News Feeds

Years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free.

–Eugene V. Debs

Six years ago, the racist police murder of George Floyd sparked the biggest uprising in the history of the United States. Across the country, over 26 million people poured into the streets for months in a mass multiracial movement against the police and jails that enforce U.S. capitalism’s class and social inequalities.

Calls to defund and abolish the police emerged as organic demands of the movement. The burning down of a Minneapolis police precinct proved more popular than both presidential candidates. Faced with a profound crisis of legitimacy, the two capitalist parties each in their own way launched a counteroffensive to shore up and expand the police state at the core of our bourgeois democracy.

Tragically, some on the Left have adapted to the backlash. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently ridiculed the movement and its demands, quipping “woke 1.0 was crazyyyyy,” while Jacobin writers such as Paul Heideman, Eric Blanc, Ben Burgis, and Dustin Guastella have come out against defund and abolition in the name of what they describe as “mass politics.”

Their position is not only profoundly mistaken, but dangerous. Their echoing of ruling-class attacks on abolitionism and support for the police surrenders the ideological ground won by the 2020 rebellion, undermines the struggle against President Trump’s authoritarianism, and impedes the fight for socialism.

Ruling Class Backlash

Their arguments must be understood in the context of the bipartisan backlash against Black Lives Matter. Each party has played its traditional role. In 2020, President Trump and his Republican Party assassinated the character of George Floyd, demonized BLM activists as terrorists, defended the police, rallied support for racist counterdemonstrations, turned vigilante Kyle Rittenhouse into a right-wing hero, and even threatened to deploy troops to repress protests.

The Democrats, of course, pretended to be the movement’s ally, with lifetime supporters of policing like Nancy Pelosi donning kente cloth and bending her knee in the Capitol building. Mayors painted Black Lives Matter on city streets and enacted corporate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) measures. They did so to co-opt the struggle and turn Black Lives Matter into Black Votes Matter for Joe Biden. The ruling class demobilized the movement, opening the door for both parties to increase funding for cops, ICE, CBP, and the FBI.

From Compassionate Policing to Authoritarianism

Once in power, President Biden vowed to “fund, fund, fund the police.” He escalated the bipartisan war on migrants–shutting down the border, continuing the construction of Trump’s border wall, and ramping up deportations. Biden and Democratic governors and mayors proposed and, in many cases, passed bills named after George Floyd. These dramatically increased funding for policing and prisons under cover of fake reforms like community policing, body cameras, and professional training. Under Trump and Biden, national police expenditure increased by forty percent.

The Democrats thereby re-legitimized and enacted the right’s law-and-order agenda. This has led to an increase in police murders every year since 2020 and paved the way for the return of the racist-in-chief Donald Trump and his white supremacist Republican Party. Despite the national drop in crime, Trump seized the opening provided by the Democrats, whipping up a racist moral panic over false claims about lawlessness, lies about Black criminality, nonsensical allegations of “reverse racism” against DEI, and a xenophobic assault on immigrants.

Trump has funded, expanded, and weaponized the police state to an unprecedented degree. His “Big Beautiful Bill” poured $75 billion into the coffers of ICE to abduct immigrants and throw them into concentration camps. He deployed the National Guard to patrol Washington, D.C. in search of nonexistent criminals, reducing them to weeding the city’s unkempt gardens.

He deployed his ICE Gestapo in city after city as an occupying army, resulting in the murders of Renee Good, Alex Pretti, Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, Johan Sebastian Duran Guerrero, Silverio Villegas González, and Isaias Sanchez Barboza, to name only a few. Many more have died in ICE concentration camps. When the killing of Good and Pretti triggered a city-wide uprising and a national day of protest, Trump unleashed his beefed-up surveillance state to snoop on activists in the name of controlling left-wing terrorism.

His McCarthyite campaign led to charges against the Minneapolis 15 and the conviction of the Prairieland 9. Now, with his popularity plummeting and his party certain to lose the midterms, Trump has taken aim at democracy itself in an attempt to rig the elections. He has gerrymandered districts, his Supreme Court has gutted the Voting Rights Act, and some like Steve Bannon are calling for ICE to be deployed at the polls to deter Black and Brown voters.

Democratic Party Backlash and Left Accommodation

The Democratic Party’s “resistance” to Trump’s ethnonationalist authoritarianism has been weak, counter-productive, and barely worthy of the name. This explains why the party’s approval rating remains essentially tied with that of the Republican Party at 40 percent.

At best, the Democrats have demanded fake reforms to ICE, like body cameras and more training, which Trump happily enacted to legitimate his escalating war on migrants. Internally, the Democratic Party pressured its candidates to disavow any radical critiques of the police. Rather than stand up against this calumny, reformist politicians have disowned their previous positions.

Their position is not only profoundly mistaken, but dangerous. Their echoing of ruling-class attacks on abolitionism and support for the police surrenders the ideological ground won by the 2020 rebellion, undermines the struggle against President Trump’s authoritarianism, and impedes the fight for socialism.

Zohran Mamdani apologized for calling the police racist during his campaign for mayor of New York City. AOC dismissed the movement and the radicalization it produced as collective insanity. Mamdani defended her, saying people can change their positions, while he himself praised Jessica Tisch, his police commissioner, the law-and-order heir to a billionaire family, for lowering New York City’s crime rate.

These reversals derive from their strategy of prioritizing electoral campaigns within a capitalist party over mass struggle. They wager that by abandoning their previous positions they can win elected office and advance socialist demands. In fact, they are capitulating to a capitalist party well-versed in co-opting and neutralizing the Left.

Reformist Intellectuals Against Black Lives Matter

Several self-avowed Marxists have supported AOC and Mamdani’s abandonment of abolitionism. Eric Blanc dismisses Black Lives Matter’s call for defunding the police and refunding systems of care as ultra-left and an impediment to their idea of “mass politics.” There are two key problems with this argument.

First, as decades of Gallup polling have documented, the demand to shift funding from cops to care is actually popular. As some have pointed out, Jacobin’s own polling data demonstrates that defund is more popular among working-class people than spending on mass transit. And second, even if defund wasn’t popular, raising the demand is both morally and strategically right.

Remember, every major reform we’ve won from the abolition of slavery to suffrage, union recognition, civil rights, an end to the war in Vietnam, abortion rights, and gay marriage were initially unpopular. But a determined minority fought for them, won majority support, and used our collective power to protest and strike to force our rulers to concede them. But Blanc rejects that approach and instead argues for a strategy of reformism in the vain hope of using the capitalist state to enact socialism through legislation.

As a result, he argues that politicians must downplay supposedly unpopular demands of oppressed people like defund in order to win “working class votes.” This class reductionism will backfire. It will shatter working-class unity by selling out oppressed people, lead reformist politicians to adapt to capitalist positions like law and order, lower rather than raise class consciousness and combativity, and thereby set back the very class and social struggles necessary to win reforms on the road to socialist revolution.

That said, the debate about abolitionism is deeper than demands and strategy; it is about the goal. Paul Heideman makes that abundantly clear when he argues against defund and abolition, advocates that socialists adopt “carceral minimalism,” and cites as justification an article by Adaner Usmani and Chris Lewis that calls for hiring 500,000 more cops to control crime.

These reformists believe, despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary, that the state and its police force can be wielded for social good in the present and to achieve socialism in the future. Advocating this position in the midst of the biggest expansion of authoritarian policing in U.S. history and its weaponization against unions, social movements, and the Left is bizarre, counterfactual, and unconscionable. They are empowering the ruling class to bolster a police state it will use to repress us all.

Marxism is Abolitionism

All these arguments are at odds with Marx and socialism from below, which is abolitionist to its core. Marx advocated the overthrow of the capitalist state, the establishment of workers’ democracy, and “the withering away of the state” itself. As Lenin argued, the socialist’s “ideal should not be the trade union secretary, but the tribune of the people, who is able to react to every manifestation of tyranny and oppression” to “ produce a single picture of police violence and capitalist exploitation” to advance the cause of socialism.

Thus, Marxism is abolitionist. The goal of social revolution and abolition shapes our immediate practice. Faced with Trump’s deployment of the government police state, we should be demanding massive cuts to police, ICE, CBP, and the military and redistribution of that money to social programs that provide homes, jobs, education, and healthcare.

In these struggles, socialists must reject the argument that police solve social harm. They don’t and never will. As the enforcers of class and social inequality, they are one of the main causes of social harm, as their skyrocketing record of brutality and murder demonstrates. Instead, we must combat the carceral state and all its ruling-class violence, racism, and dehumanization.

