RNZ Pacific

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/11/stranded-solomon-islands-ferry-passengers-adrift-at-sea-brought-on-shore/

Asia Pacific Report

Mass pro-Palestine protests across at least 60 countries in more than 250 locations worldwide were launched as part of a Global Day of Action beginning in Aotearoa New Zealand today.

Thousands of people took part in solidarity rallies and marches in the three largest cities, Auckland, Wellington and Chistchurch — and vigils and actions happened at least 23 other places around the country.

An estimated 15,000 people, including representives of more than 50 organisations and movements backing the global action took part in the march up Queen Street from downtown Te Komititanga Square next to the Waitemata transport hub to Albert Park.

• READ MORE: Death toll from Israel’s war on Gaza rises to 74,370, says Health Ministry
• Other Palestine reports

Giant banners proclaiming “Genocide is a crime — Free Palestine” and “Global March for Palestine – NZ Sanction Israel now” were carried by lead marchers, and posters displaying slogans such as “The genocide feeds on the silence”, “Freedom for Palestine”, and “Bombing and shooting kids is not self-defence — Free Palestine” were carried throughout the crowd.

One cardboard poster said “The intifada is global now” and another “The Epstein class are killers”, referring to allegations in the United States against members of the elite, including President Donald Trump.

A counter-protest was staged by supporters of Israel and the Shah’s regime in Iran — waving Israeli, Lion and Sun flags of the ousted monarchy, Stars and Stripes and Union Jack flags — but this was dwarfed by the pro-Palestine rally.

Police kept the peace and 1News reported just one minor incident.

Detained and tortured
Before the march began, organised by the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) and a coalition of groups, two protesters who had been on Gaza freedom flotillas in humanitarian aid efforts to break the siege and had been detained and tortured by Israeli security forces talked of their experiences.

Hāhona Ormsby (Ngāti Maniapoto) condemned a recent “Indigenous” delegation from New Zealand hosted by Israel and said this was undermining Tangata Whenua solidarity with Palestinians.

“We know what settler colonialism is,” he said.

In Albert Park, representatives of opposition parties pledged their support for a change in government policy in active support for Palestine if elected on November 7.

The Labour Party foreign affairs spokesperson Vanushi Walters told the crowd that New Zealand could not stand by in the face of genocide in Gaza, ethnic cleansing in the West Bank and ongoing violations of international law.

The party has made it clear that a Labour-led government would recognise the State of Palestine, including diplomatically with presentation of credentials, impose economic sanctions on Israel via new laws similar to the Russian Sanctions Act, support South Africa’s genocide case at the International Court of Justice, and ensure our Super Fund and ACC divest from companies identified by the UN as operating in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Today was the third anniversary of protests against the Israeli genocide.

Major global protests
Meanwhile, the Middle East Eye reports that capital cities across the globe will see major protests and actions in support of Palestine today, according to the Global Alliance for Palestine (GAFP).

The statement says that more than 200 organisations will be mobilising for a mass “synchronised Global Day of Action”, involving civil society groups, trade unions, student federations and human rights networks across 60 countries.

The global event is organised by GAFP alongside the Anti-Apartheid Movement (AAM) and Global Coalition Against Occupation of Palestine (SANED).

The Global March for Palestine action in Christchurch Ōtautahi today. Video: PSNA

“As governments actively fund, arm, and protect Israel from any legal accountability, grassroots movements are refusing to allow this genocide to become normalised as the status quo,” GAFP wrote.

It added that the event “marks a decisive shift, moving beyond symbolic protest toward direct civil intervention to shut down public complicity and demand systemic accountability for Israel’s war crimes and genocide”.

Anas Altikriti, secretary-general of the Global Alliance for Palestine, said that the third anniversary marking Israel’s continued genocide in Gaza was a “stark, devastating reminder of the unbearable terror and suffering that the Palestinian people had been forced to endure every single day for three years”.

“As world powers remain silent and complicit, civil society is rising,” he added, saying that the global demonstration is a a direct response to “this ongoing horror”.

‘Global conscience’
Altikriti described the event as a “declaration that the global conscience will not stand idly by as a genocide is normalised”.

“We are taking to the streets to demand total accountability, an immediate end to the siege, and a free Palestine.”

Participating organisations in more than 250 locations worldwide are expected to shut down civic squares, encircle government buildings and blockade corporate entities directly tied to military supply chains.

“The objective is clear: render normal commerce and political diplomacy impossible while Israel’s genocide continues uninterrupted.”

As well as mass protests in major capitals worldwide, in cities like Athens and Modena, the coalition indicated that “actions will extend across multiple days with cultural sit-ins, public teach-ins, and large-scale visual projections highlighting Israel’s war crimes directly onto government and corporate buildings”.

“Three years into Israel’s genocide, the global movement for Palestine has grown in power, unity, and resolve,” the statement added.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/10/aotearoa-marches-vigils-kick-off-global-day-of-action-for-palestine-with-mass-protests-in-dozens-of-countries/

Evaluating national leaders is a difficult task. Citizens often judge presidents and prime ministers by simple measures like economic growth during their term, or personal character. However, these metrics are misleading and ignore the actual mechanics of political power.

I am a researcher in public policy and politics. My recent analysis offers a fresh four-dimensional framework to evaluate presidential leadership.

This model examines how leaders handle tensions between:

• symbolic authority and executive decision-making

• heading a party and running a state

• foreign policy and domestic pressures

• formal authority and informal power networks.

In each dimension there are opportunities for a skilled president to promote synergies. But there is also a risk of conflict and contradiction. I have previously used this framework to explore Nelson Mandela’s presidency.

Read more:
Nelson Mandela was a towering global symbol – but how effective was he as a president?

Applying this framework to Thabo Mbeki, who governed South Africa as president from 1999 to 2008, reveals a complex legacy. Mbeki was the country’s second post-apartheid president after Mandela. He was succeeded by Kgalema Motlanthe, who served briefly before Jacob Zuma became president in 2009.

I found that Mbeki was a skilled and policy-focused president who introduced reforms that strengthened South African governance. However, his leadership contributed to institutional weaknesses that emerged more fully after he left office.

He concentrated power and blurred the line between the ruling party and the state. Systems of political appointments and influence expanded during his presidency. These systems later made state capture easier – private financial interests could corrupt public institutions to steal public resources.

Running government vs uniting the nation

South Africa has a hybrid parliamentary system with some presidential features. The national assembly elects a president rather than a prime minister. This figure combines two roles: acting as head of government – managing cabinet leaders of national executive departments – and as a head of state charged with uniting the nation.

Mbeki managed the head of government role with great technical skill.

He centralised strategic planning within the presidency and personally drove the creation of a modern national treasury. Working with finance minister Trevor Manuel, Mbeki stabilised the economy (blessed with favourable global conditions). Economic growth averaged over 4% annually, up from less than 3% under Mandela. His administration reduced public debt, expanded infrastructure and extended welfare grants to millions of poor citizens.

However, Mbeki failed as a unifying head of state during the health crisis of HIV and Aids. Rather than bringing people together to fight the epidemic, he rejected scientific consensus on the cause of the disease. He questioned the safety of life-saving antiretroviral medication and delayed public distribution. One study estimated that earlier access to antiretroviral treatment would have saved over 300,000 lives.

Mbeki held his position despite intense public protest and global condemnation. His stance demonstrated a failure to provide national leadership when it was most needed.

Serving the party vs strengthening the state

The second structural tension involves the divide between the ruling party and state administration.

Mbeki rose through the exiled ranks of the African National Congress (ANC). After taking power in 1994, the party struggled to turn a political organisation into a party of government. At its 1997 national conference, the party adopted a policy document on its “strategy and tactics”. The document described constitutional democracy as an interim step towards a broader national democratic revolution.

