#Civil Services 2019 Examination

[tarunias-official]

UPSC PYQs: UPSC Prelims Question 2019 | Polity & Governance | Salient Features of history

[kp777]

By Julia Conley

Common Dreams

Aug. 13, 2024

"When targeting LGBTQ people is a priority for our enemies, it's all the more critical that defending LGBTQ people remain a priority for our friends," said one ACLU official.

The American Civil Liberties Union released a detailed policy memo Tuesday outlining how Vice President Kamala Harris can and should work to protect LGBTQ+ people should she win the presidency in November.

The ACLU noted that Harris' record serving in the Biden-Harris administration provides the organization with "a strong basis for optimism that a Harris administration would continue to fight for LGBTQ people," but said it was driven to release the memo because of attacks on the community in recent years by Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and lawmakers at the local, state, and federal level.

"When targeting LGBTQ people is a priority for our enemies, it's all the more critical that defending LGBTQ people remain a priority for our friends," said Mike Zamore, national director for policy and government affairs at the ACLU.

"The Biden-Harris administration has worked hard to earn the trust of LGBTQ people and our families through concerted efforts to protect transgender kids in our schools, defend the right to marriage equality, and ensure medical decisions stay between trans people and their doctors," added Zamore. "We're hopeful a Harris-Walz administration would build on this legacy, and we will bring all of our resources to bear to help them do so."

In the memo, titled Harris on LGBTQ Rights: Building on a Legacy of Undoing Harm, Expanding Protections, and Serving as a Bulwark Against State Attacks, the ACLU said one key action would be to issue an executive order directing federal agencies to examine how they can enhance access to gender-affirming healthcare in federally funded programs.

"This would send a powerful message about how a future-President Harris is prioritizing the healthcare needs of trans people, and it would strengthen coverage and access to gender-affirming care under federal policies and programs," reads the memo, which said protections could include mandatory coverage determinations and increased clarity for patients and providers.

"The Biden-Harris administration has worked hard to earn the trust of LGBTQ people and our families... We're hopeful a Harris-Walz administration would build on this legacy, and we will bring all of our resources to bear to help them do so."

The memo was released as the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to hear a challenge brought by the federal government and families in Tennessee against a state law banning gender-affirming care for transgender youths. Tennessee is one of 24 states that ban medication and surgical care for transgender youths—care that is supported by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, and other health authorities. Six states have passed laws making it a felony to provide certain kinds of gender-affirming care.

In addition to appealing a lower court's decision to uphold Tennessee's ban, the Biden-Harris administration has sued several other state's over similar laws; ordered federal agencies to protect LGBTQ+ people from discrimination in employment, housing, healthcare, and credit lending; reversed a ban on transgender service members in the military; and expanded access to gender-affirming care in government healthcare programs, including in prisons.

The ACLU also wants passage of the Equality Act—a bill introduced in 2019 that would amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The group says it is "prepared to harness the public pressure necessary to push the Senate to restore its ability to deliver full equality under the law for LGBTQ individuals."

The ACLU—which also plans to publish memos this month outlining steps Harris should take to promote abortion rights, voting rights, immigrants, and other issues—also outlined how federal agencies can strengthen protections for LGBTQ people under a Harris administration.

The Department of Education should unveil "more robust enforcement of nondiscrimination rules and more vigorous investigation and resolutions of Education Office of Civil Rights complaints based on sex discrimination," reads the memo. "It is worth noting that the most recent department regulations clarifying how Title IX can be used to protect LGBTQ students are enjoined in certain states, so the administration must continue to fight in the courts to lift that injunction."

The ACLU also called on the Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Civil Rights to provide more robust enforcement of nondiscrimination rules, proactively ensuring public and private insurance policies don't exclude case for transgender patients and "rigorously investigating all complaints of discrimination."

A potential Harris administration, said the group, could work with states to ensure they have the resources needed to expand pro-equality protections, as nearly half of U.S. states work to erode LGBTQ+ rights.

"State employees and state-funded programs should be fully trained on LGBTQ competency, and state budgets must provide dedicated funding streams for LGBTQ-specific programs," reads the memo. "State medical facilities and insurance programs can ensure trans and gender-expansive people have access to the care that is medically necessary to live their lives. State housing programs must have policies in place to ensure they are affirming and accessible to LGBTQ people."

In the face of attacks from GOP-controlled state legislatures and with "a landmark Supreme Court case on the horizon," said James Esseks, co-director of the ACLU's LGBTQ & HIV Project, the ACLU recognizes the Biden-Harris administration's "strong record of protecting and expanding the freedom of LGBTQ people."

"We would encourage a Harris-Walz administration to continue this commitment and do everything in its power to protect our rights, our healthcare," said Esseks, "and our freedom to be ourselves without fear."

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Matt Shuham at HuffPost:

Donald Trump has no greater enemy than the United States’ federal bureaucracy — what he calls the “deep state.” And he has a plan to bend it to his will if he’s elected in November. The plan, to create something called “Schedule F,” would make tens of thousands of civil servants easier to fire, fundamentally changing the nature of the federal government — and, some worry, paving the way for authoritarianism.

