? "The Queen was most interested to hear that the Princess of Wales had agreed to the divorce," was all her press office would say at first. Later, it would announce that the Queen wished the divorce discussions "be conducted privately and amicably."

It took time for Elizabeth-a woman married seven decades to the same man-to adjust to modern mores. A longtime sticking point was Charles's future bride, Camilla; the press noted that Elizabeth was not enamored of her son's consort. The turning point occurred in 2002, when, by bringing Camilla to events celebrating Elizabeth's 50 years on the throne, Charles provided strong evidence that he was gaining ground in his campaign to officially bring Camilla into the family fold.

Charles and Camilla got engaged around Christmas 2004, and before long the Queen issued a statement saying, "The Duke of Edinburgh and I are very happy that the Prince of Wales and Mrs. Parker Bowles are to marry." She and Prince Philip did not attend their wedding at Windsor Guildhall on April 9, 2005, but they did attend a blessing of the couple at St. George's Chapel in Windsor Castle and held a reception for them at the castle.

A more festive wedding-and one more in keeping with Elizabeth's sense of royal tradition-took place on Apr. 29, 2011, when Elizabeth's grandson William married Kate Middleton in a lavish ceremony at Westminster Abbey. And she remained her regal self at Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's more modern wedding at Windsor Castle in 2018, which included a fiery sermon delivered by Bishop Michael Curry of Chicago, the first African American head of the Episcopal Church in the U.S.

The Queen would face further familial scandals, however. In a televised interview with Oprah Winfrey in March 2021, Harry and Megan alleged that racism had tarnished their relationship with the Windsors. While the press hounded Megan like they did Harry's late mother, "no one from my family ever said anything," Harry said.

The family was once again thrust into the spotlight when allegations surfaced about Andrew's relationship with the late sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein. Andrew stepped back from royal duties in late 2019, and in 2021 was served with a lawsuit by Virgina Giuffre, one of Epstein's victims, who accused Andrew of sexual abusing her when she was 17. According to The Daily Telegraph, the Queen contributed millions of pounds to her son's legal defense, and agreed to contribute £2 million ($2.7 million) to a victim support charity as part of the eventual settlement.

As the Queen neared the end of her life, she doted more on her grandchildren and great-grandchildren. "In a small room with close members of the family, then she is just a normal grandmother. Very relaxed," Harry said before he and Meghan stepped back as working royals in early 2020. "She obviously takes a huge interest in what we all do, that's her children as well as her grandchildren. She wants to know which charities we're supporting, how life is going in our jobs and such. So you know, she has a vested interest in what we do."

Royal Duty

Even after she entered her ninth decade, Elizabeth continued with her royal duties, despite her age and a rapidly changing world.

For nearly all her reign, the Queen would read a selection of the 200 to 300 letters that she received daily, as well as review official papers and documents sent her way from government ministers and her representatives in foreign countries. Until she was forced to slow down by mobility issues and bouts of ill health, she would have 10- to 20-minute audiences with ambassadors, commissioners, and other officials, and there would be her weekly visit from the British prime minister.

Despite growing republican movements within the Commonwealth realms, the Queen herself remained a hugely popular figure in both the U.K. and beyond. And she remained a force for good, offering messages of inspiration and optimism in even the most trying times. In one of her last annual Christmas Day messages, she urged her subjects in Britain and across the Commonwealth to draw inspiration from "ordinary people doing extraordinary things."

The Queen has been a constant figure in most of the British public's living memory-in February 2022 she became the first British monarch to reach 70 years on the throne. Although mobility issues prevented her from attending the majority of Buckingham Palace's Platinum Jubilee celebrations in June of the same year, community celebrations were widespread across the U.K. Some 16,000 official street parties were organized and almost 17 million people-about one in four Brits- took part in events. The Together Coalition, which aims to bridge divides, said the celebrations were the largest community event in British history.

The Queen also looked extraordinary yet ordinary at Prince Philip's funeral held shortly after he died on Apr. 9, 2021, after 73 years of marriage. The image of the monarch solemnly sitting alone in a pew at Windsor Castle due to coronavirus restrictions became instantly iconic, and further burnished her image as a stoic leader through good times and bad.

The Queen did not lead an ordinary life, but she filled it with extraordinary acts of duty both public and private-whether carrying out the requirements of the state from the trappings of the throne, or giving quiet words of encouragement to a well-wisher in a crowd. She "has been a rock of stability in an era in which our country has changed so much," said Britain's former Prime Minister David Cameron. "And we could not be more proud of her. She has served this country with unerring grace, dignity, and decency."

Contact us at letters@time.com.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Queen Elizabeth II, Britain's Steadfast Monarch, Dies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Queen Elizabeth II, the world's longest-serving head of state who led her subjects for more than seven decades, has died at the age of 96. Her extraordinary reign, which began in 1952, spanned 15 British prime ministers and 14 U.S. presidents.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The CDC says that the vast majority of abortions, 92.8%, are performed during the first trimester. Most people who get abortions are unmarried, although they may be living with a partner at the time. About one in 10 women who get an abortion are teenagers, with most being in their 20s. About 60% of people who get abortions have also given birth before, and nearly 60% had never had an abortion before.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Abortion: What does overturn of Roe v Wade mean?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The CDC says that the vast majority of abortions, 92.8%, are performed during the first trimester. Most people who get abortions are unmarried, although they may be living with a partner at the time. About one in 10 women who get an abortion are teenagers, with most being in their 20s.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Boris Johnson always seemed to defy political odds.

He went the typical path of the political class - Eton- and Oxford-educated - but sold himself as an outsider and populist man-of-the-people, messy hair and all. He was fired from journalism for fabrication, and his reporting and political careers were marred with scandal after scandal, professional and personal, and sometimes a mix of the two. For some of his supporters, his gaffes and his disregard for the norms added to his appeal.

And he continued to rise: the Conservative mayor of London, a Labour town; a prominent face of the "Leave" campaign that prevailed in the 2016 Brexit referendum; the leader of a party that won a historic majority in 2019, making him the prime minister with the biggest Conservative majority in three decades. As prime minister, he officially took the United Kingdom out of the European Union after years of a divisive Brexit debate.

Those successes helped Johnson defy those political odds - until they couldn't anymore.

After a dizzying few days of fresh scandals and unprecedented government resignations, the British prime minister announced his resignation Thursday, marking the close of his leadership of the Conservative Party nearly three years after he took on the job.

In the end, Johnson was taken down by someone else's sex scandal, a minor drama that was only partly of his own making. But this erupted after months of stories about illicit, in-person parties at 10 Downing Street during the height of the Covid-19 lockdowns in England - parties that Johnson originally denied happened, until media reports and investigations proved otherwise.Johnson was fined for violating the Covid-19 restrictions he himself set - along with dozens and dozens of other officials.

Conservatives, then, had already soured on Johnson by the time this latest scandal broke involving sexual misconduct allegations against the government's chief deputy whip. They saw a backlash in electoral results and poor polling and an escalating cost-of-living crisis, and they ultimately had to make choice.

"That calculation is Johnson - is he a blessing or is he a burden? And if the tipping point is met, he's more of a burden than a blessing," said Matt Beech, a professor at the University of Hull and senior fellow at the University of California Berkeley.

Conservatives chose burden, and so they revolted and dispatched with him, not unlike past Conservative prime ministers before him. "The Conservative Party, historically, has been very good at getting rid of leaders who they do not think are going to win the next general election," said Simon Griffiths, a politics professor at Goldsmiths, University of London. "They've been much more ruthless about it than other political parties."

Johnson himself acknowledged this in his resignation speech, though he declined to take any responsibility for bringing about his own political demise. "The herd instinct is powerful; when it moves, it moves," Johnson said. "No one is remotely indispensable."

"I want you to know how sad I am to be giving up the best job in the world," Johnson added. "But them's the breaks."

For now, Johnson remains prime minister until a successor is chosen, a process that will likely conclude sometime in the late summer or early autumn. Some Conservatives see Johnson as too much of a political liability to stick around, even for a few weeks, and want him gone immediately. If that happens - which would be pretty unusual - an interim prime minister would take over until the next leader is selected.

As Johnson departs, there isn't an obvious successor to replace him, which may be another reason Johnson lasted as long as he did. Plenty of people are likely to put their names forward, but it is still unclear who might emerge as the true frontrunner. Whoever does will say a lot about the future of the Conservative Party and just how much influence Johnson may have had in shaping it, even as it leaves him behind. Them's the breaks, after all.

Conservatives made a deal that Johnson would deliver on Brexit and win elections. Those requirements no longer apply.

"The reason I have fought so hard in the last few days to continue ... was not just because I wanted to do so, but because I felt it was my job, my duty, my obligation to you to continue to do what we promised in 2019," Johnson said in his resignation speech on Thursday, outside of No. 10 Downing Street.

In his brief remarks, Johnson cited that historic 2019election victory; delivering on Brexit; the UK's navigation of the Covid-19 pandemic, including its vaccine rollout; and the UK's support for Ukraine against Russia among the achievements of his tenure.

Johnson's resume is a bit more complicated - an inquiry is examining the UK's Covid-19 response, Brexit is still very, very messy - but on the top-line things, Johnson succeeded at what Conservatives wanted him to do.

In 2019, he emerged as the frontrunner for Conservative leader following Theresa May's resignation because he was seen by Conservatives as the best option to deliver Brexit, but also to win supporters back toa party badly battered by the Brexit debates.

Johnson did both. He mounted a stunning victory in 2019 that brought together more traditional Conservatives and new working-class voters who had traditionally voted for Labour (Britain's center-left party, now in opposition). Sure, Johnson was assisted by then- Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn's unique unpopularity, but 80-seat majorities don't come around all that often. And while Johnson may have glossed over some of the obstacles to his Brexit approach, the bottom line is he broke the Brexit deadlock that had previously been tearing the country apart and took the United Kingdom out of the European Union.

Partygate tested that bargain. Juicy details of boozy parties aside, the scandal is fairly straightforward: The people in charge of making and enforcing Covid-19 rules were themselves breaking them. Not only that, but much of the country was on extreme lockdown and couldn't visit family or friends in the hospital, let alone host parties. "The hypocrisy is too obvious there," Griffiths said.

It also put the rest of the Conservative party in a bind. Members of Parliament and government officials had to twist themselves to defend the prime minister - only to have new revelations emerge that showed Johnson wasn't being honest. Official ethics investigations and police inquiries proved the media reports were as bad as they seemed.

"I think they can tolerate that if the guy's a winner," said Sean Kippin, a lecturer in public policy at the University of Stirling. "But as soon as it starts following through into election results - the polls have been pretty bad for quite a long time - as far as the Conservatives are concerned, it's a sense that this man is going to drag them down with him."

As Kippin said, "Boris Johnson's been known to be all the things that he's been shown to be for a long time." But Conservatives were willing to overlook it in Johnson as long as voters could, and as long as Johnson delivered. But the inflation crisis further dampened support for the prime minister. In May, the Conservatives lost hundreds of seats in local elections, a sign that the electorate was moving against Johnson and his party. Even after Johnson survived a no-confidence vote in June, the party lost two seats in off-cycle elections to replace Conservative MPs. One, in Tiverton and Honiton, reversed a Conservative majority of 24,000. If Conservatives needed a sign that Johnson shouldn't lead them through the next election, this was probably it.

"The biggest driving force behind this decision is the conviction of most Conservative MPs that they cannot win the next election with Boris Johnson as leader," said Roger Mortimore, professor of public opinion and political analysis at King's College London. "I think up to this point many of them have been hanging on essentially because Boris does have this past record of pulling improbable things out of the hat. He has a very enviable record of winning elections that other politicians would not have been expected to win."

Johnson probably held on a bit longer than another Conservative leader because there was a sense that if anyone could turn this around, he probably could. But there were also those who saw him as flawed and knew this was always a risk. This time, it finally caught up with him. "They've been proven correct because obviously, it's ended in a kind of chaotic, disorderly [way] - allegations of wrongdoing," said Ben Williams, a lecturer in politics and political theory at the University of Salford. "And that's probably what many would say was inevitable."

Johnson leaves a Conservative party different from the one he found. It's just not entirely clear what comes next.

Johnson's promise of getting Brexit done helped usher in his rise. That unifying factor isn't there anymore because the UK left the EU. (The Brexit problems continue.) That also means the Conservative Party about to choose a new leader is, in lots of ways, very different from the one that bet on Johnson three years ago.

As experts told me, the Conservative Party is now largely one of Euroskeptics.Instead of Brexit, the fault line is likely to be in this new Conservative coalition that Johnson managed to bring together. Divisions are emerging between themore traditional Conservatives who want to rein in public spending and want to see tax cuts (basically, what you'd consider low-tax, fiscal conservatives in the US) and these newer Conservative voters, many from working-class or blue-collar backgrounds, that are more likely to support public spending and want to see more state intervention and investments - the "leveling up" that Johnson talked up - come to fruition. Add in an economic and inflation crisis, and those tensions are likely to be even more pronounced.

How that plays out will depend on who becomes party leader - whoever the heck that might be.

A lot of people are going to put their names forward, though a clear favorite hasn't really emerged. Ben Wallace, the defense secretary, whose profile has risen during the Ukraine war, is among the possible frontrunners. So is Rishi Sunak, who is one of the cabinet ministers who launched the government rebellion against Johnson this week. But unlike in 2019, when it was pretty much Johnson from the get-go, this leadership contest is pretty wide open.

This is kind of by Johnson's design. "One of the clever things about Johnson, politically, is he's really good at undermining potential rivals. So it's not as if there was somebody waiting in the wings to come in and swoop in," Griffiths said.

All of that has left a huge spread of people, in a pretty factional party, all of whom have decent odds of being the next leader. Typically, Conservative MPs will vote on candidates, eliminating them in rounds of voting until two finalists emerge. About 200,000 members of the Conservative Party will decide between those finalists. Those members tend to be older, white, and more conservative than probably the party as a whole.

But as experts pointed out, what will be top of mind for all members is which person is most likely to help Conservatives win. And the party is sure of one thing: That person is no longer Boris Johnson.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Boris Johnson's downfall, explained by his rise to power

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Boris Johnson always seemed to defy political odds. He went the typical path of the political class - Eton- and Oxford-educated - but sold himself as an outsider and populist man-of-the-people, messy hair and all. He was fired from journalism for fabrication, and his reporting and political careers were marred with scandal after scandal, professional and personal, and sometimes a mix of the two.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Alyssa Milano on Roe v. Wade & Abortion Rights in the U.S. | Exclusive

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The 6-3 decision from the Supreme Court said Roe v. Wade was "egregiously wrong from the start."

The court's three liberal justices dissented, lamenting "fewer rights" for Americans today.

Experts say the fight over abortion now shifts to states. About half will likely ban the procedure.

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court ruled Friday that Americans no longer have a constitutional right to abortion, a watershed decision that overturns Roe v. Wade and erases a reproductive right the high court established nearly five decades ago.

In the most closely watched and controversial case to arrive at the Supreme Court in years, a majority of the justices - all of whom were appointed by Republican presidents - held that the right to end a pregnancy was not found in the text of the Constitution nor the nation's history. The decision set off a flurry of reactions from political leaders on the right and left, including President Joe Biden and members of Congress.

Associate Justice Samuel Alito wrote the opinion for a 6-3 majority upholding a Mississippi ban on most abortions after 15 weeks. There were five votes to overturn Roe v. Wade, because Chief Justice John Roberts wrote he would not have gone so far as to upend one of the court's most recognized precedents. The court's liberal justices dissented.

"Roe was egregiously wrong from the start," Alito wrote for the majority. "Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences.

"It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people's elected representatives."
Future: Explainer: Roberts: Chief Justice John Roberts facing test of leadership amid tense time at Supreme Court What does overturning Roe mean? What we know about the Supreme Court's abortion ruling. Where the abortion fight goes from here: Roe overruled but the battle will continue
The decision instantly shifts the focus of one of the nation's most divisive debates to state capitols: Republican lawmakers are set to ban abortion in about half the states, while Democratic-led states are likely to reinforce protections for the procedure. Access to abortion, in other words, will depend almost entirely on where a person lives.

"After today, young women will come of age with fewer rights than their mothers and grandmothers had," Associate Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in the dissent joined by the court's two other liberal justices. "The majority accomplishes that result without so much as considering how women have relied on the right to choose or what it means to take that right away."

The decision will also play into the November midterm elections, in which control of Congress is up for grabs, though there are signs it may not be as salient for voters as other issues, such as inflation. In a USA TODAY/Suffolk University Poll taken before the decision, even those Americans who opposed striking down the landmark decision said 2-1 that the economy will be more important to their vote in November.
Live updates: Roe v. Wade overturned; Aftermath of Supreme Court abortion decision
"This fall, Roe is on the ballot," Biden said from the White House, adding that the decision "casts a dark shadow over a large swath of the land."
Poll: Fallout: Supreme Court ruling poised to trigger maze of state abortion laws Furor over Roe v. Wade reversal likely won't rescue Democrats in midterms
Though not unexpected, the court's decision hit like a political and cultural earthquake, reshaping the relationship between millions of Americans and the government. Though the opinion will be celebrated by conservatives, it will almost certainly lead to protests, lawsuits and charges from the left that the nation's highest court - ostensibly above the partisan fray - is just as political as the other branches of the federal government.

That's exactly what happened when a draft opinion in Mississippi's challenge to Roe v. Wade leaked May 2. The unprecedented breach of Supreme Court protocol, which showed how the conservative justices might overturn Roe, led to protests across the country. The opinion Friday appeared to closely track with the earlier leaked draft.

Anti-abortion groups, which had pushed for Friday's outcome for decades, applauded the decision.

"Today marks an historic human rights victory for unborn children and their mothers and a bright pro-life future for our nation," said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the Susan B. Anthony SBA Pro-Life America. "Every legislature in the land, in every single state and Congress, is now free to allow the will of the people to make its way into the law through our elected representatives."

Experts say the decision may set off challenges to other rights that, like abortion, have been grounded in the 14th Amendment's guarantee of due process. Many of those have been taken for granted for years, such as the right to same-sex marriage, the right to interracial marriage and the right to access contraception.

In a concurring opinion, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas said the Supreme Court should now "reconsider" some of those other rights established by the high court. No other member of the court joined Thomas, and the court's majority opinion stressed that other rights were not at issue in the case.

Democrats and groups that support abortion rights decried the decision.

"Today, the Republican-controlled Supreme Court has achieved the GOP's dark and extreme goal of ripping away women's right to make their own reproductive health decisions," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said in a statement. "Because of Donald Trump, Mitch McConnell, the Republican Party and their supermajority on the Supreme Court, American women today have less freedom than their mothers."

The opinion follows a decades-long movement by conservatives to overturn the high court's 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, which established a constitutional right to abortion. The effort to roll back that right was aided by President Donald Trump, who was elected in 2016 in part on a promise to name justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade. Over the course of a single term, Trump managed to put three conservative justices on the high court.

At issue in the case is a Mississippi law that bans most abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy - earlier than had been permitted under the high court's previous decisions.

Jackson Women's Health Organization, the last abortion clinic in Mississippi, challenged the state law in 2018, asserting it conflicted with Roe v. Wade and a subsequent case in 1992 that upheld Roe. A 7-2 majority in Roe v. Wade established a constitutional right to abortion and allowed people to exercise the right until the end of the second trimester.

