Britain’s forgotten general strike

 

AUGUST 1, 2025

Jeff Slee reviews The General Strike of 1842, by Mick Jenkins, published by Lawrence & Wishart.

This is an unusual book review, because this book in question was published in 1980. It is now out of print, but it can be bought online.

I have written this review because, although I have a fair knowledge of British working class history, I only recently found out we had a General Strike in August 1842. It was probably the first ever General Strike anywhere in the world, and the most massive industrial action in this country in the 19th century. This book is an inspiring and eye-opening account of it.

The 1842 General Strike is little covered in most of the standard histories of the British working class, such as GDH Cole’s and Raymond Postgate’s The Common People (first published in 1938) and Henry Pelling’s History of British Trade Unionism (first published in 1963).  Engels, who came to England in December 1842 – after the strike – was mistaken when he wrote in The Condition of the Working Class in England (1845) that the General Strike was largely instigated by the “rich manufacturing bourgeoisie”, as part of its opposition to the landowning aristocracy and in particular its aim of abolishing the Corn Laws which, as Wikipedia says, “protected landowners’ interests by levying taxes on imported wheat, thus raising the price of bread at a time when factory-owners were trying to cut wages.”

Yet, as Mick Jenkins’s book shows, the strike was an important event in the history of our class.

The Working Class in 1842

In 1842, the industrial revolution was still ongoing. The working class was growing in numbers, in self-organisation and in experience. Cotton, the biggest industry, employed about 350,000 workers – mainly around Manchester, the centre of the industrial revolution. Other industries – coal, engineering, wool –  employed about half a million workers across the UK. Workers had already held localised strikes against pay cuts, protests where they destroyed machinery that was replacing jobs (the Luddites) and created early trade union organisations. 

Working class radicals were also campaigning for universal male suffrage, and a large demonstration for this had been violently dispersed by the army in St Peter’s Square Manchester in 1819 – the Peterloo Massacre (covered in The Peterloo Massacre by Joyce Marlow, Harper and Collins, 1971, and in the 2018 film by Mike Leigh). The Reform Act of 1832 had extended the right to vote to property owners, including the bosses of the new industrial companies, but less than one in five men – and no women – had the right to vote. The People’s Charter was launched in 1838 and soon became the main political demand of working class militants.

The Strike

The strike started in Manchester and the towns around it, against wage cuts and against unemployment.  As well as these aims, the strike also, as Mick Jenkins clearly explains, had a very clear political aim – universal suffrage so that Parliament would include workers’ representatives.

 It rapidly spread to include half a million workers, perhaps half the UK’s industrial workforce: cotton workers of course; coal miners from Scotland and the North East to South Wales; pottery workers in Staffordshire; engineering workers in London and elsewhere; and woollen weavers in Somerset and Norfolk.

The strike was led by skilled workers – mechanics, toolmakers, etc., who were self-educated and literate. Many of the strike leaders were also leading figures in the Chartist movement, though other Chartist leaders such as Feargus O’ Connor were less keen on uniting the industrial and political struggles.

The strike was organised through strike committees which held mass meetings; maintained discipline and order; collected and distributed food; issued permits to work where they decided this was necessary; and built support for the strikers amongst shopkeepers and others in their towns.

Mick Jenkins’ narrative draws on an impressive range of contemporary sources, including the Northern Star, the widely read Chartist newspaper; the Manchester Guardian, then as now the paper of the liberal bourgeoisie; records of the trials of the strike leaders; government documents; and ministers’ letters.

The Significance of the Strike

In his introduction to the book, John Foster (then and now one of Britain’s leading Marxist historians) explains the significance of the strike for the way the British trade union movement developed. In Britain in 1842, wage workers formed the majority, unlike the rest of Europe which was still largely agricultural and feudal. Governments both Whig and Tory, the bourgeoisie, the landowners, all feared that universal male suffrage would lead to the transfer of state power to workers’ representatives – a political revolution. As John Foster wrote, the strike’s “unification of wage demands with the demand for universal suffrage raised working class struggle to the level of class struggle for the revolutionary transformation of society.”

While the army and the newly-created police force were. used against the strikers, it was not they but hunger, and concessions on wages by employers, that eventually forced the strikers back to work.

After the strike, the state hled what John Foster describes as a “monster show trial” of the strike and Chartist leaders for 1843. The intention was to give them the harshest punishments for defying the state. But between the strike and the trial, government policy shifted from repression to conciliation. At the trial, none of the 31 defendants found guilty were sentenced. The government acknowledged the hardships suffered by industrial workers, and some concessions were made to alleviate the worst poverty and hunger, and to tolerate and incorporate trade unionism – but for skilled workers only. In return for which, the leaders of the Chartists, and the leaders who emerged in the trade unions after 1842, accepted the separation of economic and political demands, the authority of the bourgeois state, and accepted that agitation for better pay and conditions should be done within the capitalist system. In one word, reformism.

Jeff Slee is a retired rail worker and former RMT National Executive Committee member.

HubMP2012

Top Ten Reads for Days of Sun, Sand and Subversion

An eclectic selection for beach reading provided by Mark Perryman.

The summer: a time for the beach, sunshine, sunglasses and in between whatever takes our marine fancy for a holiday read. A bit of escapism, something for the fast-approaching start of the new football season, a challenge to prejudices old and new, words to inform, and inspire. My  selection aims to provide all of this, and more.

