and this the head is how we going to beat the teams. how we're going to scare them and give them trouble trouble guy, i thought in preparation to cutter cameron's national team or playing it friendly match against jamaica players. even referees are warming up to the reggae songs of bob marley. ah, fans enter the stand. it feels like a carnival. some dressed up to bless their team before their departure. others excited for the event they wore like lions? ah, it is a display that catches onlookers even the media's attention. after all. cutter 2022 is also their world cup nasty boot. so much of football is less about what's happening on the page. but what's happening off the page? it's an opportunity for found to be creative and celebrate their tea. most cameron's won't make it to the golf country. those that are like body painter and

gondo picket, have celebrity status. they are as famous as the football players on the pitch. inspiring legions of fans to put the paint on for the team. and for the occasion. nicholas hawk al jazeera. yon day camera rude. ah, it is good to have you with us. hello, adrian, for the good hearing. so how the headlines on al jazeera, china's president she sent ping as arrived in bali for a high stakes meeting with you as president joe biden. they'll be on the sidelines of the g. 20 meeting relations between the 2 superpowers of sod. because of taiwan, trade and human rights issues are diplomatic. it is a james base reports. now the number one strain perhaps, certainly in this part of the world for china, is taiwan. and the u. s. is views on taiwan on the u. s. as policy towards taiwan

and the potential us defense of taiwan, particularly aggravated that relationship between the u. s. and china after that visit from the u. s. speak nancy pelosi to taiwan in the summer. and that was something that chinese were very, very angry about. i think the us will be saying no, our policy is not changed in any way, but of course you got the midterm elections and the results still not clear. we may have a new speaker and kevin mccarthy. and he said one of his 1st things that he's planning to do is to go to taiwan. so that is likely, i think, still to be contentious issue going forward. turkish police are detained, at least 46 people in connection with sundays explosion in istanbul that killed 6 people and injured many more. police say, the woman who planted the bomb was a syrian national. it happened on the city is busy, is the cloud, st. ukraine's president followed me as a landscape accused russia of committing hundreds of war crimes in the southern castle region, ukrainian forces. we took parts of the area last week,

after russia retreated. east african leaders have announced talks aimed at stopping the fighting of the eastern democratic republic of congo. they'll be held in kenya on november 21st and mexico demonstrators and protesting against plans reformed the electoral system president on the malware. lopez orbital says that the move will reduce electoral fraud, but critics argue that it will compromise democracy. others the headlines morning and i'll just here are after upfront. next, talked to al jazeera, we got a limit of a gun that was sent at bandon by the international community. we listen, we have a huge price for the war against terrorism. as going on for money. we meet with global news making and talk about the stories that you see if the u. s. the midterm elections and the votes. 1 on it, and while republicans were hoping for a red wave,

the political landscape remains largely the same. so how's the country move forward when the american population remains more divided along ideological lines than at any point in the last 50 years? that conversation is coming up, but 1st, even a small republican majority in the house is still likely to spell trouble for democrats. already shown signs of division. what is the future of the democratic party and its agenda? as a result were coming in, we spoke the congressman jamal bowman, just one reelection in new york, the congressman jamal bowman. thank you for joining us on upfront. of course, rather, thank you for having me. of course, of course in the run up to the us midterm elections, the republicans had a clear message. they were talking about the economy and they were talking about crime democrats. on the other hand, they said there is on the fall out from the getting of abortion rights, and they also had a kind of abstract narrative of the future of democracy. but the initial impression

from many, with a democratic messaging wasn't quite galvanizing voters. it wasn't quite doing the job. however, it does seem that had an impact, not enough to retain control of the house of representatives, apparently, but an impact. do you think the democratic messaging needs to change? i think it needs to be sharpened for shore and i think there are challenges when you're trying to communicate to a so called big tank a lot more diversity in the democratic party. a lot of people coming from different backgrounds coming with different ideas. you have to understand how to leverage to different voices in a party, to community communicate to a diverse constituency. i'm so you know what was good about the election results so far and there are still many races to be determined. we saw a large showing or from jen z and young people overall a large showing of from people of color. but we also saw that magar republicans in those who were riding with donald trump, didn't do as well as the media would lead you to believe. so you know,

