SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " democracy " 422 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Latest threat to democracy: Politicians bullying journalists
When officials refuse to answer questions they aren’t simply disrespecting journalists. They are disrespecting the citizens those journalists serve.
'Hamilton' dance workshop celebrates importance of art in politics
On Sunday, the Rutgers Democracy Lab and Livingston Theatre Company hosted "Hamilton: Arts, Democracy & Dance" to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the United States as well as the Eagleton Institute of Politics' 70th anniversary. Held at the College Avenue Student Center, this event was an opportunity to showcase the intersection of arts and democracy, to discuss this serendipitous connection and to learn some choreography from the Broadway hit musical.
AIPAC retreats from candidate endorsements and direct giving as political backlash grows
Pro-Israel group AIPAC will keep operating its United Democracy Project super PAC while mobilizing individual donors to give directly.
Geoffrey Hinton, the godfather of AI: ‘I’m not a doomer. I think there’s a 1% chance it will destroy us’
The winner of the Nobel Prize in Physics warns of Silicon Valley’s fascist drift and says that if Trump wins the midterm elections, it will be the end of American democracy
How Big Tech money is undermining US democracy
US Author Gil Durán warns that Silicon Valley "billionaires have enough money to buy both sides" in any US election.
Kagan says supreme court conservatives have made US political system ‘a nightmare’
Liberal justice says recent decisions on redistricting and campaign finance have undermined democracy and polarized US even more
Stand Up for Science Endorses Dan Barrios for Congress in Texas’ 32nd Congressional District
SUFS endorsements promote candidates who will protect science and democracy, replace anti-science members of Congress in 2027
Australian democracy is usually peaceful. But there’s a homegrown history of political violence
Like other features of our public landscape, both good and bad, political violence has a history in Australia – one from which we may learn
Supreme Court’s conservatives have let down democracy, Justice Kagan says
Two weeks before the midterm elections, liberal Justice Elena Kagan bluntly sized up the Supreme Court handling of election and voting-related cases, saying, “The court has kind of blinded itself to the very deleterious effects of their rulings on how the political system works.”
Justice Kagan warns Supreme Court rulings are fueling polarization and undermining democracy
WASHINGTON (AP) — Justice Elena Kagan on Tuesday said voting and elections decisions from her conservative Supreme Court colleagues have helped make the country more politically polarized and less democratic.
Justice Kagan warns Supreme Court rulings are fueling polarization and undermining democracy
WASHINGTON (AP) — Justice Elena Kagan on Tuesday said voting and elections decisions from her conservative Supreme Court colleagues have helped make the country
Justice Kagan says Supreme Court has damaged democracy with recent rulings
The liberal justice took aim at the conservative majority’s rulings on the Voting Rights Act, campaign finance and partisan gerrymandering.
Justice Elena Kagan accuses Supreme Court’s conservative majority of undermining democracy
The liberal justice took aim at various recent rulings, including one that paved the way for rampant partisan gerrymandering of legislative districts.
Georgia: Secretary General Alain Berset calls for safeguarding democracy and political pluralism ahead of opposition ban hearings
Council of Europe to closely follow developments and continue dialogue with Georgia
Georgia: Secretary General Alain Berset calls for safeguarding democracy and political pluralism ahead of opposition ban hearings
Council of Europe to closely follow developments and continue dialogue with Georgia
Trump’s attacks on California elections endanger democracy, repeating a pattern
Republicans questioned elections before reforms made redistricting nonpartisan. Now they accuse California of letting noncitizens vote.
A note to readers: Science, accountability and elections
Dear readers, As early voting begins, I wanted to share some news — and why it connects to the decisions we make at the ballot box. I’ve been selected for the inaugural cohort of the South Atlantic Climate Journalism Hub mentorship program, hosted by Covering Climate Now. I’m excited to join this group, learn from scientists and fellow journalists, and expand my science reporting. Science directly ties to governance. Local officials make decisions about where development goes, how infrastructure is maintained, what emergency preparations receive funding, and how communities rebuild after disasters. Understanding the evidence behind those decisions helps us evaluate whether our government is serving us well. Here in western North Carolina, those connections are all around us, in Lake Lure and beyond. Flood maps inform decisions about property and development. Engineering assessments help identify risks at dams and bridges. Rainfall forecasts guide emergency preparations. Geological information helps explain landslide hazards. Water testing gives communities information they need to assess conditions. Meteorologists’ knowledge and public perception of weather events shape public safety. Each involves scientific or technical knowledge. Each also raises questions about public responsibility: What did officials know? How did they use that information? What did they tell the public? What did taxpayers receive for their money? A study can identify a problem. Elected officials still have to decide what to do about it, how to pay for it, and how to explain their choices. Reporting should examine both the evidence and the response. That is where I want to strengthen my work. My reporting on Helene recovery, infrastructure, flooding, public safety, and public spending has repeatedly brought me to questions that require scientific expertise alongside public records. This mentorship may help me better understand the research, ask more precise questions, and explain the answers clearly. I also bring the perspective of someone living with these concerns. I live downstream of Lake Lure Dam, and landslides affected my property during Helene. Those experiences bring urgency to my questions. Careful reporting helps establish the answers. Readers deserve to know what the evidence shows, where uncertainty remains, and whether officials accurately describe the information guiding their decisions. You also deserve scrutiny of proposed solutions: what they cost, what they are expected to accomplish, and what risks remain. Access to that information matters. As a mostly deaf journalist who relies on written communication, I will continue pressing for written public warnings, records, and explanations that people can read and use in real time. As you consider the candidates seeking your vote, consider how they approach evidence, preparedness, and transparency. Do they support local journalism, even when it’s not parroting a press release? Do they explain weather events clearly in plain English and explain their decisions after them? Make supporting records available? Acknowledge uncertainty? Follow through when a report identifies a risk? Those are practical questions about governing. Thank you for supporting Cops & Congress and the work that makes these questions part of the public conversation. I’m grateful to David Dickson and the CC Now team for this opportunity, and I look forward to bringing what I learn back to you. Annie DanceEditor & Publisher, Cops & Congress — Learn more about this newsletter, ethics policy, how you can help shape this work, and support it. Follow on X and Facebook. Send constructive criticism, fan mail, and tips with public documents for future stories: CopsandCongress@gmail.com ICYMI: View the Cops & Congress archive — Annie Dance is the publisher of Cops & Congress, a newsletter that analyzes what happens when crime, courts, disaster, democracy, and small-town policies collide. Views expressed here are covered by the First Amendment. Dance has a Bachelor of Arts from Manhattan University in Communication with a focus in Journalism and Government. She has been a journalist for over 20 years. Share Upgrade now or give a gift subscription
France Protests Show Europe’s Shift Away From Centrist Politics
Europe’s centrist parties are losing ground among young people and workers, who are increasingly tempted by populist promises of radical change.
Does your vote matter in Ohio? Political experts weigh in ahead of the midterms
Election Day is near, and while many are already early voting, some eligible voters may feel disengaged from politics or concerned about the state of our democracy. We'll talk to experts about your election questions and why your vote matters.
Workers Can Govern, but They Need Power First
A new book makes the most rigorous case yet for why so few working-class people hold office. But by treating the lack of workers in office as a law of electoral democracy, its authors underrate how mu...
{item.title}
(ANALYSIS) Political shamelessness threatens democracy by weakening leaders’ respect for ethical principles and the rule of law. Drawing on Plato’s Laws, this article explores reverence as a virtue that encourages humility, self-restraint and recognition of human limitations, arguing that responsibl
Can AI solve our mental health access problem?
