The World Bank has claimed that “Africa could be on the brink of an economic take-off, much like China was 30 years ago and India 20 years ago,” and the Economist reported, at the end of 2011, that the economies of Africa are growing at an average of 2.7 per cent a year with many registering double digit growth figures. These levels of growth require an ever increasing energy consumption that has to be sourced from somewhere.
Despite Africa’s comparatively low level of economic prowess, it is endowed with a bounty of resources that are the driving force behind its new economic successes but also the causes of many of its worries.

The newest country on Earth, South Sudan, has begun its independent life embroiled in a dispute over oil with Sudan – of which it was part until July 2011. 98 per cent of South Sudan’s revenue is derived from oil and yet its sole means of exporting it is through its more powerful Northern neighbour, which is demanding a larger cut than South Sudan is willing to give. The quarrel is threatening to bring the two countries into armed conflict as the dispute continues after over half a year of haggling.

Similarly, fossil fuel production has created controversy in Nigeria. The disputes between the oil company, Shell, and the Ogoni people of the Niger Delta has been widely reported on and the problems expose the inadequacy of fossil fuels as an over-arching policy choice for developing countries, particularly in Africa. The dispute centred around the damaging environmental consequences of Shell’s drilling in the Niger Delta – much of which Shell attempts to refuse to pay for – and the lack of employment and remuneration provided to local people who lived on the land.

In states not yet strong enough to prevent their own exploitation, fossil fuels represent a particularly worrying problem in light of the inadequacy in promoting the local economy, the associated environmental costs and security issues.

Many African countries’ economies are also highly dependent on imports of oil, which could present a choke on future growth. The oil crisis of 1973, where the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) restricted the supply of oil resulting in a stagnation of growth, and even recession, in the West, could be repeated in a global way in the future as oil production decreases but demand increases. Despite China’s interest in “African” oil, not all African countries possess an abundance of fossil fuels. Future dependence on them could lead to a quick halt to this prophesied “economic take-off,” as countries use their limited foreign currency reserves to compete on the energy market against China and the US.

But there is hope of change in Africa. Africa’s people are seeing, and will continue to see, the brunt of the effects of climate change. The problem was not caused by Africans but Africans could help to solve it by offering a successful alternative to the unsustainable approach with which the West has so far broached energy policy.

The Sahara Desert receives enough solar energy in 0.3 per cent of its land area to provide energy for the entire of Europe. As a result, the European Union (EU) has set up “Desertec,” a largely German-led plan to provide 15 per cent of the EU’s energy through energy production from solar in the Sahara Desert. Both for profit and for energy security, Africa should increase the provision of renewable energy.

Similarly, Africa’s propensity for other renewable energy sources is almost unmatched. For example, geothermal energy production, creating energy from heat emitted from the earth, can be widely used along the rift valley in Western Africa. Kenya has already proven this fact, currently exploiting 200 MW – with plans to increase to 500MW – of its energy needs.

According to the Institute for Environmental Security, 74 per cent of Africa’s citizens – and 90 per cent of the continent’s rural citizens – live without electricity. Many African have to walk to find fuelwood, the collection of which often causes deforestation; many must use dung that would better serve to fertilise the land and creates harmful pollutants. Of course, renewable energy production has problems – not least that it is expensive – but the local production of clean energy has the potential to provide economic growth and national security that fossil fuel use simply cannot.

After some time on the Internet, I was informed of the campaign’s main goals, notably to stop Joseph Kony, a Ugandan warlord who kidnaps young children, enrolling them into his personal army, and the criticism that have arisen from the now famous campaign. Without delving into its strengths and flaws, the campaign has succeeded in its foremost goal, to make Kony famous, something that arguably they could not have achieved without the social media sites, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, and their immense popularity. The hash tags #stopkony and #Kony2012 have produced thousands of tweets and the 30 minute Kony 2012 video, released by the non-profit organisation, “Invisible Children”, has garnered over 70 million views. Jason Russell, the main filmmaker pointed out in the video, quite correctly, that social media has revolutionised the way in which people connect with each other.