To secure control, the party started using a “cadre deployment” policy that bore Mbeki’s intellectual imprint. Cadre deployment meant placing loyal party members into top positions across government departments, municipalities and state companies. It severely damaged state capacity. Civil servants became answerable to party bosses rather than professional standards.

Read more:
South Africans who blow the whistle face retaliation and murder: their stories over five decades

A study on party dominance notes that long-ruling party tenure erodes public accountability. Mbeki centralised policy inside his personal office and suppressed party dissent. When he tried to retain party control in 2007, the party base rejected his ambition for an additional term and voted him out of office.

Leading abroad vs domestic interests

The third tension pits international diplomacy against domestic priorities. Mbeki reshaped foreign policy around pan-Africanism, a political idea promoting African economic unity and self-reliance.

Mbeki centralised foreign relations within the presidency. He helped create the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (Nepad), a plan to integrate African economies fully into the global economy. He also led the transformation of the Organisation of African Unity into the African Union.

He built strong diplomatic ties with developing nations across the global south, most strikingly through the India-Brazil-South Africa Dialogue Forum. These efforts expanded international trade and secured South Africa a non-permanent seat on the United Nations security council.

Yet Mbeki’s foreign policy created severe problems at home through his response to neighbouring Zimbabwe. As Zimbabwe suffered political repression and economic collapse, Mbeki adopted quiet diplomacy. This relied on private persuasion rather than public criticism.

Mbeki protected President Robert Mugabe and endorsed flawed Zimbabwean elections. This policy shielded a repressive regime. The later collapse of Zimbabwe’s economy forced millions of desperate citizens into South Africa, fuelling violent xenophobia after Mbeki had left office.

Formal vs informal influence

The final tension lies between formal legal powers and informal networks of influence.

The South African constitution grants the president expansive appointment powers over cabinet ministers, judges, police chiefs and tax officials. Mbeki used these powers to place loyalists across critical state agencies.

At the same time, rising campaign costs forced the ruling party to seek private funding. Under Mbeki, fundraising events sold corporate access to government ministers in exchange for party donations. This helped the party fund effective participation in national elections but compromised the integrity of government decisions.

Read more:
South Africa’s police serve the ANC insiders, not the people: here’s how it happened

Mbeki also expanded a variant of Black Economic Empowerment, a state policy that gave Black citizens ownership stakes in businesses to redress apartheid inequality. Established corporations used the policy to grant shares to politically connected individuals in exchange for influence in government.

One study on economic transformation regimes found that empowerment policies can turn into patronage networks for ruling elites. The African National Congress even established its own investment firm, Chancellor House, which won multibillion-rand state contracts.

While Mbeki personally faced no corruption charges, his administration built a system of informal patronage and money politics. This system created an architecture of dysfunction that enabled widespread state capture under his successor, Zuma.

Mbeki’s mixed legacy

Evaluating presidential leadership requires looking beyond personal character or short-term economic prosperity.

Mbeki proved himself a highly capable administrative manager. He maintained fiscal discipline and expanded South African influence across the continent. Yet his centralising leadership style, party deployment policies and informal patronage networks weakened democratic institutions.

Anthony Michael Butler does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/09/thabo-mbekis-legacy-in-south-africa-stronger-government-but-a-blurred-line-between-state-and-party/

U.S. colleges and universities have long struggled to increase the racial diversity of their faculty.

And after they are hired, some faculty of color say they feel that their qualifications and scholarship are subjected to greater scrutiny, or that they do not feel valued by their colleagues and schools.

As a scholar of critical race theory, I have studied these barriers, and I think that it is helpful to understand what universities, students and academic research all stand to gain from a more diverse faculty.

The search for diversity

While college faculties have become more racially diverse since the 1970s, the diversification of the faculty has not kept pace with changes in the college student population.

Overall, approximately 16% of the U.S. population were of color in 1970.

In 1975, approximately 8% of full-time faculty at U.S. colleges and universities were people of color. Approximately 4% were Black, 2% were Asian, and 1% were Hispanic.

In 1976, meanwhile, nearly 16% of U.S. college students were people of color.

Black students specifically accounted for about 9% of all full-time college students in 1976, Hispanic students about 4% and Asian or Pacific Islander students about 2%.

By 2022, 72% of full-time faculty across universities and colleges nationwide were white, while Asian professors made up 13%, Black professors 7% and Hispanic professors 6%, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

By 2022, Hispanic students accounted for 21.5% of U.S.-resident students at colleges and universities, Black students 13.2% and Asian students 7.8%.

Overall, in 2022, people of color made up approximately 41% of the U.S. population.

Promises not kept

Diversifying college faculties has not been a straightforward journey in recent years.

After a white police officer shot and killed Michael Brown, a Black teenager living in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014, student protests erupted across college campuses.

Amid this student activism around racism, some U.S. research universities publicly committed to making their faculties more diverse.

By 2015, at least 88 of the country’s 187 leading research universities had promised to take this step.

Another 96 schools made similar commitments over the next few years, including after the 2020 police murder of George Floyd, a Black man living in Minneapolis.

Among a group of selected research universities examined by The Washington Post, the share of Black, Hispanic and other underrepresented faculty rose from 9% in 2015 to 12% in 2024.

But many of those public efforts have since been scaled back or abandoned. Of the 184 universities that had made faculty-diversity commitments, at least 108 had fully or partially rolled them back by early 2026.

Separately, in 2023, more than 45 bills meant to restrict or ban diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in higher education were introduced in state legislatures. By late that year, eight states had enacted anti-DEI laws.

These measures have included restrictions on schools’ DEI offices and programs, diversity statements and spending on DEI-related initiatives.

Some scholars argue that these policies, along with other restrictions on racial-equity programs and initiatives, are contributing to what they describe as the “resegregation” of higher education.

Isolation at universities

Some faculty of color have said that they have seen evidence of a kind of tokenism in higher education. Some feel that they are expected to represent, exemplify, teach and do research with a focus on race and ethnic studies programs.

“Apparently, my colleague had assumed that because I am Black, I must be an expert on the African diaspora,” wrote Tyler Austin Harper, a former environmental studies professor at Bates College, in an August 2026 article in The Atlantic, which detailed his decision to leave his tenure-track position.

“The school’s culture encouraged us to see professors of color as vehicles for achieving the college’s diversity goals. The inescapable conclusion I arrived at was that I had been hired to be visibly Black first and a scholar second, if at all,” Harper wrote.

Other faculty of color have reported feeling like they and their scholarship are undervalued by their schools and peers.

Some faculty of color also report that scholarship focusing on marginalized populations or social problems is treated as less rigorous or less central to their disciplines.

Faculty of color across American colleges and universities face other challenges, including feeling isolated or like they are being watched.

Some faculty of color also report feeling like they should mentor students of color. This work can add to their workloads and, they say, sometimes come at a cost to their own careers.

Some research has found racial disparities in tenure and promotion outcomes, although those disparities vary considerably by discipline, school, gender and racial or ethnic group.

LGBTQ+ faculty of color, in particular, also report feeling isolated or intimidated, and experiencing delayed tenure or other promotion opportunities.

A diverse faculty benefits everyone

Having diverse faculty can benefit students and universities in several ways.

Research has linked greater faculty diversity to a range of positive outcomes for students, including student retention and college completion, particularly for Black and Hispanic students.

Exposure to professors with different backgrounds and perspectives can broaden students’ educational experiences.

Having a diverse faculty at universities can also strengthen academic research.

Researchers’ backgrounds can influence the questions they ask, the populations they study and how participants respond to them.

More diverse research teams can also bring different experiences and perspectives to the design and interpretation of research.

Research teams and study populations that lack diversity can overlook important perspectives and produce findings that are less applicable to broader populations. Conversely, more diverse teams can bring a wider range of perspectives and approaches to research.

An important mission

I believe that continuing to make university faculty ranks more diverse is essential for higher education.