Schedule F is a new category, or schedule, of federal workers who are exempt from codified job protections, like being hired and fired based on merit and having the ability to appeal disciplinary action. The majority of federal civil service employees, from climate scientists to bank examiners to IT specialists, are covered by these protections; some positions, like postal workers and intelligence officers, are currently exempt. That system ensures that experience and skill, rather than political favoritism or personal connections, guide hiring and firing decisions within the federal government. But conservatives have long complained that the president should exercise more control over the federal bureaucracy, and Trump in particular has said it needs to be “brought to heel.” Trump created Schedule F in an October 2020 executive order. Under that order, federal workers involved in “confidential, policy-determining, policy-making and policy-advocating positions” — a vague description that would include at least tens of thousands of people — would be stripped of their civil service protections and reclassified as “at-will” appointees, meaning they could be hired or fired for any reason, or none at all.

Because the order came so late in Trump’s presidency, only a handful of agencies created lists of specific jobs that would be eligible for conversion to Schedule F. And President Joe Biden reversed the order before any jobs could actually be converted. But Trump has explicitly said he’ll pursue Schedule F again if he’s elected. In a campaign video last year, Trump referred to Schedule F as an effort to “remove rogue bureaucrats.” “I will wield that power very aggressively,” he said.

Federal employees, political scientists, union leaders and watchdog groups told HuffPost that Schedule F could lead to a “chilling” effect. At-will employment, they said, would make it harder for government workers to raise concerns that go against their bosses’ political loyalties. That could lead to a degradation of public services like disaster relief, financial regulation and the administration of government benefits. “You can see where it can grind work to a halt, because even people who are trying to do the right thing [would] be afraid that if they do something wrong, they’ll be out of a job,” said Joe Spielberger, a policy counsel at the Project on Government Oversight who has raised alarms over how the implementation of Schedule F would harm key welfare programs like Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. Schedule F would be the “fundamental element of an authoritarian agenda,” he said, allowing Trump to take control of the vast federal bureaucracy and reverse generations of reforms.

Donald Moynihan, a professor of public policy at Georgetown University, signed on to an open letter in April arguing Schedule F would open the door to “politicization and patronage throughout the federal workforce.” He told HuffPost, “This feels like the biggest problem that the fewest people understand about a potential second Trump administration.”

[...]

The ‘Lightbulb Moment’

The push for Schedule F started with what one Trump staffer called a “lightbulb moment.” In 2019, James Sherk, a top White House adviser on civil service and labor policy, was frustrated by reports of federal workers pushing back against the Trump policy agenda. He started reading through existing U.S. law on federal labor rights, and realized that the language about exceptions from civil service protections could actually be interpreted quite broadly. Such a change in interpretation would be a break from decades of precedent. Presidents only bring around 4,000 political appointees with them at the start of a new term, and many additionally require Senate confirmation. These appointees are generally classified as “excepted” — they aren’t required to complete standardized competitive civil service exams, but they also aren’t afforded standard civil service protections. (The “excepted” portion of the federal workforce includes more than a million federal workers under various schedules, though the vast majority of them come from the United States Postal Service, the military, and Department of Veterans affairs.)

But Sherk argued that the “excepted” service should grow much larger, to include “the most important” federal workers — “the people who are telling all the rest of the bureaucracy what to do,” he said in a 2022 interview. In his view, the change would make the federal government more accountable to the White House, and therefore, the American people. “Nothing in [federal law] says that you can only take away the civil service protections of political appointees,” Sherk said. Sherk estimated that Schedule F would have applied to 1% to 3% of the federal workforce, or about 50,000 workers, had Biden not unwound it. But the number actually affected if Trump pursues Schedule F again could be much larger. A Government Accountability Office review of the few agencies that did start making Schedule F conversion lists found that agencies thought anywhere from 2% to 68% of their employees were eligible to be “rescheduled.”

[...]

Project 2025, the 900-page right-wing agenda-in-waiting for Trump cooked up by the Heritage Foundation and dozens of other arch-conservative organizations, refers to plans to reintroduce Schedule F in several sections. And one member of the project’s three-person leadership team is Paul Dans, the former chief of staff at the OPM during the Trump administration. The Project 2025 team has signaled that potential staffers in a second Trump White House would need to be on board: A questionnaire for potential new hires in a Trump administration asks applicants if they agree that “the President should be able to advance his/her agenda through the bureaucracy without hinderance from unelected federal officials.”

HuffPost has a story on how Project 2025 and Schedule F could chill dissent against a potential 2nd Trump.

This is why Americans should vote Joe Biden to stop Project 2025 from taking effect!

Read the full article at HuffPost.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

April 30, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

MAY 01, 2024

This morning, Time magazine published a cover story by Eric Cortellessa about what Trump is planning for a second term. Based on two interviews with Trump and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisors, the story lays out Trump’s conviction that he was “too nice” in his first term and that he would not make such a mistake again. 

Cortellessa writes that Trump intends to establish “an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world.” 

