Academy of Ideas

A lecture delivered at Living Freedom 2018, an Academy of Ideas residential school in London on 5-7 April 2018. Tensions are growing around how and whether religion should be accommodated in public life. In the era of Trump, religious conservatives in America have made it easier for hospitals, doctors and employers to object to providing birth control, abortions and transgender care on the grounds of conscience. Detractors say this is discrimination under the guise of religious freedom. Similar debates are playing out across Europe. So how do we reconcile the right of faith communities to exercise their beliefs in a pluralistic society? Should we censor individuals that disagree with same-sex marriages? Is firing a midwife that refuses to perform abortions an act of justice or discrimination? Does the right of conscience mean that a pharmacist can deny emergency contraception or that they can provide it even if it is forbidden? Or both? Has the United States gone too far in protecting the faithful? Has Europe gone too far in neglecting them? SPEAKER Jon O’Brienpresident, Catholics for Choice

With the case of Alfie Evans in the news, this Battle of Ideas debate is very pertinent.ORIGINAL INTRODUCTION The tragic case of Charlie Gard, a baby with a terminal congenital illness whose parents refused to accept the decision of medical staff to withdraw life support, highlighted the problems that may arise when there is a breakdown of trust between doctors and parents. The old adage that ‘doctor knows best’ is being challenged not just by patients, but from within the medical profession itself, as paternalism gives way to shared decision-making. But can patients know enough to take responsibility for major decisions about treatment? If doctors relinquish authority, does this impose an undue burden on patients. What is the role of the courts? SPEAKERS DR FRANKIE ANDERSONpsychiatry trainee; co-founder, Sheffield Salon SARAH BARCLAYfounder and director, The Medical Mediation Foundation RAANAN GILLONemeritus professor of medical ethics, Imperial College London; president, Institute of Medical Ethics PROFESSOR SIR SIMON WESSELYregius chair of psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London; president, Royal Society of Medicine

A lecture from Living Freedom 2018, the Academy of Ideas residential school for 18- to 25-year-olds interested in exploring the historical ideas and contemporary debates related to freedom, which took place on 5-7 April 2018 at the Council on International Educational Exchange in central London. It has been claimed that the Industrial Revolution was the biggest turning point in human history. It was the moment when the creative potential of society was left free to flourish, leading to huge changes from life expectancy to the growth of cities, from wealth production to the establishment of democratic nation states. Yet, in today’s climate of pessimism and low expectations, the Industrial Revolution is often either seen with scepticism or as a historical accident, a result of factors such as technology or cheap raw materials from the colonies. The crucial missing link is the relationship between the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution. In the former, the mind demands its freedom; in the latter, it shows what it can achieve when it is free to translate its ideas into action. LECTURER Dr Nikos Sotirakopoulos lecturer in sociology and criminology, York St John 

A lecture from Living Freedom 2018, the Academy of Ideas residential school for 18- to 25-year-olds interested in exploring the historical ideas and contemporary debates related to freedom, which took place on 5-7 April 2018 at the Council on International Educational Exchange in central London. Our genes have, for better and for worse, been a central preoccupation in science, medicine and politics for more than a century. How has our understanding of genes changed during that time? Why are we moving increasingly from talking about ‘genetics’ to talking about ‘genomics’ (and ‘epigenetics’ and ‘epigenomics’)? What, if anything, can our genes really tell us - individually and collectively - about where we’ve come from, where we’re going to and how free we are? LECTURER: Sandy Starrcommunications manager, Progress Educational Trust

Only 35 years ago a predominantly peasant economy, China has become the largest trading nation in the world. It is also remarkable that China has relinquished its status as environmental pariah to become a critic of the US president’s rejection of the Paris climate accords. Only recently a communist outsider, China is now a capitalist powerbroker, most notably in dealing with the challenge of North Korea. Can there be a peaceful adjustment of the West’s global domination to accommodate the rise of the new Eastern superpower? Is the demise of the West exaggerated? Is there a serious risk of military conflict? JONATHAN FENBYauthor, Will China Dominate the 21st Century? managing partner, TS Lombard ALAN HUDSONvisiting professor, Shanghai Jiaotong University; director, programmes in leadership and public policy, University of Oxford DR CHUN-YI LEEassistant professor, The School of Politics and International Relations; director, Taiwan Studies Programme DR LINDA YUEHeconomist, broadcaster and author; adjunct professor of economics, London Business School