We should therefore reaffirm our dedication to Marx’s abolitionist call at the end of the Communist Manifesto. “The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win.”

Opinions expressed in signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or the Tempest Collective. For more information, see “About Tempest Collective.”
Featured Image credit: Chad Davis; modified by Tempest.

The post In defense of abolition appeared first on Tempest.

“‘ html.

Over the last few years, the online gaming landscape in Sweden has experienced considerable growth, drawing in both residential and global gamers. With the advent of technological improvements, svenska gambling establishment online systems have actually come to be significantly prominent, providing a broad selection of games and betting options. This write-up delves into the dynamics that have added to the blossoming popularity of online gambling enterprises in Sweden and checks out the crucial aspects that players need to think about.

The growth of on the internet gambling establishments in Sweden is not simply a pattern however a representation of broader social changes and customer choices. As internet connectivity boosts and mobile modern technology breakthroughs, more Swedes are turning to on the internet platforms for their gambling requires. This shift has necessitated regulatory adjustments and has driven development within the industry.

The Regulatory Landscape of Svenska Casino Site Online

One of the critical components shaping the Swedish online gambling enterprise market is its governing structure. The re-regulation of the Swedish video gaming market on January 1, 2019, noted a considerable shift in the industry’s procedure. Under the brand-new system, online betting operators need to obtain a Swedish license to use their solutions legitimately. This action aimed to ensure consumer security, advertise liable gambling, and remove unlicensed operators from the market.

The Swedish Betting Authority, or Spelinspektionen, plays an important role in supervising the market, guaranteeing that certified operators follow rigorous standards. These regulations cover elements such as fair gaming practices, anti-money laundering steps, and advertising and marketing criteria. This durable regulatory environment is created to cultivate a safe and fair video gaming experience for players.

In spite of the strict regulations, the demand for accredited svenska casino site online systems remains durable. Lots of players value the protection and justness that certified casinos offer, contributing to their expanding popularity.

• Mandatory consumer identity confirmation.
• Rigorous marketing and bonus offering standards.
• Implementation of the self-exclusion plan, Spelpaus.
• Regular audits for video game fairness and security.

These steps underscore Sweden’s commitment to producing a well balanced ecological community where players can appreciate betting sensibly, while companies operate transparently.

Key Functions of Svenska Casino Site Online

The success of on the internet gambling establishments in Sweden can also be credited to the exceptional user experience they supply. Many systems emphasize seamless navigating, making it easy for players to find their preferred games. The assimilation of advanced technology guarantees a glitch-free pc gaming experience, which is critical in keeping customer involvement.

Anybody knowledgeable about svenska gambling establishment online will identify the extensive range of games readily available. From timeless table video games like blackjack and roulette to cutting-edge video clip slots and live dealer video games, there’s something for everyone. These platforms also often include games certain to Swedish culture, adding a local touch that resonates with domestic gamers.

One more substantial attribute of Swedish on the internet casino sites is their dedication to accountable nightwin app gaming. Players have accessibility to tools that help them set limits on their costs and time spent on the system, strengthening a healthy and balanced method to betting.

Repayment Approaches and Protection

Safeguard and varied payment alternatives are another foundation of the svenska casino site online experience. Gamers can pick from a range of repayment methods, including credit rating and debit cards, e-wallets, and even straight bank transfers. This versatility ensures that gamers can transfer and take out funds in a manner that ideal suits their preferences.

• Visa and MasterCard for instant transactions.
• Popular e-wallets like Skrill and Neteller.
• Trustly for seamless financial institution transfers.
• Advanced security technology for information protection.

The concentrate on safety and security is critical, with security innovations utilized to protect individual and financial info. This guarantee of security more boosts the depend on gamers have in these systems.

Future Potential Customers of Svenska Gambling Enterprise Online

As the market remains to advance, the future of svenska gambling establishment online looks promising. Recurring technical developments, such as online reality (VR) and augmented truth (AR), are set to redefine the online gaming experience. These modern technologies guarantee to supply more immersive and interactive video gaming experiences, potentially attracting a new age of gamers.

In addition, the expanding trend in the direction of mobile video gaming is expected to intensify as more gamers select the convenience of using their smartphones and tablets. This shift provides opportunities for drivers to establish mobile-optimized platforms that cater particularly to the needs of mobile individuals.

Conclusion: Welcoming the New Age

The svenska gambling establishment online market is positioned for ongoing development, driven by technological developments and a helpful regulatory structure. Gamers can expect boosted gaming experiences, boosted by durable safety measures and compelling video game offerings.

As Swedish players remain to accept online betting, drivers will require to stay adaptive, guaranteeing they meet the advancing demands of their target market while maintaining the greatest requirements of stability and obligation.

The post The Surge of Svenska Casino Site Online: A Comprehensive Overview appeared first on test.

Print article Share

The UK government has slashed its hopes for electric planes and “sustainable aviation fuels” (SAFs), ahead of giving the green light to a third runway at Heathrow.

An “ambitious” rollout of new technologies and efficiency upgrades will only cut flight emissions by a quarter over the next two decades, according to forecasts quietly released in June.

This would leave aviation emissions in 2050 nearly 50% higher than expected under the “jet-zero” strategy, launched by the previous Conservative government in 2022.

The Labour government has signalled its support for a contentious third runway at Heathrow airport, with a final planning decision expected by 2029.  

Ministers have justified this expansion by citing the rollout of clean-aviation technologies.

Yet, the updated forecasts suggest that rising flight numbers and a reduced role for “techno-fixes” will leave aviation emissions stubbornly high in 2050 – the UK’s legal target for net-zero.

If this is to be compatible with UK climate goals, then these higher emissions from flights in 2050 would need to be taken out of the atmosphere using costly and largely unproven “carbon dioxide removal” technologies – or by planting gigantic new forests.

Emissions up 

The previous government’s “jet-zero” strategy committed the UK to a “high ambition” pathway that would have seen aviation emissions peak at 38.2m tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e) in 2019 and drop to 19.3MtCO2e in 2050.

At the time, the Conservative government said this “clear goal” was achievable, alongside airport expansion and rising flight numbers.

Its strategy relied heavily on the extensive use of early-stage technologies, such as SAFs and battery-powered planes, as well as wider fuel-efficiency improvements.

In public statements, Labour has broadly continued this approach, backing new airport runways while supporting SAFs as a way to curb aviation emissions.

However, the government’s latest forecast, quietly published ahead of the formal approval of a new runway at Heathrow, sets far lower expectations for these technologies.

Its “technology development” pathway, with “ambitious carbon abatement measures”, only sees emissions drop to 28.1MtCO2e in 2050. As the chart below shows, this is around 9MtCO2e higher than the jet-zero strategy’s stated goal – a roughly 50% increase.

The shift is down to much lower expectations for SAF uptake, fuel-efficiency improvements and the roll-out of battery-powered planes, as well as lower international carbon prices.

The government now expects SAFs to make up 30% of aviation fuel by 2050, rather than 50%. It also concedes that SAFs will save less carbon over their lifecycle than previously thought.

SAFs have faced considerable criticism, due to limited supplies and uncertainty around the extent to which they cut emissions. Even meeting the UK’s relatively modest goal of 22% SAF uptake by 2040 would require enormous – potentially unattainable – volumes of waste products, which are currently the main source of the fuel.

For its new forecasts, the government commissioned a separate analysis of likely aircraft fuel-efficiency improvements over the next few decades. This analysis, from the Aviation Impact Accelerator, yielded “less optimistic” projections than earlier work.

Fuel-efficiency improvements have therefore been revised downward from 2% per year in the “jet-zero” strategy to 1.3% in the new “technology development” scenario.

There is also a reduced role for battery-powered planes, with only some of the smallest zero-emissions aircraft expected to be in use by 2035.

Crucially, even making the more limited emissions cuts in the new “technology development” pathway would require greater efforts to decarbonise the aviation sector.

If the UK fails to implement new policies or innovations, while flight numbers continue to rise, then aviation emissions would be even higher in 2050 than they are today. 

This is illustrated by the pink “current trends” pathway in the chart above, in which emissions increase to 41.1MtCO2e by 2050.

This is roughly double the amount targeted by the jet-zero strategy and recommended by government climate advisors, the Climate Change Committee (CCC).

Budget ‘busting’

The new forecasts all account for the growth of several UK airports, including “planned Heathrow expansion”. Overall, passenger numbers would be at least 50% higher by 2050. 