He plans to use the military to round up, put in camps, and deport more than 11 million people. He is willing to permit Republican-dominated states to monitor pregnancies and prosecute people who violate abortion bans. He will shape the laws by refusing to release funds appropriated by Congress (as he did in 2019 to try to get Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky to smear Hunter Biden). He would like to bring the Department of Justice under his own control, pardoning those convicted of attacking the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, and ending the U.S. system of an independent judiciary. In a second Trump presidency, the U.S. might not come to the aid of a European or Asian ally that Trump thinks isn’t paying enough for its own defense. Trump would, Cortelessa wrote, “gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.”

To that list, former political director of the AFL-CIO Michael Podhorzer added on social media that if Trump wins, “he could replace [Supreme Court justices Clarence] Thomas, [Samuel] Alito, and 40+ federal judges over 75 with young zealots.” 

“I ask him, Don’t you see why many Americans see such talk of dictatorship as contrary to our most cherished principles?” Cortellessa wrote. No, Trump said. “‘I think a lot of people like it.” 

Time included the full transcripts and a piece fact-checking Trump’s assertions. The transcripts reflect the former president’s scattershot language that makes little logical sense but conveys impressions by repeating key phrases and advancing a narrative of grievance. The fact-checking reveals that narrative is based largely on fantasy. 

Trump’s own words prove the truth of what careful observers have been saying about his plans based on their examination of MAGA Republicans’ speeches, interviews, Project 2025, and so on, often to find themselves accused of a liberal bias that makes them exaggerate the dangers of a second Trump presidency. 

The idea that truthful reporting based on verifiable evidence is a plot by “liberal media” to undermine conservative values had its start in 1951, when William F. Buckley Jr., fresh out of Yale, published God and Man at Yale: The Superstitions of “Academic Freedom.” Fervently opposed to the bipartisan liberal consensus that the federal government should regulate business, provide a basic social safety net, protect civil rights, and promote infrastructure, Buckley was incensed that voters continued to support such a system. He rejected the “superstition” that fact-based public debate would enable people to choose the best option from a wide range of ideas—a tradition based in the Enlightenment—because such debate had encouraged voters to choose the liberal consensus, which he considered socialism. Instead, he called for universities to exclude “bad” ideas like the Keynesian economics on which the liberal consensus was based, and instead promote Christianity and free enterprise.

Buckley soon began to publish his own magazine, the National Review, in which he promised to tell the “violated businessman’s side of the story,” but it was a confidential memorandum written in 1971 by lawyer Lewis M. Powell Jr. for a friend who chaired the education committee of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that insisted the media had a liberal bias that must be balanced with a business perspective. 

Warning that “the American economic system is under broad attack,” Powell worried not about “the Communists, New Leftists and other revolutionaries who would destroy the entire system.” They were, he wrote, a small minority. What he worried about were those coming from “perfectly respectable elements of society: from the college campus, the pulpit, the media, the intellectual and literary journals, the arts and sciences, and from politicians.” 

Businessmen must “confront this problem as a primary responsibility of corporate management,” he wrote, launching a unified effort to defend American enterprise. Among the many plans Powell suggested for defending corporate America was keeping the media “under constant surveillance” to complain about “criticism of the enterprise system” and demand equal time. 

President Richard Nixon appointed Powell to the Supreme Court, and when Nixon was forced to resign for his participation in the scheme to cover up the attempt to bug the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in the Watergate Hotel before the 1972 election, he claimed he had to leave not because he had committed a crime, but because the “liberal” media had made it impossible for him to do his job. Six years later, Ronald Reagan, who was an early supporter of Buckley’s National Review, claimed the “liberal media” was biased against him when reporters accurately called out his exaggerations and misinformation during his 1980 campaign. 

In 1987, Reagan’s appointees to the Federal Communications Commission abandoned the Fairness Doctrine that required media with a public license to present information honestly and fairly. Within a year, talk radio had gone national, with hosts like Rush Limbaugh electrifying listeners with his attacks on “liberals” and his warning that they were forcing “socialism” on the United States. 

By 1996, when Australian-born media mogul Rupert Murdoch started the Fox News Channel (FNC), followers had come to believe that the news that came from a mainstream reporter was likely left-wing propaganda. FNC promised to restore fairness and balance to American political news. At the same time, the complaints of increasingly radicalized Republicans about the “liberal media” pushed mainstream media to wander from fact-based reality to give more and more time to the right-wing narrative. By 2018, “bothsidesing” had entered our vocabulary to mean “the media or public figures giving credence to the other side of a cause, action, or idea to seem fair or only for the sake of argument when the credibility of that side may be unmerited.”

In 2023, FNC had to pay almost $800 million to settle defamation claims made by Dominion Voting Systems after FNC hosts pushed the lie that Dominion machines had changed the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, and it has since tried to retreat from the more egregious parts of its false narrative. 

News broke yesterday that Hunter Biden’s lawyer had threatened to sue FNC for “conspiracy and subsequent actions to defame Mr. Biden and paint him in a false light, the unlicensed commercial exploitation of his image, name, and likeness, and the unlawful publication of hacked intimate images of him.” Today, FNC quietly took down from its streaming service its six-part “mock trial” of Hunter Biden, as well as a video promoting the series. 

