How Italy’s mafia uses social media to recruit new blood Economist  Nov 15th 2025 

Mobsters are exploiting the social-media app to normalise their
image, mythologise their culture and even to launder money, 
TikTok’s algorithm, based on user interaction, soon subjects casual
users to a perpetual torrent of violence, loyalty and ostentation,
“including wives of prisoners offering advice, photos of victims of
clan wars, young heirs flaunting luxury brands, repentant mafiosi
offering commentary…and parades of scooters designed to
intimidate”, the report said. This continual exposure to “grief,
violence, luxury and prison…has trained audiences to consume
criminal imagery as entertainment.”

https://www.economist.com/by-invitation/2025/11/11/a-human-rights-researcher-on-why-she-pushed-back-when-china-bullied-her-university  Democratic governments must resist authoritarian states trying to co-opt their institutions, writes Laura Murphy Whatever the reasons—whether commercial, legal, ethical or
reputational—these documents suggest the university had knowingly
and deliberately complied with the demands of a foreign statesecurity agency to silence me and my researchers, among them
Uyghurs who risked their own and their families’ wellbeing to expose
Chinese abuses. SHU administrators clearly no longer shared their
courage.
Academic freedom is the cornerstone of knowledge production in
democratic societies. Preserving it requires that universities shelter
researchers from the retaliation of authoritarian governments by
refusing to surrender to threats or put harnesses on their faculty’s
research agenda. Universities protect that freedom in part by
securing the necessary insurance to cover their researchers. And
they provide financial and administrative support to faculty to pursue
the questions that animate them, regardless of whether they are
considered “sensitive”. We must not allow those who seek to
deny rights abuses to co-opt our democratic institutions, such as
courts, media or universities. Those who comply with such demands
encourage bad actors to extort similar submission out of others. The
effects are corrosive of our institutions, our freedoms, our
knowledge and our power to effect change

Share

India’s census will be consequential—and controversial  https://www.economist.com/the-world-ahead/2025/11/12/indias-census-will-be-consequential-and-controversial

https://cop30.br/en/news-about-cop30/over-usd-5-5-billion-announced-for-tropical-forest-forever-facility-as-53-countries-endorse-the-historic-tfff-launch-declaration  The TFFF is a historic paradigm shift in global efforts to protect and restore tropical forests, as the facility will address a market failure and recognize the value of, and pay for, the ecosystem services provided by tropical forests to the world. The TFFF creates an unprecedented global financial incentive to protect standing tropical forests, rather than destroying them.

Read more …

Advocacy Statement on the Green Bonus and the Future of the Himalaya: People for Himalaya
We, the undersigned organisations committed to ecological democracy, mountain livelihoods, and climate justice, welcome the recent appeal by the Constitutional Conduct Group urging the 16th Finance Commission to recognise the ecological contribution of the Himalayan states through a Green Bonus. The letter rightly highlights that Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Sikkim, Jammu & Kashmir, and other Himalayan states sustain India’s forests, rivers, and glaciers that nourish nearly half the country’s population. Yet, these very regions are being eroded by climate change, unchecked infrastructure, and fiscal compulsions that drive them to exploit their own ecological wealth.

The demand for a Green Bonus is both justified and necessary, but it must be accompanied by a clear and collectively defined framework for Himalayan development. The standards for what constitutes sustainable and equitable growth in the Himalaya must be discussed widely with the governments and people of these states. Himalayan regions should be designated as eco-sensitive or protected zones, where large construction projects, major industries, hydropower dams, and extensive road-widening are strictly regulated or prohibited. The objective must be to reduce extractive pressures, not legitimise them through compensation.

Beyond compensation, Green Bonus funding should promote community-based mixed forest development and green, small-scale industries that create local employment and add value to agricultural and forest products. Priority must be given to education and healthcare, following the Kerala model, where decentralised, participatory governance has enabled poverty reduction and improved quality of life. Horticulture and tourism can serve as additional livelihoods, but tourism must be responsible and environmentally sustainable, with local communities owning and managing these enterprises. Large, high-impact tourism projects must be discouraged in favour of decentralised and community-run destinations.

The Himalayan states face an impossible paradox: they are expected to conserve forests and regulate hydrology for the nation, while disasters, infrastructural collapse, and limited revenue options threaten their survival. The Green Bonus, therefore, is not charity but an instrument of fiscal justice within India’s federal system. Yet, it cannot become another exercise in offsetting and compensating that commodifies nature. Financial transfers alone will not fix systemic inequities; they must be tied to structural and institutional reform.