the read tsunami or to read wave, if you will, i was predicted. doesn't seem to have taken place, and the house hasn't been determined yet, so we still got an outside shot to, to keep dad and also keep dissented on so we'll see how that goes. abilene outside shot for sure. and you're, you're right, republicans didn't have the read through nominated, they predicted. but what they have is just an of power justin of votes justin of seats. it seems to be real, anything that democrats want to do this upcoming a congressional season. but what does that mean for the democratic agenda year, so particularly in the house, i am not looking forward to being in the minority. but as you know, policies don't become law until they pass the house and the senate. so the fact that the senate might still remain in our favor. is it actually right for collaboration? if republicans are ready, willing and able to do that,

i got applause. you there because i agree, right? and the abstract that is true, that's actually how government is supposed to work. you got different chambers, you got different people in power, you work together, you compromise, you advance poverty, but that's not what actually happened, right? what we've seed is obstruction, what we've seen is gridlock. what we've seen is frustration from everybody, frankly, including the voters that nothing's going to get them. so when you look for you're not expecting and if you're not expecting partisan bipartisanship and collaboration, you're expecting a fight. i mean, listen, yes, i'm expecting a fight, but i'm also an optimistic person. and even this pass cycle, we got to buy parson pieces of legislation. done the infrastructure bill and a safer communities act after the horrible you validate shooting, which has a huge focus on mental health supports and pushing a lot of resources there. and obviously we got the american rescue plan done. the chips act, which is also by parts and 3rd piece of my parson legislation and the inflation

reduction act. again, high hopes we'll see, you know, more of the, remember a time before donald trump, when a former us president brock obama also is facing obstruction, is pre mother. right. there is just a sense that republicans aren't going to collaborate or cooperate with you. but it seems to me that even when you had both chambers of the congress, right, which we just saw the democratic majority for 2 years. we didn't see significant legislation on key issues that matter. i hear you and by on some bipartisan bills. i see i hear you on some central policies and i hear you on a kind of public response to a mass shooting which we should be able to come together on. but what about the stuff that the voters vote for you for vote for other people, for reproductive justice, reproductive rights, environmental policy, gun control, minimum wage, a universal, minimum wage living wage. even these are things that people come to you all for and we weren't able to get it done when you all controlled both chambers of congress. i

know you're optimistic, i still would hope, but like what do i have any reason to believe that we will get anything done in the next 2 years? yes. so add to that list voting rights, add to that list of george flood justice and policing act. you know, there are many pieces of legislation that we not do with that. we did not get done historic investments in housing going big on climate. but as you know, we had control of the house control and incentive, but there was a very slim majority. and if there were a democrats who weren't on board with policies that we were pushing, they were not going to support those policies. entered joe mansion and kirsten cinema. right. so it's not only republicans will push back against the policies the american people want. is often democrats often connected to big politics. why? right, let me let me pause. you can just have something that super interesting to me because you started by saying, look, we're big 10. basically, anybody not republican is going to be on our side. and so we have to appeal to

different ideological camps, different interest, different policies. i get that. some of this isn't about different ideology. some of this is about what you just started to a lou to which is special interest corporate interest. also just flat out career isn't opportunism, help me understand why republicans are able to speak in a single voice even though they have ideological diversity. but when it comes to democrats outside of the big tent argument, why is it so hard for you all to come together on things? it seems like voters to send you to congress to fight for. you know, i think too many democrats have compromised themselves to the corporate interest in the corporate lobby. and many of them have come to congress and gotten rich and wealthy and worked with wealthy lobby. yes, to make sure they remain in congress and fight for policy that support the well the in new or but doesn't support working class people. we saw from center the mansion center cinema and many members in the house as well. continue to act as

to the corporate agenda in congress, and that's part of the problem. you feel like you're getting a greater consensus for the type of work you do. we see the working families party, we see dsa with the organs organizations sort of expanding representation in congress. and we also see significant push back to that. how are you feeling about the actual political direction of the congress of civically democrats in congress? you feel good? i mean, we have other progressive, so we're going to be coming to congress this cycle, but not just in congress. i mean, you saw historic races being a one at the state level as well. governor, massachusetts is one example of that. so we need to keep organizing to when congressional seats, as well as state county municipal seats, and even a school board man, because school boards are still implementing, implementing education policy that is harmful, the black and brown kids and school districts across the country. earlier you talked about democratic senators, jo, mansion and kristen cinema,