A subsequent decision in 1992, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, ended the trimester framework and allowed people to obtain an abortion until viability - the point when a fetus can survive outside the womb, or about 24 weeks into a pregnancy.

Two lower federal courts agreed with the clinic, citing Roe and Casey. Mississippi appealed, asking the Supreme Court not only to uphold its ban but also to do away with the constitutional right to abortion altogether. Because the issue is so divisive and personal, the state argued, it should be decided by state lawmakers accountable to voters rather than by federal courts whose jurists enjoy lifetime appointments.

The frenzy around the case, Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, had almost as much to do with the justices who are on the high court as it does with the Mississippi law. Conservatives enjoy a 6-3 majority on the court for the first time since the Roosevelt administration. Three of them were nominated by Trump: associate justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

Mississippi had explicitly asked the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade, calling it "dangerously corrosive to our constitutional system." That is a more aggressive position than the state took when it first brought the case to the court in 2020.

For years, the legal battle over abortion has focused on regulating the procedure, such as requirements that minors inform their parents before ending a pregnancy or requiring doctors performing the procedure to have privileges at nearby hospitals. For anti-abortion groups, the Dobbs case represented the first opportunity in decades to focus squarely on whether the procedure itself is constitutional.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, eliminating constitutional right to abortion

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The 6-3 decision from the Supreme Court said Roe v. Wade was "egregiously wrong from the start." The court's three liberal justices dissented, lamenting "fewer rights" for Americans today. Experts say the fight over abortion now shifts to states. About half will likely ban the procedure.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Quizlet has study tools to help you learn anything. Improve your results and reach your goals today with flashcards, practice tests and expert-written solutions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why we can’t stop fighting about cancel culture

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Is cancel culture a mob mentality, or a long overdue way of speaking truth to power?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Cancel culture," as a concept, feels inescapable. The phrase is all over the news, tossed around in casual social media conversation; it's been linked to everything from free speech debates to Mr. Potato Head.

It sometimes seems all-encompassing, as if all forms of contemporary discourse must now lead, exhaustingly and endlessly, either to an attempt to "cancel" anyone whose opinions cause controversy or to accusations of cancel culture in action, however unwarranted.

In the rhetorical furor, a new phenomenon has emerged: the weaponization of cancel culture by the right.

Across the US, conservative politicians have launched legislation seeking to do the very thing they seem to be afraid of: Cancel supposedly left-wing businesses, organizations, and institutions; see, for example, national GOP figures threatening to punish Major League Baseball for standing against a Georgia voting restrictions law by removing MLB's federal antitrust exemption.

Meanwhile, Fox News has stoked outrage and alarmism over cancel culture, including trying to incite Gen X to take action against the nebulous problem. Tucker Carlson, one of the network's most prominent personalities, has emphatically embraced the anti-cancel culture discourse, claiming liberals are trying to cancel everything from to the Fourth of July.

The idea of canceling began as a tool for marginalized communities to assert their values against public figures who retained power and authority even after committing wrongdoing - but in its current form, we see how warped and imbalanced the power dynamics of the conversation really are.

All along, debate about cancel culture has obscured its roots in a quest to attain some form of meaningful accountability for public figures who are typically answerable to no one. But after centuries of ideological debate turning over questions of free speech, censorship, and, in recent decades, "political correctness," it was perhaps inevitable that the mainstreaming of cancel culture would obscure the original concerns that canceling was meant to address. Now it's yet another hyperbolic phase of the larger culture war.

The core concern of cancel culture - accountability - remains as crucial a topic as ever. But increasingly, the cancel culture debate has become about how wecommunicate within a binary, right versus wrong framework. And a central question is not whether we can hold one another accountable, but how we can ever forgive.

Cancel culture has evolved rapidly to mean very different things to different people

It's only been about six years since the concept of "cancel culture" began trickling into the mainstream. The phrase has long circulated within Black culture, perhaps paying homage to Nile Rodgers's 1981 single "Your Love Is Cancelled." As I wrote in my earlier explainer on the origins of cancel culture, the concept of canceling a whole person originated in the 1991 film New Jack City and percolated for years before finally emerging online among Black Twitter in 2014 thanks to an episode of Love and Hip-Hop: New York. Since then, the term has undergone massive shifts in meaning and function.

Early on, it most frequently popped up on social media, as people attempted to collectively "cancel," or boycott, celebrities they found problematic. As a term with roots in Black culture, it has some resonance with Black empowerment movements, as far back as the civil rights boycotts of the 1950s and '60s. This original usage also promotes the idea that Black people should be empowered to reject cultural figures or works that spread harmful ideas. As Anne Charity Hudley, the chair of linguistics of African America at the University of California Santa Barbara, told me in 2019, "When you see people canceling Kanye, canceling other people, it's a collective way of saying, 'We elevated your social status, your economic prowess, [and] we're not going to pay attention to you in the way that we once did. ... 'I may have no power, but the power I have is to [ignore] you.'"

As the logic behind wanting to "cancel" specific messages and behaviors caught on, many members of the public, as well as the media, conflated it with adjacent trends involving public shaming, callouts, and other forms of public backlash. (The media sometimes refers to all of these ideas collectively as " outrage culture.") But while cancel culture overlaps and aligns with many related ideas, it's also always been inextricably linked to calls for accountability.

As a concept, cancel culture entered the mainstream alongside hashtag-oriented social justice movements like #BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo - giant social waves that were effective in shifting longstanding narratives about victims and criminals, and in bringing about actual prosecutions in cases like those of Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein. It is also frequently used interchangeably with "woke" political rhetoric, an idea that is itself tied to the 2014 rise of the Black Lives Matter protests. In similar ways, both "wokeness" and "canceling" are tied to collectivized demands for more accountability from social systems that have long failed marginalized people and communities.

But over the past few years, many right-wing conservatives, as well as liberals who object to more strident progressive rhetoric, have developed the view that "cancel culture" is a form of harassment intended to silence anyone who sets a foot out of line under the nebulous tenets of "woke" politics. So the idea now represents a vast assortment of objectives and can hold wildly different connotations, depending on whom you're talking to.

Taken in good faith, the concept of "canceling" a person is really about questions of accountability - about how to navigate a social and public sphere in which celebrities, politicians, and other public figures who say or do bad things continue to have significant platforms and influence. In fact, actor LeVar Burton recently suggested the entire idea should be recast as "consequence culture."

"I think it's misnamed," Burton told the hosts of The View. "I think we have a consequence culture. And that consequences are finally encompassing everybody in the society, whereas they haven't been ever in this country."

Within the realm of good faith, the larger conversation around these questions can then expand to contain nuanced considerations of what the consequences of public misbehavior should be, how and when to rehabilitate the reputation of someone who's been "canceled," and who gets to decide those things.

Taken in bad faith, however, "cancel culture" becomes an omniscient and dangerous specter: a woke, online social justice mob that's ready to rise up and attack anyone, even other progressives, at the merest sign of dissent. And it's this - the fear of a nebulous mob of cancel-happy rabble-rousers - that conservatives have used to their political advantage.

Conservatives are using fear of cancel culture as a cudgel

Critics of cancel culture typically portray whoever is doing the canceling as wielding power against innocent victims of their wrath. From 2015 on, a variety of news outlets, whether through opinion articles or general reporting, have often framed cancel culture as " mob rule."

In 2019, the New Republic's Osita Nwanevu observed just how frequently some media outlets have compared cancel culture to violent political uprisings, ranging from ethnocide to torture under dictatorial regimes. Such an exaggerated framework has allowed conservative media to depict cancel culture as an urgent societal issue. Fox News pundits, for example, have made cancel culture a focal part of their coverage. In one recent survey, people who voted Republican were more than twice as likely to know what "cancel culture" was, compared with Democrats and other voters, even though in the current dominant understanding of cancel culture, Democrats are usually the ones doing the canceling.

"The conceit that the conservative right has gotten so many people to adopt, beyond divorcing the phrase from its origins in Black queer communities, is an obfuscation of the power relations of the stakeholders involved," journalist Shamira Ibrahim told Vox in an email. "It got transformed into a moral panic akin to being able to irrevocably ruin the powerful with just the press of a keystroke, when it in actuality doesn't wield nearly as much power as implied by the most elite."

You wouldn't know that to listen to right-wing lawmakers and media figures who have latched onto an apocalyptic scenario in which the person or subject who's being criticized is in danger of being censored, left jobless, or somehow erased from history - usually because of a perceived left-wing mob.

This is a fear that the right has weaponized. At the 2020 Republican National Convention, at least 11 GOP speakers - about a third of those who took the stage during the high-profile event - addressed cancel culture as a concerning political phenomenon. President Donald Trump himself declared that "The goal of cancel culture is to make decent Americans live in fear of being fired, expelled, shamed, humiliated and driven from society as we know it." One delegate resolution at the RNC specifically targeted cancel culture, describing a trend toward "erasing history, encouraging lawlessness, muting citizens, and violating free exchange of ideas, thoughts, and speech."

Ibrahim pointed out that in addition to re-waging the war on political correctness that dominated the 1990s by repackaging it as a war on cancel culture, right-wing conservatives have also "attempted to launch the same rhetorical battles" across numerous fronts, attempting to rebrand the same calls for accountability and consequences as "woke brigade, digital lynch mobs, outrage culture and call-out culture." Indeed, it's because of the collective organizational power that online spaces provide to marginalized communities, she argued, that anti-cancel culture rhetoric focuses on demonizing them.

Social media is "one of the few spaces that exists for collective feedback and where organizing movements that threaten [conservatives'] social standing have begun," Ibrahim said, "thus compelling them to invert it into a philosophical argument that doesn't affect just them, but potentially has destructive effects on censorship for even the working-class individual."

This potential has nearly become reality through recent forms of Republican-driven legislation around the country. The first wave involved overt censorship, with lawmakers pushing to ban texts like the New York Times's 1619 Project from educational usage at publicly funded schools and universities. Such censorship could seriously curtail free speech at these institutions - an ironic example of the broader kind of censorship that is seemingly a core fear about cancel culture.

A recent wave of legislation has been directed at corporations as a form of punishment for crossing Republicans. After both Delta Air Lines and Major League Baseball spoke out against Georgia lawmakers' passage of a restrictive voting rights bill, Republican lawmakers tried to target the companies, tying their public statements to cancel culture. State lawmakers tried and failed to pass a bill stripping Delta of a tax exemption. And some national GOP figures have threatened to punish MLB by removing its exemption from federal antitrust laws. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said that "corporations will invite serious consequences if they become a vehicle for far-left mobs."

But for all the hysteria and the actual crackdown attempts lawmakers have enacted, even conservatives know that most of the hand-wringing over cancellation is performative. CNN's AJ Willingham pointed out how easily anti-cancel culture zeal can break down, noting that although the 2021 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) was called "America Uncanceled," the organization wound up removing a scheduled speaker who had expressed anti-Semitic viewpoints. And Fox News fired a writer last year after he was found to have a history of making racist, homophobic, and sexist comments online.

These moves suggest that though they may decry "woke" hysteria, conservatives also sometimes want consequences for extremism and other harmful behavior - at least when the shaming might fall on them as well.

"This dissonance reveals cancel culture for what it is," Willingham wrote. "Accountability for one's actions."

CPAC's swift levying of consequences in the case of a potentially anti-Semitic speaker is revealing on a number of levels, not only because it gives away the lie beneath concerns that "cancel culture" is something profoundly new and dangerous, but also because the conference actually had the power to take action and hold the speaker accountable. Typically, the apocryphal "social justice mob" has no such ability. Actually canceling a whole person is much harder to do than opponents of cancel culture might make it sound - nearly impossible, in fact.

Very few "canceled" public figures suffer significantcareer setbacks

It's true that some celebrities have effectively been canceled, in the sense that their actions have resulted in major consequences, including job losses and major reputational declines, if not a complete end to their careers.

Consider Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, R. Kelly, and Kevin Spacey, who faced allegations of rape and sexual assault that became impossible to ignore, and who were charged with crimes for their offenses. They have all effectively been "canceled" - Weinstein and Cosby because they're now convicted criminals, Kelly because he's in prison awaiting trial, and Spacey because while all charges against him to date have been dropped, he's too tainted to hire.

Along with Roseanne Barr, who lost her hit TV show after a racist tweet, and Louis C.K., who saw major professional setbacks after he admitted to years of sexual misconduct against female colleagues, their offenses were serious enough to irreparably damage their careers, alongside a push to lessen their cultural influence.

But usually, to effectively cancel a public figure is much more difficult. In typical cases where "cancel culture" is applied to a famous person who does something that incurs criticism, that person rarely faces serious long-term consequences. During the past year alone, a number of individuals and institutions have faced public backlash for troubling behavior or statements - and a number of them thus far have either weathered the storm or else departed their jobs or restructured their operations of their own volition.

For example, beloved talk show host Ellen DeGeneres has come under fire in recent years for a number of reasons, from palling around with George W. Bush to accusing the actress Dakota Johnson of not inviting her to a party to, most seriously, allegedly fostering an abusive and toxic workplace. The toxic workplace allegations had an undeniable impact on DeGeneres's ratings, with The Ellen DeGeneres Show losing over 40 percent of its viewership in the 2020-'21 TV season. But DeGeneres has not literally been canceled; her daytime talk show has been confirmed for a 19th season, and she continues to host other TV series like HBO Max's Ellen's Next Great Designer.

Another TV host recently felt similar heat but has so far retained his job: In February, The Bachelor franchise underwent a reckoning due to a long history of racial insensitivity and lack of diversity, culminating in the announcement that longtime host Chris Harrison would be " stepping aside for a period of time." But while Harrison won't be hosting the upcoming season of The Bachelorette, ABC still lists him as the franchise host, and some franchise alums have come forward to defend him. (It is unclear whether Harrison will return as a host in the future, though he has said he plans to do so and has been working with race educators and engaging in a personal accountability program of "counsel, not cancel.")

In many cases, instead of costing someone their career, the allegation of having been "canceled" instead bolsters sympathy for the offender, summoning a host of support from both right-wing media and the public. In March 2021, concerns that Dr. Seuss was being "canceled" over a decision by the late author's publisher to stop printing a small selection of works containing racist imagery led to a run on Seuss's books that landed him on bestseller lists. And although J.K. Rowling sparked massive outrage and calls to boycott all things Harry Potter after she aired transphobic views in a 2020 manifesto, sales of the Harry Potter books increased tremendously in her home country of Great Britain.

A few months later, 58 British public figures including playwright Tom Stoppard signed an open letter supporting Rowling's views and calling her the target of "an insidious, authoritarian and misogynistic trend in social media." And in December, the New York Times not only reviewed the author's latest title - a new children's book called The Ickabog - but praised the story's "moral rectitude," with critic Sarah Lyall summing up, "It made me weep with joy." It was an instant bestseller.

In light of these contradictions, it's tempting to declare that the idea of "canceling" someone has already lost whatever meaning it once had. But for many detractors, the "real" impact of cancel culture isn't about famous people anyway.

Rather, they worry, "cancel culture" and the polarizing rhetoric it enables really impacts the non-famous members of society who suffer its ostensible effects - and that, even more broadly, it may be threatening our ability to relate to each other at all.

The debate around cancel culture began as a search for accountability. It may ultimately be about encouraging empathy.

It's not only right-wing conservatives who are wary of cancel culture. In 2019, former President Barack Obama decried cancel culture and "woke" politics, framing the phenomenon as people "be[ing] as judgmental as possible about other people" and adding, "That's not activism."

At a recent panel devoted to making a nonpartisan " Case Against Cancel Culture," former ACLU president Nadine Strossen expressed great concern over cancel culture's chilling effect on the non-famous. "I constantly encounter students who are so fearful of being subjected to the Twitter mob that they are engaging in self-censorship," she said. Strossen cited as one such chilling effect the isolated instances of students whose college admissions had been rescinded on the basis of racist social media posts.

In his recent book Cancel This Book: The Progressive Case Against Cancel Culture, human rights lawyer and free speech advocate Dan Kovalik argues that cancel culture is basically a giant self-own, a product of progressive semantics that causes the left to cannibalize itself.

"Unfortunately, too many on the left, wielding the cudgel of 'cancel culture,' have decided that certain forms of censorship and speech and idea suppression are positive things that will advance social justice," Kovalik writes. "I fear that those who take this view are in for a rude awakening."

Kovalik's worries are partly grounded in a desire to preserve free speech and condemn censorship. But they're also grounded in empathy. As America's ideological divide widens, our patience with opposing viewpoints seems to be waning in favor of a type of society-wide "cancel and move on" approach, even though studies suggest that approach does nothing to change hearts and minds. Kovalik points to a survey published in 2020 that found that in 700 interactions, "deep listening" - including "respectful, non-judgmental conversations" - was 102 times more effective than brief interactions in a canvassing campaign for then-presidential candidate Joe Biden.

Across the political spectrum, wariness toward the idea of "cancel culture" has increased - but outside of right-wing political spheres, that wariness isn't so centered on the hyper-specific threat of losing one's job or career due to public backlash. Rather, the term "cancel culture" functions as shorthand for an entire mode of polarized, aggressive social engagement.

Journalist (and Vox contributor) Zeeshan Aleem has argued that contemporary social media engenders a mode of communication he calls "disinterpretation," in which many participants are motivated to join the conversation not because they want to promote communication, or even to engage with the original opinion, but because they seek to intentionally distort the discourse.

In this type of interaction, as Aleem observed in a recent Substack post, "Commentators are constantly being characterized as believing things they don't believe, and entire intellectual positions are stigmatized based on vague associations with ideas that they don't have any substantive affiliation with." The goal of such willful misinterpretation, he argued, is conformity - to be seen as aligned with the "correct" ideological standpoint in a world where stepping out of alignment results in swift backlash, ridicule, and cancellation.

Such an antagonistic approach "effectively treats public debate as a battlefield," he wrote. He continued:

It's illustrative of a climate in which nothing is untouched by polarization, in which everything is a proxy for some broader orientation which must be sorted into the bin of good/bad, socially aware/problematic, savvy/out of touch, my team/the enemy. ... We're tilting toward a universe in which all discourse is subordinate to activism; everything is a narrative, and if you don't stay on message then you're contributing to the other team on any given issue. What this does is eliminate the possibility of public ambiguity, ambivalence, idiosyncrasy, self-interrogation.

The problem with this style of communication is that in a world where every argument gets flattened into a binary under which every opinion and every person who publicly shares their thoughts must be either praised or canceled, few people are morally righteous enough to challenge that binary without their own motives and biases then being called into question. The question becomes, as Aleem reframed it for me: "How does someone avoid the reality that their claims of being disinterpreted will be disinterpreted?"

"When people demand good-faith engagement, it can often be dismissed as a distraction tactic or whining about being called out," he explained, noting that some responses to his original Twitter thread on the subject assumed he must be complaining about just such a callout.

Other complications can arise, such as when the people who are protesting against this type of bad-faith discourse are also criticized for problematic statements or behavior, or perceived as having too much privilege to wholly understand the situation. Remember, the origins of cancel culture are rooted in giving marginalized members of society the ability to seek accountability and change, especially from people who hold a disproportionate amount of wealth, power, and privilege.

"[W]hat people do when they invoke dog whistles like 'cancel culture' and 'culture wars,'" Danielle Butler wrote for the Root in 2018, "is illustrate their discomfort with the kinds of people who now have a voice and their audacity to direct it towards figures with more visibility and power."

