Los retos cruciales que esperan al Boris.

El nuevo líder del gobierno británico tiene el reconocimiento global , pero podría ser el Prime Ministerio solo por un tiempo corto, si él no combate estos retos fundamentales.

Todos sabemos quién es. La figura divertida de la política en el Reino Unido. Pero nada más. Este hombre tiene las llaves del gobierno, él con la autoridad a pulsar el botón nuclear. Este situación habría podido ser diferente si Theresa May consiguiera el Brexit, pero así no es. Actualmente, Boris, el alcalde de Londres anterior, ha cumplido su sueño joven durante un periodo crítico por el país.

No solo es un momento importante por la población general, pero también por Johnson y su partido Conservador: Los gobernadores de la década pasada, los que habían implementado el referéndum infamoso en 2016. El resultado después de los días que viene vaya tener una consecuencia inevitable por todos. Por eso, la competencia para gobernar y facilitar un acuerdo con la Unión Europea sea fundamental. Sería un éxito si Boris cumple un acuerdo revisado para facilitar un divorcio limpio, porque después, lo podría presentar al Parlamento británico como una alternativa de una situación sin acuerdo.

Hay varias cuestiones para enfrentar para gestionar un acuerdo, y es claro que Boris está en una posición con tiempo mínimo. Parece que necesite resolver desacuerdos para alcanzar donde lo querría estar:

El asunto más importante de un acuerdo potencial- el “backstop”. El border de Irlanda y Norte Irlanda ha causado muchos problemas a través de las implicaciones de la paz entre ambos lados. Boris ha dicho recientemente que el backstop debería ser rechazado en todas formas y que la sugerencia es intolerable. La presión de miembros del partido Unionista en Norte Irlanda es un factor imprescindible, porque forman los números para asegurar una mayoridad en el Parlamento. Pero, la Unión Europea están manteniendo su necesidad de tener un backstop, para controlar el movimiento de las mercancías entre el Reino Unido y el mercado único europeo. Tiempo en Europa y los números en casa no favorecen la posición del gobierno británico y con la fecha de terminación oficial este Octubre (31), un acuerdo sin el backstop no tenga un estatus probable.

Como dije antes, el partido Conservador habrá alcanzado diez años como los líderes del gobierno en 2020. Pero, los meses posteriores de Octubre podrían ser los más esenciales por la sobrevivencia de Boris como Prime Ministerio, particularmente con la potencial de unas elecciones. Si una elección está escogida posteriormente del Brexit, una batalla entre Boris y Jeremy Corbyn vaya satisfacer. Corbyn, la socialista, ha decidido recientemente de oponer Brexit, solo dos años desde su promesa para respaldarlo en el manifiesto de 2017. Como líder de Labour, la ocasión de unas elecciones sería la última oportunidad para gobernar por Corbyn y con la rivalidad de los partidos que rivalizan Brexit, Corbyn luchará con mucho compromiso en el evento de nuevas elecciones. Quizá si Boris completa Brexit, gane qualquieras elecciones luego del proces de salir la Unión Europea. Aún vez más, Brexit tiene efectos tan fundamentales del fúturo del país, junto con la carrera del Boris.

Boris ganó la campaña para llegar como líder del país con una actitud de esperanza. Insistió que con esfuerzo, él conseguiría el salido del Reino Unido a la Unión Europea sin dudo. Evidentemente, los meses de Septiembre y Octubre van a formar el periodo más crítico del futuro largo plano. ¿Habremos cumplido Brexit en dos meses tiempo? Este pregunta solo tiene una respuesta. Y, Boris tiénela.

¿Has visto un error gramatical? Si has visto uno, mencionarlo en los comentarios abajo. Estoy aprendiendo el lenguaje para mis calificaciones. Gracias.

