Episodes
| Title | First Broadcast | Repeated | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20200709 | The Rethink project continues every month with a new debate exploring how the world should change after the coronavirus pandemic. BBC Media Editor Amol Rajan talks to a global panel about issues around inequality and intergenerational fairness - and asks how their own lives have been changed by the spectre of Covid-19. Producer: Pete Hanington Amol Rajan and a global panel discuss inequality and intergenerational fairness. | ||
| 20250626 | Combining original insights into major news stories with topical investigations. Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently | ||
| Authenticity | 20260205 |  As generative AI and Deepfake technology has progressed over the last decade, you could be forgiven for thinking that it's never been more difficult to try to work out what is authentic and what is fake. The search for authenticity is not new. It's a task that's challenged humanity for hundreds of years. Forgers have always tried to pass off copies as great artworks, but it's not always clear when an artist was responsible for an entire painting or farmed out parts of the job to apprentices. A few well-known modern artists outsource all of the construction and manufacture of some of their works to skilled craftsmen and women. Although the idea is theirs, does that make the final product somehow less than the genuine article? Idiosyncrasies, perceived flaws or personal flourishes are often key indicators that show an image is authentic. We use those same tell-tale signs to judge the authenticity of another type of image: the one that politicians want to portray. How important is it to be a politician who is seen as authentic by voters? How can we measure political authenticity? If someone is carefully crafting their image on social media, how real is it? And even if it is fake, do voters care, if they have been seduced by the illusion? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editors: Lisa Baxter and Nick Holland Contributors: Estelle Lovatt, FRSA. Art Critic, Writer and Lecturer. Lone Sorensen, Associate Professor of Political Communication, University of Leeds Nick Clarke, Professor of Political Geography, University of Southampton Tracy Dennis Tiwary, Professor of Behavioural Neuroscience, Clinical Psychology and Developmental Psychology, at the City University of New York. Rethink is a BBC co-production with the Open University. Is authenticity in the modern age in the eye of the beholder? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently In an age where AI can simulate reality, how can we tell what's genuine and what's not? Whether it's art or someone's character, does it always matter if we can't spot a fake? But the search for authenticity is not new: it's a task that's challenged humanity for hundreds of years. Forgers have always tried to pass off copies as great artworks, but it's not always clear when an artist was responsible for an entire painting, or farmed out parts of the job to apprentices. Some modern artists delegate all of the construction or manufacture of some of their works to skilled craftsmen and women How important is it to be a politician who is seen as 'authentic' by voters? How can we measure political authenticity? If someone is carefully crafting their image on social media, how 'real' is it? And even if it is fake, do voters care, if they've been seduced by the illusion? Image matters - but is authenticity in the modern age in the eye of the beholder? In an age when AI can simulate reality, how can we detect the genuine article? How can we decide which images - both pictures and human - are real, and does it matter? As well as forgers who have tried to pass off copies as great artworks, it's not always clear when an artist was responsible for an entire painting. Some - extremely famous - artists would focus on particular parts of a portrait, while leaving the rest to other workers. Commissions would be passed-on to apprentices in their studio. And modern artists like Damien Hirst and Jeff Koons have often delegated the construction or manufacture of their works to skilled craftsmen and women. But does that make the final product somehow less than the genuine article? Idiosyncrasies, perceived flaws or personal flourishes are often key indicators that show an image is authentic. And we use those same tell-tale signs to judge the authenticity of another type of image: the one that politicians want to portray. Editor: Lisa Baxter | |
| Behaviour Change | 20200929 | Has the coronavirus pandemic demonstrated how governments can change the behaviour of individuals? Or is the real lesson the way that citizens have started making radical decisions about their own health and lifestyles? Amol Rajan speaks to leading thinkers and policymakers about how our world should change post Covid-19. Is this a moment of opportunity for radical thinking, reshaping our politics, economies, societies and ecosystems? Producer: Smita Patel Has the pandemic shown that governments can change how citizens act? How the world should change after the coronavirus pandemic. | |
| Care | 20241024 | 20241028 (R4) | The care system in Britain is creaking at the seams. People who need care aren't receiving it - or if they do it's untenably expensive. There aren't enough staff for care homes, and unpaid family carers often burn out looking after their loved ones without support. Successive governments have recognised it's a problem, but they haven't been able to fix it. Rachel Reeves is just the latest in a long line of chancellors to back away from care reform. How can we reform the care system so it works better for everyone involved? And crucially - how can we pay for it? In this edition of Rethink we look at some of the big ideas that could revolutionise social care in this country. We look at the arguments for a National Care Service to match the National Health Service. We hear about new technological fixes, from robots in care homes to smaller scale initiatives to help with medication or paperwork. Or maybe we all need to think about the whole system differently - and all care for each other a little more. Contributors: Sir Andrew Dilnot, head of the 2011 government review on Funding of Care & Support Kathryn Smith, chief executive of the Social Care Institute for Excellence Ben Cooper from the Fabian Society, co-author of their report Support Guaranteed: The Roadmap to a National Care Service Hilary Cottam, designer, social activist and author of Radical Help: How We Can Remake the Relationships Between Us and Revolutionise the Welfare State Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Lucy Burns Editor: Clare Fordham How can we make the care system work better for everybody - and how should we pay for it? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Ben Cooper from the Fabian Society, author of their report Support Guaranteed: The Roadmap to a National Care Service |
| Cities | 20200910 | Amol Rajan and guests discuss how urban environments should change post-coronavirus. He'll be joined by a panel of influential thinkers and policymakers, plus contributors from across the globe, to examine the changing nature of the city. They have been the driving force in creating wealth, innovation and culture over the last few centuries. But does a combination of Covid-19 and new technology mean that the need for dense concentrations of people is lessening? Many city dwellers - especially those recently forced to work from home - have wondered why they were paying high urban prices during lockdown and looked enviously at those in larger homes in suburbs or the countryside. Is now a moment to rethink conurbations - in terms of transport, planning and amenities - to move from a concrete jungle to a green and pleasant cityscape? Guests include: Saskia Sassen, sociologist, Columbia University Amanda Levete, architect Ros Jones, mayor of Doncaster James Palmer, mayor of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Producer: Pete Hanington How the world should change after the coronavirus pandemic. | |
