SOCIETY - EDUCATION

WSJ Editorial Board on Andy Burnham "wish him well,"  yet  this editorial says "he has wrong instincts." Calls Burnham as being "cipher on immigration," "want government to take lead on housing construction" and "wants greater state control of utilities," are unfounded criticism as shown below- "Cipher on immigration" - Burnham has supported Shabana Mahmood, as Home Secretary, on new action for strict immigration rules, tight control over migration, similar to Denmark.  He "wants greater control over utilities."  WSJ says nothing about how utilities were privatized under the Conservatives for basic services that are necessities for a basic quality of life- water, energy and transportation. It is widely accepted across Britain that the private entities have dismally failed the British people in ways not thought possible. Handing basic services to for profit companies was a fundamental error in Britain as it deteriorated the quality of life of the British people. As Burnham pointed out yesterday in speech to Labour and the British people if one cannot get something as basic as a bus service right how on earth can one fix the larger problems facing Britain? He "wants government to take the lead on housing construction."  When there are shortage of housing affecting the standard of living and quality of life as in the US and Britain the government can make a difference, and its stepping in and doing things correctly can improve the quality of life of the British people. He has the wrong instincts on economy suffocating net zero policies. It is reported in The Guardian that Burnham will support drilling for oil to help bring down cost of energy. The focus now is not net zero goals but making life better, improving the quality of life, achieving some balance which now is leaning towards cost of living affecting the people. He has the wrong instincts for business. In modern economies business is part of and the main driver of the economy. In Burnham's work in Manchester business was part of his plan for the economy, and successfully implemented. For far too long in Britain there has not been an honest reckoning on how policies that were reckless with the quality of basic services that affect the quality of life of the British people, would let Britain down, would fail to deliver for the people of Britain. The country that led the Industrial Revolution deserves something better and should get it in this one bold effort by Burnham. ...

Andy Burnham of Labour says "I am Ready." He also told Labour and the British Nation: "I have a Plan." Even before he assumes office The Burnham Programme is on the web. Burnham has implemented it in the North in the Manchester Region. He is now bringing it to the whole of Britain. What Thatcher did in Britain had reverberations in the US with Reagan. What Boris Johnson did in Britain had reverberations in the US with DJT. What Andy Burnham does in Britain will have reverberations in the US. At Lyrarc.com we had sections on Renewal America, Renewal Europe and Renewal India from its founding period. The US (and Britain) is on the cusp of a national renewal, so is India among the English speaking nations of the world. Modi's work in Gujarat state for industrialization and modernization is similar to the work for reindustrialization and modernization undertaken by Burnham in Manchester region. Like Modi Burnham can now take it to the whole country. For the countries UK and Britain that led the Industrial Revolution, and for India that adopted all the parliamentary and democratic processes of Britain and the UK, there is new hope amid the rubble of factionalism, corruption, and deindustrialization. ...

Asking Congress to pass Save America Act DJT says 278000 noncitizens on voting rolls, on July 16 2025 in address to Nation. The fight is for voter ID's and verifying voters, limiting mail in voting.

Andy Burnham's first speech as a Labour leader July 16 2026- historic address to the British people for a time to hope in every corner of Britain for the first time in 40 years. After 40 years of destructive politics, a time when ordinary people would say "Labour is us." ...

The European Union is about to ban social media platforms from accessing children under age 13. This is how Ursula Van Leyen puts it - it is not about children accessing social media, it is about social media platforms accessing our children, says Leyen. She will announce this in her address to the European Union in September. A new report by a psychologist Fegert and an epidemiologist Melchior comes to the conclusion that social media is harmful for children, not just under 13 years, restrictions should be placed on 13 to 18 year olds also to prevent infinite scrolling and other addictive features. Australia has announced a ban setting the age at 16 years. Britain is tightening its ban. France is planning to ban setting the age at 16. The following countries are about to do this- Denmark, France, Germany, Spain, India, Indonesia and Malaysia. When the EU announces a ban it will apply to all of Europe. In the US Florida passed a ban setting age at 14 years. Across Europe children spend 4 to 6 hours on social media a day and for 60% of children it is having harmful effects on emotional health and creating psychosocial problems for children. It also affects the education, the reading comprehension of children as less books are read, and a whole new generation of children is growing up in a way that was never before seen in the Modern period where books and reading were a key aspect of modern society for the last 200 years. ...

On the hope for the world that can be created through the example of the 1.4 billion people of India combined with the 290 million people of Indonesia PM Modi told the Indonesian parliament-"On this great soil of Indonesia, I come before you with confidence in our shared journey of development. I come with the conviction that, together, India and Indonesia can inspire humanity with renewed hope, purpose, and energy. When the 1.4 billion people of India and the 290 million people of Indonesia move forward together with shared purpose and collective effort, the world will witness the making of a new chapter in history. India is a nation that believes not in expansionism, but in development. That is why we are guided by the principle: Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas—Together with all, development for all." On the civilizational dialogue between India and Indonesia PM Modi said- "India, Indonesia, and the Indian Ocean – these very names bear witness to the deep and enduring bonds between our two nations. For thousands of years, our ports connected the world, and our ships carried trade, culture, and ideas across distant shores. The seas continue to hold immense opportunities for our shared future. It is with the vastness of this ocean as our inspiration that I invite you today to take India–Indonesia relations to even greater heights." "Honourable Members, India and Indonesia share far more than the sea—we share a common history. Our relationship is rooted in the timeless legacy of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. In the wisdom of Nalanda that reached these shores centuries ago. In the traditions of Wayang, dance and music. We are connected through magnificent monuments such as Borobudur and Prambanan. We are united by Garuda, the national emblem of Indonesia." On the struggle for independence and shared history- "Friends, there is so much that our ancestors experienced together. Both our peoples endured long periods of foreign rule. Our two nations also attained independence at nearly the same time-Indonesia in 1945, and India in 1947. And when the question of Indonesia’s sovereignty as an independent nation arose, India stood firmly in support of Indonesia’s freedom struggle and became a strong voice for its cause at the United Nations. During that defining period, the role played by the respected Biju Patnaik remains a shining chapter in our shared history. The courage and determination with which he safely brought Prime Minister Sutan Sjahrir and Vice President Mohammad Hatta to India forged an even deeper bond between our two nations."   ...