Social media networks are more often than not full of trivialities but can at times, be one of the most effective platforms to encourage political change. Passionate individuals can come together in a public forum to discuss their frustrations and share common beliefs, hopes and dreams. The power of social media can clearly be seen in the political movements that constituted the Arab Spring. For all intents and purposes, though the causes behind it were socio-political and economic, the Arab Spring was a revolution of social media. Facebook, Twitter and YouTube’s power to bind together groups of fairly diverse people from different backgrounds on common ground, using real-time communication, was now being harnessed for a political purpose; one that gained substantial international exposure.
The free flow of information has proven to be central to the ability of a dissent movement to effectively take hold and spread. The organisation and dissemination of ideas has never been as easy and widespread as it is now. Take Egypt for example. The eighteen days of protests following the “Day of Rage” on 25th January last year would not have been as successfully organised had there not been excessive activity on Twitter, advertising the event under the hash tag #Jan25, and Internet users on Facebook and YouTube calling on other Egyptians to protest. Similar web protests occurred in Tunisia.

The Arab Spring has shown us that the individual can be as much an actor in their state politics as those who run the country. The protestor need not be alone; he can amass widespread support through Facebook and Twitter. A campaign against social injustices can use the Internet domain to gain as much awareness and support as needed. Being Internet savvy can now make you a commodity in attempts to invoke socio-political change. The “Occupy Wall Street” campaign, for example, understood the effectiveness of the Internet and social media. Facebook pages were set up for the various cities in which the Occupy movement had taken off, for example, Occupy London. Images of the tented occupations could be shared on the website, Tumblr.

The success of social media to some extent relies on the degree of virtual freedom within the state. Some state leaders and governments have recognised the power of social media sites and have sought to control this, notably with Iran’s crackdown on some social media sites during the 2009 elections. Libya exercised strong control over the country’s Internet infrastructure during the period of unrest against Gaddafi.

The real question that arises from the discussion of the importance of social media is whether social media can actually produce significant change. Raising awareness and binding people together is what Facebook and Twitter do best, but is posting a video on YouTube enough to get rid of a Ugandan warlord? Social media did not produce the Arab Spring, but it was an effective accelerator of the revolution process, especially within Egypt. Occupy Wall Street originated from discontent with the current financial system, but rose in popularity and encouraged similar movements elsewhere through effective campaigning in social networks. It is important to recognise that social media is a tool, one that can be manipulated for the better, for example by garnering support for protests against undemocratic governments, or for the worse, with select governments having significant control of their country’s Internet access. It is also difficult to measure exactly how much of an impact social media can have in ousting a dictator, for example. The social media phenomenon can easily overshadow the actual work of the protestors who took to the streets, in terms of gaining recognition for the quick fall of Ben Ali and Mubarak in Tunisia and Egypt. It is worth noting that the Arab Spring took place in a region with low to middling Internet usage, with the influence of social media sites being higher in Egypt and Tunisia as compared to Yemen, for example.

Should you browse through a website today, more often than not, you will find a small taskbar with the Facebook and Twitter logos, encouraging you to share whatever information you just read. Sharing your opinion is as easy as one click, thus explaining why social and political revolutions are able to manifest as much support as they have in the past. Social media can branch a YouTube user in Tokyo to a Facebook user in Johannesburg. Social media and the Internet are now changing the way the world operates politically. The quickest way to gain attention is to go “viral”, so to speak. The Joseph Kony campaign is perhaps the best example of this.

On 5th March, a video (KONY 2012) produced by an American nonprofit activist group called the “Invisible Children” was released. Its sole purpose was to “elect” Joseph Kony into global consciousness, thus making him as famous and visible as any other superstar celebrity. The video is brilliantly made, endearing (with the use of the founder Jason Russell’s young son), and heart wrenching in its depiction of the plight of Ugandan children at the hands of the warlord Joseph Kony- leader of the now largely defunct Lords Resistance army (LRA) guerilla group. It has been said that the LRA abducted approximately 60,000 children, and was guilty for the tens of thousands of mutilations and killings over the past 26 years. The head of this “terrorist’ group” being none other than the now famous Joseph Kony.
If the more than 70 million viewers (thus far), 400,000 YouTube comments, hashtags (#Kony2012, #stopkony, #MakeKonyFamous) and “sharing” on Facebook these past few days are anything to go by, Invisible Children have succeeded in their publicity campaign. And that is a severe understatement. Unsurprisingly, it has also attracted fervent support and sharp criticisms from all sides, and raised questions concerning the power of the social media.