Red Menace: Joe Thomas

Joe Thomas was a beach read discovery last summer via White Riot, a novel that brilliantly weaved its way around the late 1970s growth of the National Front, a resistance led most spectacularly by the Anti Nazi League and Rock against Racism.  And then into the early 1980s featuring the rising number of young black men dying in police custody. It’s a political thriller with a left wing bent, the added twist being it is written from the perspective of a spycop. Oh my!  Red Menace is the second in a promised trilogy, this time taking us from the Broadwater Farm riots in Tottenham to the Wapping Picket Line. I’m not sure there’s ever been novels written with such political insight and rollicking plot lines. A writer top of my pile, second summer running.

Red Menace from here

Pitch Invasion: Karen Dobres

Karen Dobres is the face, brain and unstoppable energy behind the reinvention of non-league Lewes FC as the global trailblazing Equality FC.  To declare an interest, I’m a supporter of Lewes FC and don’t always entirely agree with the detail of the direction Karen would take the club, or indeed football, in. But that’s not the point. It’s the direction that is right, arguing over the detail shouldn’t distract from that. Where the two collide is the almost unremarked upon dominance of women’s football by the same ‘big’ clubs as the men’s game. And in the process, the almost complete extinction of autonomous women’s clubs of the sort of the glorious Doncaster Belles. Pitch Invasion provides the kind of rounded view that, if focused, could resist both these unwelcome developments.

Pitch Invasion from here

Planet Patriarchy: Beatrix Campbell and Rahila Gupta

Two long-standing feminists, writer Beatrix Campbell and Chair of Southall Black Sisters Rahila Gupta, deliver an outstanding and up-to-date analysis of patriarchy, worldwide. Much has changed in and around feminism since the heady days of the 1970s’ ‘second wave’. But as this politically spiky duo reveal, much hasn’t. Their survey of the inequality and discrimination women face globally proves that, but also the enduring commitment to change all this of its foe, feminism, a movement founded on sisterhood, solidarity and resistance. The sheer variety of expressions of this mix the authors uncover is quite breathtaking, the scale of what societies produce to deny these women liberation staggering. A potent mix for a powerful read.

Planet Patriarchy from here

The Activism of Art: Dipti Desai and Stephen Duncombe

Stephen Duncombe is one of those rare writers who combines the study of how culture shapes politics with an accessible way of describing how. The often indecipherable  language of cultural studies academics is stripped bare, to produce a new common sense. In his latest book, co-authored with Dipti Desai, these two wonderfully gifted writers chronicle the intersections between art and politics that the sheer scale of the dullness of the conventional versions of ‘doing politics’ from the parliamentary to the protest ignores, at their and our peril. In this regard, a book not simply to read but also to practise.

The Activism of Art from here

Sound System: Dave Randall

If there’s one space where the fusion of the cultural and the political has revealed the popular potential of the mix it is music.  Dave Randall is both a professional musician and a skilled interpreter of his mix.  In Sound System, sub-titled “The political power of music”, he has written an intellectual how-to guide for a movement of change in which a soundtrack is every bit as vital as the more customary baggage of worthy texts. Historical, international and practical: the three ingredients of not only this very fine book but the reasons for the huge impact of the current most obvious example of what the book might aspire to: Kneecap.

Sound System from here

The Carnation Revolution: Alex Fernandes

The kind of political fusions in their different ways that Dipti Desai, Stephen Duncombe and Dave Randall describe take their most vibrant forms in revolutionary moments. The trouble is, despite the worst efforts of Saturday morning Socialist Worker paper-sellers, those moments for most of us are either few and far between, or far away, or both. Yet for those heading to the Algarve coast for the beaches and sunshine, or Lisbon for a summer city break, Portugal was the setting of a revolution just a generation ago. The Carnation Revolution by Alex Fernandes records in thrilling detail how in 1974 Europe’s last remaining fascist regime was brought to an end: daring deeds, the courage of crowds, the rebellion of young army officers. Those were the days: a regime and its empire ended by R-E-V-O-L-U-T-I-O-N.

The Carnation Revolution from here  

The Fiery Spirits: Popular Protest, Parliament and the English Revolution: John Rees

Detailing the leadership and ideas that would lead to the deposing of King Charles (no, not that one) and his eventual execution in 1649 (ditto), The Fiery Spirits is a hugely readable account in the tradition of a ‘people’s history’ of Christopher Hill and others. This was English republicanism on the march, at war with all things regal. Yet, as John Rees details, this was a movement that knew it needed to make allies, to use the inspiration of their republican, revolutionary ideals to inspire others. No, despite the execution, it didn’t end the monarchy but it did strip them of almost all their powers, if not riches. Which left me asking after reading this very fine book: time (minus the execution) to finish the job? 

Fiery Spirits from here

A People’s History of the Anti Nazi League (1977-1981): Geoff Brown

If English revolutions are in historically short supply, the same, thankfully, cannot be said of mass movements on these shores that effect social change. In the 1930s, the Popular Front against Moseley and his black-shirted British Union of Fascists, the International Brigades who went to Spain to defend the Republic against Franco’s fascists.  In the 1950s, the rise of CND, in the 1960s the Vietnam War and in the 1970s opposition to Apartheid South Africa via stopping their cricket and rugby tours. The Anti Nazi League absolutely stands in this tradition, as detailed by Geoff Brown in his ‘people’s history’. Unselfishly galvanised by the organisational skills of the Socialist Workers Party the ANL worked because it was unimaginably bigger and broader than the self-styled ‘revolutionary left’. And everyone could be a part of it, from wearing a ‘School Kids Against the Nazis’ badge, pogoing at a Rock against Racism gig, dishing out leaflets, going on marches and, if push came to shove, stopping the fascists, the National Front, in their tracks.  Geoff Brown chronicles this  rich and plural variety which not only makes a very good read but powerfully illustrates all kinds of lessons for how we resist today the rise of the populist right and their attendant far right too.   

