Connect with us

World

Generation gap: What student protests say about US politics, Israel support

Published

on

Generation gap: What student protests say about US politics, Israel support

Washington, DC – A Gaza-focused campus protest movement in the United States has highlighted a generational divide on Israel, experts say, with young people’s willingness to challenge politicians and college administrators on display nationwide.

The opinion gap – with younger Americans generally more supportive of Palestinians than the generations that came before them – poses a risk to 81-year-old Democratic President Joe Biden’s re-election chances, they argue.

It could also threaten the bipartisan backing that Israel enjoys in Washington.

“We’re already seeing evidence of a generation divide on Israel, and that is going to be a long-term issue for the Democratic Party,” said Omar Wasow, assistant professor of political science at the University of California, Berkeley.

“These protests accelerate that generation gap,” Wasow told Al Jazeera.

Advertisement

Students at Columbia University in New York set up a Palestine solidarity encampment last week, and they have since faced arrests and other disciplinary measures after the college administration called on police to clear the protest.

Yet, despite the crackdown, similar encampments have sprung up across the US, as well as in other countries.

Footage of students, professors and journalists being violently detained by officers on various campuses spurred outrage but has done little to slow the momentum of the protests, which have continued to spread.

‘Inflection moment’

The students are largely demanding that their universities disclose their investments and withdraw any funds from weapons manufacturers and firms involved with the Israeli military.

Politicians from both major US parties, as well as the White House and pro-Israel groups, have accused the students of fuelling anti-Semitism – allegations that protesters vehemently deny.

Advertisement

Eman Abdelhadi, a sociologist at the University of Chicago, said younger people are growing increasingly frustrated with the status quo on domestic and foreign policy issues.

“I think there’s a real disaffection with the older generation, but more importantly with the system that they’re running,” said Abdelhadi.

She added that the protests mark an “inflexion moment” in US public opinion more broadly.

“In American history in general, usually the big shifts in public opinion have either coincided with or been triggered by large student movements,” Abdelhadi told Al Jazeera.

She said campus activism can be the basis of political change. “There’s a sort of sense that this is the future.”

Advertisement
People demonstrate at a protest near an encampment in support of Palestinians in Gaza at George Washington University in Washington, DC, April 26 [Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters]

Biden’s woes

For years, public opinion polls in the US suggest that younger people are more likely to be sympathetic towards Palestinians and critical of Israel.

But Americans overall have grown more critical of Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, including in the ongoing war on Gaza.

Multiple polls suggest that a majority of US respondents back a permanent ceasefire in the besieged Palestinian enclave, where Israel has killed more than 34,000 Palestinians since the conflict broke out on October 7.

But Biden has maintained staunch support for Israel, the US’s top Middle East ally, amid the war.

The 81-year-old president’s stance could be politically costly, as Biden faces a tough re-election bid in a November election that is expected to pit him against his Republican predecessor, Donald Trump.

Advertisement

Polls suggest that Biden will need to appeal to his Democratic Party base, which is not as united in support of Israel as the Republican Party.

Angus Johnston, a historian of US student activism, explained that the generational divide on Israel is especially pronounced among Democrats.

“On a national level, we have seen this for a while as a disconnect between the values of young voters and most Democratic politicians,” Johnston told Al Jazeera.

“And what we’re seeing now is a similar disconnect between young people on campus and many of the administrators who run these campuses, along with alumni and donors.”

Abdelhadi, the sociologist, added that the heavy-handed law enforcement approach to the Gaza solidarity protests has undercut Democrats’s argument that electing Biden would protect the nation from Trump, whom they accuse of authoritarianism.

Advertisement

“The reality is the Democrats have been telling us that young people need to save democracy and that people of colour need to save democracy and that any quibbles with this current administration need to be put aside in order to save democracy,” she told Al Jazeera.

“But where’s the democracy when you have state troopers beating up students and faculty for protesting, and the White House saying nothing about that?”

Wasow also said the protests and crackdown against them could add to the apathy towards Biden.

“The Democrats can’t really afford to give people more reasons to vote against Biden, and this actually becomes one.”

Policy change

The student protesters are not getting involved in US partisan politics, however. They instead have stressed that their demands aim to help protect the human rights of Palestinians.

Advertisement

So can the demonstrations help bring about changes to US policy and achieve their divestment demands?

Johnston, the historian, said it is unlikely that US colleges will divest from large firms and the defence industry in the short term, but the call for transparency in their investments is reasonable.

He added that long-term change is possible, but it will not come overnight.

“We have seen over and over again that student organising does change policy, not always quickly, and not always in the ways that the students would have hoped,” Johnston said.

