Simon Tisdall hits the mark in his analysis of our contemporary “villains” but I fear he is over-generous (“In an unheroic age, Putin, Trump and Netanyahu are sick parodies of great men”). For these men are tyrants and their impact goes beyond their murderous actions, crimes against humanity and “undermining of universal values”.
Perhaps their most insidious impact is in reconfiguring the ethical and moral framework by which such men (and it is invariably men) can be perceived as dangerous and unfitted for power. They create the conditions for perpetuating tyranny. In this, they are supported by the tyrants of social media, a group headed by Elon Musk who, as Carole Cadwalladr argues (“Don’t rejoice yet, Elon Musk and his tech bros-in-arms are winning the global battle for the truth”), promotes the spread of “distorted truth” – for which read “lies” – thereby helping to normalise this new morality.
Ian Sanderson
Leeds
Wrong choices, chancellor
I was disappointed to read Rachel Reeves’s article on why the Labour government is making “hard choices” affecting the poorest in society (“These were not the economic decisions I wanted to make, but they are right for Britain”). We have heard, known about and, in many cases, experienced the Tory mismanagement and profligacy and I’m frustrated to hear it being repeated again and again as a defence for not addressing the poverty and hardship such mismanagement has created.
Why is there no mention of a revision of the council tax bands to ensure greater contributions from larger properties and estates? Why no reformation of the tax dodges and loopholes that allow money to be hoarded, sent offshore and spent on carbon-emitting luxuries? Why no creation of higher tax bands to ensure those who “have the broadest shoulders bear the heaviest burden”? It is right to give public sector workers a rise but why should the already poor among us bear the cost? In many ways, this does not feel like a Labour government at all.
Sue Dean
Whitley Bay, Tyne and Wear
Ban the blazer
Blazers are superfluous items of clothing that serve no useful purpose, but cost parents about £60 a go (“Branded uniforms cost double high-street prices, new analysis reveals”). They are made of nylon, polyester or viscose, are not warm in winter and are hot and sweaty in summer. Schools choose them as clothing to signify their aspiration for the future professional workers they are teaching, but most workplace dress codes are much more relaxed these days. Plastic clothing is environmentally disastrous.
Surely it’s much better for kids to be comfortable in order to learn, and a sweatshirt or jumper with a logo can be the leveller and provide the sense of identity and belonging that is the purpose of a school uniform.
Janet Mills
Bristol
Ruthless, but at what cost?
The print headline on Andrew Rawnsley’s interview with Tony Blair seems very apt (“Tony Blair: ‘I would have stayed if I could, is the truth’”). While the feature focused on the principles of leadership, the scant comments on the catastrophic leadership failure on going to war in Iraq was, to say the least, disappointing. What kind of leader ignores the appeals of at least one million demonstrators? Leadership is about making the necessary calls and taking difficult decisions, but that does not preclude a duty of care and acting responsibly. Tens of thousands of civilian deaths, the subsequent displacement of so many, and enduring mental and physical health problems in Iraq is hardly a favourable legacy. We cannot overlook the impact of the war on our former strong diplomatic gifts in soft power and trust, the perceived double standards of the UK and sending all the wrong signals to despots and rogue states, in acting without a second UN security council mandate.
Sadly, no matter how reflective or relevant Tony Blair’s views are on leadership, we are left with the feeling that humanitarian consequences, in this instance, have been ignored.
John Hinman
Swainby, North Yorkshire
Fear and loathing on campus
I was so glad to read Sonia Sodha’s piece, “Academic free speech is too crucial to be used as a political football by left or right”. As a university student, I have increasingly noticed the subtle tension, or even fear, expressed by students and faculty when discussing politically contentious concepts. Areas of inquiry, particularly those linked to culture war issues, have become political silos where no dissenting or even questioning viewpoints may be raised unless they align with the prevailing ideologies of the department. As a result, well-reasoned debates and discussions have become increasingly rare and are sometimes even curtailed.
This is deeply disturbing and runs counter to everything I believe universities stand for.
Keir Starmer was elected on a mandate of pragmatism and a departure from divisive party politics. To see Labour politicising what should be a non-partisan issue is deeply disturbing, especially at a time when new ideas are needed more than ever.
Luke McAdie
London W12
Imran Khan: ideal for Oxford
Catherine Bennett’s portrayal of Imran Khan fails to acknowledge the complexities of his leadership and his achievements that extend far beyond his political missteps (“Is the Taliban-friendly Imran Khan really the best choice as Oxford’s next chancellor?”). Khan is not merely the sum of his controversial statements; he is a transformative figure whose contributions to education, healthcare and social welfare make him a deserving candidate for Oxford’s chancellorship. The characterisation of Khan as “Taliban-friendly” ignores his efforts to negotiate peace in a war-torn region. His comments on women’s rights, though often misrepresented, are not reflective of his broader efforts to improve education and healthcare for women in Pakistan, as demonstrated by his projects such as Namal University and Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer hospital, which serve all without discrimination.
Oxford’s chancellor should be someone who inspires, leads by example and is committed to giving back to the community – qualities Khan embodies. Instead of dismissing him based on selective criticisms, it’s essential to consider his broader impact and potential to positively influence the future of Oxford University.
Muhammad Ali Raja
Karachi, Pakistan
Smoking sucks
I can only presume that Martha Gill is not aware of the cost of smoking to life, the NHS and economy (“I love the nanny state, but let’s leave outdoor smokers to puff away in peace”). She may not be bothered by passive smoking but I and thousands of others are. We need a smoke-free country so that children will not be exposed to this filthy habit.
Linda Theobald
London NW9