This is not simply a matter of making professors more closely resemble the students they teach. It is about broadening the perspectives represented in classrooms and research, and ensuring that universities draw on the widest possible pool of scholars and ideas.

Rodney Coates does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/09/why-faculty-diversity-at-universities-still-lags-far-behind-the-changing-demographics-of-college-students/

It has been a rollercoaster year for the Green Party of England and Wales. It’s little more than 12 months since the election of the charismatic Zack Polanski as party leader. And months later, the equally charismatic Hannah Spencer became the Greens’ fifth MP. But Polanski couldn’t repeat this win in Keir Starmer’s former constituency of Holborn and St Pancras in London, losing to Labour’s Sagal Abdi-Wali.

Back in February, when Spencer won the Greater Manchester seat of Gorton and Denton, it was the party’s first ever Westminster byelection win and the Greens were in the pink. There had been a string of positive opinion polls, and Starmer’s Labour party was in the doldrums. Such was the party’s confidence and momentum that Polanski even voiced his ambition for the Greens to “replace” Labour as the anchor party of the UK centre-left.

But now, that optimism has evaporated. The party is in the spotlight – and split along ideological lines – following its conference adoption of a “Zionism is racism” policy motion.

Read more:
What is Zionism? The different meanings of a contested term

The motion, supported by 1,022 conference votes from a party membership of almost a quarter of a million, is important because it makes the Greens the first UK political party to formally adopt a policy defining Zionism as racism. In doing so, it has endorsed a one-state vision for Israel-Palestine. Polanski did not vote but later said that he would not have backed the motion in the form that was passed by conference .

The decision unleashed a media backlash, but it was not just media reaction that was hostile. The Israeli government immediately banned Polanski, who is Jewish, from entering Israel and accused the party of antisemitism. These sentiments were echoed by the US and UK governments, some of whose backbenchers have referred the Greens to the UK police. Jewish organisations in the UK and beyond were also angry and dismayed. This was not unexpected.

But more worrying for the Greens was the reaction from sister parties and organisations across Europe. Closest to home, the Scottish Greens’ reaction was muted. Co-leader Ross Greer backed the Zionism is racism message, while other MSPs were similarly behind the motion of the party in England and Wales. The party north of the border does not advocate for a single state, however.

The view from Europe

Across the channel, the reaction of the German Greens was vehement, with co-leader Felix Banaszak describing the motion as “intolerable and unacceptable”. Veteran German Green Jutta Ditfurth was even more robust, stating on X that “we could never have imagined an antisemitic Green party in the UK. I despise Jew-haters. They are preparing pogroms.”

And the European Green Party – which represents 47 Green parties across the continent including the Green Party of England and Wales – stated that the party’s position was incompatible with its own.

This leaves the British Green party in a difficult position in the short run. In theory it runs the risk of being suspended or possibly even expelled from the European Green Party if the German Greens in particular were to pursue the issue through the European Green Party’s governance structures.

At the same time, however, Green parties in European countries have historically taken different positions on Israel-Palestine without internal sanction. So the storm may blow over in time. This would be more likely if the Green Party of England and Wales were to moderate, amend or even abandon its controversial position on Zionism. But this seems unlikely, given how much party activists have invested in it. There is certain to be much more debate on the pros and cons of this.

But the question remains; beyond the byelection, how will this play with the UK electorate in future? It would be wrong to assume that the Greens’ resolution has been universally condemned, and many on the Corbyn-adjacent left in particular have welcomed the move.

The confidence Polanski took from the polls earlier in the year spurred him to try to enter parliament and consolidate his power within the party. But his bid failed and there is no doubt that – rightly or wrongly – much of the blame for will be placed on the party’s position on Zionism.

Had Polanski won, despite concerted pushback from the political establishment at home and abroad, British politics would have been ushering in an era of even more polarisation. But as it is, as far as fraternal relations with Europe are concerned, the party appears to be in danger of engineering its very own mini-Brexit. And it has created a situation in which Britain’s Jewish community feels even less safe among its fellow citizens.

Charles Lees does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/09/zack-polanski-loses-his-byelection-bid-and-the-green-partys-zionism-motion-has-outraged-its-closest-allies-in-europe/

Anthony (Anthony Nicola) is an anxious, grief-stricken mess mourning the loss of his partner, Michael, who died from AIDS. Over the weekend of his partner’s funeral, Anthony must play host to Michael’s closest and cattiest friends, Justin (Paul Capsis) and Jamie (Paul Reichstein).

All the while, Anthony is cruised by a spectral Leather Daddy (Chris Asimos) determined to keep him bound to his grief.

I would almost dare to call Anthony Nocera’s Log Boy a gesture towards a post-AIDS play. But this production, directed by Riley Spadaro, knows just as well as many of us do that, despite enormous medical progress, there remains no cure for HIV/AIDS.

Instead, Log Boy is about grief, community and memory. Nocera uses the personal to interrogate questions of the political. We’re asked to consider to whom queer history belongs, and how we can possibly move on from a crisis that is, indeed, still ongoing.

The ‘AIDS play’

The significance of works like Tony Kushner’s Angels in America (1991), Larry Kramer’s The Normal Heart (1985) and Matthew Lopez’s The Inheritance (2018) is undeniable.

In particular, the works of Kramer and Kushner were vital to the humanisation of the queer community in the middle of the crisis years.

But I must confess a frustration with theatre’s fixation on the crisis and the image of the dying queer body. The “AIDS play” often centres on an insufferable queen and his conventionally attractive boyfriend. After falling in love, the pretty boy slowly dies across the second half of the work.

Given Kushner and Kramer’s prominence, the image of the heartbroken widow crying over his dead partner’s corpse has become endemic to gay men’s theatre. This was once necessary in provoking empathy in heterosexual audiences, but now it often feels grotesque.

The HIV/AIDS crisis was not the only hardship faced by the queer community over the course of the 20th century. It is, indeed, defining and often an undercurrent of other struggles; however, stories of systemic police violence, the impacts of the second world war and the Lavender Scare all go largely untold due to this focus.

Log Boy is not primarily about AIDS and it does not stage the dying queer body. These facts are of great benefit to the work.

The small heartaches of grief

Nicola delivers a wonderfully awkward portrait of the mid-to-late 20s over-intellectualising gay man that descends, as his character does, into a riveting study of the small heartaches that make up grief.

Capsis is diabolical as the fastidious and facetious Justin. Justin learns details of the funeral’s guest list and throws an absolute fit, plunging the weekend into chaos. Capsis might play a nelly bottom, but he makes this production his bitch.

Reichstein enters to lightning and smoke reminiscent of Death Becomes Her (1992) and acts up an absolute storm as the secretive and seething Jamie. Jamie knows things Anthony does not – and he is not afraid to let Anthony know it.

Elena Carapetis is a breath of fresh comedic air as Anthony’s mother. Mum is gloriously written and Carapetis makes the absolute most of every heart-warming, knee-slapping second that she spends on stage.

Asimos delivers as the sexiest spectre of grief I have ever seen put to stage, and the audience are all enthusiastically consenting recipients. However, I do feel Leather Daddy is somewhat under-utilised, and not just because he is sexy.

Leather Daddy is not much more than an inconvenience to Anthony. If he were more of a horrific undead obstacle to Anthony’s healing, it would increase the sense of danger the work seeks to curate.

Wickedly intelligent

Perhaps the greatest horror Log Boy stages is the self-involvement of young neoliberal gay men. We see this come to a fever-pitch at the work’s emotional climax, which begins with the bickering of Anthony and Justin.

Nocera’s visceral, haunting script shows us just how differently these two generations of gay men view just about everything. Anthony rightly criticises Justin’s sex-negative language. Justin won’t have a bar of it, rightly naming the mindset Anthony criticises a survival strategy from the time before PrEP.