A People’s History of the Anti Nazi League from here 

Palestine A-Z: Kate Thompson

If the Anti Nazi League and Rock Against Racism were the movements that provided a generational moment in the late 1970s, the Miners’ Strike did the same in 1984-85.  Likewise, the Iraq War 2001- 2005, the student tuition fees protests of 2010, #BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo (fill the gaps with your own memories and experiences) and now without any doubt Gaza. This last has by no means ended and the abject betrayal of Palestine by the political and wider establishment, most notoriously by this Labour government, has created a cleavage which (quite rightly) won’t be closed in a hurry. But this cannot be an excuse for narrowing the cause to the fully signed-up left.  Palestine is absolutely not a left/right issue: the cause crosses all such divisions – it must appeal, not only to those who will march and those who don’t. The potential is huge and broad yet nowhere near reached.  Kate Thompson’s delightful A-Z will convince anyone why it needs to: if not, how?

Palestine A-Z from here

FIVE STAR CHOICE

The Leopard In My House: One Man’s Adventure in Cancerland: Mark Steel

My ‘five star’ choice for this summer’s top beach read is a comically inspirational real life read out of real-life potential disaster: cancer. No, it doesn’t sound like quite the book for long-awaited summer hols but in the hands of the one and only Mark Steel anything is possible.  Cancer touches the lives of all sorts, ages and sizes, it requires all the skills the NHS can provide to detect and diagnose. The treatment is often lengthy, sometimes intrusive.  Most cancers can be moderated, few extinguished entirely, some, too many, prove lethal. Men on the whole aren’t very good talking about much, or indeed, any of this. Mark Steel is, and provides bucketfuls of laughs along the (happy ending alert) road to recovery. An absolutely superb beach read.  Five gold stars fully deserved.

The Leopard In my House from here  

Note No link in these reviews are to Amazon; if you can avoid buying from tax-dodging billionaires please do so. 

Mark Perryman’s new book, The Starmer Symptom, is published by Pluto in August, here.

UK

Reinstate the whip for the suspended Labour MPs

AUGUST 1, 2025

A statement by the Labour Campaign for Council Housing.

The decision to suspend four Labour MPs and take away the role of three trade envoys, following the row over the ill-health and disability benefit cuts, runs counter to the government’s promise to engage with backbenchers. It is completely unprecedented for 127 Labour MPs to sign a “reasoned amendment” which would kill a government Bill. That this could happen was the result of the government’s refusal to listen to the disability organisations that were calling on it to back down, and to their MPs who were inundated with angry and fearful protests from their constituents.

One of the reasons why even supporters of the leadership were threatening to kill off the Bill was that these cuts were not in the Manifesto and the government had no democratic mandate from any Labour Party structure. No government can expect its MPs to blindly follow policies which increase poverty and in which they have had no say.

That they have chosen to suspend just four out of 47 MPs who voted against the Bill because of the £2 billion cuts still contained in it, can only be seen as a warning for the rest. Disabled people can reach no other conclusion than the partial retreat on Personal Independence Payments was tactical rather than the recognition of a mistake. The government backed down because it feared it would lose the vote, rather than admitting that it had been wrong.

Ironically, in the case of one of the four, Chris Hinchliff, his suspension was said to be related to his amendments to the Planning Bill. Having refused to meet with him to discuss his amendments, the government opposed them. Now it seems, having withdrawn the whip for his ‘rebellion’ on the Planning Bill, the government has introduced its own amendment, at least similar to his.

We supported his amendments, which recognised that liberalising planning law would not resolve the housing crisis. His most important amendment was for “affordable housing” to mean “social rent housing”. The government opposed this since it is maintaining its support for the Tories’ definition of affordable housing, supporting “affordable rent” (up to 80% of market rent), “shared ownership”, and even “affordable private rent”.

As Chris Hinchliff said, the ‘developer-led model” has enriched a handful of corporations while failing to deliver the housing we need. The Bill “slashes so-called red tape, stripping back democracy and environmental protections.” He said we need an alternative – mass council house building and getting tough on developers.

Martin Wicks, Secretary of the Labour Campaign for Council Housing, said: “The action taken by the government against a small number of MPs who voted against the benefit cuts will tell disabled people that it does not admit to a mistake. It was the government that was wrong, not the MPs. No government can expect its MPs to follow instructions when they have not even been involved in discussion on policy, especially when they were being asked to vote in support of pushing 250,000 into poverty. That a quarter of the PLP were threatening to vote down the Bill was because of the intense pressure that they came under from their constituents; because of the widespread anger that the government was seeking to balance the books on the backs of the poor and the vulnerable.

“Debate, democratic discussion, cannot be silenced by bureaucratic action. If the government cannot admit to mistakes, if it tries to silence discussion by using discipline as an instrument of fear, it will reap the electoral whirlwind.

“The Labour Campaign for Council Housing is calling for the reinstatement of the whip for all suspended MPs and withdrawal of the action against the trade envoys. We call on our members and supporters and the wider movement to do likewise.”

Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/uk_parliament/53867021320. Licence: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 Deed

UK

HubMP2012

When the Lionesses win, what changes?

AUGUST 1, 2025

Philosophy Football’s Mark Perryman measures the impact of England’s Euro 2025 Victory.

The 2025 sporting summer will forever be remembered for three and a bit weeks in Switzerland and England winning the Euros. Checks notes: the Women’s Euros. A mere decade ago, when the Lionesses made it to the World Cup semi-final, losing to Japan, was the first breakthrough. One which scarcely anybody had expected, it provoked ripples of interest – but nothing compared to 2025. It has been a slow but steady growth of interest which detonated three years ago with the Euro 2022 victory and, if anything, has been even more explosive this time around. 