| Crime Prevention | 20250206 | 20250210 (R4) | In 2024, more than two million crimes went unsolved in England and Wales, with police unable to identify a suspect. That figure has increased by 180,000 since 2022, despite there being 86,000 fewer crimes in the same period. So with detection rates down, and constant financial pressures on the police services across the UK, should crime prevention play a greater role in policing? Targeting preventable crimes and the people most likely to commit them, a process called 'focused deterrence' is being trialled at five sites in England. Police services already have better intelligence resources available than in any time in history, and they are also working with care services and other agencies to flag up potential problems. How could crime prevention be taken further? Would a more academic approach to policing result in knowledge being spread more quickly, and how could police be better prepared for emerging crimes as society and technology change? Ultimately, could it lead to lower crime rates and financial savings, and is there any evidence to suggest it does either? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ivana Davidovic Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: 40% of English and Welsh crimes went unsolved in 2024. So is prevention better than cure? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Nearly two in every five crimes went unsolved in England and Wales in 2024, so could crime prevention play a bigger part in policing and be an effective way to reduce offences? Katrin Hohl, Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice at City University Alexander Murray, Threat Leadership at the National Crime Agency and the Chair of the Society for Evidence Based Policing Alex Sutherland, Professor in Practice Criminology & Public Policy at Oxford University Dr Rick Muir, Director of the Police Foundation |
| Energy | 20241031 | 20241104 (R4) | Rethink considers how we might take a different approach to issues that affect all of us, asking some of the brightest minds what we could do to make the world a better place. This week, we're rethinking energy. The massive rise in the price of wholesale gas in 2022, and the subsequent rise in our household energy bills highlighted the need for the UK to have a secure, reliable and cheap energy supply. So what choices do we have? UK fossil fuel reserves are dwindling, but we have offshore wind, and sunshine in the south. Renewable power is also cheaper than fossil fuels. In the first three months of 2024, the UK's wind, solar and other forms of renewable power generated just over half of our energy and by the end of September, coal had been phased out completely. But there is still a long way to go before the UK is self-sufficient. It can take as long as 15 years to connect a renewable power plant to the National Grid. A nuclear power station hasn't been completed in the UK for nearly 30 years Do we have enough power storage for cloudy or windless days? And industry and homes are still reliant on gas. So how to we need to rethink energy to keep the lights on, charge our many devices and power our electric vehicles in the future? And if we get it right, what will be the rewards for everyone? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Aoife Foley, Professor & Chair in Net Zero Infrastructure at the University of Manchester. Emma Pinchbeck, Chief Executive, the Climate Change Committee. Sam Richards, a former special advisor on energy to Boris Johnson, and now the Chief Executive of campaign group Britain Remade. Andrew Crossland, Associate Professor in practice at the Durham Energy Institute. How can the UK secure cheap, reliable and renewable power for our future needs? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently In the future, how can we keep the lights on, charge up all our devices and power our electric vehicles? Wind and solar are here to stay, but what more needs to be built? Emma Pinchbeck, Chief Executive, Energy UK. |
| How Can Flying Be Less Polluting? | 20250911 | 20250915 (R4) | Aviation has a problem: it's reliant on fossil fuels which release greenhouse gases when they're burned in a jet engine. Other industries are worse polluters, but in the next few decades, they are likely to decarbonise much faster than the airline sector. Why? Because kerosene is a light enough fuel for planes to get off the ground, while producing enough thrust for them to do so. Also it enables airliners to carry passengers to the other side of the world. International flight has only been around for less than 100 years, but research suggests that it's responsible for 4% of total global warming to date. It's not just that airliners pump out carbon dioxide, but they also emit nitrous oxides and soot. Even contrails, which are mostly water vapour, have a warming effect high up in the atmosphere. Can efficiencies in jet engines, optimal routes and air traffic control lead to less fuel being used? What technologies are available to make flying cleaner? Is the pace of change fast enough to meet net zero by 2050? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Lisa Baxter Contributors: David Lee, Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Centre for Aviation, Transport and the Environment, Manchester Metropolitan University. Dr Mark Bentall, Head of the Research and Technology Programme, Airbus Dr Naomi Allen, Head of Research at the Royal Aeronautical Society, Alice Larkin, Professor of Climate Science and Energy Policy in the School of Engineering at the University of Manchester. Duncan McCourt, Chief Executive, Sustainable Aviation Rethink is a BBC co-production with the Open University Aviation is fiendishly difficult to decarbonise - but how can it be made cleaner? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Flying is a weight game, and kerosene is the best fuel there is for getting planes off the ground and across the world. So what tools do we have for getting aviation to net zero? |
| Immigration | 20241010 | 20241014 (R4) | Rethink looks again at the issues of our time, and considers how we might approach them differently. Scrutinising the latest thinking and research, we look at what this might mean for policy and society. In this episode, we're looking at one of the most divisive issues of our time – immigration – and in particular, how we can change the discourse around migration. Polling from the British Social Attitudes survey suggests that the UK is now more divided on immigration, by age, education, and political party, than at any time since 2011. But polling also indicates that there are large areas of agreement between people who are pro-immigration and others who are immigration-sceptic. A majority of people think net immigration is too high. A majority also believe that Ukrainian refugees, Afghans who helped UK forces, Hong Kong Chinese, doctors, nurses and care workers should be allowed to come to the UK. And most people agree that crossing the channel in small boats is not a good idea. So if a majority of people agree on these issues, how have we become so tribal? Why have politicians of all flavours failed us over the decades? How can get them to be more honest about the trade-offs that come with every immigration decision that's made - and how can we change the political discourse? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Sunder Katwala, Director, British Future Alan Manning, Professor of Economics at the LSE and former chair of the Migration Advisory Committee Dr Madeleine Sumption, Director of the Migration Observatory in Oxford, and a current advisor to the Migration Advisory Committee Robert Colvile, Director, the Centre for Policy Studies Is the UK more divided than ever over immigration, or are there areas of consensus? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Polling suggests that the UK is more divided over immigration than at any time since 2011. But are there areas where a majority of people agree. So what are they? |