and one of the key spaces where they have absolutely been at odds with at least the heart of the democratic party is immigration reform. immigration has been a priority issue for democrats, least you've expressed that it is, but there has yet to be a cohesive party line. in 2021, there was a social spending plan that would have helped undocumented immigrants with their legal status. it got blocked again. centers mentioned in cinema, we're right in the mix of that. why is there no clear unified stance on immigration? we often in my opinion are responding to the fear mongering of republicans and media narrative around that. as opposed to telling a true story around immigration reform, and how much immigrants matter to our country. our economy rise when we have a road bus, healthy immigration system, our global footprint and global standing improves when we

treat immigrants who are coming here seeking asylum with the utmost dignity and respect. we also have to tell the true story about how our foreign policy has been destructive to, to know of the triangle and many other countries that contribute to immigrants coming here in the 1st place. we are literally, along with many of our eyes in europe and canada are destroyed ecosystems in places like han dura is what tamala and others, which is leading to the need to come to erica. because we have been so destructive while continuing to fund their military and police operations. so it's really important for us to tell the truth about that, to not be afraid of that. because as we know, afraid that you are global capitalism, global imperialism, your reason some big issues. and i hear you say it, i hear rashid to leave, say it, i hear on omar. say it, i occasionally hear a o c say,

but what i'm not hearing is that being the heartbeat of the democratic party, is that fear or is that just? are you just on the ideological minority? well, yes and yes, right. so it is fear because i think members of my party who are older and from different parts of the country, can speak to those issues as well, without the backlash that they are afraid to receive. if they do speak about them, it is out of the logical as well and this speaks to, some of the shifted are happening in the party towards a more progressive understanding of balls, not just domestic issues, but foreign policy issues. so, you know, my job is to make sure i'm speaking truth and being responsive in representing my district in a way they want me to represent them on this issue of immigration and many others. i mean, a 3rd of my district are immigrants. so, you know, i represent them and i need to represent them. the truth. you know,

when i look on the republican side, i see the fantasy. nikki haley, the other folk who might be the heir apparent, or you know, who are at least in the conversation on the other side. i don't see anybody right now who is next in line after president biden biden was elected. not because he was the most dazzling or energizing candidate, but because voters quite pragmatically said that person can beat trump. right. right now he's pulling around 42 percent, which is not unusual doing a midterm. but the question is, who else is there who probably harris was pulling lower than that and out in the congressional landscape and in governor's houses around the country. i don't see anybody who seems poised to be next in line that were you are, you worry about the future, the democratic party, in particular as it pertains to the white house. so i see a deep bench for, for the democratic party, everyone from elizabeth warren, to gabby newson, to the governor of michigan to myself, to a l. c. 2 i. on a presley,

there are many incredibly talented die. amen. people who can galvanize the country and get them excited about what this country is supposed to be. we haven't, as you know, we haven't really done the work of me in the ideals of our constitution, our democracy. you know, the question for me is, what does, what does that look like? how could we galvanize the american people to get there? and i think everyone i just named has the ability to do that. if they really embrace the beautiful diversity of our country, really a lot of adversity for the white. how to do it for the white house? no. do you see any of those people. 2 able to step into the role of presidential candidate and we see a president a o c with the, you know, with the president bowman. and that's what we're talking about that. that's what we're talking. okay. yes, absolutely. fair, fair. i mean, i was thinking and i think that's how other people are thinking as well. and i

think that's what the country you don't have a chance to to do some traveling graph, this election cycle. and when i went to i was in michigan, i was in georgia, i was in arizona, i was, i was in pennsylvania and the energy is there and people are passion, looking for visionary leadership. and i think yes, there's a possibility for all that for sure. august menu, woman, thank you so much for joining me up front. thank you, brother. good to be with you. the democrats and republicans are further apart. india logically today than at any time in the past, 50 years. that's according to the pew research center. the midterm is proved to be far less of a red wave than expected, with democrats flipping republican held seats and staving off republican winds in several key battleground states. but with an increasingly polarized electorate and a deep cynicism towards the electoral system. among many in the united states,