Transparency and accountability are essential, but so too is strong environmental regulation. Without effective enforcement of environmental and forest laws, fiscal incentives will not prevent degradation. Any Green Fund must include strict ecological performance criteria, independent monitoring, and public disclosure. Most importantly, Gram Sabhas and local governance institutions must have a decisive role in land-use planning, forest management, and environmental decision-making. This requires closing legal loopholes and strengthening the implementation of the Forest Rights Act, Environmental Impact Assessment, and related laws to revive the survival rights and needs of mountain communities rather than the “ease of doing business.”

If designed with justice, participation, and regulation at its core, the Green Bonus can advance fiscal, environmental, and social justice together. If not, it will merely place a price tag on the Himalaya’s collapse. We urge the Finance Commission and the Government of India to treat this as an opportunity for reform and rebalancing — to ensure that the mountains, their people, and their rights stand at the heart of India’s climate and development future.

Endorsed by:
People for Himalaya

Citizens’ Concerns Against Privatisation of Public Land

This white paper emerges from a brainstorming meeting organised by Moneylife Foundation on 4 October 2025 at the Mumbai Press Club, which brought together activists, urban planners, architects, researchers and concerned citizens to deliberate on the redevelopment of railway and other public lands in Mumbai. The discussion recognised the urgent need for a collective, evidence-based response to the growing trend of monetising public land under the pretext of redevelopment, infrastructure expansion or revenue generation.

Context

Mumbai’s vast tracts of public land—once the foundation for affordable housing, open spaces and social infrastructure—are rapidly shrinking. Over the past two decades, lands belonging to the mills, ports and railways have been successively diverted for commercial
development.  ( https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/fare-hike-and-land-sale-two-more-nails-in-bests-coffin/articleshow/120866544.cms )   Such moves have eroded the public domain, displaced working communities and undermined the city’s environmental and social fabric.
The most recent proposal for redevelopment of railway land, including suggestions to relocate tracks underground to free surface land for “development,” represents a critical juncture. This approach, seen alongside similar monetisation efforts by other public
authorities, raises fundamental questions about who benefits from such “redevelopment”, and at what social and ecological cost.
Monetisation or sale of assets, which are essentially a transfer of rights from the public to private hands, are presented as a source of revenue for the authorities.  ( https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/mumbai-news/msrtc-to-monetise-its-assets-at-prime-locations-to-overcome-financial-losses-101687115558999.html)   However, as these revenue projections are typically overstated, their recovery is a challenge, and even the utilisation of the revenue is rarely for the stated purposes. Occasionally, it is claimed that
assets are not being “sold” but leased. This is misleading, since both lease and outright sale amount to the same thing: i.e. a transfer of rights, use and control of the asset from  public to private hands. The revenue or benefit of such a handover is merely a justification, and the actual outcome is almost never in the public interest.

Core Principles
1. Public Land as a Public Trust
Public land must serve public purposes and must not be alienated or commodified. All public authorities are custodians or trustees, not owners, of the lands they manage. Distributing public land for commercial exploitation needs to be stopped.
2. Public Purpose and Social Equity
The government must put the land to uses that maximise public benefit. Public land must be reserved for public use. The primary goal of any development must be for essential amenities, open spaces, public housing, and public transport—rather than to maximise commercial returns.
3. Expanding, Not Shrinking, Public Land Stock
Public land is a finite resource that belongs not just to the present generation but to all future ones. The government’s duty is to protect and enhance this shared asset for social, civic, and environmental purposes — not to monetise it for short-term revenue or private gain.
4. Public Land Off the Market
Public land should not be treated as a commodity for sale. They should be taken off the market. Any development must ensure that ownership, use, control and benefits remain within the public domain.
5. Transparency and Public Participation
Decisions regarding the use or development of public land should be subject to transparent procedures and meaningful public consultation, including full disclosure of project details and independent review mechanisms.

Policy Recommendations
The current pattern of land redevelopment in Mumbai reflects fragmented governance, opaque decision-making and a lack of coordination between agencies. Development  authorities operate in silos, pursuing individual revenue or commercial objectives without
a shared vision for the city’s long-term needs. This has led to unequal access to land, loss of open spaces, displacement of communities and urban designs that prioritise private gain over public welfare. The following recommendations outline the structural and policy
reforms needed to achieve these goals.

1. Adopt a Unified Public Land Policy for Maharashtra
Develop a public land policy that applies consistent principles (as listed above) to all public authorities — Railways, MMRDA, BMC, MHADA, Revenue, Forest, CIDCO, MIDC, Dairy Department, Mumbai Port Authority, SRA, etc. The policy should require:
a) Full disclosure of land parcels acquired and notified under the land ceiling act;
b) Full disclosure of land parcels under public ownership;
c) Public consultations for any plans or proposals made on these land parcels;
d) Periodic reporting to the state legislature and a designated oversight body constituted as an independent body of people’s representatives, experts and civil society members.
e) Proposals and plans to expand the available pool of public land, either through direct purchase or acquisition.