“But we do see that when student organising rises to a certain level of intensity, it can have a significant effect.”

Advertisement

For example, he said college activism against apartheid in South Africa began in the 1950s and grew over the years.

“I think that there is no question that the anti-apartheid campus organising of the 1980s was a significant piece of what shifted American popular opinion and political opinion on the South African regime,” he said.

Wasow, who studied the 1960s civil rights protests, also said demonstrations could shift public opinion, help grow political coalitions around a cause, and build civic capacity to advance an issue.

“If what’s happening now doesn’t result in any kind of policy change but does result in a generation of young people developing some kind of civic capacity around activism around these issues, I think that would continue to have effects in the long term.”

Advertisement

World

Netflix Says No to Warner Bros. After Price War, Beltway Concerns

Published

on

Netflix Says No to Warner Bros. After Price War, Beltway Concerns

And just like that, Netflix has bowed out of its pursuit of Warner Bros. Discovery’s streaming and studio assets.

Late Thursday, the streaming colossus announced that it has decided against raising its $82.7 billion bid for a big chunk of the WBD properties, leaving Paramount Skydance with what amounts to the winning offer. Under Paramount’s latest revision to its original proposal, David Ellison’s media conglomerate will fork over some $111 billion for everything under the WBD tent, including the sports-heavy cable networks division.

Among the backers of Paramount’s $31 per share, all-cash bid are Bank of America Merrill Lynch, Citi and Apollo, which are providing a $57.5 billion debt commitment, and Ellison’s father/Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison, who has guaranteed a $45.7 billion equity commitment.

In a statement issued by co-CEOs Ted Sarandos and Greg Peters, Netflix noted that Paramount’s latest escalation made any further attempt to claim the WBD assets a bad bit of business. “The transaction we negotiated would have created shareholder value with a clear path to regulatory approval,” Sarandos and Peters wrote. “However, we’ve always been disciplined, and at the price required to match Paramount Skydance’s latest offer, the deal is no longer financially attractive, so we are declining to match the Paramount Skydance bid.”

Netflix went on to thank the WBD brass for “running a fair and rigorous process” before going on to characterize the assets as “a ‘nice to have’ at the right price, not a ‘must have’ at any price.”

Advertisement

Meanwhile, as part of its sweetened offer, Paramount will foot the bill for the $2.8 billion termination fee WBD now owes Netflix.

Netflix’s announcement arrived just hours after Sarandos met with White House staffers to discuss his company’s bid for the WBD assets. President Donald Trump was not on hand for the meeting.

Paramount’s updated offer all but guarantees that it will walk away with the WBD spoils. While shareholders must vote to approve the deal, the amount of cash in play and the absence of a viable alternative suggest that the transaction will get the green flag.

Upon closing, the Paramount deal will bring CBS Sports and Turner Sports under one roof, thereby creating a massive rights portfolio that includes the NFL, NHL, Major League Baseball, college football, the Masters, the UFC and March Madness.

Uniting the rights to the marquee men’s college hoops tourney would effectively close the circle on the partnership forged in 2010 by former CBS Sports chairman Sean McManus and ex-Turner Sports president David Levy. After McManus determined that CBS could no longer afford to go it alone with its coverage of March Madness, the two execs hashed out a 14-year, $10.8 billion rights deal that would see the Turner networks share the burden—and the spoils—with CBS.

Advertisement

Ten years ago, the two partners extended the deal through 2032, tacking on another eight years of Madness for an additional $8.8 billion.

Having been subjected to a Beltway cross-examination and at least one disapproving social media salvo by the president, Netflix may have come to the conclusion that the regulatory fix was in. Earlier this month, Sarandos was grilled by a Senate committee in an antitrust hearing that often teetered on the edge of the profoundly unserious. In one heated exchange, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) asked why “so much of Netflix content for children promotes a transgender ideology?”

Hawley began his line of questioning by inquiring into relevant matters (labor concerns, theatrical windows), before veering into the culture war lane near the end of his allotted time. He concluded by expressing his concern that Sarandos and Netflix “don’t share my values or those of many other American parents,” a vibes-based assessment which the framers of the Sherman Act neglected to consider 136 years ago when they were going about the business of outlawing monopolistic practices.

Later in the hearing, Eric Schmitt, the junior senator from the Show Me State, told Sarandos that Netflix was responsible for creating the “wokest content in the history of the world.” Again, this was an antitrust hearing, not a meeting of a network standards and practices division.

Ellison turned down an invitation to testify at the hearing.

