Month: September 2024

Politics

Israel and Palestine Conflict Revisited: One Year After October 7th

| admin

Israel and Palestine Conflict Revisited: One Year After October 7th

The Israel and Palestine conflict rages on without a solution. The war against Hamas, in response to the October 7th attacks, has devastated Gaza, while violence in the West Bank remains underreported. The Palestinian people have suffered greatly, not just in Gaza but also in the West Bank. Gaza is under a blockade, with 60% of its buildings destroyed or damaged. Core infrastructure, including water supplies, has been severely affected, further restricting essential services. The risk of famine in Gaza remains high. The situation in the West Bank, while less severe, is still alarming. Jewish settlers have been attacking defenseless villagers, sabotaging farms, engaging in harassment and violence, and attempting to displace people from their homes. This violence includes the murder of civilians and the demolition of homes with state approval. Despite these issues, global attention has largely focused on Gaza, leaving the West Bank’s struggles unnoticed.

The humanitarian impact breaks my heart. Hearing stories of people unable to feed themselves, lacking shelter, or of how people were injured is devastating. Children playing in the streets have been hit by sniper fire. Entire families have been wiped out by airstrikes. The reports are horrifying, and I’ve started to grow numb to them. Journalists and aid workers have been murdered for reporting on the war. The conflict remains largely closed off, with very few granted free access.

Gaza

The aim to destroy Hamas has failed, as Israel has leveled Gaza, yet Hamas remains. Its leadership has hidden within a vast tunnel network, making them moving targets that can’t easily be found. It’s a game of cat and mouse, with guerrilla warfare being waged against Israeli troops trying to clear the tunnels. It has been clear for some time that hostages are no longer the primary concern, and the threshold for acceptable civilian damage has shifted. Hostages are now leverage, not to be given away without something significant in return. A two-state solution seems impossible when everyone is moving the goalposts, and trust is at an all-time low. After so much blood has been spilled, no one is willing to make a deal.

The only bit of good news is that a regional war has been avoided so far. Hamas leadership hoped that, after October 7th, Hezbollah and other allies would launch a full-scale war against Israel, yet only minor escalations have occurred. Everyone seems to be responding in some way but avoiding an all-out war. The situation feels like a powder keg, with everyone lighting matches and setting off fireworks at each other. While the state of Israel is unlikely to be destroyed, it has become increasingly isolated on the global stage.

Hezbollah and the North

Attention has now shifted north toward Hezbollah, another Iranian-backed group in Lebanon. Unable to fully defeat Hamas, Israel has degraded them enough that its next focus appears to be Hezbollah. Rocket strikes into northern Israel have caused people to flee border areas. Despite Lebanon’s status as a failed state, Hezbollah is considered the strongest and most well-armed threat. Israel has targeted Hezbollah leadership by sabotaging their communication network and following up with airstrikes. The aim is to escalate in order to de-escalate, forcing Hezbollah into a deal. The goal seems to be dismantling Iran’s “axis of resistance” one group at a time. It’s unclear whether Iran itself will be the next target, possibly with Trump’s return to influence. Israel’s actions have left it isolated, as international opinion continues to turn against it.

Arab states have refused to work on normalizing relations until the war is over. European allies have strongly condemned Israel, and in some cases, voted to recognize the state of Palestine. Only the Americans have remained firmly on Israel’s side, though even they are questioning and growing frustrated. Some, including the British, have blocked arms exports to Israel. All sides are increasingly concerned about post-war plans, with ideas floated such as displacing people into the Egyptian desert.

Iran

Iran’s long-term goal is to reduce or remove American influence from the region. Over the last couple of decades, Iran has targeted American allies, and it also wants to destroy the state of Israel, which has aggressively pushed back. For now, Iran has kept its distance from the conflict. Both are powerful actors, but neither has the ability to destroy the other outright. They are trading blows using proxy forces under the united banner of the “axis of resistance.” However, the groups within this axis have different goals and ideas.

If tensions with Iran escalate further, we could see Israel and Iran engaging in more direct attacks. The risk of a war between the two sides looms, with the possibility of a single miscalculation setting off a conflict. It’s hard to predict what that would look like. A war would put the U.S. in a tricky position, especially since Trump has unfinished business with Iran. Trump, entangled in legal battles, has revealed Pentagon plans to attack Iran, and Iranian hackers have targeted his campaign as an act of vengeance for the assassination of Qasem Soleimani, which Trump ordered.