Also today, Judge Juan Merchan, who is presiding over Trump’s criminal trial for election fraud, found Trump in contempt of court for attacking witnesses and jurors. Merchan also fined Trump $1,000 per offense, required him to take down the nine social media posts at the heart of the decision, and warned him that future violations could bring jail time. This afternoon, Trump’s team deleted the social media posts. 

For the first time in history, a former U.S. president has been found in contempt of court. We know who he is, and today, Trump himself validated the truth of what observers who deal in facts have been saying about what a second Trump term would mean for the United States.

Reacting to the Time magazine piece, James Singer, the spokesperson for the Biden-Harris campaign, released a statement saying: “Not since the Civil War have freedom and democracy been under assault at home as they are today—because of Donald Trump. Trump is willing to throw away the very idea of America to put himself in power…. Trump is a danger to the Constitution and a threat to democracy.” 

Tomorrow, May 1, is “Law Day,” established in 1958 by Republican president Dwight D. Eisenhower as a national recognition of the importance of the rule of law. In proclaiming the holiday today, Biden said: “America can and should be a Nation that defends democracy, protects our rights and freedoms, and pioneers a future of possibilities for all Americans. History and common sense show us that this can only come to pass in a democracy, and we must be its keepers.” 

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[beardedmrbean]

Aformer Seattle city employee has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit alleging he was a victim of anti-White discrimination due to a "racially hostile work environment."

Joshua Diemert, who worked as a program intake representative in Seattle’s Department of Human Services from 2013 to 2021, filed suit Nov. 16 against the city and its mayor, Bruce Harrell, claiming he was constantly belittled and harassed at work for being White and that he was denied advancement opportunities and retaliated against due to the color of his skin.

Diemert’s lawsuit blames the alleged anti-White culture he experienced on the city’s Race and Social Justice Initiative (RSJI), which seeks to "end institutionalized racism and race-based disparities in City government," according to the city government’s website. 

The lawsuit alleges that Diemert's race was an "albatross around his neck" throughout his career, and that the discrimination became "increasingly pervasive and hostile" as his career developed.

SEATTLE OFFICIALS PROPOSE OFFERING GIFT CARDS TO METH ADDICTS TO ENCOURAGE SOBRIETY AS DRUG OVERDOSES SURGE

"The City routinely urged Mr. Diemert to join race-based affinity groups and required him to participate in training sessions that demeaned and degraded him based on his racial and ethnic identity," the lawsuit states. "He was chastised and punished for combating racially discriminatory hiring practices by [Department of Human Services] colleagues."

"His supervisors and other colleagues continually dismissed his concerns over a period of years and claimed he could not be a victim of racism and discrimination because he possessed ‘white privilege,’" it claims. "And he was denied opportunities for advancement by the City based on his racial and ethnic identity."

As part of his RSJI training, the lawsuit alleges, Diemert was required to attend a two-day workshop in 2019 called "Undoing Institutional Racism," during which facilitators declared, "white people are like the devil," "racism is in white people’s DNA," and "white people are cannibals."

"When Mr. Diemert objected, the facilitators used their platform to belittle and attack Mr. Diemert," the lawsuit claims. "Other coworkers that were present continued the mockery in the workplace and made Mr. Diemert the office pariah. Mr. Diemert’s coworkers called him a ‘white supremacist.’"

"Mr. Diemert’s colleagues used their work emails to berate and entertain violence against him, referring to him as ‘some a--hole,’ the ‘reincarnation of the people that shot native Americans from trains, rounded up jews for the camps, hunted down gypsies in Europe and runaway slaves in America,’ noting that it was not worth addressing his concerns because he would ‘just come back with more stupidity,’ and that someone should ‘get a guy to swing by when Josh is in the restroom and beat him bloody,’" the lawsuit alleges.

$15M IN AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN FUNDS WENT TO ‘ANTI-RACISM,' ‘SOCIAL ACTIVISM’ PROGRAMS FOR KIDS

The lawsuit also claims that Diemert was required to attend racially segregated trainings for White people and meetings where supervisors forced employees to "identify their race and to stand and affirm where they ranked themselves on a defined ‘continuum of racism.’"

"In June 2020, the Office of Civil Rights emailed Mr. Diemert stating that it was hosting a training on ‘Internalized Racial Superiority,’ and that this was ‘specifically targeted for White employees,’" the lawsuit claims. "The training focused on examining white employees’ ‘complicity in the system of white

supremacy,’ and how white employees ‘internalize and reinforce’ racism."

"The goal of the training was to turn these employees into white ‘accomplices’ who would interrupt the ‘whiteness’ that they saw in their colleagues," it added.

$825K IN AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN FUNDS WENT TO ‘ORAL HISTORIANS’ RESEARCHING ANTI-RACISM, ‘LATINX’ HISTORIES

"When Mr. Diemert objected, the facilitators used their platform to belittle and attack Mr. Diemert," the lawsuit claims. "Other coworkers that were present continued the mockery in the workplace and made Mr. Diemert the office pariah. Mr. Diemert’s coworkers called him a ‘white supremacist.’"