Advertisement

Netflix’s decision to bow out of the running was made shortly after the WBD board determined that Paramount’s latest bid was the “superior” offer. Paramount’s strategy to usurp Netflix as the front runner was reinforced by an aggressive campaign to assure WBD shareholders that it has a far better shot at successfully negotiating any potential regulatory hurdles.

Misgivings about Netflix’s chances were further amplified last weekend when President Donald Trump made a dig at a Netflix board member.

Trump on Saturday took to Truth Social to demand that Netflix bounce Susan Rice from its board of directors “IMMEDIATELY, or pay the consequences.” A former Obama and Biden administration official, Rice poked the bear during a podcast appearance in which she insinuated that “it is not going to end well” for corporations and news organizations that “bent the knee” to Trump.

When asked by the BBC about Trump’s anti-Rice salvo, Sarandos tried to shrug the whole thing off, saying of the president, “He likes to do a lot of things on social media.” Sarandos went on to assert that the executive branch has no say in the matter, and while that may be accurate from a legal standpoint, the Netflix co-CEO may want to take a gander at the big pile of nothing that used to be the East Wing of the White House. Stranger things (sorry) have happened.

“This is a business deal. It’s not a political deal,” Sarandos said. “This deal is run by the Department of Justice in the U.S. and regulators throughout Europe and around the world.”

Advertisement

The day after Sarandos brushed off Trump’s remarks, Paramount upped its offer to WBD to $31 a share, to be paid in all cash. This marked the 10th revision of Paramount’s original bid and included billions in additional financial incentives. Just hours after WBD acknowledged receipt of the beefed-up proposal, Ellison, the chairman and CEO of Paramount, attended the State of the Union Address as a guest of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

The Justice Department, which just two weeks ago dismissed Gail Slater, the head of its antitrust division, is said to be looking into Paramount’s proposal. Under federal law, antitrust enforcers are at liberty to scuttle any deal that poses a threat to fair and competitive business practices.

On Wednesday, House Democrats petitioned U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to provide a full accounting of why the DOJ ousted Slater, noting that her ejection has left a “leadership vacuum” at a time when “the antitrust division is handling historic cases.” Signed by Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House judiciary committee, and Jerry Nadler, a Democratic congressman from New York, the letter stated that Slater’s departure leaves the DOJ bereft of “any principled antitrust experts left to guard the antitrust division from [a] cascade of corruption.”

Hand-picked by Trump to lead the antitrust division, Slater was confirmed by the Senate last March by a 78-19 vote.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

Tour guide arrested after drawing stick figure on 4,000-year-old pyramid

Published

on

Tour guide arrested after drawing stick figure on 4,000-year-old pyramid

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

An Egyptian tour guide was arrested after allegedly sketching a stick figure onto the side of the 4,000-year-old Pyramid of Unas while leading a group of tourists.

Video of the incident, which circulated widely on social media, shows the man leaning toward a lower section of the pyramid’s outer casing while tourists stand nearby listening. He is then seen attempting to wipe the markings away with his hand, though remnants remain visible in the footage.

In a post on X, Egypt’s Interior Ministry said the guide “damaged an antiquity by drawing on the outer casing of one of the pyramids” while explaining the site to tourists. Although the initial report mentioned the general Giza area.

The ministry said the investigation was launched after the video spread online, prompting an antiquities inspector to file a report with the Saqqara Tourism Police Station identifying the guide. Officials said the markings were later removed by specialists.

Advertisement

An Egyptian tour guide was arrested after allegedly sketching a stick figure on the 4,000-year-old Pyramid of Unas in Saqqara, officials said. (Egyptian Ministry of Interior)

Authorities apprehended the suspect, who confessed to the act during questioning, according to the ministry.

“Legal measures have been taken,” the ministry added, noting that specialists have since removed the markings.

Local media outlets, citing the Interior Ministry’s investigation, identified the site as the Pyramid of Unas in the Saqqara necropolis south of Giza.

VANDALS HIT YOSEMITE NATIONAL PARK WITH GRAFFITI ON BOULDER, MORE

Advertisement

An Egyptian tour guide was arrested after allegedly sketching a stick figure on the 4,000-year-old Pyramid of Unas in Saqqara, officials said. (Egyptian Ministry of Interior)

B.C. for the Pharaoh Unas, is historically significant for containing the earliest Pyramid Texts. These religious inscriptions consist of more than 200 spells carved into the pyramid’s interior walls, forming what scholars consider the oldest known collection of funerary texts.