| Is Big Tech Stealing Your Life? | 20250130 | 20250203 (R4) | Rethink examines emerging issues in politics, society, economics, technology and the UK's place in the world, and how we might approach them differently. We look at the latest thinking and research and discuss new ideas that might make the world a better place. In this episode, we consider the changing relationship between the public and big tech companies. Big technology companies have given us incredible social media and online services, that came with a price - our data. They used it to target advertising and to learn about our likes and dislikes, and the vast majority of us couldn't have cared less about giving up this information. But Artificial Intelligence products have changed the game, from chatbots that can hold human-like conversations, to Generative AI that can write prose or create a picture from a simple text prompt. And these unthinking machines require endless amounts of data to train them. Some companies have been quietly changing their terms and conditions to access our social media and messages for AI training. Privacy regulators in the UK have called a halt to this so far, but US consumers don't have that protection. Developers have also been scraping the internet, gathering both free and copyrighted material, and leading to legal actions in both the USA, the EU and the UK. Copyright holders are concerned about a lack of payment or licencing deals, and also that AI imitates their content, putting them out of work. The Government has now launched a consultation to try to balance up the needs of AI and the creative industries. But with some companies refusing to pay for content, creators have a new tool at their disposal - a program that makes stolen pictures poisonous to AI. Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Ben Zhao, Neubauer Professor of Computer Science at University of Chicago Jack Stilgoe, Professor in science and technology studies at University College London, where he researches the governance of emerging technologies Justine Roberts, CEO and founder of Mumsnet. Cerys Wyn Davies, Partner at Pinscent Masons solicitors, specialising in IP and Copyright. Neil Ross, Associate director of policy for Tech UK How is our relationship with big tech changing? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently AI training requires vast amounts of data, but tech companies face legal battles over copyright, and UK and EU regulators have restricted the use of our personal data. Justine Roberts, founder and CEO of Mumsnet. Cerys Wyn Davies, a partner at Pinscent Masons solicitors, specialising in IP and Copyright. |
| Is The Internet Getting Worse? | 20240919 | 20240923 (R4) | Rethink examines emerging issues in politics, society, economics, technology and the UK's place in the world, and considers how we might approach them differently. We look at the latest thinking and research and discuss new ideas that might make the world a better place. In this episode, we look at 'Enshittification', or to put it more politely - the problem of internet platform decay. Facebook used to be about posts from your friends, but its feed now also includes groups, adverts, reels, and threads posts. Trying to work out if the Amazon product you want is any good can be tricky, because sellers can pay for their product to appear higher in your list of results. Search engines are not immune; German researchers have found that Google, Bing and Duck Duck Go are prone to spam marketing, making it more difficult to find what you want. There's no ill-intent behind this: platform decay is a side-effect of the way these businesses work. So what can governments and individuals do, to try to get a better internet for everyone? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Cory Doctorow, visiting Professor of Computer Science at the Open University, and co-founder of the UK Open Rights group. Professor Gina Neff, Executive Director of the Minderoo Centre for Technology & Democracy at the University of Cambridge, Marie Le Conte, political journalist and author of the book escape - about the rise and demise of the internet Dr Cristina Caffarra, competition economist and former anti-trust consultant. How can we get a better internet for everyone? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Platform decay results in social media feeds full of posts you didn't ask for, and sponsored results and spam at the top of your search results. What can be done to combat this? How the world should change after the coronavirus pandemic. |
| Leadership | 20200813 | The coronavirus pandemic has encouraged us to rethink our lives. Many people say they want to change the way they live and work, whilst some see this as a moment to radically rethink society. But are our political leaders a help or a hindrance to that change? What sort of leadership do we need in order to recover and rebuild and are there lessons for the UK in the way other world leaders are handling the pandemic and their plans for life after Coronavirus? In the latest Radio 4 Rethink programme Amol Rajan discusses this with a panel of thinkers and international voices Presenter: Amol Rajan Producer: Peter Hanington What sort of leadership do we need in order to recover and rebuild after covid-19? How the world should change after the coronavirus pandemic. | |
| Liberalism | 20250227 | 20250303 (R4) | Across the West, the long-established liberal order appears to be struggling to adapt to the economic and social challenges of the 21st century. As a result, traditional politics is being rejected by voters at the ballot box, increasingly usurped by narratives once considered too radical for the mainstream. In Europe, right wing populists and the far-right are in the ascendancy in countries such as France, the Netherlands, Germany and Italy. Across the Atlantic, Donald Trump has returned to the White House for a second term. The roots of political liberalism can be traced back to the 18th century, with much of the modern liberal world order emerging out of the end of World War II. But as similar patterns emerge across numerous democracies, could we be witnessing the end of liberalism? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ben Cooper Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Jon Cruddas, author and former Labour MP for Dagenham and Rainham Edmund Fawcett, political journalist and author Sarah de Lange, Professor of Political Pluralism at the Department of Political Science at the University of Amsterdam Catherine de Vries, Professor of Political Science at Bocconi University Michael Gove, Editor of The Spectator and former Conservative MP for Surrey Heath Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Across the west, the long-established liberal order appears to be struggling to adapt to economic and social challenges. Could we be witnessing the end of liberalism? Combining original insights into major news stories with topical investigations. |