The beauty of these collisions between their mindsets means that across Log Boy the three men are all simultaneously right. But they are all also simultaneously wrong – about HIV/AIDS, about the titular Log Boy, about Michael.

Our youth-obsessed culture tosses aside old queens like Justin and Jamie, and Log Boy advocates valiantly against this norm. I couldn’t help but wonder while watching: how many gay men under 25 know George Michael by name alone? How many of them know he was outed on a beat like those Log Boy memorialises?

Log Boy is a wickedly intelligent examination of the legacies of the HIV/AIDS crisis and the dissonances inherent to the fact the disease still touches and ends the lives of many across the world.

Log Boy from Smiling Bear and State Theatre Company of South Australia is at AC Arts, Adelaide, until October 10.

Triss Niemi does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/09/grief-community-and-memory-log-boy-is-a-wickedly-intelligent-post-aids-play/

By Kelvin Anthony of RNZ Pacific

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/09/fijian-teachers-association-heads-threat-to-roast-critics-in-earth-ovens-sparks-political-storm/

Three years ago, I wrote an article for The Conversation Canada about rape culture when actor Danny Masterson went to jail for sexual assault. His friends from That ’70s Show, Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher, had written letters of support for him because he was a such a great friend and they wanted the judge to be lenient in sentencing.

I argued this episode illustrated several elements of what is called rape culture — so-called good guys don’t rape, women are to blame for sexual assault and victims probably consented and shouldn’t be believed.

Two years ago, five former Major Junior hockey players went on trial for sexual assault after a consensual sexual encounter with one player and one woman became a group sex activity after the player in question texted his buddies to “be in a three-way quick.” Multiple players took him up on it and joined in.

Read more:
Hockey Canada sex assault verdict: Sports culture should have also been on trial

I believed at the time that regardless of the outcome — the five players were acquitted and several are now back in the NHL — there was at least a fair bit of condemnation of the behaviour of the men in this one-woman, five-man scenario.

If it didn’t rise to the legal definition of assault, perhaps it would provide a cautionary tale for men thinking they could invite other men into their room to have sex with the woman they just had sex with. It was, at least, a moral failure. Maybe it would lead to culture change in these elite male environments, and with it their sense of entitlement to women’s bodies.

The Cornell 7 case

Apparently not. Cornell University has found itself in a crisis of its own making after a former student launched a civil suit alleging she was gang-raped at a fraternity over several hours by up to seven men. One of those men texted his buddies that there was “free pussy” to be had, and one allegedly hit her so hard during the attack that it left bruises on her buttocks.

The Cornell case illustrates several aspects of rape culture that still prevail. The campus police didn’t record her statement that she had been raped. The district attorney failed to prosecute because she was “voluntarily intoxicated.” Some of the men in the frat played on the rugby team and were considered good guys; one of the alleged assailants was her friend.

The complainant initially didn’t come forward because she thought she was a “whore” for what had happened to her.“ She was the victim, and yet her socialization and lived experience told her that “putting herself in that position” qualified her as a “slut.”

In her mind at first, she was the problem, not the men who allegedly assaulted her.

In this mindset, women who have sex outside of marriage or relationships are sluts. Women who dress provocatively or get drunk at parties are sluts. Women who have sex with multiple men are sluts. And sluts need to be punished.

There is a long and sordid history of western rape laws that show us how raped women have been portrayed. Unless they were virgins, had bruises and had some kind of corroboration, it wasn’t rape. Men could legally rape their wives until 1983 in Canada, to name just one example, so it’s not a stretch to see that victim-blaming and slut-shaming are deeply rooted in popular culture. It will apparently take multiple #MeToo and #IamJaneDoe moments before men (and women) understand what consent looks like.

Read more:
#MeToo turns 5: Taking stock of gender-based violence in Canadian politics

Slut-shaming in popular culture

Women can, of course, slut shame with the best of them. American media personality Megyn Kelly has come under fire for suggesting that the victim liked the attention from the men, alleging that’s because she isn’t very attractive.

United States President Donald Trump used the same trope to argue that he couldn’t have sexually assaulted E. Jean Carroll because she wasn’t his “type” — a classic rape myth that suggests the victim actually wanted the abuse and that the perpetrator doesn’t “need” to rape because, in Trump’s case, he can “grab ‘em by the pussy” with impunity.

Many universities participate in sexual violence prevention programs, including consent workshops and bystander training, especially for freshman students. Cornell University probably did, too.

Just last week, St. Francis Xavier University in Antigonish, N.S., had to deal with an episode of rape culture when a sign was posted on off-campus housing that suggested arch-rival Acadia University football players should drop off their girlfriends there. An outcry has ensued but it raises serious questions about how much good university consent and bystander education is actually doing.

In the future, I hope police on campus, community police investigators and prosecutors look carefully at alleged gang-rape situations before they put it down to partying, intoxication, attention-seeking or remorse. Do investigators really think most women enjoy having sex with several men at a time? Is this a plausible situation outside of pornography or sex work?

In case anyone’s operating under false assumptions about the effects of group sex on women’s bodies (the Cornell incident’s Jane Doe got a urinary tract infection immediately afterwards), I once interviewed a voluntary and otherwise thriving sex worker for my book on slut-shaming. She told me she’d given up group sex and paid orgies because they were so hard on her body.

If we surveyed all sexually active, heterosexual women, would group sex be a realistic desire?

How to consent when overpowered?

What does consent look like when a woman is surrounded by several rugby or hockey players excited about “free pussy.” When a woman like Jane Doe says she was “pretty OK” with some of what happened, it should raise some basic consent concerns.

Classic consent education often uses the acronym FRIES to illustrate what consent means. As common sense as they may appear to those of us working or researching in the area, the five elements of consent bear repeating:

• Freely given (no manipulation, alcohol or plying women with ketamine)
• Reversible (they can change their mind at any time)
• Informed (they knows what they are agreeing to; not advertised without their knowledge like property, as in “free pussy”)
• Enthusiastic (active and eager, not “pretty OK”)
• Specific (saying yes to one thing or man does not mean agreeing to sex with all the others).

The culture must change, institutions must change and male attitudes that women are playthings who can be passed around from one man to another must change.

Meredith Ralston has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/08/the-cornell-7-case-proves-were-still-trapped-in-a-rape-culture-deja-vu/

A placard held by a young man as school protests continued across France appeared to capture the mood on the streets. Young people, it said: “want the Bac (high school diploma), not the BAC”. The Brigade Anti-Criminalité (BAC) is a police unit widely known for its aggressive tactics in tackling street crime.

The protests, which began as demonstrations over conditions in high schools (lycées) in Paris have spread across France. Hundreds of thousands of school students and young people have taken to the streets in many cities. After several young people were injured, including a 15-year-old who lost a hand to a stun grenade, the police response has sparked a debate over what some consider to be heavyhanded tactics. The use of stun grenades by police in this protest has now been banned.

The use of force by French police (and its military predecessors) has been a regular topic for debate over more than two centuries. In the 19th century, the army was responsible for public order policing in France. When they opened fire on protesters in February 1848, killing dozens, public outrage boiled over into revolution. It toppled King Louis-Philippe and his regime, marking the start of the Second Republic (1848-1852).

To deal with social unrest after the first world war, the first permanent units for public order policing were created, the “gendarmerie mobile”, joined after the second world war by the Compagnies Républicaines de Sécurité (CRS). Both are highly professionalised and well-trained units, with considerable experience in containing the street protests which have been a big part of French political life since the revolution of 1789.

Yet both are also far more militarised and confrontational in approach than the riot police of most other European countries – hence the slogan coined in the 1968 student protests, “CRS=SS”. Their arsenal of riot-control weapons includes tear gas, the infamous batons or matraques, as well as stun grenades and other projectiles. The risk of public outrage at police brutality fanning the flames of protests into the fire of revolution was certainly present in 1968.