The strategy behind Kony 2012 is brilliant in its simplicity, and essentially takes full advantage of everything that social media has to offer today. Firstly, armed with a strong and emotionally appealing message, it offers a very simple call to action: talk about it and get others to talk about it too. By targeting the children and youth, arguably the most technologically savvy and virtually well connected; awareness of the campaign has quickly spread to all levels of society.
Secondly, it has managed to mobilize a rapid lobbying campaign by targeting twenty “culturemakers” (e.g. Rihanna, Taylor Swift, Ellen Degeneres) and twelve “policymakers” to make a statement supporting the campaign. There has already been some success on this front. Last year, 100 US troops were deployed to provide assistance and advise to the Ugandan army. Celebrities, and their millions of Twitter and Facebook followers, have also been quick to show their support for the cause. This impressive list includes Oprah, Ryan Seacrest, Rihanna, Bono, Warren Buffet, George Clooney, Lady Gaga, Rush Limbaugh, Justin Bieber… you get the idea.
Thirdly, Invisible Children has responded instantly and at length to criticisms concerning its finances, charity navigator rating and strategy. It has also rebuked accusations of apparent exaggerations of the impact of the LRA and its apparent portrayal of the “white man’s burden” . Despite the sudden deluge of interest in the Invisible Children, its website remains accessible, allowing people to continue to have direct access to information from them.

Right now, 20th April is the targeted date that all the Kony 2012 supporters have set their sights on. The night when supporters go out to cover cities throughout the world in posters of Kony 2012. The simple idea being that the issue of Kony will be prioritised in the political agendas of governments, and that military and financial support will continue to be provided until one of the most wanted men on the International Criminal Court list is finally captured, dead or alive.
If there is one thing that everyone agrees on, it is that Joseph Kony is a bad guy. Critics however, have ripped everything else apart. Some of these criticisms are contained below:

The video is accused of misrepresenting reality, and of creating the false impression that Kony is still in Uganda right now, abducting children, turning them into child soldiers and brainwashing them into killing their own parents. The question subsequently raised is this: Why now? Why wasn’t something done between 1999 and 2004, when Kony was still in Uganda and actively committing these crimes? Thousands of lives could have been saved, if awareness had been raised back then.
In response to the counterargument that it is ‘“better late than never”, recent arguments have surfaced concerning the 1.2 billion barrels of crude oil found in Uganda in 2006, with 2.5 billion barrels confirmed last October. Kony’s army has diminished considerably with approximately 250 members in total, scattered across the jungles of neighbouring countries, with Kony himself reported to be in Congo. He has not been in Uganda for the past 6 years. They are no longer a threat, so the calls for capturing Kony to stop these atrocities are misguided; especially given that the governments currently supporting this campaign are suspected of possessing an ulterior motive.

Last year, Invisible Children spent $8,676,614. Only 32 per cent went to direct services, with most going to staff salaries, travel and transport, and film production. Charity Navigator rates their accountability with two out of four stars. Jason Russell has been accused of misappropriating donated funds for himself.
In response to these criticisms, Russell has been quick to point out that it is an “unorthodox organization” which spends one third of its finances on film, one third on film-related advocacy and the rest on the mission to end the war and rehabilitate war-affected children. This justifies the prima facie disproportionate spending on video production, with its costly special effects.

Furthermore,its two star rating is because Invisible Children does not have five independent voting members on their board of directors – they have four, and are in the process of interviewing potential board members in order to regain their four-star rating in 2013. Since the fiscal Year of 2006, they have also been independently audited by “Considine and Considine”, which resulted in unqualified opinions on the audit reports.

Many are opposed to Invisible Children advocating sending US troops to Uganda to support the Ugandan government’s army in capturing Kony. There is a 2008 photo of three Invisible Children members holding guns alongside troops from the Sudan People’s Liberation Army, itself accused of rampant human rights abuses. Yet in spite of that, the organization is not calling for any diplomatic pressure to be put on President Museveni’s administration.