| Medical Data | 20250213 | 20250217 (R4) | Sir Keir Starmer says that the NHS is well placed for an AI revolution in health care. The Health Secretary Wes Streeting says it could lead to huge advances in health care, from patient passports, which enable doctors to easily access a patient's full medical history, to early intervention - being able to assess a child's risk of disease from birth. The NHS has a vast pool of information about our health, and unlocking its power is a noble aim: but can everything really be thrown straight into an AI, which will then pump out answers? Inputting it presents a mammoth task; NHS data is in many places, the bits of information are not always compatible, nor are they easily accessible. Also, medical records are hugely sensitive and private, so what safeguards need to be put in place before data researchers and medical tech companies can be given access? What will be the most likely, realistic and achievable benefits of using AI in our healthcare system, and - if the NHS gets this right - what are the potential rewards for patients? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Dr Jess Morley, postdoctoral research associate at the Yale Digital Ethics Centre Professor Andrew Morris, President of the Academy of Medical Sciences, and Director of HDR UK, the national institute for health data science Michael Shenouda, Chief Commercial Officer and Chief Medical Officer at Open Medical, and board member for the ABHI, The Association of British HealthTech Industries Matthew Taylor, Chief Executive of the NHS Confederation The PM says the NHS is well placed for an AI revolution in healthcare - but is it? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently The NHS creates a vast pool of medical data and the Prime Minister says it's well-placed for an AI Revolution in health care. But will the promise live up to the hype? |
| Middle Age | 20260115 | 20260108 20260119 (R4) | People are living longer and delaying life's milestone moments. How does this affect our middle years and should we be paying more attention to people in this phase of their lives? For some, middle age can be a very challenging period in their lives. Today, people are postponing the milestones in life that traditionally signified a change in priorities. People are having children later in life meaning parents in their 40s or even 50s are looking after small children. Jobs for life no longer exist and housing is so expensive that many have no choice but to pay costly rents. All of these phenomena have given rise to the so called “sandwich Generation ? – simultaneously looking after children but also elderly parents. Many experience multiple roles- worker, parent, carer, spouse and friend – and juggling the demands of all of those roles can lead to burnout. Academic literature on happiness has until recently suggested that our satisfaction with life as we age is hump shaped. When we're young, we're happy — and then that declines, bottoming out in middle age. As we pass middle age and get older, we get happier again. But is that still the case? Is mid-life a uniquely unhappy place to be? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Tom Gillett Editor: Lisa Baxter Contributors: Ben Akers - Co-founder and co-CEO of Talk Club David Blanchflower - Professor of Economics, Dartmouth College, New Hampshire Jane Green - Professor of Political Science and British Politics at the University of Oxford Andrew G Marshall - Marital therapist, communications trainer and author Les Mayhew - Professor of statistics at Bayes Business School, City University, London Kate Muir - Journalist, author, and documentary filmmaker People are living longer and settling down later. Should we rethink middle age? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Rethink is a BBC co-production with the Open University. |
| Museums | 20250123 | 20250127 (R4) | The UK has many world-leading museums that inspire wonder and fascination in their visitors. Many were originally created to display artefacts from empire or house the collections of their wealthy Victorian founders but recent decades have seen museums finding innovative ways to challenge what a modern museum can be. However, in tough economic times many museums are facing serious challenges. The sector is having to make the case for why museums should receive public money when there's a lot less to go around. They are also facing criticism about who visits them, who curates them, and what objects they collect and display. What are museums for? Who are they for? And how can they teach us about our past whilst remaining relevant and exciting for today's visitors? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Viv Jones Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Sara Wajid, co-CEO of Birmingham Museums Trust Tony Butler, Director of Derby Museums Trust Stephen Bush, columnist and associate editor at the Financial Times Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Combining original insights into major news stories with topical investigations. |
| Nightlife | 20251002 | 20251003 (R4) 20251006 (R4) | The Night Times Industries Association says one in four venues have shut down since 2020, and the sector will face an irreversible decline unless the government provides urgent support. The industry was one of the worst hit during the pandemic, and it's asking for cuts to National Insurance, a permanent cut in VAT and a reform of business rates to help it keep afloat. The NTIA claims the night time economy contributes more than £153 billion to the UK economy and supports over 2 million jobs. Culturally, the sector punches above its weight. The nightclub boom in the last 50 years gave us disco, acid house, drum and bass and grime, as well as many other sub-genres of music. But nightclubs are expensive and consumers are finding their thrills elsewhere; drink is cheaper from supermarkets, and why search for someone you fancy on the dancefloor when you can use a dating app? And as nightclubs struggle, so do small music venues, where artists like Ed Sheeran, Dua Lipa, Coldplay, Arctic Monkeys Blur and Oasis started out, as well as many others. People are willing to pay hundreds of pounds to see those same artists in giant venues like Co-op Live in Manchester or at Wembley Stadium, so what can be done to make sure the next wave of new artists have somewhere to play? Should the government intervene? Should big venues subsidise smaller ones, or is it up to fans to throw them a lifeline? Or has nightlife in its current form - much like variety music halls - taken its last curtain call? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Tom Gillett Editor: Lisa Baxter Contributors: Michael Kill - CEO, Night Time Industries Association Fat Tony - DJ Steve Lamacq - BBC 6 Music DJ and Patron of the Music Venues Trust Richard Simm - Co-owner, The Forum Tunbridge Wells Jane Darougar - Psychotherapist and counselor at the Central St Martins University, London The UK's nightlife sector is on its knees, so can - and should - it be saved? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently The Night Time Industries Association says the sector faces an irreversible decline, unless the government implements urgent support. But is it worth saving? |