Last week I asked you what worries you most about AI in health. It was close, but your top answer was “AI giving bad health advice.” Last week’s poll results: You’re in good company. This concern was top of mind at a conference I joined at Stanford last week, where researchers, clinicians, and people who build AI systems spent a day debating trust and safety in health AI. Stepping back, I’m also hearing your emerging concerns about AI’s impact on our well-being generally. I see this as a matter of public health, and we’ll take it in pieces as we learn together. Today we’ll focus on AI chatbots used for therapy for mental health. Early this month, Governor Newsom vetoed Senate Bill 903, California’s most ambitious attempt to regulate AI use for mental health. It’s at the center of active debate, and raises the questions patients, family members, citizens, and voters will face as AI moves deeper into health care. Let’s work through it. What is “AI-based therapy”? It’s really two things: purpose-built mental health apps designed to deliver structured support, and general chatbots like ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini that people increasingly use for emotional support—even if they weren’t built for it. Spoiler alert: I don’t know whether the shift toward AI therapy is good or bad. The evidence isn’t there yet. But I do know it’s already happening, and I have some ideas about how we can roll it out with safety in mind. The therapy dilemma, in a nutshell Mental health challenges are common, and strain health and well-being across populations. Therapy (interactive dialogue with a trained, empathetic practitioner) helps many people heal. The demand for licensed therapists far exceeds the supply in California, and AI-based therapy can narrow that gap. AI-based therapy remains novel, unproven, and not well tested. Right off the bat, we can see we’re dealing with trade-offs here. Since the main driver of demand for therapy from a robot is lack of access to therapy from a human, we’ll start there. It’s too hard to find and afford a human therapist California is short roughly 55,000 licensed, non-prescribing therapists and counselors, about 40% of what we need. Psychiatrists, who rely on talk therapy as a complement to prescribed medications, are even more scarce. Eight counties have none, and density ranges from 1.7 per 100,000 residents in San Benito County, to 68.1 in Marin County. My wife is a psychiatrist in Marin, and even here access is tight. If it’s hard in the best-supplied county, imagine rural Sierra County, or the San Joaquin Valley. In 2024, more than half of Californians who tried to make a mental health appointment struggled to find a provider who took their insurance, compared with 14% for physical health care. When Senate staff posed as “secret shopper” patients and called 120 mental health providers in Medicare Advantage networks, they landed an appointment less than once for every five tries. Insurers pay behavioral health clinicians about 22% less than medical and surgical clinicians for comparable office visits. On top of that, billing denials and prior authorizations hit hardest at the solo and small practices common in mental health. Psychiatrists opt out of Medicare at the highest rate of any specialty. In many places, a cash practice for therapy fills quickly with patients paying $250 or more an hour, with no insurance paperwork at all. Families who can pay cash find providers more easily. Those who rely on insurance, including Medi-Cal enrollees, older adults, rural residents, and non-English speakers, compete for what’s left. So we can’t pretend the human system works, and we can’t blame people for turning to AI for support when they’re in distress. AI is filling the gap It’s estimated that roughly a quarter of AI users use it for mental health support. If you have internet, it’s available 24/7, it’s cheap, and it speaks your language. Uninsured adults are about twice as likely as insured adults to do it (30% vs. 14%). It feels anonymous in ways that may enable people to ask things they’re unsure or embarrassed about. The largely hidden, personal use makes it hard to study whether it’s actually helping people with their mental health issues, but researchers are trying. Does AI therapy work? A 2026 analysis of nearly 40 randomized trials found chatbots showed a real but small reduction in depression symptoms. But most of these trials were compared to an alternative of no therapy, not a human therapist. So the benefit of AI therapy is probably real, but modest, and mostly untested against the alternative of human contact. We need more studies. Serious concerns OpenAI’s own estimate is that more than a million ChatGPT users each week show signs of suicidal planning or intent. These are high stakes encounters, and AI doesn’t always get it right. That’s partly because a chatbot can sound like a therapist, but it has no license, no duty of care, and it’s not clear who to hold accountable when it gets things wrong. AI is also designed to help users in whatever task they’re seeking to accomplish. People may feel like they’re getting therapy, but they’re mainly getting a convincing conversation. It’s easy for an AI companion to wander into gray areas, like playing along with “creative writing” that may be about the user’s own suicidal intent. Courts are driving safety conversations A wave of lawsuits have been filed on behalf of families claiming that chatbots pushed people they loved toward self-harm, including teens who died by suicide. The first settlements came this year. OpenAI is headquartered in San Francisco, and dozens of cases alleging that ChatGPT drove users to suicide or self-harm are now before a San Francisco judge. Character.ai has filed for bankruptcy after several states brought lawsuits accusing the chatbot of pushing dangerous content to kids. But the technology seems to be improving. Last month, an independent evaluation found that newer AI models “almost never endorse suicide.” That’s progress, but our societal appetite for even one preventable death is very low. So how do we move forward? Finding a middle ground Earlier this month the governor vetoed Senate Bill 903, a bill designed to place guardrails on the use of AI for therapy. The bill would have prohibited any AI-based platform from being advertised as psychotherapy, and would have required a licensed professional to review and approve each encounter where AI was used to support therapeutic decisions. Newsom called it overly broad, since even routine screening questions would have needed clinician sign-off. Knowing we’re already short on mental health providers, requiring human review of AI encounters may not relieve our access problems. Still, the answer isn’t no oversight. Here’s one feasible short term solution. Rather than reviewing each encounter, a licensed clinician can design the guardrails: what counts as a crisis, what triggers an immediate handoff to a human, and what gets sampled for audit each month. The AI runs inside that structure. Conversations get checked, failures get reported, and a real clinician owns the framework. Medicine already has models to learn from. The FDA process for rolling out newly approved medications is an example. After a product reaches patients, we keep watching for adverse events. Patient-facing AI needs the same “digital pharmacovigilance”: systematic tracking of harms, near misses, and the types of groups that get hurt and why. It’s also critical that users know that they can reach a human if they’re in crisis. Most chatbots now include messages like these: Bottom line The rush to use unproven AI tools for mental health support is mostly a workaround, a sign of a health system people can’t get into. We need better access to proven care from licensed clinicians. That takes reimbursement that makes accepting insurance viable, and a bigger workforce. But, built and tested well, AI could be part of the answer. It could be the 2 a.m. check-in when no one else is awake, or a way for patients to practice skills their therapist taught them. It could be the first step to get someone the right level of care, and take paperwork off clinicians’ plates so they spend more time with patients. None of this is simple. The SB 903 veto doesn’t end the debate, and the legislature will be back. In the meantime, those of us using these tools need to stay informed, ask hard questions, and hold the companies building them accountable. I’ll try to do my part, and we’ll keep learning together. Love,Matt P.S. If you or someone you know is struggling with mental health challenges, emotional distress, substance use problems, or just needs to talk, call or text 988- you’ll reach a real person— or chat at 988lifeline.org 24/7. Dr. Matt Willis is the author of Your Local Epidemiologist in California. A California native, he’s served as a primary care physician, CDC epidemiologist, and public health officer for Marin County, where he guided the pandemic response. He lives in Marin with his family and their dogs, Teddy and Ramona. Thank you Cynthia He, MD, PhD, and Parnika Saxena, MD, for their guidance in preparing this article. Cynthia works in an outpatient mental health clinic, treating patients who have Medi-Cal or, sometimes, no insurance. Parnika works in an inpatient psychiatric unit, treating patients with public or private insurance or self-pay ability. All opinions are their own and do not represent their employers.
Key takeaways from the final, fiery debate between Susan Collins and Troy Jackson
The debate featured lots of talk about Donald Trump, disparate views on the state of American democracy and a moment when Jackson told Collins to "shut up."
Defender of Kenya's democracy or political compromiser? Kenyans divided over Raila Odinga's legacy
One year after Raila Odinga's death, Kenyans are reflecting on his contribution to democratic reforms and national reconciliation. However, the so-called 'handshakes', with his political rivals remain debatable.
Clinton Policy Institute outlines maternal health solutions for states
Health Care Clinton Policy Institute outlines maternal health solutions for states It’s the first major report from the project, which launched in July to foster nonpartisan policies to improve the wellbeing of children and families. Stephanie Akin 10:00 AM, Oct 15, 2026 Dr. Jacob Lenz performs an ultrasound at the Oklahoma State University obstetrics and gynecology clinic in Tulsa, Okla., on Tuesday, July 16, 2024. (AP Photo/Mary Conlon) The Clinton Policy Institute is calling on states to lead efforts to curb maternal mortality, releasing a 61-page playbook Thursday highlighting successful policies that could be adopted nationwide. The playbook is the first major report from the Clinton Foundation’s project, which launched in July to foster nonpartisan state and local policies to improve the wellbeing of children and families. “Eighty percent of maternal deaths are preventable, and we know what works,” CPI Chair Jennifer Klein said. “The solutions are well established and evidence-based.” CPI’s mission is to convene political leaders from both parties, policy experts, state officials and other stakeholders to explore solutions to longstanding problems. “What we aim to do is bring together people who are deeply engaged, but may not be meeting together in the same room,” Klein said, noting that state policymakers might not always be aware of what their peers are doing in other states. In May, CPI brought together lawmakers from Virginia and Pennsylvania, two of the 14 states that have passed bipartisan maternal health “Momnibus” packages modeled after a comprehensive federal proposal that has repeatedly stalled, called the Black Maternal Health Momnibus Act. Other participants included Dr. Mona Hanna, founder of Rx Kids, a Michigan program that provides direct cash allowances to pregnant women and infants. Pennsylvania Rep. Morgan Cephas, who was part of the group, said she learned about funding opportunities she hadn’t come across during her decade in the Legislature. “As legislators we can issue grants, we can pass legislation, we can move policy, but we want to ensure that funding opportunities and programs that are tackling this issue are sustainable,” Cephas said. The playbook outlines broad areas where state policy can make a difference, such as allowing Medicaid to pay for doulas and remote patient monitoring, and using federal and private grant funding to pay for home visits to pregnant and postpartum women. For each category, it highlights innovative programs that can serve as models, with examples of specific actions state lawmakers and governors’ offices can take. Those include the Rx Kids model, which gets funding from the Michigan state budget; Pennsylvania’s Healthy Moms Vibrant Futures strategic action plan, emphasizing equity-centered maternal care, regional collaboration, Medicaid innovation, and workforce development that was launched this year with more than 160 stakeholders; and Kansas’s Bridging Plan, which reserves three slots and provides at least $26,000 in loan forgiveness for obstetric residents who commit to practicing in rural or underserved communities for 36 months. CPI emphasizes that its work is nonpartisan. Klein, the director of the White House Gender Policy Council under former President Joe Biden, acknowledged that CPI also takes positions on abortion, Medicaid funding, and the need to address the economic and social drivers of poor health, which might rankle some conservatives. “We don’t shy away from talking about those things that we think are part and parcel of the maternal health crisis in this country,” Klein said. “That said, there are so many policies that are both evidence-based and have been tried successfully in both red and blue states, and people can see that they can have real impact.” She pointed to the federal option to extend postpartum Medicaid coverage from 60 days to 12 months that was made available during the Biden administration and has since been adopted by every state but Arkansas. Other initiatives embraced across party lines include Medicaid coverage for midwives and doulas, as well as “bundled” payments for prenatal and postpartum care. That alternative payment model, pioneered in states such as Arkansas, Colorado and Tennessee, incentivizes fixed fees to cover all healthcare services associated with pregnancy and childbirth. Advocates say it promotes more coordination among caregivers, discourages unnecessary interventions, and expands postpartum support. In addition to maternal health, the initiative is also focused on addressing family economic security, children’s well-being, and democracy and civic resilience.