Read more:
French student protests: comparisons with 1968 will only serve the political extremes

The spectacle of police brutality during the gilets jaunes (yellow vest) protests, which raged on French streets between November 2018 and July 2020, also undoubtedly consolidated widespread public support for the movement. This same dynamic appears to be in play today, because the protesters are mainly under 18 and therefore children under French law. As children they are supposed to benefit from enhanced protection and safeguarding.

The deployment of the BAC is particularly disturbing. These units are not public order specialists. They are mainly plain-clothes police, who drive around in vans patrolling the suburbs and intervene very aggressively against petty criminality, including drug dealing, vandalism and robbery.

They also conduct the hated routine identity checks, which disproportionately target ethnic minority youth. These police often use rubber bullets, which although technically less lethal, can still cause excruciatingly painful and life-changing injuries.

In 2005, the BAC chased three teenagers into an electricity substation, where two of them, aged 15 and 17, were electrocuted and died. This led to some of the most intense urban rioting in the history of France.

French sociologist Didier Fassin noticed in research for his 2013 book, Enforcing Order, that some officers of the BAC sported insignia indicative of far-right and white supremacist views.

Vandals and hooligans?

Government officials have tried to discredit the protests by claiming that they have been infiltrated by so-called casseurs (hooligans). This use of this label for violent demonstrators was popularised in the repressive police crackdown of the early 1970s, following the 1968 protests.

The label was revived in 2019. It’s now been co-opted in the nickname for proposed new emergency legislation popularly known as the “casseurs-payeurs” law. If it is passed, demonstrators could be fined up to €10,000 (£8,500) for continuing to participate in a protest after being asked to disperse and in which damage had occurred. This is regardless of whether they are directly responsible for any of the damage in question.

The government has been advised that this measure is compatible with the constitutional right to demonstrate, yet there is no doubt that it would significantly reduce the scale of street protest. Given the vital role which such protests do in fact play in the political life of France, many question whether the proposed law is compatible with democracy.

Marine Le Pen, the far-right candidate in next year’s presidential election, said “I believe that the police are doing their job in difficult circumstances”. Yet there have been numerous reports of excessive use of force by police against children. Le Pen’s statement offers a chilling foretaste of one plausible future for the country.

The fact that the police are not being more effectively restrained by ministers (a few minor concessions aside) indicates that the government does not want to be seen to be weak on law and order in the run-up to the elections.

Oliver Davis does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/08/school-protests-focus-attention-on-the-chequered-history-of-public-order-policing-in-france/

After high-level Trump administration officials said they might send armed officers to the polls during the upcoming midterm elections, and after months of administration efforts to wrest control of some aspects of voting from state officials and limit how people vote, there’s a lot of fear that armed federal officials will disrupt voting and even seize ballots. A number of civil rights and voter advocacy groups and labor unions have filed lawsuits against the Trump administration to bar any such presence, with one suit claiming that “threatening messaging and violent enforcement actions” by administration officials “have created a climate in which voters, especially voters of color, are intimidated and fearful of engaging in the democratic process.”

The Conversation asked scholar Danielle Friedman, legal director of the State Democracy Research Initiative at the University of Wisconsin Law School, to answer four fundamental questions about the law protecting voters’ rights at the polls as well as the protection of their ballots.

What does the law say about armed officials at polling places?

Federal law directly prohibits federal troops or armed officers, including federal law enforcement agents, from appearing at polling places during an election.

Other federal laws, which more broadly prohibit any intimidation of, or interference with, voters may also be applied to keep armed officials from appearing at polling places.

Despite these clear restrictions, some federal officials have suggested publicly that they still may deploy armed federal officials to polling places during the upcoming midterm elections.

For that reason, it is important to remember that state laws also likely prohibit armed officials from appearing at polling places. The specific law in each state varies, but all states have some restrictions on behavior at or near polling locations that are intended to ensure that voters can cast a ballot free from intimidation.

Similar to federal law, some states have laws directly prohibiting armed officials at polling places. Others have more broad statutes prohibiting any kind of intimidating behavior.

Many states also prohibit any person from having a firearm at or near a polling location. These laws may apply to armed officials in the same way that they apply to other individuals.

Can local police legitimately be at a polling site?

The answer to this question will depend on state law. But in many cases, local police may only be at a polling location if a local election official has specifically requested the presence of law enforcement.

That may happen if, for example, there is an emergency at the polling place and local police are called to help de-escalate the situation. In many states, when the local police are called to assist with a situation, they are required to follow the orders of the local election officials when they arrive.

What should a person do if armed officials show up at polling places?

If a voter sees armed officials at a polling place, they should alert the election officials at the polling place right away. Election officials have specific procedures to follow to report the situation and have it appropriately handled in an efficient manner.

Depending on the nature of the situation, the voter may also want to document the behavior that they see and provide that information to the election official at the appropriate time.

What laws apply to the seizure of ballots?

There are many laws that may ultimately apply to the seizure of ballots, but the most critical are the very specific laws in every state about the chain of custody of ballots.

Chain of custody refers to rules that make clear who can have access to ballots both before an election and after each ballot has been cast. The reason for these rules is obvious: Ensuring that only certain individuals have access to the ballots used in an election protects the integrity of that election and ensures that there is no interference from outside actors in the ultimate result.

A seizure of ballots by law enforcement would likely violate these chain of custody laws and could undermine the integrity of the election results that they are intended to protect.

A recent case in California helps to illustrate these issues. A sheriff in Riverside County seized hundreds of thousands of ballots cast in connection with a special election, claiming that there were anomalies in the results that had not been fully explained.

This action by the sheriff was challenged by, among others, voters in Riverside County who argued that it violated the state’s chain of custody rules. The California Supreme Court agreed.

Importantly, the state Supreme Court also noted that this does not mean that there is nothing to be done about allegations or issues related to an election. The law in California, and in all states, provides many options for citizens or officials in those cases – seizure of ballots by law enforcement officials is simply not one of them.

The seizure in Riverside County was in connection with a past election, but the case provides an important road map for courts that may be confronted with these issues in the context of an ongoing election in November. Adherence to the chain of custody laws is even more critical before an official result has been certified, and legal experts have encouraged judges to scrutinize warrant applications for ballots especially closely.

Danielle Friedman does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/08/what-the-law-says-about-armed-officers-at-polling-places/

In June 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear appeals of two lower court rulings that challenged assault weapons restrictions. The high court will decide whether the Second and 14th amendments protect the right to possess semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15. This marks a reversal for the court, which for years has declined to consider such challenges.

Two lower court rulings followed the Supreme Court announcement. On July 9, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit upheld Illinois’ assault weapons ban. And on July 17, the 33rd Circuit struck down New Jersey’s ban on semi-automatic assault weapons, making it the first federal appeals court to so rule.

Some analysts suggested that these decisions had an eye on the Supreme Court’s fall review.

As a gun policy scholar, I believe this flurry of legal activity brings to a head the multi-decade dispute over restricting assault weapons that extends far beyond legal arguments. The source of the conflict ranges from elements of gun culture identity to the technical characteristics of these weapons. Much of this controversy remains misunderstood, including conflicting claims about the weapons’ origins and definition.

Where the court ultimately stands will have to do with its answers to these tough questions. Is an assault weapon a weapon of war or a sporting rifle? Is it a machine gun or simply a tricked-out hunting rifle? Does it really pose a risk to the public compared to other guns?

A short history of assault-style guns

Assault-style weapons – particularly the AR-15 – date to the late 1950s, when they emerged as a next-generation battlefield weapon.

According to Jim Sullivan, one of the AR-15’s designers, the weapon was “designed for full automatic military use. It wasn’t really designed as a sporting rifle.” The U.S. military adopted the weapon during the Vietnam War and designated it as the M16. The gun could fire in automatic or semi-automatic fashion.