| Political Labels | 20250116 | 20250120 (R4) | At the last General Election Britain's traditional parties of left and right, Labour and the Conservatives, collectively amassed their lowest vote share ever - well under 60%. Three out of seven Brits voted for Reform UK, the Liberal Democrats, the Green Party or one of Britain's many regional or nationalist parties. Does this result suggest that British politics is now too complicated to be understood by the labels left and right? In Europe, some new parties like the German Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance have been labelled both far left and far right. Many similar parties seem to be having success by suggesting that they're throwing off old political labels and offering something radically new in their place. Studies say voters struggle to place policies along a left/right spectrum, and many don't define themselves along left/right lines. So how can we have a shared political sphere if we can't agree on terms? Are our political labels of left and right outdated? Are they due a rethink? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Viv Jones Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Sara Hobolt, Sutherland Chair of European Institutions at the London School of Economics and Political Science Claire Ainsley, Director of the Project on Center-Left Renewal at the Progressive Policy Institute. and previously the Executive Director of Policy to Sir Keir Starmer Giles Dilnot, Editor of Conservative Home and previously special advisor to James Cleverly at the Foreign Office and Home Office Is British politics today too complicated to be understood in terms of left and right? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Is British politics today too complicated to be understood in terms of left and right? How can we rethink our political labels? Combining original insights into major news stories with topical investigations. |
| Pricing | 20241017 | 20241021 (R4) | Rethink looks at the issues of our time, and considers how we might approach them differently. Scrutinising the latest thinking and research, we look at what this might mean for policy and society. In this episode: the cost of living has been high, but all too often, we also pay a premium. It's because of dynamic pricing, drip pricing and now personalised pricing. Dynamic pricing is why, after queuing for hours, Oasis fans were offered tickets that were considerably more expensive than the ones advertised. It's also why do you can be offered different prices each time you try and book an airline ticket, or a hotel online. Big data means that companies can figure out exactly what you are willing to pay online and can shift the price you face to match that. AI data-gathering software is causing cartel-like behaviour amongst competitors, who can draw similar conclusions about their market, and set similar prices. The depth of information available to companies means that they know the price a market will bear, rather than how much customers can afford and regardless of interest rates set by central banks. Regulators are playing catch-up, but what other strategies could be used to combat anti-competitive pricing led by algorithms? And what needs to change to ensure buyers can work out if they're getting a fair deal? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: David Dayen, writer and journalist, and the executive editor of The American Prospect magazine. Tom Smith, partner at Geradin, and former Legal Director at the UK Competition and Markets Authority. Cathrine Jansson-Boyd, Professor of consumer psychology at Anglia Ruskin University. Martyn James, consumer rights campaigner and journalist. Dynamic, drip and personalised pricing are now common - but are they fair? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently The market now knows so much about consumers from their data, it can set prices based on our willingness - and not our ability - to pay. So how can regulators ensure fair prices? |
| Productivity | 20250612 | 20250616 (R4) | The UK government has made growth its key mission. But solving the British productivity puzzle is not a new priority - it's been on the agenda for successive governments. Getting productivity up is crucial to sustain higher living standards. The more productive we are, the better off we'll be. But the UK has experienced significantly slower productivity growth than comparable countries since the global financial crisis in 2008 and by some measures, Britain has been going through its worst period for productivity growth since the Napoleonic Era. Britain's productivity lags that of many of our major trading partners, including France, Germany and the USA and that's despite British workers spending longer in the office. According to the ONS, the French can work four days and achieve roughly as much as the British do in five. What are the factors behind the UK's chronically weak productivity growth, what are other countries doing better? How can we increase Britain's productivity? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Farhana Haider Contributors: Margaret Heffernan, Professor of Practice in Management at the University of Bath, writer and former CEO. Paul Johnson, Director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Gareth Davies, Head of the National Audit Office. Leslie Perlow, Professor of organisational behaviour at the Harvard Business School and founder of the Crafting Your Life special project. Rethink is a BBC co-production with the Open University Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Britain's productivity lags that of many of our major trading partners and that's despite British workers spending longer in the office. How can we increase our productivity? |
| Regeneration | 20260115 | 20260122 (R4) 20260126 (R4) | The government has launched the Pride in Place scheme but is it possible to regenerate urban areas without leaving local people out? Most buildings have a certain shelf life before they need renovating. Social norms change and the ways people interact develop as society transforms with time. And local economies can change dramatically with once prosperous industrial areas falling silent, or tourist hot spots left behind by low-cost air travel. But is it possible to do this without being accused of gentrification? Swanky new buildings are introduced attracting people with money, house prices go up, expensive shops and cafes open up and before you know it, local people are priced out of the area. So are there ways to improve urban areas without leaving local residents behind? How much should any regeneration project acknowledge and honour local history? Isn't attracting new people, with new ideas and new businesses a vital part of any regeneration project? With building and land costs high can we avoid gentrification when reviving urban areas? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Tom Gillett Editor: Lisa Baxter Contributors: Dr Eilis Lawlor, Director of the research institute Just Economics. Patrick Murray, Executive Director of Policy and Public Affairs, the Northern Housing Consortium. Wayne Hemingway, designer. Martha Grekos, Barrister who specialises in planning and environmental law. Paul Chatterton, Professor of Urban Futures in the School of Geography at the University of Leeds. Rethink is a BBC co-production with the Open University. |
| Should We Stop Flying? | 20250918 | 20250919 (R4) 20250922 (R4) | Aviation is far more difficult to decarbonise than other sectors of the economy, because kerosene is the perfect fuel for planes. It produces enough power to enable planes to fly, yet it is light enough for them to get off the ground and cross the world. Alternatives are thin on the ground; batteries are too heavy, clean hydrogen power is in its infancy, while Sustainable Aviation Fuel - or SAF - is expensive and in short supply. Although the Government has a 'SAF-mandate', only 22% of all jet fuel supplied by 2040 will have to be sustainable. New airliners are more fuel-efficient than ever before, and both routes and air-traffic control are being optimised. But if growth outpaces efficiencies, greenhouse gas emissions will continue to rise. And passenger demand is back at pre-pandemic levels. In 2024 the UK was the third largest market in the world for flights. In the absence of any immediate solution, should we fly less, if at all? How realistic and affordable are slower alternatives like the train? Could passengers be penalised for taking more than one return flight a year? And should the Government rather than individuals be taking responsibility for change? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Lisa Baxter Contributors: Alice Larkin, Professor of Climate Science and Energy Policy in the School of Engineering at the University of Manchester. Dr Roger Tyers, UK Aviation specialist at Transport & Environment Yannick van den Berg, postdoctoral researcher at the University of Amsterdam Law School Tom Nevitt, project manager of Climate Perks Duncan McCourt, Chief Executive, Sustainable Aviation Rethink is a BBC co-production with the Open University Should we take individual responsibility for the polluting effects of aviation? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Aviation is difficult to decarbonise, because there are no real alternatives to jet fuel, and technology alone won't help get us to net zero. So should we stop flying? |