The horror of Britain’s Hidden Majority

Poverty is a term which has a string of misconstrued representations in the modern day. The type of poverty that has arisen over the last decade lies in the wake of the biggest financial crash of the 21st century: a crash which consumed livelihoods, took jobs and resulted in economic turmoil for the general population. The response, at least here in the UK, was to enter a harsh era of austerity, something which Theresa May declared was all but over in October of last year. The former Prime Minister took office with a heralding speech which promised to “fight the burning injustices” in modern Britain- words that befitted a historic speech by only our second female leader. May made it her mission to make our Union a “country which works for everyone” an idea which was, at the time, a mirroring of David Cameron’s ideas regarding the importance of society. Even he, the bespoke Etonian schoolboy, believed in a ‘society’, as long as it was not confused with the state. Modern Conservative Party ideals have since been lost in translation, and regardless of political alignment, this has to be admitted. In her relatively short period in office, the indications are that Theresa May failed in justifying the promises in her premier speech three years ago.

“That means fighting against the burning injustice that if you’re born poor you will die on average nine years earlier than others”

Theresa May, July 13 2016.

In England, life expectancy has worsened between the richest and poorest, a solemn rate which goes some way in highlighting the massive disparity between the well offs and the worse offs. This could still yet change, with May sanctioning an extra £20 billion in funding for the NHS to improve health provisions across the country. What shouldn’t be misinterpreted is that life expectancy is a figure delicately dancing between various important variables, but this goes no way in hiding that the United Kingdom is still lagging behind in expectancy- ranked only at 18 in Europe in 2016. But, life expectancy isn’t the most serious indicator screaming over the horrors of poverty in the sixth biggest economy in the world, much to the anguish of the ‘silent majority’. Yet, the failings of a decade are only being noticed now, a full eleven years on from the crash that inflicted such societal wounds in the first place. It would be ignorant to suggest that poverty is a new phenomenon, but the displacement of finances and the consequences that have entailed since 2008 have been the heaviest of a generation.

Poverty hasn’t a fixed state, nor an actual face value. The problems surrounding poverty are formulated through a principle that poverty has relatively few forms. Poverty is an all consuming black hole which has scores of different forms- each one having varying levels of strenuous pressure on families and society alike. Poorness isn’t the sole bearer of poverty in the United Kingdom. Economic disparities among people are the easiest trends and figures to allude to, but poverty does indeed have far reaching social implications for a society- social richness being the cornerstone of a generation. Whether that be childcare, strong schooling, healthy community support or certain local provisions, the increasing deficit in social wellness is hard-hitting on the hidden majority. The hidden majority are those who desperately need help from strong local community institutions, but through the unnecessarily deep measures of austerity, their concerns fall on deaf ears. The Conservatives’ response to poverty has been irresponsible and tragic: a UN delegate condemned the “uncaring ethos” of the governmental shift of social policy. It should have been better, in fact, it had to have been better. The “tragic consequences” which Professor Alston reported should have been something unthinkable for a One Nation Conservative government; whose ethos centred around the core principle of Noblesse Oblige-stating the need to look after the worse-off in society. Both Mr Cameron and Ms May were clear of their One Nation ideals, so, hiding behind a staunch Conservative facade is useless. And, as the jittering process of Brexit stumbles on, there is a genuine concern that the hidden will soon be the forgotten.

David’s (Cameron) true legacy is not about the economy, but social justice “”

May’s first speech as Prime Minister thanked Cameron for his social policies.

While May’s government increased spending into local communities in the final months of her administration, the problems are so deeply cut that throwing money at the problem will not change the fate of those trapped in trouble. Trouble being a plethora of consequences which have manifested across Britain. The effects of poverty on local communities have been alarming- social deprivation being the most prolific killer. Around 33% of young children are in poverty in the United Kingdom, according to results found by the Social Metrics Commission– a leap of approximately 400,000. And, there is an inextricable link between children experiencing social turmoil and those living in poverty to gangs. The harsh realities that local communities have faced has allowed for exploitation of young people with an invariable connection with growing gang-related activities across the board. Research is indicative that fourteen to seventeen year-olds are the children at greatest risk of falling into the trap of gang life and following a warning from The Children’s Society group, a coherent response from local governments and the government itself is needed.

