Dr.Simon Leitch argues that nothing could better illustrate why a Brexit is necessary than the behaviour of the political establishment in the aftermath of the vote. Having lost the argument and the democratic process, the establishment resorts to legalism and bureaucratic dirty tricks to make sure that nothing so stupid and trivial as the electorate can interfere with their grand plans. It is the way our pseudo-democracies now operate. It is the EU way. It needs to stop.
Mubashar Hasan explains the reasons behind BREXIT which includes (a) dysfunctional British democracy, (b) a rising gap between rich and poor, and (c) the rise of neo-liberal economic policymakers who downplay the interests of common British people.
Azim Zahir argues that when it comes to states like the Maldives that are gripped by political turmoil, there is a politics of radicalisation that further aggravates the issue. Unless this politics of radicalisation is managed, it will be difficult to address real issues of religious radicalisation and violent-Islamisation of non-religious radicals as the Maldives case shows.
Dr. Shafiul Alam Bhuiyan explains why it is a counterproductive approach for Bangladesh’s major opposition party– BNP to raise questions about the number of martyrs of Bangladesh’s liberation war taken place in 1971. He argues that it is unheard of mainstream politicians in anywhere in the world to challenge popularly accepted notions related to the Liberation War.
In recent times, the Muslim majority Bangladesh has witnessed a rising spate in cases of unsolved rape, murder, kidnapping, enforced disappearances of political opponents, extrajudicial killings, plunder of national assets etc. etc. Against this backdrop, Adil Khan argues that, most have resigned to fatalism and believe that they have no option but to wait for Allah’s ‘bichar’ (judgement) on the ‘Roj Hashorer Din’ or ‘Yawm al-Qiyāmah’, the Final Day of Judgement when Allah will punish the guilty and reward the righteous.
Simon Katterl argues that the creation of Mental Health Acts have adverse and unintended impacts on voluntary users of services. Rather than utilize services freely, consumers are governed in lawless spaces, without rights, protections and restrictions on clinical power.