In contrast, the CCC and other experts have advised that the rise in passenger numbers may need to be limited, in order to keep emissions down.

In order to meet the UK’s net-zero target, any aviation emissions that remain in 2050 would need to be offset by planting many thousands of hectares of new forest, or by relying on costly and largely unproven CO2 removal technologies.

Tim Johnson, director at the Aviation Environment Federation (AEF), says the new forecasts present “a more honest and realistic vision of what’s possible in the next 24 years”. However, he tells Carbon Brief:

“Less reliance on cleaner technology and fuels reopens the debate about the role and scale of greenhouse gas removals and ways to tackle the projected 50% growth in demand for air travel.”

AEF calculations, based on government data and shared with Carbon Brief, suggest that emissions from the third runway at Heathrow would initially be relatively modest, reaching 3.5MtCO2e per year in 2050. Its emissions would then be expected to rise significantly beyond the legal 2050 net-zero deadline.

Previously, the Labour government has explicitly cited SAFs and other new technologies as part of its justification for expanding Heathrow airport.

Dr Lois Pennington, a research associate at the University of Manchester who has analysed Heathrow’s emissions impact, says the government’s new forecast shows “we are projected to be well over aviation’s share of the carbon budget even before a third runway is considered”. 

She tells Carbon Brief:

“For Heathrow, it means expansion can no longer be waved through on the promise of technology, and any approvals will be in the full knowledge that it will bust our legally binding carbon budgets.”

Related El Niño: Indonesia fire emissions in 2026 ‘on track’ to match record for this century 11.09.2026 El Niño and La Niña Analysis: UK solar power hits record high over summer 2026 04.09.2026 Renewables How this summer’s heat and drought impacted crops in Europe – in six charts 04.09.2026 Food and farming Analysis: Weaker EV targets could cost UK consumers £3bn a year by 2030 12.08.2026 Policy

The post UK aviation emissions to be 50% higher than thought by 2050, government admits appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Apologies to those who just can't or won't hear more of it, but the foul mad child-king is running notably rampant, and the historic record beckons. The bilge somehow keeps surging, from a weekend deluge of deranged AI slop, slurs, rants, boasts to this week's "sick fantasy" of nobly working "long and hard" (sic) in the rubble of 9/11 to choosing to "celebrate" GOP "achievements" (double sic) at a tacky mid-term crap-a-palooza nearly dead in the brackish water. Have mercy.

Unsurprisingly, Labor Day prompted an attack on "Communists and Dumocrats" from a failed real-estate nepo-baby who never worked a day in his soft tawdry life and only ripped off those who did; got famous for sneeringly telling people on TV they were fired; and morphed into "the most anti-union president in history." All weekend he spewed a blizzard of puerile, insane AI posts, each more bonkers than the last. Some: He nuked earth from space, threatened takeovers of multiple countries, declared "the moon is ours," attacked Iran, Canada, and "third-rate loser Debbie Dingbat," bragged about his billions, posed as Hulk Hogan, Green Lantern, a bemedalled general, a dark overlord with robot bodyguards snarling, "THEY WILL NEVER SLEEP AGAIN,” posted new Space Force uniforms "inspired" by Nazis, and renamed New Mexico New America grotesquely "dancing" to YMCA.

On Tuesday, before First Responders and a steel beam from the ruins of the Twin Towers, he gave an obscene mess of a speech; unlike every living president, he's skipping 9/11 ceremonies at Ground Zero because they wouldn't let him speak and it conflicts with a golf tournament. Halting reading from a piece of paper, he mourned a day “etched forever into the memories of Americans" before launching into bullshit. He praised his war with Iran - "Nobody thought it could go so well" - and bragged, "We’ve punished them greatly." He told a story about former Cantor Fitzgerald CEO Howard Lutnick, whose wife "would always be screaming at him" to take their son to school, so on 9/11 he unhappily did, thus surviving the attacks that killed almost 700 of the company's employees: "He got to see it, but they all died...Now it's bigger, stronger, better than ever."

Then he got to the important part of the 9/11 story: Himself. He was building nearby, he "had a lot of construction workers," he took 100, maybe 200 of them to Ground Zero the next day, "and we worked long and hard." Huh. Except there is no evidence or record of that happening, which there'd have to be in a massive recovery effort supervised by city officials; also, his nephew says he was building Trump Tower five miles away, he ran a real-estate office that contracted out construction, and the only people he had access to were secretaries and accountants. There is, though, a record of him calling a radio show rom his safe miles away to giddily boast he now had the tallest building in Manhattan, from which he could "see" thousands of jubilant Muslims dancing in the streets - an infamous lie from what was, and remains, a racist, rancid pile of subhuman crap.

There is also video of him, young, brash and creepy, arriving near Ground Zero a few days later with a German television crew. When they asked what he thought of the human tragedy, the 3,000 dead, the day's terror and loss and grief, he said, "I hope we attack fast." Also fast, it was reported years later: His taking of $150,000 from a post-9/11 recovery grant program meant to help small businesses near the site of the attack. That was then; now, he's whining that Welles Crowther, a young equities trader remembered as “the man in the red bandana” who saved multiple people before dying in the towers' collapse, has "become more famous than me. I don't like it." He also added the shiny new lie that on 9/11 two firefighters “lifted me up and started running with me” to save him from an imaginary collapsing building. We assume they had tears in their eyes.

Trump's hideous lies about 9/11 especially infuriated Dean Blundell - "A Canadian Dog Did More Than He Did" - who cited what thousands in Canada gave freely with no camera crews in sight: Their lives, homes, help when needed. In retrospect, the only worse douchebag in the horrifying saga of 9/11 is Rudy Giuliani, who hid vast evidence of the hazardous air around Ground Zero while telling residents it was safe. Jon Stewart, who long fought for First Responders' rights: "They didn't recognize the air everyone was breathing (was) toxic until October of 2001. So to be fair, they only buried that information for 25 years." Those lies came out thanks to this week's release of 170,000 documents by Mayor Mamdani - the (Muslim) guy Rudy didn't think should be at the 25th anniversary ceremony. Rudy also chose the Twin Towers for an emergency command center against all advice and gave firefighters radios he knew didn't work, so fuck him all the way to Four Seasons Landscaping.

His former loser mob boss, meanwhile, continues to wreak havoc. Ignoring an approval rating 40 points underwater 'cause nobody can afford food or gas, he waddled to Dallas Wednesday for "The Greatest RALLY of them all!”, a glitzy, pretend, ill-planned Nazi confab with a daunting $25,000 entry fee he's defiantly, desperately made all about himself though nobody wants it to be. "The Convention, is really ‘HOT!’”, one of his 8 words, he exclaimed. “It's totally sold out! Everybody wants to be there!" Except even with every GOP House member and a third of the Senate facing re-election and the RNC “pulling out all the stops” to fill 20,000 seats with what ultimately became free tickets on a night competing with the first regular season NFL game, video of the first night showed glaring vistas of empty seats - the fragile snowflake's worst, primal fear. LOL.

Furthering the indignity, many of the lawmakers turning down the invite offered hilarious reasons akin to, "I have to wash my hair." Some carefully, vaguely declared they had "prior commitments" or they needed to be "in my district." One was taking his daughter "on college visits," one had to go to his son's (weirdly mid-week) high school football game, one said with visible relief he was going to his son's "destination wedding." A Sean the Sheep-ish James Comer said he had "stuff already planned." Another said he was going "dove-hunting." Max Miller, credibly accused of putting a gun to his ex-wife's head and breaking his toddler daughter's collarbone, said he was staying home to "spend time with family." One anonymously declared it was "a waste of time" and he was not "going to some convention center and holding up a sign."

Asked en route to Dallas about the announced absences, Trump bristled. "Everybody wants to come," he snapped, before attacking the reporter - needless to say, a woman. "Who are you with?" he snarled to ABC News' Mary Bruce. "ABC Fake News - you are the worst," he said. "We don't have room for them all." Event organizers have promised "a clear vision for the future of our country," with "lots of Great Entertainment" and over 50 speakers a night; they will include, "Everyday Americans sharing how they have benefited from the president’s policies," which def sounds lively, also Don Jr., Press Barbie and Lying Todd Blanche. Sen. Tim Scott gave a taste of the mood with an over-the-top, "SNL cold open" speech about "dangerous, radical and frankly weird" Dems willing to "rip the heart our of our chests..They hate our culture. They hate what it means to be American," which wasn't frankly weird at all.