The miserable men who loudly decry all this as not ‘proper football’ remain a vocal minority, but they are precisely that, loud but marginal.  Never mind Wimbledon, Chelsea’s World Club Cup, the Lions, the Test series against India: this sporting summer belongs unquestionably to the Lionesses. And that’s one huge change, for the better. 

The best thirteen words ever written on Englishness were provided by the historian Eric Hobsbawm: “The imagined community seems more real as a team of eleven named people.”

England is a nation which doesn’t even have a National Anthem to call our own and a national day, St George’s Day, which, year in, year out, passes by unnoticed, dwarfed by a Guinness-driven night out for that Saint from across the Irish sea. All this changes for a Euro or World Cup tournament when Hobsbawm’s ‘imagined community’ is wrapped in the St George’s Cross. Except this was always previously for a team of eleven named men. Not anymore, the Lionesses and their support is in turn reshaping this summertime version of a popular Englishness.    

As I’ve chronicled elsewhere, it was always something of a stereotype to picture all England fans as xenophobes, racists, Far Right. And the brutish expressions of football Englishness, arms out, ‘Ten German Bombers’, beered up, ready for a fight, was a minority too. But that’s not to say this ugly mix doesn’t exist. Compare and contrast the morning of the Euro 2021 final to this summer. A pissed-up fan starts proceedings off in Leicester Square with a flare stuffed up his arse, before promptly lighting it. And it’s all downhill from there. His flare now safely extinguished, even if his backside is feeling a tad warmed up, he joins thousands of others making their way to Wembley Way. Their mission? Ticketless, to battle with police and security to force their way into the Final. Official reports estimate some 5,000 succeeded. It’s hardly essentialist to point out these were all men.

Nothing remotely of this sort occurred at the Women’s Euros, 2022 or 2025.  Does that mean this popular Englishness has been entirely transformed by the Lionesses’ success? No, of course not, but nor is it the same as what it had been.

These are changes of mood and attitude, changes ‘from below’ and on a mass scale. However, change isn’t a simple process, principally because of the forces that seek to determine what can and can’t be changed. The business that football has become does its best to eliminate the kind of risky endeavour that depends on the kind of last-minute equalisers and penalty shoot-outs that shaped the enormous impact of the Lionesses this summer. And such risk aversion is central to domestic women’s football. No club comes anywhere close to challenging the absolute dominance of Chelsea, Arsenal and Manchester City Women. And spot the difference with men’s football. Liverpool is the only one missing from the Premier League’s dominant quartet. But in men’s football there is the odd exception, Leicester most famously, Nottingham Forest so close last season, the multibillion petro-dollars Newcastle can rely on getting them there or thereabouts.  

In women’s football, the triumvirate appear even more impregnable that the men’s ‘big four’. But in men’s football there’s also the chance of a cup upset, a giant-killing, Crystal Palace lifting the cup.  Women’s football has even managed to eliminate this flicker of hope, the cups almost always ending up with one or other of the ‘big three’.  I follow non-league Lewes FC, mainly the men’s team. But my best ever moment I’ve had at our much-loved ground, The Dripping Pan, was when Lewes Women made it into the FA Cup Quarter-Finals to face Manchester United. United dominated, as expected, 2-0 up and then… I saw something I thought I’d never witness, a Lewes player chipped England’s first choice goalie. Never mind the gender, this was historic. Mary Earps, England hero of Euro 2022, beaten. Of course, United then brought on another England international, Nikita Parris, to finish the job, 3-1, but that moment was unforgettable.  

The big three hegemony is rarely rattled. And it gets worse: eleven out of the twelve Women’s Super League clubs are the sister clubs of Men’s Premier League clubs. The one exception? London City Lionesses, owned by an American billionairess. The Women’s Super League Two (AKA, the Championship)? The same pattern: sister clubs of Premier League and Championship clubs, with the sole exception of Durham. The modernisation of women’s football has all but extinguished autonomous women’s football clubs at anything resembling elite level, with just a handful reaching the Women’s National League North and South (AKA League One) and none coming close to being promoted. 

In 1990, All Played Out by Pete Davies was published. It was a runaway best seller telling the story of England’s Italia 90 campaign that marked the birth of what became known as ‘modern football’.  Pete’s book was second only in importance and impact to Nick Hornby’s Fever Pitch. After that, Pete could choose whatever subject he wanted for his next book, publisher’s advance and support guaranteed. He chose, women’s football. Or more specifically, the Doncaster Belles.

I’ve read an awful lot of football books: I Lost My Heart to the Belles is by some considerable distance the best.  Prior to the formation of the first Women’s National League in 1991, the Belles won their regional league every season from 1976 to 1991. Then they won the National League for its first two seasons as league and cup doubles, having already won the FA Cup previously four times.

The club was founded by Sheila Stocks and fellow women who sold half-time lottery tickets at Doncaster Rovers home matches.  Sheila played for the club for 25 years. In 2003, the FA created the first women’s professional league and effectively forced independent women’s clubs to merge with professional men’s clubs. The Doncaster Belles were taken over by Doncaster Rovers, a club whose trophy cabinet was more or less bare compared to the Belles’.

Autonomy and self-organisation were founding principle of the women’s liberation movement. It is hardly ‘political correctness gone mad’ to observe that in the dash for growth, women’s football clubs subsumed into men’s has lost the kind of distinctiveness the Doncaster Belles and countless other clubs like them had.