Kony is just one small part of a much larger problem. Even with the capture of Kony, the Ugandan people are still at the mercy of many of the equally brutal military leaders. For instance, Invisible Children makes the crucial omission of failing to mention that President Museveni himself, who came into power in the civil war, also used child soldiers. Sam Childers, the real life “Machine Gun Preacher”, has further stated that President Omar Al-Bashir of Northern Sudan is the true “villain”. President Al-Bashir has admitted to backing Kony and is the reason for the genocide currently happening in Darfur. There are much larger, more current problems that need to be addressed.

Invisible Children states that this oversimplification was a deliberate move to summarise a 26-year conflict into a thirty minute film in a clear manner. The film is merely an entry point to this conflict, to raise awareness and encourage people to do their own research and make their own conclusions.

At the end of the day, Invisible Children has succeeded in raising awareness concerning the problems in Uganda and its surrounding regions, and any raised awareness should be regarded as a net positive. People who hate the campaign argue that it will succeed only if people do something, and that “raising awareness” is a futile effort. I beg to differ. Every person viewing the video might not subsequently make a donation, join the 20th April efforts or write to their local MP, but they are aware. Awareness breeds discussion, which in turn will eventually lead to action by people, like Natalie Warne, who recently gave a stirring TED talk on her Kony campaign involvement. It is about being young, and being unafraid to step out and make an impact on an issue that we personally care about.
It must have been a strange feeling for Ken Jennings to stand powerless at a podium that he had dominated for longer than any other champion in the history of the game – not only defeated, but crushed.

And perhaps this is the most disconcerting aspect of it – the magnitude. Perhaps Jennings could have trained himself night and day and eventually overcome Watson, or at least made his IBM opponent’s massively parallel processors feel the digital equivalent of pressure, the computational version of sweat. But were Jennings to do this, it wouldn’t matter – Watson’s performance would keep skyrocketing upwards along the exponential trajectory of Moore’s Law, constantly becoming cheaper, faster, smaller.

The implications of artificial intelligence make the head spin with incredulity. Step outside, walk down the streets, and it’s difficult to believe that technology really improves exponentially. But then reach into your pocket, feel the thin rectangular shape that beckons, and ask yourself how many people would have believed you if you had calmly explained the concept in 1985. What will people in 2035 have to show us?

In the mean time, we are left only to admire the astonishing slope of the curve and wonder vaguely how it works, what it means, where we’re going. Perhaps these are questions to best posed to Siri.

The Journalism industry is driven by the passion to uncover the truth. It claims to fly the flag of information and carries the responsibility to disseminate knowledge with speed, accuracy, and integrity. The growing interconnectedness of global information means real-time stories reach more people every day. But just how deep are reporters expected to go in the name of this mandate?

The media blackout in Syria has seen the worldwide tally of reporter fatalities grow to 21 this year according to the Committee to Protect Journalist (CPJ). Since 1992, 70 per cent of all reporters were directly murdered, compared to 18 per cent who were caught in the crossfire, and 12 per cent who died as a result of undertaking dangerous assignments.

The high-profile death of Sunday Times correspondent Marie Colvin on the 22nd Feb in Homs has served as a reminder that real people deliver reporting from the front-line of conflict. In an age of social networking, amateur reporting, and free daily newspapers, traditional conflict journalism promises to pick out the truth from a pool of rumours and to show rather than tell. In Colvin’s own words, reporting means ‘trying to find the truth in a sandstorm of propaganda.’ When office-based writers source reports from the front-line, they owe a lot to those willing to risk their lives over their stories.

But surely no story or image can be worth a life. Are writers unable to produce a good story at a safe distance from the front line? Assignments to dangerous areas are voluntary, and reporter behaviour is dictated by an innate sense to investigate deeper and to bring the unknown into the limelight. The bravery of war correspondents should not be confused with bravado or ill-informed decisions; reporters, photographers and cameramen are fully aware of the risks and choose to take them. Our desensitisation of graphic images and violent stories shows how news consumers might take the industry for granted; these stories are unfortunately part of the quotidian routine of daily life but would be much missed if gone. They have brought greater transparency to warfare and more accountability to the propagation of violence. Today we are (or should be) well aware that atrocities are committed by all sides in a conflict.