But far too often, people who call for accountability on social media seem to slide quickly into wanting to administer punishment instead. In some cases, this process really does play out with a mob mentality, one that seems bent on inflicting pain and hurt while allowing no room for growth and change, showing no mercy, and offering no real forgiveness - let alone allowing for the possibility that the mob itself might be entirely unjustified.

See, for example, trans writer Isabel Fall, who wrote a short story in 2020 that angered many readers with its depiction of gender dysphoria through the lens of militaristic warfare. (The story has since become a finalist for a Hugo Award.) Because Fall published under a pseudonym, people who disliked the story assumed she must be transphobic rather than a trans woman wrestling with her own dysphoria. Fall was harassed, doxed, forcibly outed, and driven offline. These types of "cancellations" can happen without consideration for the person being canceled, even when that person apologizes - or, as in Fall's case, even when they had little if anything to be sorry about.

The conflation of antagonized social media debates with the more serious aims to make powerful people face consequences is part of the problem. "I think the messy and turbulent evolution of speech norms online influences people's perception of what's called cancel culture," Aleem said. He added that he's grown "resistant to using the term [cancel culture] because it's become so hard to pin down."

"People connect boycotts with de-platforming speakers on college campuses," he observed, "with social media harassment, with people being fired abruptly for breaching a taboo in a viral video." The result is an environment where social media is a double-edged sword: "One could argue," Aleem said, "that there's now public input on issues [that wasn't available] before, and that's good for civil society, but that the vehicle through which that input comes produces some civically unhealthy ways of expression."

Prevailing confusion about cancel culture hasn't stopped it from becoming culturally and politically entrenched

If the conversation around cancel culture is unhealthy, then one can argue that the social systems cancel culture is trying to target are even more unhealthy - and that, for many people, is the bottom line.

The concept of canceling someone was created by communities of people who've never had much power to begin with. When people in those communities attempt to demand accountability by canceling someone, the odds are still stacked against them. They're still the ones without the social, political, or professional power to compel someone into meaningful atonement, but they can at least be vocal by calling for a collective boycott.

The push by right-wing lawmakers and pundits to use the concept as a tool to vilify the left, liberals, and the powerless upends the original logic of cancel culture, Ibrahim told me. "It is being used to obscure marginalized voices by inverting the victim and the offender, and disingenuously affording disproportionate impact to the reach of a single voice - which has historically long been silenced - to now being the silencer of cis, male, and wealthy individuals," she said.

And that approach is both expanding and growing more visible. What's more, it is a divide not just between ideologies, but also between tactical approaches in navigating those ideological differences and dealing with wrongdoing.

"It effectuates a slippery-slope argument by taking a rhetorical scenario and pushing it to really absurdist levels, and furthermore asking people to suspend their implicit understanding of social constructs of power and class," Ibrahim said. "It mutates into, 'If I get canceled, then anyone can get canceled.'" She pointed out that usually, the supposedly "canceled" individual suffers no real long-term harm - "particularly when you give additional time for a person to regroup from a scandal. The media cycle iterates quicker than ever in present day."

She suggested that perhaps the best approach to combating the escalation of cancel culture hysteria into a political weapon is to refuse to let those with power shape the way the conversation plays out.

"I think our remit, if anything, is to challenge that reframing and ask people to define the stakes of what material quality of life and liberty was actually lost," she said.

In other words, the way cancel culture is discussed in the media might make it seem like something to fear and avoid at all costs, an apocalyptic event that will destroy countless lives and livelihoods, but in most cases, it's probably not. That's not to suggest that no one will ever be held accountable, or that powerful people won't continue to be asked to answer for their transgressions. But the greater worry is still that people with too much power might use it for bad ends.

At its best, cancel culture has been about rectifying power imbalances and redistributing power to those who have little of it. Instead, it now seems that the concept may have become a weapon for people in power to use against those it was intended to help.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What does "cancel culture" even mean in 2021?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Conservatives are weaponizing "cancel culture" against progressives. Progressives are using it to eviscerate each other.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Echoes of ‘Brexit’ in U.S. Election | The New York Times

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2019/09/18/step-by-step-guide-why-people-cant-stop-arguing-about-cancel-culture/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Barack Obama takes on 'woke' call-out culture: 'That's not activism'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Covid-19 : divided States of America - L'actualité en anglais

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Aux États-Unis, la lutte contre la pandémie de la Covid-19 divise démocrates et républicains. Face aux déci...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Jefferson Statue Will Be Removed From N.Y.C. Council Chambers (Published 2021)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
After a debate over Jefferson’s legacy and his history as a slaveholder, city officials delayed deciding on where to display the statue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
TED-Ed’s mission is to create lessons worth sharing. Feed and expand your curiosity with our award-winning animated shorts - published on YouTube and available with supplemental learning materials on ed.ted.com. Want to suggest an idea for a TED-Ed animation, nominate an educator or animator? Visit our website at: http://ed.ted.com/get_involved. Consider backing us on Patreon. By doing so, you directly support our nonprofit mission to create free, high-quality educational content: https://www.patreon.com/teded For more information on using TED-Ed content for commercial purposes (e.g. employee learning, in a film, or in an online course), please submit a Media Request using this link: https://media-requests.ted.com/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As the nation's military kills, assaults and terrorizes unarmed civilians each day, some protesters say there is no choice but to fight the army on its own terms.

Credit...

In a jungle in the borderlands of Myanmar, the troops sweated through basic training. They learned how to load a rifle, pull the pin of a hand grenade and assemble a firebomb.

These cadets are not members of Myanmar's military, which seized power last month and quickly imposed a battlefield brutality on the country's populace. Instead, they are an eclectic corps of students, activists and ordinary office workers who believe that fighting back is the only way to defeat one of the world's most ruthless armed forces.

"I see the military as wild animals who can't think and are brutal with their weapons," said a woman from Yangon, Myanmar's biggest city, who was now in the forest for a week of boot camp. Like others who have joined the armed struggle, she did not want her name published for fear that the Tatmadaw, as the Myanmar military is known, would target her.

"We have to attack them back," she said. "This sounds aggressive, but I believe we have to defend ourselves."

After weeks of peaceful protests, the frontline of Myanmar's resistance to the Feb. 1 coup is mobilizing into a kind of guerrilla force. In the cities, protesters have built barricades to protect neighborhoods from military incursions and learned how to make smoke bombs on the internet. In the forests, they are training in basic warfare techniques and plotting to sabotage military-linked facilities.

Image

Protesters threw firebombs in an attempt to hold off the security forces in Yangon last week.

The boldness and desperation of this new front recalls the radicalization of a previous generation of democracy activists in Myanmar, who traded treatises on political philosophy for guns. As in the past, the hard-line opposition is a defensive response to the military's mounting reign of terror. The Tatmadaw has cracked down on peaceful protesters and unarmed bystanders alike, killing at least 275 people since the coup, according to a monitoring group.

Other forms of resistance have continued in Myanmar. A mass civil disobedience campaign has idled the economy, with a nationwide strike on Wednesday leaving towns devoid of business activity. In creative acts of defiance, protesters have lined up rows of stuffed animals and origami cranes as stand-ins for demonstrators who could get shot.

But there is a growing recognition that such efforts may not be enough, that the Tatmadaw needs to be countered on its own terms. Last week, remnants of the ousted Parliament, who consider themselves the legitimate government, said that a "revolution" was needed to save the country. They have called for the formation of a federal army that respects various ethnic groups, not just the majority Bamar.

"If diplomacy fails, if the killings continue, the people of Myanmar will be forced to defend themselves," said Dr. Sasa, a spokesman for the ousted Parliament who is on the run after having been charged with high treason.

Any such movement will have to contend with a military that has ruled Myanmar by force for the better part of 60 years and has fought dozens of insurgencies for even longer. The Tatmadaw's bloodthirst is notorious. Senior Gen. Min Aung Hlaing, the army chief who led the coup, has repeatedly commanded the extermination of entire villages, most chillingly the ethnic cleansing of Rohingya Muslims.

The country has trembled as the Tatmadaw has brought its war machine to the cities, imprisoning Myanmar's civilian leaders last month and erasing a decade of political and economic reform.

Since then, dozens of young protesters have been killed by single gunshots to the head. Security forces have fired into homes at random, leaving families cowering in back rooms. On Tuesday, a 7-year-old girl sitting at home in her father's lap was shot in the city of Mandalay, in what appeared to be a collateral death. (Hundreds of protesters were released on Wednesday after weeks of detention.)

The Tatmadaw is flouting the international rules of war. Security forces have fired at ambulances and tortured detainees. Given the brutality, members of Myanmar's frontline of democracy say there is no choice but to take up arms.

Most days in the concrete conflict zones of Yangon, Ko Soe Win Naing, a 26-year-old sailor, prepares for war: a GoPro camera affixed to his helmet, a balaclava over his head, vials of tear gas in his vest pockets, a sheathed sword on his back and a gas mask at the ready. His weapon of choice is a firework fashioned into a sort of grenade.

Mr. Soe Win Naing has not gone home for weeks, part of a roving gang that tries to protect neighborhoods from marauding security forces. He does not, however, support going into the jungle to train to fight the military.

"Although we are working for the right thing, I have become like a fugitive," he said. "But even if I get killed, I will fight until the very end."

The frontline fighters have piled up sandbags and built bamboo barricades, which they defend with homemade firebombs. Children have joined, too, dressing in pajamas to look harmless as they travel to their battle posts.

"I don't have fear," said Ko Moe Min Latt, 15, a member of a defensive line who barely reaches 5 feet tall.

The image of resistance in Myanmar, once known as Burma, is often wreathed in an aura of nonviolence. In 1988, students argued political theory in the classroom and marched for democracy on the street. In 2007, Buddhist monks overturned their begging bowls and walked barefoot in quiet dissent.

The nation's ousted civilian leader, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for her campaign against the generals who locked her up for 15 years. (The award was tarnished by her defense of the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya.)

But most struggles in Myanmar have involved guns and slingshots. In the mountainous periphery of the country, ethnic armed groups have been fighting for autonomy for decades. After soldiers gunned down hundreds of protesters in 1988, thousands of students and activists fled into the forests and formed armed groups that fought alongside ethnic insurgencies.

Of late, their tactics have extended to information warfare. On Wednesday, anti-coup protesters said they had launched hacking attacks on two military-linked banks.

For the new generation, the decision to fight is born of a desire to protect what the country has gained over the past decade. Myanmar was once one of the most isolated countries on Earth, as a xenophobic and economically inept junta cleaved the country from the international community. Then came tentative political reforms, an internet link to the world and chances at private-sector jobs.

The notion that Myanmar might return to a frightened past has galvanized some protesters. One young woman, who is about to start military training in the jungle, said she remembered huddling as a child with her family and listening secretly to BBC radio broadcasts, an act that once could have earned imprisonment.

"I decided to risk my life and fight back any possible way I can," she said. "If we oppose nationwide in unison, we will make the military have sleepless nights and insecure lives, just as they have done to us."

The security forces, she continued, are following orders and lack a greater purpose.

"We have our political faith, we have our dreams," she said. "This is the fight in which we have to use our brains and our bodies."

If any armed rebellion is to succeed, it will need the backing of the ethnic insurgencies that have long been at war with the Tatmadaw. Last week, the Kachin Independence Army, which represents the Kachin of northern Myanmar, launched a surprise strike against the Tatmadaw.

On Thursday, five Tatmadaw soldiers were killed by the Karen National Liberation Army, which fights for the Karen ethnicity. Last year, hundreds of Tatmadaw troops died while battling another ethnic insurgency in western Rakhine State.

"If ethnic armed groups launch offensives, it could help relieve pressure on the protesters in the cities," said Padoh Saw Hser Bwe, a general secretary of the Karen National Union.

With the Tatmadaw's most notorious brigades now stationed in the cities, focused on anti-coup protesters rather than ethnic civil war, the military's killing continues unabated.

On Monday in Mandalay, Ko Tun Tun Aung, 14, wandered out of his home to grab a pot of water. A bullet pierced his chest, killing him instantly, according to his relatives. At least seven others were also shot dead in the same neighborhood that day. Two were rescue workers.

Ko Thet Aung, a 23-year-old frontline defender, is from the same Mandalay neighborhood where the killings occurred. For three weeks, he has been manning barricades and dodging gunfire.

"The more they crack down, the more we are motivated to fight back," he said. "We are from Generation Z, but I would call ourselves Gen-P - Generation Protection. I will die protecting my country at the front lines."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'I Will Die Protecting My Country': In Myanmar, a New Resistance Rises

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As the nation's military kills, assaults and terrorizes unarmed civilians each day, some protesters say there is no choice but to fight the army on its own terms. Credit... In a jungle in the borderlands of Myanmar, the troops sweated through basic training.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
WASHINGTON - For many Americans, a 21-year-old white man has become the face of anti-Asian violence that has swept the country over the past year. That impression may be misleading.

Robert Aaron Long, the son of a southern Baptist lay leader from Canton, Georgia, is accused of murdering eight people, including six Asian American women, at three spas in the Atlanta metropolitan area last week.

The one-time Bible-carrying high school drummer and video fanatic who later dropped out of college and became a self-described sex addict, has not been charged with committing a hate crime, despite demands by many in the Asian community to do so.

Long has told police he launched his killing spree to eliminate sexual "temptation," not to target the Asian community. While investigators have yet to determine a motive in the case, many of those who carry out attacks on Asian Americans do not fit Long's racial profile.

FILE - A makeshift memorial is seen March 19, 2021, in Acworth, Ga., in the aftermath of shootings that left eight people dead at three metro Atlanta massage businesses.

In New York City, where anti-Asian hate crime soared nearly nine-fold in 2020 over the year before, only two of the 20 people arrested last year in connection with these attacks were white, according to New York Police Department data analyzed by the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism. Eleven were African Americans, six were white Hispanics and one was a Black Hispanic.

"I thought it was jarring," said Brian Levin, executive director of the center, noting that the finding runs counter to assumptions made by many that perpetrators of anti-Asian hate are mostly angry white men who blame China for the COVID-19 pandemic.
Hate crime perpetrators
A hate crime is defined by the FBI as a criminal offense motivated by bias against the victim's race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender or gender identity. While historically whites have been responsible for most hate crimes reported to the FBI, the arrest data from New York shines a light on a sensitive topic in the Asian American community - that attacks on Asians are often carried out by people of color.

Most police departments do not publish this kind of data, but anecdotal evidence suggests the pattern seen in New York has emerged in other cities, as well.

"What is not being discussed in a way is, what is the background of the perpetrators and who is getting charged with these hate crimes," said Chris Kwok, board member of the Asian American Bar Association of New York.

In New York, one of the seven Latinos arrested in anti-Asian attacks last year was a 44-year-old man who allegedly harassed and hit a Hong Kong-born man in Queens.

Among the 11 African Americans arrested last year was a group of four teenage girls charged in April with hate crimes after attacking a 51-year-old Asian woman on a bus in the Bronx while accusing her of causing the COVID-19 virus. One of the teens struck the woman in the head with an umbrella. Prosecutors later dropped hate crime charges against the other three.

Of the two white suspects arrested, one was a woman. In March, Lynn Ferguson, 33, was charged with hate crimes after she bumped into an Asian woman in Manhattan, spat on her and pulled her hair, declaring, "You're the reason why the coronavirus is here!"

FILE - A woman rests a sign over her head while listening to speakers during a Rally Against Hate to end discrimination against Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in New York City, March 21, 2021.

Several factors may explain the relatively high number of non-white arrests in New York City, Levin said. One is the city's racially diverse urban population. Proportionally, the city has 57% more Latinos, 81% more African-Americans, 139% more Asians and about 50% fewer whites than the nation as a whole, with whites often living in less racially mixed neighborhoods, according to Levin. What's more, African Americans are more frequently arrested than whites, and many whites involved in anti-Asian hate crimes may be at large, he noted.

In response to the surge in anti-Asian hate incidents, the New York Police Department created a task force last year. Asked about the anti-Asian hate crime perpetrators' backgrounds, Deputy Inspector Stewart Loo, the task force head, said he could not confirm the statistics, "but they are often misleading."

"I can only give the facts that I know, which is this task force was created by Asian and Black ranking officers within the NYPD," Loo said in an email. "Leaders of the Black community were the first and most vocal in publicly condemning the surge in hate crimes against Asians."

Jack McDevitt, a sociology professor at Northeastern University and co-author of two books on hate crimes, cautioned against reading too much into the data.

"When you look at the data nationally, in any given community in any given year, you can have an anomalous number of hate crimes reported to the police because so many are not reported," he said.

Nevertheless, noting that most hate crime perpetrators tend to be white, McDeVitt added that "other communities have modeled their attacks on what we white folks have been doing for a long time now."

While Asian Americans are not strangers to hate and discrimination, anti-Asian hate crimes spiked by nearly 150% in major U.S. cities last year, exacerbated by former President Donald Trump's anti-China rhetoric, as VOA first reported in March.

Trump and his spokesmen have denied the former president's repeated use of terms such as "kung flu," to refer to the coronavirus, was racist. And conservative commentators have seized on the recent spate of anti-Asian attacks involving African Americans, some of them captured in viral social media videos, to downplay Trump's role.

"The recent crime wave against Asians in America's big cities is not the fault of Donald Trump, MAGA activists, conservative talk radio, or white people," right-wing Asian American commentator Michelle Malkin wrote recently. "It's the fault of the perpetrators and the perpetrators alone - most of whom happen to be thugs 'of color.'"

But Asian American community leaders and experts say the hate directed at their community cannot be delinked from Trump's vitriol.

"When you have a former president who stoked the flames of white nationalism by using ethnic slurs to refer to the coronavirus, you're going to incite hate against a vulnerable minority, in this case, Chinese Americans, and by extension, Asian Americans," said Jennifer Lee, a sociology professor at Columbia University in New York.

Lee said that blaming African American men for the anti-Asian hate spree is misguided.

"The tropes of Black criminality and Black-Asian conflict made it all too convenient for viewers to reduce anti-Asian hate crimes to conflict between two minority groups," Lee said, referring to recent video footage that appears to show Black men attacking Asians.
Divided community
The surge in anti-Asian hate crimes has divided the Asian community over the appropriate law enforcement response.

Progressives oppose tougher police action over concern it could lead to a disproportionately high number of African American and Latino arrests without putting a stop to the hate. Lee cited data showing that an increase in arrests in Asian neighborhoods in four major U.S. cities last year did not deter anti-Asian hate incidents.

Others, however, say the surge in hate crimes warrants stepped-up prosecutions.

"I certainly understand the desire not to unfairly criminalize African American and Latinos, but I think we also need to have accountability for these attacks," Kwok said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Anti-Asian Hate Crime Crosses Racial and Ethnic Lines

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
WASHINGTON - For many Americans, a 21-year-old white man has become the face of anti-Asian violence that has swept the country over the past year. That impression may be misleading. Robert Aaron Long, the son of a southern Baptist lay leader from Canton, Georgia, is accused of murdering eight people, including six Asian American women, at three spas in the Atlanta metropolitan area last week.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
LONDON (Reuters) - Britain will introduce new rules for those seeking asylum, making it more difficult for refugees entering illegally to stay in the country, interior minister Priti Patel said on Wednesday, calling it a firm but fair system.

Since Britain completed its exit from the European Union at the end of last year, Prime Minister Boris Johnson has been keen to set out a new independent vision for the country, unveiling new policies on defence, foreign affairs to immigration.