| Social Housing | 20250529 | 20250530 (R4) 20250602 (R4) | For most of this century, the UK has had a housing shortage, but for one section of society, that shortage has become a crisis. Prices have risen so much that people who need social housing are completely locked out of the private renting market, and owning a home for many is only a pipe dream. And when politicians speak about 'affordable homes', these are also out of reach for many people. 'Affordable' means homes available at 80% of the market rate. Typical social housing rents are much lower- around 30% of the full rate. And this type of home is in very short supply. In 1980, there were around seven million dwellings in the social rent sector, largely owned by councils. Today that's just over four million, the majority of which are owned by housing associations instead. To the average person, the answer seems simple - just build more homes. And that's being done, but not enough are being built - only around 10,000 social homes are constructed each year - far lower than the estimated 90,000 we need every year. So how can we speed up the process to help the million households in England currently sat on council waiting lists? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Contributors: Anna Minton, Reader in Architecture at the University of East London and author of the book 'Big Capital, Who is London For? Jasmine Basran, Head of Policy at the homelessness charity Crisis. Richard Hyde, founder of Thinkhouse.org, an open library of housing research, and chair of Solihull Community Housing. Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester. Graham Kauders, commercial director at EDAROTH, an AtkinsRéalis company. What's stopping the UK from building the social housing we need? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently How can we build 90 thousand homes a year, who will pay for them and what hurdles need to be overcome to get 1 million households off council waiting lists? Rethink is a BBC co-production with the Open University |
| Summer Holidays | 20250630 | Two weeks in the sun - it's the classic summer getaway. For many of us, summer holidays are something to look forward to all year. But some of the most popular destinations for British holidaymakers are under strain. Protesters in Barcelona and Majorca have been pushing back at the number of visitors they host - even spraying them with water pistols. Locals are unhappy at being priced out of the housing market and feeling pressure on public services - but they also need tourists to support their economies. At the same time, many destinations are experiencing increasingly hot summers, with sometimes catastrophic results. Two years ago, 20,000 tourists in Rhodes were forced to evacuate their hotels to get away from wildfires. Climate models suggest future summers will be hotter still. So is it time to rethink how we approach the summer holiday? Should we be considering different destinations for our holidays - swapping Mediterranean beaches for northern Europe or British destinations? Would those places be ready for more summer visitors? How can tourist destinations change to meet shifting demands? Is it time for schools to move away from the long summer break? We'll look at the history of the beach holiday, and try and imagine what summer holidays will look like in the future. And we'll ask - what is a summer holiday for? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Lucy Burns Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors Sarah Stodola, author of The Last Resort: A Chronicle of Paradise, Profit and Peril at the Beach Simon Calder, travel journalist Christos Giannakopoulos, research director, the National Observatory of Athens Rowland Rees-Evans, chair of the Wales Tourism Alliance Lee Elliot-Major, professor of social mobility at the University of Exeter Rethink is a BBC co-production with the Open University In an age of climate change and over-tourism, what's the future for our summer holidays? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Over-tourism, climate change and the cost of living all threaten the traditional two weeks in the sun. How can we change our holiday habits to be more sustainable in future? Combining original insights into major news stories with topical investigations. | |
| The Civil Service | 20250605 | 20250609 (R4) | Across many countries, civil services, once seen as the backbone of stable governance, are facing growing scrutiny. Long viewed as the impartial and efficient machine of government, the role of civil servants is now being questioned as political polarisation intensifies and trust in traditional institutions declines. In the UK, the United States and other democracies, critics question its effectiveness, arguing that the civil service has become opaque, unwieldy and inefficient, and process is getting in the way of outcomes. The modern British civil service emerged in the 19th century, and was designed to carry out the day-to-day tasks of government in an unbiased and professional manner. However, is a bureaucracy that was created and designed more than a century ago still fit for purpose - or are we witnessing a turning point in its role in modern governance? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Eleanor Harrison-Dengate Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Gus O'Donnell, former Cabinet Secretary, 2005 - 2011 Jennifer Pahlka, former United States government's deputy chief technology officer Aaron Maniam, scholar at the Blavatnik School of Government, and former Singaporean civil servant Hannah White, Director and CEO of Institute for Government Joe Hill, Policy Director, Reform Rethink is a BBC co-production with the Open University Can the civil service be reformed or is it simply too old and unwieldy? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Critics say the civil service is bloated, with falling productivity. A host of reforms are on the government's agenda, but can the institution really be changed? |