It might therefore feel futile to mention the sensationalist branch of journalism which is pushed by the thirst of scandal and the pressure to sell. The difference is between sacrificing life for truth or integrity for truth (and money) is enormous to say the least. The Leveson inquiry into media misconduct in the United Kingdom has uncovered the extent to which reporters are willing to breach legal restrictions and moral obligations to reveal scandal.

It has also drawn attention to the fact that the profitability of the printed newspaper industry relies heavily on tabloids; the former News of the World deputy editor Neil Wallis said in his statement that “the chosen newspaper of this country is the Sun and the red tops.

The high-profile death of Sunday Times correspondent Marie Colvin on the 22nd Feb in Homs has served as a reminder that real people deliver reporting from the front-line of conflict.

The Great British population do not want the broadsheets.” The current regulation on reporting processes has failed, but it might be impossible to change it dramatically without compromising on the already struggling finances of the industry.

Nevertheless, the decision to publish information obtained through unorthodox processes can sometimes be very problematic for purposes beyond maintaining profitability, especially when the possibility of uncovering truths in the public interest is at stake. The Wikileaks case is a good example of this trade-off, as the confidential cables made available through the organisation have been essentially stolen from government offices.

But some of these leaked documents have made officials accountable to their people; an article in the Foreign Policy journal (13th Jan 2011) regarding unrest in Tunisia last year goes as far as to claim that although Tunisians already faced grave social discontent.

‘WikiLeaks acted as a catalyst: both a trigger and a tool for political outcry’ as it provided the hard evidence needed to give meat to rumors of corruption.

Although phone-hacking, celebrity stalking and bribery are condemned by newspaper consumers, it is because of their demand for sensationalism that journalists go to such great extents. Conflict reporters pay with their lives for stories that might fail to register in the minds of the majority of news consumers, as we are far more interested in Ryan Giggs’ affair with his brother’s wife.

We want to be distracted and entertained, and not drawn into more horrific news of violence.

But information should not be entertainment. Perhaps it is time we re-evaluate our demands.

The most noticeable difference found within the confines of the LSE is the political slant of the candidates.
While in Westminster, Labour and the Conservatives wrestle for control of the levers of power. In the LSE Students’ Union, these societies often band together against the more radical elements within the political spectrum of the student body.

Each university has its own political spread, the LSE’s in recent years has seen a battle between the radicals, and the moderates. Two camps have emerged: the first, whose members seek to make the Union more politically active, participate in demonstrations and focus on international solidarity; the other, whose members focus more inwardly, upon the Union itself, aiming to produce localised changes.

The divide between student politics and wider politics is clear. The Students’ Union is fascinating to those not immediately turned-off by politics. This election saw a sharp divide between two groups of candidates, those endorsed by the radicals and those endorsed by the moderates.

The political slant of these groups can be seen by the collective campaigning techniques of the candidates in each of the Sabbatical elections. One was typified by ‘vote for the progressive candidates’ with voting recommendations organized by how left wing the candidate’s manifestos were. The other was typified by the Facebook event entitled “Restoring sanity to the LSE.”

The fact that there was little if any overlap between the endorsements given by the groups shows a strong level of identification to the respective sides that it became in certain races more about personality that politics. Arguably some of those endorsed by one side were perhaps closer to the other, politically speaking.
Recent years have seen a strong showing for the more activist wing of LSE students, this was noticeable with students such as Ashok Kumar being elected to Sabbatical positions. Likewise candidates supported by the far left groups won three quarters of the Sabbatical positions last year and the remaining position was only lost by four votes.

There is however a transience of political feelings at the LSE, which is perhaps best shown by the re-election of Alex Peters-Day as General Secretary of the SU last week. Last year, Peters-Day was the candidate endorsed by the far left, yet this year she was the champion of the more moderate group.

Nevertheless, groupings do appear to play a significant role. This year saw a sharp swing to the moderate groups, with all four candidates endorsed by the moderate groups achieving office. This was due to a variety of reasons, but most probably because the centrist candidates managed to combine their campaigns more effectively than in previous years, and votes were thus distributed among them all.