The Carnival-Barker-In-Chief kept up the hysteria. Dems just want to cheat: "They're really good at this stuff." There have been "zero" border crossings the last 16 months; it's 600,000, but close enough. Just "pretend that i'm on the ballot," which isn't weird at all. Also, pretend he didn't say in desperation that if Republicans retain control of the House and Senate, he'll send every citizen $5,000, which is a bribe, which is way illegal. In Texas, where Talarico is leading spectacularly corrupt Ken Paxton, he urged votes for Paxton. "Some may not like the way he dresses," he noted, or the way he talks or looks, but he's "the greatest attorney genera in Texas," and maybe the galaxy? "Vote Republican and we will leave the world in our dust for generations to come," he said. "There’ll be nothing like it.” Now that's something we can believe. Hang in, speak up, this too shall (presumably) pass.

A common continental voice from farmers, pastoralists, women, youth, Indigenous Peoples, fisherfolk and faith leaders in more than 30 countries, charting the road to COP31 and COP32

ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA, September 9, 2026 — African civil society organisations and movements from more than 30 countries today issued the Addis Ababa Declaration of an African Civil Society Position on Climate Action in Food Systems and Agriculture, closing a three-day Continental Convening hosted by the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) in partnership with the Ethiopian Ministry of Planning and Development. Representing farmers’ and pastoralists’ organisations, women’s, children’s and youth networks, people living with special needs, faith-based organisations, Indigenous Peoples, fisherfolk, researchers and academia, alongside government and inter-governmental representatives, delegates affirmed a shared conviction: Africa’s climate future cannot be separated from its food future, and decisions about that future must be shaped by the people who produce, trade, prepare and consume food.

The Declaration names four persistent gaps that must define the road to COP31 and COP32: between ambition and implementation, between adaptation needs and available finance, between pledged and delivered climate finance, and between global rules and the daily realities of people on the front line. Smallholder farmers, delegates were clear, do not experience climate change as an “implementation gap” or a negotiating acronym, they experience crop loss, water stress, declining soil fertility, livestock stress, rising debt, hunger and falling income. The Declaration places agroecology, as a science, practice and social movement, at the centre of Africa’s own pathway to resilience and food sovereignty.

Civil society sets out six key demands for COP31 and COP32:

1. Put adaptation, agriculture and food security at the centre of implementation, treating adaptation as a political priority equal to mitigation and renewing the Sharm el-Sheikh Joint Work on Agriculture and Food Security to move from knowledge exchange to delivery.
2. Make climate finance accessible, grant-based and locally accountable, closing the gap behind the USD 300 billion annual finance goal set at COP29, with expanded direct-access windows for smallholder farmers, pastoralists, fisherfolk, and women’s and youth enterprises.
3. Fund African-led agroecology and seed sovereignty, through public investment in community seed banks, soil and ecosystem restoration, water harvesting, Indigenous foods and knowledge, and local markets.
4. Support a people-centred just transition that is bottom-up and farmer-centred, protecting land and seed rights and rejecting prescriptive pathways that shift costs onto smallholder farmers, pastoralists and fisherfolk.
5. Make nutrition, health, gender and pastoralism visible in climate implementation, measuring resilience by dietary quality, health and dignity, not yields alone, with explicit attention to pastoral land tenure and rangeland protection, and to women’s access to land, finance and decision-making.
6. Build an African accountability architecture from Addis to communities, aligning national climate and development plans and budgets, and publishing regular reports and data on climate finance promised, approved, disbursed and delivered.

As a movement, African civil society commits to coordinate around a shared set of demands, connect community realities to national, continental and UNFCCC processes, create space for the meaningful participation of frontline communities, mobilise public and grant-based finance for African-led solutions, and communicate publicly on promises, finance and outcomes.

“Africa’s food systems cannot remain in the shadows of global climate action, they are central to our adaptation, livelihoods, economies, health, cultures, biodiversity, sovereignty and future,” the Declaration states. Its test for both COPs is not the number of declarations adopted, but whether a farmer can withstand the next failed rainy season, whether a pastoralist can access water and grazing without losing a livelihood, and whether a child can grow up nourished rather than stunted by drought.

Civil society calls on African governments, Parties to the UNFCCC, the COP31 and COP32 Presidencies, the African Union, the African Group of Negotiators, climate funds, development partners, research institutions and responsible private actors to work with African civil society and frontline communities to deliver a decisive shift from promises to implementation.

“Africa must not wait for its food and climate future to be designed elsewhere. Our evidence must influence decisions, our solutions must be recognised, and climate finance must reach the people and places where adaptation is already happening.”

The full text of the Addis Ababa Declaration of the African CSOs Position on Climate Action in Food Systems and Agriculture Towards COP31 and COP32 is available to download at: 

THE ADDIS ABABA DECLARATION OF AN AFRICAN CIVIL SOCIETY POSITION ON CLIMATE ACTION IN FOOD SYSTEMS AND AGRICULTURE TOWARDS COP31 AND COP32

LA DÉCLARATION D’ADDIS-ABEBA DE POSITION DE LA SOCIÉTÉ CIVILE AFRICAINE SUR L’ACTION CLIMATIQUE DANS LES SYSTÈMES ALIMENTAIRES ET L’AGRICULTURE EN VUE DES COP 31 ET COP 32

About AFSA

The Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) is the largest civil society organisation network on the continent, representing major social movements working on food sovereignty, agroecology and climate justice across Africa.

 

###

Stretching from West Africa to the Gulf of Mexico, a massive bloom of sargassum seaweed is swamping beaches and killing coastal wildlife. But scientists have discovered the floating algae also shelters a vast array of ocean creatures, and some are now calling for its protection. 

Read more on E360 →

Headline News:

• “Drones Hold Secret To Producing More Rain, Engineers Say” • Amid perpetual drought, population growth, and trillions of gallons of water used in desert agriculture, much of the West is in desperate need of more rain and snow. A team of engineers at California tech company Rainmaker say they believe drones could be part of a solution. [ABC News]

Preparing a drone for rain making (Rainmaker image)

• “August 2026 Tied For The World’s Hottest Month On Record, According To Copernicus” • August was the hottest month on record, tied with July 2023, according to data published by the European climate observatory Copernicus. The global average air temperature was 1.65°C higher than it was in 1850–1900, the pre-industrial reference period. [Euronews]
• “European Gas Prices Keep Climbing The As IEA Calls For Emergency Reserves” • Europe’s benchmark wholesale gas price, the front-month Dutch TTF contract, traded above €79/MWh, its highest level since early 2023. PFighting between the US and Iran has intensified concerns about LNG shipments through the Strait of Hormuz. [Euronews]
• “Denmark Can Produce 140% Of Its Electricity Demand From Wind Power” • US President Trump may have a peevish vendetta against wind turbines, but the rest of the world’s nations enjoy bumper crops of clean kilowatts from the sky and turn them into export revenues. When windpower provided Denmark with 140% of its needs, the excess was exported. [CleanTechnica]
• “Irish Summer Solar Generation Jumps 58%” • Solar electricity generation in Ireland increased 58% in June, July, and August of 2026 compared with the same three months in 2025. Production reached 692 GWh. EirGrid said solar contributed 7.7% of the country’s electricity fuel mix in August, after achieving 9.4% in July and 8.2% in June. [reNews]

For more news, please visit geoharvey – Daily News about Energy and Climate Change.

Diesel prices hit an all-time high on Friday. Then another, and another. 

According to AAA, the average price of diesel as of September 10 stands at a staggering $5.98 — about $2.31 more than in late February, when the United States and Israel launched a war against Iran. The jump has been even higher in some states, such as California, where a gallon of diesel currently costs $7.91. 

Most Americans don’t buy diesel fuel, but they pay for it. It powers the trucks and ships that move everything from milk to lumber, and the costs are embedded in the prices people see at stores. The last time consumers saw diesel prices climb to such heights was in 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine and they hit $5.82 per gallon. 

This year, the Iran war has largely closed the Strait of Hormuz, through which 10 percent of seaborne diesel once traveled. This has sent prices soaring, and consumers are increasingly feeling the impact. 

“Early on, much of the cost increase gets absorbed along the supply chain through existing freight contracts and retailer margins,” David Ortega, a professor of food economics and policy at Michigan State University, told the Associated Press. “But as contracts reprice and fuel surcharges take hold, more of that cost makes its way to the grocery store.” 

All told, the rising price of diesel has cost U.S. consumers an additional $46 billion, or about $350 per household, according to a Brown University tracker. That’s slightly less than the impact of rising gasoline prices — at $55 billion — but the 61 percent jump in diesel prices has outpaced the 41 percent increase in gas. 