In what the government says is the biggest overhaul of the asylum system in decades, the "New Plan for Immigration" sets out a plan to resettle refugees at urgent risk more quickly while making it more difficult for those arriving illegally.

"Under our New Plan for Immigration, if people arrive illegally, they will no longer have the same entitlements as those who arrive legally, and it will be harder for them to stay," Patel said in a statement.

"Profiteering from illegal migration to Britain will no longer be worth the risk, with new maximum life sentences for people smugglers ... I make no apology for these actions being firm, but as they will also save lives and target people smugglers, they are also undeniably fair."

She also said those arriving after travelling through a safe country such as France would not have immediate entry into the system, and that the government "would stop the most unscrupulous abusing the system by posing as children".

Reducing immigration was one of the promises made by the Vote Leave campaign, for which Johnson was a figurehead, during the 2016 referendum on membership of the EU, and the government has said it would toughen up its post-Brexit asylum system.

But the main opposition Labour Party said the policy was defined by "a lack of compassion", saying successive Conservative governments had failed the immigration system.

Charities have also criticised the proposals, saying they would create an unfair two-tiered system.

"This is inhumane," British Red Cross chief executive Mike Adamson said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
judicial process / court cases / court decisions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
monetary / fiscal policy / policy makers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Britain toughens its post-Brexit asylum system

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
LONDON (Reuters) - Britain will introduce new rules for those seeking asylum, making it more difficult for refugees entering illegally to stay in the country, interior minister Priti Patel said on Wednesday, calling it a firm but fair system.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Brexit: What trade deals has the UK done so far?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Liz Truss has said a new US-UK trade deal is unlikely in the “short to medium term”.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Four men described as leaders of the far-right Proud Boys group have been charged in the US Capitol riot, as an indictment ordered unsealed on Friday presents fresh evidence of how federal officials believe members planned and carried out a coordinated attack to stop Congress certifying Joe Biden's electoral victory.

At least 19 leaders, members or associates of the neo-fascist Proud Boys have been charged in federal court with offenses related to the 6 January riot, which resulted in five deaths.

The latest indictment suggests the Proud Boys deployed a much larger contingent in Washington, with more than 60 users "participating in" an encrypted messaging channel for group members created a day before.

The Proud Boys abandoned an earlier channel and created the new Boots on the Ground channel after police arrested the group's leader, Enrique Tarrio, in Washington. Tarrio was arrested on 4 January and charged with vandalizing a Black Lives Matter banner at a historic Black church during a protest in December. He was ordered to stay out of the District of Columbia.

Tarrio has not been charged in connection with the riots but the latest indictment refers to him by his title as Proud Boys' chairman.

Ethan Nordean and Joseph Biggs, two of the four defendants charged in the latest indictment, were arrested several weeks ago on separate but related charges. The new indictment also charges Zachary Rehl and Charles Donohoe.

All four defendants are charged with conspiring to impede certification of the electoral college vote. Other charges in the indictment include obstruction of an official proceeding, obstruction of law enforcement during civil disorder and disorderly conduct.

Nordean, 30, of Auburn, Washington, was a Proud Boys chapter president and member of the group's national Elders Council. Biggs, 37, of Ormond Beach, Florida, is a self-described Proud Boys organizer. Rehl, 35, of Philadelphia, and Donohoe, 33, of North Carolina, are presidents of local Proud Boys chapters, according to the indictment.

A lawyer for Biggs declined to comment. Attorneys for the other three men didn't immediately respond to messages.

Proud Boys members, who describe themselves as a politically incorrect men's club for "western chauvinists", have engaged in street fights with antifascist activists at rallies and protests. Vice Media co-founder Gavin McInnes, who founded the Proud Boys in 2016, sued the Southern Poverty Law Center for labeling it as a hate group.

The Proud Boys met at the Washington Monument around 10am on 6 January and marched to the Capitol before then president Donald Trump finished addressing thousands of supporters near the White House.

Around two hours later, just before Congress convened a joint session to certify the election results, a group of Proud Boys followed a crowd who breached barriers at a pedestrian entrance to the Capitol grounds, the indictment says. Several Proud Boys entered the Capitol building after the mob smashed windows and forced open doors.

At 3.38pm, Donohoe announced on the "Boots on the Ground" channel that he and others were "regrouping with a second force" as some rioters began to leave the Capitol, according to the indictment.

"This was not simply a march. This was an incredible attack on our institutions of government," assistant US attorney Jason McCullough said in a recent hearing for Nordean's case.

Prosecutors have said the Proud Boys arranged for members to communicate using Baofeng radios. The Chinese-made devices can be programmed for use on hundreds of frequencies, making them difficult for outsiders to eavesdrop.

After Tarrio's arrest, Donohoe expressed concern that encrypted communications could be "compromised" when police searched the group chairman's phone, according to the new indictment. In a 4 January post on a newly created channel, Donohoe warned members that they could be "looking at Gang charges" and wrote, "Stop everything immediately," the indictment says.

"This comes from the top," he added.

A day before the riots, Biggs posted on the Boots on the Ground channel that the group had a "plan" for the night before and the day of the riots, according to the indictment.

In Nordean's case, a federal judge accused prosecutors of backtracking on their claims that he instructed Proud Boys members to split up into smaller groups and directed a "strategic plan" to breach the Capitol.

"That's a far cry from what I heard at the hearing today," US district judge Beryl Howell said on 3 March.

Howell concluded that Nordean was extensively involved in "pre-planning" for the events of 6 January and that he and other Proud Boys "were clearly prepared for a violent confrontation". However, she said evidence that Nordean directed other Proud Boys members to break into the building is "weak to say the least" and ordered him freed from jail before trial.

On Friday, Howell ordered Proud Boys member Christopher Worrell detained in federal custody pending trial on riot-related charges. Prosecutors say Worrell traveled to Washington and coordinated with Proud Boys leading up to the siege.

"Wearing tactical gear and armed with a canister of pepper spray gel marketed as 67 times more powerful than hot sauce, Worrell advanced, shielded himself behind a wooden platform and other protestors and discharged the gel at the line of officers," prosecutors wrote in a court filing.

Defense attorney John Pierce argued his client wasn't aiming at officers and was only there in the crowd to exercise his free speech rights.

"He's a veteran. He loves his country," Pierce said.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Four Proud Boys leaders charged over alleged roles in US Capitol attack

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Four men described as leaders of the far-right Proud Boys group have been charged in the US Capitol riot, as an indictment ordered unsealed on Friday presents fresh evidence of how federal officials believe members planned and carried out a coordinated attack to stop Congress certifying Joe Biden's electoral victory.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Climate protesters from as many as 60 countries have gathered in person and online for Fridays for Future, a movement created by the Swedish activist Greta Thunberg.

Campaigners raised local issues alongside the globally co-ordinated campaign #cleanupStandardChartered, which calls on the London-headquartered Standard Chartered to divest from coal in emerging markets.

The action follows a letter activists wrote last month to the Standard Chartered chief executive, Bill Winters, calling for the FTSE100 bank to stop funding coal.

It said: "Standard Chartered is still one of the world's largest coal-financing banks, fuelling the climate crisis.

"Mr Winters, funding destruction, killing the planet, and contributing to the death of its inhabitants must stop."

Thunberg also tweeted a link to the campaign, claiming the bank had lent $24bn to coal, oil, and gas businesses since the Paris agreement on climate was signed in 2016.

In the Philippines, where Standard Chartered is the biggest funder of the coal industry, activists stood outside the bank's headquarters with banners and placards.

Maths graduate and full-time activist Mitzi Jonelle Tan was part of a group that handed over a giant cheque to symbolise the amount of money the bank had lent to the coal industry in the country, which they said was $674m.

She said: "Put simply, we need immediate action because the climate crisis is here and it's only going to get worse. And we need to choose the people and the planet over profits.

"That's all we're asking for that we listen to the science that we prioritise people because this is a matter of life and death. The climate crisis is already here."

In the UK, student activist Dominique Palmer was part of a group that protested outside the University of Birmingham and Birmingham city council calling for divestment from fossil fuels. She also took part in online activism as part of the #cleanupStandardChartered campaign, using social platforms to boost the voices of people in other parts of the world who are more directly affected by the climate crisis.
Activist on hunger strike in Canada calls on government to halt logging
Palmer said: "It's so important that on this side of the world we're also getting involved in helping pressure, and you know also helping platform, the voices of people who have already been directly impacted by it, so that's why we're taking action over here."

Climate activists are increasingly targeting banks. Environmental campaigners put Barclays and HSBC under pressure last year and both banks have agreed to discuss divesting from fossil fuels.

A Standard Chartered spokesperson said: "We have made major strides in our coal policy over the past few years. We continue to review our positions in light of stakeholder feedback and intend to remain leaders in articulating a path to net zero by 2050. We are committed to detailed transparency on our transition strategy and plan to put it to a shareholder advisory vote in 2022.

"Our position regarding coal is that we will not provide financial services directly toward new coal-fired power plant projects in any location. We will not provide financial services directly toward any coal-fired power plant expansions, retrofits or dedicated infrastructure."
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate protesters gather in person and online for Fridays for Future

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Climate protesters from as many as 60 countries have gathered in person and online for Fridays for Future, a movement created by the Swedish activist Greta Thunberg. Campaigners raised local issues alongside the globally co-ordinated campaign #cleanupStandardChartered, which calls on the London-headquartered Standard Chartered to divest from coal in emerging markets.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Sign up for the Guardian's First Thing newsletter

Canceled four years ago by a president who considered global warming a hoax, climate crisis information has returned to the website of the US government's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of Joe Biden's promise to "bring science back".

The revival of a page dedicated to the climate emergency reverses Donald Trump's order in 2017 to drop all references to it from government websites, and prioritises the Biden administration's pledge to "organize and deploy the full capacity of its agencies to combat the climate crisis".

In a statement, Michael Regan, confirmed by the US Senate last week as the federal agency's new head, said: "Climate facts are back on the EPA's website where they should be. Considering the urgency of this crisis, it's critical that Americans have access to information and resources so that we can all play a role in protecting our environment, our health and vulnerable communities."

Trump's decision to drop the EPA's climate informational page was just one of many controversial moves that angered environmentalists during his single term of office. He pulled the US out of the Paris climate agreement, rolled back countless environmental regulations and protections and appointed a scandal-ridden climate change denier, Scott Pruitt, to lead the EPA.

Analysts, however, considered the Orwellian removal from the world wide web of scientifically accepted climate data and information to be especially heinous.

In a Guardian article last October, Michael Mann, one of the world's most eminent climate experts, likened the following month's presidential election to "a Tolkienesque battle between good and evil" and said Trump's re-election would have made it "essentially impossible" to avert a global climate catastrophe.

The climate change webpage of the Environmental Protection Agency website, which was relaunched on 18 March 2021. Photograph: Reuters

The EPA's climate change page relaunched on Thursday, featuring a prominent graphic stating that the agency "is restoring the role of science" in addressing the emergency. "Trustworthy, science-based information is at the foundation of strong, achievable solutions," Regan said.

So far, the site appears sparsely populated, containing details of a couple of executive actions concerning the climate that Biden signed in his first week in office in January, and restoring links to previous EPA reports and other related federal agencies, such as Nasa and the national oceanic and atmospheric administration.

A short video features Regan laying out the agency's priorities: "Americans in every corner of our country are seeing and feeling the effects of climate change, wildfires out west, back to back hurricanes in the Gulf Coast, extreme heat and rain in the heartlands and historic flooding in the east," he said. "Combating climate change is not optional, it's essential at EPA."

The site promises more content to come, urging viewers to "return in the coming weeks as we add new information and features".

Biden made tackling the climate emergency a cornerstone of his election campaign and acted quickly to deliver on the promise, restoring the US to the Paris agreement and enacting early executive orders covering a range of environmental initiatives. They include creating a position for a special presidential envoy for climate, and hosting an Earth Day climate summit in April.

"Science is back," the president said during a tour of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) headquarters in Atlanta on Friday.

"We're not going back to the old days. When you have a crisis you're prepared to meet it because you speak the truth and science to power."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Climate facts are back': EPA brings science back to website after Trump purge

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Canceled four years ago by a president who considered global warming a hoax, climate crisis information has returned to the website of the US government's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of Joe Biden's promise to "bring science back".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Lauded for his human touch, Joe Biden is facing an early political and moral test over how his government treats thousands of migrant children who make the dangerous journey to America alone.

Officials say the number of people caught attempting to cross the US-Mexico border is on pace to hit its highest number for 20 years. Single adults and families are being expelled under coronavirus safety rules inherited from Donald Trump.

But a growing number of children, some as young as six years old, from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras are arriving at the southern border without parents or guardians. These minors are brought to border patrol facilities - where many languish in cramped, prison-like conditions for days on end.

The fast-developing humanitarian emergency shows how Biden's determination to break from Trump's harsh, nativist crackdown in favour of a more compassionate approach has collided with the reality of finite resources and a broken system.

"I do think that they were blindsided by this surge," said María Teresa Kumar, founding president of the grassroots political organisation Voto Latino. "As someone that monitored this a lot, I didn't see that coming and I don't think the community saw that coming. It took everybody by surprise.

"It is heart-wrenching knowing that there are children that are cold and don't have family. It's one of these cases where there seems to be no right answers. Knowing the people inside the administration are very much on the side of immigrants speaks to me that there are real moral dilemmas happening right now and I would not want to be in that position."

It's a very smart move by Republicans to play this out and Biden needs to be compassionate but not naively welcoming

Henry Olsen

Democrats have called the situation a "challenge" and "problem" and blamed Trump's legacy. Republicans have rushed to brand it the first "crisis" and "disaster" of Biden's presidency. The battle is proof that border access remains one of the most complex, emotive and radioactive issues in American politics.

Trump launched his campaign for the presidency by promising to build a wall, routinely vilified migrants and, ahead of the 2018 midterm elections, spoke often of an "invasion". Biden stopped construction of the wall and promised to unwind Trump's zero-tolerance policies.

The number of "encounters" between migrants and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has increased every month since April 2020. But when 100,441 migrants were reported attempting to cross the border last month, it was the highest level since March 2019 and included a particular rise in unaccompanied children.

Many such children head to the US to reunite with family members or escape poverty, crime and violence. Central America has been hit by hurricanes and the economic fallout of Covid-19. In an ABC interview this week, Biden denied that more migrants were coming because he is "a nice guy", insisting: "They come because their circumstance is so bad."

Under Trump, unaccompanied children were sent straight back to Mexico. Biden decided they should go to a border patrol facility and, within 72 hours, be transferred to the health department with a view to being placed with a family member or sponsor.

However, it has quickly become clear the system is not fit for purpose, leaving about 4,500 children stuck in facilities designed for adult men. Lawyers who visited one facility in Texas described seeing children sleeping on the floor or on metal benches and being allowed outside for a few minutes every few days.

The administration is scrambling to find more capacity, opening emergency shelters and using a convention centre in Dallas to house up to 3,000 teenage boys. It also deployed the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema), which typically responds to floods, storms and other disasters, to help shelter and transport children at least until early June.

Republicans seized on that move as evidence a disaster is unfolding. The House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, led a delegation of a dozen Republicans to El Paso, Texas, and spoke of "the Biden border crisis", adding: "It's more than a crisis. This is human heartbreak."

The message has resounded through a conservative media that finds Biden an elusive target. Trump made wildly exaggerated claims in a Fox News interview: "They're destroying our country. People are coming in by the hundreds of thousands, And, frankly, our country can't handle it. It is a crisis like we have rarely had and, certainly, we have never had on the border."

For Republicans, reeling from election defeat, internal divisions and failure to block Biden's $1.9tn coronavirus relief bill, the border offers a political lifeline.

Henry Olsen, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center thinktank in Washington, said: "If the numbers go down next month this isn't a crisis, but I think what they are expecting is that they're not going to go down and that this is going to be something that will be an enduring and endemic problem.

"It's something that energises and unites the Trump voting coalition and could easily be seen as a failure on behalf of the administration by just enough of the people who voted for him but aren't hardcore Democrats. So I think it's a very smart move by Republicans to play this out and Biden needs to figure out how you can be compassionate while not being naively welcoming. He has not yet figured out how to do that."

When Republicans had a president teargassing refugees, not one stood up. It's callous and cold political expediency

María Teresa Kumar

Others, however, regard the Republican response as predictable ploy by a party obsessed with demonising migrants. Kumar said: "They're phonies and it is coldly calculated because they know they have problems with suburban white women voters, and they are trying to make a case for it for the midterms.

"It's cynical and gross because when children were literally dying at the border, when they had a president that was teargassing refugees, not one of them stood up. It's callous and cold political expediency and it's shameful."

The White House has pointed out that the Trump administration forcibly separated nearly 3,000 children from parents, with no system in place to reunite them. Alejandro Mayorkas, the first migrant and first Latino in charge of the Department of Homeland Security, told Congress: "A crisis is when a nation is willing to rip a nine-year-old child out of the hands of his or her parent and separate that family to deter future migration. That, to me, is a humanitarian crisis."

Mayorkas argues that Trump's decision to cut staffing, bed capacity and other resources was reckless given the likelihood that the number of migrants would rise again as the pandemic waned.

"The system was gutted," he said, "facilities were closed and they cruelly expelled young children into the hands of traffickers. We have had to rebuild the entire system, including the policies and procedures required to administer the asylum laws that Congress passed long ago."

John Katko, a New York Republican, addresses the press in El Paso. Photograph: Justin Hamel/AFP/Getty Images

On Thursday, Mexico announced restrictions on non-essential travel across its border with Guatemala and Belize, "to prevent the spread of Covid-19". In what to many appeared more than coincidence, the measure came the same day the US confirmed it will send 2.5m doses of the AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine to Mexico.

But there are no quick fixes. House Democrats this week passed bills that would create a path to citizenship for millions of young undocumented migrants and allow a path to legal status for some agricultural workers. Biden is planning programmes that allow Central Americans to apply for refugee status from their home countries and has also vowed to push for $4bn in US aid for Central America.

Kumar said: "The situation in Central America is getting worse. They're having more devastating climate change and insecurity and what we're seeing at the border is sadly a symptom of all of this. Now how do we actually figure out a Latin American policy so that we can start addressing it?

"One of the things that [Barack] Obama put in place was allowing children to present themselves in home country at the US embassy to get processed so they wouldn't make the journey, Trump eliminated that option so that's where we saw a real influx. Biden is now putting that policy back in place and it's going to be a matter of advertising it."

For now Biden, who has to pick up the pieces from Trump's brutal regime and from the pandemic, appears to have time and political goodwill on his side.

Ali Noorani, president and chief executive of the National Immigration Forum, said: "The previous administration had every intention of treating migrants as cruelly as possible. In fact, that was the point. The intent of the Biden administration is to treat people with compassion and to keep the country safe.

"So what we're looking forward to is a set of clear metrics that show that the Biden administration is being effective. How many hours are unaccompanied children staying in CBP facilities? How long is it taking to identify legal guardians in the US? How long is taking to adjudicate cases?