It is always difficult criticising a government for making cuts following a heavy recession, but there has been evidence enough to suggest that the extent of the cuts exceeded what was required. Yes, borrowing had to fall. Yes, the deficit needed to be cut. But no, there wasn’t a need to perform such stinging reductions in welfare and social care areas. Some organizations have even accused that infamous coalition of ‘economic murder’ in which may have resulted in 120,000 deaths. That is no feature of a ‘compassionate conservative’ party. That is carefree Conservatism.

There is undoubtedly a social crisis in this country, alongside the impending political one. The mismanagement of political institutions in general has given way to such problems, which will have long-term consequences. London is at breaking point- more rough sleepers than ever before. A soaring crime rate. Something needs to give and quickly. The works of small organisations isn’t enough- Homeless Link is barely managing with the help it gives to those on the streets.

There is clarity over one thing: something needs to change. This shouldn’t be an ideological battle, there are real people who haven’t a voice and haven’t hope. There could be light in the idea that there was a revolt in the referendum three years-ago. Why wouldn’t there be? An incompetent opposition, behind a bulldozing ‘do or die’ government. It’s a shame that Brexit is becoming a partisan issue. Or, an opportunity for ideological, purely fantastical dreams about a ‘correct Brexit’. The only Brexit that should be in consideration is one that would ensure social security, so that society’s worse-off don’t fall into an even deeper hole of insecurity and poverty- financial or social.

It says alot about the state of politics that neither party is trustworthy enough, or ‘alive’ enough to enforce impactful change. If Brexit is to happen, a deal is the only option viable enough to safeguard the social security nets, which are already on the brink. A no-deal would further the pain of those of us on ‘running the fine line’; those of us already struggling and members of society who have been left in the dark. This is a clear dividends in our politics. Drop the ideological toxicity- gamesmanship isn’t a solution to the serious political questions of our time. If there was ever a need to do politics properly, this is it. The end of the road for political posturing. Communities are on the verge, and they need to be resuscitated or it could signal yet more struggle and more uncertainty. There must be an urgent focus in the following weeks and months ahead in helping to improve the lives of the hidden majority.

There needs to be urgency, as the hidden could well become the lost.

Thank You for reading. If you liked it, why not email subscribe on the right? Or, share on Twitter or Facebook using the top right menu of this page.

Corbyn’s Labour is fast reaching the point of no return.

Labour is losing the principles which have made it the supposed party of the minorities and working class. Corbyn’s leadership has shown that this is no longer the case, and that it may have reached endgame.

Labour have dominated my constituency for as long as records show. The extent to which shows that they have held power here all but three times since 1918, indicative of the strong ties of left wing alignment in my area of London. Indeed, the majority of London is red and that may not change for the foreseeable future. There has always been an inherent presumption, particularly where I live, that Labour are the party of the working-class and the party of the minorities. That may well have been the case, hell, that was the prime reason for the party’s inception in 1900. The success it has had in my area is obvious when interpreting voting records, but markers of Labour support are nowhere to be seen. This is a strange marker of politics in modern London. Within the local vicinity lie a vast collection of different cultures and backgrounds- something which has been of permanence all my life. Walking to school daily is complemented by a vast array of smells from nearby shops and restaurants: the names of local shops are distinctively foreign, paying remarkable homage to the countries and cultures that found them.

So, it is no surprise that prescriptive politics demands that Labour win here, and they do. They expectedly increased their majority here in 2017, following our verdict to stay in the EU by 55%. Yet, the political disconnect here is as clear as day. There is no urge to care about politics, heck, why should they? Politics here has had no real impact, there are still local problems which have been swallowing here since before my birth, I am told. Places like mine are close to such political apathy, that the prudence of the Labour party in maintaining votes from places like my community could be in serious doubt. People here don’t vote for Labour because they feel connected with the party’s values or ideas, but rather because it is what happens. The chances of the Conservatives ever winning here are low, considering that the core electorate here vote Labour based on principle. It is safe to note that Labour will win the seat here next election, whenever that may be, but the danger of Labour disconnecting from its core vote should be a point of worry for the party’s hierarchy. If it continues to steal the votes of a politically blind public, then those who swing-vote should be of major concern to the team charged with getting Labour elected into government again.