“Diesel right now is caught up in more of a geopolitical turmoil than gasoline,” said Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis for GasBuddy, an app that lets consumers track fuel prices. In addition to the Iran war, Ukraine’s increasingly successful attacks on Russian oil refineries have also applied upward pressure. 

“Russia is no longer supplying the global market,” said De Haan, and U.S. refineries are already at full capacity, giving them little ability to pick up the slack. Domestic inventories are at their lowest level since 1982, according ​to data from the Energy Information Administration.

“We’re entering a key period for diesel consumption with the lowest inventories on record for early September,” David Russell told Reuters. He’s the global head of market strategy at the brokerage service TradeStation. “Farmers and truckers typically use more diesel in the ​autumn, which raises the stakes for the current crisis and increases the risk of sharper price increases.” 

Winter is likely to bring more problems. Because heating oil is also essentially diesel, the millions of U.S. households that still rely on it can expect unprecedented bills. This comes as President Donald J. Trump’s administration has threatened to eliminate the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which helps households afford their fuel bills. 

“If you’re in the Northeast, then this is much more burdensome than anywhere else in the country,” Mark Wolfe, executive director of the National Energy Assistance Directors Association, told Axios. “Families are getting hit by both gasoline and heating oil.” 

These surging costs are hitting consumers just before the midterm elections, when the economy is at the front of voters’ minds. Normally, fuel prices are a somewhat downstream factor in the voting calculus, but Kevin Book, head of research at energy consulting firm ClearView Energy Partners, told Axios that this year could be different. “In cold weather states — particularly those that rely on fuels other than natural gas,” he said. “It could be a very big deal.”

Even if the wars in Iran and Ukraine were to end tomorrow, it would take weeks or months for fuel prices to come down and diesel supply to recover. 

“After both of those are solved, then once the flow normalizes, that will start to help global inventories recover,” said De Haan. “Only after inventories have recovered do diesel prices really see a full decline.”

This post has been updated to reflect the current price of diesel fuel as of September 10.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline What the record-high cost of diesel means for you on Sep 10, 2026.

This podcast by ESAFF explores why farmers continue to challenge the WTO and call for a just trade framework that works for people, not just markets.

The post Beyond Free Trade: An Alternative Trade Framework Based on Food Sovereignty | ESAFF Podcast appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

If we want to fail more beautifully, to make our predicament less ugly, we need to learn what it means to face it together.

Moving toward plant-based diets will not, by itself, solve the climate problem, but it is necessary for solving it.

The provisional application of the EU-Mercosur FTA without a vote from the European Parliament remains a democratic scandal.

The post Europe: Temporary ban on Brazilian meat and honey highlights EU-Mercosur risks, says ECVC appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

Tidak semua putaran pada sebuah game memberikan pengalaman serupa. Ada spin reguler dengan tempo normal, mode turbo untuk mempercepat animasi, putaran otomatis, sampai rangkaian bonus dengan aturan berbeda. Variasi tersebut membuat Situs Slot Maxwin hari ini terasa memiliki banyak lapisan, terutama ketika provider menggabungkan reel modern, simbol khusus, multiplier, serta free spin dalam satu permainan.

Istilah “memancing kemenangan” kemudian sering dipakai untuk menggambarkan kombinasi putaran tertentu. Namun, kombinasi tersebut lebih tepat dilihat sebagai pola penggunaan fitur, bukan formula untuk menentukan hasil berikutnya. Jika permainan memakai RNG, mengganti manual spin menjadi auto spin tidak otomatis membuat peluang kemenangan meningkat.

Kombinasi Putaran Membuat Slot Maxwin Hari Ini Lebih Variatif

Putaran reguler merupakan struktur paling dasar. Pemain menekan tombol spin, reel bergerak, kemudian sistem menampilkan hasil berdasarkan mekanisme game.

Perkembangan desain membawa variasi baru. Turbo spin mempercepat presentasi, sementara auto spin menjalankan sejumlah putaran secara otomatis. Beberapa judul juga menyediakan bonus round dengan karakter berbeda dari permainan dasar.

Perbedaan tersebut membuat satu game dapat mempunyai beberapa ritme tanpa perlu mengubah aturan matematisnya.

Kombinasi putaran umumnya dapat berupa:

• manual spin untuk menjalankan putaran satu per satu;
• auto spin untuk menjalankan rangkaian secara otomatis;
• turbo spin untuk memperpendek durasi animasi;
• free spin sebagai bagian dari fitur bonus;
• cascade untuk melanjutkan kombinasi dalam satu rangkaian;
• respin apabila mekanisme permainan memang menyediakannya.

Masing-masing memiliki fungsi berbeda. Tidak ada satu mode dengan status universal sebagai jalan pasti menuju maxwin.

Manual dan Auto Spin Berbeda pada Cara Pengoperasian

Perdebatan antara manual serta auto spin cukup sering muncul. Sebagian pemain merasa manual memberikan kontrol lebih besar karena setiap putaran dimulai secara terpisah.

Auto spin mengambil pendekatan berbeda. Pengguna menentukan jumlah putaran atau pengaturan tersedia, lalu permainan menjalankannya secara berurutan.

Perbedaan utama berada pada interaksi pengguna. Apabila aturan game tidak menyatakan perubahan probabilitas, pergantian tombol tersebut tidak dapat dianggap sebagai pemicu kemenangan di Situs Slot Maxwin.

Kemenangan di Situs Slot Maxwin Dipengaruhi Mekanisme Game

Kemenangan di Situs Slot Maxwin hari ini perlu dipisahkan dari cara tombol spin digunakan. Hasil permainan lebih berkaitan dengan konfigurasi matematis, paytable, simbol, serta fitur bawaan dari judul terkait.

Wild dapat membantu membentuk kombinasi sesuai aturan. Scatter mungkin membuka free spin. Multiplier memodifikasi nilai pembayaran ketika persyaratannya terpenuhi.

Dengan kata lain, fitur memiliki fungsi teknis. Tombol putaran lebih banyak mengatur bagaimana sesi dijalankan.

Kombinasi Fitur Lebih Penting daripada Urutan Tombol

Sebuah permainan bisa terasa semakin aktif saat beberapa fitur bertemu. Contohnya, cascade membentuk kombinasi pertama, wild muncul pada rangkaian berikutnya, kemudian multiplier ikut aktif.

Situasi semacam itu berbeda dari pola tombol seperti “10 manual, 20 turbo, lalu 10 auto”.

Urutan tombol merupakan keputusan pengguna. Sebaliknya, interaksi wild, scatter, cascade, serta multiplier merupakan bagian dari desain permainan.

Pemisahan ini penting agar istilah kombinasi putaran tidak berubah menjadi klaim seolah-olah ada kode tertentu untuk memaksa kemenangan.

Membaca Kombinasi Putaran Secara Lebih Rasional

Daripada mencari angka putaran sakti, pengguna dapat membaca setiap mode berdasarkan fungsi sebenarnya.

Beberapa hal lebih relevan untuk diperhatikan:

• Paytable, untuk melihat nilai simbol serta aturan kombinasi.
• RTP teoretis, untuk memahami parameter pengembalian jangka panjang.
• Volatilitas, untuk melihat karakter distribusi hasil secara umum.
• Aturan bonus, untuk mengetahui pemicu free spin atau fitur khusus.
• Batas maxwin, untuk memahami kemenangan maksimum sesuai konfigurasi game.
• Mode spin, untuk menentukan tempo interaksi sesuai preferensi.

Informasi tersebut memberikan konteks lebih kuat dibanding klaim pola putaran tanpa dokumentasi.

Situs Slot Maxwin Kini Memiliki Ritme Permainan Lebih Kompleks

Situs Slot Maxwin dengan katalog multi-provider dapat memperlihatkan betapa beragamnya desain putaran saat ini. Satu judul memakai reel konvensional, sementara game lain menawarkan cascade, respin, expanding reel, atau sistem Ways.

Akibatnya, pola penggunaan pada satu permainan belum tentu relevan untuk judul lain.

Bahkan dua game dari provider sama dapat memakai konfigurasi berbeda. Jumlah reel, volatilitas, struktur pembayaran, fitur bonus, serta batas kemenangan dapat berubah.

Inilah alasan istilah “kombinasi terbaik” perlu dibaca secara hati-hati. Tidak ada urutan manual, turbo, atau auto spin dengan kemampuan universal untuk bekerja pada seluruh permainan.