"Let's see where we are today and every week, every month, let's see how things are improving."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Blindsided': Biden faces tough test in reversing Trump's cruel border legacy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Lauded for his human touch, Joe Biden is facing an early political and moral test over how his government treats thousands of migrant children who make the dangerous journey to America alone. Officials say the number of people caught attempting to cross the US-Mexico border is on pace to hit its highest number for 20 years.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Australia accused of ‘shamefully’ holding back global action on climate change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
United Nations calls on all countries to have ‘concrete plans to phase out fossil fuels as fast as possible’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The first assessment of countries' pledges to cut their greenhouse gas emissions in the next decade, a vital component of the Paris climate agreement, has found they are only a fraction of the effort needed to avoid climate breakdown.

If all of the national pledges submitted so far were fulfilled, global emissions would be reduced by only 1% by 2030, compared with 2010 levels. Scientists have said a 45% reduction is needed in the next 10 years to keep global heating to no more than 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, in line with the Paris agreement.

Patricia Espinosa, the executive secretary of UN Climate Change, said: "We are very far away from a pathway that will meet the Paris agreement goal. We are collectively walking into a minefield blindfolded. The next step could be disaster."

The assessment, published by the UN on Friday, covers countries responsible for only about a third of global emissions. Only 75 of the 197 signatories to the Paris accord submitted their national action plans for reducing emissions between now and 2030 - known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs) - in time to be assessed.

Some of the world's biggest emitters, including China, the US and India, have still to formulate NDCs. They face renewed pressure to do so urgently. The UN has said that without them, the Cop26 climate summit in Glasgow in November will fail.

The UN secretary general, António Guterres, said: "2021 is a make-or-break year to confront the global climate emergency. Today's interim report is a red alert for our planet. It shows governments are nowhere close to the level of ambition needed to meet the goals of the Paris agreement. The major emitters must step up with much more ambitious reduction targets for 2030 in their NDCs well before the November conference in Glasgow."

Many of the countries still to produce NDCs, including China and the US, have stated their intention to reach net-zero emissions by 2050, seen as a key commitment to fulfil the Paris agreement. Guterres, however, said 2030 targets were also crucial: " Covid-19 recovery plans offer the opportunity to build back greener and cleaner. Long-term commitments must be matched by immediate actions to launch the decade of transformation that people and planet so desperately need."

The US and China will now be firmly under the spotlight. China could publish its NDC as soon as next week, when the government is expected to unveil its next five-year plan. The US is holding a major international climate summit on 22 April, at which it could come forward with plans.

The two biggest emitters are involved in a diplomatic balancing act, echoing that before the Paris agreement, when presidents Barack Obama and Xi Jinping held their own summit before the talks in the French capital to forge a common understanding.

Helen Mountford, the vice-president of the World Resources Institute, called for stringent plans from both. "The US should set an ambitious and attainable 2030 emission reduction target of 50%, while China should peak its emissions by 2025, which our research shows is possible, as well as rein in its non-CO2 emissions" such as methane and industrial gases.

Aubrey Webson, the ambassador to the UN for Antigua and Barbuda and chair of the Alliance of Small Island States, many of which face inundation if temperatures rise by more than 1.5C, said: "The US recently rejoined the Paris agreement and the world applauded. Now we need them to continue to showcase real climate leadership.

"Other large emitters that have not yet made pledges must do so immediately. If we are truly determined to limit global warming to well below 1.5C, these emitters must do better. They must go further. And they must implement their climate targets faster."

Espinosa also made it clear that the countries that had already submitted their pledges had not done enough. She refused to single any out, and the assessment - entitled the Initial NDC Synthesis Report - shows aggregate data. She said: "It is incredible to think that just when nations are facing an emergency that could eventually end human life on this planet, many are sticking to their business-as-usual approach."

Japan submitted its NDC early last year, but since then the country's new government and regional rivals China and South Korea have committed to net-zero targets, which could prompt a rethink. Australia and Brazil also submitted NDCs widely regarded as inadequate. EU member states agreed a target of 55% emissions cuts by 2030, compared with 1990 levels, though MEPs wanted to go further.

The UK, which will host Cop26, claimed its target of 68% emissions reductions by 2030 was the toughest of any developed country, but some economists calculated a target of 70% or more was feasible.

Carolina Schmidt, Chile's environment minister who hosted the last Cop talks in 2019, said that of the major economies only the EU and UK had pledged enough. "With respect to the world's biggest emitters, whose contributions are most decisive, only two followed Chile's footsteps by presenting NDCs with a strong increase in greenhouse gas reduction targets last year," she said.

"These were the EU and UK, whose efforts we commend. The remainder have either failed to present new NDCs or presented NDCs with no increase in ambition. They must all now step up if we are to keep the hopes of Paris alive, even if this means resubmitting an NDC to ensure it is fit for that task."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
CO2 emissions: nations' pledges 'far away' from Paris target, says UN

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Secretary general António Guterres says first assessment of promises amounts to 'red alert for our planet'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate crisis hitting ‘worst case scenarios’, warns Environment Agency

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sir James Bevan says extreme flooding in UK indicates urgent need for change if humanity is to survive

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Thousands of lives lost to air pollution, inactivity and unhealthy diets could be saved each year if the UK takes the action needed to tackle climate change, researchers have said.

Across the world, millions of lives could be saved if countries raise ambitions on cutting emissions to limit global heating to well below 2C above pre-industrial levels, as they have committed to in the global Paris climate accord.

The researchers said the findings highlighted the added incentive of improvements to human health from tackling climate change.

Research from the Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change looked at the health impact of boosting national climate action plans to meet the Paris targets to avoid dangerous climate change across nine countries, including the US, China, Brazil and the UK.

The world is currently off track to meet the Paris goals, but the research found strengthening commitments to curb temperature rises in line with the international agreement would also have significant benefits for health.

Tougher measures to curb emissions would save lives through better, more plant-based diets, more physical activity from active travel such as walking and cycling and cuts to air pollution from burning fewer fossil fuels.

The research, published in a special issue of the Lancet Planetary Health journal, looked at three scenarios: carrying on the current path, increasing efforts to achieve the Paris goals, and a more ambitious scenario, which put health at the heart of tackling climate change.

In the UK, implementing policies to meet international climate goals would save 98,420 lives a year by 2040 through better "flexitarian" diets, which involve less meat and more vegetables, legumes and fruit.

Meanwhile, 21,486 lives could be saved by people taking more exercise and 3,458 from reductions in air pollution.

If even more ambitious plans were put in place to make sure health was the focus of climate policy, 100,100 lives a year could be saved through dietary changes, with 50% adopting flexitarian diets and 50% going vegan.

A further 5,771 lives could be saved from cuts to air pollution and 38,441 from more active travel, with 75% of people walking or cycling over the course of a week, the modelling suggests.

Across all nine countries, implementing national climate plans which meet the Paris goals could save 5.8 million lives due to better diet, 1.2 million lives due to cleaner air, and 1.2 million lives due to increased exercise.

And putting explicit health objectives in their plans, known as nationally determined contributions or NDCs under the Paris accord, could lead to a further reduction of 462,000 deaths due to air pollution, 572,000 from diet, and 943,000 from physical inactivity a year by 2040.

The lead author, Ian Hamilton, executive director of the Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change, said: "Our report focuses on a crucial but often overlooked incentive for tackling climate change.

"Unlike the direct benefits of carbon mitigation which are ultimately long-term and understood in terms of damage limitation, the health co-benefits of ambitious climate policies have an immediate positive impact."

He said the report's message was stark.

Hamilton said: "Not only does delivering on Paris prevent millions dying prematurely each year, the quality of life for millions more will be improved through better health.

"We have an opportunity now to place health in the forefront of climate change policies to save even more lives."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate action could save 'millions of lives' through clean air, diet and exercise

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Meeting Paris goals would bring health benefits aside from tackling global heating, research says

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Troops have joined police in forcefully dispersing marchers in the city of Mandalay in northern Myanmar, as protests against the military coup continued despite the deployment of extra soldiers in some areas and an eight-hour internet blackout overnight.

Images and reports from the city on Monday showed police and soldiers using rubber bullets and slingshots to disperse protesters. A student union in the city said several people had been injured.

In the capital, Naypyidaw, protesters gathered outside a police station demanding the release of a group of high school students who were detained while joining in anti-coup activities.

One student who managed to escape told reporters that the pupils - thought to range in age from 13 to 16 - were demonstrating peacefully when a line of riot police arrived and began arresting them. It was not clear exactly how many students were rounded up, but estimates put the figure at between 20 and 40.

Myanmar resurfaced online at about 9am local time on Monday after an internet-monitoring service showed a dramatic fall in connectivity from midnight. There were fears the blackout might be used as cover for mass arrests or violence.

"Before 1am we were still checking up on each other, calling to confirm that we were each in a safe place," said a protest organiser who came from a family of activists. "Anything could have happened last night based on my experience living under the military regime and dealing with the military intelligence and special branch. I have been worried since day one of the coup. I haven't slept well since day one."

There was no sign of overnight violence on Monday, but the country woke to extra troops on the streets of many cities including the former capital Yangon, where the new forces on the ground included the 77th light-infantry division which, during pro-democracy protests in 2007, was accused of ramming demonstrators and using live ammunition against them.

Protests continued in the city despite the show of force, albeit in numbers smaller than the peaks of Friday and the weekend. Students and Buddhist monks demonstrated in front of the troops, and a banner reading "We do not want military government" was stuck to an army vehicle outside Yangon's central bank.

"Patrolling with armoured vehicles means they are threatening people," said 46-year-old Nyein Moe, among the more than 1,000 gathered in front of the central bank in Yangon.

"People are marching on the streets and they don't care to be arrested or shot. We can't stop now. The fear in our mind is going away."

There was a new rally in the southern city of Dawei, too, a verified livestream on Facebook showed, with hundreds of protesters accompanied by a marching band.

Crowds also gathered outside the headquarters of the National League for Democracy, the civilian party that won November's general election but whose top leaders, including Aung San Suu Kyi, were detained when the military took power on 1 February.

Aung San Suu Kyi's detention on charges of illegally importing six walkie-talkie radios was due to expire on Monday but her lawyer said she would be remanded in detention until Wednesday for a court hearing. Aung San Suu Kyi had spoken to a judge via video conferencing, her legal team said, and she had asked if she could hire a lawyer.

Speaking in Naypyidaw on Monday morning, Khin Maung Zaw said he was still trying to see his client in line with the law. When asked about the fairness of the proceedings, the lawyer said: "Whether it is fair or not, you can decide yourself."

Since the coup, hundreds of thousands of people have taken to the streets to call for an end to Aung San Suu Kyi 's detention in the nation's biggest protests in more than a decade.

The unrest has revived memories of bloody outbreaks of opposition to almost half a century of direct army rule, which ended when the military began a process of withdrawing from civilian politics in 2011.

On Sunday, police opened fire to disperse protesters at a power plant in northern Myanmar, but violence in this month's protests has been limited.

As well as the demonstrations around the country, the military rulers are facing a strike by government workers, part of a civil disobedience movement that is crippling many of the functions of government.

Soldiers were deployed to power plants in the northern state of Kachin, leading to a confrontation with demonstrators, some saying they believed the army intended to cut off the electricity.

The security forces fired to disperse protesters outside one plant in the state capital, Myitkyina, footage broadcast live on Facebook showed, although it was not clear if they were using rubber bullets or live fire.

On Sunday evening, armoured vehicles appeared in the commercial capital of Yangon, Myitkyina and Sittwe, the capital of Rakhine state, the first large-scale rollout of such vehicles across the country since the coup.

Armoured vehicles drive along a road in Yangon, Myanmar, 15 February 2021. Photograph: Nyein Chan Naing/EPA

The government and army could not be reached for comment.

Shortly after midnight, residents reported an internet outage. All four telecommunications networks were inaccessible from about 1am until 9am on Monday, when connections were restored.

Monitoring group NetBlocks reported that a "state-ordered information blackout" had taken Myanmar almost entirely offline, but services began resuming around the start of the working day.

In the early days after the coup, the internet was cut across the country.

The army has been carrying out nightly arrests and on Saturday gave itself sweeping powers to detain people and search private property. On Sunday, it published penal code amendments aimed at stifling dissent.

"It's as if the generals have declared war on the people," UN special rapporteur Tom Andrews said on Twitter. "Late night raids; mounting arrests; more rights stripped away; another Internet shutdown; military convoys entering communities. These are signs of desperation. Attention generals: You WILL be held accountable."

The amendments to the penal code set out a 20-year prison term for inciting hatred of the government or military or hindering the security forces engaged in preserving state stability.

Hindering the security forces carrying out their duties is punishable by seven years in prison while spreading fear, fake news or agitating against government employees gets three, according to the amendments posted on a military website.

In the latest sign of disruption by workers, the government's civil aviation department said in a statement many staff had stopped coming to work since 8 February, causing delays to international flights.

A pilot, who asked not to be identified for fear of retribution, said hundreds of staff from the department were striking. Some trains also stopped running after staff refused to go to work, domestic media reported.
Reuters and Agence France-Presse contributed to this report

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Myanmar: troops and police forcefully disperse marchers in Mandalay

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Troops have joined police in forcefully dispersing marchers in the city of Mandalay in northern Myanmar, as protests against the military coup continued despite the deployment of extra soldiers in some areas and an eight-hour internet blackout overnight. Images and reports from the city on Monday showed police and soldiers using rubber bullets and slingshots to disperse protesters.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Hill We Climb: the Amanda Gorman poem that stole the inauguration show

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
ews that Oxford and Cambridge cut the number of UK undergraduates over the past 10 years - when many other universities increased theirs - and recruited more international students instead highlights the exceptionalism of England's two oldest but oddest universities.

They are the commanding heights of our higher education system, and close to the top of global university league tables. Their dreaming spires and sheltered quadrangles and courts are part of England's timeless heritage. Both their success and antiquity make it difficult to ask the question whether they are still fit for purpose in the 21st century.

Most of their students still come from socially privileged groups, with a grossly disproportionate number from independent schools, despite the best efforts of grassroots access and outreach staff. Many Oxbridge students aspire to join the nation's elites, whether public service or hyper capitalist. They help perpetuate England's "chumocracy", whose deficiencies have been on such cruel display in the Brexit negotiations compared with rival European elites trained, for example, in France's grandes écoles.

The reduction in the number of UK undergraduates has made it even more of a challenge for both universities to recruit students from more disadvantaged - or, maybe, just more normal - social groups. Widening participation without increasing participation is difficult, because more-deprived applicants then appear to be displacing those who are more privileged (with their vociferous and influential parents).

Independent schools watch like hawks for any sign of "social engineering" - in other words, levelling the admissions playing field. Getting their pupils into Oxbridge, after all, is their USP. They, and the more successful state schools, are adept at grinding out the top grades, which Oxford and Cambridge, in thrall to an "excellence" that gives little weight to the gross inequalities of school education (not to mention the English class system), have come to expect.

Yet at the same time, they are without question world-class research universities. The roll call of past Oxbridge scientists and scholars exudes eminence. These two universities continue to play a leading role in research in most, although not all, disciplines, not only in the UK but worldwide.

Oxbridge sometimes resembles a pantomime horse - undergraduate finishing schools fighting with world-class research in the same sack. Efforts to adjust the balance between the two, to the advantage of the latter, have been too tentative. New graduate colleges have failed to challenge the dominance of the original undergraduate colleges. The recruitment of more postgraduates, often international students, is a step in the right direction. But, in the absence of tougher policies on fair access, this rationing of undergraduate places makes entry even more competitive.

Then there are governance and constitutional weaknesses. Put bluntly, colleges, especially at Oxford, have too much power and are difficult to reform. Some have barely escaped the shadows of Barchester Towers - if the current wrangle between Christ Church and its dean is anything to go by.

Resources remain unevenly distributed. Super-rich colleges enjoying medieval wealth coexist with underfunded university departments. College fellows with parson-like freeholds (let's forget the wine cellars for the moment) rub shoulders with researchers on precarious contracts. Efforts to redistribute wealth have achieved little real change.

The simple truth is that Oxford and Cambridge are too good and too important to be allowed to remain unreformed. They need to do more - much more - on fair access if they are to reflect, even approximately, modern Britain. Quotas for students from less-privileged backgrounds are essential, even if they squeeze out some of the gilded youth. They also need to use their resources more rationally by taxing excessive college wealth if they are to continue to compete with the likes of Harvard - and, in the future, the Far East.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Oxbridge needs student quotas to end its role in the 'chumocracy' | Peter Scott

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ews that Oxford and Cambridge cut the number of UK undergraduates over the past 10 years - when many other universities increased theirs - and recruited more international students instead highlights the exceptionalism of England's two oldest but oddest universities. They are the commanding heights of our higher education system, and close to the top of global university league tables.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A Paris court has convicted the French state of failing to address the climate crisis and not keeping its promises to tackle greenhouse gas emissions.

In what has been hailed as a historic ruling, the court found the state guilty of "non-respect of its engagements" aimed at combating global warming.

Billed the "affair of the century", the legal case was brought by four French environmental groups after a petition signed by 2.3 million people.

"This is an historic win for climate justice. The decision not only takes into consideration what scientists say and what people want from French public policies, but it should also inspire people all over the world to hold their governments accountable for climate change in their courts," said Jean-François Julliard, the executive director of Greenpeace France, one of the plaintiffs.

He said the judgment would be used to push the French state to act against the climate emergency. "No more blah blah," he added.

Cécilia Rinaudo, the director of Notre Affaire à Tous (It's Everyone's Business), another plaintiff, said it was an "immense victory" for climate activists around the world.

"It's a victory for all the people who are already facing the devastating impact of the climate crisis that our leaders fail to tackle. The time has come for justice," Rinaudo said.

"This legal action has brought millions of people together in a common fight: the fight for our future. The judge's landmark decision proves that France's climate inaction is no longer tolerable, it is illegal. But the fight is not over. Recognising the state's inaction is only a first step towards the implementation of concrete and efficient measures to combat climate change."

The court ruled that compensation for "ecological damage" was admissible, and declared the state "should be held liable for part of this damage if it had failed to meet its commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions".

It did not uphold a claim for symbolic compensation, saying compensation should be made "in kind", with damages awarded "only if the reparation measures were impossible or insufficient".

However, the court ruled that the applicants were entitled to seek compensation in kind for the "ecological damage caused by France's failure to comply with the targets it had set for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It said this needed further investigation and gave the state two months to respond.

It awarded each organisation a symbolic €1 for "moral prejudice", saying the state's failure to honour its climate commitments was "detrimental to the collective interest".

Wednesday's judgment was hailed as "revolutionary" by the four NGOs - including Greenpeace France and Oxfam France - that lodged the formal complaint with the French prime minister's office in December 2018. When they received what they considered an inadequate response, they filed a legal case in March 2019.

The Paris agreement signed five years ago aimed to limit global warming to less than 2C above pre-industrial levels. Donald Trump pulled the US out of the deal in 2017, though Joe Biden plans to rejoin. Environmental experts say governments, including the French administration, have failed to meet their commitments.

The French government has pledged to reduce the country's greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by 2030 and reach carbon neutrality by 2050.

NGOs say the state is exceeding its carbon budgets and is not moving quickly enough to renovate buildings to make them energy efficient, or to develop renewable energy. They claim this is having a serious impact on the daily quality of life and health of people in France.

In a report last July, France's High Council for the Climate severely criticised government policies. "Climate action is not up to the challenges and objectives," it said.

France's greenhouse gas emission dropped by 0.9% in 2018-19, when the annual drop needed to reach its targets is 1.5% until 2025 and 3.2% afterwards.