This dash for growth driven by the Football Association and their support for the women’s game, having previously presided over a 50-year ban on women playing matches on any FA-affiliated club pitches from 1921-1971, are of course only to be welcomed. But there is a danger lurking too. This growth is driven first and foremost by the success of the Lionesses, and in particular their winning Euro 2022. The men’ game had a similar breakthrough after Italia 90 when the success of the England team reaching the World Cup semifinal and the dramatic ending, out on penalties to West Germany, reached a huge audience. ‘New fans’ emerged, escaping from the years of domestic hooliganism, with English club sides banned from European competition, and the combination of decaying grounds and poor policing that led to the Bradford Fire Disaster and Hillsborough. So, what did the FA do? They sold off the old First Division’ to be privately run as The Premier League.  

The FA in this regard is unique: a governing body effectively ceding control over the elite end of their sport. And now the self-same has happened to the women’s top two divisions too. All is fine now but as the club game grows, the concern must be that the divisions will enlarge, with more and more fixtures, pre-season tours added, and release periods for the Lionesses to prepare for, and recover from, tournaments, shortened. The primacy of the England team will be undermined. Yet it is the Lionesses’ success more than any other single factor that has driven the growth of women’s club football. 

The FA, now basking in the success of Euro 2025, should be careful what they wish for. The same warning signs should be applied to UEFA, and FIFA. Euro 2025 was a glorious tournament both on and off the pitch. It worked because sixteen teams mean just about every group stage match counts, with the turnaround between group stages and knockout rounds long enough for players’ recovery, short enough to maintain attention span. Sixteen teams is ideal for a country the size of Switzerland to host, their first major tournament since World Cup 1954. A single host stamped its identity on the competition, in the most gloriously nicest possible way.

None of the above applies to the men’s World Cup 2026, which had three hosts – USA, Mexico and Canada, with 48 teams spread across them and innumerable matches of little or no consequence. Sixteen was just right for the Women’s Euros, 32 arguably already too many for the Women’s World Cup. Bigger isn’t always better. 

The most immediate change, however: the Lionesses are expected to achieve in order to ‘inspire’, an ambition always linked to participation. It’s an expectation endlessly repeated by the massed ranks of the great and the good, from Royals to politicians, sports administrators, and the players unsurprisingly joining in too.

Sadly, this is myth-making on an epic scale. The 2012 London Olympics made the self-same claim on the biggest scale of all. After a brief spurt, year on year participation in sport has fallen ever since.

Every single piece of evidence proves that elite sporting success has next to zero impact on participation. Competitive team sport is the worst possible model for boosting participation. Not being good enough to be picked for the team means from the earliest age. If watching a game from the sofa or in the pub counts as participation, OK. Much more of anything else, forget it.

To achieve anything remotely resembling connecting inspiration to participation means entirely rethinking the latter. It means investing heavily in beginner-focused coaching. It’s the hardest coaching job of all to turn non-participants into participants; coaching elite athletes hungry for success is sublimely easy in comparison. It means transforming playing football from a talent contest, in which most will inevitably fail, into bursts of fun for all, young, old and in-between.  Combining imagination and positivity, we might call it, ‘soccerobics’ mixing ball games with fitness for fun, from the very young to those of us who were old enough to think we were past it. And in the process, when the Lionesses next turn out, feeling part of their wider community.

When the Lionesses win, what changes? We can answer that question only when we rethink the meaning of ‘change’.

Philosophy Football’s Lionesses Euro 2025 Champions T-shirt is available from here

Mark Perryman is the co-founder of the self-styled ‘sporting outfitters of intellectual distinction’ AKA Philosophy Football.      

Volunteers clean up shores of Geneva lake as plastic waste tops 100 tons a year

Despite daily city efforts, plastic waste continues to enter the lake, driven mostly by land-based sources, head of Green Earth Action Foundation's Geneva office tells Anadolu

Beyza Binnur Dönmez |01.08.2025 - TRT/AA


Some of the collected waste will be used in an art installation displayed during UN plastic treaty talks in Geneva, says Baptistelle Paldino

GENEVA

More than 50 volunteers rolled up their sleeves on an afternoon in Geneva to tackle one of today's most pressing environmental threats: plastic pollution.

Armed with gloves, reusable bags and a shared sense of purpose, participants gathered at Baby Plage, a small sand beach, for a lakeside cleanup organized by the Green Earth Action Foundation.

The citizen-led initiative aimed to raise awareness, collect waste and empower the local community to take concrete action in the face of growing environmental risks.

According to the foundation, nearly 100 tons of plastic waste flow into Lake Geneva every year, much of it invisible to the naked eye but harmful to aquatic biodiversity, water quality and even human health.

"Plastic is a disaster. It's a disaster for our ecosystems and for us, basically," Baptistelle Paldino, the head of the foundation's Geneva office and projects, told Anadolu in an interview. "But it’s a real disaster at the moment because of the microplastics that it delivers everywhere."

The event Wednesday focused not only on cleaning up the shoreline of Lake Geneva but also on promoting behavioral change. Awareness-raising activities were held on-site to inform participants about the effects of plastic on aquatic ecosystems and the importance of waste sorting and reduction at the source.

"This is also why we not only wanted to clean this beach, but we also wanted to include this very technical raising awareness part," said Paldino.

She urged people to be mindful of their waste when visiting the lake, encouraging them to take their plastic bottles, cups and other items home, sort them properly, and dispose of them responsibly.

Plastic collected at cleanup to feature in UN art installation as treaty talks begin

The Geneva cleanup followed similar efforts around the world organized earlier this year by the foundation's global ambassadors.

"These ambassadors in April were all achieving a task that is good for the planet," Paldino explained. "Some were cleaning coastal areas or cleaning some beaches. And we're like, okay, we need to do this in Geneva."

According to Paldino, the city cleans the lakefront daily, sometimes even multiple times a day. But the problem persists.

"So when I say 100 tons of plastic is literally in Lake Leman (Lake Geneva) every year, this is even more concerning when we know that the city is cleaning every day," she said. "Despite all these efforts, we still have some plastic that ends up in the lake."