Slot Maxwin Hari Ini Lebih Banyak Bermain dengan Tempo

Perubahan paling menarik justru terlihat pada tempo. Provider menggunakan animasi, suara, transisi bonus, dan kecepatan reel untuk membuat setiap tahap terasa berbeda.

Turbo menciptakan tempo cepat. Free spin dapat membawa suasana baru. Cascade mempertahankan kontinuitas, sedangkan respin memberi satu tahap tambahan sebelum permainan kembali ke kondisi reguler.

Dari perspektif desain, kombinasi tersebut berhasil membuat sesi terasa lebih dinamis. Dari perspektif probabilitas, efek visual tetap tidak boleh dianggap sebagai sinyal bahwa kemenangan berikutnya sudah dekat.

Kombinasi Putaran Bukan Tombol Rahasia Kemenangan

Memancing kemenangan di Situs Slot Maxwin terdengar menarik sebagai konsep, tetapi kombinasi putaran tidak mempunyai dasar universal sebagai formula untuk menghasilkan maxwin. Manual spin, auto spin, turbo, respin, dan free spin mempunyai fungsi masing-masing berdasarkan desain game.

Slot Maxwin hari ini justru menarik untuk dibaca melalui hubungan antara mode putaran dan mekanisme permainan. Paytable menjelaskan pembayaran, volatilitas memberi konteks distribusi hasil, sedangkan fitur menerangkan bagaimana bonus bekerja.

Kemenangan di Situs Slot Maxwin hari ini tetap tidak dapat ditentukan hanya melalui urutan tombol. Kombinasi putaran paling masuk akal digunakan untuk mengatur ritme serta memahami fitur, bukan sebagai kode tersembunyi untuk memaksa hasil permainan.

'Store food for climate shocks' Channel News brendan 10th September 2026 Teaser Media

Industrial expansion, data centres, population growth and electrification are putting new pressure on a system already facing affordability, reliability and infrastructure challenges. Much of the public conversation focuses on how much new...

Waymo’s rollout of driverless taxis in Nevada must be halted because the company has violated state law by not lining up alternatives for disabled passengers, an emergency petition to state authorities claims.

Kelsey Maurine Brickl, who uses a powered wheelchair, filed her appeal in August, just days after the Nevada Transportation Agency permitted the autonomous taxi company to deploy 1,000 driverless vehicles in the Las Vegas area.

Kelsey Maurine Brickl

“We can’t [allow] this shiny new piece of convenient tech … to chip away at the rights of disabled people,” said Brickl, who initially founded Ghostlight Access to promote disability rights in theater. She is also a stockholder in Waymo’s parent company Google.

Nevada law requires driverless car companies to provide wheelchair-accessible vehicles for passengers upon request, but few companies have such capacity, so most merely contract with human-driven taxi companies, such as Uber and Lyft, to fulfill trip requests.

But for now, Waymo has no such contract in Nevada, likely because it has not had time to finalize such an arrangements, which one source told Streetsblog, is complicated. For now, all that Waymo would say on the record is that it intends to follow state law to provide wheelchair-accessible trips.

“We will comply with applicable Nevada accessibility requirements,” said Ethan Teicher, a spokesperson for Waymo. “We are committed to working with manufacturers, researchers, and the accessibility community toward a future where our fully autonomous vehicles can accommodate the diverse needs of all riders.”

Waymo is far from the only company that has been accused of failing disabled riders. Two other companies — Tesla and Uber’s Aviari — were permitted for driverless passenger service in Nevada in August, but it is unclear if either is providing wheelchair-accessible rides.

Recommended Report: Waymo Surpasses The Way-Too-Low Human Driver Safety Bar Ren Zaro Fitzgerald July 24, 2026

Brickl says that she directed her petition at Waymo because of Tesla’s recent announcement that it is developing compliant vehicles, and Uber’s relatively small share of the driverless car market. She says she has contacted Tesla for a timeline on the release of its new vehicles, but has not heard back.

Waymo is Brickl’s immediate target, but the problem of this basic civil rights violation is industry-wide, Brickl said, citing loopholes in Nevada, other states’, and federal law that allow taxi companies to provide alternative services instead of making fleets accessible. Even if providers do contract out an accessible operator, these rides can cost more and come with a longer-than-average wait, she added.

Truly equal access, in which fleets are accessible by default, is several years away at minimum. Currently, no cars meet Waymo’s specifications and are wheelchair accessible. Other brands face similar challenges, particularly as companies switch to fully electric vehicles, whose bulky, floor-stored batteries interfere with necessary loading ramps. For its Zoox fleet, Amazon opted to manufacture a bespoke car model – but it cannot accommodate wheelchairs.

The proliferation of driverless cars has threatened more-accessible forms of transportation. Multiple independent studies have confirmed that taxi companies, such as Waymo and Uber, are replacing sustainable modes in about half of trips. And many of those trips would have been on public transit, which is accessible. Those lost public transit trips mean that fare revenue is being shifted away from cash-strapped agencies, which will be less able to provide fully accessible service (not to mention that the added congestion of more cars on the road slows down the service).

“[Driverless cars are] taking something away, potentially damaging something that’s already there,” Brickl said.

The Nevada Transportation Authority claimed in an email to Streetsblog that it is not required to respond to petitions after a decision is made, but Nevada state law clearly allows petitions for a reversal within 15 days of decision — in this case, a clock that began ticking on Aug. 20. Brickl filed on Aug. 26, well within the appeal window. The Authority did not clarify why it considers itself exempt from state law.

In Brickl’s view, Waymo must be compelled to follow the law, or see its expansion put on hold.

“Disabled people already have civil rights, we just need them enforced,” she said. “If the rollout of Waymo is going to take those existing civil rights away, then it needs to be halted.”

I am a 12-year-old cyclist in New York City. I’m constantly wondering if I’ll make it to 13.

My mom and I ride all the time, but even though I’m allowed by law to ride on the sidewalk (well, maybe I am — more on that later), I ride on the same streets as she does. So every time we go anywhere on my bike, I review my hand signals, especially the ones I use to go around a car parked in a painted bike lane, and take a deep breath.

Nine times out of 10, there is a car or truck parked in a painted bike lane. Trucks are the worst because they have huge blind spots. Typically, my mom and I have a strategy discussion about going around these scofflaws, though sometimes we just pull over when we don’t feel safe. That’s not cycling. That’s walking with a bike between your legs.

Car-filled unprotected bike lanes are a problem for all cyclists, but especially for someone my age. In theory, I should just be riding on the sidewalk, as riders under 14 are allowed to do) — except that I’ve also seen rules that say that I must bike in the roadway because my wheels are 26 inches in diameter. That rule (that 12-year-olds and under can only bike on the sidewalk if their wheels are less than 26 inches) is quoted a lot in all sorts of places — summaries of bike rules, legal code — but the city Administrative code says that as a 12-year-old, I can bike on the sidewalk. So it may just depend on the cop — which then may subject the biker to police bias.

Even the cops are confused.

In any event, many kids stop biking once they graduate to an adult-sized frame. After all, the streets are a mess, and pedestrians frankly resent seeing middle-schoolers biking on the sidewalk. (As Streetsblog once reported, roads with schools are much more dangerous than roads without, so students have an especially unsafe biking experience.)

Many more middle-schoolers would bike if they had safe routes to school. And that can’t merely mean painted, car-filled bike lanes because if we want more tweens biking, we have to make the roadway safe for people who are still just learning to bike in the city. 

Of course, politicians don’t care because people like me can’t vote until we’re 18. That means that for six more years, I don’t have much of a say in the policymaking that could determine whether I get killed or seriously injured by a car driver. And it’s not just the driver’s fault — it’s the fault of a system that allows cars to dominate all the streets; menace cyclists, pedestrians, and air quality; and push kids to the curb.

Recommended



‘ALWAYS SCARED’: Dangerous Streets Outside City Schools Threaten Children
Jesse Coburn

May 24, 2022

I once attended a “biking class” (about traffic patterns, signals, that sort of stuff), and everyone besides me was an adult. The class emphasized avoiding crashes while staying on the good side of the law — and treated illegal, crash-causing car behavior as a fact of life. Who decided that crashes are normal? Other forms of murder certainly aren’t.

Nonetheless, I’ve stuck with biking because, I suppose, I’m just a contrarian: I want to spite the cars. I want to defend the environment from today’s politicians. And biking is fun.

But it’s not so fun to navigate around wheeled boxes of death on a regular basis, thinking something along the lines of, “Am I going to die today?”