When you consider the geopolitical complexities, the situation becomes even more tangled. Powers in the Middle East—America, Russia, Iran, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, and Qatar—all have different views and goals. Arab states are divided on how to act, especially those allied with the U.S., who fear Iran’s growing influence.

The interconnected conflicts of the Middle East have added yet another chapter to this war. A year after October 7th, we have seen one deadly gamble after another. The conflict in Gaza has turned into a stalemate, while in the West Bank, Israel has the upper hand with settlers driving people out. Peace is a distant dream, and the Palestinian people are being forgotten. Now, as attention shifts toward Hezbollah, the biggest threat to Israel may lie within, as extremist settlers appear to have gained control of the nation’s future. This paints a bleak picture for both Israel and the Middle East, leaving me feeling uncomfortable and deeply sad.

Economics, Politics

Labour budget dilemma

| admin

Labour’s Budget Dilemma

The UK Labour Party is grappling with a significant budgetary challenge. While there is widespread agreement on the need to increase public spending to repair public services, there is no consensus on who should bear the cost. The economy is currently operating at maximum capacity, meaning any increase in spending without corresponding tax hikes would lead to inflation. Higher taxes are not just about raising revenue but are necessary to free up resources. However, this solution is unpopular and risks destroying jobs. It could also reduce consumer spending, particularly in sectors with high productivity growth due to intense competition for labour. Redirecting that labour towards the public sector, which has struggled with low productivity in recent years, is a troubling prospect given the UK’s lacklustre productivity growth.

When people shift from consuming goods and services to investing in assets to protect their gains, other negative consequences emerge. A reduction in consumer spending could create economic “doom loops.” There’s already a pervasive sense that high streets are dying, giving many areas a bleak, stagnant vibe. This is dangerous both economically and politically. Economic stagnation breeds intolerance and reactionary politics, fostering support for far-right movements among disillusioned voters. The ability to spend hard-earned money outside the home is a key factor in personal happiness. The post-COVID surge in spending at shops and pubs highlights this, as people sought to regain a sense of normalcy and joy.

This helps explain why the UK has settled on a tax-to-GDP ratio of 37%, with little appetite for increasing it. Higher taxes come with trade-offs that the public has been unwilling to accept. Taxing the rich won’t solve the core issue of freeing up resources for the public sector, though I wish it would, out of a sense of social justice.

But this leads to a critical question: Are we, as a society, ready to make the sacrifices needed for better public services, even if it means paying more in taxes?

The Path Forward

The solutions lie in raising the inflation target to better reflect economic realities and boosting productivity. The public sector, particularly the NHS, needs real capital investment to become more efficient—better computers, rebuilt hospitals, and modern infrastructure. For example, investing in modern healthcare technology could shorten waiting times and improve patient outcomes. Hospitals built with better infrastructure would also become more energy-efficient, saving long-term operational costs.

Planning reform is a good start, but we need to shift taxes from income to land, among other reforms. A land value tax, for example, could encourage the productive use of land and help tackle the housing crisis. However, these changes will be fiercely opposed by vested interests who benefit from the current system.

Another challenge is reallocating labour in a more efficient economy, which could mean the disappearance of tens of thousands of jobs. These workers would need support while transitioning to new employment, and not just “bullshit jobs” created by overly complicated systems propped up by tax breaks. Simplifying the tax code would provoke fierce resistance from those with a stake in the current system. Redirecting labour will require targeted, specific measures—not broad-brush solutions.

How can we ensure that workers in obsolete or inefficient industries are given the support and retraining they need? This is where government policy must be proactive, not reactive. Without adequate support, we risk creating a new wave of economic and political dissatisfaction.

The Core Problem

So far, the government has shown little interest in tackling the vested interests that resist raising productivity. This leaves higher taxes as the only option, with the accompanying risk of fueling far-right sentiment. If Labour is to succeed in its mission and counter the rise of the far right, it must rethink its approach. Addressing the most problematic aspects of capitalism is necessary—not just as a matter of left-wing idealism but as a pragmatic strategy. The political right has been co-opted by landlords and predatory, reactionary capitalism.

While Labour must act decisively, it also needs to frame its efforts as a step toward a more equitable and functional economy. Yes, reform will be difficult, and opposition from powerful vested interests is inevitable, but change is not only possible—it is essential.

Is it not time for a government that puts the long-term well-being of its people above short-term gains?

Conclusion

The UK faces a crossroads. The budget dilemma Labour grapples with is emblematic of deeper systemic issues—stagnant productivity, growing inequality, and a political landscape susceptible to far-right sentiment. Raising taxes, increasing public spending, and improving services aren’t easy choices, but they are necessary steps toward a more sustainable future.

The challenge is not just about managing the economy—it’s about confronting the vested interests that have for too long blocked meaningful reform. Labour must be bold in its vision, but also pragmatic in how it implements change. Tackling inefficiencies in the public sector, reallocating labor, and modernizing the tax system are all achievable with the right political will.

Ultimately, the public must be persuaded that short-term sacrifices, like higher taxes, are worth the long-term benefits—better public services, more meaningful jobs, and a more just society. Failure to act now will only deepen the cycle of stagnation and discontent, further empowering reactionary forces.

As the UK stands at this pivotal moment, the question becomes: Will we choose progress and shared prosperity, or continue down a path of economic decline and political instability?

Labour has the opportunity—and the responsibility—to steer the country toward a more hopeful future. The time to act is now.

Smite

Smite 2 Alpha Thoughts

| admin

Smite 2 Alpha Thoughts

I have been playing Smite 2 since the earliest closed weekend alpha. Alpha software is still in a very early stage, with decisions being made on core gameplay and features that have yet to be added. The foundation of the game exists, but content is sparse; this stage is all about ensuring that the core mechanics can support the rest of the game. Complaints about the game lacking content at this point misunderstand the nature of development. Comparing an 11-year-old game to a brand-new one being built from the ground up is unrealistic.

The developers are currently focused on porting characters over while updating effects and designs. The emphasis has been on quality-of-life improvements and reworking older designs. The current alpha roster seems to be building a library of abilities that can be used as a basis for further character porting. Although this hasn’t been explicitly stated, it appears to be the case. More complex characters, which require additional time and resources, are being skipped for now, with various features either missing or yet to be added.

While the game mechanics generally make sense, I have some concerns with certain balance choices. It seems that balance has taken a backseat to content porting at this stage. Judging certain aspects of the game is difficult when matchmaking is inconsistent. Minor changes have gradually reshaped the gameplay. For example, the removal of the class system has shifted the focus toward INT (Intelligence) and STR (Strength) as more important factors in determining roles. Characters now deal either physical or magical damage: Physical damage scales with STR, while magical damage scales with INT. However, building INT on physical characters does not convert their damage to magical. For example, Sol deals magical damage but can benefit from STR in a carry role.

Some characters are designed to play multiple roles, gaining bonuses like extra utility when building INT. This approach shows promise in creating a flexible set of role archetypes. I hope the developers are bold enough to expand on this concept with early, middle, and late-game design. One possible idea could be that building STR on magical characters increases attack speed for ranged attacks.

In addition to changes in character design, itemization has also been revamped. The game now uses a recipe-component mechanic, allowing players to switch between build paths without being overly punished. If you make a mistake, the system is far more forgiving.

The two biggest changes, however, are how relics work and the introduction of active items. Relics can now only be selected at the beginning of the game and have long cooldowns. As a result, crowd control has become much stronger and more impactful, though there has already been a reduction in crowd control duration across the board. There is also less choice in terms of relics, with older relics moving to active items. These two changes have significantly altered how the game plays.

Additionally, wards now offer less vision and have shorter timers, meaning junglers face fewer counters than before. Combined with some buggy interactions, this creates a rough experience. At this point, I’m unsure about the direction the developers want to take the game.

Currently, the game feels snowball-heavy, with a focus on bursting down opponents and chasing them. The damage feels unavoidable, and there are few options for recovery when you fall behind. The early game has a punishing focus, with no trade-offs for characters that excel in this stage. Perhaps I’m wrong, but the base strength of characters seems off, and I worry that using this as a baseline could lead to future problems.

It’s also hard to describe the art and graphics; something feels off, as if the characters don’t quite fit into the world. The Conquest map remains unchanged, making the layout feel overly familiar. It’s still very easy to move between the jungle and lanes. While various new objects have been added, they don’t significantly change how the game feels.

Overall, Smite 2 feels like a love letter to the original game—more of a remaster than something entirely new. Even ability sounds have been transferred over. It seems like the developers are playing it safe instead of experimenting with bold new ideas. Despite this being a new engine with a new team building the game from the ground up, Smite 2 still feels like it’s treading familiar ground.

I understand that finding the right balance between innovation and preserving what works is tricky, but with no competition on consoles, Smite remains the only MOBA in town.

So, should you try it? Not yet—unless you can stomach an early-access game that could disappear, like so many live-service games over the years.