She also warned of the impact on the food chain.

“Some animals can just eat it...and in the end, it ends up on our plates," she said. "So now the issue is that some children here at school (are) getting maybe some fish from Lake Leman, and they are directly eating plastic."

Paldino said studies suggest that an average person may ingest the equivalent of a credit card’s worth of plastic every week -- a figure she described as disturbing and a clear sign that plastic pollution has become inescapable.

"We need to recycle it, and we are here to collect it, recycle and use it to send a powerful message," she said.

To encourage more sustainable habits, the foundation distributed reusable water bottles and cups during the cleanup.

"With one bottle only, you reduce by 10 the amount of plastic that you can have within a day, within your life," said Paldino.

The collected waste will be repurposed for a large-scale art installation by Canadian artist Benjamin Von Wong, to be displayed at Place des Nations, the UN Geneva Office, during the second part of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution (INC-5.2). The piece is intended to visually confront delegates negotiating what could become the first legally binding global treaty on plastic pollution.

Made from plastic waste collected during Wednesday's beach cleanup, the installation is going to show the world, while negotiating on plastic, "what real plastic is," said Paldino.

Despite the scale of the problem, the foundation's message remains rooted in optimism and collective effort.

"Continue doing these activities, and you can make your difference as well," Paldino said, referring to reducing plastic consumption, sorting and recycling.

"What we really promote within the Green Earth Action Foundation is about being hopeful. And we really want to empower young generations, young women, young climate leaders to be able to take part in these initiatives," she added.

Can Europe and China Forge a Climate Connection?

Aug 01, 2025



Earlier this year, the Chinese firm CATL, the world’s largest battery-maker, unveiled an electric-vehicle (EV) battery capable of delivering a remarkable 520 kilometers (323 miles) of driving range after just five minutes of charging. The announcement came a month after BYD, China’s leading EV manufacturer, launched its own ultra-fast charging system. In solar, too, the numbers are staggering: Chinese firms can now produce over 1,200 gigawatts of solar panels annually.

These feats are a product of the global green-tech race, which China leads by a wide margin. Some frame this as a problem of Chinese oversupply. But another way of looking at it is that the rest of the world isn’t deploying these technologies fast enough. While China’s green-manufacturing engine is running at high speed, others are idling.

Given this, Europe confronts a strategic choice. It can respond with defensive industrial policy: securing supply chains, raising tariffs, and futilely attempting to catch up. Or it could forge a shared competitiveness agenda, which would allow Europe to use its strengths – rulemaking, coalition-building, and norm-setting – to shape the deployment environment, define standards, and guide green investment frameworks.

Despite the breakdown in ties between the European Union and China in recent years, the idea of collaborating on clean trade and investment is not so far-fetched. The climate transition is the defining political and economic challenge of the twenty-first century. And on this front, the EU and China have become interdependent: if Europe pumps the breaks on decarbonization, Chinese assets could be stranded, whereas China could face retaliation if it refuses to collaborate or align with global norms. The question now is whether they can constructively shape their interdependence.

Taking advantage of the narrow window for establishing a climate partnership requires a deal that promotes each government’s core economic interests. For the EU, that means reducing reliance on Chinese imports while moving up the value chain. For China, it means maintaining access to a high-value export market amid a shifting global trade environment. Success requires pragmatism on both sides.

Whether the EU and China can cooperate effectively depends on several factors. First, they must reach an agreement on local-content requirements. The EU should target domestic production of at least 40% of green technologies by 2030 – not just low-paid assembly, but higher-value activities like research and development – to create jobs and build resilience.

Second, any partnership must open the door for joint ventures, which have helped China reach the technological frontier and are already emerging in the EU battery and automotive sectors. If correctly structured, such partnerships can drive mutual gains while building cooperation into long-term industrial strategies.

Third, trade measures must be carefully calibrated. While the EU has imposed tariffs as high as 45.3% on Chinese EVs, import barriers alone cannot close competitiveness gaps. At best, they can complement more strategic policy efforts such as local-content rules and industrial partnerships. If poorly implemented, they could further weaken Europe’s technological position, rather than buying it time to catch up with China.

Fourth, there is a need for structured mobility schemes. Some EU member states have begun restricting visas for Chinese engineers. This is short-sighted. Enabling European firms to host Chinese talent and vice versa would ensure that R&D and design, not just final assembly, occur in Europe.

Ultimately, finding a way to collaborate on decarbonization efforts would yield economic and geopolitical dividends for both sides. Collaboration with China would strengthen the EU’s resilience, bolster its industrial sector, and cement the bloc as a leader in clean tech. China would be able to offload surplus green goods, secure market access, and signal to the world that, while the United States is retreating from climate action, it remains dedicated to green growth.

The EU and China are more aligned than many realize. Both are net fossil-fuel importers. Both are major producers of zero-carbon technologies, and thus have an interest in sustaining global demand for green products. And, amid growing uncertainty, both have bet on the energy transition as the most viable path to competitiveness and innovation.

This window of opportunity will not stay open forever. As scientific and political timelines converge, the coming months are critical to keep the world on track to meet the Paris climate agreement’s 1.5° Celsius goal. The recent EU-China Summit laid the groundwork for closer cooperation on decarbonization. But, as pressure mounts to submit 2035 climate targets ahead of November’s United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30) in Belém, the next meeting of the Council of the EU in September, under the Danish presidency, will be pivotal.

With many European countries – most notably France – pushing for a clearer industrial and investment plan before committing to a strong 2035 emissions-reduction target, EU heads of state and government must devise a framework for transforming industry at the September meeting. An important part of that plan will be how the bloc engages with China.