As military demand for the M16 declined, a semi-automatic version, the AR-15, was sold to the domestic civilian market. But consumers took little interest until the late 1980s, when cheap imports began to flood the market.

Then in 1989, an assailant attacked an elementary school in Stockton, California, using an assault rifle to kill five people and wound 29, prompting public outcry and calls to restrict such weapons. Other mass shootings in Killeen, Texas, in 1991 and San Francisco in 1993 followed.

Outrage over these shootings led Congress to pass the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, a 10-year ban on specific types of assault weapons. But the ban lapsed in 2004 because the law included a sunset provision. Repeated efforts to resurrect it have failed.

Today, 15 states have enacted assault weapons restrictions. Most of these laws ban their manufacture, sale or transfer.

Opponents of these laws note that the weapons available to civilians fire only in semi-automatic mode, making them functionally no different from traditional semi-automatic hunting rifles.

However, even in semi-automatic firing mode, the assault weapon is destructive and usually retains other military features. Battlefield experience has found that semi-automatic firing – a single round for each pull of the trigger – is often more effective, as it improved targeting and wasted less ammunition.

It’s also worth noting that the term “assault weapon” predates 1989 and the era of mass shootings. Gun manufacturers used the term before the 1980s, when the rifle’s military provenance was a major selling point.

Assault weapon popularity

Opponents of these restrictions argue that assault weapons have become the nation’s highest-selling guns, with sales increasing after the federal assault weapons ban lapsed in 2004.

Much of this market has been driven by politics. Assault weapons buyers increasingly view such purchases as a way to make a political statement – to register their objection to gun regulations. The gun industry refers to these purchases as “political sales.”

Supporters of assault weapons restrictions propose a different calculus: These weapons represent a small percentage of the total number of guns in the country while accounting for an inordinate number of mass shooting casualties. There are no precise counts of assault weapons, but if a 2022 estimate of 20 million is divided by a total of some 400 million guns in the U.S., assault weapons represent only about 5% of them.

Assault weapons and crime

Opponents of assault weapons restrictions are correct in pointing out that such weapons are rarely used in crimes committed with guns. Indeed, nearly 80% of those weapons are handguns.

On the other hand, assault weapons pose three specific safety threats.

First, they are increasingly the gun of choice for mass shooters. Handguns are used in roughly two-thirds of all mass shootings, but assault weapons are appearing with increasing frequency – nearly 40% of these events in the past decade.

Moreover, they result in greater harm. That’s because of their ability to use large-capacity ammunition magazines, which can hold up to 100 rounds. And their muzzle velocity – the speed at which the bullet leaves the barrel – means rounds travel farther and cause more harm.

A 2019 study of public mass shootings found that over 85% of fatalities from those incidents were from assault rifles. And in the past 10 years, the 10 highest-casualty mass shootings were committed with assault weapons.

Second, assault weapons are disproportionately more likely to be used in the shooting of a police officer.

Third, they are increasingly guns of choice for gang-style violence and extremist political groups.

What comes next

When the Supreme Court takes up the assault weapons cases this fall, it will apply its history standard to determine whether assault weapons restrictions are “consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”

As I mention in my book, if the history of weapons regulation shows anything, it is that weapons deemed dangerous by the public and state and local governments or otherwise incompatible with civilian use have been widely restricted. That includes everything from Bowie knives and certain types of clubs to the notorious Tommy gun of the 1920s.

Despite this extensive regulatory past, experts generally expect that the court will strike down assault weapons restrictions. If so, it will be hard-pressed to justify the result as consistent with America’s extensive history of weapons regulation.

Robert Spitzer is a member of the National Rifle Association and of Brady United Against Gun Violence

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/08/why-the-assault-weapons-debate-is-a-culture-debate/

Not a week goes by without a news story about illicit tobacco in Australia, which is now a serious problem across the country.

This week, the federal government announced an additional A$2.7 million in funding for Queensland to support ongoing illicit tobacco control efforts in the state.

The announcement featured trends in monthly legal tobacco sales from major retailers in the past financial year. The data show a massive increase in legal sales in Queensland, jumping 55% in December 2025 compared to July 2025. The figures showed the national market remained steady across the same period.

These findings suggest that, in Queensland, a large proportion of consumers who had previously switched to the illicit market, switched back to buying their tobacco legally at the end of 2025, but this trend was not replicated across the country.

What’s Queensland doing?

The Australian Council on Smoking & Health states Queensland’s multi-pronged approach to illicit tobacco control is the best in the country.

It includes investment in the largest enforcement team per capita in Australia and strong penalties for retailers found selling illegal tobacco or vaping products.

These penalties include large fines, the power to immediately close stores for three months, empowering landlords to end leases, and penalties for landlords who turn a blind eye to illegal sales from their leased premises.

The jump in legal sales in Queensland followed an enforcement blitz in November and December 2025.

What about other states and territories?

Research published this week outlines how other states and territories are strengthening their laws to deal with the illicit tobacco trade. Some have been much slower in doing so and invested less in their enforcement workforce than Queensland did.

For example, Victoria only started enforcement activities in February 2026. Its initial enforcement team consisted of only 14 officers. In contrast, Queensland has been closing stores since November 2024. By October 2025, it reported 159 authorised health and compliance officers, with an additional 43 dedicated officers recruited in 2025.

However, Victoria is now doing more to combat illicit tobacco, announcing what it says is Australia’s toughest enforcement laws, granting authorities the power to:

• instantly shut down illegal shops for 90 days
• enforce fines of more than $2.4 million and up to 20 years in jail
• hold landlords criminally liable
• triple the inspector workforce.

Western Australia and Tasmania have new laws, including 90 day closure orders. However, neither hold landlords accountable for illegal sales, unlike Queensland, South Australia, New South Wales and Victoria.

The laws related to landlords have been an important part of Queensland’s success. So, Western Australia, Tasmania, along with the ACT and Northern Territory – which lag behind all the states – should also update their laws to include them.

What more needs to happen?

The purpose of high tobacco taxes and graphic health warnings on cigarette packs is to improve health by reducing smoking. Also, fewer people smoking means fewer potential customers for illicit tobacco.

Given the latest national statistics suggest smoking rates have never been lower, building momentum to increase quitting and reduce smoking uptake is more important than ever.

Reassuringly, in addition to the increase in legal sales, calls to Queensland’s Quitline doubled following the recent enforcement blitz.

This is a promising sign, showing many Queenslanders are keen to quit smoking.

Queensland’s illicit tobacco strategy includes free nicotine replacement therapy and telephone counselling via Quitline for eligible groups to help them quit smoking or vaping.

This initiative should be replicated across Australia, with access to free support expanded to all people who smoke, rather than restricted to specific groups.

New policies that could support both illicit tobacco control and more people quitting are needed.

One option is to reduce the number of retailers permitted to sell tobacco and to greatly increase governance over the entire supply chain.

Small tobacco retailers such as tobacconists and convenience stores are the last remaining forms of tobacco product promotion. Their widespread presence in the community can make quitting more difficult.

Small retailers, particularly tobacconists, have also been strongly associated with supply of illicit tobacco in Australia. During the time of increased illicit tobacco trade, the proportion of consumers buying tobacco from supermarkets dropped from 51% in 2013 to 35% in 2022–2023. The proportion buying from tobacconists increased from 17% to 33%.

In 2025, more than half of those who bought illicit cigarette packs reported buying them from a tobacconist.

So, reducing the number of smaller retail outlets that have been a highly visible source of illicit tobacco may also reduce access to illicit tobacco in addition to helping people quit smoking.

The bigger picture

Ultimately, Queensland’s experience suggests strong enforcement can disrupt illicit tobacco trade. But, real success should not be measured in how many consumers return to the legal market but in how many quit smoking altogether.