| The Global Economy | 20250220 | 20250224 (R4) | You would be forgiven for thinking that inflation, interest rates, GDP and tariffs drive the global economy. But there are a whole set of interconnected underlying systems that work quietly in the background to keep economies running smoothly. It's not just countries that rely on them, but individuals as well. These systems allow workers to get paid, banks to make transfers, and the free-flow of information on the internet. These immaterial systems have a presence in the physical world, from fibre optic cables to the servers that host our data. Building and maintaining this infrastructure, and everything else that makes up modern civilisation requires a constant and reliable supply of raw materials. But in this globalised world, both the underlying systems online and the supply chains in the material world have pinch points - places where if just one thing gets squeezed, then there are immediate and dramatic effects on the economy. And whoever controls those pinch points wields a vast amount of power. In this episode of Rethink, Ben Ansell explores those pinch points, how the USA and China are realising their power, and what this means for the UK. Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Henry Farrell, SNF Agora Professor of International Affairs at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, and co-author of Underground Empire. Abe Newman, professor in the School of Foreign Service and Government Departments at Georgetown University, and co-author of Underground Empire. Ed Conway, economics and data editor of Sky News and author of Material World. Forget tariffs, what are the systems and raw materials that underpin the global economy? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Tariffs, GDP and inflation drive the world economy. Or do they? What underlying systems and building blocks actually support modern civilisation, and how can they be controlled? Combining original insights into major news stories with topical investigations. |
| The Meaning Of Terrorism | 20250904 | 20250908 (R4) | What is terrorism? Without doubt, it is a pejorative term; few people would ever want to be called a terrorist, and when the word terrorism is attached to a belief system, it delegitimises it in the eyes of the public. It's an emotive word with severe consequences for any individual or group given the label. Virtually everybody agrees that being a terrorist is not a good thing and that the law must seriously punish them. But there isn't an agreed international definition of what terrorism is. The UK has a legal definition, but it differs from other western democracies. When does property damage become a terror offence? How do police officers decide the difference between support for a cause and membership of a proscribed organisation? Should individuals without an ideology who plan or commit mass murders be considered terrorists? Are UK anti-terror laws too broad, or too narrow? And can violence by states be counted as terrorism? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Lisa Baxter Contributors: José À?ngel Gascón, Professor of Argumentation in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Murcia Jonathan Hall KC, UK Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation Nick Aldworth, Threat, risk & security strategist, former Detective Chief Superintendent and National Coordinator in Counter Terrorism Policing. Leonie Jackson, Assistant Professor and Senior Lecturer in International Relations, Northumbria University, and author of ' What is Counterterrorism For? Richard English, Professor of Politics at Queen's University Belfast, and author of Does Counter-Terrorism Work? Rethink is a BBC co-production with the Open University Is the word 'terrorism' overused, and what do we mean when we use it? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently We all think we know what 'terrorism' is, and there are serious consequences for groups given the label. However, there is no international consensus about what the word means. |
| The Promise Of Ai | 20260129 | 20260122 20260202 (R4) | At the start of 2023 ChatGPT took Artificial Intelligence from research labs to the mainstream. Now we can choose between the latest version of OpenAI's product, as well as Claude, Gemini, Grok and many others. Generative AIs can produce pictures and video from a text prompt, and many websites and apps are now labelled 'Powered by AI'. This new technology can do lots of things, and tech companies have raised funds based on its potential. But what is AI actually for? There are certain specialized AIs which have a clear purpose. AlphaFold2, which can predict how amino-acid sequences fold into a protein, won its creators the Nobel Prize for Chemistry. Google Translate is an AI with a purpose that's clear from its name. But so far there is no must-have or 'killer' application for the Large Language Models and Generative AIs, which would potentially generate huge revenues for technology companies. The future of AI is equally unclear. Will AI somehow lead to all-purpose 'Artificial General Intelligence', fully-autonomous robots or even machine consciousness? Or is this the stuff of fantasy and nightmares? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Lisa Baxter Contributors: Mike Wooldridge, the Ashall Professor of the Foundations of Artificial Intelligence at the University of Oxford. Rosalind Picard, Grover M. Hermann Professor of Health Sciences and Technology and director of the Affective Computing Research Group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Media Lab. Ethan Mollick, Professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and AI researcher. Pip Finkemeyer, author of 'One Story' and software designer and researcher. Tracy Dennis Tiwary, Professor of Behavioural Neuroscience, Clinical Psychology and Developmental Psychology, at the City University of New York. AI is now integrated into many websites and apps - but what is it for? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Artificial intelligence burst into the mainstream back in 2023. Several years on, is it any clearer what AI is for, and how it might develop? In 2023, ChatGPT took Artificial Intelligence into the mainstream. Now there's a bewildering choice of human-like chatbots to choose from. Generative AIs can produce pictures and video from a text prompt, and many websites and apps are now labelled 'Powered by AI'. This new technology can do lots of things and tech companies have raised vast amounts of money from investors based on its potential. Certain specialised AIs have a clear purpose. AlphaFold2 can predict how proteins fold-up and won its creators the Nobel Prize for Chemistry, and Google Translate is an AI with a purpose that's clear from its name. The future of AI is equally hazy. Will AI somehow lead to all-purpose 'Artificial General Intelligence', autonomous robots or even machine consciousness? Or is this all just the stuff of fantasy and nightmares? Rethink is a BBC co-production with the Open University. If you look online, AI now seems to be everywhere - but what is it for? |
| The Uk's Relationship With China | 20250619 | 20250623 (R4) | President Trump promised 'America First' on the campaign trail, and has delivered that in his second term, unleashing a trade war and causing global economic instability. Although China and the USA have recently agreed a temporary truce in the trade war, the US President regards Beijing as an economic enemy. Perversely, Donald Trump's actions may push other countries into China's embrace. For some countries, like Russia, that's a natural fit. Others, like China's neighbours South Korea and Japan, have agreed to talks about a free-trade agreement, while the EU says it is seeking to 'engage constructively' with Beijing. So where does that leave the UK? Of late, Labour ministers have been on a charm offensive, with the Chancellor, the Foreign Secretary and the Energy Secretary all visiting China, as well as a recent trade delegation. So should the UK be seeking closer ties with China? What are the risks, and is China even interested in us? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Todd Hall, Director of the University of Oxford China Centre and Professor of International Relations at the Department of Politics and International Relations at the University Of Oxford. Yeling Tan, Professor of public policy at the Blavatnik School of Government at Oxford University and also a non-resident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Wang Guan, senior news anchor with The China Media Group and also a founding fellow of the Taihe Institute think tank in Beijing. Cindy Yu, contributing editor and a columnist at The Times, who also writes the Chinese Whispers substack. Rethink is a BBC co-production with the Open University Should the UK seek closer diplomatic and trade links with China? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently The US trade war has left many countries wondering what President Trump will do next. But there is another economic superpower. So should the UK align more closely with China? In the following months, he rolled-back on some tariffs as a temporary measure, signed a trade deal with the UK- which still left us with tariffs on many goods, and made another deal which still left some tit-for-tat tariffs in place between the US and China. The US President regards China as an economic enemy, but perversely, his actions may push other countries into China's embrace. Cindy Yu, contributing editor and a columnist at The Times, and presenter of the Chinese Whispers podcast. |