By coalescing around the belief that the new must be built before the old can be phased out, Europe is starting to follow China’s strategy. But to do so, it must also learn from China’s coherent and systematic execution, which centers on long-term planning across the entire clean-tech value chain.

China, too, must step up with an ambitious 2035 emissions target that is aligned with its 2060 net-zero goal – meaning a roughly 30% reduction from peak emissions, which are expected to be reached this decade. This would bolster its international credibility and help create space for a strong EU target.

Both Europe and China have wagered their future on green growth. To make it a winning bet, and capture the full benefits of decarbonization, they must find common cause on clean trade and investment – one of the few areas where strategic self-interest and global public goods still converge.

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2025.
www.project-syndicate.org




Emmanuel GuerinFellow and Special Adviser to CEO at European Climate Foundation

Bernice LeeDistinguished Fellow and Special Adviser, Chatham House

Advisory Opinion of the ICJ on Climate Change: The dawn of a new era?

On July 23, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) released a highly anticipated and widely debated Advisory Opinion on the obligations of states in respect of climate change.

By Athanasia Santikou
August 4, 2025

MODERN DIPLOMACY

Climate activists and campaigners demonstrate outside the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ahead of the reading of an advisory opinion that is likely to determine the course of future climate action across the world, The Hague, Netherlands, July 23, 2025. REUTERS/Marta Fiorin

On July 23, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) released a highly anticipated and widely debated Advisory Opinion on the obligations of states in respect of climate change.

In 2023, a group of students and youth activists, in coalition with legal experts and NGOs, took the initiative to raise the issue of climate change and its destructive impact. The General Assembly of the UN adopted by consensus a resolution entitled “Request for an Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice on the Obligations of States in Respect of Climate Change.”

As atmospheric temperatures rise, anthropogenic GHG emissions continue to increase, and no clear guidelines are drawn in State practice, the destruction of the environment and the extinction of low-yielding States (initially) become inevitable.

UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol, and Paris Agreement: cornerstones of climate change law

In the decade of 1990, the results and impact of climate change began to emerge. In 1994, at the Earth Summit in Rio, the UNFCCC was adopted, as the foundational legal instrument of Climate Change Law. The ultimate goal of the UNFCCC, according to Article 2, is to achieve stabilization of GHG concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. However, the Convention proved insufficient to achieve the target, as it did not include any binding enforcement mechanism to ensure compliance. Subsequently, in 1997, although the Kyoto Protocol introduced legally binding targets for the reduction of GHG emissions, it had limited participation and object. In 2015, a shift was made, through the adoption of the Paris Agreement.

The interpretation of the Paris Agreement is a key aspect of the implementation of climate change law. The legal characterization of the Agreement has been controversial since the adoption of the text. Participant states in the proceedings of the Advisory Opinion made submissions with differing interpretations of the instruments in question.

The Paris Agreement is an international treaty without legally binding objectives, meaning that it has a legally binding framework without binding objectives. The dominant interpretation is based on a textual approach; the language used (“efforts,” “aims”) indicates an aspiring goal to respond to the threat of climate change without making the target legally binding. This controversy raises many questions regarding the implementation of the Paris Agreement, particularly at the level of international responsibility. Are states obliged to follow a course of conduct consistent with the objectives set in the agreement? Could states be held internationally responsible in case of non-compliance with the provisions of the agreement? All these questions have finally found their answers in Advisory Opinion.

In order for the Court to rule on the legal value of the Paris Agreement, it took into account the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol.

According to the A.O., the key link among those three instruments is deeper than their relation to climate change; they complement each other. This perspective introduces a dimension to the interpretation and implementation of climate change instruments. The UNFCCC establishes the ultimate objective: the need to respond to the threat of climate change. The Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement supplement and specify the general obligations contained in the UNFCCC. The conflicting dimension of these two instruments, in respect of their legal value, has come to an end. The voluntary nature of the provisions included in Paris A. does not absolve the enforceability and the legal obligations of the Kyoto regime.

NDCs: a legal strategy or a procedural obligation?

Nationally Determined Contributions, known as NDCs, are declarations under the Paris Agreement. NDCs are procedural obligations that embody the highest possible efforts by each state to reduce its national GHG emissions and to adapt to the impacts of climate change as soon as possible. In the context of interpreting the Paris Agreement, NDCs have constituted the most important, yet legally “weakest,” mitigation strategies. State practice demonstrated a lack of consensus regarding the binding nature of the targets set.

Surprisingly, albeit with a tone of relief, the ICJ ruled that the voluntary nature and state discretion in the process of making and enforcing NDC targets are limited. NDCs are not merely a procedural obligation to prepare, maintain, and communicate these declarations every five years. Notably, the Court concludes that NDC targets are not entirely discretionary; rather, they must achieve the individual targets set, as well as realize the overall mitigation target (Art. 2 Paris A.).

This obligation is based on the determination of key principles, such as the principles of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and Respective Capabilities, the Precautionary Principle, Sustainable Development, Equity, and Intergenerational Equity. How could an LDC (Least Developed Country) be expected to reduce the same amount of GHG emissions, or bear the same extent of international responsibility, as an Annex II State? The IPCC itself underlined the essential role of the aforementioned principles in order to determine the existence and subsequently the extent of each state’s responsibility.

The legal “handcuffs” of international responsibility

The Court found it necessary to address the determination of state responsibility in the context of climate change. General questions on attribution and causation arose in the submissions of the participant States; the implications of the plurality of global emitters and whether responsibility can be traced and attributed to one specific entity, as well as the scientific certainty distinguishing climate effects attributable to anthropogenic GHG emissions from those resulting from natural climate variability.