what hope is there for a functional democracy? joining me to discuss this is an, an garrett artist. he is the author of the persuaders at the front lines of the fight for hearts minds and democracy. good to see you. thank you for joining me on up front. thank you for having me. there were a lot of crucial issues at stake in this election from been controlled reproductive rights to the high cost of living. there were even fears to some that democracy itself was head state. yet, despite all of that, the political landscape really didn't change that much. in fact, some people called it a studying return to the status quo. what does that say about what our electoral processes? i don't know that, that that's the case in the sense that there were, as you say, very big issues at stake. and over the course of the last several months, democrats actually did a remarkable job of linking various forms of freedom into

a closing argument. the freedom to choose your leaders, a democracy that freedom over one's body. i think particular resident with young people the freedom to thrive on a planet that thrives and framed the, the kind of increasingly dangerous republican party, hijacked, by donald trump and, and oriented toward the kind of fascist division of america as a, as a kind of dangerous forest that will not help you or your family. i think we're also seeing that was despite that compelling closing argument from democrats, we ended up with an electro outcome so far. we have the same basic read state, same basic blue states, same partisan gridlock. it seems to me that despite making these compelling arguments about the status of democracy in the planet and reproductive justice, we're kind of in the same place in terms of the political landscape. look when i prefer to be living in a world in which a kind of fashion republican party isn't winning any seats at all. yeah. and i

think part of what i argue in the persuaders is that it's not enough to eek out these narrow victories. the seasons of the persuaders is that it is time for a freedom movement that cannot eke out $5149.00 or $5545.00 victories against american fascism. but the can actually build a dynamic rooted, connected to ruling and transcendent movement that can beat the crap out of that movement. europe lee, for the era to come in your latest book, the persuaders you write about how we can change things by changing mind that persuasion is essential for achieving progressive victories. we're living through a time when you say that americans are being offered a clear choice between liberal democracy on the one hand and fascism. so how do we, how did people, and opposite side of the political or even any logical spectrum engage each other? if the alternative is so extreme, even fascist, as you put it, who are the real persuadable se?

yeah. so this is, this is at the heart of the, of the book and i, i didn't have the answer to that myself as much as i would love to. so i spent time over the last few years, reporting on people who are, who are doing this work. and you know, i think a lot of the most important work that i saw is happening outside of the national limelight. it is organizing work. it is base building work, it is work that is not about vote for me in the election 2 days from now or donate $5.00 for the acute crisis. that is immediate. but it is the long term work of building a base for multi racial democracy in this country for all seasons. and, you know, i, i focused on, for example and experiment, arizona. it's happening everywhere. but i saw in arizona called deep canvassing, where an army of organizers is going door. ready door among their own neighbors in communities across the country, talking people through their deep prejudices on issues through their aspirations or

their values. but really going at some of the hardest issues we have on, on immigrant rights on trans rights on l. g b t writes on really hard economic issues. and what they do is they just process, they listen to people, they help people get out all of their prejudices, all of the bile that they might have about whatever group in question. and then they don't try to replace what is in that person's head. and if you've been married, you know that does not work. they try to stir up some cognitive dissonance in that person. and so to your fundamental question, i think look, there is a hard core 2030 percent on the left. that has a very baked world view that they're not gonna be talked out of at the door. there's another 2030 percent equivalent on that. it's not, if not, i can work on it. why does it have evidence that as a group in the middle that can move, can be toggled into different why views, if you build a kind of process of trying to help make meaning and talk people through their

feasible part of what's worrisome is not just the people who have deeply entrenched baked ideological positions. there are people who can't accept basic facts as true that there was a pole, an axial momentum poll from january 2022, but found that more than 40 percent of americans are either unsure or do not believe that president biden legitimately won the election. how can you begin to persuade people, even if i spend 2 hours at the door? if i can't get them to accept basic facts, they're still disputing fundamental truths. yeah, and i'm glad you brought that up. that is a almost separate problem. that kind of problem of persuasion in the context of disinformation and what i would call cult cult manipulation, which in many case case of q and on another phenomenon, you're dealing almost with the idea of a dispersed online cult that has 43000000 american adherents. right? now, look, i in the persuaders have a chapter on 2 different experts, thinking about this problem in different ways. i'm a, both of them said is look,