The drawback of this is that it produces an almost clique view of the Union. Unless one carries particularly strong feelings for or against the relevant political issues there is not a place for you in either campaign. Emotions can run particularly high within each campaign depending on the numbers won and lost, but this interest doesn’t appear to reach the wider political community. The fact that only around twenty per cent of students voted in this election seems to typify the lack on interest in the LSE in general. The turnout was better than most university elections, but there is a lot more that needs to be done.

Those walking down Houghton Street could not help but have noticed that student politics also has a surprisingly bizarre collection of campaign themes. National campaigns are generally characterised by catchy slogans, portraying authority, calm, and a coherent message about their plans for the future. Student campaigns are, generally, the opposite. Last week we witnessed a campaign built around Facebook, and Captain Jack Tindale, memorable for his election video where he was dressed as a pirate wielding a poorly designed sword to the Pirates of the Caribbean theme music. Last year we even saw a candidate build his campaign around a Lucozade bottle.

These seem irrelevant to how they intended to run the Union, but they all share one thing in common: they won.

We simply do not take ourselves too seriously, perhaps this is a fault with the student population in general, but one we seem to enjoy.

What can we say from student politics? Perhaps it is a good introduction to real world politics. Candidates form groups as in national politics, and try to invent catchy campaigns tailored to their audience. What appears different is the location of candidates on the political spectrum and the style of their campaigns.

For years since Turing’s proposal, leaders in artificial intelligence held the view that this kind of computation was at the heart of human cognition. This invited a raft of new speculations about the human mind and whether one day such computational systems would become sophisticated enough to be called “intelligent”. These kinds of ideas have been popular in science fiction for a long time but it took Turing to breathe the necessary practical wisdom into them. Turing’s great idea is enshrined in the Loebner Prize. Each year it sets the challenge of building a piece of software according to Turing’s conditions that is capable of convincingly conversing with a human judge in a way indistinguishable from a human being. Chat bots like these are deployed in various guises, sometimes with hilarious (or tragic) consequences. One in particular was so convincing that an eminent Psychology professor who believed he was speaking to a Russian woman from a singles website embarked on a six month correspondence before realising he was talking to a machine. Astonishingly he reported developing an emotional attachment to the bot. What this says about him, the software and the science of psychology is left to the reader to surmise. Whatever the conclusion, it is clear that Turing triggered an approach to thinking about the mind in an environment beyond the philosophers armchair.

In his centenary year, Turing’s interdisciplinary impact is being celebrated by artists as well as philosophers, scientists, biologists, system theorists, novelists, film makers – the list goes on. Computer art is an emerging discipline providing radical augmentation to artistic practice. Dr. Nick Lambert, lecturer in contemporary digital art at Birkbeck, provides this precise account of what Turing has afforded artists: “the computer operates simultaneously as medium, tool and context, in addition to its organisational and interactive elements. The image-space described using software frees artists from the restrictions of physical media by providing a dynamic non-material environment, whose potentials may be realized in the resulting artwork.” Making in the Metaverse means entirely new kinds of art works are possible. Physics does not frame the artist’s imagination and conceptual projects can be realised in increasingly higher degrees of fidelity. Roy Ascott’s “La Plissure Du Texte” is a good example of how computers render artists’ ideas. In 1983 Ascot had the idea of opening up a shared text file which participants from across the globe could log into, and write their own improvised narratives based around a set of fairytale characters that he suggested – a prince or a witch. The end result was a constantly evolving text which told a story, co-authored by anyone and everyone, a global game of “Exquisite Corpse”. Move forward to 2010 and Ascot revives the project, except now he uses Second Life as the canvas. LPDT2 is a Second Life environment in which text explodes and shimmers, traversing impossible architecture and physically moving through space. Avatars interact with the text, embodying it and performing its narrative. The same concept is executed in fundamentally different ways, thanks to the computer.