"Mr. Diemert’s colleagues used their work emails to berate and entertain violence against him, referring to him as ‘some a--hole,’ the ‘reincarnation of the people that shot native Americans from trains, rounded up jews for the camps, hunted down gypsies in Europe and runaway slaves in America,’ noting that it was not worth addressing his concerns because he would ‘just come back with more stupidity,’ and that someone should ‘get a guy to swing by when Josh is in the restroom and beat him bloody,’" the lawsuit alleges.

$15M IN AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN FUNDS WENT TO ‘ANTI-RACISM,' ‘SOCIAL ACTIVISM’ PROGRAMS FOR KIDS

The lawsuit also claims that Diemert was required to attend racially segregated trainings for White people and meetings where supervisors forced employees to "identify their race and to stand and affirm where they ranked themselves on a defined ‘continuum of racism.’"

"In June 2020, the Office of Civil Rights emailed Mr. Diemert stating that it was hosting a training on ‘Internalized Racial Superiority,’ and that this was ‘specifically targeted for White employees,’" the lawsuit claims. "The training focused on examining white employees’ ‘complicity in the system of white

supremacy,’ and how white employees ‘internalize and reinforce’ racism."

"The goal of the training was to turn these employees into white ‘accomplices’ who would interrupt the ‘whiteness’ that they saw in their colleagues," it added.

$825K IN AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN FUNDS WENT TO ‘ORAL HISTORIANS’ RESEARCHING ANTI-RACISM, ‘LATINX’ HISTORIES

[blueprintbelle]

I am Back!

Hi to my followers and everyone here on Tumblr! It's so fun to look back on all the progress I made while striving to finish my degree and claim the title of Civil Engineer.

Here's a quick recap of the years I missed posting on this digital diary of mine:

Back in November 2019, I finish my bachelor's degree in civil engineering. I tried my best to update this blog, posting my notes and other references to help other students with their studies.

In 2020, I wasn't able to take the civil engineering board examination due to the COVID-19 pandemic and started working in the field of electronics engineering. It wasn't long before I switched jobs related to my field. In 2021, I was hired at an interior fit-out firm as a Junior Cost Estimator, and I will be forever grateful for that opportunity since it opened doors for me today.

I took my civil engineering board examination last November 2022, after a year of working and getting hired at the subsidiary of the largest power distributor here in the Philippines. While I was working, I took the time to study and prepare for another board examination, the Master Plumbers.

I passed my Master Plumber examination last July 2023, and now I've been absorbed in an international company that caters to Middle East projects as a cost consultant.

Looking back at all the hard work and self-doubts, I'm so proud to say that I did not give up and more importantly, I gained opportunities that were beyond my expectations.

I'm sharing this because I want to return to the platform where all the inspiration came from.

I am very happy to share that I have been thinking about sharing again all my study contents and services in line with civil engineering and plumbing.

I'll be posting the details soon!!! For now, I hope my story will also inspire other to NOT GIVE UP and GO GET IT! :)

[tandavmedia]

Srushti Deshmukh: A Trailblazer's Journey to New Horizons

Delve into the inspiring narrative of Srushti Deshmukh, a name synonymous with resilience, determination, and groundbreaking achievements. Explore the milestones and triumphs that define her journey, as she paves the way for a new generation of trailblazers.

In the realm of trailblazers and pioneers, one name stands out—Srushti Deshmukh. Her journey is an extraordinary testament to passion, perseverance, and the pursuit of dreams. Let's embark on a compelling exploration of the milestones that define Srushti Deshmukh's remarkable odyssey.

Early Beginnings: Srushti Deshmukh, hailing from Kandharpur in Maharashtra, India, exhibited an early penchant for soaring ambitions. From her formative years, she demonstrated a keen interest in aeronautics, a passion that would later propel her to unprecedented heights.

Breaking Barriers: Srushti made history in 2019 by becoming the youngest woman in the world to scale the summit of Mount Everest at the age of 21. This awe-inspiring achievement not only placed her in the annals of mountaineering history but also shattered stereotypes and inspired countless individuals to reach for the peaks of their aspirations.

Academic Excellence: In addition to her mountaineering feats, Srushti Deshmukh has excelled academically. She achieved yet another milestone by clearing the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) examination, securing an All India Rank of 152. Her dedication to her studies and her adventurous spirit exemplify the perfect blend of intellectual acumen and daring courage.

Empowering Future Generations: Srushti Deshmukh's journey goes beyond personal triumphs. She has emerged as a symbol of empowerment and a source of inspiration for aspiring individuals, particularly young women, encouraging them to pursue their passions fearlessly. Through her talks, interviews, and social initiatives, she continues to foster a culture of empowerment and ambition.

Legacy of Resilience: As we reflect on the journey of Srushti Deshmukh, it becomes clear that her legacy is one of resilience and audacity. Whether conquering the world's highest peaks or navigating the challenges of civil services, she epitomizes the spirit of pushing boundaries and defying expectations.