The Politics of Heat, Homes, and Lobster Boats.
The Bar Harbor Story is generously sponsored by First National Bank. MOUNT DESERT ISLAND REGION—The candidates’ forum focusing on House District 15 and incumbent Holly Eaton and Clifford Noyes last week spent a lot of time on the candidates’ thought of heating, communication with constituents, property taxes, education costs, and other issues. It also was a time for the community to ask their own questions and see two candidates up close and personal at the Southwest Harbor Fire Department firehouse. Jim Vallette organized the hour-long event, which was moderated by Carrie Jones of the Bar Harbor Story. Ken Rozsahegyi provided technical support for the congenial event. House District 15 serves Brooklin, Deer Isle, Eagle Island Township, Frenchboro, Isle au Haut, Marshall Island, Southwest Harbor, Stonington, Swan's Island, Tremont, and Vinalhaven. Jones advised as she began the question and answer part of the event, ”Treat everyone here like they are going to be the ones who might give you a ride in a rainstorm, pull your pet out of a burning building, or be the one grading your kids’ papers at school, okay?” She continued. “That’s it. Tonight isn’t meant to be a gotcha debate. The goal is to give people in the district a chance to get to know both candidates, hear what they care about, and understand what they’d actually try to accomplish in Augusta.” The questions and discussion throughout were kind. Eaton currently serves in the position. She’s a Democrat from Deer Isle, raised in a fishing family and has worked in nonprofits and volunteered for her school board. Noyes is unenrolled (politically) and from Southwest Harbor and currently a school board member, self employed as a mason. He focused on fiscal issues throughout the forum. Eventually, at Jones’ prompting, the candidates played “Rock, Paper, Scissors” for who would go first for their closing statements. Noyes used the opportunity to urge others to head to the ballot. “Whether you vote for me or Holly, it’s important that people vote,” Noyes said. He hoped the voter turnout in the district would be over 35 percent because that would mean people were truly engaged. Eaton stressed that she’s a Democrat, but in Augusta, her role isn’t about party. “I am a Democrat, but when I go to Augusta, I am there to represent the people of District 15. I want people to feel as though I’m accessible, that I’m responsive, and that I show up for the district,” Eaton said. Being there for others was vital, she explained. “When something comes before me in Augusta, I try to look at it through the lens of the people and the communities that I represent. How will this affect the people who live here? Does it make it easier or harder to raise a family here, to operate a small business, to work on the water, to afford a home, to keep our schools open, or provide the essential services our communities depend on?” Eaton said. Noyes spoke about fiscal responsibility and about the state being more responsive to communities and the ideas that come from them. “I feel that we desperately need to restore some fiscal sanity, a little bit. So when the legislature meets again,” Noyes said, “it could be critical for Maine residents that we don’t keep digging this hole that we’re in financially and keep raising our taxes so the struggling families struggle even more.” The two answered a series of questions from Jones, then answered questions from the audience and participants via Zoom. Jones asked what they heard the most from people about what was making their lives hard and what can the legislature in Augusta do it about those issues. Both spoke to concerns about heating oil costs. Noyes spoke to the three H’s: health, home, and heat. Eaton and Noyes spoke to the burdens of families with lower incomes, with Eaton mentioning LIHEAP (Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program). They both were in favor of free community college and trade programs. They both supported the working waterfront. Both said that data centers—such as the one proposed in Eastport, which is out of the district—should be a local decision, but neither were in favor of it. The working waterfront was supported by both. Eaton’s served on the Maine Marine Resource Committee in the legislature. She advocated a diversity of fishing resources and less of a reliance on lobstering. Shrimp, she hoped, would make a comeback. Noyes worried about out-of-state pressure on the lobstering industry, also spoke of shrimp harvesting timings, and said he supported the lobstering industry. QUICK NOTE Carrie Jones is, obviously, the co-founder of the Bar Harbor Story, which made us have a bit of a hard time putting out this story and thinking it through and how to present it. We ended up with this article. The debate in its entirety is below, many thanks to Ken and Jim for making it publicly available. UPCOMING AND PAST EVENTS The following events are or were organized by the League of Women Voters Downeast. DISTRICT 7 DISTRICT ATTORNEY DISTRICT 13 Thursday, Oct 15, 2026 5:30 PM to 6:30 PM Candidate Forum: House District 13 125 State St , Ellsworth Featuring candidates Michael Cunningham (D) and Russell White (R), moderated by Cyndi Wood, managing editor of the Ellsworth American. DEMOCRACY FORUM Friday, Oct 16, 2026 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM Democracy Forum — Election 2026: What’s on Your Ballot RECENT PRESS RELEASES AND BRIEFS To see all the press releases, click here. To see our news, click here. For the full archive, click here. All of these are on our dedicated website. [ ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/feeling-stressed-kids-corner-invites) [ Feeling Stressed? Kids’ Corner Invites Parents, Educators, and Caregivers to Rediscover the Joy with National Speaker Raelene Ostberg Oct 14 ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/feeling-stressed-kids-corner-invites) [ Read full story ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/feeling-stressed-kids-corner-invites) [ ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/mainely-meats-pink-party-for-breast) [ Mainely Meat’s Pink Party for Breast Cancer Awareness is October 18! Oct 14 ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/mainely-meats-pink-party-for-breast) [ Read full story ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/mainely-meats-pink-party-for-breast) [ ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/conners-emerson-school-announces) [ Conners Emerson School Announces Public Surplus Property Sale Oct 14 ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/conners-emerson-school-announces) [ Read full story ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/conners-emerson-school-announces) [ ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/planting-the-writers-garden) [ Planting the Writer’s Garden 12:15 AM ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/planting-the-writers-garden) [ Read full story ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/planting-the-writers-garden) [ ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/artist-maria-de-los-angeles-explores) [ Artist Maria de los Angeles explores migration and belonging in COA public lecture 12:19 AM ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/artist-maria-de-los-angeles-explores) [ Read full story ](https://barharborstory.substack.com/p/artist-maria-de-los-angeles-explores) HELP SUPPORT THE BAR HARBOR STORY When we started The Bar Harbor Story, we didn’t know if anyone would read it. But you showed up. You shared. You sent tips. Now—over 400,000 views every month later—it’s clear: people here care about their community and each other. We’ve kept everything free because news should never be out of reach, but every one of our stories takes time to write, and your support keeps The Bar Harbor Story going. If you value our work, please consider a paid subscription, a founding membership, or a sponsorship. It truly helps us cover one more meeting, tell one more story, shine one more light. Even $5 a month makes a difference. Click here to become a one-time supporter now. Thank you so much for being here. Founding member information can be found here. Have questions about sponsorships? Just send Shaun an email at sfarrar86@gmail.com, he’d love to hear from you. Subscribe Share Bar Harbor Story Share Leave a comment
Ahead of the midterms, most voters cite the economy and cost of living as top issues and favor political change - AP-NORC
Eight in 10 voters want substantial change or total upheaval in how the country is run. Most are pessimistic about the state of U.S. politics, and nearly half express pessimism about the future of democracy in America.
Today’s irreverent politics ignore ancient wisdom: The need to know your limits
Many Americans have decried today’s politics as ‘shameless.’ The antidote, a political philosopher argues, may be more reverence – awe at just how difficult democracy is.
Today’s irreverent politics ignore ancient wisdom: The need to know your limits
Many Americans have decried today’s politics as ‘shameless.’ The antidote, a political philosopher argues, may be more reverence – awe at just how difficult democracy is.
Today’s irreverent politics ignore ancient wisdom: The need to know your limits
Many Americans have decried today’s politics as ‘shameless.’ The antidote, a political philosopher argues, may be more reverence – awe at just how difficult democracy is.
To save democracy, you might want to go to church
The solution to some of American democracy’s biggest problems might be something old and controversial: More religion.
How American politics has changed under Trump
An increasingly unpopular president has tried to change the rules for American democracy.
'If You Can Keep It': The Purpose Of The Polls
Polls play a major role in U.S. politics. And in the months leading up to an election, they’re everywhere.Polling doesn’t just indicate which party has a competitive advantage in a race. They also tell us about the issues that are most concerning to voters. And how these concerns break down by race, gender, education, age, and political affiliation. They also tell us the level of trust people have in the institutions tasked with carrying out our democratic processes.In this installment of our weekly series, “If You Can Keep It,” we break down the purpose of polls and their place in our elections, politics, and democracy.Find more of our programs online. Listen to 1A sponsor-free by signing up for 1A+ at plus.npr.org/the1a.
2026 Voter Insight Panel: Elections, Immigration, and Family
Central Floridians with different political views discuss the U.S. Senate race, democracy, immigration enforcement, and how they navigate political differences with family and friends.
The story of how big business began shaping our understanding of reality » Yale Climate Connections
An interview with Amy Westervelt, climate reporter and author of ‘Brought to You By: How Corporations Warped the Truth, Public, and Broke Democracy'
Democracy Can’t Only Show Up for Black Voters at Election Time
Democracy cannot just be something Black Americans are asked to save every election. It has to be something we can see working in our lives between elections. Every election season, here it comes again. We are told how important this election is. We are told democracy is on the line. We are told to ...
PM says it is 'clear' Russia interfered with Brexit referendum
He says voters were not "sufficiently" informed about how foreign actors sought to disrupt UK democracy.
Yes, it’s been a tough week for the Greens: but don’t lose sight of how we’re transforming British politics
We must now have unity and a discussion about party democracy. And let me be clear: as leader, I will never tolerate antisemitism, says Zack Polanski, leader of the Green party of England and Wales
Abdul El-Sayed says Democrats must ‘win by massive numbers’ to fend off GOP election denial
Michigan’s Democratic Senate nominee said he’s concerned that President Donald Trump and GOP Senate candidate Mike Rogers “are not committed to the institution of our democracy.”
What Shapes Independent Political Identity?
The increase of independent political identities has significant implications for the basic functioning of American democracy.
Speaker Han makes 3 wishes for Taiwan, calls for political compromise
Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜) on Saturday wished for a secure Taiwan, prosperity for its people and a thriving democracy, while urging the government and the opposition to resolve their differences through compromise.
The midterm spending bonanza is threatening democracy like never before.
New on "Stress Test": This cycle's shameless spree is bigger and more brazen than ever. Voters might finally be fed up.
Retired Rear Admiral Tim Gallaudet Talks Marine Science, Leadership At St. Mary’s College
LEXINGTON PARK, Md. — The Patuxent Partnership and the Steny H. Hoyer Center for the Study of Democracy at St. Mary’s College of Maryland hosted an evening with Rear Admiral Tim Gallaudet, Ph.D., USN (Ret.), on Sept. 30, at the College’s Dodge Performing Arts Center. The recital hall was full, with SMCM college students, alums, […]
Coalition Challenges Unlawful Use of Public Money for Trump Political Ads
Blatant Violation of Decades of Law Should Be Stopped, Watchdog Group, Unions and Candidate Say
New Report Assesses the Strategy to Remake the U.S. Science Ecosystem — and Lays Out a Path to Rebuild It
First installment of a multi-part series, Forging the Future of Science and Democracy, examines the players and the playbook that got us here.
Trump hit with second lawsuit over taxpayer-funded political propaganda ads
The lawsuit came the same day the Democratic National Committee (DNC) filed a separate challenge in Washington, D.C., seeking to stop the administration from using federal funds for the ad campaign.
‘Business for Democracy’ Sees Friends Rising and Keep Showing Up Rally in Downtown Plaza
On a scorching 100-degree Saturday midday on October 3, 2026, local volunteers from Culver City and Friends Rising, joined by Keep Showing Up Culver City, led a march and rally. The demonstration f…
Brazil: Lessons from a Disaster
By Antonio Martins (Outras Palavras) Defeats become deeper and more prolonged when we misunderstand what caused them, avoid correcting course, and embrace “solutions” that only compound our mistakes. Lula’s government and the Brazilian left suffered a disaster in Sunday’s election. Contrary to every poll, the president finished the first round 2.2 million votes behind Flávio Bolsonaro—and, more significantly, 3.4 million votes below his total four years ago, when the machinery of the state was working against him and in favor of his opponent. His vote share declined in 98 percent of Brazil’s municipalities. The PL, the main party of the far right, elected 121 deputies and 28 senators, becoming the largest caucus in both houses of Congress. The parties aligned with the Centrão—Brazil’s bloc of transactional center-right parties—were somewhat diminished, but will still hold roughly 250 seats in the Chamber of Deputies and 35 in the Senate. That will make it easier to assemble the majorities needed to amend the Constitution or impeach Supreme Federal Court justices. If elected, Flávio Bolsonaro could appoint four members of the Court, substantially altering its internal balance of power. What produced these results? How can the far right be prevented from consolidating them into a prolonged political hegemony? And what is the essential change of direction the left now needs? Explaining the Disaster Across the commercial media and the exuberant chaos of digital platforms, interpretations are multiplying. Some focus on specific episodes: Lula’s absence from the Globo debate, his very close relationship with Alexandre de Moraes, or his emphasis on issues supposedly remote from most people’s everyday concerns, such as rare earth minerals. Among the more systemic interpretations, three seem especially questionable. One argues that the principal defeat was not the left’s, since its congressional representation declined only slightly. The decisive movement captured at the ballot box, according to this view, was a shift within the right itself—from the more moderate and transactional forces of the Centrão toward the more ideological and radicalized forces of the PL and Novo. A second interpretation holds that the nature of electoral and political processes has changed. The material interests and aspirations of society, it argues, no longer play the central role they once did; they have given way to forms of subjective self-identification that the left has yet to understand. And a third concludes that, because of these two developments, we should expect a political winter: a prolonged period in which the far right and the broader right dominate Brazilian political life. There are important elements in all three interpretations. The problem lies in what they deny or leave out: Lula’s third government was a small-bore government. It offered the majorities that elected it neither a clearly better life nor reasons to believe again in politics and its power to transform society. These failures flowed from two fatal accommodations, which I will examine below. As a result, the government suffered a slow but steady erosion of support. And, as has happened in so many Western countries, it gave the far right the opportunity to present itself as anti-system and to benefit from popular frustration and distress. The interpretation that emphasizes the migration of votes from the center-right and traditional right toward the far right has been advanced, among others, by the courageous journalist Leonardo Sakamoto. In his UOL column on Monday, October 5, he highlights the miserable behavior of the traditional conservative parties. Over the past four years, they repeatedly joined forces with the “neo”-fascists, helping to “normalize” them—a criticism that could equally be directed at almost the entire corporate media. Believing they could use the far right as a stepping stone, they instead ended up partly devoured by it. This was especially true in the Senate, where the PL’s gain of 13 senators and Novo’s gain of two came at the expense of the PSD, which lost nine; the MDB, which lost two; the PSDB, which lost two; and the PP, which lost one. Sakamoto’s observation is accurate and necessary, but it leaves uncomfortable questions unanswered. Why did the erosion of the Centrão benefit the far right rather than, for example, producing growth for the left—as has happened so many times before, both in Brazil and elsewhere? The answer is not difficult. Throughout its four years in office, Lula’s third government was almost invariably associated with the Centrão. Here lies its first accommodation: accepting the limits imposed by conservative institutions; avoiding, as much as possible, any attempt to strain those limits through popular pressure; and believing only in the modest changes that could be squeezed through openings in Congress. The failure of the campaign to end the six-day workweek is emblematic. Lula could have electrified the presidential race by pairing it with a popular campaign for passage of the measure. Instead, he chose to place his hopes in the hands of Senate president Rodrigo Alcolumbre. He generated no mass mobilization, did not force his opponents onto an uncomfortable defensive, and won no victory. In September 2025, the government squandered the greatest of its many opportunities to shake up conservative power in Congress. Popular opposition to the so-called Shielding Amendment—which, if approved, would have restricted criminal proceedings against members of Congress—brought crowds into the streets, mobilized primarily by artists and social movements. This opened the possibility for a broader political education: a campaign that could begin exposing the limits and dysfunctions of Brazil’s political system while putting Bolsonaro’s movement on the defensive for its predictable support of political privilege. The amendment was defeated. But the executive branch then backed away from the fight. It remained associated with an institutional world widely seen as corrupt, elitist, and indifferent to ordinary people’s struggles. In doing so, it forfeited its credibility as a vehicle for the protest vote. On Sunday, it reaped the bitter fruits. Are We Doomed? Taking a different approach from Sakamoto, the philosopher Moysés Pinto Neto and other writers have drawn attention, in their first analyses of October 4, to the fragmentation of the public sphere produced by Big Tech platforms. Through their algorithms, these platforms present each person with a different view of social reality. As a consequence, it becomes much harder to identify common material problems and demands—for example, the fight for labor rights or for a properly funded public health system. Voters no longer embrace such demands, these authors argue, because they no longer see themselves as part of a collective. Instead, they tend to value the identities assigned to them by neoliberal subjectivity—the role of the entrepreneur, for example. On this interpretation, the left’s possible error lies in clinging to outdated illusions. Moysés’s warning is highly relevant and resonates with arguments such as Naomi Klein and Astra Taylor’s “Apocalyptic Fascism and the Billionaires’ Bet.” Unlike a century ago, the far right no longer promises a radiant future. It concentrates instead on resentment—especially that of young men. “They belong to a generation that fears it may never own a home, but compensates with the pleasure it gets from constantly provoking progressives online. Convinced their future has been stolen, they share memes romanticizing historical authoritarian regimes,” the authors write. But Moysés seems to confuse this danger with inevitability. He fails to see that the left’s answer cannot be adaptation. On the contrary, it must strengthen the possibility of politics as collective action. Nor does he recognize that precisely such a reversal is already becoming possible in some of the most promising mobilizations of the twenty-first century: the election, at the end of 2025, of the young Muslim Zohran Mamdani as mayor of New York, on a platform centered on the intensely material fight for an affordable city; the Left Party’s victory in Berlin two weeks ago, built around the demand to expropriate private real-estate corporations; and the very recent wave of demonstrations in Spain—including an occupation of Madrid’s Puerta del Sol—in which tens of thousands of young people mobilized by the Tenants’ Union have demanded limits on rents. By putting itself in the straitjacket of the “fiscal framework” in the first months of 2022, Lula’s third government adopted the second fatal accommodation of its term. Faced with conservative institutions and a country devastated by four years of Bolsonaro, increased public investment was the government’s remaining weapon for offering a more dignified life to the majority and forging an anti-conservative pact with them. The same state that disburses 1 trillion reais a year to enrich a small class of rentiers could instead spend money to extend the Family Health Strategy to every Brazilian, at a cost of 30 billion reais; provide full-day public schooling and childcare to all adolescents and children—and, especially, relief to their mothers; achieve universal sanitation while cleaning up polluted urban rivers; multiply metro systems; begin transforming the urban peripheries; and undertake many other urgently needed projects. In April 2023, an article in Outras Palavras warned that the fiscal framework could “shrink the Lula government and preserve the forces that condemn the country to inequality and regression.” A year later, another article showed that restraints on public spending were strangling policies vital to ordinary people and undermining the president’s popularity. In November 2024 came a reality check, in the form of the government’s humiliating defeat in the municipal elections. Even then, the fiscal lock was neither removed nor loosened. On the contrary: throughout the government’s four years, fiscal restraint remained central to its political narrative. The administration proudly proclaimed that it had “put the state’s accounts in order,” without grasping either how misleading that phrase was—given the payment of 1 trillion reais in interest—or how badly the message was hurting it politically. Lula finally woke up in September 2026. The increase in Bolsa Família benefits, after four years of being frozen; the announcement that anti-obesity drugs would be offered through Brazil’s public health system; and the ban on online betting showed that the state has the power to act decisively on behalf of the majority when those in government are willing to confront obstacles. The huge marches that closed the campaign in Fortaleza, Salvador, Rio de Janeiro, and São Paulo on the eve of October 4 showed how such initiatives can mobilize activists and the broader public. But it was too late—and too little to change the outcome of the first round. History has not ended The possibility of a turnaround in the three weeks leading up to November 25 cannot be ruled out. It will not be simple or easy. Lula must not only make up a deficit of 2.2 million votes; he must also offset the movement of voters who backed other right-wing candidates in the first round, most of whom are likely to move toward Flávio Bolsonaro. Pulling that off will require a broad, grassroots effort to win over voters, potentially reinforced by new initiatives from Lula. The coming hours and days will be decisive. If Bolsonaro’s movement also wins the presidency, the result will create a high-risk situation for Brazilian sovereignty and democracy. The enormous challenges posed by such an outcome would require the left to reexamine, in depth and with a genuine willingness to engage in self-criticism, its political projects—or its lack of them—and its practices. But would that mean we are condemned to the long winter of far-right hegemony that some analyses are beginning to forecast? It is far too early to say, suggests a recent text by Álvaro García Linera, the thinker who served as vice president of Bolivia under Evo Morales. His central hypothesis is that this political current will prove short-lived. At a moment when the entire world is once again talking about sovereignty and protecting national economies, the far right offers a stale, recolonizing neoliberalism. Its submission to the United States is as blatant and pathetic as Flávio and Eduardo Bolsonaro’s overtures to Donald Trump. Its project amounts to something like every man for himself: greater inequality, capitalism without limits, devastation, and supremacism. Will it work? In the United States, just two years into his second term, Trump himself is reaching record levels of unpopularity and may be on the verge of losing Republican control of both the House and Senate in November. Every new beginning is difficult. Whatever the outcome of the second round, the defeats of October 4 show how profoundly the Brazilian left will have to rethink and rebuild. But just as it would be foolish to underestimate the seriousness of its mistakes, it would be equally foolish to conclude that rebuilding a political project is no longer possible. History has not ended. The times are moving faster than ever. Originally published in Portuguese by Outras Palavras. English translation by Eric Blanc; I’ve added the subtitles. More We can’t stop the far right at home or abroad without a revitalized labor movement, which is yet another reason why you should become a sustaining supporter of the Emergency Workplace Organizing Committee (EWOC) — one of US labor’s pivotal bright spots. Relatedly, Jacobin published a short piece of mine reflecting on a decade of Bernie Sanders inspiring a whole new generation of young worker organizers.
“When democracy is secure, business is too”, says Deputy Secretary General at the European Democracy Summit 2026 in Brussels
“Our standards are stronger when they are built with those who apply them”: the event focuses on the role of business in defending Europe’s democratic foundations
Essay: Do political debates still matter to voters?
Political debates aren't just about candidates performing well. They're an opportunity for voters to hear real answers, see how candidates think and engage in democracy.
'If You Can Keep It': Mental Health And Democracy
A veteran journalist covered the Jan. 6 attacks on the Capitol. That experience got her exploring the connection between stress, trauma, and our political choices.Our mental health might affect our politics. But our politics also definitely affect our mental health.In this edition of “If You Can Keep It,” we examine that intersection.Find more of our programs online. Listen to 1A sponsor-free by signing up for 1A+ at plus.npr.org/the1a.
New York and American Democracy: A Conversation with Christina Greer
Noted political scientist will unpack urban politics and public policy with Professor Mitchell Moss - Oct. 20 at NYU Wagner
NC election experts warn about voter trust as AI makes political misinformation easier to create
State election officials, journalists and democracy experts say transparency and trusted local sources will be increasingly important as AI-generated political content spreads this election cycle.
Colorado’s mobster democracy
The issues on your ballot aren’t just questions about trains, taxes and spending. They are exhibits in a larger case: dishonesty, intimidation and political bullying have become standard operating procedure at the Colorado Capitol. The message from lawmakers is increasingly simple: Vote however you like — we’ll make sure it turns out the way we […]
My students are politically apathetic. Here’s what colleges can do to get them involved and engaged. (Opinion)
Although colleges might not think it’s their job to teach their students how to talk about civics, government and American democracy, it is. Instead of leaving families, the internet, and the nation’s K-12 schools to do the heavy lifting, i…
Culver City protesters demand Sony, Amazon, other studios defend democracy
LOS ANGELES — On a sweltering Saturday, around 100 people gathered in Culver City for a rally and march to deliver a message to several major media companies: Help us
When is the right time to compare US politics to the Nazi era? This expert on Christian nationalism says: now
Robert P Jones argues that declining white Christian influence has fuelled an alliance with Trump, and warns it is reshaping US democracy
'There’s no such thing as democracy' – Yanis Varoufakis | Radical Thinking with Aditya Chakrabortty
In the first episode of Radical Thinking, a new series from the Guardian, senior economics commentator Aditya Chakrabortty speaks to the former Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis. What does he make of Andy Burnham's plans to 'rewire' the UK economy? Radical Thinking will be published every Saturday in the Politics Weekly feed
On complex political issues, most Americans take shortcuts to simplicity
A core assumption in any democracy is that citizens with access to information will make reasoned decisions on political candidates and policy issues. But a new study by UC Berkeley social scientists ...
Stand Up for Science Endorses Pro-Science Congressional Candidates in Critical Districts
Endorsements promote candidates who will protect science and democracy, replace anti-science members of Congress in 2027.
Prediction markets are going mainstream. What does that mean for public health and democracy?
Prediction markets are becoming mainstream, bringing gambling risks and a novel source of political information to public life.
Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation announces Sports, Democracy, and Civic Health Initiative
The Reimagining Democracy Program at Harvard Kennedy School’s Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation has announced an expanded initiative examining how professional sports and fandom can strengthen civic health and democratic life in the United States. Led by Tova Wang, Director of Research Projects in Democratic Practice at the Ash Center, the Sports, Democracy and Civic Health program brings together scholars, election officials, democracy advocates, professional sports organizations, leagues, athletes, and civic organizations. The initiative will explore how the shared identity and sense of belonging fostered by sports can build trust, reduce polarization, encourage civic participation, and strengthen connections across differences.
Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation announces Sports, Democracy, and Civic Health Initiative
The Reimagining Democracy Program at Harvard Kennedy School’s Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation has announced an expanded initiative examining how professional sports and fandom can strengthen civic health and democratic life in the United States. Led by Tova Wang, Director of Research Projects in Democratic Practice at the Ash Center, the Sports, Democracy and Civic Health program brings together scholars, election officials, democracy advocates, professional sports organizations, leagues, athletes, and civic organizations. The initiative will explore how the shared identity and sense of belonging fostered by sports can build trust, reduce polarization, encourage civic participation, and strengthen connections across differences.
Across the Globe, People Increasingly Say Social Media Is Harming Democracy
Most think social media leads to manipulation and division, but they also say it informs people and gives them a voice in politics.
Political Prisoners Watch: Five Democracy Advocates Targeted for Seeking Help Abroad
Dictatorial regimes are retaliating against democratic activists who talk to foreign governments and international bodies.
A few noncitizen votes are a scandal. But thousands of rejected ballots are business as usual
One state rejected ballots because some voters failed to include their mother’s maiden name on the back of the return envelope.
New campaign disclosures reveal how much American political campaigns spend on AI tools
Though politicians are quiet about how they use AI, the book Rewiring Democracy examines how AI is starting to influence American politics
Oct. 1 Vallejo/Vacaville Arts-Entertainment Source: Faces and Places
The Vacaville Indivisible rally, “Save Our Democracy — Register to Vote,” was held on Sept. 19 in front of Vacaville City Hall.
Commentary: Higher education plays an integral role in building the trust democracy requires
Democracy’s future will be shaped not only at the ballot box, but also in classrooms, community forums, and everyday conversations that help citizens better understand one another.
Commentary: Civic preparedness has never been more critical
Comprehensive civic education is necessary to navigate our digital democracy and excel in postsecondary pursuits.
Facing up to the threat that Reform poses to our democracy
Letters: Readers respond to an article by John Harris in which he urges Labour to offer hope and change
Why joining local groups in Kansas is key to fixing politics
Civic health depends on joining groups. Here is why rebuilding social capital is vital for our democracy.
What are the Lib Dems for? They must champion localism to stay relevant in an age of single-issue politics
Ed Davey’s party are the obvious candidates to push the deeper local democracy that the public is crying out for, says Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins
Column: Politics has become a battle for attention
Democracy requires us to disagree and still live, work and solve problems together, government communications strategist Kellen R. Reed writes in a guest column.
Column: Politics has become a battle for attention
Democracy requires us to disagree and still live, work and solve problems together, government communications strategist Kellen R. Reed writes in a guest column.
Tom Watson’s move to Palantir is the latest sign of how far the rot has spread in UK politics
When a former Labour deputy leader joins a firm built on surveillance and military targeting, it deepens public cynicism – and democracy depends on trust, says Labour MP Clive Lewis
Video: Jane Fonda Criticizes Both U.S. Political Parties for Climate Inaction
The actor and activist Jane Fonda said the U.S. is facing “two existential crises — climate and democracy.”
At Rutgers, Talking Across Difference Aims for Civil Dialogue in a Divisive Political Climate
An initiative at Rutgers University-New Brunswick is helping students develop the skills and confidence to engage in meaningful conversations during an era marked by political polarization, social division and declining trust in democratic institutions. Through Talking Across Difference, a program developed within the Rutgers Democracy Lab at the Eagleton Institute of Politics during the 2024-2025 academic year, students, faculty and staff are learning how to engage in productive conversations
Reform and the UAE – a threat to British politics
By Alex Carlen The United Arab Emirates likes to present itself as part of the solution to the climate crisis. The oil-rich Gulf state has committed to Net Zero by 2050, hosted COP 28, and even declared “championing climate action” as one of three strategic objectives for this week’s session of the United Nations General Assembly. But behind the scenes the UAE has quietly built one of its closest political relationships in Europe with the party most hostile to climate action in Britain: Nigel Farage’s Reform UK. There is no evidence that the UAE is funding Reform. But a new FairSquare report, Petro-populism: the UAE–Reform threat, published today, documents a growing political relationship that should concern anyone interested in the integrity of British democracy. Reform’s leaders have embraced the UAE’s political model and promoted positions that align closely with the Emirati government’s priorities, while the UAE has given Farage and his party unusually warm access and public backing. What is emerging is not simply a relationship between British politicians and a wealthy Gulf state, but a channel through which an authoritarian government can cultivate political influence here, and abroad. Democracy for Sale relies on its readers. If you already support us, thanks so much. If you don’t, sign up to support fearless independent investigative journalism. Subscribe Back in January, Nigel Farage appeared at a GB News event in Dubai. On the 50th floor of a tower overlooking the luxury resorts and upscale residences of Palm Jumeirah, the Reform leader declared: “I want Clacton to look like this.” At the event – which Farage never declared on his official register of interests – senior Emirati officials mixed with British expats. Farage was keen to flatter. “We recognise you are our friends”, he said, assuring them that “a Brexit London, a Reform London, will remember you.” Controversy surrounding Reform’s finances and its susceptibility to foreign influence have centred around high-profile donations from billionaire crypto donors, and the jailing of Nathan Gill, Reform’s former leader in Wales, for accepting bribes to give pro-Russia speeches. Far less attention has been paid to Reform’s blossoming new alliance with the UAE, an oil-rich authoritarian state with a track record of ruinous anti-democratic interventions. Farage wasn’t always so fond of the UAE. Back in 2023 he called it an “absolute monarchy with an abysmal human rights record.” Now Reform’s hierarchy calls the UAE home. Deputy leader Richard Tice splits his time between his constituency and Dubai and has called on the UK to learn from the UAE. The party’s treasurer Nick Candy runs a firm which has been in partnership with a UAE-state linked firm since 2024. Nadhim Zahawi sits on the board of an Abu Dhabi think tank alongside an array of the most senior UAE officials and is reportedly close to three brothers of the country’s despotic ruler Mohammed Bin Zayed. Reform’s leading lights have effusively praised the UAE’s governance model, defended it from criticism, and advanced its political agenda in the UK. GB News, whose two major shareholders – the Legatum Foundation and Paul Marshall – have strong links to the UAE, has been more than happy to broadcast UAE propaganda and was forced to pay damages in 2025 after airing a false claim about a UK charity by the UAE “disinfluencer” Amjad Taha. The UAE has responded in kind. When the UAE Minister for Foreign Affairs conducted an official visit to the UK in May, Farage was the only non-government figure granted an audience. UAE state media publicised the meeting, and said that they discussed “the strategic relations between the two countries and ways to enhance them in a manner that serves mutual interests.” For the UAE these ‘mutual interests’ largely concern its paranoia over political Islam, and in this regard the UAE-Reform alliance is part of a broad and troubling pattern. Following a crackdown on dissent at home in the aftermath of the Arab Spring, the UAE has offered material and political support to a range of violent and authoritarian actors willing to oppose the Muslim Brotherhood with no regard for the consequences. Its meddling in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, and most notably Sudan, have been devastating. The UAE’s strategy of seeking out partners on the political fringes who it believes will advance its interests is not unique to Britain – it extends beyond the Middle East to Europe and the US. In France, it has offered clandestine support to Marine Le Pen through secret meetings, as well allegedly funding trips to the region after which Le Pen returned with a renewed focus on the UAE’s perceived enemies – Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood. Left-wing opposition leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon has accused the UAE of smearing him and of “encouraging discrimination, hatred or violence”. In the US, the UAE actively supported the rise of Donald Trump, establishing itself as a key ally during both his first and second terms. Around these relationships sits a wider ecosystem of figures willing to amplify UAE narratives, that even extends to Andrew Tate and Tommy Robinson. Subscribe In Britain, the UAE has used a combination of aggressive diplomacy and illicit, disruptive tactics to achieve its policy goal of eliminating any perceived threat from political Islam. In 2012, for instance, it threatened to block billion-pound arms deals with the UK and stop inward investment if David Cameron did not act against the Muslim Brotherhood and rein in the BBC’s coverage of the group – going so far as to suggest, with no supporting evidence, that the group had infiltrated the BBC. It has financed smear campaigns against a high-profile UK charity and funded a mercenary to secretly surveil, and possibly assassinate, a British national on British soil. In Reform UK, the UAE has finally found an ally willing to not only ban the Muslim Brotherhood, but to publicly vilify the group and repeat the UAE’s claims that dangerous Muslims are a fifth column in British society, a narrative that aligns with the Islamophobia and anti-immigration sentiments that underpin Reform’s populist politics. The Rycroft review into foreign interference concluded that “hostile states and non-state actors have a clear incentive to attempt to undermine UK democracy.” The UAE’s network and alliance with Reform must be understood within that framework. It is a powerful, disruptive and deeply authoritarian actor with the resources and networks to intervene in our politics, and a track-record of doing so in a multitude of other countries. The evidence of the threat the UAE poses is overwhelming. The question is whether parliamentarians are willing to call the UAE out and demand action using the tools that the government has to respond. Placing the UAE on the “Enhanced Tier” of the Foreign Registration scheme alongside Russia and Iran would send a powerful signal to the UAE that its meddling will no longer be tolerated, and would place Farage’s next trips to the UAE under the scrutiny they deserve. Alex Carlen is research and advocacy manager at London based human rights organisation FairSquare and author of its new report Petro-populism: the UAE–Reform threat. Subscribe
Stand Up for Science’s Climate Week Discussion Panel to Tackle Science, Democracy and Climate Tomorrow
Cross-disciplinary panel discussion will explore the interplay among scientific consensus, democratic governance, and the climate crisis.
“Politics Are Desperately Important at the Moment”: Bill McKibben on Midterms, Trump & Climate Crisis
Ahead of the midterm elections, activist and writer Bill McKibben says he has been traveling across the United States with Third Act, the environmental group he founded to harness the power of seniors who care about the climate and democracy. “These elections are also starting to set the groundwork for 2028,” says McKibben, who calls the next U.S. presidential vote “maybe the last election that happens in a timeframe when we still really have an opportunity to affect some of the outcomes of these things.”
Perception Gaps: Why Misjudging Our Political Opponents Is Damaging American Democracy
Perception gaps — misunderstandings about our fellow Americans across the political spectrum — are damaging the fabric of our country. Correcting these gaps is essential to preserving the kind of democracy that respects free speech, individual dignity, and civic responsibility.At their core, percept...
Convicted Greek neo-fascist tries to evade election ban
His return has also caused tensions inside the governing New Democracy party
Paula Poundstone on sobriety, saving democracy, and her upcoming Pittsburgh show
Paula Poundstone is looking forward to returning to Carnegie of Homestead Music Hall with a set that covers politics and practical tips.
