Following the 2010 General Election the Conservatives reinvigorated the Right to Buy scheme which had originally been instituted by Margaret Thatcher. The issue of Right to Buy has always been a contentious issue, not so much the principle of council residents buying their own homes but what would happen to the money raised from these sales. In the 1980s critics of the scheme said that the money generated from the sale of council houses wasn’t reinvested in building new council homes. Now the 21st Century incarnation of this policy is accurately receiving the same criticisms.
From shore to shore debates on borders are raging. Global warming, warfare and insurgency-based conflict continue to ravage nations across the world. A majority of migrants travelling from Africa are escaping a violent dictatorship in Eritrea. Kim Jong-Un continues to rattle his sabre with rocket launches whilst his people starve. Syria, Nigeria, Turkey and Iraq continue to be battle grounds as the religious zealots of Daesh/ISIS and Boko Haram continue to displace their populations. The immigration argument therefore has swept its politicised fingers across the industrialised world as migrants continue to flood in to industrialised countries. The element of movement that built civilisations has now become a fertile ideological battle ground.
Ever since the Supreme Court decided that the Fourteenth Amendment applied to same-sex couples that wanted to get married, conservatives have sought to restrict the ability of LGBT people from receiving services from private companies. Conservatives want to discriminate, thus showing that they have fully absorbed the message of Jesus, against LGBT people by asserting the people with sincerely held religious beliefs shouldn’t have to do anything that contradicts these views. The time has come, therefore, to ask: what is religious freedom?
As the EU debate heats up Mayor of London Boris Johnson has begun to speak more openly about why is supporting Britain’s exit. In order to make a pitch for more socially liberal sections of the electorate Johnson made some interesting comments. They are interesting because they bypass logical reasoning and his conclusion is wildly incoherent. Because of the speculation about the future Tory leadership, Johnson’s comments will always carry weight because the media like the horse-race element of politics. What we need to do is expose the inanity of what he says.
With the spectre of the Soviet Union hanging over Western Europe, the capitalist powers banded together in a military alliance to deter any potential Soviet action. Whether this move was good for the Western nations or not, or whether this action was offensive or defensive are both interesting questions, but these shall not be the thrust of this article. This piece will look at a more fundamental question: in the modern world, what is the point of NATO?
Last night ISIS-inspired jihadis once again struck in Europe as three bombs went off in the Belgian capital. Federal prosecutors have said that 31 people have died and 260 people were injured however the death toll may still rise. The three bombs were in two separate locations: two explosions occurred at Zaventem Airport; the other went off at Maelbeek metro station. The response was largely positive but it is important to not let our emotional response to the attacks cloud our judgement and induce us into an irrational response.
After years of rule by a repressive military junta, Myanmar has transitioned into democratic rule following a Presidential election. Unlike in other Presidential systems like France or the United States, the President of Myanmar is elected by members of the country’s bicameral parliament. The new President, Htin Kyaw, shall be sworn in on 30th March and will be the first president in over fifty years that is not affiliated with the military. Democracy is continuing to spread and the fact that it has been done so peacefully is the most uplifting part of the story.