Conclusion: Srushti Deshmukh's odyssey is an ode to the human spirit's capacity for triumph over adversity. Her story continues to inspire, urging us all to reach for new horizons, break barriers, and carve our own paths in the pursuit of greatness. Srushti Deshmukh: A Trailblazer's Journey to New Horizons—a narrative that invites us to dream, aspire, and ascend to the peaks of our own potential.

[eliteiasacademy2]

Cracking the Dress Code: IAS Interview Attire Decoded for Women

[avisionadmin]

[taylahhowie4145]

Entry 3: Exploration of a negative situation of a sports venue

When I think of negative situations that have occurred at sport venues my attention goes straight to the Hillsborough disaster. It took place on April 15, 1989, at Hillsborough Stadium Sheffield, South Yorkshire, England, and is widely known as the fatal human crush (Day, 2019). The unforgettable tragedy happened during a FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham in the first five minutes of the game. A disturbing 96 people who were all Liverpool fans died which included men, women and children and hundreds were injured (Scraton, 2013). Historically, it has been considered the deadliest stadium disaster (Gopalan, 2020). 

Image source: memorial of people who died in the disaster

In order to prevent hooliganism, fans of both teams entered the stadium through opposite sides as there were more than 53,000 fans expected (Tikkanen, 2023). There were 24,000 Liverpool fans ordered to enter only through one entrance, Leppings Lane (Tikkanen, 2023). With 10,000 people of those fans having tickets for the standing terraces only able to enter through 7 turnstiles (Tikkanen, 2023). With 15 minutes until kickoff there were still more than 4,000 fans needing to enter through the turnstiles. A decision was then made to open another gate which saw another 2,000 enter through to the already full standing terraces (Day, 2019). The barrier broke in terrace three which then created the crush as people kept falling forward which applied extra pressure on the people at the front. Some fans escaped by climbing the fence at the front of the terrace (Day, 2019).

Image source: barriers that broke during the crush 

All these facts and issues have been examined thoroughly and the findings of the disaster were unfortunate. Firstly, the people who died from the disaster were considered ‘unlawfully killed’ by the jury's verdict (Dickie, 2018).  Although crowd management on the day of the event wasn’t considered the immediate cause of the incident it is obvious with the facts above that it was poorly handled and should be considered a serious issue (Dickie, 2018). According to the ‘Guide to Safety at Sports grounds’ also referred to as the Green Guide which was applicable at the time of the disaster shows how the layout, design and construction of the venues terrace stand 3 and 4 were found not fully compliant with the guide (Sports Grounds Safety Authority (Great Britain, 2018). For example, based on the Green Guide, the height of the barrier in the two terraces did not meet protocol, and crowd capacity exceeded (Dickie, 2018).  Another venue misjudgement was having no ambulances on sight. The disaster wasn't declared a major incident until 3.22pm, which was too late, and ambulance control was not informed of the severity of the crisis (Conn, 2014). Therefore, only one ambulance was on the pitch at 3:14pm. If the incident was reported a lot earlier, it's undeniably that more people would have survived.

References

Conn, D. (2014). Hillsborough inquest: better ambulance response could have saved lives. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/04/hillsborough-inquest-ambulance-service-response

Day, A. (2019). What Happened At Hillsborough? How The Disaster Unfolded. HuffPost UK; HuffPost UK. https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/what-happened-hillsborough-disaster-explained-timeline_uk_5c9a548ce4b049d4aba68244

Dickie, J. (2018). Critical assessment of evidence related to the 1989 Hillsborough Stadium disaster, UK. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Forensic Engineering, 171(2), 58–69. https://doi.org/10.1680/jfoen.18.00007

Gopalan, S. (2020). The Hillsborough Disaster: A Bundle of Errors. Global Sports Policy Review, 1(2), 84. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/gblspr1&div=23&id=&page=

Scraton, P. (2013). The legacy of Hillsborough: liberating truth, challenging power. Race & Class, 55(2), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306396813499488

Sports Grounds Safety Authority (Great Britain. (2018). Guide to safety at sports grounds. Sports Grounds Safety Authority.

Tikkanen, A. (2023). disaster | Description & Types | Britannica. Www.britannica.com. https://www.britannica.com/science/disaster

[miahfoster]

Week 10; Social Media Governance & Online Harassment.

For the final week we examined the need for controls and restrictions online that are in place in response to attempting to restrict online hate speech, harassment and explicit content from the wider audience. 

Bromell (2022) states that whilst the internet is a state of the art service that provides great abilities to communicate, share information, expand trading opportunities and works wonders for democracy, it equally involves an evil side to the use. Providing the opportunity for bullying, abuse and the spread of misinformation which in turn can generate hostility and violence to occur offline (p. 1). 

In recent years younger generations have been labelled by a term coined by older generations who grew up with little to no social media; ‘snowflakes’. Haslop et. al (2021), explains the phrase snowflake generation is used to mock younger individuals who are deemed overly sensitive to hate speech and harassment that these older generations have become accustomed to in their youth (p. 1419). They describe this online harassment as any malicious behaviour or speech online. This violent communication is motivated by hostility or prejudice generally against a specific individual or community who share certain interests or traits (p. 1420). 