The question for Labour and Corbyn doesn’t lie with constituencies like mine electorally, but with those he must convince of his values and ideas. The ideals of the Labour party have been lost here, despite the fact they hold the local council, and have held the local constituency seat since 1992. Yet, they continue to win here and yet, the very foundations of the Labour party have been corrupted, nearing a point of irretrievable nothingness. Labour has a rich history of cultivating local values, through invigorating bubbling support and outreach from its local branches-oozing the collective values that have bounded its precedents throughout the history of the party.

The brunt of harsh austerity measures here have clearly had an affect on the community , and undoubtedly, others around the country. Rightly or wrongly, the Conservatives’ economic plan was actioned due to the desperate times following 2008’s financial meltdown. That had a huge impact, both financially and socially. Had Labour’s outreach been more effective, they certainly would’ve won in 2015. Ed Miliband failed, so he dutifully left. The realisation within the Labour party was clear- it had failed to win the voters that were in the middle, the dwindlers. The significance of the result was mirrored by the stunted turnout in Labour strongholds, like mine. Here, turnout fell more than twelve percentage points lower than the national average. Labour failed in engaging with swing voters, and had accelerated the process of core voter apathy, indicative in safe seats across the country.

Corbyn’s Labour is so open to political diversity, that it prevents the blossoming of political discourse among its own members.

To be fair to Corbyn, his campaign did well to push voter turnout here, which resulted in more Labour voter turnout since 1951. That 2017 election, however gleeful it may have seemed, only saw turnout rise by two percentage points. Corbyn’s performance in 2017 was a surprise to pundits and political heads everywhere, but the fall-out since has been obvious. Corbyn’s Labour has done more to alienate itself over the past year than the Conservative leadership could’ve hoped for. Rows over anti-Semitism, policy indiscretions and a general centralisation of the party leadership is something which has distanced itself from the voters it should be representing- both ideologically and locally. Corbyn has managed to show the world why socialism is apparent to failure. He claims to stand for the many and not the few, but this politics only seem to be dictated by the few. Himself. Labour self identifies as the party for many, for the minorities, but is significantly failing to adhere to those such basic principles. Corbyn’s leadership is ironically forged and upheld by the few. The tenacious stranglehold of Mr Corbyn’s leadership by Momentum is an ideological monster which has failed in invigorating local communities such as mine. Its startling focus on tribal politics is dangerous- it is restricting the very diversity within its own party. An instant contradiction to its so called ‘irreversible’ principles. Corbyn’s Labour is so open to political diversity, that it prevents the blossoming of political discourse among its own members.

Labour is no longer the party of the working class, or of the minorities. That won’t stop people voting Labour, particularly where I come from. Labour is now the party of purely ideological infighting. Yeah, the majority of people here are left-leaning voters, or are comfortable voting for social justice or greater provisions for their public services. That’s something which has resonated here for a long time. But a party consuming itself through the weak leadership of Jeremy Corbyn is fast alienating moderate Labour voters around the hardest hit areas of Britain. He may well go onto become our next Prime Minister, sooner than expected if he gets his way. But, it is evident enough to suggest that his stewardship as Labour leader is tearing the party apart. It could well implode. If it does, the 31,000 voters here who voted for them last time will be left without adequate political representation. I may not be a Labour supporter or future voter, but it says something about the state of the party when it is more concerned in its ideological infighting than representing the voters that are struggling to be heard in an age of populist politics. Corbyn must go if Labour is to return to being loosely tied together through its ideological values and community outreach- an equilibrium which has brought it electoral success in the past.