Whether you like it or not, celebrities have an impact on politics
The global groundswell of support for Macklemore’s pro-Palestinian advocacy serves to remind us that maybe celebrity activism really is that deep after all, writes Cheek’s Varsha Yajman. Subscribe In the last week, publications, podcasts, and influencers that have either rarely or never spoken about Israel’s genocide in Palestine have flooded my social feed. And it was all because singer Ed Sheeran and his team dropped Macklemore as his opener for saying “Free Palestine” on stage. Millions raised, millions speaking up in support of Palestine - all of this confirming my view that, whether I like it or not, celebrities do have an impact on political outcomes. And this is interesting when much of the time celebrity activism can induce an eye roll - I love to see Charli XCX pointing out a Palestinian flag in the crowd, but it’s hardly the bold symbol of allyship that some fans would make it out to be. But there’s a line between healthy scepticism and outright dismissal - and I’d argue that the latter lets the rich and powerful off far too easily. For instance, actress Jennifer Lawrence, once outspoken about her political views, last year told The Times she no longer believes celebrities have a role to play: “Celebrities do not make a difference whatsoever on who people vote for. So then what am I doing? I’m just sharing my opinion on something that’s going to add fuel to a fire that’s ripping the country apart.” While it’s a narrative she might find comfort in, it simply is not true. Grassroots movements often garner worldwide attention when celebrities and other high-profile spokespeople bring a mainstream platform to their causes. And this frustrates me. We have had three years of a live-streamed genocide. Macklemore himself has been calling for a Free Palestine long before he booked the Sheeran concert. Yet it’s the high-profile fallout of the last week that finally seems to have made saying “Free Palestine” socially acceptable in the mainstream. It feels like the collective mood has shifted, where calling out censorship is now the obvious response - not just the business of ‘radical’ activists. To recap, Sheeran’s decision followed an ultimatum from billionaire Robert Kraft, owner of Gillette Stadium, one of the venues Sheeran was scheduled to perform at: either drop Macklemore as your opener after only two of the eight scheduled shows, or you do not play at any stadiums. Sheeran’s disappointing decision to stand on the side of billionaire-led censorship has ultimately seen a surge in support for Free Palestine. It began when all his openers and his backing band pulled out of Sheeran’s tour, in solidarity with Macklemore and with the Palestinian cause. It was met with an uproar of support from those who had never or barely touched politics before: influencers lip-syncing to Macklemore’s music, singers like Jack Antonoff singing “Free Palestine,” and publications and podcasts standing with Macklemore. And finally, we saw material support: Macklemore donated $1 million in profits from his two nights opening for Sheeran’s tour to several Palestinian aid groups and called for Sheeran and Kraft to match it, which they have since promised to do. We’ve also seen children’s entertainer Ms Rachel follow suit with a $1 million donation to Palestinian aid, and publication PopBase has donated $10,000. Anera, a humanitarian aid group working in Palestine, Lebanon, and Jordan, said donations since Macklemore’s announcement were more than triple this month’s daily average. The group’s Instagram page has also gained 8,000 followers. Macklemore far from the first celebrity to speak and participate in politics in the Western World. In 1924, singer Al Jolson supported Republican candidate Warren G. Harding for president, and decades later, celebrities such as Harry Belafonte, Lena Horne, and Aretha Franklin voiced their public support for the Civil Rights movement. More recently, in the lead-up to the 2024 US election, ‘The Daily Show with Trevor Noah partnered with the organisation Power the Polls to recruit poll workers to address shortages- a problem disproportionately affecting voters of colour. The campaign saw 170,000 new sign-ups - 35,000 of which came directly through the TV show’s link - resulting in the recruitment of 713,000 total poll workers that year, an almost three-fold increase on the organisation’s goal. Alongside recruiting workers, celebrities in the US (where voting in elections is not compulsory) have made a huge difference by calling for people to register to vote. Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Kamala Harris in 2024 saw over 400,000 visitors on the voter registration site within 24 hours of her Instagram post. In 2023, Swift had urged her fans to register, resulting in 35,000 new voter registrations. Similarly, Ariana Grande promoted voter registration in 2019 by setting up booths at concerts on the American leg of her tour, resulting in over 33,000 voters registering. And the same thing is happening closer to home. This year, musician Jack River successfully called for government action to ensure creatives in Australia do not have their work scraped by generative AI companies. Celebrity as the mediator between the punter and the politician Celebrity activism isn’t just a feel-good news story - research tells us it actually makes a difference. By directing attention to issues affecting the average person, like voting inaccessibility or a lack of action on a genocide, researchers Alfred Archer and Amanda Cawston state that “celebrities can play a useful bridging role between political elites and the people they represent”. Alternatively, in a world where talking about politics is “not cool,” or where people lack exposure or knowledge to engage with politics, celebrities can act as an educational resource or an entry point into the political world - when they speak up about an issue, their audience gets exposed to it. Olivia Rodrigo’s Daisy Chain Fields festival is a perfect example. Rodrigo partnered with twelve organisations focused on women’s issues, such as reproductive rights. These organisations had stalls at the festival for people to meet them and were also featured heavily on social media, giving their issues global attention and raising $20 million for the organisations. We have also seen celebrities at award shows such as the Emmys wearing F*CK ICE pins, referring to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s treatment and detainment of people - generally people of colour. When celebrities speak up about political issues in public forums, they put the issue at the forefront of mainstream media, rally their supporters, and make it clear that, however much they disagree, the government cannot simply ignore it. Our over-reliance on celebrities versus our politicians As much as I love seeing my favourite celebrity use their platform for a good cause, there is an important question to ask: not whether celebrity activism is good or bad, but whether we should have to rely on celebrities. And the answer would, in an ideal world, be no. In an ideal world, or merely a just world, action on Palestine would’ve happened decades ago, climate change would be taken seriously, and most importantly, people would understand their democratic rights. However, that is not our reality. Only around 28 per cent of Australian Year 10 students reach proficiency in civics and citizenship. In the US, almost two-thirds of people under 30 say high school civics education didn’t prepare them to understand voting deadlines, how to research candidates, or how to vote by mail. When civics education is weak, our trust in these institutions and our understanding of change-making processes also decline. This is where celebrity steps in and becomes our main source of reliance. As Mary R. Connelly notes in _The Tartan, “_Celebrities will always be involved in campaigns in one form or another, but their presence is not what causes people to vote blindly. The lack of political engagement and literacy is what allows celebrities to wield their influence on the political sphere so impactfully.” About the author Varsha Yajman is the Digital Content Producer at Cheek Media. She is a youth advocate and lawyer with a background in climate litigation and is passionate about looking at the intersection between race, climate justice, and mental health. Thanks for reading Cheek Media Co. ! This post is public so feel free to share it. Share
Accelerating AI creates need to nurture a constituency for ‘anticipatory democracy’
Recent appeals from a half-dozen chief executives in our artificial intelligence (AI) community asking the federal government to jump in and slow them down should alarm us all. Their warnings imply a fear their rapid progress in achieving “super intelligence” just may get us all killed. Now that Congress is considering mandatory “kill switches” installed […]
Why politicians should pay more attention to the polls (reprise)
Welcome to the 231st edition of The Week in Polls (TWIP), a polling newsletter that always welcomes new readers. So please don’t keep TWIP a secret; share it with your friends and colleagues: Share The Week in Polls With all the stories swirling around Reform, JL Partners and political polling, I am finally tearing myself away from talking about the regulation of polling this week - and instead re-running a previous piece reminding us why the solution to problems with polls isn’t simply to ban or ignore them. Rather, we need them to play a vital role in making our politics - and politicians - better. This is followed by summaries of the latest national voting intention polls, seat projections from MRPs and the most recent party leader ratings. Subscribers who pay for the full edition can also read ten insights from the latest polls and analyses, including: A trio of organisations and a pair of professors have been casting their eyes over the Liberal Democrats ahead of the party’s autumn conference; What impact did the summer heatwave have on views on climate change? and Which wins out between chocolate and cheese? If you are not yet a paid subscriber, you can read all ten by starting a free trial now: Get FREE 7-day trial For more polling news as it comes in ahead of next week’s edition, you can also follow The Week in Polls on Bluesky. Picking up on my doubt last week about whether or not 35% of British train travellers have tried to order a takeaway for delivery to a railway station or carriage, thank you to reader Iain, who has been in touch to say he has done just that… in India. Another quick pair of updates, this time on the controversies around Reform and polling. Politico has a further scoop - “Farage aide caught in donor sting attended Egypt retreat with JL Partners” - and Ian Dunt has written about the problems with polling too: “Seeing the response of many polling experts in the last few weeks suggests that they are nervous about what is happening and keen to mitigate against it. Seeing the response of journalists, which has been basically non-existent, suggests the precise opposite.” My usual reminder as well: please do hit reply if you’ve spotted a poll, focus group or new piece of poll-based research that you think should be in contention for coverage in a future edition. Thank you! And with that, on with the show. How politicians get public opinion wrong I have written before about the benefits that come from widespread availability of high-quality political polling. We need more polls and more good coverage of polls. However, what I’ve not dug into before is the research into how accurately politicians estimate public opinion on issues. Thankfully we have academic research to tell us. First, the bad news: We present results from a study of 866 politicians in four countries.1 Politicians were asked to estimate the percentage