The Mamdani administration is implementing Sammy’s Law through a patchwork of short, disconnected stretches, some as short as about 100 feet.@NYC_SafeStreets is calling on the mayor to think bigger and lower speed limits across entire neighborhoods to save lives. pic.twitter.com/HZra34RRRm

— Transportation Alternatives (@TransAlt) September 8, 2026

• Cleaner air equals smarter children. That was the result of a Columbia University study that found that a reduction in tailpipe pollution, among other sources, in New York City improved toddlers’ cognitive development by 26 percent. Other studies have also shown respiratory benefits when measures like low-emissions zones are implemented. (NY Times)
• Jake Boyles provides hard proof that interstates are homogenizing the country, at least when it comes to the businesses that lie just beyond them. (Strong Towns)
• Robotaxis would be much more useful in rural areas that lack transit than in big cities. (Bloomberg CityLab; paywall)
• Human backup drivers in robotaxis might not be worth much if they lose their skills while observing most of the time. (The Conversation)
• Electrek lays out how it’s possible to replace a second car with an e-cargo bike.
• Lyft was able to convince California voters to classify rideshare drivers as independent contractors, and now CEO Logan Green wants to take Prop 22 nationwide. (Mashable)
• Chicago’s new regional transportation authority overseeing the CTA, Metra and Pace is up and running. (Eno Center for Transportation)
• How many bike-riding children have to die before Michigan stops designing roads solely for drivers? (WLNS)
• At least one Atlanta city council member is onboard with a new plan for light rail along the 22-mile Beltline. (CBS News)
• Cincinnati’s Connector streetcar has not quite lived up to early expectations, but it’s still carried 7.5 million riders in 10 years, and the numbers are trending up. (Axios)
• In addition to cutting bus routes and early morning service, Miami-Dade could start charging for the Metromover. (Miami Times)
• Japanese architects are going to great lengths to provide parking for single-family homes with limited space. (Design Boom)
• Clearly Ottawa mayoral candidate Alex Lawson hasn’t read “The High Cost of Free Parking.” (CBC)
• Montreal, too, is in danger of backsliding as Mayor Soraya Martinez Ferrada puts bike projects under renewed scrutiny. (Momentum)

The far-right AfD was the undoubted winner of the closely watched state election in Germany’s Saxony-Anhalt on 6 September. Still, the party fell short of an outright majority, in part thanks to a surprisingly strong performance by the Greens. The question now is, can the AfD form a government at all, and if not, what coalition of rivals could possibly agree to govern in its place?

On 6 September, voters cast their ballots in the Saxony-Anhalt widely watched and publicised state election. More than anything, the results have led to a climate of uncertainty and shown a desire for fundamental change. The outcome amounts to a political earthquake whose shockwaves extend far beyond the state’s borders.

43.8 per cent of voters opted for the “confirmed far-right”  Alternative für Deutschland (Alternative for Germany, AfD) state branch (+23 percentage points). The ruling conservative party (CDU/Christian-Democratic Union) was punished; with 17.2 per cent, its share more than halved (-19.9). The liberal party (FDP/Free Democratic Party), which had previously been part of the coalition government, was ousted from the state parliament in Saxony-Anhalt, whilst the social democrats (SPD/Social Democratic Party), also part of the coalition, made a slight gain but remained at a low level (9.3/+0.9).

On the other hand, the Greens made a surprisingly significant gain, achieving their best result to date with 8.9 per cent (+3.0). They were the strongest force in terms of second votes in the Halle III constituency (33.7 per cent; lowest second-vote result: Eisleben constituency, 3.8 per cent). The Left lost ground again (8.6/-2.4), but managed to win three constituency seats outright (Halle II, III; Magdeburg II). The newly formed BSW (Alliance Sahra Wagenknecht/Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht; a party positioned towards the left economically and towards the right culturally) cleared the 5 per cent threshold.

The election results and accompanying opinion polls reveal a highly politicised, deeply divided state. Voter turnout soared to a record high of 77.8 per cent (+17.5), continuing the trend of rising participation. The previously ruling coalition of the CDU, the SPD, and the FDP has been voted out of office. In the new parliament, forming a government will prove exceedingly difficult, and the BSW is expected to play a key role in any possible coalition.

Chart: Heinrich Böll Foundation. Source: State Returning Officer of Saxony-Anhalt

The new normal?

Although just over 1.7 million people were eligible to vote in Saxony-Anhalt, the vote was closely monitored in and outside Germany. The reasons for this extraordinary attention are clear: polls indicated that the AfD would become by far the strongest force, as had already been the case in the 2024 Thuringia state election and in the 2024 local elections in Saxony-Anhalt. What was new, however, were the poll figures for the AfD and, consequently, the question of whether the AfD’s state branch – classified as “undoubtedly far-right” – would provide the Minister-President with an absolute parliamentary majority.

This possibility of a government with a far-right character, unprecedented in Germany since 1945, led to an intense media, political and societal debate about the potential consequences for democracy in the country. As a result, the election was subject to unusually extensive scrutiny. At the same time, however, the consequences of the election were discussed in an unusually broad and multifaceted manner, which at least gave voters the opportunity to reflect on the significance and consequences of their voting decisions far more deeply than usual.

However, for two reasons it would be unrealistic to view the state election as essentially an exceptional case. On the one hand, whilst the scale of targeted disinformation, fake news, and defamation – extending even to the acceptance of politically motivated threats and acts of violence from the far right – has indeed risen once again, it is no longer an exceptional case: whether through hybrid attacks and campaigns from abroad (particularly from Russia) or targeted delegitimisation from within (by AfD politicians and right-wing influencers), the aim was to influence the elections directly and to gradually undermine democracy as a whole. The authoritarian playbook for delegitimising democracy has now found its way into the German federal system.

On the other hand, from a sociological perspective, there is much to suggest that the election result, whilst differing in scale, follows the same underlying pattern as a broader societal trend. The AfD has long been a nationwide phenomenon; it is merely the structural conditions and social stabilisers that differ. This explains the variations between the federal states, particularly in times of global uncertainty (e.g. party loyalty, economic structures, collective bargaining coverage, etc.).

Social divisions

The state election in Saxony-Anhalt took place against a backdrop of general pessimism. Whilst this is not unusual in itself, this election year is also characterised by widespread dissatisfaction with the state government and persistent, deep-seated dissatisfaction with the federal government, which goes beyond the negative assessment of the “traffic light” coalition.

A large majority of citizens in Saxony-Anhalt are concerned about the state of affairs in Germany (here and below: Infratest dimap: Saxony-Anhalt ahead of the 2026 election), both regarding the future of democracy and economic development. Concerns are widespread across the population and in all political circles, yet the differences in the details highlight the division within the state. Pronounced fears of inflation and social decline are a defining feature (feeling overwhelmed by price rises: 70 per cent; standard of living under threat: 58 per cent). These concerns are, in part, entirely justified: Saxony-Anhalt has many structurally weak rural areas struggling with an ageing population, and the “Chemical Triangle” in the south of the state is also in the throes of a deep crisis, whilst other plans for new industrial settlements, such as that involving Intel, have failed.

Combined with lower net worth and a lower uptake of transition support schemes, many employees therefore fear that their own jobs – and thus their livelihoods – are at risk, whilst a large share of (future) pensioners are critical of the federal government’s reforms. The survey data clearly show that this fear of loss – partly real, partly perceived – has been exploited politically, particularly by the Right. AfD supporters, in particular, fear they will no longer be able to pay their bills (89 per cent; overall: 70 per cent) or maintain their standard of living (80 per cent; overall: 58 per cent). Supporters of the Left share these fears roughly in line with the overall average, whereas supporters of the CDU, the SPD, and the Greens do so to a far lesser extent. This shows that the divide is clearly discernible along the lines of economic fears.

Furthermore, whilst concern for democracy and the rule of law is shared across all social groups and political currents, there are significant differences in the interpretation of exactly what the threats consist of: Only AfD supporters are more likely than average to see the country’s way of life as under threat or to complain about there being too many foreigners in the country. In addition, only a majority of AfD supporters do not see Russia as a threat. In other words, the perception of these issues among AfD supporters differs fundamentally from that of other parties’ supporters (BSW, FDP: not shown). Thus, whilst the vast majority of people in the country are concerned, their reasons vary greatly and clearly follow party lines (often pitting the AfD against the CDU, the SPD, and the Greens), suggesting that right-wing narratives and interpretative frameworks exert a strong persuasive influence in receptive circles.