There is a hint of irony about Corbyn’s Labour party and its current state. But irony would only have worth if there was a hint of humour about it. The only joke here is that Labour’s representation of the minorities is a laughable fallacy.


Now that you have read the article, it would be a great help if you could share our work if you enjoyed it below.

En Español: Gabriel García Márquez.

Las obras de García Márquez han continuado dándonos un gran volumen de enriquecimiento y el patrimonio de sus historias vayan a sobrevivir a través de las generaciones.

Las obras de Gabriel García Márquez han tenido un efecto significativo en el mundo de hoy, en particularmente en el torno de la literatura. Sus ideas y las representaciones de sus novelas hubieran tenida un rol fundamental en la formación de la literatura hispánica durante el siglo veinte y los años posteriores como consecuencia directa. Su presencia durante el siglo veinte tenía implicaciones fenomenales entre el uso de las técnicas literaturas, en particularmente el realismo mágico- un aspecto famoso de la literatura hispánica.

Nos ha dado novelas como Cien Años de Soledad (1967), que incorpora el realismo fantástico en la cuenta de un pueblo colombiano ficcionario. Se dice que la influencia de esta novela habría sido una reflexión, en parte, de las fuerzas políticas de su juventud. La cuenta se revuelve alrededor la familia de las Buendías, en que los miembros fundaron el pueblo de Macondo. La novela pinta el destino circular del poblado vecinal y las Buendías, durante más de un siglo- mostrando las tendencias de la natura humana en afrontando las secuelas de las cuestiones indispensables. Es justo para observar que Cien Años de Soledad formara el basis de sus obras posteriores y la cultura literatura también.

Empujar la imagen para ver el video.

Sus cuentas hubieran sido imprescindibles en asegurando el nombre de la literatura hispánica a un nivel global y firmándola el respeto en un mundo en rápido desarrollo. Podemos ver su logro en los galardones que él ganó, un premio más prestigioso siendo el Premio De La Paz (1982) por la dedicación que mostraba en el torno de la literatura. Ganó premios, pero nos daba una plétora de las matas más reconocidas, y dejó después de su fallecimiento una legacía que siempre vaya quedar como una influencia de el arte. La interpretación de su novela Cien Años de Soledad llegará a la plataforma de Netflix pronto, una indicación obvia de su ascendiente hoy.

About/ Un resumen del blog.

On Face Value is a blog which recollects the most influential ideas of a generation, alongside tackling the biggest political issues of today.

In an age of misconception, this blog looks to find the people across the world that are making a difference and the issues that follow them.

In the  Spanish edition, it revises the most important people to the Hispanic culture and strives to find contemporary issues relevant it. It is very much a medium to practise my Spanish, but also to gain a wider understanding of the Hispanic world.

The blog is an opinion news site, providing an alternative coverage of politics, that doesn’t necessarily follow closely with the week’s news stories. The current affairs section is updated with pieces on the important issues that have been heavily debated.

The ‘long read’ section provides a more detailed and focused coverage of an important issue that I feel is important to talk about, or a topic which isn’t getting wide news coverage.

On occasion, other writers may contribute in their views to politics today.

This blog is self-run by me, Joshua Guillen, between my studies in the hope that I can expand my political knowledge in writing posts, which I hope are of intriguing content.

Kind regards,

Joshua Guillen

joshguillen6@gmail.com


La edición española se encuentra las figuras más importantes sobre la cultura hispánica y el poder que tienen/tenían. Este blog es el producto del estudiante, Joshua Guillen, viviendo en el Reino Unido. Actualmente, está estudiando el español, la política y la ingles en colegio. Con raises de ambos México y España, Joshua tiene un diverso interés en la cultura hispánica y la gente que es imperativa en la comunidad hispánica.

La recolección de las figuras imprescindibles será el único contenido en español, por razones de tiempo, pero puedes encontrar un número de artículos ingleses para leer.

Gracias, Joshua.   

Follow us on Twitter: