I have free top-tier guests for you this evening. I will speak to Samuel Moyn, Yale professor, and offer an upcoming book on American wars about Biden's pledge to stop trying to radically change foreign countries by military force. I also speak to Ovidal Abahir, an academic and journalist in Kabul, about how now that Western troops have left Afghanistan, they might still influence the Taliban. And finally, I speak to the chair of a young labor about the party's astonishing decision to ban the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, as well as Jeremy Corbyn, from speaking at Labor Party Conference, or at least that's the latest communication from them to young labor, all very odd if predictable. As ever, let us know your thoughts by tweeting on the hashtag Tiski Sauer or commenting below. And if you haven't already, do hit that subscribe button. First story. On Monday night at one minute to midnight, the last remaining American soldiers left Afghanistan and the war, at least for the United States, was over. The nature of the exit has been widely seen as a humiliation for the United States. But last night, Joe Biden gave a defiant speech. He labeled the evacuation from Kabul airport an extraordinary success and the decision to leave Afghanistan as the right decision, a wise decision, and the best decision for America. Defiant speeches which make no apologies to his opponents are what we've come to expect from Joe Biden. But the most interesting part of his address was not about his past decisions, but a declaration about the future of American foreign policy. As we turn the page on the foreign policy, this guided our nation the last two decades, we've got to learn from our mistakes. To me, there are two that are paramount. First, we must set missions with clear, achievable goals. Not ones we'll never reach. And second, we must stay clearly focused on the fundamental national security interest of the United States of America. This decision about Afghanistan is not just about Afghanistan. It's about ending an era of major military operations to remake other countries. We saw a mission of counterterrorism in Afghanistan, getting the terrorists and stopping attacks, morph into a counterinsurgency, nation-building, trying to create a democratic, cohesive, and united Afghanistan, something that has never been done over many centuries in Afghan history. Moving on from that mindset and those kind of large-scale troop deployments will make us stronger and more effective and safer at home. Joe Biden there suggesting the US should give up on military operations to remake other countries and should give up on nation-building. A sharp break there to what the United States was saying for example 20 years ago. I'm joined now by Samuel Moyne, Professor of Law and History at Yale University and author of the upcoming Humane, How the United States Abandoned Peace and Reinvented War. Thank you so much for joining us this evening. That book, which is out very soon in the United States, a bit later in this country serves as a critique of the idea that wars can serve the greater good of those being invaded. Does that mean you welcome what Joe Biden said yesterday? I do up to a point. It was a courageous step that Joe Biden took to resist the groupthink of Washington DC. There hasn't been a successful occupation of a country that has done the kind of nation-building Biden alluded to since a really long time ago the time of the American and British occupation Germany or America and Japan or South Korea. In the last few decades what we've seen is a kind of two bad options when Americans decide to engage in regime change. Either they do try to set up a friendly government and fail and that happened long ago in Afghanistan to be honest, or they remove a regime as in Libya under Barack Obama and let it descend into chaos without helping. And so many of us are happy to hear Biden say that nation-building is over. The question is whether regime change will stop and more important what Biden will do with the counter-terror war because he's made very clear and he made clear in the speech last night that giving up counter-insurgent wars by no means suggests that America can or will give up a counter-terrorist war even though it doesn't have a very clear objective that can be achieved either. Glad you brought up that statement by Biden that this counter-terror war will continue because I do think that has been underplayed in many accounts of the speech he gave yesterday and the current US position. I want to go to the relevant moment in that speech where he suggested that because as you say he demonstrated a reluctance to keep troops on the ground but he didn't renounce the right of the US military to use deadly force abroad. We all maintain the fight against terrorism in Afghanistan and other countries. We just don't need to fight a ground war to do it. We have what's called over-the-horizon capabilities which means we can strike terrorists and targets without American boots on the ground or very few if needed. We've shown that capacity just in the last week. We struck ISIS-K remotely days after they murdered 13 of our service members and dozens of innocent Afghans. And to ISIS-K, we are not done with you yet. As commander-in-chief, I firmly believe the best path to guard our safety and our security lies in a tough, unforgiving, targeted, precise strategy that goes after terror where it is today, not where it was two decades ago. That's what's in our national interest. Joe Biden there making clear that while troops on the ground in the Middle East might be something in the past, the war on terror is still continuing just by other means. What was particularly odd about that section of the speech was that the drone strike he is bragging about, the one that he showed us or suggested was a sign of the success of the future of American wars, killed 10 civilians, including seven children. And because it can seem abstract, talking about these things in terms of numbers of people, I want to play a clip of Rahmin Yusuf, he called in to the BBC. He's the cousin of one of the people who were killed. And it's also his cousin's children who were killed in that attack. Let's take a look. They are killed in this attack, all civilian people, all the children, all those that they work in the civilian field. The army did not start attack. You can ask from the nightboard for those ones that he has friendship with our family. We will laugh in this area about 25 years. You can ask from the other person. What is your family feeling today after this attack? You've lost 10 members of your family.  We gather at our price of our members and our hands.  I'm sorry, Rahmin John. And what message do you have for the international community? That's one of our questions. Why did he kill our family, our children, seven children, that they all are born out? We cannot identify his face, his body. We just... Rahmin John, we'll have to leave it there. That was obviously incredibly difficult to listen to and put Biden's celebration of that drone strike in perspective. Samuel, I would like to get you to expand further on this issue of drone strikes and whether there is a danger that this war which involves troops on the ground will just become a war which involves drones in the sky. And to some degree that could make it even less accountable because the American public are even further away from the consequences of the actions of the US military than they were beforehand. Well, it's not a fear. It's happened. So I think we have to step back and recall that the war on terror has been sort of two parallel wars, one succeeding another. The first involved invasion, intervention with massive troop numbers, and indeed occupation in the case of both Afghanistan and Iraq. But the truth is that that war has been on the wane for a very long time. Remember that not just Barack Obama but Donald Trump before Joe Biden ran on withdrawal because George W. Bush's popularity was so damaged by the reversals of the Iraq war involving American death, the death of American soldiers. And so Obama, as I narrate in the Guardian Long Read piece from yesterday and in my new book, did something, you decide, diabolical or ingenious. He invented the other war. And it involved not just drones, which Bush had used much more minimally in fewer places and which Obama used maximally and in many places. But also the use of standoff missiles sent from afar. And this should not be left out, special forces, small teams of men who come and stealth, pay a visit, and kill. And that war has been entrenched now for a very long time. So the risk in focusing on the finale of Afghan withdrawal, when Obama had gotten troops down to 8,000 there from 100,000 and Trump to 5,000 from 8,000, is that we miss the expansion of the of the other war, the forever war, the one that's sanitized and less visible, except that kind of disturbingly Biden bragged about its continuation last night. And so what we can expect to see, not just in Afghanistan, but in many other places, is a continuation of that war. It will involve civilian disaster, but even when it doesn't, it involves things we really ought to keep track of. And the worry is that as American controversy around the Afghanistan deployment subsides, Americans and their allies will just treat counter terrorist operations wherever they take place as normal, along with the surveillance, which has has come together, as you know, with the forever war in our lifetimes. One other break, I think in Joe Biden's speech, compared to previous presidents, or at least pre-Trump presidents, was that he was very specific that American wars would be limited to defending the national interest. There would be no, I suppose, grand liberal ideas about remaking nations or neocon ideas about projecting American influence to transform the world. It can sound kind of brutal, it can sound kind of harsh on the face of it. All we're going to do is protect the American national interest defined in quite constricted ways. At the same time, do you think that is for the best, considering how our liberal interventions have gone recently? I do think it's for the best for as long into the future as we can imagine. It's not that in an ideal world, or in theory, we might not welcome democratization if we knew how to do it. The same, by the way, is true of much more limited kinds of interventions we call humanitarian interventions. But in our time, sadly, both of these kinds of projects, one more championed by neoconservatives, the other more often by liberal internationalists, so called, have failed and have generally made the places they intend to improve worse off. If you believe that ought implies can, then I think Biden is correctly recognizing that we do not know how, even to intervene to save civilians from their own governments with military means without changing the regime and making things worse, witness Libya, and certainly don't know how to conduct regime change for the sake of building a democracy. Now, what we do know how to do is what's called, in another context, mowing the lawn, a kind of constant campaign of identifying threats and striking. And in some ways, the lesser goal, which gives up, let's call it hope and improvement, is also depressing because it's not as if when Americans relinquish regime change, they give up violence. On the contrary, Biden announced that he will pursue it with redoubled efforts. Is there a distinction between drone strikes which are done in a way that is hostile to foreign governments and potentially ones which are called in by foreign governments? For example, if it were the case that the Taliban and the Americans agree that they both want to defeat ISIS-K and the Taliban say, well, we give you tacit permission to do the odd strike here and there to try and deplete their capacities, do you see that as something that would be more acceptable than the hostile airstrike? So it depends on your criteria or standards. If you care about international law, it surely is helpful that there's consent. But we know that we don't think the fact that generally illicit governments consent to things makes them all right. And in my view, and what I try to show in my writings is that a world in which you can have strong powers like my government and yours sending violence globally and then in some cases excusing it by saying they got permission from a weak power seems pretty far from ideal. It seems like a recipe for a world of permanent hierarchy, permanent security, sometimes with tacit or other permission, but always through some kind of deal or security arrangement. And so it's a very sad outcome because you're right that Biden has relinquished any hope in a kind of progressive form of internationalism that would be about human improvement in exchange for this more security internationalism. But there's one thing further to add, which is that also in the speech, Biden explained clearly that what American mainstream foreign policy thinkers care much more about than the Middle East now, another legacy from Donald Trump is pivoting away from that quagmire to confronting China. And this, in a way, I think is equally troubling because this is not a recipe for speech for peace. Sorry, the speech last night was framed. I think we'll come to be seen as a big moment in the turn towards embracing a kind of Cold War with China. And we know how bad for humanity the last Cold War was. I suppose the issue there, as Vincent Bevin says, come on the show before, sort of documents very powerfully in that previous Cold War, it wasn't fighting between the United States and the Soviet Union that caused all of the deaths and the horrors. It was in those third countries. Do you see that as happening now? Will there be drone strikes in countries that the United States think there is a risk that they could turn to being more supportive of China than they are of the United States? Is that the future we're looking at? Well, so I think it's a really interesting comparison because first we'd have to kind of think back to what the Soviets world agenda was. They didn't conduct much intervention beyond their own sphere and later Afghanistan where they famously lost before Americans did. But it's true that there was an ideological contest in which the Soviets were deeply involved. It's not clear yet that the Chinese have a world vision, anything like the one that the Soviets did. So there in a sense may be less for Americans to oppose. I think it's really different not just for that reason, but because America is an empire in decline and its trouble with China is that it's in the ascent and it really wants to slow the process. It doesn't seem to me as likely to turn as the old Cold War did on kind of third world competition for hearts and minds. It may turn on markets with climate change. It may turn on agricultural land and resources. Regardless, there's a lot of chance for violence because we know that failing empires, the British as an excellent example, tend to be very violent as they decline in part because of imperial nostalgia, in part because vested interests that refuse really to accept decline. In a way, the last week was a good example of that phenomenon when many in Washington DC had a tantrum, even though Afghanistan had essentially been lost long ago because the loss was so graphic for Americans that it conflicted with their left you like imperial sensibilities. But that kind of thing is going to be more and more regular. I'm afraid. My last question was going to be about that, which was was that tantrum, that huge reaction we've seen both from the US foreign policy establishment, and I have to say basically everyone with any power and significance in the UK has been a cross-party consensus between the conservatives and the Labour Party that what Joe Biden did in withdrawing was a horrific and terrible decision. All of our newspapers are calling it a disgrace that he withdrew. He should have stayed there for longer. Do you think this tantrum is going to have any effect? Do you think Joe Biden might think again before he withdraws? I don't know where that would be, but do you think he might take a step back and think, oh actually going against that foreign policy consensus was dangerous, let's not do it again? I don't think so. I mean, there is a tradition on the part of West Europeans or Europeans of kind of deferring to American hegemony. It worked well for them or well enough in the Cold War. As you noted, as Vincent Bevin's shows so masterfully, there was a lot of global violence, but Europeans were provided peace. And Europeans, including Brits, having handed off imperial power to my country, got into the routine of thinking it part of the natural order. But it's not now. And in that sense, the speech really was significant because it's rare to find an American president admitting limits to the power of the United States, which is in effect what Joe Biden did last night. And that kind of retreat marks the kind of winds of change moment, even if the actual withdrawal from Afghanistan had long since taken place, the loss of massive territory to the Taliban had long since taken place. And even if, as we've suggested, the war on terror will continue with your own special forces for as long as we can imagine. Samuel Moyn, thank you so much for joining us this evening. And I said earlier in the interview that your book is out later in the United Kingdom. It seems that people in the UK can order it on September the 14th, 2021. So very soon, you won't have to wait long for that. Samuel Moyn, thank you so much for joining us this evening. Thank you for inviting me, Michael. Let's go to a few comments. Con Mack tweets on the hashtag Tiskey Sour. It has shown that unlawful and undemocratic occupation of territory doesn't work, and at some point due to cost and life, we all had to leave. Hopefully we learn and try a more diplomatic way before militarily. P.S. looking tanned, hope that Aaron's wedding went well. Thank you very much for the comments about my town. I did work on it and for the kind words about Aaron's wedding. Read your comment, read the substance of it. I mean, I think that's a very important point. I suppose what that conversation with Samuel Moyn suggests is that there are sort of two directions that this could go in. One, this military adventurism failed. Let's go for diplomatic means. The other is to say this mission with troops on the ground was too expensive and too politically costly.  And we have an American president who seems happy to celebrate a drone strike which killed 10 people, including seven children, without getting any political backlash at all. So you can see how dangerous it is if boots on the ground wars just get replaced by drones in the sky wars. Let's go straight on to our second story, very much related. With the last U.S. troops out of Afghanistan, the effort to transform the country with troops on the ground has come to a close, but Western leaders are still suggesting they can influence how the Taliban, back in power after two decades, will govern. This was Joe Biden on Tuesday. And let me be clear. We'll continue to support the Afghan people through diplomacy, international influence and humanitarian aid. We'll continue to push for regional diplomacy engagement to prevent violence and instability. We'll continue to speak out for the basic rights of the Afghan people, especially women and girls, as we speak out for women and girls all around the globe. So he sounded tough when he said that. In fact, it was fairly ambiguous what he really meant. It was just a commitment to speak out for the rights of women and girls, unclear what that would mean in practice. Of course, any attempt to influence the Taliban will be more powerful if it's multilateral. The G7 met last week to discuss Afghanistan afterwards. Boris Johnson laid out the group's priorities. The number one condition we're setting as G7 is that they've got to guarantee right the way through, through August 31st and beyond, a safe passage, safe passage for those who want to come out. Now, someone will say that they don't accept that and some of them, I hope, will see the sense of that because the G7 has very considerable leverage, economic, diplomatic and political. That was potentially slightly optimistic from Boris Johnson, at least from his perspective, saying the G7 has considerable economic, diplomatic and political leverage. Obviously, it has less of all of those things because of the rise of China, and the G7 has never had any democratic legitimacy. It's the club of rich nations you can't apply to join. As for the UN, which does have that legitimacy, on Monday, the 15 Strong Security Council passed a watered-down resolution on Afghanistan. It called for safe passage for those who wish to leave the country, urgent humanitarian access and respect for human rights. It also said that Afghanistan must not be used to threaten to attack any other country or to shelter and train terrorists. No consequences were specified for if the Taliban did not fulfill those demands. China and Russia, for their part, abstained. So it passed with their permission, but not with their support. So what, if any, policies should Western governments adopt to influence the Taliban? I spoke earlier today to Oba Dullaba here, an academic and journalist based in Kabul. Well, there is a very delicate balance right now. So the international community would really have to make sure they rule the Taliban and they have some sort of leverage on them to make sure that their behavior is compliant with a certain level of international norms. Obviously, it wouldn't ever be completely according to that because the Taliban have a reputational cost associated with being moderate as well because the fighters didn't fight this long for a very modern vision of the world. So that being said, there is a little that can be done. There's room that can be created for civil societies to exist in for civil liberties to at least have some sort of existence within this new system. And then the hope would be that the people themselves along with the continuous support of the international community can expand these circles and make sure that the government has to reckon with their existence. So for now, the use of the fear of sanctions, the promise of foreign aid and international legitimacy as well, all of those are leverages that the international community has. And it has to use them wisely because if they are too strict with regards to giving them, the Taliban might be pushed away and might be more inclined towards accepting isolation. And again, that isolation is not going to be absolute as well because there are countries like China and Russia that are already at the doors of the Taliban and are willing to do business while turning a blind eye to anything that happens within Afghanistan. So we'll have another blood diamond issue of Africa happening in Afghanistan. So there has to be a certain uniform approach or source, a certain level of cohesion between international actors to make sure that all those incentives or all those deterrence work, it has to be on a uniform level internationally. And we wouldn't have any countries straying away and having their own direct bilateral relations with the Taliban government. The two sources of leverage which come up in conversation most in the West are aid and diplomatic recognition. I want to take those in turn. So to begin with aid, the suggestion is that because the Afghan economy and the Afghan population is so dependent on international aid and support from NGOs, that could be a potential source of leverage for Western governments. The argument against using that as leverage is that all you will be doing is punishing ordinary Afghan people and the Taliban could come around and say, look, if you want to starve the Afghan population, we'll just blame you and stoke up resentment against foreign countries and it will be ordinary Afghan people that suffer. Do you think that is the danger of using aid as leverage that it is just ordinary Afghans who suffer the most? Well, it's not just the aid problem, it's also the isolation problem that will both lead to the common man suffering. But there's another side to it as well that I want you to look at, Michael, and that is the fact that the war economy is gone, which means that all of the money that was going into fighting the war is not there. But on the other end as well, the Taliban themselves were generating $1.4 billion annually as revenue. And that's money that can be injected into the economy along with other bank accounts or capital that the Taliban had. All of this is going to be either freed up or injected into the economy. So Afghanistan has quite successful government-run enterprises as well. And if managed correctly, there's the wood industry, there's the coal industry, there's the cement industry, there's the national minerals as well. All of those, if managed correctly, can actually produce a prosperous economy. So the idea is that foreign aid stopping might not really change things drastically in the short term. And that's what would make the Taliban really be indifferent towards that fear. Also, because the sponsor states that were willing to sponsor them during the fighting will sponsor them as well during this transition. So maybe foreign aid doesn't really hurt the Taliban or the economy as much in the short term. With regards to international recognition, and the whole idea of sanctions is very closely linked to that as well because it makes putting sanctions on the Taliban, their leadership, much easier. International legitimacy is going to be important because if you look at the Taliban history 25 years ago when they were in power, it took them only a few months to approach the United Nations to ask for some sort of international recognition. And then they were by the end of it really trying to meet with US officials to try to reach an understanding with regards to international recognition there as well. So they do understand how important it is to engage diplomatically with the world. But I guess the problem right now is it's a damned if you do and damned if you don't kind of situation for the international community because they have to find a working relationship with the Taliban. The airport situation cannot be managed until something like that exists. The ISK threat cannot be managed until some sort of understanding exists. So that's why I guess cutting off these ties is going to be problematic for every side. And so a very difficult balance honestly to make sure that the Taliban are deterred from acting out and they are incentivized enough to comply as well. So doesn't look like the West has the formula right so far. But we are hoping that they do for the sake of Afghanistan as a nation because the people within Afghanistan who are going to try and fight for their vision of the world and their vision for the country in order for that moderation to prevail, they will have to be an international community standing behind them. And if they just choose to not grant international legitimacy or just walk away, they're going to leave the Afghans on their own. It's going to be a very uphill battle. I want to talk a bit more about that battle and the general issues of what's going on in Afghanistan right now. I learned from a brilliant piece you wrote for the Economist recently that your grandfather was a leading member of the Mujahideen and in that piece you wrote for better or worse both the Talibs in whose jihadi environment I grew up and the progressive Afghanistan I live and teach in will have to learn to live with each other. From your perspective, are we any closer to finding out if that process is taking place? I'll give you a short example, okay. So the Taliban walked into Hirat University and they said that we want classrooms to be segregated. We want female faculty to be teaching female students. And then the university argued back and said they didn't have enough classes that there weren't enough female faculty. And the Taliban said, okay, fine, we will let old pious men teach the female students but classes have to be segregated. And when the university kept protesting, they were told that they had to submit a counter proposal. This is improvement. This isn't something that the Taliban would have done before. Understand that both sides of the conflict see each other as enemies for 20 years, enemies that have always been seen in their worst behavior. Look, we have a law for peace times and law for wartime and literally the rules that govern us change depending on the circumstances that we are. So does our nature. So we've seen the worst of the Taliban and from the Taliban perspective, they've seen the worst of us for 20 years. And now those lines are gone. Now there's just Afghans amongst themselves trying to figure out how to move ahead. And for that to happen, there has to be a conversation. And that conversation looks like giving them alternatives like, okay, fine, if you don't want a male teacher physically standing in class, can it be online? Is there a way with regards to the reasoning for jurisprudence that you're giving that we can move around that? It sounds like turning to the Taliban and saying when they say women should not join the workforce as of now because our fighters aren't trained to deal with them. This is their official statement. And until they do, women should be safe inside their houses, which isn't really a good point to start from. So we have to turn to the Taliban and say, you know what? Establish a police force, bring back the same police that existed within the city, ask other people to run these tasks, people that are trained, not your own battle-hardened fighters, but give these people a space to start working, right? And that's where the international community starts putting pressure as well. So these happen every day, every interaction between people who were in the cities and the Taliban who just came in. And we're breaking each other's barriers, bringing down each other's walls. I know this sounds very idealistic, but this is the organic way of reaching some sort of cohesion and reconciliation. Look, I speak their language, I speak their culture, I know all the nuance of it. And when they stop me in my car and I'm wearing a suit and tie, and the way I interact with them is a pleasant surprise to them, right? And this is how we change each other's perceptions. And it really is up to their leadership as well as to whether they want that to happen. Because if they ever imagine to create a sustainable society and government within Afghanistan, that sort of reconciliation has to happen. And then there are academics I've specialized in reconciliation. I've lived reconciliation through my life. And I'm hoping that if nothing else, if none of these political measures, these long-term measures work, at least if I can educate a generation or two after me, they will stand up for their rights. And it might take a decade or two, but this country will still change, will still transform, will still become better. Because I know I don't want to be a reductionist. I don't want to reduce this argument to an analogy, but you don't just throw away a child because they aren't perfect for you. And circumstances are that way, especially one's own country, one's own people are that way. I know circumstances aren't ideal, but that shouldn't mean we should turn our back on our country. So we'll try our best to dig through whatever dirt we have to get somewhere that is sustainable, that is happy eventually for our people. That was Obeyla Bahir, an academic and journalist speaking to me earlier today from Kabul. We have a super chat from Paloma Ozia and she says, I'm disappointed that Sharon Graham's win has been given no mention on tonight's show.  In terms of the first part, we're not going to cover all the news stories that happen while we were away. We try and keep things fairly up to date. So that does mean we missed some stories. On your second point, I will put my hands up. I did write off Sharon Graham's campaign. I thought because Steve Turner got way more nominations than he would be the main challenger to Gerard Coyne. And so we suggested that Sharon Graham should probably stand down and we have been proved hella wrong. So absolutely I put my hands up. We were wrong about that and congratulations to Sharon Graham. It seems like it's going to be pretty exciting what she does to the trade union. Our priority was always that Gerard Coyne didn't win. Turns out the tactics of it, we got wrong. I was incredibly surprised when I found out that Sharon Graham had won. But it is very exciting. It shows that there is a movement and a campaign that had some energy to win against all odds is an exciting thing, especially if it does someone of the left. And Coyne did come last, which was very good to see. I do think Steve Turner was a great candidate, but Sharon Graham obviously ran the better campaign. Let's go to our last story. This September, Brighton will host the first labour conference since Keir Starmer became party leader because the last one took place just online. It was just speeches online. The conference is expected to be a stage managed affair with less time set aside for policy battles. And with all the attention intended to be focused on the leader's speech from Keir Starmer. But the overbearing management from Labour's bureaucrats in what is supposed to be a democratic party has already got under the skin of some key players. Jess Barnard is the democratically elected chair of young Labour, which represents every Labour member under the age of 26. Take a look at what she tweeted this week. A few months ago, myself and Lara McNeill, who's the NEC youth representative, met with David Evans, that's the party's general secretary, once we were told the party would not be holding a young Labour conference this year, despite it being a rulebook requirement. We tried to negotiate, made the case for democratic engagement, but were outright refused. I asked David Evans if he would inform young members that this was his call and if he would provide young Labour with more resources at national conference to make up for it. He agreed to both. Months ago, the entire young Labour committee submitted our proposals for Young Labour Day at conference, well within the deadline given. Everything we do and all our speakers have to be approved by the party. I have been pushing for an update on this multiple times a week, with no joy. The most concrete information I have been given is that anyone from Palestine solidarity campaign will be refused as a speaker, as will Jeremy Corbyn. I've requested this in writing with reasoning, appalled that PSC, who have had a space at conference for years, would be silenced. In short, according to that, Fred party bureaucrats cancelled Labour conference, then came to a compromise, which was that young Labour could have an increased presence at the national Labour conference. Then they didn't reply for months and then said only that Jeremy Corbyn and people from the Palestine solidarity campaign would be banned from speaking if that had all happened under Jeremy Corbyn. I'm sure the press would be decrying such behaviour as Stalinist, yet because it's Stammer, they don't give a damn. Well, we at Navarro Media do, and I'm joined now by Jess Varnad. Jess, could you talk me through some of the interactions you've had with the party that led you to write that, Fred? Yeah, of course. It seems so dramatic when you hear it read back to you, and I guess it is.  For me in particular, because I guess as chair of the committee, a lot of the duties fall on me to be the one that is negotiating with the party and kind of the party bureaucracy, and it has been a very much one-sided relationship of me pushing and pushing and pushing and feeling like I'm harassing the staff members for answers which they either can't answer or won't answer. Whether that is a factional decision or a matter of incompetence or lack of resources, I know the party are going through a tough time, but increasingly it does feel like a factional situation and that because we're a left-wing committee, because I'm a socialist and we've made it really clear that we are going to organize our socialists in the Labour Party because that's what young members like us to do. We're being given not just the cold shoulder, just complete silence, and I think it's increasingly disappointing as well because I think we have really, really tried to approach the relationship with good faith, particularly the meeting with David Evans that I referenced. We were really, really disheartened and really upset that we were told outright that our conference would be refused, but we agreed to it. We acknowledged the challenges that the party was facing. We acknowledged the challenges of the pandemic and all we asked in return was a little bit more resources to make sure that after two years of everything that young people had been going through, the demographics most likely to have lost their jobs or had to work on the front line during the pandemic, that we make sure that there is a space for them to organize and discuss their politics in the Labour Party in a safe and supported environment. Let's talk a bit more about the Palestine Solidarity Campaign because I mean that's what I found most shocking from your Fred and I think what lots of people did and I mean the reason I found that strange is because one the Palestine Solidarity Campaign is the most prominent pro-Palestine organization in this country. In the same year there has been a brutal attack on Palestine, on Gaza. Also people who are currently in the leadership of the party have been fairly open to working with the Palestine Solidarity Campaign in the past. I want to bring up a tweet from Lisa Nandi. She signed up to the pledges put forward by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign during the leadership campaign. So we can get that up there. Yep, I have always, I haven't always will support Palestinian rights. That's why I oppose Trump's plan and have campaigned against British businesses profiting from the occupied territories and support any embargo on arms deals which violates human rights. I'm happy to back these Palestine Solidarity Campaign commitments. Keir Starmer has also spoken at a Palestine Solidarity Campaign, Hustings in 2015. What's going on there then, Jess? Did they explain why they thought that the Palestine Solidarity Campaign shouldn't be able to speak at Labour Party Conference? No, I mean this is I guess probably in an ongoing situation. I mean PSC have confirmed that they will be given their usual stool at conference. They will have their usual fringe event and we have since heard that there won't now be a blanket ban on PSC through due diligence checks as we were initially told. So I stand by my account of what I was told by the party but we have since received an apology. So what I'm taking from this is hopefully this was a mistake but this does need to mark a point in which the party starts to acknowledge that they cannot continue to make arbitrary decisions like this. There needs to be accountability. There needs to be due processes and I hope that they reach out to the Palestine Solidarity Campaign to apologise and make amends because obviously this has been a really stressful time for them not knowing where they stand with the Labour Party which they have always felt was a place at which they could organise. So the story is perhaps what about chaos within the Labour Party then, sort of a Stalinist purge of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign? Is that correct? I guess time will tell. It's really hard to know. I think it's a bit of a turning point and definitely a turning point for us in that young members have a constitutional right to organise within the Labour Party as do people who want to support Palestinians. We have in the rulebook that we have a right to hold our conferences. We have a right to organise within Labour and it doesn't say young members can only organise within the party if they agree with Kierstama. That's not what it says and the party have a decision whether they keep looking over their shoulder, keep looking to control, keep looking to shut down and that will eventually just disenfranchise all their young members, not just left-wing ones, all of them. Or they can say, right, we've won power, we've got control of the Labour Party, let's use the space to put forward our vision, whatever that is, start looking forward and stop looking over their shoulder at what young members are doing. This does seem slightly paranoid doesn't it? I want to go to some responses to your Fred. The most dramatic was from Oliver Cam. We've had our own altercations with Cam before. He's come from Navarra Media more than once. He's a Times columnist if you didn't know that all ready. Oliver Cam responded to your Fred, good to see that Labour is getting a grip on this parasitic pressure group which has no members of its own as any young person who joins the party is deemed to belong and whose views are incompatible with Labour's values and traditions. He followed that tweet up with the following. Labour supports a two-state solution between a secure Israel and a sovereign Palestine. Young Labour urges the abolition of Israel which could only be accomplished by means of a second Holocaust against the Jewish people. Hence, Young Labour's views are alien to the parties. That second tweet particularly grotesque. How would you respond to Oliver Cam though? I'm still in shock that he's getting away with writing this in the public domain. Obviously, I completely refute that. Everybody knows that that's just an absurd thing to accuse Young Labour of. Young Labour is a broad organisation. We have not adopted an official position on a two-state solution. The initial part of that tweet doesn't even make sense. Absolutely, of course, we are not supporting it or calling for a second Holocaust. It's one of the most vile things I've ever seen written on Twitter, let alone about Young Labour. Obviously, I will be taking legal advice about this. He has since, if you've seen, written another article where he's doubled down on the accusations against both myself and Young Labour. We have approached the party for legal support as well. We will see where that takes us. I think we are at a point where we have to start pulling together to challenge these people. There is absolutely nowhere it's acceptable that someone who calls himself a reporter in the times should be allowed to get away with writing completely defamatory, made-up lies about young members. This isn't people who are elected MPs on 80K wages who can go and fund their own legal battles. This is young members who are all volunteers, myself working a full-time job on a very minimal wage. He has just completely taken his position of power to spread hate, lies and fear. I think that's the worst bit of fear amongst young people and society, which is actually just about a group of young people who are trying to fight for a better, fairer world. I have a very relevant super chat from Sol, Solidarity Jess, and on a different matter entirely, if there's a crowd fund to Sue, Cam, I'll donate. If the Labour Party don't stump up the money, because I think they're probably more keen to stump up that money when it's against their factional opponents rather than to defend them, then you might do well on a crowd funder. Finally, I want to ask you about my young Labour strategy more generally. From this interview, it sounds like Labour is slightly all over the place when it comes to how they are dealing with you. It also seems pretty clear they're not keen on you having much voice or say within the party. What can you do to challenge that? Obviously, it seems like potentially this tweet thread was quite effective, but what else will young Labour be doing to challenge the manoeuvres by Keir Starmer to basically silence young Labour because you're too left-wing? Yeah, and that's a really good question. I'd just like to say for the record, the tweet threads are always a last resort. I hate having to bring it into the light of day because it's not pleasant, and I guess there's a lot of staff who are also deeply unhappy in the middle of all this, and it's not nice, but it does feel like a last resort sometimes, and lo and behold, things are moving now. But I think in the future, we are looking at other options. Obviously, this year for the first time, we're partnering with the World Transformed to deliver some panels at their event. So look out for those. Do make sure you come along and support us, including one on Palestine. So please be there. A little plug, but we're also looking to build our relationships with lots of other left organisations, including the trade unions, just solidifying at those links because, obviously, if you understand the structures of Labour, we're entirely financially dependent on Labour Party. We have no funds of our own. We don't have any staffers that are directly accountable to us. There is one staffer in the Labour Party in Southside who works on in Labour. That's it. So you have an organisation that is entirely dependent on the Labour Party, and so I think we need to start thinking about how we broaden our connections with other left organisations, and we're working really hard to deliver that. And also just making sure that we are delivering face-to-face actions. When there is key issues arising, when people are organising on the ground, young Labour is going to be focused on being in those spaces where members are rather than wasting more of our time in party bureaucracy and trying to fight barriers that are just put up to silence young socialists. I'm trying to get emails replied to. Jess Barnard, thank you so much for coming on this evening. It's been a real pleasure and lovely to be joined by your cat as well. I know. Thanks so much for having me. That was Jess Barnard, chair of Young Labour. That means our first show back has come to a close. I'd like to say a thank you to all our free guests this evening. We'll be back on Friday. I think I'm going to be with the now married, or the newly married, Aaron Bustani on Friday. Thank you all for watching and for your super chats. Make sure you hit subscribe if you haven't already. Thank you if you're a regular donor. For now, you've been watching Tiskey Sour on the Vara Media. Good night.


High school students from around the area got mad at Bemidji State University today. As Malmire reports, the first ever Media, Art and Design Day gave hands-on experience for over a hundred talented students. And the laser which will start. BSU reached out to area educators within about a hundred miles of the campus asking for their best and brightest students who might want to go into the field. The high schoolers attended three of thirteen available sessions, such as judging some of the potential movies for the Headwaters Film Festival. We have films from all over the world and they're really high quality student films and they're inspiring and interesting and pretty amazing. Now this is a copy of the Northern Student. Taught by faculty members of the School of Integrated Media and the School of Technology, Art and Design, workshops like Create a Magazine cover provided a crash course introduction. Giving students an introduction to the InDesign software, which is the industry standard for us and showing them the elements of what goes into a magazine cover and how to create an effective magazine cover. Maddie Fleger says she was looking for a new experience and found it in this class. It's really fun to be able to do something hands-on and very interactive and have somebody actually showing you all the little pieces of the design. The workshops are incredibly helpful for many students who are considering what's next after high school. Sydney Rantz has never used this kind of software before, while she has a while before choosing a post-grad pursuit now is the perfect time to get her hooked. I hope to get more experience with different medias of art today. Josie Hahn says she's considering going to the University of Minnesota Duluth for psychology and pre-med with a minor in visual arts. I just wanted to see all of the different things that arts has to offer because I know there's so much different stuff that isn't offered at high schools. PSU staff hopes that this will help convince some that there are job opportunities and career growth in the field. We also want to expose them to different degrees that are here at the University so they can look at that and say, oh geez, there's all kinds of things that I can do to make a living in those areas. In Bemidji, I'm Al Meyer, Lakeland News. Other workshops featured during the day included a virtual reality experience, logo casting and video game design. If you've enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland Public Television.


Welcome to today's webinar from SOAS University of London. My name is Alicia Sales, I am the Scholarship Deputy Manager at SOAS. And here with me is Ricky Clark, Peace Deputy Manager. Good afternoon everyone. Today's webinar is Peace, Scholarships and Funding Information for Postgraduate Studies. Before we start, just to say that this presentation will be available on the SOAS website after this webinar and will be emailed to those who have registered. Also, if you have any general questions, we will be answering some of them live at the end of the webinar. If you cannot attend the webinar live or if you have specific questions, you can also email your queries to scholarships at soas.ac.uk and we will reply to you after the presentation. At the end of the webinar we will have between 15 to 20 minutes to answer questions. During this session we are going to cover scholarship funding. Then we will talk about the most important aspect you need to consider when making an application for a scholarship at SOAS. We will look at candidate criteria, candidate assessment, application deadlines and notification of results, and finally how to apply. Scholarship Information is normally published annually in November on the scholarship web pages, www.soas.ac.uk forward scholarships. Once you have chosen your degree course, you should research sources of funding. We advise you to make applications for scholarships as early as possible. SOAS offers a wide range of scholarships aimed at assisting the same students with their studies. These scholarships are unique to SOAS and like loans, you don't need to pay back. There are different types of scholarships you may be eligible for. So as scholarships and external scholarships. Detailed information of these scholarships is available on the scholarship website. External scholarships are those funded by the government, organization or charities with an invested interest in higher education. For example, non-UK students can apply for funding from the UK government through sheeting awards and Commonwealth scholarships. These external awards are not administered by us, so you will need to contact the external organization directly for further details and application procedures. SOAS scholarships are provided by SOAS, for example the Felix scholarships. You can apply for all scholarships for which you might be eligible, both SOAS scholarships and external scholarships. In fact, we strongly advise you to apply for as many scholarships as you can to increase your chances of gaining funding. Unless specified otherwise, you will need to complete a separate scholarship application form for each scholarship. Eligibility criteria depends upon various factors and is different from award to award. You will know if you are eligible to apply for a scholarship by reading the details on the candidate criteria found on the website. It is important that you apply early and read the guidelines thoroughly in order to have the best chances of success. I will now go through some of these key factors. This is not an exhaustive list and you will need to read carefully the scholarship pages for full details on eligibility. Excellent academic record. Applicants are expected to have an outstanding academic record and scholarships are awarded to the best candidates. Applicants must normally hold a good honours degree with a first or a 2-1. For research scholarships, they must possess a good merit or distinction at a master's level. Some scholarships may give preference to those with a first class or distinction. Others may give some consideration to financial need. In this case, this will be specified clearly on the relevant scholarship pages. Residency, citizenship and fee status. Eligibility may depend on residency, that is the place where you normally live. It may depend on citizenship of a country if the scholarship in question is targeted at the students from specific regions. Scholarships may also be based on fee status assessment if the scholarship is specific to those paying home or overseas fees. Some scholarships are subject or program specific, so you will also need to check if your programme of study is specific to the scholarship you are interested in. In most cases, so as scholarships are only open to students who have already accepted onto a programme by the scholarship deadline. However, you don't need to wait for the outcome of your admission application before applying for scholarships. Most of our scholarships require that you meet the English language condition by the 1st of June. So please arrange your English test and ensure you meet the English requirements as soon as possible. In addition to this, you will be required to meet all the conditions of your offer before the start of the programme. Decision on scholarships are normally made by a panel of SOAS academics. I will now talk briefly about some key things you need to get right to make a competitive application for a scholarship at SOAS. So, what is the key information for application success? Firstly, your academic record or predicted grades. Most of the scholarships are based on academic merit. We are looking for well qualified and committed applicants. When assessing applications, we will have your academic record, most particularly your most recent results. We will consider evidence of outstanding academic achievements as indicated by degree outcome, prizes and awards, etc. Your references are also important. We look at what the references have to say about you, including your academic abilities, your core knowledge and your determination. All the key areas are your potential to go further, to grow and excel in your programme of study. Another key aspect is your personal statement. This is your opportunity to tell us why you are interested in the subject and why you want to study at SOAS. In your statement, we are looking for genuine subject interest and a strong fit between your application and programme of study. We will consider your pre-straining, additional preparation and commitment to undertaking the proposed course of study. For instance, we will look at your relevant work experience, additional language studies, fieldwork travel, etc. It is critical that you read the specific candidate criteria carefully for each scholarship and that you provide evidence in the statement on how you meet the scholarship requirements. Scholarship information is published annually in November. Our deadlines are normally January and February. However, some scholarships close on different days. To avoid missing key deadlines is therefore crucial that you check individual scholarship pages and know the closing dates in your calendar. In order to be eligible for a SOAS scholarship, you must also apply for your programme of study, ideally six weeks before the deadline. Successful candidates will be notified of the course of the outcome of their application by July. In order to apply for scholarships, you must follow two steps. Step one, apply for your programme ideally six weeks before the scholarship deadline. You must submit a complete online admission application. A complete application for admission includes official transcripts, copies of degree certificates, an explanation of the grading system for any degrees obtained outside the UK, two references, a CV, and a personal statement. In addition to these, MPHB applicants must also submit a research proposal. Applicants must normally have an offer of admission by their scholarship application deadline. The panel will be considered in your scholarship application together with your online application for admission. Finally, step two, you must apply for the scholarship via the online application form by the scholarship deadline. This brings us to the end of the presentation. We have now got 15 to 20 minutes for general questions and we will reply to any specific enquiries after the webinar. So let's have a look at the questions we have received. Our first question is from B Sitea, who's asking about scholarships that give a full fee, I guess a full tuition fee waiver. And if I may, I can say that this is quite variable. So we have around 60 to 65 different scholarships. They each have different criteria as outlined. So you wouldn't need to look at them individually. Some of them do give an amount of money, which will cover both tuition fees and money towards living, whereas others are a set amount of money. So it depends on the degree you apply for the tuition fee amount. So you might not cover the full tuition fee. It does get more complicated. So please do look at each of the individual scholarships that you think you're eligible for to see how much you could get both towards fees and towards living costs. Our second question is asking about details of needs-based scholarships for Indian nationals, which cover living expenses. I mean, most of our scholarships are based on academic merit. There are a few that will consider financial need. So for Indian scholars or applicants, we have, for example, the Felix scholarships, which is a fully funded scholarships. Obviously, we have a list of scholarships on the scholarship website. I would advise you to check the list in first instance, look at the eligibility criteria. And then if you have any specific questions, then you can of course contact us by emailing scholarships at soas.sc.uk. Of course, I will be happy then to give you specific information for you. Debbie has a question. Is it okay if I apply to the department at SOAS a week before the Felix scholarship deadline? Would it be a problem? As Lydia said, ideally you should apply six weeks before. But if you only learn of it at the moment, then do apply before the scholarship deadline. If you don't apply at all, then obviously you won't be considered. However, some of our scholarships are very competitive. If there's a complete application of admission and a number of them, then it's possible you might not be considered by the selection panel. I think, I mean, if you haven't submitted the admission application yet, do that as soon as possible. Because if you have an offer of admission by the time the selection takes place, then we will be able to put your application forward if you meet the other criteria. Adra asks, how are there two ways to apply different from each other in outcome? I think that's referring to the two steps that Alitha outlined. So the first step is to apply for admissions to the admissions office, to the degree that you want to study. And the second step is to apply on the scholarship application form. And the two go hand in hand. The selection process looks at your admission application and your scholarship application together before making a decision. The scholarship application is a very small online form and it captures information and evidence that we need for the scholarship, particular to each individual scholarship, which might not be captured by the admissions form. Amanda has asked regarding advice on funding for disabilities. And there is for UK citizens and EU systems, I believe, a disabled student allowance which is administered through our student advice and wellbeing team. So it's not a scholarship per se, but it is additional funding for students who need access to education. So definitely check out the SOAS website with student advice and wellbeing and you can search using DSL, disabled student allowance. And in addition to this, obviously, you can apply for any of the scholarships listed on the scholarship website, which are based on academic merit. Irrespective of ability or disability. There is a question from Clara regarding the SOAS research studentships. Basically, the SOAS research studentships will be available from 1920. Up-to-date information will be posted on the website at the end of January. With up-to-date information on deadlines, criteria and application deadlines. So please do have a look again on the scholarship website at the end of January. This has been confirmed as available for 1920. We have a follow-up question about the Felix application from Debbie. This says, how long do you get an application number? And that is your admissions reference number. So once you've submitted your application through the admission system, you should get an acknowledgement which will give you your application number. And that's the one to use. How long it takes? It shouldn't take too long, but if you do want to know more about how to apply directly for the admissions to degrees, there will be another webinar next week for postgraduate admissions. We've got a question from Ahmed about scholarships available for students from Egypt. And that is probably best answered by looking at the list of scholarships online. We do have both a general web page and then specific web pages for masters, undergraduate and research level scholarships. And within those pages, there is a column that indicates any residency or nationality requirements. And so that will include either saying Egypt, for example, specifically, or it might say Africa or it might say developed countries. And if it's something more general or ambiguous, such as developed countries, then clicking into the scholarship itself will give a breakdown of which scholarships qualify or how you work out whether your country is eligible. We have some questions about specific scholarships, such as the SOAS Impact Scholarships. So please do email us directly as the scholarships are SOAS. Question about funding for mothers with children. So again, the scholarships are on academic merit, so they're equally available to parents and non-parents, mothers and fathers. But you can also arch here as a student. There are some childcare funds through Student Advice and Wellbeing. Student Advice and Wellbeing is there to give additional support to anyone who has additional costs or barriers to studies. They give study support skills, counselling, but also some small funds, which are not scholarships, but do so for students with particular needs. I have a question from T. Muranda. Please, may you give an indication of living costs and accommodation costs for 1920? As a rough guide of the cost of living in the UK, we would say that the minimum would be around £1,000 per month. There is a breakdown on the living costs in the UK on the website. But just to give you an idea, for example, accommodation could cost around £590. Then another type of cost, for example, food, it will be between £230 and £175. Laundry between £15 and £18. Travel cost is between £50 and £110. For example, books between £35 and £55 per month. For personal expenses, you could roughly estimate between £20 and £35. And for other miscellaneous costs between £40 and £70. So as an overall, we would calculate a minimum of £1,000, but depending on how much you want to spend in several aspects, then it could be more. And that is just a guide that's been given by our colleagues, the student advice and wellbeing. And of course, as Alithia says, there's a range of amounts there. And it does really depend where in London you live, how far away from the service campus, which will affect your travel costs, and how efficient you are at budgeting or making food last. So there's no set amount, but definitely it's something worth working out and considering when coming to study in London at SOAS or any other university. The application number for your admissions, yes, Min, is asking, come as you apply for admissions. So your reference number will be given, I think, in an acknowledgement email or within the system as you apply for admissions. So you don't get that once you get an offer of a place. It is as you apply at the initial stage. A good question from Faisana is scholarship assessment based on previous academic performance only. That's a sort of yes and no. If you've finished your first degree or your master's degree and you're applying for a PhD, then it will be looking at your graduated grades. But if you're in your final year or you're just completing your master's, for example, then it will also be subject to what your references are suggesting your predicted grades are. And that's where your transcript comes in so that your previous year's marks or for a master's, someone studying on their master's, their previous essay marks, we can see a projection of what you've already achieved during the year and what you're likely to achieve by the time you graduate in the summer. And then any offer of a scholarship will be conditional on achieving a first class degree or a master's degree with merit depending on the level. Jasmine is asking, I graduated over 10 years ago, will two professional references be acceptable? Basically, for the scholarship application, we don't require any additional supporting documents. Basically, we will be using the information you've submitted with your admission application. So I would advise you to check with the admission team the sort of references they accept when you apply for admissions. I think there is some frequently asked questions available on their website. And I think they have a section about references. So I would advise you to check that first. And if you have any further questions or you would require further advice, you can email master's admissions at soas.ac.uk and they will be happy to advise you on references. Somebody's asked, can we make an appointment to see student advice wellbeing on campus? Definitely, once you enroll as a student, that is their function. They have drop-in sessions and appointments. If you're a prospective student, I think they'd also be happy to see you, but maybe email them or in advance just to make sure any particular specialist advisor for your requirement is available on the day you come in. Not all advisors are available on every day. We have a question from Farzana. She wants to know whether experience will be taken into consideration as well. Yes, so basically, academics will be looking at the grades because obviously scholarships are quite competitive. So one of the criteria will be academic, but obviously they will also be looking at other aspects such references or any relevant experience. So if you have relevant experience, it's important that you mention that that will be also another criteria that the academics will be considering. Epi is asking, are there any scholarships available for part-time students? There are some. There are more for full-time study, but there are some on the website to do have a careful look. And also, as well as the SOAS scholarships on the three webpages, there's a fourth web page in the scholarships area, which is for external funding providers. These are organizations, philanthropic charities, government organizations and others. The application isn't through SOAS, so you need to check directly on those webpages for their own criteria, the deadlines and application procedures, but there is a far wider range of different scholarships at different times of the year available externally to us. And Sean is asking, can we apply for several scholarships provided by SOAS? Absolutely. As long as you're eligible for all of them, you can apply for as many as you are eligible for, and that would be a sensible option. We do look at when selection is made, applicants who've applied for more than one. And if you're successful for one, then of course that means your application for others is not necessary and that gives somebody else another chance. But for you yourself, the best way forward is to apply for as many things that you're eligible for, and you don't know which ones you're going to be successful for. There is a question from Team Miranda. Should we fail to raise funds from 1920? If we don't get a scholarship, is it possible to defer the acceptance while we save? Yes, it is normally possible to defer your offer of admission. In order to do that, you need to request it in writing, so you will need to write to the admission team and request that and then we'll get back to you. There is a question from Yasmin. This is the last question we have time for. Is a retired referee acceptable? That's an interesting one. I think probably best to check the postgraduate admissions webinar next week. So references are more about the admissions criteria. I don't want to give you false hope or be disappointing, so I'm not sure. But as I said, there is a webinar that you can register and the admission team will be able to advise you on that. And also, as I mentioned before, there is a section on the website about frequently asked questions and there is a section that gives information about references and what is acceptable. So you can have a look at that first and obviously register for the next webinar and admissions will be happy to advise you. And very quickly, yes, Maria, this webinar will be recorded and available on the webinar page on the service website. So thank you very much everyone for your questions. And I hope you found this webinar helpful. As I mentioned before, if you have any additional questions, you can email us to scholarships at soas.totec.uk and we will be very happy to answer them. Thank you very much.


Welcome to the Snap. Today we are going to be showcasing the features of our brand new M-plus vaporizer, the perfect dry herb vaporizer for those that are looking for something affordable, premium, efficient, and easy to use. First up on the M-plus we have the new tip, which has been completely redesigned for better performance. The M-plus finless tip design has less mass, which provides faster heat up, as well as a 15% larger bowl by volume compared to the previous M, and sharper serrations for better grinding. This premium tip provides further heat retention and thermal extraction, ensuring that your vapor from your M-plus is smooth and flavorful, while providing you the potency that you expect from your material. On the new tip, we've included spots as a visual heating reference. These spots are targets to help you aim the flame for the heaviest hits. Simply aim for the spots, rotate, and enjoy for a powerful and satisfying vapor experience. Next we have the new texture on the stem. This texture was inspired by nature for the M-plus, and it has an enhanced tactile interface that makes it easier to handle and use. The new texture provides a comfortable grip and allows you to control the temperature with ease with our newly designed square port. This unique design allows you to quickly identify the air inlet, making it easier to use. That's it for new features on the Dynavath M-plus. If you're one of those people out there that are looking for something premium, affordable, easy to use, and efficient, why don't you try it today? Thanks for watching. www.youtube.com


This is St. Tech, Hawaii. The community matters here. Passion, right? Okay, we're back, we're live. We're into the passion of opera. It always, nearly always makes me cry. I'm Jay Fidel, and I love opera. This is opera in Hawaii, and my co-host is Lynn Johnson. She's member of the Opera Board. She's also an instructor of opera in various places. We'll ask her about that. Welcome to the show, Lynn. Thank you, and thank you for having me. This is a great show, and opera's fabulous. So that's why we're here. It is indeed. And our special guest today, Leslie Goldman McInerney, who's an opera singer with Hawaii Opera Theatre. She's also part of the education department of Hawaii Opera Theatre, and she's part of Carmen. She's a gypsy in Carmen. The name of her character is Frasquita. Yes. Yeah, we're gonna talk more about that in a minute. But let's have a full discussion, Lynn, of, well, first, let's have the news. You had a talk last week, a few days ago. We did, yes, a week ago, Wednesday, and I guess I give this for every opera. And this is at the Doris Duke Theatre, and it's 10 o'clock in the morning, about a week and a half before the actual first performance of the opera. And I talked about a half an hour. I have a PowerPoint, and then I interview the cast.  It gets people geared up, and it's lots of fun. And of course, with Carmen, there was a lot to talk about. Yes, what did you say?  I talked about basically the basic plot of most operas. And you know what the basic plot is? It's like high school. A likes B, and B likes C, right? You're in love with somebody else, but they like somebody else. So you have this in Carmen. So the plot of Carmen is A likes B, and for a while, B likes A. But then B falls for C. And C and B like each other for a while, and then C falls in love with D, so B kills C. And there you have the plot of Carmen. It sounds a little bit like a Seinfeld episode, except it's more serious. It's very serious, but it's a wonderful story. It's a wonderful story. And what's interesting is not only the story itself, but the background of the opera. And it's Bizet, here is this fabulous, George Bizet, fabulous French composer who hasn't quite made it. He's only like 36 years old. He's had almost hits, but everybody knows he's a good composer, and he knows that Carmen is gonna be the turning point of his career. The problem is that this wonderful opera Carmen is presented in the Opera Comique, which is a family theater. You're just supposed to have Walt Disney stuff at the Opera Comique. This is the Opera Comique venue in Paris, right? In downtown Paris, yeah. That's right. And so what happens is that you have Carmen, and there was the assistant, I guess, producer of this, or director of this wonderful opera theater, and they said, you're gonna have Carmen.  I mean, you have all these gypsies, and then you have these thieves. We can't do this. It's not funny. We cannot do this. This is a family theater. People do not die, do not have or die. You cannot have this. And then the librettist came to him and said, look, I mean, we're gonna soften her character, and we're gonna have gypsies, but they're gonna be comic gypsies, and we're introducing a woman that is totally chased with wonderful family values. And she's gonna, Micaela, and she's gonna be in there, and then she does die, but we sneak it in at the end, and after a wonderful fanfare and celebration and the bright sunlight, it's gonna be fine.  Over that issue. Over that issue. And then they went on. But the opera went on. The opera went on, and they found the perfect Carmen, and Gali Margiel. Ooh, Celestine, she was like a Carmen herself. She was married at 15, a widow at 21, and then she was having an affair with another composer before the opera began, and then she and Bisey had an affair. I mean, she was perfect, she was perfect, but the audience was shocked. They were totally shocked, and they didn't know what to make of it, and it bombed. Ooh. Actually, it didn't totally bombed. People said, this isn't quite right, and then it was sort of dammed with faint craze. And so it never made any money. Bisey died three months to the day after this opera.  He never knew that Carmen was gonna be the fabulous master. It's the C in ABC, isn't it? That's right, it is. Aida, Baram, and Carmen is one of the most popular operas in the world, and he died three months after it opened, what a shame. Yes, yes, yes. So anyway, it's really something, yeah. Well, okay, so you spoke about that at your talk, and then you will speak about that again at your Lanai talks just before the opera, and the opera is opening this Friday. It's opening this Friday. Friday the 13th, not a good day for Carmen, not a good day for Carmen, but you know what, it's worth it. It's got absolutely gorgeous music, and what's really neat about it is that when Carmen was first written, it was written for the Apocome, which has spoken dialogue, and we usually think of Carmen with recitatif. We have spoken dialogue taken from the original production. In this production opening Friday, that's faithful to the history of the opera. That's faithful to the history, so it moves the dialogue right along, and we have superscripts. If your French is in the top form, you can read those superscripts, and you know what's going on, and Leslie plays one of Carmen's very close friends. I think it's time to introduce Leslie to our audience. Yes, I'd like to introduce Leslie, Goldman Machiner, and she was born in Hawaii, born in Hawaii. I think, I'm not sure when you realize your talent, but instead of going to Punahou, everybody goes to Punahou or something like that, she went to the Interlaken Arts School in Michigan, because she was so talented, and then to the Manhattan School of Music, and I can tell you she's very talented. Thank you. We're all gonna see you on Friday, yeah. Yes, uh-oh. Yeah, so we don't get super titles. You said that you were actually born into music. Tell us about it. I wasn't necessarily born into music. My family all loves music, but my mother said when the doctor was bringing her her new baby, she heard this loud, loud screaming from the other end of the hospital, and she was like, oh no, and it was me, so I suppose I've always wanted to express loudly. Yeah, that's not screaming, it's rehearsal. Right, that's a, it's my welcome to the world, Aria. Well, this is the thing about opera singing, and this is the thing about opera. You don't have mics. You have to project. So she has a big voice. You have to have. And it's a beautiful voice, and it's gotta be big. It can't be pretty and nice. It's gotta be beautiful and powerful. That's also why we always have a day in between to rest. They don't do operas back to back to back. Yeah, and you have to warm up, too, before you're actually singing on the stage. So it's like bookends. You have to warm up, and then you have to cool down. Exactly, yes, yes. The next performance, yeah, yeah. And this is your debut, right? This is my debut. Oh, wow. This is news. We have a scoop here. Beyond excited. Yeah, I can see. So what's your character like, Leslie? So my character, Fraschita, she is a thief. She is kind of flaky.  She is absolutely obsessed with money. She kind of, she's all over all the guys. And I really enjoy playing her. It's a stretch, I know it's a stretch. I really have a hard time tapping into that part of myself. But I'm just kidding. I'm a flirt. She's not a shrinking violet. She is a supporting role, but there are no small roles. There are only small actors. There's nothing very small about me. So I'm really, really having fun. So did you know the role before?  I never performed this role before. I had, of course, seen the opera. And I'd been in several Carmen choruses, but I had never actually performed her. So it was super fun. Yeah, it is super fun, yeah. So can you tell us the relationship of your character and Carmen? So I kind of, I'm a little bit jealous of Carmen sometimes because I have a very big crush on Escamillo, the Corridor. But we're best friends. We're her Mercedes, who is like my counterpart. We're with her all the time. We're the three female thieves. There's a point where the three of us are singing together, trying to lure Don Caillero or flirt with him. And it's fun. It's just like, we're three best friends. The girls out, yeah. And then there's one point where Micaela comes in and we're all standing just sneering at her. So we're like the mean girls. That's my favorite part. I said that. We're just like, who does she think she is? Is this sitcom, I tell you? So before we began the show, it was a scoop to me to find that the word Torridor was actually invented for this opera by Bizet. Can you talk about it? Yeah, that's right.  And Carmen is his big piece. And he has this wonderful character, Escamillo, who Carmen eventually falls in love with and leaves down to the day before. So he, I mean, Escamillo is perfect for Carmen. He's got a big ego. He's gorgeous. He's a hunk. He loves women. And the two are very well matched. And he sings this song. Well, they have this Torridor song, but actually, I guess it was Torto. Torto means bull. And he needed four syllables. So he came a Torridor. And we all think of it, oh, that must be Spanish, right? We assume that that's Spanish. That was invented by Bizet. And it works. It works. It has worked for 100 years around the world. Absolutely. And it works around the world. When did this opera actually premiere? This 1875, I think it was, yeah, I think it was 1875, yeah. So since then, this word has found its way into every corner of the universe. That's right. That's a regular word, not as an opera word. This shows you the influence that opera has on the language in the world. It does. It absolutely does. And I'm thinking, you sing French. And usually we think of, you know, what's interesting about this season, with the Hawaii Opera Theater, we don't have one Italian opera. We have one French opera by Bizet. Then we have an Italian composer writing a French opera because he's in Paris. And everybody in Paris loves opera, which is the daughter of the regimen. That you've done that before. We've done this before. And the last one is Eugene O'Nagan by Tchaikovsky, who everybody knows for all his wonderful symphonies. And he wrote this beautiful opera called Eugene O'Nagan. And it's in Russian. It's great. It's great. It's international. It's global. And right here in Hawaii, we're doing ourselves a little fabulous. So what's it like singing French versus Italian? I tend to be a little explosive with my consonances. And what I really learned through doing this opera is I don't always need to be like, or, you know, I, well, I guess we do that more in English than Italian, but I've learned to sort of soften things. And we do sing a quintet, which is very, very fast. And I was like, how many, I couldn't get all the words of you. And I'm like, if I just put my mouth like I'm kissing the whole time, I can do it easily. So with French, you want delicate consonances.  And then it's much easier. And it's very French. She writes, that's a cultural French. And that's a wonderful quintet. And that's in the second act. And you are with Mercedes and Carmen and then these two smugglers come in and they need help moving merchandise. They need to help. And they say, news of what was on the move, which means we need your help. And so it's a very rhythmic and exciting and it's wonderful, just a great quintet. So we're going to have a break in a minute, you know, but Leslie, you could, could you sing us out into the break with that rapid, that rapid French culture? The rapid one or the toreador? Whatever you prefer. Why don't we do a little toreador? Okay. Toreador, Phoenix, You have to take a break. My heart, my heart. Fantastic, fantastic. Yay! You know, it's really interesting that when you're next to somebody who's singing opera it's just, it's just mind blowing. Well, I'll tell them what I'm singing right now. I'll take that. We'll take a short break. This is Think Tech Hawaii, raising public awareness. I just walked by and I said, what's happening, guys? They told me they were making music. With my gear. Research says reading from birth accelerates the baby's brain development. And you're doing that now? Oh, yeah. This is the starting line. Push. About 15 minutes. Every child, every parent, every day. I'm in a state now because you sang so close to me and I felt the power of your voice and your emotive strength. I felt it all. Wow. I'll be looking. I'll be there. I'm in the second row. Right near the end, you know? Yeah, please. I'll be waiting for you. So saying in the break is very interesting, that in terms of character development, Don Jose, his character evolves and develops. You see a different person from beginning to the after till the end. But Carmen stays constant. She's always what she was to begin with. And it's a really interesting sort of literary evaluation of how this works. Talk about it? Yes, yes. And of course, the name of the opera is Carmen. And she's so gripping because she's so against the convention. She's so against the way women should be. And she's strong and she's powerful and she's confident. And that was a real threat to households. She's the kind of woman that men fall for and women are threatened by. Nice women are threatened by. But she stays the same. And she never gets up for independence. She never gets up for freedom. And then you have Don Jose. He's a nice soldier. He comes from a nice background. He has a nice girlfriend. And then he becomes a deserter. And then he becomes a vagabond. And then eventually he becomes a burger. And he's lost his career, his girlfriend. And he gives it all up for Carmen. And she tells her for somebody else. And so at the end, he's a broken man. He's a broken man. And to me, he's, I mean, yes, Carmen dies. And that is a tragedy. It's also a tragedy what happens with Don Jose. Yeah. And as we leave the opera, he's broken. And he's about to be arrested. And who knows what's going to happen to him. It isn't going to be good things. No. But he won't care.  Yeah. Wow. That's great. So that touches you.   He can't control her. I was telling you before, I cry for Bo-M. I cry for her every time. But I don't cry for Carmen. Maybe I should cry for Don Jose. I think you should cry for Carmen, too. I should, too. It was not her fault. She never said, I'll marry you and have your baby. Isn't it quiet? She never said that. And, you know, she and Escamillo are perfect together because he, I mean, when he decides to go after Carmen and she's kind of getting tired of Don Jose, Escamillo says, well, she never is with anybody longer than six months. So, you know, he'd drawn his card and his time was there. And he's ready for Carmen. He knows it's not going to last for more than six months. And he's OK with that. He's OK with that. I mean, Don Jose was going to love her forever. That's not the way she's made. He's the only one on the stage who doesn't realize that she's flighty. Exactly, yeah. Well, let's talk about the scenes in which you are singing. OK? So there's three of them. Let's go through them. One is the cafe scene. Yes. One is the mountain scene in the remote village, I guess. Remote, remote. It's actually not a village. It's just the countryside. Yeah, because these guys are crooks. I mean, they're thieves. They have to be, you know, they have to hide in the mountains. Mugglers, as it were. We're camping out, reading our tarot cards. Oh, you should tell about that scene. That's a wonderful scene. That's a fabulous scene. That's where you sort of get to know Medesades and I's person and my personality. We are reading our cards. And Medesades, my friend, she is only drawing love. She's like, oh, I'm going to meet a man. And I'm so in love with him and he loves me. And then I'm drawing cards and I'm saying, I met someone. He is old and he is rich. And he is going to put me up in his castle. And then the final thing, where I get this fun high note, is I say, oh my gosh, he dies. I am his real and his heirs. And then Carmen comes in. Oh, it's so fun. And then Carmen comes in and she takes some cards and it's all death. And we're kind of like, oh, she's such a bummer. Yeah, absolutely. But I mean, it's also kind of serious because we as gypsies full-heartedly believe in these cards. What is a gypsy? I mean, what's the difference between a gypsy and another person between the gypsy and Micaela or the people in the town? Micaela is not a gypsy. Right, what's the difference between a gypsy and the straight person, if you will? So these gypsies, while they're thieves, they don't have a home. They live in the mountains. They essentially, they have very fluid living situations. And they... They're on the run, they're smuggling. And as you can see from our costumes, they care more, we're wearing as much jewelry as we possibly can be, where we have sort of dirty makeup, our hair is crazy. It's just a whole different culture. We're constantly trying to earn a dollar. We don't really care how. However, yeah. Yes. They're not necessarily long-term planners. No! You heard it here on Tiktok. Right. Right. Okay, so... They don't hack out, they don't plan out career paths. No. No. So how does that, how does that, we're focusing on that scene in the mountains then? Yes. Where does it start, where does it end? I mean, in terms of the, you know, its position in the direction of the opera. Okay, so we start, the five of us, Don Quero, Remindado, Carmen, Mercedes and myself, we start sort of staring at the audience, singing about how our job is hard, but it's strong and we must do it. We're just kind of like staring at the audience and intimidating them. And then the chorus joins in and we sing this beautiful chorus, like saying, listen, listen. And it's very powerful. And then we go into the card trio, which I love. And then after the card trio, we sing this wonderful chorus called Conto Duenier to, we are singing it to Don Quero saying, don't worry, you can get past, we can get past the customs man, we'll just lure them with our feminine ways. That's a pretty tune. Can you sing that tune? Can you sing it now? We'll sing that tune. Of course. Wow. Wow. Beautiful. That's for a company right next door and they love to hear our opera shows. Wow. And that's in the harmony that is so beautiful. Yeah, imagine. It's a beautiful harmony. It doesn't do it, Justin, when I just do it on my cell. No, but it's beautiful. Yeah, it's beautiful. Thank you. Wow, what a treat. What a treat. What a treat.  Yes. And so what does that mean? Well, that means on most days anyway, unless I'm very tired, I can sing very, very high. Yeah. Which I love to do. Yeah. I'm clear, like a bell. Yes, on most days. Depending on how well my daughter sleeps. No, yes, that's what it means. So warming up helps. So would you, if you were to say soprano and then you would put another adjective next to it, would you say anything other? I would say I'm a high lyric soprano. So like you have the color tours, which are much lighter, which I actually used to be when I was young, which are like, they do all that chirpy stuff.  And then you have your lyric sopranos, which thankfully get to do a lot of the, like, lead roles. Yes. Yeah, the lead roles. Yes, Mikael is also a lyric soprano. That's great. But I think Freski does a little more fun. I don't know how I do all pinned up and no. I can't quite see you if Mikael never do it. No, no, no, no, no, no, no.  Does your character evolve? She does a little bit. Has at the very end, the very last scene, you see her concern for Carmen and Mercedes and Freski, we go up and we're warning her. We're like, do you need to be careful, Carmen? Don Jose's here. So you see very flighty and fancy free women turn into some people that are very concerned for their friends. Ah, so now the relationship is revealed even further. Right. And the audience can see that you care for her and you know the tragedy that's taking place. Yes, I mean, it's a very short little vignette that we're on in the fourth act, but I think it really shows kind of the humanity of Carmen and of the Gypsies. I think it just shows sort of, you know, these people kind of all deserve to be treated fairly and, yeah. Oh, I'm beginning to really love this opera. Yeah, I got to see it with new eyes when I see it on Friday night, yeah, yeah, yeah. So how does that third scene that you're involved in, the boring scene, how does that evolve, what happens there, what's your role in it? So like I said, we come in right after the wonderful, wonderful children's chorus. We come in right after everybody's waving red flags and screaming for Eskimo. We come in and Carmen is just, she looks so fabulous. She's decked out in this wonderful outfit and she's having a little love moment with Eskimo and then Eskimo goes off and we come up to him where we say, Carmen, you need to go out to beware. Beware, Carmen, please, Don José. You see it, she doesn't see it, you see it. And she's saying, no, no, no, we're very upset and then she tells us to leave, but then she sort of pauses and hugs us. So maybe she knows, maybe she knows that something's gonna happen and then Don José comes in and they get into a fight and I don't wanna spoil anything, but it's okay. It's not a mystery ending. No, it's not, but what happens is, and I was watching it from the sidelines, Don José pulls a knife on Carmen and Carmen looks at him like, please. And she takes the knife and she pushes it down and he sort of looks like this and then she struts away in all of her fabulousness and then he runs and he turns her around and he stabs her. And it's just like, ugh. It's great stage direction, isn't it? It's great. Our director's fabulous. Who was your director? Tara, Tara Fairclough, she's fabulous. Our conductor's, we're very lucky. We're very, our conductor's just wonderful. And so, congratulations for putting together a great performance. This is a good selection. Well, this is really good. And you got all the right people. Oh yeah, for sure. I mean, I had nothing to do with it, but I think we have a wonderful director with Simon Crookle and he got all the right players, I mean, it's gonna be really exciting. So let's take a minute, just a minute to talk about your educational activities at HOT. We're working with Eric Haines to educate the public and the children especially. Wonderful. I've been involved with the outreach program. This will be my third year. So basically, since I moved home and we take about, we take 30 minute long operas to like 80 different schools. I mean, and to the Outer Islands, including the Outer Islands. Did you say 80? I believe, I believe so. Like we did, yeah, we did about 80, we did 80 performances last year. We counted them and some, I mean, we do three performances a day sometimes and it's just such a pleasure because some of these schools have absolutely no music program. Nothing, you know? And they really should. Music is what helps our brains grow. So we're able to bring these operas to them. Blythe, Kelsey, Eric, Shank and Eric Haines, they also do these programs for about, I could be wrong, but I believe about six weeks, six to 12 weeks in schools where the children put on operas. I mean, so that's just amazing. They did Aida. We were at Blanche Pope Elementary. I helped with this one and we did a whole opera about the Ahupua'a, the, and these children are mostly Hawaiian and they just made it up. Oh, sure, I can imagine. It was wonderful. And then we have a new program, relatively new, called the Young Voices Program, which I'm one of the teachers with Eric Haines and it's basically any high school student from anywhere can join. It's free of charge, we get a grant for it and we get to do workshops and master classes with these wonderful high school kids and they're just wonderful. We have two of our girls in the adult chorus in Carmen. Wow. That's so great. Their lives have been affected by what you've taught them. And they would not be there if we didn't have this program. No, it's so important and you get kids from all different, from punahoe to wherever. Every different walk of life comes and they all come together and they share this camaraderie in music and it's just so special to be a part of. How gratification. But you're seeding this knowledge, it's a special taste all these kids are giving them a great gift. No, it's wonderful, I feel very blessed. And if you didn't hear, I was listening and I hope you remember and it'll be on the final exam, opera builds your brains. That is why I'm so smart. But singing is good for the solo. It's good for the solo.  It's good for you. Have music in your life and come around and see opera, see Leslie Goldman McInerney, see Lynn Johnson. Yeah, absolutely, come to my talk. Come to my talk. One of the great things about our community. Thank you much both of you. Thank you. Great to talk to you. Thank you for having us. Aloha till next time. Aloha.