This is also confirmed by the splitting analysis of the Infratest dimap post-election survey: neither did AfD first-vote voters cast their second votes for other parties to any significant extent, nor did the AfD list receive a significant number of additional votes from first-vote voters of other parties. The AfD’s voter base is therefore, on the one hand, clearly cohesive, but on the other hand, as the results show, broadly anchored in society: in Saxony-Anhalt, the AfD is the dominant force in almost all regions, social milieus and demographic groups. It won 38 out of 41 constituencies outright; only in three urban constituencies was the Left able to secure a direct mandate. In only one constituency is the AfD not the strongest force in terms of second votes, achieving less than 20 per cent, whereas the Greens became the strongest force by second votes in that constituency (Halle III).

With the exception of civil servants and older voters, the AfD was consistently the strongest force and recorded double-digit gains, particularly among young men and voters with a lower level of formal education (except among civil servants; data here and below: Infratest dimap: Election Analysis). The party has gained across the political spectrum, but most significantly from the CDU, the group of minor parties, and above all, through the mobilisation of former non-voters.

Voting motives continue to be characterised by protest voting (in particular as a protest against the federal government), but to a far greater extent than before also by conviction in the party, its ability to address issues and its policy platform, as well as, to a significant degree, in its lead candidate Ulrich Siegmund: according to their own statements, four in ten AfD voters chose the party because of him. AfD voters were almost unanimously in favour of a state government led by their party and its lead candidate.

Map: Heinrich Böll Foundation. Source: State Returning Officer of Saxony-Anhalt. Map data: © GeoBasis-DE / LVermGeo ST dl-de/by-2-0

Dizzying coalition arithmetic

The widely differing perceptions of the situation and the clear divide between the electorate ultimately also shape perceptions of the government’s work at the federal level and, above all, at the state level. Whilst the majority of supporters of the CDU, the SPD, and even the Greens were generally satisfied with their state government, supporters of The Left, and above all the AfD, express clear dissatisfaction. The extent to which these camps have solidified is also demonstrated by the massive shift in the attribution of competence and in preferences for the Minister-President: supporters of the AfD favour “their” party on these points and reject all others across the board, and vice versa.

This clear polarisation of the two blocs against one another is by no means new and is the reason why cooperation between the AfD and the CDU would most likely be to the detriment of the latter: the election in Saxony-Anhalt clearly shows how deeply the AfD has penetrated among the middle class with a charismatic lead candidate and a positive, mood-driven campaign in times of uncertainty. Whilst the AfD has recently focused primarily on mobilising its core electorate in the west, its support in the east – particularly in this election – has already broadened considerably, meaning it has become socially normalised.

Looking ahead to the formation of the next government, this means that the difficulties in securing a majority are not merely a matter of party tactics, but are clearly rooted in policy issues and voter preferences. Everything points to an extremely difficult process of forming a government. If one assumes the model of a majority government (rather than a minority government with shifting majorities), no simple solution is in sight. With 39 seats each for the AfD on the one hand, and the CDU, the SPD, the Greens, and the Left Party on the other, there is a deadlock; 42 votes are required for an absolute majority.

The AfD reversed course immediately after the election, saying it no longer regards an absolute majority of its own as a prerequisite to governing, and that, for the time being, it only sees the need for a reliable majority. This could be achieved through a coalition or at least a firm cooperation agreement with the BSW. A CDU-led coalition against the AfD, on the other hand, would require the involvement of all the other parties in the state parliament – namely the Left , the Greens, the SPD, the CDU, and the BSW – a highly unlikely scenario. Consequently, the idea of a cross-party Minister-President, which the BSW has once again brought into the discussion, takes on a certain relevance: assuming this person were acceptable to the entire democratic spectrum, the BSW could thus play a decisive role in the election of a democratically supported Minister-President.

That said, by being prepared to abstain in the third round of voting, the BSW also has the opportunity, for the first time, to help a Minister-President from a confirmed far-right party into office. This would not be without further complications: the five abstentions would help the AfD but would not break the deadlock. To do so, at least one further vote, one more abstention, or an absence from the vote by one of the other parliamentary groups would be required.

It is now up to the BSW to decide which side to support, but a minority government cannot be entirely ruled out. Saxony-Anhalt, in particular, is one of the few federal states with long-standing experience of this form of government, which is atypical in Germany (except for the “Magdeburg Model”, an SPD minority government from 1994 to 2002). Saxony-Anhalt is characterised not only by high volatility and low party loyalty, but also by a willingness to embrace new coalition models (the “Kenya Coalition” comprising the CDU, the SPD, and the Greens, or the “Germany Coalition” comprising the CDU, the SPD and the FDP).

Chart: Heinrich Böll Foundation Source: State Returning Officer of Saxony-Anhalt

What will the Greens do now?

There was a lot at stake for the Greens in this election, as they had recently been struggling, particularly in the eastern German federal states. In Thuringia and Brandenburg, the Greens lost their parliamentary status in 2024, and this election risked repeating that. However, the outcome – surprising to some extent – turned out differently: the Greens have achieved their best-ever result in a state election in Saxony-Anhalt. The structural patterns in electoral sociology are unremarkable, and the motives for voting also match expectations: for three-quarters of their voters, the decisive reason for voting for the Greens was policy-based considerations, coupled with a unanimous rejection of an AfD government and a clear preference for a CDU-led state government.

And yet something is different. The election result is largely attributable to the debates and initiatives promoting tactical voting: the aim was to prevent the AfD from securing an absolute majority – and thus taking power – by ensuring that the Greens and the SPD retained their seats in the state parliament. Whilst the former objective was achieved, the question of who will form the government remains unanswered.

Although up until July the polls gave little indication that the Greens would return to the state parliament, they managed to capitalise on the window of opportunity presented by this election. They benefited not only from CDU swing voters, but also from the mobilisation of former non-voters. This election campaign was underpinned by disciplined communication and unusually strong support from the entire party – from the party leadership and prominent figures, as well as from many members – but also from figures such as former Vice-Chancellor Robert Habeck and Baden-Württemberg’s Minister-President Cem Özdemir.

After the Saxony-Anhalt elections, Özdemir summed up the central responsibility of the Greens – and indeed of all parties – as follows: “What is required is honest and unsparing self-criticism from all democratic parties, leading to a dramatic change in the way we all conduct politics, both in form and substance. Less squabbling, fewer promises, more honest listening, and shared outcomes. Saying what is possible and saying what is not.”

This article was first published in German by the Heinrich Böll Stiftung. The English version is taken from the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung Brussels.

Back in June, we asked you to submit preliminary scoping comments on a particularly ill-conceived oil and gas lease sale in Utah. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) recently announced that it’s barreling ahead with this sale and is now accepting comments on the draft proposal, which would auction off some of Utah’s wildest places for fossil fuel development, including parcels in the Dirty Devil and Hatch Point regions. All told, the BLM’s Fourth Quarter Lease Sale would offer 43 parcels spanning more than 74,000 acres of public land in Utah.

The BLM is accepting public comments through Monday, September 21. Please tell the agency to keep oil and gas development out of these scenic, wild landscapes.

Hatch Point. © Ray Bloxham/SUWA

The Dirty Devil parcels are in a wild and remote region west of the Horseshoe Canyon unit of Canyonlands National Park and immediately north of the Dirty Devil Wilderness Study Area.

The Hatch Point parcels are located near the mouth of Trough Springs Canyon, south of Moab, and encompass Hatch Canyon and Kane Springs Canyon. These canyons are designated critical habitat for the threatened Mexican Spotted Owl in addition to supporting a wide array of other wildlife. The Hatch Point area also provides expansive views of the nearby Bears Ears region.

In its haste to fall into line with Trump administration priorities, the BLM prepared a draft environmental analysis that falls short of what the law requires. For example, many of the parcels—including those near Bears Ears—are in designated critical habitat for the Mexican Spotted Owl, a species listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). However, the agency failed to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service about foreseeable impacts to the owl, as required by the ESA. Rather than consult now, the agency kicked the can down the road to the drilling stage when it claims that it may (but likely won’t) fulfill that requirement. This backwards approach is illegal and does nothing to ensure the owl is protected.

SUWA fully intends to hold the BLM accountable for its failure to follow the law. You can help by telling the agency to keep fossil fuel development out of Utah’s remarkable wild landscapes.

Click here to submit your comments by September 21

The post Tell BLM (Again) to Keep Fossil Fuel Development Out of Utah’s Wild Places appeared first on Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.