With specific reference to Turing’s work the Lighthouse Gallery in Brighton recently put together a show entitled “Intuition and Ingenuity”. Curators Anna Dumitriu, Sue Gollifer and Nick Lambert sought out “works that embodied certain concepts that Turing either directly invented (such as the foundations of computation and the Turing Test for Artificial Intelligence) or was influential upon (like cellular automata and morphogenesis)” and in doing so responded to the challenge of embodying Turing’s work in an artwork. These include algorithmically-plotted prints and etchings, simulations of Turing Machines and two functioning robots, one of which projects the viewer’s face onto it’s own face mask in an attempt to “overcome the widespread fear of androids” (see image). According to Lambert, works inspired by Turing – especially interactive artworks – are eliciting new aesthetic responses from audiences and re-characterizing this relationship. The creative application of Turing’s ideas are spawning new aesthetic categories, posing more problems for philosophers and further exemplifying the significance of his thinking.

Turing’s great idea was a simple one. And like all great ideas, it is hard to imagine a world without it being the kind of place we would like to inhabit. Tragically, the society from within which Turing worked was not ready to accept him, and electroshock therapy administered as a “cure” for homosexuality threw him into a depression that brought on suicide. In a fitting tribute in his centenary year there is now an online petition to have the charges against him dropped. One can only hope that Turing will have the last laugh by setting in motion a chain of events that lead to his recognition not only as a mathematician but also as a citizen.

According to Eurostat, Greek unemployment has reached a staggering 20.9 per cent while 48 per cent of people aged between 16-25 are currently unable to find a job. Moreover, the new bailout approved in Brussels on the 21st February entails further cuts in wages and pensions and additional reductions in public expenditure, contributing to the mounting uncertainty over what will follow. Despite the considerable costs incurred by Greek citizens in 2011, the country’s G.D.P. shrank by nearly 7 per cent and it is expected to fall by another 4-5 per cent in 2012. This makes meeting fiscal targets even harder. People are increasingly concerned that their sacrifices are to no avail. Under such circumstances, Roubini argues that a return to the drachma, combined with a significant depreciation of the currency, is the optimal alternative, as it will quickly boost the country’s competitiveness. Should Greece therefore default and leave the Eurozone?

Not necessarily. A Greek exit may have devastating effects, creating a dangerous precedent in Europe and exposing the country to the risk of a prolonged economic depression. Denis MacShane, a British politician who served as Minister of Europe between 2002-2005, responded to Mr. Roubini by arguing that a default would lead to an outburst of panic, condemning Greece to extreme poverty and undermining its road to recovery. In contrast to what a segment of Greek citizens may believe, leaving the Eurozone will not ease the pressure on their incomes, while the country’s deficient productivity will mean than any gains in competitiveness from a devalued drachma will only be temporary. Most of the harsh measures imposed by the EU are essential if the country wishes to abandon the wildly inefficient ways of its past. The over sized public sector, the excessive public borrowing and spending, the toleration of substantial tax evasion, as well as the heavily politicised university institutions, have badly hurt the country’s productive capacity and will continue to undermine any attempt at reform.

The €130 billion bailout (£108 billion), complemented with a 53.5 per cent haircut of the nominal value of private-sector bonds are not sufficient for placing the country on an upward trajectory. The European Union, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank warned that the Greek debt would remain close to its current level (171 per cent of G.D.P) if Athens fails to apply the measures. The reform of the tax system, the opening of the country’s highly regulated markets and the efficient operation of the public sector are necessary conditions for the country’s return to growth.

The economic downturn can be seen as a unique opportunity to finally establish a strong and competitive Greek economy that will provide its citizens with equal opportunities to achieve high standards of living. While the majority of the population feels aggrieved, forced to bear the burden of an economic crisis it did not cause; the truth is not all of them are free of blame. Widespread corruption in politics is not the sole contributor to the current social and economic decay. The population’s mass engagement in tax evasion and willing participation in the clientelismat play in the public sector, are also largely responsible.

Greece does not need freedom fighters. It needs conscious citizens who will efficiently carry out their duties and will not look away in instances of fraud. It needs new political representatives who will inspire the people and encourage their concern over the achievement of the common good. It needs institutions that will not undermine morality as a Utopian notion, but will instead restore its significance. And it needs a population conscious of the bankruptcy of the ways of the past and determined to support painful measures that will reestablish social justice and restore economic prosperity.