| Voting | 20240926 | 20240930 (R4) | One person, one vote - we're all equal in the voting booth, right? But it hasn't always been this way, and just who can vote has changed many times since the Second World War. Until 1951, business owners and some university graduates were allowed multiple votes. 18 year olds could vote for the first time in the 1970 general election, and In 2024 British expats who had lived outside the UK for longer than 15 years were given the vote. There are anomalies too. Irish and Commonwealth citizens who have just arrived in the UK can vote as long as they're registered, but an EU citizen who's lived here for 20 years cannot, unless they become a British citizen. And when it comes to the results, smaller parties say the First Past the Post system leave them with few seats that don't reflect their level of support. So is there a better way? Quadratic voting, which allows people to vote multiple times could be the answer. Ben Ansell speaks to one of its inventors, and asks, 'is it time to rethink voting? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors Glen Weyl, Microsoft Research Rosie Campbell Professor of Politics at King's College London Dr Hannah White the CEO of the Institute for Government Rob Ford Professor of Political Science at the University of Manchester How can we make every vote count? Quadratic voting could be a possible solution. How the world should change after the coronavirus pandemic. Smaller parties say the UK voting system is unfair, and the number of seats they won in the 2024 general election doesn't reflect their support. But is there a better way? And when it comes to the results, smaller parties say the First Past the Post system leaves them with few seats that don't reflect their level of support. Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently |
| Wealth | 20241003 | 20241007 (R4) | Rethink considers how we might take a different approach to the issues of our time, asking some of the brightest minds what we could do to make the world a better place. This week: Billionaires. They are some of the wealthiest people who have ever lived, a tiny group with a large influence on politics, society and the lives of millions. The gap between the super rich and everyone else is huge. According to Credit Suisse, just fourteen billionaires own fourteen percent of the world's entire wealth. And wealth inequality is much higher than income inequality. What we own is much more unequally divided than what we earn. And yet, our governments end up relying more on taxing income than wealth. In the UK, under ten percent of tax revenues come from taxes on individuals' wealth. Should we cap the wealth of the super rich? Limitarianism is the concept of limiting individual wealth to 10 million dollars, pounds or euros - or whatever the local currency is - and if anyone has any more than this, it would be confiscated by governments. So is this theft? Socialism gone mad? A good idea? Or something that governments must do? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Lucy Burns Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Ingrid Robeyns, professor of Ethics of Institutions at Utrecht University Liam Byrne, Labour MP and author of the book 'The Inequality of Wealth Sam Dumitriu, author and head of policy at campaign group Britain Remade Helen Miller, Deputy Director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies and head of their tax sector Most of us would love to be wealthy - but is it possible to be too rich? Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Modern billionaires are some of the wealthiest people who've ever lived. The gap between rich and poor is huge. So should we adopt Limitarianism, the concept of capping wealth? Should we cap the wealth of the super rich? Philosopher Ingrid Robeyns has developed the concept of 'limitarianism'. This would limit an individual's wealth to 10 million dollars, pounds or euros - or whatever the local currency is - with anything beyond that point confiscated by governments. Ingrid Robeyns, professor of Ethics of Institutions at Utrecht University and author of 'Limitarianism: The Case Against Extreme Wealth Modern billionaires are some of the wealthiest people who've ever lived. The gap between rich and poor is huge. So should we adopt 'limitarianism' - a cap on extreme wealth? |
| Winners And Losers | 20250925 | 20250926 (R4) 20250929 (R4) | Do you agree with either of these statements? Illegal migrants come here and are a burden on services and the taxpayer. OR The only way to reduce inequality is to tax billionaires and giant companies who avoid tax. They may seem on opposite poles of the political spectrum, but both anti-migrant campaigners and anti-capitalists share an identical mindset. Both are demonstrating zero-sum thinking; the belief that if one group wins, another has to lose. In itself, zero-sum thinking isn't moral or immoral, right or wrong. But Economists claim it leads to poor economic policy, and they say evidence shows it is possible to create win-win situations for everyone. But many of the main parties at Westminster also use zero-sum thinking in their political rhetoric - from Reform and the Greens, to the Conservatives and Labour. Also, the first past the post electoral system is literally a zero-sum process. So is this kind of thinking baked-into UK politics? So are there particular groups of people that are more prone to zero-sum beliefs? Where did this mindset come from? What economic conditions encourage zero-sum thinking, and how deeply are these beliefs held? Presenter: Ben Ansell Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Richard Vadon Contributors: Stefanie Stantcheva, Nathaniel Ropes Professor of Political Economy at Harvard and founder and director of the Social Economics Lab. Dr Patricia Andrews Fearon, behavioural science researcher at social impact accelerator The Agency Fund, and Stanford University. Her research on zero-sum mindsets began during her doctoral studies at Cambridge, where she was a Gates Scholar. Dr Parth Patel, Associate director for democracy & politics at the Institute of Public Policy and Research Iain Mansfield, Director of Research and Head of Education and Science at Policy Exchange Cleo Watson, Former Downing Street strategist, adviser to Theresa May and Boris Johnson, author, and presenter of Radio 4's 'How to win a campaign Why understanding zero-sum thinking can help explain modern politics and attitudes. Rethink looks at the issues of our time and considers how we can approach them differently Both anti-immigrant protesters and anti-capitalists who want a wealth tax share the same mindset: zero-sum thinking. What is it, and how does it explain modern political attitudes? Editor: Lisa Baxter Dr Patricia Andrews Fearon, social psychologist at the Golub Capital Social Impact Lab at Stanford University. Cleo Watson, Former Downing Street strategist, adviser to Boris Johnson, author and presenter of Radio 4's 'How to win a campaign |