Policies that encourage less tobacco use overall are critical to tackling the illicit tobacco problem.

Coral Gartner receives funding in the form of competitive grants from National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) and Australian Research Council (ARC). She is the director of the NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence on Achieving the Tobacco Endgame, which is a network participant in the Global Alliance for Tobacco Control. She is also a member of Project Sunset, which is a network of tobacco control researchers and advocates who support phasing out the general retailing of commercial tobacco products.

Cheneal Puljević has received funding from the Australian Research Council; Department of Health, Disability and Ageing; Australian Institute of Criminology; Queensland Injectors Voice for Advocacy and Action; Cancer Council Victoria; Queensland Police Service; Metro South Health; and VicHealth.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/08/queensland-is-leading-australias-fight-against-illicit-tobacco-should-other-states-follow-suit/

There’s a rich tradition of daggy humour in Australian film and television, running from Alvin Purple (1973) to Muriel’s Wedding (1994) to the inimitable ABC series Dog’s Head Bay (1999). These works embrace the cultural cringe of Australianness in a way that’s thoroughly disarming.

It’s great to see Stan keeping this tradition alive and kicking, first with The F Ward and now with the comedy horror series Gnomes.

Gnomes is, undeniably, extremely silly.

The series opens with Nazis trying to resurrect the evil Gnome Queen – a larger than human statue resembling a garden gnome – in order to win the second world war. We then jump ahead to the garden-gnome obsessed small Victorian town, Nompton, population a touch over 4,000.

We follow local constable Arnold Kipps (Asa Butterfield) as the town’s yearly “Gnome-a-Palooza” is run aground when the show’s “pièce de résistance”, to quote Mayor Lachlan (brilliantly played by Darren Gilshenan) – yep, the evil Gnome Queen – comes to life after Kipps accidentally touches the queen’s magic hatchet with his bloody hand.

Alas, magic dust brings to life the rest of garden gnomes of Nompton. They proceed to run amok, creating havoc and slaughtering people in macabre ways. A zealous video store (“Videozone”) clerk, for example, played by TV comedy favourite Luke McGregor, is murdered by DVDs.

More Gremlins than Hellraiser

This narrative trajectory develops alongside the individual stories of the panoply of cliched characters who populate the town. There is the disaffected teen, trying to please his hardboiled dad; the ferocious young policewoman; the ex-girlfriend who’s returned to town with unfinished personal business; the horny housewife, and so on.

While there’s plenty of blood and plenty of coarse language, it feels as light as an episode of a kids’ show like Round the Twist, definitely more Gremlins than Hellraiser in its horror.

The premise of the show involves an uncanny group of objects – garden gnomes are pretty weird things – but it relishes in its silliness, the jokes so low-key that it’s hard for them to fall flat.

Master gnome craftsman Tobias Black (Syd Brisbane), for example, we see in episode two, is working on a Game of Gnomes series, along with 50 Shades of Clay (garden gnomes in bondage gear). Mayor Lachlan is interviewed by journalists from Better Gnomes and Gardens.

Butterfield hits just the right notes as the goofy but likeable rural Australian cop, a nice chap who probably has talent but is happy to cruise along as everyone’s favourite small town cop and friend.

The cast is rounded out by several other notable Aussie TV actors, including Matt Okine and Brett Tucker as Police Superintendent Harvey Poll who arrives as Nompton to lead a restructure of the station for “efficient policing”.

Extremely silly and extremely daggy

The other elements of the show similarly feel low-key. This is one of its major strengths.

The visual effects would give the first Power Rangers series a run for its money, the music is pitch perfect but utterly forgettable, and there are none of the (pretentious) cinematic flourishes that characterise the serious, boutique series that have come to dominate television drama.

Though the show is ostensibly set in the present, it has a distinct late ‘90s/early naughties feel. As a daggy Aussie TV show, it’s pretty effective – it’s a bonus that the episodes are only 30 minutes, anything longer and the material would wear thin.

The tone is right, and it doesn’t strain too hard. The good cast, comfortably predictable plot turns, low key visual treatment and comedy, and televisual look all make for a pretty rewarding show.

It’s extremely silly and extremely daggy – but likeable and well made, perfectly suited to short episodic format.

Nothing about the show is particularly arresting, but this is the point. There’s something deeply comforting about its aesthetic, and Stan seems to have realised that bodgy 1990s style Australian television taps into a daggy nostalgia sure to please anyone born in the last century.

Gnomes certainly isn’t going to feature on anyone’s list of the top 21st century TV shows. For me, this is a distinct part of its charm.

Gnomes is on Stan from today.

Ari Mattes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/08/new-comedy-horror-series-gnomes-understands-just-how-delightfully-daggy-good-aussie-tv-should-be/

The student demonstrations that have spread across France in recent weeks are not unprecedented. Indeed, commentators have been quick to point to comparisons with the events of May and June 1968, where, at their peak, more than 10 million students and workers took to the streets.

In 1968, as now, there were legitimate reasons for protest. The unrest began at the Nanterre campus of the University of Paris, which was miles from the city centre and poorly equipped for the changing social norms of the 1960s. In particular, the ban on women and men being able to enter each other’s accommodation was the catalyst for initial demonstrations that then spread into central Paris and beyond.

Today’s parallels with the past are unmistakable. What began in September as a demonstration at the poor quality of high school (lycée) buildings in the Parisian suburbs (this time Saint-Denis) has escalated into wider protests about the conditions facing young people in France today.

In addition to the disproportionate number of missed days of teaching in underprivileged areas, students have been complaining about the appalling insulation of school buildings and the complexity of the post-school training and education application platform.

In 1968, the regime of General Charles de Gaulle came under severe pressure. De Gaulle was so convinced that he would lose control of the situation that he travelled to Germany to meet representatives of the French Army, who would be prepared to “invade” France to protect the general if required.

Despite the best efforts of de Gaulle’s prime minister, Georges Pompidou, police actions against the students, and later the millions of striking workers, were brutal. Now – as then – the police across France have also been accused of heavy-handedness, including firing tear gas directly at protesters. The use of stun grenades has been banned, after a 15-year-old reportedly lost a hand after picking one up at a protest.

Sébastian Lecornu, France’s beleaguered prime minister, has stated that he believes the students and young people have genuine concerns, while also defending the police response.

Revolt and rebellion are nothing new in France. There is a strong history of taking to the streets to protest, dating back to the revolution of 1789 via various revolutions and rebellions – in 1830, 1848, 1871 and 1944, along with many others.

No president of the current Fifth Republic has avoided some form of protest during their time in office. But what makes this wave of demonstrations so interesting is the way that political actors have sought to capitalise on events.

In May and June 1968, the Parti Communiste Français (the French Communist Party, once the biggest political party under the Fourth Republic) condemned the students as bourgeois and were slow to realise the potential of the demonstrations.

Far-left gets the 1968 spirit

By contrast, Jean-Luc Mélenchon of La France Insoumise (LFI), also on the far-left, has been quick to respond. Elected LFI representatives have joined the protests in the street and have in some cases put themselves between police and students. A savvy media operator, who in the past has used holograms to appear in multiple locations at the same time, Mélenchon has made much use of social media to garner support among the youth.

Many of the images developed by LFI and indeed by the protesters themselves have evoked the spirit of May and June 1968. One student was caught on camera with a placard proclaiming that the “6-7” Generation, after the popular meme, was “redoing” May 68.

This nostalgia for protests of the past is serving the far left rather than the political centre. Indeed, Emmanuel Macron, already the least popular president of the current Fifth Republic, is hamstrung by the political stalemate in the National Assembly caused by his own disastrous decision to call elections in June and July 2024.