In the last week a long-running case against the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) has been postponed yet again. In a situation more similar to a country under authoritarian rule, witnesses were not heard and time meant to be spent listening to the case against the authorities was devoted to their defence. The case in question is not that widely known about outside the country, yet it is a significant case in the struggle for women’s rights in Egypt. It centres on Samira Ibrahim, a woman who during the protests last year was arrested and forced to undergo “virginity tests”. These amounted to her being forced to strip and undergo a physical examination in front of soldiers, which she claimed amounted to sexual harassment and torture. Although she has become somewhat of an icon of a growing women’s movement for more fair treatment, many within Egypt have tried to push it to the side, as it blights the image of change they are so proud of.
This has not been an isolated incident of harassment in the protests. Images of Lara Logan, a CBS reporter were beamed across screens when she was assaulted as she tried to report on the protests last year. However, most accounts of violence within these protests have not reached the general public’s consciousness. On the anniversary protests at the beginning of this year, a Swedish female friend of mine and her two friends were all sexually harassed in Tahrir Square, which has otherwise been a symbol of liberation. She describes the incident as such: “ten to fifteen men took my American friend, then suddenly ten to fifteen men took my Spanish friend and then it was my turn; men pulled me away and gathered around me, pulling my hair, touching my breast and bum, but they never managed to pull my clothes off. I started to scream allah u akhbar and that was my salvation”. The men in these incidents were not the authorities, whom it would be rather easier to rally against, but the same men whose protests and defiance helped to pull down the regime. Tahrir square means liberation square. Yet whilst the destiny of men seems to be taking their rightful position in society after repression by a dictatorship, for women their liberation is still forthcoming.

As the political process has become more inclusive, women still find themselves outside the system. They were excluded from the committee that enacted reforms to the constitution last March and female candidates secured only around one percent of the 508 seats in the new assembly. This is a step back from under Mubarak when 64 seats were reserved for women. Excluding women from political changes does not bring much hope that the position of women across Egypt can be advanced. Although it would be wrong to tar all men in Egypt with the same brush, if those clamouring for justice have stood by as women have been assaulted, why should we expect those who have then gone on to take office to do anything to address the awful position of women of the status quo?

Egypt has always had longstanding problems of gender inequality. The World Economic Forum Global Gender Gap report 2010 ranked Egypt 125 out of 134 countries in respect to gender inequality. Some of the indicators showed the legal system has played a role in perpetuating the position of women- Egypt did very badly on the existence of legislation punishing acts of violence against women. Others showed that problems remain more cultural. Female genital mutilation was outlawed in 2008, but is still practised, particularly in more rural areas. A week ago, the city of Alexandria hit the news as two “honour” killings occurred. Both women- in separate incidents- were killed by their brothers, one of whom justified his actions because of her “bad morals”. Egypt may not be the only country to experience “honour” killings, but they are an extreme example of the pressure women are often under to conform.

There is undeniably a culture of liberation in the country at the moment; it just is not reaching women. Partly this liberation is political as the revolution has brought promises of more popular participation. Women’s role in this though is yet to be confirmed and the current situation is not promising. Culturally too, Egypt is undergoing a transformation. Music videos, fashion and films are all addressing the conservative culture, but the position of women still appears unchanged. As the incidents of the honour killings demonstrate, whilst it is becoming more acceptable for men to have sex outside marriage, it can destroy the reputation – and life- of the woman involved. As woman go onto the streets to demand the change their brothers are they face assault not just from the authorities, but from the very men they are protesting alongside.

Why does Egypt face these problems? Many are quick to blame religion. Yet countries, such as Tunisia fair much better in terms of gender equality. In their most recent elections, half of every party’s candidates had to be women, and as a result the assembly is much more equal in representation. From 1957 women’s rights have been enshrined in law in Tunisia. Young Egyptian couples often go to neighbouring countries, such as Lebanon or Jordan, to get a break from the restrictive confines of their own country. Religion itself is not the cause it appears, but rather the justification of a restrictive culture. In the process of change and upheaval Egypt is going through, it would appear to be the perfect chance to address some of these issues. In reality, not only have they not been addressed, but women have actually found themselves more at risk as they have tried to participate in transformation the country is going under.