The Court observed that, although it cannot give a comprehensive overview on the law of State Responsibility, as that would require a case-by-case examination, it does have the jurisdiction to assess certain actions or omissions that may give rise to state responsibility in the context of climate change.

The Advisory Opinion relied on ILC Articles on State Responsibility, emphasizing the provision that “the conduct of any organ of a State must be regarded as an act of that State”. State Responsibility is not governed by the emission of GHG per se, but by the breach of international obligations and norms pertaining to the protection of the climate system. This marks one of the most important observations of the Advisory Opinion, as this view does not establish a new causal link theory in the context of climate change, but a causal nexus between the wrongful act and the injury caused is sufficient.

Notably, private entities can no longer “hide” behind their status as non-subjects of International Law; States may be held internationally responsible if they fail to exercise due diligence by not taking the appropriate and necessary adaptation measures in relation to the emissions caused within their jurisdiction by private actors. Consequently, the Court indirectly wishes to intervene in national regulatory and legislative measures, safeguarding compliance with international environmental treaties.

Is the Advisory Opinion where we draw the line?

It was the first time that the Court ruled on an issue of climate change, even if only in the form of an advisory opinion. This marks the inaugural step of the climate change “ladder” and paves the way for any future contentious cases concerning this global challenge. Although an advisory opinion is not legally binding upon states, it carries significant weight in international law.

However, further action is required; the compliance mechanism embodied under the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement has never been activated, nor have they established legally binding enforcement procedures to resolve disputes regarding climate change obligations. It is likely that the Advisory Opinion will encourage more states to pursue judicial remedies before the World Court. It may also serve as a basis for examining the establishment of a judicial framework, similar to UNCLOS, to facilitate recourse to judicial settlement under binding mechanisms.

The Advisory Opinion marks the dawn of placing the response to climate change among the highest national priorities and essential interests. Today, a small island sinks on the other side of the world; tomorrow—an entire continent. Let this Advisory Opinion prove that international law can, and will, work for the disadvantaged.


Athanasia Santikou
Athanasia Santikou is an undergraduate Law Student at Democritus University of Thrace, with a keen interest in Public International Law, legal advocacy and global affairs.

Body Of Last Miner Recovered From Chilean Mine After Collapse

The collapse occurred last Friday at El Teniente mining centre that trapped five miners and killed one on spot

Outlook News Desk
Curated by: Saswat Mishra
Updated on: 4 August 2025 


Relatives of a missing miner embrace in front of the offices of Codelco Photo: AP


Summary of this article


Body of last trapped miner recovered


Collapse in tunnel occurred due to a seismic event


Cause for Seismic Event under investigation


El Teniente mining centre located in the Andes mountain range in Chile collapsed on Friday due to a "seismic event", trapping five mining workers inside. The search operation for the workers ended on Sunday when the last worker remaining was found dead.

The collapse of some of the tunnels was caused by a 4.2 magnitude tremor on Thursday. Miners had been working deep below the surface. Whether the cause of the shaking was due to an earthquake or drilling remains under investigation. Operations at the mining center had been suspended since Friday after the tremors

"Today we finally found [dead] the last of the missing workers," Aquiles Cubillos, prosecutor for Chile's O'Higgins region, told reporters.



Death Toll Reaches 11 In Pakistan Coal Mine Collapse
BY PTI

The four other bodies had been discovered on Saturday and earlier on Sunday during a desperate search in collapsed mine tunnels, about 70km (43 miles) south-east of the capital Santiago. The overall death toll is now confirmed at six, as another person was killed at the time of the incident on Thursday reported BBC

El Teniente, which is operated by the Chilean state-owned mining firm Codelco, boasts of having more than 4,500 kilometers (2,800 miles) of tunnels and is the largest underground copper deposit in the world. It is located high in the Andes mountains in central Chile.


Tsunami Threat Eases Across Pacific After Earthquake, Chile Remains on High Alert

Codelco has so far named two of the victims - Paulo Marín and Gonzalo Núñez Caroca - but said the others were yet to be identified "by the relevant authorities".


"We share the anguish this situation causes their families and the entire community," the copper mining company said.

Chile's mining industry is considered among the safest in the world, with a fatality rate of 0.02 percent in 2024, according to the National Geology and Mining Service of Chile.

Trump seeks pitches from bank chiefs on Fannie, Freddie stock offerings: Report

Trump is meeting top US bankers to discuss taking Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac public, reviving plans to privatise the mortgage giants after years under federal control.

Reuters
Aug 1, 2025

In Short

Meetings include J P Morgan, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America CEOs

Shares surged amid speculation on public stock offerings

Fannie and Freddie have repaid Treasury loans, posting profits post-2008 crisis

President Donald Trump is meeting with chiefs of major US banks to discuss monetising mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Bloomberg News reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter. The pitches include a major public offering of stock, the report added.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been under federal conservatorship since 2008 following the financial crisis, during which both entities became insolvent amid the subprime mortgage meltdown.
advertisement

Since then, the companies have rebuilt capital reserves, repaid their treasury loans and returned to 

Shares of both firms, currently traded on over-the-counter markets, have surged amid speculation over privatization plans.

Trump first signaled intentions to take the companies public in May, posting on Truth Social that he was giving "very serious consideration" to the move.

Trump met with JPMorgan JPM.N CEO Jamie Dimon last week at the White House and is meeting Goldman Sachs GS.N CEO David Solomon on Thursday, the report said.

Bank of America BAC.N CEO Brian Moynihan is also expected to meet with Trump in the coming days, the report added, with talks likely to include other banking executives as well.

Trump is asking the CEOs to provide ideas on strategies for taking the organizations public and exploring how their banks might participate in the process, the report said.

Representatives for BofA and Goldman declined to comment, while the White House did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.

- Ends