of public support for various policy proposals. Comparing more than 10,000 estimations with actual levels of public support, we conclude that politicians are quite inaccurate estimators of people’s preferences. They make large errors and even regularly misperceive what a majority of the voters wants. Politicians are hardly better at estimating public preferences than ordinary citizens. Walgrave, S., Jansen, A., Sevenans, J., Soontjens, K., Pilet, J.B., Brack, N., Varone, F., Helfer, L., Vliegenthart, R., van der Meer, T., Breunig, C., Bailer, S., Sheffer, L. & Loewen, P.J. (2023a), “Inaccurate Politicians: Elected Representatives’ Estimations of Public Opinion in Four Countries”, The Journal of Politics, 85(1): 209-222. The bad news is not quite as bad as that makes it sound because, when asked whether the majority of public opinion was for or against various policies, politicians picked the wrong option ‘only’ 29% of the time. However, this included getting it wrong even when public opinion is far from evenly split on an issue: They do not only get it wrong when the public is divided and hard to read (e.g., when there is a 51%:49% distribution). Seventy percent of the misplacements occur for policies with a relatively clear distribution of at least 60% (dis)agreeing citizens. Moreover, the public scored only slightly worse than politicians, picking the wrong option 2.7 out of 8 times on average, compared with 2.3 times for politicians. Turning to the other measure of accuracy (not which side is in the lead but what the percentage support is for each side), politicians on average were 18 percentage points out in their guesses. Again, this was only slightly better than the public, whose error came in at 21 percentage points.2 Further research, using the same mix of countries, gives a little more comfort about how (in)accurate perceptions are: We show that politicians have a better understanding of public opinion when they think the issue matters to voters. Further, when an issue is personally important to politicians they more accurately estimate their party supporters’ opinions. The results confirm that politicians hold more accurate perceptions of voters’ preferences when they think it is important to do so but not necessarily when the issues actually are important to voters. Butler, C., Walgrave, S., Soontjens, K. & Loewen, P.J. (2024), “Politicians are better at estimating public opinion when they think it is more salient”, Party Politics: 1–13. Even so, it’s not a good picture. The remedy for this? Politicians should spend more time reading the polls. So forward this newsletter to someone you know… Share For a more general argument against banning polls, see my 2024 piece. Is “Let Bartlet Be Bartlet” good advice or not? The latest episode of my Political Fictions podcast heads across the Atlantic for a dip into one of the political TV classics: Mark and Cory talk about a giant of American political drama for the first time this week, as they tackle The West Wing. They talk about Let Bartlet Be Bartlet, the nineteenth episode of series one. In it, Mark wonders if The West Wing is actually the epitome of the “Boris Johnson school of politics”, Cory outmanoeuvres Mark into confirming we will record a Christmas Special about Love, Actually and they debate whether the central message of this episode has been misunderstood. Cory’s email newsletter is Paperback Rioter and Mark has a family of email newsletters. Subscribe to our newsletter for some additional bonus content and to get alerted whenever a new episode comes out. Our theme tune is “Monkeys Spinning Monkeys” by Kevin MacLeod/incompetech.com and licensed under the Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License. You can also listen to our episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, the web or YouTube. Elsewhere from me… [ A Lord's Eye View How to fix the problem of money in our politics Welcome to my latest update on work in the House of Lords. This time I am taking a look at how our political system is regulated, and the protections we need to keep democracy safe from becoming simply a contest to see who has the biggest bank account… Read more 5 days ago · 3 likes · 2 comments · Mark Pack ](https://lordseyeview.substack.com/p/how-to-fix-the-problem-of-money-in?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web&embedding_publication_id=1269283) If you spot a factual error… Borrowing an idea from Stuart Ritchie and others, if you spot a factual error in an edition of this newsletter, I will give you a free 12-month subscription to the paid-for version (or an extra 12 months on your existing one). Factual errors qualify, but grammatical errors or disagreements over interpretation do not, and my decision is final. Messages about both of those are always welcome, though. Voting intention and leadership ratings Here are the latest voting intention polls from different pollsters. It is all pretty static at the moment, with a small and consistent Labour lead in nearly all the polls. The table is also online here, along with explanations about what is included. It is updated regularly throughout the week as new polls are released. Next are the seat projections from MRPs, also sorted by fieldwork dates, listing those which are based on dedicated fieldwork (rather than models based on averages of other polls). Because such MRPs are published infrequently, some of the entries below are quite old. Finally, here is a summary of leadership ratings, with a graph from PollCheck: Detailed numbers from the latest polls are online here, and both that and the graph are updated regularly throughout the week as new data comes out. For historical figures on both voting intention and leader approval stretching back to the 1930s, including Parliamentary by-election polls, see PollBase. Catch up on the previous two editions [ ](https://theweekinpolls.substack.com/p/a-crisis-point-for-political-polling) [ A crisis point for political polling Sep 13 ](https://theweekinpolls.substack.com/p/a-crisis-point-for-political-polling) [ Read full story ](https://theweekinpolls.substack.com/p/a-crisis-point-for-political-polling) [ ](https://theweekinpolls.substack.com/p/extra-questions-about-the-polls-in) [ Extra questions about the polls in Reform’s funding scandal Sep 6 ](https://theweekinpolls.substack.com/p/extra-questions-about-the-polls-in) [ Read full story ](https://theweekinpolls.substack.com/p/extra-questions-about-the-polls-in) My privacy policy and other legal information are available here. Links to purchase books or other items are usually affiliate links which pay a commission for each sale. Quotes from social media messages are occasionally lightly edited for punctuation and clarity. If you are subscribed to other email lists of mine, please note that unsubscribing from this one will not automatically remove you from the others. If you wish to be removed from all my lists, simply reply to this email to let me know. A quintet of Lib Dem polling analyses, and 9 other polling insights you shouldn’t miss The following ten findings from the most recent polls and analyses are only for subscribers who pay for the full edition, but you can sign up for a free trial to read them straight away. Ahead of the start of Liberal Democrat conference, we have a trio of organisations and a pair of professors with pieces out about Ed Davey’s party:
Jersey's Democracy Week includes chance to meet new politicians
Jersey's Democracy Week is being held for the seventh time.
Russia Aims to Inject Chaos Into Elections, U.S. Intelligence Finds
The Kremlin is once again seeking to undermine confidence in American democracy with online influence campaigns, U.S. officials said.
Your Weekly Michigan Political Brief
A coalition of 600 Michigan Jews have affirmed their support for Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed. The group, Michigan Jews for Democracy, includes former Congressman Sander Levin; former Congressman Andy Levin; Washtenaw County Prosecuting Attorney and Democratic nominee for Michigan Attorney General Eli Savit; and Jessica “Decky” Alexander, the Chair of the Michigan Democratic […]
ANFREL, International IDEA to launch new report on citizen monitoring of political and campaign finance in Asia
The Asian Network for Free Elections (ANFREL) and International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) are launching a framework for action on monitoring campaign and political finance during the Political Finance Transparency and Oversight International Roundtable in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, on 23 September 2026. ANFREL Executive Director Brizza Rosales and International IDEA Senior Programme
Nurses put Maine hospitals on ‘RED ALERT’ status
Registered nurses will hold a rally and community event on Saturday, Sept. 19 in Bangor, Maine to highlight the patient care impacts of federal health care cuts on Maine hospitals. Nurses will also use the event to discuss their Vision for a Healthy Society, a set of broad political demands that require taking back health care, democracy, and society from billionaire and corporate control.
Irish PM worried over hostility to politicians after lawmaker assaulted
Irish Prime Minister Micheal Martin on Thursday condemned an assault on an independent politician as "an attack on democracy" and said the country needed to take very seriously a rise in hostility to those in office.
The “Dark Money” Myth: Don’t Confuse Issue Education with Political Speech
In a recent article covering the 2026 midterms, The New York Times sounded an all-too-familiar alarm, warning readers of a tidal wave of "dark money" supposedly washing over the election. The narrative is meant to incite outrage, painting a picture of shadowy figures “upending” and “manipulating” politicians, our political process and indeed democracy itself through secretive nonprofit organizations.
Banking scandal rocks Brazil’s politics and the country’s presidential election in October
On the night of November 17 2025, Brazilian federal agents pulled banker Daniel Vorcaro off the tarmac at Sao Paulo’s Guarulhos airport as he prepared to board a private jet. He was initially detained as a flight risk and arrested a few months later on multiple charges of bank fraud, corruption and money laundering. He currently awaits judgment. Now, less than a month before Brazil’s national elections, the so called “Banco Master crisis” threatens to shake the country’s democracy to its core.
Constitution Day reminder: Our democracy is not for sale to the highest bidder
The best way to mark Constitution Day, this Thursday, is to fight the influence of money and foreign influence in our politics through active active civic participation, writes Mike Pellittiere, who particularly calls on fellow veterans to step up.
VIDEO: Warnock Calls Out AI Developers, Social Media Companies, After Bizarre Health Hoax » Reverend Raphael Warnock
Senator Reverend Warnock warned about the risk to democracy after AI-generated social media posts with false health news about the Senator went viral Senator Reverend Warnock: “What if hours before an election, someone created a page with AI-generated images, fake stories about the candidates? How will voters know what’s true and what’s not true?” Washington, D.C. – Yesterday, U.S. […]
World News in Brief: Shipping alert from IMO, democracy vanishing in Nicaragua, alert over political ‘denialism’
Amid a rising number of attacks on shipping in key waterways in the Middle East linked to the US-Iran war, the head of UN maritime agency, Mr. Arsenio Dominguez, has insisted that the conflict is not a “pretext” to target “innocent seafarers”.
Discussion Panel Tackles Science, Democracy & Climate at NYC Climate Week
Cross-disciplinary panel discussion will explore the interplay between scientific consensus, democratic governance, and the climate crisis.