2. Public Land, Planning and Consultation
Mumbai has a “balkanised” planning system, where different public authorities carry out their own plans and projects as their own little islands. However, land use planning must be undertaken by the local planning authority irrespective of land ownership.
a) Many land parcels in the past have been given to public authorities or departments (like MbPA, NTC, Railways, Posts and Telegraph, BSNL, MTNL) or private owners for a specific use at throwaway prices or lease rents. If these lands are no longer used for the specific purposes, they should revert back to the government without compensation.  ( https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/mumbai-ambedkar-memorial-indu-mill-land-transfer-deal-is-
final-2817676/ )   Under no circumstances should the various public agencies or private owners be allowed to change their use or monetise their value.
b) Furthermore, the use of the land, irrespective of land ownership, must be decided by the local planning authority (BMC) through the planning process, and not by the land owner.
c) All plans for diversion of public land or change of user must undergo a detailed cost benefit analysis, mandatory disclosure, independent oversight and public consultation.
d) Details of the proposed land uses must be clearly indicated in local development plans
e) All statutory procedures (notification, suggestions & objections period, and consultations) must be followed for any change of land use on public land.

3. Public Land Exclusively for Public Purposes
Public land is to be used for the highest public purpose, which is to create public amenities—such as affordable public or low-income housing, schools, healthcare facilities and open spaces. The land must be reserved exclusively for:
a) Publicly managed parks and playgrounds that are open to the sky
b) Publicly managed amenities for basic healthcare and education
c) Public housing / low income housing built and managed by the government based on NBCI norms for low income housing. Amenities must be based on land area per capita, and not percentage of land area.

Conclusion and Way Forward
The principles and recommendations outlined in this note are based on the elementary
distinction between public and private interests. Public authorities are not owners but
stewards of public land. A public authority’s mandate is different from the motivations of
private landlords or private developers who seek to maximise profits from the land.
Alienating public land undermines public interest, and the main consideration for public
agencies is what is best and highest public interest. Furthermore, the government must
seek to expand rather than shrink public resources.

Acting on the principles and reforms listed above will require a combination of policy
commitment, institutional coordination and public accountability. The Government of
Maharashtra can take the lead by issuing a comprehensive Public Land Policy directive
that applies uniformly to all state and city-level agencies. This policy should be
accompanied by clear disclosure norms, standardised evaluation frameworks and
mandatory consultation processes.
This white paper represents a collective effort by the undersigned activists, planners,
researchers, and citizens who share a common concern for the equitable and sustainable
use of Mumbai’s public land

Why tech giants are offering premium AI tools to millions of Indians for free https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c14pr0enjr6o Nikita Yadav such offers are calculated investments...India has over 900 million internet users and offers some of the world's cheapest data. Its online population is young - most internet users are under the age of 24, belonging to a generation that lives, works and socialises online, using smartphones.
  
  Bundling these AI tools with data packs creates a massive opportunity for tech companies given India's data consumption outpaces much of the world. The more Indians use these platforms, the more first-hand data companies can access.  
- "Most users have always been willing to give up data for convenience or something free and that will continue,..  But this is where the government will have to step in.   "Regulation will need to increase as authorities figure out how to manage the broader issue of people giving away their data so freely," says Mr Roy.

 Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDP) 2023 around digital media and privacy, is yet to be enacted...while the act introduces broad protections around personal data, its implementation rules are still pending and it does not yet address AI systems or algorithmic accountability.

From 'Anandamath' to the present, Vande Mataram reflects how a song born in devotion and marked by early exclusion has journeyed from hymn to ideology, revealing the uneasy link between faith and belonging in the making of the nation.

https://thewire.in/communalism/vande-mataram-bankim-official-celebration-150-years-reality-muslims-india 

by Sreejith K.

07/11/2025

From Zohran Mamdani, Nehru and the forgotten thread of freedom   https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/pratap-bhanu-mehta-writes-from-zohran-mamdani-nehru-and-the-forgotten-thread-of-freedom-10350358/   the working class — not the privileged elite — that heralded a genuinely open and cosmopolitan society. In contemporary parlance, one might say that the cosmopolitanism of the city is the cosmopolitanism of labour, not of capital... The ideological thread connecting these figures( Debs/Baldwin & Nehru) belonged to a historical moment we have largely forgotten — when civil liberties, anti-racism, socialism, open societies, and decolonisation were all considered part of a single emancipatory movement. Freedom and justice were indivisible...

Civil liberties, in this view, were a cause of the Left — distinguishing it from communism and far removed from today’s libertarian appropriation. What is so resonant about this connection is the reminder that civil liberties once meant defending even the rights of those accused of conscientious objection and treason. In an age when the definition of treason has expanded to the point that the very idea of a “political prisoner” has lost meaning, this history bears remembering.