Those associated with Macron and the centre, especially the two candidates most likely to represent the moderate branch of French politics, Gabriel Attal and Édouard Philippe, seem not to have caught the mood of the protests. Having both served as prime ministers under Macron, they are seen by protesters to be complicit in the declining standards in French schools.

Far-right nostalgia

Nostalgia is not limited to the far-left, though. The protests come at a time where the far-right Rassemblement National party and its presidential candidate, Marine Le Pen, continue to question accepted versions of France’s past.

Le Pen has her own appeal to young people through a protectionist economic approach. It looks to limit the power of the European Union in shaping the French economy and has always challenged the notion that the French state was responsible for atrocities during the Algerian War of Independence and the second world war.

The release of a recent film, A Man of His Time, focusing on the experiences of an “ordinary” man under the Vichy government has reignited this debate ahead of next year’s presidential elections. The four-years of Vichy rule during the Occupation of France continue to prove disturbing for the French: 76,000 Jews were deported to their deaths at the instigation of the Vichy government.

Importantly, this reexamining of the past appeals to a group of young people unlikely to take to the streets with Mélenchon and the far-left. Le Pen is especially convincing to a youth that is unconvinced by “wokeism” and she continues to poll well among 18-24 year olds.

It remains to be seen whether Macron and his government can do enough to address the concerns of young people in the coming weeks. If not, he and his Renaissance party – and the rest of the moderate centre – may well lose the debate when France goes to the polls in April and May 2027.

David Lees does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/07/french-student-riots-comparisons-with-1968-will-only-serve-the-political-extremes/

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• The mass nationwide movement led by high school students, joined by their parents, teachers and trade unions, brought together 450,000 protesters on October 6 (250,000, according to the French government).

• French lycée students’ demands for better resources and conditions in schools are recurrent, but what’s new is the global context, the nature of the movement and where it started out: in France’s working suburbs.

• The government’s response, which first opted for confrontation before favouring negotiations, has created an explosive situation whose outcome is very uncertain.

The mobilisation behind the high schoolers’ movement that began in the Paris suburbs in September 2026 is incontinuity with the back-to-school action that secondary education has been experiencing, in response to situations that are deemed to have worsened (absent teachers, overcrowded classrooms, dilapidated premises, etc.) – in a cyclical manner since the end of the 1970s, contrasting with the type of “Spring” uprisings that characterised May 68.

In 1978 it was already noted that what had previously characterised technical secondary schools and vocational colleges (commonly known in France as ‘LT and CET’) had become a general problem for all high schools in the country.

The school year of 1978 turned out to be a calamity, with overcrowded classes and a lack of teachers and staff. In Seine-Saint-Denis in the northern suburbs of Paris, there were doubts over whether school would ever be resumed. From September 15, with the backing of parent associations and many local elected officials, teachers at high schools in Saint-Denis and Noisy-le-Sec went on strike calling for new teaching positions and classes to be opened. For the first time since May-June 1968, establishments in France were occupied day and night, particularly schools in Saint-Denis, Aubervilliers, Montreuil, (Greater Paris’ Seine-Saint-Denis Department).“

These recurring issues also gave rise to student uprisings in 1990 and 1998, leading then to significant measures that were considered victories. Movements occurring in the autumn have also affected high school students, but on other topics such as pension reform, the focus of a movement in 2010.

What is unprecedented in the autumn 2026 mobilisation is first and foremost the global context, with a war in Eastern Europe accompanied by an increase in military budgets that contrasts with a chronic shortfall in funding for education, a climate crisis that is impacting poorly insulated schools where high school students suffer from extreme heat and the prospect of a far right presidential win in 2027. This last challenge may have been experienced as an ‘existential threat’ by many high school students in working-class suburbs where the movement started out.

How can students make their voices heard?

To assert their demands, the options students have for taking action are limited. High school representation exists in law (students sit on boards of directors and within national institutions with the French Ministry for Education) but with little scope.

Apart from not being a right that high school students are entitled to, going on strike is simply time off and by no means a pressure tactic (a high school strike does not bother anyone and does not stop any production). As a result, for a high school movement to have any clout, deserting the classroom is not enough; students also need to make themselves seen, heard and media-friendly.

It is worth noting the shift in vocabulary over the last few decades. “Picket” has been replaced by “block,” or“blockade”, especially since the high school movement against the Fillon law in 2005. The general assemblies that were held in high schools, deciding on strike pickets (“filtering” pickets or “blockading” pickets) have become more difficult to organise, especially when administrations do not allow them, sometimes simply because of the lack of classrooms. From now on, upper secondary establishments and administrations no longer talk about lycées on strike but are counting the number of ‘blockaded lycées’.

To be visible, students therefore need to resort to spectacular action. Like every social group, high schoolers use what’s available to them: trash cans to blockade or slow down human traffic in front of high schools, holding demonstrations in their neighbourhood or town – with prohibitive measures somewhat getting in the way, this is admittedly more difficult – calling on public figures (elected officials, for example) likely to attract the curiosity of the media, protest signs, etc.

It is within this context that the issue of violence comes into play. While we wait for more specific information about the profiles of the youngsters arrested, we do know that the vast majority of them are minors. But are they high school students or young people who have left, or been excluded, from the education system? The circumstances, the alleged facts, may differ from one individual to another.

In the meantime, it’s worth recalling that in the early days of May 68 in Paris’ Latin Quarter, there were a significant number of young workers who stood alongside students to seek revenge on the police for humiliating them on their council housing estates and in their neighbourhoods by the police, according to French sociologist Gérard Mauger.

The current crisis blends the characteristics of high school student uprisings with those of the “proto-political unrest”, which happened across France’s suburbs – notably in 2005. Let us note that the term “suburban youth” extends to high school students and other students, sometimes unemployed or living in precarity. Their actions and reactions target their places of study, work, and where they live. High school demonstrations are also places where people come together at a local level.

The government’s response

What is also singular is the way in which the public authorities have ignored the situation, while shortages of resources and staff are regularly reported, and once again this autumn, by teachers’ unions.

If governments in France since 2017 have experienced unprecedented conflicts, such as the Yellow Vest movement, the Sainte-Soline environmental protest rally (against a huge water reserve), urban unrest, high school or student uprisings are recurrent, they are likely to be resolved through negotiation. However, since 2016 (French Labour Law), the reaction of “firmness” by the powers that have seemingly become the norm, at the risk of violent clashes, making it dangerous to be present at protests – even though they are legal. When applied to teenagers, it clearly appears disproportionate and dangerous.

It seems that, after ignoring the scale of the problems at hand, the choice of repression has prevailed. It was the French Interior Ministry that came to the fore, favouring mass closures of establishments nationwide. France had experienced some exceptional closures following past student movements, but never on such a scale.

After releasing a statement claiming ‘political hijacking’ of the movement by France’s far-left party LFI due to the party’s show of strong support and the presence of its elected representatives outside institutions (while other parties did the same), the government’s rhetoric finally admitted that students’ demands were legitimate. Undoubtedly, the public opinion in France, approving the legitimacy of the demands being made by high school students will have strengthened the movement but also the scale – as well as their good behaviour – of the October 6 demonstrations. The unions announced 450,000 protesters, whereas the Ministry estimated 250,000 demonstrators nationwide.

But, when there’s negotiation, power dynamics come into play. What was possible before the student movement to try and “calm the situation” is proving insufficient today, especially as the mobilisation has been maintained and extended, and since the threat of an extension to students and a junction with other forms of discontent weighs heavily on the government. On social media, that is widely used by young people, many references are not only being made to protests with other unions but to October 17 – a movement marking the return of the Yellow Vests. Somehow the bids are rising.

Robi Morder is a member of the French Higher Education trade union SNESup, and the non-profit Association autogestion, RESU.

Original source: https://analysis1.mil-osi.com/2026/10/07/why-the-student-protests-in-france-and-the-governments-response-are-unprecedented-and-unpredictable/