Silicon Valley used to be regarded as the global hub of entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation. It was the home of the world’s best technologies, new products and services. Yet today, Silicon Valley’s tech companies seem to have become the twenty-first-century equivalent of mediaeval robber barons. They are condemned for fleecing customers, evading taxes, and pocketing monopoly profits. Once associated with freedom, Silicon Valley is now condemned as the agency of global surveillance. Has it gone from overhype to over-reach? Or given emerging new technologies – such as express transit systems, autonomous vehicles and biotech – is the criticism mostly unfair? SPEAKERS JAMIE BARTLETTdirector, Centre for the Analysis of Social Media, Demos; author, Radicals; presenter, BBC’s The Secrets of Silicon Valley DANIEL BEN-AMIjournalist; author, Ferraris for All: in defence of economic progress ANDREW BERNSTEINauthor, The Capitalist Manifesto: the historic, economic, and philosophic case for laissez-faire; affiliate, Ayn Rand Institute LAUREN RAZAVImanaging director, Flibl; award-winning writer and consultant

How could so many people be convinced to vote for Donald Trump? Why did so many Brits vote to leave the EU, despite almost unanimous advice from experts, political leaders and celebrities that we should remain? Some attribute these results to the power of Big Data, specifically to the high-tech psychological marketing techniques of a company called Cambridge Analytica. Can the manipulation of data really swing important votes? What are the implications of this approach for privacy and democracy? What does the assumption that a few targeted messages can influence voters’ decisions tell us about elite attitudes towards the electorate? SPEAKERS JAMIE BARTLETT director, Centre for the Analysis of Social Media, Demos; author, The Dark Net and Radicals; presenter, BBC’s The Secrets of Silicon Valley CAROLE CADWALLADR feature writer, Observer SIMON COOKE member, Institute of Direct and Digital Marketing; leader of the Conservative group, Bradford City Council TIMANDRA HARKNESS journalist, writer and broadcaster; presenter, FutureProofing; author, Big Data: does size matter?

Recording of the debate at Battle of Ideas 2017 (https://www.battleofideas.org.uk/session/safety-first/) The ‘safety first’ outlook, intending to keep us safe by imagining the worst, risks increasing our sense of existential insecurity. Always anticipating catastrophe may mean over-reacting, especially in the fields of science, health and technology. We have become the victims of scaremongering over theoretical risks – from mobile phone radiation or the latest strain of flu, even from familiar foods such as sugar and salt. Has safety become an aim in itself, divorced from a common-sense assessment of risk? Does the desire to eliminate all danger undermine individual freedom? Is it time to confront the dangers of our ‘safety first’ society? SPEAKERS Richard Angelldirector, Progress Terry Barnesprincipal, Cormorant Policy Advice; fellow, Institute of Economic Affairs; former special adviser to two Australian health ministers Professor Bill Durodiéchair of international relations, former head of department, University of Bath Dr Clare Geradamedical director, NHS Practitioner Health Programme; former chair, Royal College of General Practitioners Lenore Skenazy'America’s Worst Mom'; president, Let Grow; founder, Free-Range Kids book, blog and movement

The Russian government is now routinely portrayed as a threat to the West, both on the international stage, in Ukraine and Syria, and in domestic politics, accused of interfering in elections. Russia is certainly back on the world stage and no longer prepared to accept Western-backed regime change, but to what extent does Russia represent a threat? Does Russia have legitimate interests that it is entitled to defend as much as Britain is? Is Putin simply playing a weak hand well? Does Russia loom large, not because it is relatively strong, but because Western governments themselves lack direction? SPEAKERS Mary Dejevskyformer foreign correspondent in Moscow, Paris and Washington; special correspondent in China; writer and broadcaster Dr Tara McCormacklecturer, international politics, University of Leicester Dr Lukasz Pawlowskimanaging editor & columnist, Kultura Liberalna Sir Adam Thomson KCMGdirector, European Leadership Network

After the school shooting in Parkland, Florida on 14 February 2018, the issue of gun control and the meaning of mass shootings in America has come to the fore once more. This session from Battle of Ideas 2013, in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting and Boston Marathon bombing, took a step back to examine these issues in a wider context. SPEAKERS Nancy McDermott writer; advisor to Park Slope Parents, NYC's most notorious parents' organization Christine Rosen fellow, New America Foundation; senior editor, New Atlantis Dr Tim Stanley leader writer and columnist, Daily Telegraph Dr Kevin Yuill senior lecturer, history, University of Sunderland; author, Assisted Suicide: the liberal, humanist case against legalization Chair:Jean Smith specialist development consultant; co-founder and director, NY Salon