Marwick et. al, (2018, p. 545) suggests that this behaviour is often orchestrated and the frequency of the abuse online has accustomed young people (in particular young women) to this behaviour seeing it as silly name calling and hitting back with an insulting dismissal of boys will be boys. 

There is a broad and diverse list of reasons for better content moderation online. Issues that promote violating human rights and threatening anyone's right to feel safe. However research shows the actions of harassment that promote the “digital divide” (Haslop et. al 2021, p. 1421) are most prevalent with females and LGBTQ+ communities experiencing the highest rates of targeted malicious content. In an attempt to combat this never ending overflow of hateful or violent speech and images that are swimming around social media and the internet each day. A response from the EU recently was the adoption of the Digital Services Act (DSA). 

Brown (2022) reports that “It introduces important measures to increase transparency by requiring platforms to explain to users how they moderate content, how automated tools are used, and how many content moderators they use for each official EU language”.

Whilst regulations are struggling to maintain efficiency in an ever-advancing technological climate, the need is there as the wider public rejects this hateful online content, with the producers often slipping under the umbrella of ‘free speech’. 

The 2019 terrorist attack on the Christchurch Mosque was allowed to go undetected online when the attacker live-streamed the event. Bromell investigated the issue in his research and explained that the response to this new age of digital terrorism was the development of a new independent body. Supported by numerous countries throughout Europe and Oceania. Bromell (p.10) concludes that the main objectives of these newer bodies include:

“Prevent—equip digital platforms and civil society groups with awareness, knowledge, and tools, including technology, to develop sustainable programmes in their core business operations to disrupt terrorist and violent extremist activity online;

Respond—develop tools and capacity, including through regular multistakeholder exercises, for platforms to cooperate with one another and with other stakeholders to mitigate the impact of a terrorist or violent extremist attack; and

Learn—empower researchers to study terrorism and counter-terrorism, including creating and evaluating best practices for multi-stakeholder co-operation and preventing abuse of digital platforms.”

The Guardian reported that Facebook was forced to reevaluate its moderation protocols after the video was found to be live-streamed through their site. Reporter Julia Wong communicated that the platform CEO issued statements saying the company would “reverse its previous policy and ban content that supports white nationalism and white separatism,” 

Wong elaborated that “the company had previously made a distinction between white supremacy, which it banned, and white nationalism, which it allowed, despite an expert consensus that any such distinction is merely rhetorical.”

In a separately impactful issue, Rugby Australia fired Wallabies player Israel Folau, in 2019, after he posted hate speech towards people of the LGBTQ+ community. His defence surrounded his ability to exercise religious free speech online and fought the ending of his rugby contract stating that these feelings and posts were a reflection of his religious values and went as far as to detest this in court. The company dismissed these claims with the proof that he had broken his code of conduct. This sparked an uproar in Australia calling for greater regulation of this type of aggressive content. A 2019 BBC article on the case suggested that the case had called for amendments to future contracts to eliminate the risk of this issue recurring.

References:

British Broadcasting Corporation, 2019, ‘Israel Folau: Sacked player sues Rugby Australia over anti-gay row’, British Broadcasting Corporation, 1 August, viewed 8 May 2023, <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-49187646>

Bromell, D, 2022, ‘Regulating free speech in a digital age : hate, harm and the limits of censorship’, Springer, Cham, Switzerland. 

Brown, D, 2022, ‘EU Parliament Adopts Landmark Regulation of Internet Platforms’, Human Rights Watch, 7 July, Viewed 9 May 2023, <https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/07/07/eu-parliament-adopts-landmark-regulation-internet-platforms>

Haslop, C, O’Rourke, F, Southern, R, 2021, ‘#NoSnowflakes: The toleration of harassment and an emergent gender-related digital divide, in a UK student online culture’, 

Convergence, Vol.27, p.1418-1438. 

Marwick, A, Caplan, R, 2018, ‘Drinking male tears: language, the manosphere, and networked harassment’, Feminist media studies, Vol.18 (4), p.543-559. 

Wong, J, 2019, ‘Facebook finally responds to New Zealand on Christchurch attack’, The Guardian, 30 March, viewed 9 May 2023, <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/29/facebook-new-zealand-christchurch-attack-response>

[hardynwa]

