BBC4 Beyond Belief: Immigration and the Church

Churchgoing in the UK is in steep decline, but between 2005 and 2012 attendance rose by 14% and that is down to immigration. One in seven church services in London are not conducted in English. Many of the new worshippers are Poles and other Eastern Europeans who took the opportunity which the enlargement of the European Union offered to come to Britain. Others are fleeing conflict in places like Somalia and Syria. What impact is immigration having on the Churches in Britain? What opportunities and challenges does it pose to them?

Ernie Rea is joined by Francis Davies Professor of Religion, Communities and Public Policy at Birmingham University, Dr Fiona McCallum, Lecturer at the School of International Relations at the University of St Andrews, Pouya Heideri, an Iranian Christian who has been living in Britain for the last seven years and is training for ministry in the Church of England, and Rev Sally Smith from Stoke on Trent.

listen to the podcast

Jacobin Magazine: An Uncertain Alternative

This October’s elections reflected the changed political atmosphere. On the one hand, the results were inconclusive, failing to produce a clear majority that could form a government. On the other hand, they decisively showed the fate of the sitting government, made up of the centrist Progressive Party (FSF) and the right-wing Independence Party (XD). In 2013, they had received a clear majority of votes — each winning nineteen parliamentary seats out of a total of sixty-three — despite their direct responsibility for a number of bank collapses in 2008.

Between 1991 and 2008, XD enacted a unrelenting series of ultra-neoliberal and right-wing policies that led to the financial crisis. The basis for this neoliberal turn, however, was laid in the eighties, when an earlier Progressive-Independence coalition government held power. [...]

The Panama Papers finally blew it out of power. The revelation that the prime minister held off-shore, tax-free accounts contradicted his persona as the representative of the protesting masses. On April 4, thirty thousand people rallied to demand his resignation and new general elections. Both demands were met. [...]

The Pirates’ rise in the polls can be attributed, to a large degree, to protest votes; the traditional left and right had lost all credibility, and this upstart party seemed like the only option.

But eight years of protests were also a decisive factor. The size of this movement cannot be overstated: Between 2008 and 2011, the police counted over 1,300 protest meetings of various sizes and shapes — close to one every day. The Pirates appeared as a direct, organized, and electoral representation of these protests, presaging a renewed social contract based on the enormous political activity after the collapse.

Atlas Obscura: Rock 'n' Roll and Military Dictatorships Almost Destroyed Argentine Tango

In the 1940s, Argentina was tango and tango was Argentina. Born in the marginalized outskirts and upscale brothels of Buenos Aires, the musical genre slowly but surely seeped into the very roots of the country’s culture and took a strong hold. Fathers would spend years teaching their sons how to dance, singers like Carlos Gardel were national figures, and social gatherings were always accompanied by the sound of the tango concertina, the bandoneon.

Then, two disparate but hugely impactful things arrived: a series of military dictatorships and rock ‘n’ roll. While in opposition in every other respect, the dictatorships and the new music genre inadvertently collaborated in dethroning tango and driving it to near oblivion. [...]

There was also the question of censorship. When tango first emerged, the church banned it because it was the music of  the “immoral” factions of society. It was no longer banned when the coup of 1930 occurred, but there was censorship of lyrics that supported populist ideas and used lunfardo, the slang of the working classes in Buenos Aires and Montevideo. Even Peron banned songs like Cambalache for being too pessimistic. [...]

At the same time, a shift in social mentality began to occur. While there had previously been time to allot to social gatherings, the new economic models promoted by the regimes relied heavily on the idea of production. Marcelo Solis, an Argentine tango professor at the Escuela de Tango de Buenos Aires, who lived through the last two regimes, explained that in the mind of the military, if Argentina was a mess, it was because its culture was a mess. If the country wanted to be more prosperous, it should look at foreign countries and seek to imitate them. The xenophobic attitude of peronismo was replaced by the obsession of achieving a version of the American Dream. There was no time or money for something as frivolous as culture.

read the article 

Jacobin Magazine: Why Corbyn Won?

There were three major strands which came together in Corbyn’s first leadership campaign, and which continue to form the basis of the movement around him. These were existing Labour Party members, the trade unions, and a range of people on the Left without party affiliation, many of whom were active in various social movements. These people became the £3 members. What all three stands had in common was that they all sprang from resistance to the Thatcherite economic model, or neoliberalism, which suffered such a catastrophic collapse in 2008 and hasn’t recovered.

One thing I try to show is that the last of these three elements, the £3 voters — as important as they were — only really came into play after developments in the first two strands had put Corbyn in a strong position. In other words, the Labour Party was not simply “taken over” by outsiders, as you might think from most of the media coverage. There were long-term developments within the labor movement that, in retrospect, can be seen as crucial to Corbyn’s victory. [...]

If Corbyn is removed, or if he loses an election and the internal battles within the Labour Party haven’t been won, then these instabilities will, I think, be quite starkly revealed, although I couldn’t predict where things would go. Given that, I think it’s probably better for Corbyn if the election is not called early, but is held in 2020. They need time to build.

However, we can’t let this possibility of the whole thing falling apart paralyze us. The Left is weak, true — but maybe not as weak as we sometimes imagine ourselves to be. We always seem to be on the defensive. Now more than ever, we need to have the confidence to present a dynamic alternative, both in terms of policy and a popular message.

read the article 

Quartz: A political historian’s proposal to completely overhaul the way the media covers presidential elections

In fact, when it comes to predicting election outcomes, it makes much more sense to focus on the big picture. In 1981, collaborating with the renowned mathematician Vladimir Keilis-Borok, I developed the Keys to the White House, a system for explaining and predicting presidential election results based on the study of American politics from 1860 to 1980. The Keys model demonstrates that presidential elections are primarily judgments on the performance of the party currently holding the White House, with speeches, ads, debates, campaign appearances and even tweets accounting for little or nothing in the final outcome. [...]

Since 1984, the Keys model has correctly forecast the outcomes of all subsequent US presidential elections, including in 2016. Using the model, I predicted a Trump victory in a Washington Post interview on September 23, 2016. I doubled down on that prediction in another interview on October 28, after the revelation of the Trump Access Hollywood tape and allegations of sexual assault, and before FBI director James Comey’s letter updating Congress about new Clinton email discoveries. [...]

All this suggests that both the media and politicians should rethink their strategies toward elections. Rather than focusing on polls and horserace coverage, the media should cover elections in terms of what they mean for governing. In this era of fake news they should be the gatekeepers of truth, mediating the clash between fact and fiction. Of course, all this flies in the face of the revenues that flow to the media from covering elections day-by-day with the drama of a sporting event.

read the article