I used to say I was a feminist but I didn’t know what it meant. Worse, my behaviour was conditioned by patriarchy in the home, institutionally at school and in pursuit of higher education, in physics and computer science. Then reinforced in the field of work within software engineering.
How do we know if we have won or lost the War on Terror?
How do people decide who they are going to vote for in a national or local election? It’s a big question and the focus of much thought by political hacks and pollsters but I suspect it boils down to several “simple” questions:
* Does the incumbent have my trust?
* Does the popular consensus on the candidate’s ideology match my own political instincts?
* Which way are my important social connections leaning?
* Has any of the candidates done something or evoked some proposal I find deplorable?
* Has any of the candidates improved my sense of well-being?
It’s been said “poverty wasn’t what caused a group of middle-class and reasonably well-educated Middle Easterners to fly three airplanes into buildings and another into the ground. It was, rather, resentments growing out of the absence of representative institutions in their own societies, so that the only outlet for political dissidence was religious fanaticism.” (John Lewis Gaddis)
The implication is that democracy is the answer. I have to respectfully disagree.
It may not be the most popular thing to say given the rise of the right wing, anti-immigration, anti-Islam politicians in Western Europe but I’m going to do what politicians should be doing: argue in favour of immigration.