Aviation workers declares seven-day ultimatum ahead of indefinite strike

Aviation workers’ unions, yesterday, warned of an impending indefinite strike action should the authorities fail to resolve the nagging non-implementation of Condition of Service (CoS), and other welfare-related issues in the next seven days. The unionists, at the end of their two-day warning strike on Tuesday, vowed to shut down the airspace to jolt the attention of the current administration. While the Minister of Aviation, Hadi Sirika, has since kept mum on the development and remained seemingly unperturbed by the disruptions, the Nigerian Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA) has been engaging in negotiation with the aggrieved workers. On the day-two of the warning strike yesterday, offices of aviation agencies remained shut nationwide as airports witnessed mild disruptions and low patronage of travellers. In Lagos, nooks and crannies of the domestic terminals witnessed a heavy presence of security operatives, forcing the unionists to lead a procession to the Murtala Muhammed International Airport (MMIA) corridors. Recall that the coalition of aviation workers’ unions made up of members of the National Union of Air Transport Employees (NUATE), Air Transport Services Senior Staff Association of Nigeria (ATSSSAN), the National Association of Aircraft Pilots and Engineers (NAAPE), the Association of Nigeria Aviation Professionals (ANAP), and Amalgamated Union of Public Corporation Civil Service Technical and Recreation Services Employees (AUPCTRE), recently bemoaned the non-implementation of the CoS about seven years after it was negotiated with the workers. They also rued the non-implementation of minimum wage consequential adjustments and arrears for the Nigeria Meteorological Agency (NiMet) since 2019, and the planned demolition exercise of all the agency buildings in Lagos by the Minister of Aviation for an airport city project, but without consideration for workers that will be displaced. ANAP Scribe, Abdulrarak Saidu, expressed disappointment that the aviation workers had been left hanging in the last eight years. “For eight years, the conditions of service were not implemented. This is because Sirika has usurped functions of the Governing Boards of aviation agencies to himself. So, there is no check and balance. “He also wants to pull down buildings in the sector for a roadmap that was not approved for Lagos. The one approved in Abuja for the aerotropolis, nothing has happened there, and he wants to turn his policy into law. This warming strike is the beginning. If nothing is done after seven days, then we will go on indefinite strike, and shut down everywhere,” Saidu said. However, the Director-General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), Capt. Musa Nuhu, has urged the workers’ unions to sheath their swords, assuring that their demands would be met. Nuhu, on Sunday, conveyed meetings with the union members, the Salary and Wages Commission, along with heads of aviation agencies, and their Heads of Finance Departments. Another meeting was slated for late yesterday. The meeting with the Salaries and Wages Commission is for the examination of their various account books to determine whether or not the increases in salaries being demanded could be accommodated in their various Internally Generated Revenues (IGRs). The outcome of this meeting will be forwarded to the Head of Service of the Federation for consideration and approval, he said. He also pleaded for more time and understanding of the Union. The General Secretary of AUPCTRE, Sikiru Waheed, told reporters in Abuja that the warning strike was to warn the traveling public to make other plans as they intend to shut down the airports should their demands go unmet. Waheed explained that the controversial CoS, and the payment of minimum wage were the main issues on the ground, adding that since 2009, the consequential allowance had been approved by the federal government. However, they are yet to be implemented in the sector. “If the CoS to enhance the service is not forthcoming, how do you expect people to feel when we are all going to the same market with everyone? Our purchasing power has gone, and it has become difficult for the aviation industry to work in line with the economic situation of the country,” Waheed said. Read the full article

[guide2successupsc]

Sanjita Mohapatra IAS

IAS Topper Sanjita Mohapatra UPSC has secured All India Rank 10 in 2019 in the Civil Service Exam. Sanjita was born in 1990 in the small town of Sundargarh and then she moved to Rourkela with her family. In Rourkela, she finished her education. Not only she has always been a good student but also, she was brilliant too. She finished her graduation from the College of Engineering and Technology, Bhubaneswar with a degree in Mechanical Engineering. This was her fifth attempt at the CSE examination.

Since childhood, she had the dream of becoming an IAS officer. Sanjita Mohapatra’s IAS Husband named, Biswa Ranjan Mundari, is an officer at the Reserve Bank of India, in Mumbai. She aimed to improve healthcare in Odisha.

Read More-:

[anantradingpvtltd]

Price: [price_with_discount] (as of [price_update_date] - Details) [ad_1] This is the second edition of concise study material for judicial services preliminary examinations. It contains point-wise presentation of facts and diagrammatic presentation of key concepts. The content is tailored to suit the needs of students appearing for preliminary examinations. The subjects covered are: Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Civil Procedure, Indian Evidence Act, Constitution of India, Indian Penal Code, Contract Act, Transfer of Property Act, Negotiable Instruments Act, Limitation Act, Hindu Laws, Muslim Laws, Jurisprudence, International Organizations, Partnership Act, Specific Relief Act. This edition also incorporates the relevant changes made as per the J&K Reorganization Act, 2019 [ad_2]

[guide2success]

Shubham Kumar, a native of Katihar in Bihar and the champion of the famous civil services examination 2020, says his ambition is to help the less fortunate. Kumar was making his third try to pass the IAS examination. He had previously attempted the test in 2019, and in that attempt, he had received a score of 290, which led to his selection for the Indian Defence Accounts Service (IDAS). He failed on his first try in 2018.

Read More-:

[accuratenewsng]

KWSG promotes 9,175 Civil Servants in 3 Years, 2,096 Others Undergoing Promotion Examinations

KWSG promotes 9,175 Civil Servants in 3 Years, 2,096 Others Undergoing Promotion Examinations

Kwara State government has promoted a total of 9,175 civil servants between 2019 and 2021. The government has also commenced the 2022 promotion examinations for 2,096 civil servants. Our correspondent that monitored the interview aspect of the promotion examinations at the premises of the State Civil Service Commission on Wednesday noted that the exercise was thorough. Some of the participants…