it, this is going to be endemic in the society right now, right? you're not going to be able to shut off this information. you're not gonna be able to tell elan mosques, mom, that she should raise them better and then getting it on a twitter or, or, or, or, or pressure fox news advertisers. so there's no more of that at some level, you have to accept this information as a feature of the internet age at what they suggest, therefore, is we need a real public health approach to this information. which is to say, protecting people from being infected by it. not keeping it entirely out of the air, and that essentially means an educational revolution. we need a, a real upgrade of critical thinking to be resistant to very familiar, well worn repeated tactics of manipulation that show up in this information question fair enough. you've talked about the law must already today a little bit. ah, and we've also talked about this information. there are people though, who say, look, ellen must buying twitter,

could be victory for free speech. other people are saying, no, we have to think more content moderation. all forms of abuse and violence that can happen online. but either way, it's something we have to talk about, you know, what role, what impact you think eli mosques acquisition, twitter is going to have on political discourse? look, i think you are musk is not special. i think he's a, an embodiment of a kind of silicon valley type that we, that we have come to know. and what really defines the, the silicon valley type is that they tend to be these very limited men. these, these are, these are kind of just like just limited in the sense that these are men with a lot of power who are not particularly cultivated, don't have a particularly good understanding of human society. but when these guys make money by, you know, building a, an app and, and locking out or, or, or making money in his case, in these other businesses and kind of buying with saudi money and app and,

and are now in charge of, kind of moderating human discourse and shaping, political and civic spaces and being that guardian of spaces like black twitter, even though they are, you know, have kind of flirted with racist speech for years. it's a real problem. these are highly limited men who now have roles of profound responsibility for the human conversation. you know, mark zuckerberg, i'm not how many, you know, friends, mark, villalobos, adam. i was in charge of friendship. i'm human much better. what at one must not someone who, you know, you'd say, while this person really gets human conversation and human interaction. but he's now in charge of what he calls the global human town square. i just think we need a, a system of being able to talk to each other relate to each other. have these arguments about politics, yet seek to persuade each other that are not moderated by some of the people least

capable at the skill of human connection. we can't obviously a ignore the fact he's also worth approaching $200000000000.00 and towns with more than thousands less. oh, is it problematic or how do you feel about the idea that a single person could amass that much wealth? that much control over the public square over the human conversation. yeah, no one should amass that kind of wealth. you know, i don't think we should have billionaires. we don't agree with me. let's just try it my way for a little while it's not have them. let's use that money to fund education and health and things like that for everyone. and then if it's not good in 10 years, i will come back on the show and suggest we go back to having billionaires, if it, if it didn't actually make the society better. but we are not. we are choosing when we have billionaires to prioritize the, the importance of people being able to hoard wealth over the importance of people. more people, many people being able to live good lives. it's a, it's

a dumb priority on our part. and frankly, with this other problem of these highly limited people, having this huge clause, i public authority over, you know, public life over us, over us all because they have nothing to do with their money except find new ways to rule us. and i think it's much better to just, you know, have a wealth tax and fund decent life for all people. and i go, there it is. thank you so much for joining us on upfront. thank you, bradley. all right, that is our show upfront. we'll be back next week. the for generations football hosts for the french captain latrice ever knew, never content. you keep chasing, waiting, waiting, waiting for an illuminating, open conversation. there are very few orders that spoken about the child abuse. if

you have a human being and i think we need to help each other and also show cases the incredible story of what all this in flood afghan has done to escape with. tell about generation football episode won al jazeera, motivated, active, and more politically engaged than ever before. have demanding change on their own times. welcome to generation change a global theories. the attempt to understand and talent, the ideas that mobilize youth around a presentation of people like us in the politics and government and higher aspects of society, generation change coming seen on al jazeera. this was the moment the likes of which we have never seen. this is important, this is your story from breaking down the headlines to exposing the powers attempting to silence reporting. we're seeing your freedom with being threatened

and attacked, is basically criminalizing journalism. the listening post doesn't cover the news. it covers the way the news is covered. people have no idea what the source of uses back to the game, but rolled very broad for the evidence on al jazeera bowl and, and home stories and asia and the pacific on al jazeera. when the news breaks, it's not just personal property, but also infrastructure that now leaves fixing from power lines to water me when people need to be heard and the story told they would get punished if they spoke ukrainian. i'm afraid i won't be able to return home with exclusive interviews and in depth report south african penguins, one is in captivity. al jazeera has teens on the ground to bring you more award winning documentary and live.