Mary -Louise Parker in movie Young Washington 2026 as Washington's mother Mary Ball. Here she talks to Marc Myers of the WSJ about her childhood growing up as an Army officer's daughter in different bases before settling down in Arizona. Her fight with shyness till she over compensated. Her father's confidence in her and pointing to her the prospect of going to the North Carolina Institute of Arts, where she learnt the craft of acting. She moved to New York for different roles including one in "Weeds."  She is 61 years, and lives with 2 sons 19 years and 22 years, in a large apartment in Brooklyn that overlooks the water with views of sunsets which she enjoys. It was Mary Ball who told her son not to join the British Navy, wanting to keep him in America. Washington joined the British forces in North America after a career as a surveyor. Land and landholdings were important at the time and as a surveyor with important connections to prominent British families Washington built his career, and further enhanced it by joining the British forces against Indian raids and the French in the coveted Ohio territory. Where did Washington get his keen knowledge of history and the Enlightenment thinkers that enabled him to grasp the ideas of Jefferson? Washington was like the first Chief Justice Marshall in the same communities at the time in the Virginia colony. Both were mentored by a major British landowner who built a large library in the colony that both were able to go to and learn what they later used to start the struggle for a new Nation. It shows the importance of books and libraries, of knowledge during the Enlightenment period in shaping the minds of the Nation's founding fathers- Jefferson, Marshall, Washington, Madison, Samuel Adams and others. ...

"Saving America's Story" by the White House Domestic Policy Council - getting America's story told right and protecting its heritage and aspirational values, the issue the Nation faces in 2026. A new report "Saving America's Story" is issued by the administration as a result of an executive order DJT signed in March 2025.The report’s “central finding” - that “museum leadership has explicitly adopted an ideological framework that no longer treats the American story as a shared national inheritance to be taught or celebrated, but as a political instrument to divide, dispirit, and discourage our citizens.” “To the extent that there is a story told at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History, it is not one of ‘the victory of freedom and genius of our country’ but one of regret, tragedy, and shame." Why is this important- seen from the outside world the ideals set out in the Declaration of Independence are the best ideas of the Enlightenment in Europe, have inspired the French Revolution in the 1790's, have inspired billions of people in Asia, Africa and Latin America in 1800, in 1900, and in the 1950's in the fight against Colonialism of the European Empires, leading to billions of people and many nations gaining freedom. Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln are not just the founding fathers of America but also in a way founding fathers of the principles that inspired these people and who created the Modern World we know today. ...

David Rubenstein's Interview of Heather Cox Richardson about the Revolutionary War after 1776 and the Civil War under Lincoln, and about American democracy in 2026, as a podcaster and a newsletter for Substack. She reaches a large audience in the northeastern, states and is based at Boston College where she is professor of American history. She says here most historians do not agree about history, and this shows as she has a unique interpretation of history. A reading of Abraham Lincoln's letters and speeches from the books published by Library of America shows a different Lincoln. Heather Richardson says Lincoln was hesitant about slavery and moved to abolition only as political situations required action. Our own reading at Lyrarc.com shows Lincoln in his debates with Douglas taking on the role of stewardship of the Nation Jefferson and Washington helped create with the Declaration of Independence, and Washington's conduct of the war (as a war of attrition that would be finally won with divine providence in the form of the aid from the French naval and military power.) His heart was with the Nation following the British example and abolishing slavery (as Britain had done under Witherspoon's leadership in parliament in 1807), and he was the principal proponent of that vision. All over Europe, from France to Britain the emancipation of man from feudalism, from slaveholding or holding people tied to the land was on the way out, and Lincoln believed that this direction was established and it was God's will expressed through his skills in debating the issues for the Nation to bring these ideas already established in Europe to the American continent. Nowhere, not even in one sentence unless taken out of context do we find Lincoln moving from his firm view, using every skill he had to push his vision forward to transform America step by step, almost as if God's own hand was guiding him in this task all the way. One has only to understand the mood of Britain to know that Lincoln knew in his heart that he would prevail. In 1772 Lord Mansfield in the Somerset vs Stewart case declared that chattel slavery had no basis under English Common law. In 1807 the British parliament abolished slavery. And in 1834 the Abolition of Slavery Act abolished slavery in the whole British Empire. By 1800 with the French Revolutionary Wars the mood was all over Europe for emancipation from feudalism, from slavery, for freedom. Lincoln was himself an expression of the mood of the time coming from a log cabin in Kentucky with little schooling and believing in the best British values in a new frontier country including its system of common law and freedoms guaranteed by an unwritten constitution. In 2026 there are views that show an hesitant ambivalent interpretation of America's resolve under Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln, in the fight for freedom of all people by projecting the founders into the current situation. Living in their time they fought the hardest to change what they saw, no less than William Wilberforce in the British parliament for the freedom of man in 1807. Britain's parliament abolished slavery in 1807 by 283 votes to 16 to standing ovation and an emotional parliament. Wilberforce said at the time-"God Almighty has set before me two great objects, the suppression of the slave trade and the reformation of manners." Lincoln was no less a force for good under God Almighty on the American continent than Wilberforce was in Britain. Carl Sandburg's biography of Lincoln shows this on every page. ...