ARCHAEOLOGISTS FIND 1,600-YEAR-OLD CHURCHES AND MURAL OF JESUS IN EGYPTIAN DESERT SETTLEMENT

An Egyptian tour guide was arrested after allegedly sketching a stick figure on the 4,000-year-old Pyramid of Unas in Saqqara, officials said. (Egyptian Ministry of Interior)

The pyramid is located within the vast Saqqara necropolis, part of ancient Memphis – Egypt’s first capital and now a UNESCO World Heritage Site that contains a sprawling complex of tombs, temples and pyramids.

Advertisement

Egypt has increased enforcement and preservation efforts at archaeological sites in recent years as officials seek to protect ancient monuments that attract millions of visitors annually.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Under Egypt’s Antiquities Protection Law, damaging actions such as writing on or damaging archaeological sites can carry prison sentences and fines, with the exact penalties varying by offense.

Related Article

World's top tourist city turns ancient ruins into part of the daily subway commute
Continue Reading

World

Italy calls for suspension of EU carbon market

Published

on

Italy calls for suspension of EU carbon market

Italy’s Industry minister Adolfo Urso urged the European Union to suspend its carbon market until the bloc presents a revised proposal due this summer, citing the hardship faced by European businesses because of high power and carbon costs.

ADVERTISEMENT


ADVERTISEMENT

The Emissions Trading System (ETS) is the bloc’s mechanism for making companies pay for their pollution, with the dual aim of reducing emissions and encouraging industry to invest in more sustainable alternatives.

In Europe, the ETS currently covers heavy industries, power plants as well as airlines and shipping. Additional sectors such as international aviation, landfills and incinerators will be included in the upcoming review by the European Commission.

But Urso said the ETS is to blame for Europe’s competitiveness problems because the bloc’s climate policy tool has a “perverse effect” and is preventing European companies from competing with China and the United States.

Advertisement

“We are all aware that the mechanism of the ETS, as it is currently drafted, is only a tax, a tariff on the energy-intensive companies that struggle to remain competitive,” Urso told reporters on the sidelines of a gathering of industry ministers in Brussels on Thursday. “It is necessary – we are all aware – to review it in a substantive way.”

“To do this properly, it is necessary to suspend the ETS mechanism while awaiting a reform that must necessarily be comprehensive,” Urso added.

Urso added: “If we are in the face of the collapse of the European chemical industry and the crisis of European ideology, we cannot wait for the time of negotiations within the European Union to find a solution.”

The Italian minister said that in the meantime, “we are looking for an effective organic solution,” adding that he will ask the European Commission to suspend the ETS.

Italy’s plea joins that of industry leaders who have recently asked the EU to urgently act to reduce energy and carbon costs. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has recently touted the same idea, driving down carbon market prices, only to backtrack on it a few days later.

Advertisement

Nordic business leaders back ETS

In a letter sent to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and EU Climate Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra, a group of Nordic industry associations representing Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway urged the EU to maintain the ETS, highlighting its role as a key European advantage and as a source of certainty for investments in clean technologies.

They backed the ETS as a “market-based and technology-neutral policy instrument” that helps reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

“Reforming the system must be done carefully, because it has such a significant impact on the economy and competitiveness, in addition to the climate,” the Nordic leaders suggested.

The four industry associations argued that future prosperity in the EU is linked to the ETS since its revenues can bring about decisive investments in clean energy production, critical infrastructure, electrification, and ultimately the decarbonisation of industry.

“Efficient use of the EU’s own resources is central to achieving almost all the Union’s major strategic aims, and these efforts require reliable access to both public and private financing,” reads the letter dated 23 February and seen by Euronews.

Advertisement

Since its inception in 2005, the ETS has slashed emissions by 39%, with revenues exceeding €260 billion, according to the EU data.

Hindering technological innovation

Carlo Carraro, President Emeritus and Professor of Economics at Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, criticised the Italian government’s stance on the ETS, saying the attack risks weakening a policy that has proven effective in reducing emissions in regulated sectors.

“Innovation and competitiveness are now inextricably linked to decarbonisation,” Carraro said. “Hindering the transition exposes businesses to increasing technological and financial risks and makes the country less competitive”.

Similar thoughts were voiced by Chiara di Mambro, Director of Strategy Italy and Europe at the environmental think tank ECCO.

“Suspending the ETS as proposed today or subsidising gas, as envisaged in the Government’s recent decree, would move Italy in the opposite direction (higher energy prices): weakening the price signal, increasing market uncertainty, and ultimately delaying the transition away from expensive fossil fuels,” di Mambro said.

Advertisement

Italy is already on track to overhaul its electricity market, which would strip carbon costs from power bills. Instead, Di Mambro suggests using fiscal revenues or dividends from energy companies to reduce the burden of levies on electricity bills.

Continue Reading

Trending