In a written defence, the French government rejected accusations of inaction and asked the court to throw out any claim for compensation. It argued that the state could not be held uniquely responsible for climate change when it was not responsible for all global emissions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Court convicts French state for failure to address climate crisis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
State found guilty of 'non-respect of its engagements' aimed at fighting global warming

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A l'occasion de la sortie du premier tome de ses mémoires " Une terre promise " aux éditions Fayard, l'ancien président américain, prix Nobel de la paix, Barack Obama s'est confié à Augustin Trapenard et offre son interview-radio exclusive à France Inter.

Son histoire, digne d'une épopée, est celle d'un homme que rien ne prédestinait à accéder à la fonction suprême. Jeune, métisse, sans expérience, il a su convaincre par la force du récit qu'il proposait et incarner l'espoir d'une Amérique nouvelle. Dans " Une terre promise ", il revient sur la naissance de son engagement citoyen, et sur les étapes qui ont jalonné sa première élection en 2008, alors que son pays était à l'aube d'une crise financière sans précédent. Observateur sans complaisance de sa propre action politique, il livre une analyse lucide des errances et des défis auxquels se confronte la démocratie américaine. Un récit fleuve, sincère et épique, qui témoigne à la fois de la force des mots et de leur impuissance. Barack Obama est dans Boomerang.

Retrouvez Boomerang sur France Inter : https://www.franceinter.fr/emissions/boomerang

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A l'occasion de la sortie du premier tome de ses mémoires " Une terre promise " aux éditions Fayard, l'ancien président américain, prix Nobel de la paix, Barack Obama s'est confié à Augustin Trapenard et offre son interview-radio exclusive à France Inter.Son histoire, digne d'une épopée, est celle d'un homme que rien ne prédestinait à accéder à la fonction suprême.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The melting of ice across the planet is accelerating at a record rate, with the melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets speeding up the fastest, research has found.

The rate of loss is now in line with the worst-case scenarios of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the world's leading authority on the climate, according to a paper published on Monday in the journal The Cryosphere.

Thomas Slater, lead author and research fellow at the centre for polar observation and modelling at the University of Leeds, warned that the consequences would be felt around the world. "Sea level rise on this scale will have very serious impacts on coastal communities this century," he said.

About 28tn tonnes of ice was lost between 1994 and 2017, which the authors of the paper calculate would be enough to put an ice sheet 100 metres thick across the UK. About two thirds of the ice loss was caused by the warming of the atmosphere, with about a third caused by the warming of the seas.

Over the period studied, the rate of ice loss accelerated by 57%, the paper found, from 0.8tn tonnes a year in the 1990s to 1.2tn tonnes a year by 2017. About half of all the ice lost was from land, which contributes directly to global sea level rises. The ice loss over the study period, from 1994 to 2017, is estimated to have raised sea levels by 35 millimetres.

The greatest quantities of ice were lost from floating ice in the polar regions, raising the risk of a feedback mechanism known as albedo loss. White ice reflects solar radiation back into space - the albedo effect - but when floating sea ice melts it uncovers dark water which absorbs more heat, speeding up the warming further in a feedback loop.

Glaciers showed the next biggest loss of ice volume, with more than 6tn tonnes lost between 1994 and 2017, about a quarter of global ice loss over the period. The shrinking of glaciers threatens to cause both flooding and water shortages in some regions, because as large volumes melt they can overwhelm downstream areas, then shrunken glaciers produce less of the steady water flow needed for agriculture.

Inès Otosaka, report co-author and a PhD researcher at the University of Leeds centre for polar observation and modelling, said: "As well as contributing to global mean sea level rise, mountain glaciers are also critical as a freshwater resource for local communities. The retreat of glaciers around the world is therefore of crucial importance, at both local and global scales."

The study, titled Earth's Ice Imbalance, used satellite observations over the 23-year period to assess ice all over the globe. Previous studies have examined parts of the world rather than making a comprehensive assessment of the data. The research team included the University of Edinburgh, University College London and Earthwave, a data science organisation, and was funded by the UK Natural Environment Research Council.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Global ice loss accelerating at record rate, study finds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Rate of loss now in line with worst-case scenarios of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A lot happened in 2020. Here’s how The Times’s Climate Desk covered it.

# data[].attributes.body
Mrs. Chakori’s email address is: mrschakori@gmail.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The US was battered by a record number of weather and climate-driven disasters in 2020 as extensive wildfires scorched the west, hurricanes in quick succession pummeled the east and extreme heat swept across the heart of the country, a new federal government report has shown.

A total of 22 major disasters, defined as each causing at least $1bn in damage, swept the US last year, six more than the previous record, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa).

At least 262 people died, with $95bn in total damages recorded, the federal agency reported on Friday.

The year was marked by punishing extremes on both the east and west coasts. It was the most active wildfire year on record in the US west, with California recording five of the six biggest fires in its history, an outbreak that destroyed thousands of homes and caused the sky to turn an apocalyptic orange over the San Francisco Bay Area.

A total of 10.3m acres burned in wildfires in 2020 across the US west, an area larger than Maryland and well above this century's average.

On the eastern seaboard and Gulf of Mexico, a record 12 tropical storms made landfall during a year when forecasters had to turn to the Greek alphabet for storms' names because the sheer number of events had exhausted the planned list of names.

Seven of these caused more than $1bn in damage, including hurricanes Laura and Sally, which hit the US south in quick succession in August and September. Three hurricanes and two tropical storms hit Louisiana alone.

A major drought and heatwave blasted the US west last year, there were three major tornado-related disasters and a highly destructive derecho, which is an event driven by fast-moving thunderstorms, that downed power lines, damaged houses and flattened crops in the midwest.

Noaa reported that last year was the fifth hottest on record across the contiguous US, which follows a longer-term pattern of national and global heating - all of the five warmest years on record in the US have occurred since 2012.

While hurricanes and wildfires have always hit the US, scientists have found that the strength of storms is increasing as the atmosphere and ocean heats up, while the area eaten up by fire has grown as rising temperatures dry out soils and vegetation.

"The record number of climate change-exacerbated weather disasters this year drives home the fact that, as I like to say, the impacts of climate change are no longer subtle," said Michael Mann, a climate scientist at Penn State.

"We're seeing them play out in real time. Hopefully this is the year where we finally see the sort of action, by the US and the rest of the world, that is necessary to prevent things from getting worse."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
22 disasters, 262 dead, $95bn in damages: US saw record year for climate-driven catastrophes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Report shows US was battered by punishing extreme weather on both the east and west coasts in 2020

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The planet is facing a "ghastly future of mass extinction, declining health and climate-disruption upheavals" that threaten human survival because of ignorance and inaction, according to an international group of scientists, who warn people still haven't grasped the urgency of the biodiversity and climate crises.

The 17 experts, including Prof Paul Ehrlich from Stanford University, author of The Population Bomb, and scientists from Mexico, Australia and the US, say the planet is in a much worse state than most people - even scientists - understood.

"The scale of the threats to the biosphere and all its lifeforms - including humanity - is in fact so great that it is difficult to grasp for even well-informed experts," they write in a report in Frontiers in Conservation Science which references more than 150 studies detailing the world's major environmental challenges.

The delay between destruction of the natural world and the impacts of these actions means people do not recognise how vast the problem is, the paper argues. "[The] mainstream is having difficulty grasping the magnitude of this loss, despite the steady erosion of the fabric of human civilisation."

The report warns that climate-induced mass migrations, more pandemics and conflicts over resources will be inevitable unless urgent action is taken.

"Ours is not a call to surrender - we aim to provide leaders with a realistic 'cold shower' of the state of the planet that is essential for planning to avoid a ghastly future," it adds.

Dealing with the enormity of the problem requires far-reaching changes to global capitalism, education and equality, the paper says. These include abolishing the idea of perpetual economic growth, properly pricing environmental externalities, stopping the use of fossil fuels, reining in corporate lobbying, and empowering women, the researchers argue.

The report comes months after the world failed to meet a single UN Aichi biodiversity target, created to stem the destruction of the natural world, the second consecutive time governments have failed to meet their 10-year biodiversity goals. This week a coalition of more than 50 countries pledged to protect almost a third of the planet by 2030.

A coral reef dominated by algae in Seychelles ... the climate crisis is changing the composition of ecosystems. Photograph: Nick Graham/Lancaster University/PA

An estimated one million species are at risk of extinction, many within decades, according to a recent UN report.

"Environmental deterioration is infinitely more threatening to civilisation than Trumpism or Covid-19," Ehrlich told the Guardian.

In The Population Bomb, published in 1968, Ehrlich warned of imminent population explosion and hundreds of millions of people starving to death. Although he has acknowledged some timings were wrong, he has said he stands by its fundamental message that population growth and high levels of consumption by wealthy nations is driving destruction.

He told the Guardian: "Growthmania is the fatal disease of civilisation - it must be replaced by campaigns that make equity and well-being society's goals - not consuming more junk."

Large populations and their continued growth drive soil degradation and biodiversity loss, the new paper warns. "More people means that more synthetic compounds and dangerous throwaway plastics are manufactured, many of which add to the growing toxification of the Earth. It also increases the chances of pandemics that fuel ever-more desperate hunts for scarce resources."

The effects of the climate emergency are more evident than biodiversity loss, but still, society is failing to cut emissions, the paper argues. If people understood the magnitude of the crises, changes in politics and policies could match the gravity of the threat.

"Our main point is that once you realise the scale and imminence of the problem, it becomes clear that we need much more than individual actions like using less plastic, eating less meat, or flying less. Our point is that we need big systematic changes and fast," Professor Daniel Blumstein from the University of California Los Angeles, who helped write the paper, told the Guardian.

The paper cites a number of key reports published in the past few years including:

Australia saw a devastating bushfire season in 2020. Photograph: Tracey Nearmy/Reuters

The report follows years of stark warnings about the state of the planet from the world's leading scientists, including a statement by 11,000 scientists in 2019 that people will face "untold suffering due to the climate crisis" unless major changes are made. In 2016, more than 150 of Australia's climate scientists wrote an open letter to the then prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, demanding immediate action on reducing emissions. In the same year, 375 scientists - including 30 Nobel prize winners - wrote an open letter to the world about their frustrations over political inaction on climate change.

Prof Tom Oliver, an ecologist at the University of Reading, who was not involved in the report, said it was a frightening but credible summary of the grave threats society faces under a "business as usual" scenario. "Scientists now need to go beyond simply documenting environmental decline, and instead find the most effective ways to catalyse action," he said.

Prof Rob Brooker, head of ecological sciences at the James Hutton Institute, who was not involved in the study, said it clearly emphasised the pressing nature of the challenges.

"We certainly should not be in any doubt about the huge scale of the challenges we are facing and the changes we will need to make to deal with them," he said.
Find more age of extinction coverage here, and follow biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield on Twitter for all the latest news and features

This article was corrected on 14 January 2021. The WWF Living Planet report said the average population size of vertebrates had declined by 68% in the past five decades, not the past five years as stated in an earlier version.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Top scientists warn of 'ghastly future of mass extinction' and climate disruption

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sobering new report says world is failing to grasp the extent of threats posed by biodiversity loss and the climate crisis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Par Géraldine Ruiz et Vincent Bergier https://www.4revues.fr/topo/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The US House of Representatives voted by a margin of 232 to 197 to impeach Donald Trump on the charge of incitement of insurrection. It makes Trump is the first president in history to have been impeached twice. Ten House Republicans voted in favour of the motion.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Moment Donald Trump becomes first US president to be impeached twice - video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The US House of Representatives voted by a margin of 232 to 197 to impeach Donald Trump on the charge of incitement of insurrection. It makes Trump is the first president in history to have been impeached twice. Ten House Republicans voted in favour of the motion.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
y now, the world has witnessed white rioters seize the Capitol building in Washington DC. After hearing Donald Trump encourage them to reject the presidential election's outcome, thousands reportedly pushed through cops to storm ongoing congressional debates and reign supreme over politicians who fearfully scurried out of the halls of power. Draped in American, Confederate, and Trump flags, the raiders invaded the House floor, occupied representative offices, and filled balconies and scaffolds that line the windows. Joe Biden took to a podium to respond, cautioning the country that "our democracy is under unprecedented assault".

On television, I saw paramedics rush a stretcher in the pandemonium. The woman bearing a bloodied face laying on top startled me, the anchor, and the cameraman. Please God, don't let that woman be dead,I prayed, though her eyes lacked an animating essence. When I saw the video of the Proud Boys burn a Black Lives Matter banner a few weeks ago, I knew there would be more violent acts of desperation because they need a cause to feel empowered. Envying the resistance of the oppressed, Trump supporters want reasons to march and chant, so they create enemies and feign vulnerability as their cause grows lost. They sacrificed their lives to save white supremacy, even though it threatens them, too, materially and morally. And Black lives may never matter to people, like the woman, who will risk their own white lives during a pandemic to attack the nation's capital to protect Donald Trump.

A senior Capitol police officer reportedly shot and killed her. But even the police shooting of the Trump supporter did not immediately catalyze significant law enforcement action to stop the conservative Caucasian invasion. Later, I watched a group of unmasked white men and women chase down a Black law enforcement agent who wielded only a stick in return. I was angry. Not because I felt bad for the cop, but because in that moment, I watched him realize that he was Black, outnumbered, and per the Dred Scott supreme court decision, "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect."

Wednesday was a reminder of one difference between white rebellion to feigned oppression and Black resistance to actual oppression: where there is radical Black resistance, there is state repression. Where there is white rebellion for conservative causes, there is collusion with the state. Even when the white cops are outnumbered, like the McKinney, Texas, cops who assaulted Dajerria Becton in her swimsuit, they escalate; he just pulled the gun out on Black teens who came to her rescue. Police have stomped, beat, shot, teargassed, and arrested protesters who organize, march, pray and sing for our multi-racial liberation movements. Including me. Yet on Wednesday, activists and bystanders knew damn well that if the election refusers who raided the Capitol were Black, then the same politicians who kneeled for George Floyd and painted yellow " Black lives matter" letters onto the streets would have sent the full force of the law to stop it.

'Where there is white rebellion for conservative causes, there is collusion with the state.' Photograph: Spencer Platt/Getty Images

However, calling for the police to treat white election-outcome deniers like they treat Black people fighting for social justice misses the purpose and function of police, which is largely to manage inequality. No parity exists for these protesters. When the political activist Bree Newsome scaled a pole to pull down the Confederate flag following the Charleston Massacre in 2015, a diverse pair of cops promptly arrested her. On Wednesday, police stood by as the Capitol raiders scaled a window to replace the United States flag with Trump's. White rowdy groups like this do not threaten the fundamentally racist, militarist, and capitalist foundation of the country; they are molded by it. So local and federal government usually let them have their way, from raiding and occupying federal property in Oregon, to massive biker shootouts that killed nine people in Texas; from the Oathkeepers militia group patrol in Missouri, to the militia groups that police thanked in Wisconsin, right before Kyle Rittenhouse did when he killed two men.

"Trumpism" is the predominant paradigm that accounts for the current capitol siege. Trump is obviously to blame for the most recent events. But only partly. I even forget this sometimes. Last year, I shared a story about an anti-immigration rally that I counter-protested in college. Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Kris Kobach were the headline speakers. White Republicans filled the packed Kansas auditorium, angry that they were losing their country to Mexicans that colonizers forced further south. Each speaker's xenophobic and racist rhetoric was so violent and familiar that I finally said, "It was like a Trump rally, seven years before he took office."

Ousting Trump is a good start...But changing the president only changes the spectacle; the mundane violence will remain

What racial justice activists make plain in the spectacle of Trumpism, law and order, and white nationalism is the violent failure of liberals and conservatives to foster any real democracy within these borders. Most of America's violence is mundane and happens on the floors that were taken over by rioters. Just last week, Congress issued meager $600 pandemic relief checks to people facing widespread hunger, eviction, unemployment, disease and distress. There were no riots. Senate Republicans refused to raise the relief to $2,000 but rallied bipartisan support to override Trump's veto of a nearly $800bn military budget. Biden, the president-elect, has veto dreams of his own. If Congress passes universal healthcare during the deadliest month of the coronavirus pandemic, Biden will kill the bill. Unless we organize, there will be little resistance.

Trump refuses the legitimate election results, which is staunchly anti-democratic. However, the legitimate election results are also anti-democratic. The financial and social costs to run for most offices run high, though less violent than stealing an election or staging a coup. Candidates spent $14bn alone on advertising for the 2020 election cycle, and at nearly $1bn, the most recent Georgia special and runoff senate elections were the most expensive of any state in history. Democrats presented two billionaires and five millionaires as presidential candidates last year. The race, gender and sexual orientation diversity of the field obscured the desperate need for wealth redistribution, campaign finance reform and publicly funded elections. But without resistance, many of us celebrate the few people who overcome the barriers, and carry the "our ancestors fought and died for this right" card in our pockets, all the way to our own graves.

A member of a pro-Trump mob carries a Confederate battle flag on the second floor of the US Capitol. Photograph: Mike Theiler/Reuters

And while witnesses are now championing for DC police to quiet and quell the white riots tonight, Muriel Bowser, the mayor, will have additional support to secure the tens of millions in police overtime pay that will be most practiced on the Black and brown residents in the city. Why would a Black mayor concede to defunding the police when she can be celebrated nationally for renaming a plaza "Black lives matter?"

Ousting Trump is a good start to changing the Oval Office. But changing the president only changes the spectacle; the mundane violence will remain. As much as we ought to condemn the nationalists outside the walls of Congress, we must continue to organize against the politicians inside who maintain the racist, capitalist, and militaristic agendas that wreak their destruction beneath the galleries - away from the cameras, away from the scrutiny, and away from the rest of us who actually have good reason fill up the streets.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Look at the Capitol Hill rioters. Now imagine if they had been black | Derecka Purnell

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
y now, the world has witnessed white rioters seize the Capitol building in Washington DC. After hearing Donald Trump encourage them to reject the presidential election's outcome, thousands reportedly pushed through cops to storm ongoing congressional debates and reign supreme over politicians who fearfully scurried out of the halls of power.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
n Wednesday, a coup attempt was led by the president of the United States. A rightwing mob attempted the coup in the form of a violent riot that stormed the Capitol building. They disrupted the proceedings that would have completed the recognition of the election of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. Those proceedings had been disrupted earlier by elected officials bringing forth bad-faith claims that the election was not legitimate and should instead produce a continuation of Trump's presidency. This too was a coup attempt, an attempt to violate the constitution and override the will of the voters in this election. Inside and outside were two faces of the same thing, and both were fomented by the leaders of the Republican party and by the US president. The mob outside would not exist without the politicians inside. Those insiders will make noises of horror and repudiation, but they own this.

Had Mitch McConnell and other Republican leaders recognized the legitimate winner of the election in early November, had there been no challenge to a legitimate election from inside the government, there would have been no mob. Having failed to suppress enough votes to guarantee a Republican presidential victory, the Republican party and the Trump administration decided to try to suppress them retroactively. Trump invited the mob and whipped it up for months and set it off today, as surely as if he'd lit a bomb's fuse.

I call it a coup attempt because, though I assume it will not prevent the Biden presidency, it certainly intended to, and is part of a campaign to delegitimize and thereby weaken the incoming administration. It was a long time coming, building up for years with white rage, especially white male rage fueled by everyone from Trump himself to the National Rifle Association, Fox News and the various rightwing pundits, the Republican party, the various faces of white supremacy, and the far-right groups such as the Proud Boys. It is a rage against the fact that other people might be equal under the law, that women and people of color might also govern as power begins to be distributed more equally, the same rage that attempted to delegitimize a black president with birtherism and obstruction. It is a rage against equality.

Democracy is a set of agreements to make decisions together and respect the outcome whether you like them or not. The kind of violence we saw on Capitol Hill is authoritarian, a way to try to force other people to submit to the will of the perpetrators. This violence comes from the white men who were long the only people with power in this country imagining themselves as marginalized and oppressed outsiders because others might also have power and a voice. We saw these kind of men last summer, when they invaded the Michigan capital while carrying semiautomatic rifles and saw them again when a handful of them were arrested for a plot to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer. We saw them in racist shootings from the Texas border to a Pennsylvania synagogue.

This coup attempt was built by the more and more uninhibited ideology of violence we have seen again and again, in the mass shootings that became a norm in 21st-century America, the fetishization of guns and gun rights that made the killing machines and the death they inflict far more common, so that death by gun recently overtook death by car as a leading American way to die.

As I write, I hear a Republican leader on TV say "Remember we are the party of law and order," and, of course, the riot going on in the Capitol is technically lawless, but "law and order" as a rightwing slogan means that they are the law and they impose their version of order. Authoritarianism is always an ideology of inequality: I make the rules, you follow them, I change them at will and punish those who don't obey, or, if I feel like it, those who do because I can. Frank Wilhoit once said: "Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition ... There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." They are demonstrating that nothing binds them and that they expect to have whatever they want. Entitlement is too demure a word for this.

Authoritarianism is always an ideology of inequality: I make the rules, you follow them, I punish those who don't obey

What is at stake in America today is the outcome of an election. But it's also the rule of law and the rights of voters. And in the end it's also about the authority of facts and evidence and history and science, that no one has the right to override those things for personal gain. Trump's position all along has been that he in particular has that right. Today it came to a head and became a crisis as a mob sabotaged a constitutionally mandated procedure for the peaceful transition of power. This was always going to happen because Trump's power was always going to be finite in reach and duration under the law, and because he wants that power to be infinite, he was always at war with the law, and he always had a volunteer army willing to help him take it. Today they acted like an army, a hostile occupying force in the nation's capital. This is what he wanted and this is what he orchestrated and this is what we got.

Trump was the most prolific public liar America has ever seen, and his lies were an essential part of his authoritarianism, a refusal to be bound by facts, even the facts of what he said or did the day before. He demanded a parallel narrative in which he won the election and laid the groundwork long before to claim, if he lost, that it was illegitimate, as he did in 2016. In a recorded video on Wednesday, Trump said to the crowd "We love you" as he told them to go home but also reasserted that the election was stolen, which is why they're there in the first place. Ivanka Trump apparently deleted a tweet in which she called them "American patriots".

The Trumps and their loyalists in office will disavow the worst of what happened and pretend to be surprised by it and continue feeding it. Conversation about what's been happening over the past several months has often bought into the false binary that either we have a successful coup, in which they steal the election, or we have a failed coup, but there is something insidious in-between: the delegitimization of the democratic process and the incoming administration. In this in-between state, Trump supporters continue to regard their leader and themselves as above the law and entitled to enforce it however they see fit, on the basis of whatever facts they most enjoy having. They are building a separate reality and appear to wish for a shadow government to beleaguer and undermine the legitimate one. Today, we've seen it in action.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Call it what it was: a coup attempt | Rebecca Solnit

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
n Wednesday, a coup attempt was led by the president of the United States. A rightwing mob attempted the coup in the form of a violent riot that stormed the Capitol building. They disrupted the proceedings that would have completed the recognition of the election of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By James Clayton
North America technology reporter

It's hard to see that Donald Trump now has a future on Twitter.

The president says he hates Big Tech. Yet he has loved using Twitter.

He's used it as a way for more than 10 years to bypass the media and speak directly to voters.

The 280 characters fits with his style of political engagement - broad brushstrokes rather than details.

And Twitter has undoubtedly benefited from President Trump too, the place to go to hear the latest musings from the most powerful person on the planet.

That decade-long symbiosis now appears to have ended.

On Wednesday, Twitter not only locked the President's Twitter feed, but threw serious jeopardy on his long-term future on the platform.

In theory, the firm only suspended Mr Trump's account for 12 hours, saying he could use it again provided that he deleted three tweets for violations around its Civic Integrity policy.

But this was the crucial part of Twitter's statement: "Future violations of the Twitter Rules, including our Civic Integrity or Violent Threats policies, will result in permanent suspension of the @realDonaldTrump account."

Well, Mr Trump breaks these rules all the time.

Twitter's Civic Integrity policy states that: "You may not use Twitter's services for the purpose of manipulating or interfering in elections or other civic processes."

Mr Trump's tweets about made-up allegations of mass voter fraud regularly do this.

Exception to the rules

Why hasn't he been kicked off already?

Well Twitter has very specific rules about world leaders.

"We recognise that sometimes it may be in the public interest to allow people to view tweets that would otherwise be taken down," Twitter's rules say.

"At present, we limit exceptions to one critical type of public-interest content - tweets from elected and government officials."

The BBC understands there have been frequent debates at the highest level within Twitter about permanently banning Mr Trump.

But chief executive Jack Dorsey had felt it was in the public interest to keep the account active, albeit with warning messages, unless the President incited offline violence - which the company now believes to be the case.

"No one is turning a blind eye," a senior source said,

In short, Mr Trump has been allowed to remain on Twitter - despite numerous breaches of its rules - because he is the president.

But as the power given to him by the American people slowly slips away, so does his Twitter immunity.

His words on social media, for years, helped to incite Wednesday's storming of Capitol Hill.

As a soon-to-be private citizen, a decision to kick him off would be a lot easier to make.

Facebook has already suspended Mr Trump for 24 hours, and may well be thinking of a more long-term ban too.

All the big social media companies have made it clear that - as a private citizen - if you continually look to peddle conspiracy theories and promote extremism, you should expect to be kicked out. Mr Trump will be no exception.

Social media companies are also acutely aware that President-elect Joe Biden believes Big Tech hasn't done enough to quell fake news and hate speech on their platforms.

They are now desperate to show that they can, in fact, police their own platforms without the need for stringent legal reforms.

What better way to show you're serious than to act on Mr Trump's misinformation?

For all of those reasons, Mr Trump has two options when it comes to his future on Twitter.

He can repent, adhere to Twitter's rules and obey them as a normal citizen.

Or he can get chucked off the platform.

Mr Trump's never been a conformer. It's helped him get to where he is.

But because of that, it's hard to see how he and Twitter can coexist after his exit from the White House.

James Clayton is the BBC's North America technology reporter based in San Francisco. Follow him on Twitter @jamesclayton5.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By James Clayton North America technology reporter It's hard to see that Donald Trump now has a future on Twitter. The president says he hates Big Tech. Yet he has loved using Twitter. He's used it as a way for more than 10 years to bypass the media and speak directly to voters.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
blm vs capitol protests: this was the police response when it was black protesters on dc streets last year - cnn

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rioters breached US Capitol security on Wednesday. This was the police response when it was Black protesters on DC streets last year

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As hundreds of supporters of President Donald Trump stormed the US Capitol, breaking windows and wreaking havoc, politicians and activists were among the many who drew comparisons between the police response on Wednesday to that of last year's Black Lives Matter protests.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Ameera Rajabali and Olivia Stanca-Mustea spent Christmas away from home this year, but neither was especially lonely.

The pair, from the UK and Romania respectively, met as graduate students in Heidelberg in 2015 after taking part in the Erasmus European exchange programme. After bonding over their experiences they became best friends - living, working and now spending lockdown Christmas together in Berlin.

"Whenever you meet someone from Erasmus, you have an immediate bond," said Ms Stanca-Mustea, who spent a year at Durham University as part of the exchange.

For her, Erasmus offered access to high-calibre UK programmes, while Ms Rajabali said it brought expanded horizons and new friends.

Future generations, however, will not all enjoy the same opportunities. Under the Brexit deal announced last week, the UK will leave Erasmus after 33 years and hundreds of thousands of UK participants.

Erasmus is an EU programme that funds university students to study abroad for a year or semester at a university in Europe. Since 2014, as Erasmus+, it has expanded to provide other opportunities such as work placements and training exchanges.

While agreed projects will continue to be funded, overseas study exchanges and other schemes will no longer be available in the UK or to UK students in Europe.

Former Erasmus students are mourning that Brexit will end what many called the defining experience of their youth.

"It breaks my heart to know they are not only going to lose access to this incredible scheme but the end of freedom of movement will sever opportunities for them further," said Flora Menzies, originally from Manchester who spent her year abroad studying in Italy.

Now 35 and head of audience at London charity Into Film, she said her Erasmus year at the University of Bologna "quite literally" changed her life.

"The UK has so much to learn from its European neighbours and I fear for a post-Brexit reality that is inward-looking, culturally impoverished and regressive."

Veronika Sohlström, whose family fled communist-era Poland for Germany, said she could never have afforded to see the UK had it not been for Erasmus, which funded her year at the University of East Anglia in 2006.

Now a programme manager at the Dag Hammerskjöld Foundation in Sweden, an international organisation focused on global governance and peacebuilding, she credits her UK studies for her career.

"The idea of this kind of opportunity, that I could study in the UK, could never have happened for my parents," she said. "For people like me who came from a family that didn't have the financial means, it opens doors."

Last year, 54,619 people took part in UK-led Erasmus opportunities, funded by grants totalling €145m. Of those, 9,993 were British students on placements in Europe, with 17,768 Europeans coming to the UK. The others were participants on vocational trainings and other Erasmus+ programmes.

After Brexit, those exchanges will be replaced by the Turing scheme, a £100m UK government programme for 35,000 students to take part in international study placements in 2021/22.

"We have designed a truly international scheme which is focused on our priorities, delivers real value for money and forms an important part of our promise to level up the United Kingdom," said Gavin Williamson, the education secretary.

But those working in the sector are sceptical.

Professor Paul James Cardwell, a law professor and Erasmus co-ordinator at the University of Strathclyde in Scotland, said infrastructure covered by Erasmus - agreements on course credits, tuition fees and other kinds of support - would now have to be renegotiated in a bureaucratic and costly process.

The estimated £2,800 per student covered by Turing funding looks meagre compared with this task and the costs of flights, tuition and accommodation in countries like Australia or the US.

"When exchanges are run properly you have students from all sorts of backgrounds take part. It improves those young people's long-term prospects," he said.

"My fear is that in coming out of Erasmus, those students are in the long term not going to have those opportunities."

Recommended

The Turing scheme also covers only half of an Erasmus-style exchange, funding British students on placements overseas but not those travelling to study in the UK. Prof Cardwell said this gave little incentive for foreign universities to take part in the programme and deprived UK students of the chance to learn alongside others from around the world.

Ireland said it would fund hundreds of Northern Ireland students to participate in the Erasmus exchanges by allowing them to register temporarily at Irish institutions, at a cost of €2.1m per year.

"This proposal is also a practical expression of solidarity and aims to provide continued access to EU opportunities to young people in Northern Ireland in what could be an uncertain social and economic environment," said Simon Harris, Irish minister for further and higher education.

The British government insists the Turing programme will be an improvement, affording access to opportunities beyond Europe for a more diverse range of students than the Erasmus programme.

But Professor Tanja Bueltmann, the daughter of a German seamstress and a factory worker who was inspired to do a PhD after Erasmus, said the idea that it was a scheme for the liberal elite was "nonsense".

"It enables people from all kinds of different class and social backgrounds to experience education abroad," said Prof Bueltmann, who is now a chair in international history at the University of Strathclyde.

"When you're creating a research environment, you need students, and when you have them from so many backgrounds and experiences you're all the richer. We'll be much poorer for this."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UK's Erasmus exit prompts laments on both sides of the Channel

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ameera Rajabali and Olivia Stanca-Mustea spent Christmas away from home this year, but neither was especially lonely. The pair, from the UK and Romania respectively, met as graduate students in Heidelberg in 2015 after taking part in the Erasmus European exchange programme.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Students and young people from Britain will no longer take part in the Europe-wide Erasmus exchange programme after the UK failed to reach agreement over its post-Brexit membership.

Boris Johnson said the UK would instead establish its own scheme with "the best universities in the world", to be named after the British computing pioneer Alan Turing.

Michel Barnier, the EU's chief negotiator, said the government "decided not to participate in the Erasmus exchange programme" after the two sides were unable to agree on the cost of Britain's continued membership.

The omission of Erasmus from the UK-EU deal ends a scheme that had offered student exchanges as well as school links, work experience and apprenticeships across Europe since 1987. Under the latest version of the scheme, Erasmus+, around 200,000 people have taken part including around 15,000 British university students each year.

Adam Tickell, the vice-chancellor of the University of Sussex, said: "Leaving Erasmus is a real sadness, a scheme whose original foundations were laid at Sussex. Over the years the Erasmus programme transformed the lives of thousands of young people."

In January, Johnson assured MPs there was "no threat to the Erasmus scheme". But confirming the end of membership, he said on Thursday: "On Erasmus, it was a tough decision." He claimed the UK "loses out" financially because of the larger number of EU nationals coming to study in the UK.

"So what we are doing is producing a UK scheme for students to go around the world," the prime minister said. "It will be called the Turing scheme, named after Alan Turing, so students will have the opportunity not just to go to European universities but to go to the best universities in the world. Because we want our young people to experience the immense intellectual stimulation of Europe but also of the whole world."

Vivienne Stern, the director of Universities UK International, said: "It's hugely disappointing after all this that we are no longer in the scheme, but it's not surprising - I understand that the European commission was not willing to budge on cost."

Stern said she was pleased at the prospect of a new national plan to fund outward mobility, which she hoped would meet the costs of young people travelling overseas.

"As I understand it, there will be grants for young people not just in universities but broader than that, to support study and possibly working and volunteering. These experiences help graduates gain employment, especially for students from low-income backgrounds who are the least likely to be able to travel abroad otherwise," Stern said.

Any Erasmus replacement needed to be "ambitious and fully funded", she added. "It must also deliver significant opportunities for future students to go global, which the Erasmus programme has provided to date."

The new scheme is not expected to fund students coming to the UK, as Erasmus does now, which suggests British universities will miss out on a source of income. A report earlier this year said ending Erasmus membership would cost the UK more than £200m a year.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UK students lose Erasmus membership in Brexit deal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Students and young people from Britain will no longer take part in the Europe-wide Erasmus exchange programme after the UK failed to reach agreement over its post-Brexit membership. Boris Johnson said the UK would instead establish its own scheme with "the best universities in the world", to be named after the British computing pioneer Alan Turing.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Brexit trade and security deal, finalised on Christmas Eve, runs to 2,000 pages, including annexes. It will enter into force once approved by both sides.

The devil of what has been agreed will be in the detail - and will be pored over in the days to come.

Here are the main agreements, at a glance.

Tariffs

Tariff-free and quota-free access to one of the world's biggest markets is the backbone of the Brexit deal and goes beyond the EU's deals with Canada or Japan.

Trade

There will be mutual recognition of trusted trader programmes. This means UK producers will have to comply with both UK and EU standards.

Professional qualifications

There will be no more automatic recognition for doctors, nurses, architects, dentists, pharmacists, vets, engineers. They will now have to seek recognition in the member state they wish to practise in.

Mobility - freedom of movement

UK nationals no longer have the freedom to work, study, start a business or live in the EU. Visas will be required for stays over 90 days. Coordination of some social security benefits such as old-age pensions and healthcare will make it easier to work abroad and not lose any pre-existing build up of contributions to national insurance.

Fisheries

The UK will leave the common fisheries policy.

The annual turnover of EU fishing vessels from British waters is around €650m - compared with €850m for the UK-flagged fleet. New quotas reducing the EU's share by 25% are due to be phased in over five and a half years. A quarter of the EU's catch by value - €162.5m a year - will be "repatriated" to UK-flagged vessels by the end of that period. After that, the two sides will hold annual negotiations.

The EU vessels that fish six to 12 nautical miles from the British coastline will be able to continue during the transition, but access will be negotiated on an annual basis after that. There is a three-month notice for closing access. Should access be denied to either side, the other may seek compensation or apply tariffs in a proportionate way.

State aid

The EU had insisted the UK align with its state aid rules. Brussels was concerned that the UK government would seek to find a competitive advantage through subsidies. The UK successfully killed off this idea. The UK will set up its own subsidy regime. The new domestic enforcement body can make decisions over whether state aid has distorted trade after the subsidy has been granted. This is a major concession by the EU.

However, the UK will have to ensure that its subsidy regime respects key principles set out in the treaty. The deal also allows both parties to adopt remedial measures if there is evidence that the domestic enforcement body has failed to uphold the shared principles.

Standards or level playing field

Both sides have agreed on a minimum level of environmental, social and labour standards below which neither must go.

Ursula von der Leyen said there would be a review after four years to ensure the level playing field was working.

One of the biggest sticking points in the talks was the EU's insistence on an "evolution clause", or "equivalence mechanism", as Downing Street termed it.

This would have allowed the EU to unilaterally apply tariffs on UK goods in the event of standards diverging over time. If one side upgraded their rulebook, the other would have to follow, or face consequences.

In the end, compromise was reached. It bears a closer resemblance to the UK objective than that of Brussels. The British government had merely wanted a reflection point in the future where the two sides could discuss upgrading the basic minimum below which neither could go.

The deal provides for a review and "rebalancing" clause, which allows either side to initiate a formal review of the economic parts of the deal, including the minimum level of standards.

If either side drags their feet on agreeing a new floor for standards, the other may apply tariffs subject to the approval of an independent arbitration panel.

This determines what goods count as "made in Britain".

The UK persuaded Brussels that EU materials and processing should to be counted as British input when the completed products are exported into the European market.

A product would therefore only attract tariffs under the agreement if more than 40% of its pre-finished value was either not of British origin or from a non-EU country such as Japan.

The UK failed to secure diagonal accumulation, which would include parts from countries such as Japan and Turkey, with whom the UK and the EU have a trade agreement, to be counted as British input.

Dispute resolution

This was one of the most difficult areas of negotiation as it will set remedies for trade disputes for decades to come. Angela Merkel has said disagreement over an arbitration mechanism was the biggest obstacle to a deal.

The EU was concerned that the UK could, over time and depending on which government was in power, deviate so far from EU standards that it could carve out a significant competitive advantage and become a "Singapore on Thames".

If either party feels trade is being distorted, it can take measures after consultation. An arbitration panel would meet within 30 days and adjudicate. If the measures were later seen to have been deemed erroneous or excessive, the aggrieved party would be able to take compensatory measures.

It also appears there will be some kind of overarching UK-EU governance committee which will have subcommittees to implement and enforce the treaty.

Science

The UK will continue to participate in the EU's flagship €80bn Horizon Europe programme as a paying associate member for seven years. It will also continue in Copernicus and Euratom.

Erasmus

The UK is out of the university exchange programme, baulking at the EU's insistence that to be an associate member it would have to commit to a seven-year payment plan.

The Irish government on Thursday confirmed students in Northern Ireland can continue to access Eramus as part of its promise to make sure Irish citizens in the region "will never be left behind" their fellow citizens south of the border. Citizens in Northern Ireland can also avail of a scheme to replace the European health insurance card (EHIC) funded by the Irish government.