Recording of a debate at the Battle of Ideas festival at The Barbican on Sunday 29 October 2017. George Orwell claimed that ‘political language... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable’. Today, many claim that the increasing corruption of language has become detrimental to our democracy. Political labels, such as fascism and populism, right-wing and left-wing, are used promiscuously, often as insults against opponents. The rise of identity politics has given us new words, such as ‘ze’ and ‘cis’. Do such novel terms encourage discussion or help to shut it down? Should we go back to basics, and pin down what we mean by such contested terms as liberalism and nationalism, even democracy? SPEAKERS BRENDAN O’NEILLeditor, spiked RACHEL HALLIBURTONjournalist and novelist NICK HILTONbroadcast editor, Spectator DR PAUL A TAYLORsenior lecturer in communications andcultural theory, University of Leeds

Diversity is widely celebrated in contemporary society. Big employers have adopted elaborate strategies to recruit more diverse workforces. On the world stage, diversity is posited as a progressive antidote to ‘backward forces’ clinging to outdated national cultures. But has diversity become an illiberal orthodoxy? When Google engineer James Damore notoriously inquired whether diversity was an incontestable virtue, he lost his job. Do diversity policies invite a permanent war of cultures, resulting in a society increasingly segmented along the lines of identity? Can we achieve fair treatment and equal access to jobs without creating discriminatory and divisive hiring practices? SPEAKERS JOSIE APPLETONdirector, civil liberties group, Manifesto Club; author, Officious: rise of the busybody state; blogs at notesonfreedom.com AMALI DE ALWISCEO, Code First: Girls; chair, BIMA Diversity panel; fellow, RSA DREDA SAY MITCHELLauthor, journalist, broadcaster and campaigner; winner, CWA’s John Creasey Dagger for debut novel, Running Hot; latestnovel, Blood Daughter CATHY YOUNGUS journalist and commentator; weekly columnist, Newsday; author, Ceasefire!

Alastair Donald, Claire Fox and Rob Lyons discuss the fallout from the Presidents' Club dinner, the stasis within the Conservative government and the prospects for Brexit, and the misguided 'war on plastic'. (Apologies for some noise in parts of this recording.)

Who can journalists trust out of the overwhelming selection of competing interests to act as reliable sources? Can anyone play the role of the ‘honest broker’? How can the public untangle dubious, pseudo-scientific advice and dodgy stats from facts and truth? How can we know whether journalism, particularly reporting on complex issues or assessing notoriously difficult ideas such as risk, is accurate? Should we accept that it is our responsibility as citizens to check the facts for ourselves or should we demand that the media improve its handling of statistics and data? SPEAKERS Dr Graeme Archerwriter & professional statistician; winner, 2011 Orwell Prize for blogging Vance Crowedirector of Millennial Engagement, Monsanto Company Alan Millerchairman, Night Time Industries Association (NTIA); leading campaigner, #SaveNightlife Fay Schlesingerhead of News, The Times Ceri Thomasex-editor, BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme & BBC’s Panorama; director, public affairs, Oxford University

Listen to the debate at the Battle of Ideas 2017 at the Barbican in London. Whereas earlier generations of young people provoked outrage among their elders, millennials – those born in the late 1990s and early 2000s – seem to attract merely condescension and concern. Today’s youth have been labelled ‘Generation Snowflake’ for their declarations of emotional vulnerability and demands for protection and support. Instead of revolting, today’s students seem to be preoccupied with difficulties in negotiating personal relationships, demanding formal instruction and regulation of issues of consent and protection of apparently fragile identities against hostile criticism. Yet, for those coming of age in an era of austerity and debt, Brexit and Trump, anxiety and apprehension may be appropriate responses. And, in their embrace of issues of social justice, and support for the kinder, gentler form of politics espoused by Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders, perhaps the millennials are pointing the way towards real change in society. Are the adults of tomorrow over-anxious snowflakes masquerading as a youthquake? Or is their pursuit of a different sort of politics – putting emotion and morality before ideology and policy – exactly the kind of shake up Western politics has been waiting for? SPEAKERS Bradley Allsoppostgraduate officer, University of Lincoln Students' Union; co-editor, Bright Green Jennie Bristowsenior lecturer in sociology, Canterbury Christ Church University; author, The Sociology of Generations: New directions and challenges and Baby Boomers and Generational Conflict Dr Eliza Filbyhistorian, King's College London; founder, GradTrain