Security and law enforcement

Cross-border police investigations and law enforcement can continue, with agreements that the UK can remain in key exchange programmes but not all.

The UK will no longer be part of the European Arrest Warrant system.

Nor will the UK be a full member of Europol or Eurojust. There will be "continued cooperation between the UK, Europol and Eurojust" with "strong cooperation between national police and judicial authorities".

The UK will maintain a "mechanism for access" to the Schengen Information System (SIS II), an automated database that shares police alerts on stolen goods and missing persons.

There has also been an agreement for continued joint use of the Passenger Name Records, which provides live data on the movement of air and ferry passengers, a key tool in the fight against terrorism and the Prüm database of fingerprints, DNA and car number plates of suspects.

TV Services

France successfully kept the audio visual sector out of the deal in a major blow to the UK, which is home to around 1,400 broadcasters, about 30% of all channels in the EU.

Britain's thriving TV and video-on-demand service providers will no longer be able to offer pan European services to European viewers unless they relocate part of their business to an EU member state.

Travel into the EU for paid work

Staff seconded to the EU on business can stay for up to three years if they are managers and specialists and up to one year for trainee employees. Those on short-term business will need a work permit and may stay for a period of up to 90 days in any 12-month period.

Experts have warned that British business travellers and posted workers - those that stay in the EU to work for a limited period of time - face fines unless they get advance authorisation once the UK leaves the single market.

Under the deal, reciprocal arrangements have been made "to facilitate short-term business trips and temporary secondments of highly-skilled employees".

Transport

Aviation and haulage will continue as before with passenger and cargo planes still able to fly and land in the EU including stopover flights from Heathrow and elsewhere in the UK that originated from outside the UK. Hauliers will also be allowed to continue to drive without special permits allocated in limited numbers to countries outside the EU. This comes as a relief to the logistics industry which feared drivers being locked out in significant numbers.

The deal hinged on the UK remaining a member of the European Common Aviation Area.

However planes will continue to fly in a temporary deal, which will have to be renegotiated urgently.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
From tariffs to visas: here's what's in the Brexit deal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Brexit trade and security deal, finalised on Christmas Eve, runs to 2,000 pages, including annexes. It will enter into force once approved by both sides. The devil of what has been agreed will be in the detail - and will be pored over in the days to come.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Speaking at a press conference after the deal was agreed, EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier said: "The British government decided not to participate in the Erasmus exchange programme."

At the press conference on the new deal, Boris Johnson "it was a tough decision" to leave the scheme.

The Prime Minister stated that the arrangements in place meant that the "UK exchequer lost out" and that it was an "extremely expensive" scheme.

Eve Alcock, former President of the University of Bath Students' Union, spoke to The Independent and described the government's choice as a "backwards and nonsensical decision.

"It is a well-established scheme," she said, "with crucial funding to support strong existing relationships with lots of European universities. Opting out robs students of opportunities that are central to academic, personal and professional development. Not to mention it also giving EU students the opportunity to study in the UK, greatly enriching our own higher education system."

As a replacement to the Erasmus scheme, Mr Johnson has cited the "Turing Scheme", named after Alan Turing, Mr Johnson says this will give students the opportunities to travel to "the best universities in the world" and not solely universities based in Europe.

Education and business leaders said in March, at the possibility of dropping out of the programme, that ceasing participation of the programme would effectively blow a hole in the education sector and deprive young people of opportunities.

Kim Mannion, a student at Glasgow University currently on Erasmus in Nice, France, told The Independent that "it is hard to understand why they would deliberately opt-out of something which only brings good to young people

"It is important to note that one of the best parts about the scheme is that it facilitates opportunities for young people for whom it otherwise would not be financially viable."

The Erasmus scheme gives financial support to students within the programme to study abroad for a set amount of time - either a semester or a year - in a participating country.

Now, students from the UK who want to study within Europe will not be given financial support from the EU, funded by participating states paying in.

UK students previously received an allowance of €420 per month (£378) from the scheme.

Emily Sheehy, a University of Surrey student who previously participated in the Erasmus scheme tells The Independent that "These additional financial barriers [created by the removal of the grant] perpetuate an inequality within education that is imperative to avoid, as students from lower-income brackets may no longer be able to afford the same experience I was so lucky to have".

"Stopping Erasmus deprives future generations of British students from a huge adventure and potential sense of community with their neighbours across the Channel."

The existing Erasmus scheme is thought to be worth around £243m in income a year to the UK economy, and serves around 17,000 British young people.

In 2017, 16,561 UK students participated in the scheme, while 31,727 EU nationals from other countries came to study in Britain under it.

A number of non-EU countries are members of the Erasmus scheme, including Iceland, Turkey, Norway, and Serbia.

Universities UK says funding is still in place to the end of the Brexit transition period on 31 December and that "In effect, this means staff and students can complete mobility periods and receive funding up until the end of the 2021-22 academic year." However, staff and students involved will still have to deal with whatever new immigration restrictions are imposed on the UK.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UK 'decided not to stay in Erasmus exchange programme', EU says

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Speaking at a press conference after the deal was agreed, EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier said: "The British government decided not to participate in the Erasmus exchange programme." At the press conference on the new deal, Boris Johnson "it was a tough decision" to leave the scheme.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
o one expects a joyous new year in 2021. Covid-19 will ensure that. Yet news that a collision between the pandemic and Brexit may also see Britons barred from entering the European Union for nonessential travel from 1 January has now added to the misery.

As things now stand, EU rules that ask member states to ban citizens of high-risk Covid countries from entering should be applied to UK citizens when Big Ben stops chiming 11pm (marking midnight in Brussels). This might change by then, or not. But why the surprise?

The idea that ending "freedom of movement" simply prevented a one-way traffic of Polish plumbers and Romanian fruit pickers into Britain was always absurd.

From the very beginning, Theresa May made "reciprocity" the mantra of Brexit negotiations. If Britain "cracks down" - to use a term favoured by migrant-bashers - on the travel freedoms of European citizens then British people must pay a price too.

"It's a two-way thing. We've always warned about that," said Jane Golding, the Berlin-based co-chair of the British in Europe group.

This is now dawning on those who make occasional trips to the EU - meaning much of the UK population.

The new reality is this: travel to France is not an absolute right. Nor are trips to Spain, Greece, most of Europe's best resorts, or anywhere else British people love to go in the EU. Among many other things, that is what losing European citizenship means.

Tourism must now take place under different conditions. That does not make them impossible, or even difficult. But it does mean they can be stopped at any moment. Covid is one of those moments.

Everywhere, there is a pecking order among those who enjoy freedoms, with citizens at the top. This is a principle the UK loves to apply, as the Windrush generation, or the 3 million EU citizens in Britain forced to fill out a settled status form, know full well.

Brexit, then, always meant curtailing the rights and freedoms of Britons in Europe. The surprise is that some people are only just waking up to this. Perhaps no one bothered to tell them.

More "surprises" await. Britons may yet have to buy health insurance every time they travel, adding considerably to the expense of a family holiday. They will definitely pay €7 per person for travel authorisation under the European Travel Authorisation and Information System (ETIAS) as of late in 2022.

Since Brexit has been wrapped and sold in grand terms, the minutiae of real, everyday disruption - the part that impacts ordinary lives - has been ignored.

So-called swallows, British owners of second homes in Spain, France or elsewhere, must now leave after three months and not return for another three. "Some people still think they can just pop across the border to Gibraltar and come straight back," explained Anne Hernandez, who runs a group helping British immigrants living on the Costa del Sol. "Other people are asking whether it is worth it, or if they should just sell up," she added.

Worries about the validity of health cards and the expense of health insurance add to the burden. Hernandez has just helped someone install a 90-year-old relative from the United States in their Spanish home. Insurance costs are €600 a month.

For the 1.2 million UK citizens who live in the European Union, the damage likely to be caused by loss of citizenship became obvious - and deeply worrying - four years ago.

When some of us started to organise and lobby through British in Europe, it was telling that Michel Barnier's door was immediately open. Entering the Brexit ministry was far more difficult.

We were told that the British government was determined to protect us. In fact, freedom of movement restrictions mean many low-earning UK migrants to the EU can never now return home with their families because they are not rich enough to meet the government's new criteria for bringing back "foreign" spouses. They may eventually be forced into choosing between caring for an elderly parent or living with their own partner and children.

Other UK citizens in Europe are now desperately trying to gain the qualifications that will allow them to continue exercising their professions, fretting about whether they can continue trading or offering their services across borders, or have already had UK bank accounts closed down.

A wider inability to see migration as anything but a one-way process that threatens the British way of life ignores fundamental truths about Britons as migrants.

In fact, 5 million British people - or 8% of us - live elsewhere. In percentage terms, Britain is the world's 10th biggest exporter of emigrants and the largest in the European Union. Some 350,000 British people live in Spain. They are the third largest immigrant community, after Moroccans and Romanians. The UK's head-in-the-ground attitude to emigrants, however, means it cannot be counted on to help or protect them.

The truth is that Spain needs British tourists. Its economy is 12% dependent on tourism, and in provinces such as Alicante, much of that comes from Britain. A fifth of its annual visitors hold UK passports.

Spain will bend over backwards to let British visitors in and to treat them well. It is worth remembering, though, that it can only bend as far as any EU-UK agreement allows it to. Or Covid restrictions.

There is also a sting in the tail. Before the EU introduced express extraditions, Spain's Mediterranean coast was also known as the Costa del Crime, since British crooks loved to hole up there. As of 1 January, when extradition becomes more complex, that part of British migration is quite likely to pick up again.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
An EU travel ban for Britons brings home the sad reality of Brexit | Giles Tremlett

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
o one expects a joyous new year in 2021. Covid-19 will ensure that. Yet news that a collision between the pandemic and Brexit may also see Britons barred from entering the European Union for nonessential travel from 1 January has now added to the misery.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ten billionaires reap $400bn boost to wealth during pandemic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Covid-19 pushed many into poverty but brought huge benefits for some of the wealthiest, renewing calls for fairer taxes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Unicef has launched a domestic emergency response in the UK for the first time in its more than 70-year history to help feed children hit by the Covid-19 crisis.

The UN agency, which is responsible for providing humanitarian aid to children worldwide, said the coronavirus pandemic was the most urgent crisis affecting children since the second world war.

A YouGov poll in May commissioned by the charity Food Foundation found 2.4 million children (17%) were living in food insecure households. By October, an extra 900,000 children had been registered for free school meals.

Unicef has pledged a grant of £25,000 to the community project School Food Matters, which will use the money to supply 18,000 nutritious breakfasts to 25 schools over the two-week Christmas holidays and February half-term, feeding vulnerable children and families in Southwark, south London, who have been severely impacted by the coronavirus pandemic.

The food delivery firm Abel & Cole will also provide 1.2 tonnes of fruit and veg worth £4,500 to include in the boxes.

The founder and chief executive of School Food Matters, Stephanie Slater, said: "We're so grateful to Unicef for providing this timely funding. The response to our summer breakfast boxes programme has shown us that families are really struggling and many were facing the grim reality of a two-week winter break without access to free school meals and the indignity of having to rely on food banks to feed their children.

"By providing our breakfast boxes, families know that their children will have a great start to the day with a healthy nutritious breakfast.

"Our breakfast boxes programme has also shown us that the threshold for free school meal eligibility is too low to capture all the families in need of support. That's why we're getting behind the national food strategy call for an extension to free school meal eligibility.

"We cannot continue to rely on civil society to fill the hunger gap as too many children will miss out on the nutrition they need to thrive."

Labour's deputy leader, Angela Rayner, said: "The fact that Unicef is having to step in to feed our country's hungry children is a disgrace and Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak should be ashamed.

"We are one of the richest countries in the world. Our children should not have to rely on humanitarian charities that are used to operating in war zones and in response to natural disasters.

"Charities and businesses across the country have done a brilliant job stepping in where the government has failed, but it should have never come to this."

Her fellow Labour MP Richard Burgon tweeted: "Britain is one of the world's richest nations. Unicef, for the first time ever, is now delivering emergency food to children here.

"Poverty is a political choice. The Gov't could end UK child poverty by making the super-rich pay fair taxes. It refuses to."

Anna Kettley, the director of programmes at Unicef UK, said: "This is Unicef's first ever emergency response within the UK, introduced to tackle the unprecedented impact of the coronavirus crisis and reach the families most in need.

"This funding will help build stronger communities as the impact of the pandemics worsen, but ultimately a longer-term solution is needed to tackle the root causes of food poverty, so no child is left to go hungry."

A government spokesperson said: "We are committed to supporting the lowest-paid families through the pandemic and beyond. That's why we have raised the living wage, boosted welfare support by billions of pounds and introduced the £170m Covid winter grant scheme to help children and families stay warm and well-fed during the coldest months."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Unicef to feed hungry children in UK for first time in 70-year history

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Unicef has launched a domestic emergency response in the UK for the first time in its more than 70-year history to help feed children hit by the Covid-19 crisis. The UN agency, which is responsible for providing humanitarian aid to children worldwide, said the coronavirus pandemic was the most urgent crisis affecting children since the second world war.

# data[].attributes.headline
'Stay Woke', a documentary about the Black Lives Matter Movement

# data[].attributes.subject
'Stay Woke', a documentary about the Black Lives Matter Movement

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Stay Woke: The Black Lives Matter Movement documentary (2017) - The Best Documentary Ever

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Stay Woke: The Black Lives Matter Movement documentary (2017) - The Best Documentary Ever

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Brexit happened -- and what to do next

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We are embarrassingly unaware of how divided our societies are, and Brexit grew out of a deep, unexamined divide between those that fear globalization and those that embrace it, says social scientist Alexander Betts. How do we now address that fear as well as growing disillusionment with the political establishment, while refusing to give in to xenophobia and nationalism? Join Betts as he discusses four post-Brexit steps toward a more inclusive world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Donald Trump "promised an elixir for the racial anxiety" of "millions of Americans spooked by a black man in the White House", Barack Obama writes in his eagerly awaited memoir.

Those Americans, Obama writes, were prey to "the dark spirits that had long been lurking on the edges of the modern Republican party - xenophobia, anti-intellectualism, paranoid conspiracy theories, an antipathy toward black and brown folks".

In A Promised Land, which comes out on Tuesday, Obama continues: "It was as if my very presence in the White House had triggered a deep-seated panic, a sense that the natural order had been disrupted. Which is exactly what Donald Trump understood when he started peddling assertions that I had not been born in the United States and was thus an illegitimate president."

Penguin Random House reportedly paid the former president and his wife, Michelle Obama, $65m for books about their time in the White House. The former first lady's memoir, Becoming, came out in 2018 to widespread acclaim.

Excerpts of Obama's book have run in the press - the remarks above were reported by CNN - and the former president is due to speak to CBS in two interviews on Sunday. The New York Times has also run a lengthy review. The 768-page volume is the first of two, covering Obama's rise to the US Senate and then the White House as the 44th president, from 2009 to 2017. It has been a struggle to write.

"I figured I could do all that in maybe 500 pages," Obama wrote in an excerpt published by the Atlantic on Thursday. "I expected to be done in a year. It's fair to say that the writing process didn't go exactly as I'd planned."

Obama also says he is "painfully aware that a more gifted writer could have found a way to tell the same story with greater brevity (after all, my home office in the White House sat right next to the Lincoln Bedroom, where a signed copy of the 272-word Gettysburg Address rests inside a glass case)".

A Promised Land heads for the shelves as Trump refuses to concede a clear electoral defeat by Joe Biden, Obama's vice-president, deepening dangerous political divides.

Obama considers Trump's rise, from reality TV host and political gadfly, champion of the "birther" lie which held that Obama was not born in the US, to outsider candidate, GOP nominee and norm-shattering president.

Obama recalls his first presidential election and the storm over his healthcare reform, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), two years later. He echoes many observers in detecting the roots of Trumpism in the surprise rise of Sarah Palin, the Alaska governor who became John McCain's running mate in 2008 and two years later fanned the flames of the Tea Party, the rightwing movement which railed against the ACA.

"Through Palin," Obama writes, "it seemed as if the dark spirits that had long been lurking on the edges of the modern Republican party - xenophobia, anti intellectualism, paranoid conspiracy theories, an antipathy toward black and brown folks - were finding their way to centre stage."

Obama wonders whether McCain would have picked Palin had he suspected that "her spectacular rise and her validation as a candidate would provide a template for future politicians, shifting his party's center and the country's politics overall in a direction he abhorred.

"I'd like to think that given the chance to do it over again, he might have chosen differently. I believe he really did put his country first. We're better than this."

Reviewing Trump's rise to power, Obama considers how Trump seized on a growing inclination among Republicans to dispense with evidence and polite political convention, in the name of simply opposing the first black president.

"In that sense," Obama writes, "there wasn't much difference between Trump and [House speaker John] Boehner or [Senate majority leader Mitch] McConnell. They, too, understood that it didn't matter whether what they said was true ... in fact, the only difference between Trump's style of politics and theirs was Trump's lack of inhibition."

As the Biden presidency approaches, Republicans seem likely to hold the Senate. Among Democrats, much hope of legislative progress rests with how the new president will be able to deal with the notoriously hardline Senate leader.

Obama writes that he chose Biden as his emissary to McConnell in part because of his own "awareness that in McConnell's mind, negotiations with the vice-president didn't inflame the Republican base in quite the same way that any appearance of co-operation with (black, Muslim socialist) Obama was bound to do".

Obama discusses his famous roast of Trump at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner in 2011, on the same night a Navy Seal team was preparing to find and kill Osama bin Laden. He also details two surprising offers of help from Trump - to plug the Deepwater Horizon oil well, in 2010, and to build a pavilion on the White House lawn. Both were turned down.

In the Atlantic excerpt, an adaptation of the preface to A Promised Land, the former president comments on the 2020 election, during which he campaigned for Biden.

"I'm encouraged by the record-setting number of Americans who turned out to vote," he writes, "and have an abiding trust in Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, in their character and capacity to do what is right.

"But I also know that no single election will settle the matter. Our divisions run deep; our challenges are daunting."

But at the end of a year marked by national protests for racial justice, Obama's thoughts and comments about race and his presidency will no doubt earn particular attention. At one point, CNN reported, he writes of watching television with his wife Michelle, and catching "a glimpse of a Tea Party rally".

"She seized the remote and turned off the set," Obama writes, "her expression hovering somewhere between rage and resignation. 'It's a trip, isn't it?' she said ... 'That they're scared of you. Scared of us.'"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Barack Obama: 'Americans spooked by black man in White House' led to Trump presidency

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Donald Trump "promised an elixir for the racial anxiety" of "millions of Americans spooked by a black man in the White House", Barack Obama writes in his eagerly awaited memoir. Those Americans, Obama writes, were prey to "the dark spirits that had long been lurking on the edges of the modern Republican party - xenophobia, anti-intellectualism, paranoid conspiracy theories, an antipathy toward black and brown folks".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
School Swap The Class Divide | Season 1 Episode 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
history biology literature learning education science humanities school "world history" ap tests smart fun chemistry psychology apush whap study "crash cours...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At Crash Course, we believe that high-quality educational videos should be available to everyone for free! Subscribe for weekly videos from our current courses! The Crash Course team has produced more than 45 courses on a wide variety of subjects, including organic chemistry, literature, world history, biology, philosophy, theater, ecology, and many more!