reflects

There’s no shortage of bands commemorating their glory days as decade anniversaries of albums fly by. Yet few landmark releases feel not only fresh but forward-thinking 20 years after they were recorded. My Morning Jacket stumbled onto this kind of brilliance in October 2004 when it released its fourth studio album “Z.” Across 10 tracks of lush, euphoria-driven rock ‘n’ roll, the band captured a notable tone shift in its sound that melded Southern rock, haunting folk, psychedelic soul laced with jam band energy. It’s a set of songs that still make up a huge chunk of the bands live show. In September the band performed the album in its entirety to a sold-out Hollywood Palladium for its 20th anniversary.

“We still play these songs all the time,” said frontman and principal songwriter Jim James in a recent conversation. “So it’s not like we broke up after we released ‘Z’ and then we got back together 20 years later to play these songs, and it’s such a trip. We’ve been playing them nonstop for 20 years.”

Shortly after the release of its 10th studio album “is,” the band put out a deluxe reissue of “Z” that includes four B-sides and a whole album’s worth of demo versions of songs like “Wordless Chorus,” “Off the Record” and Dodante. Recently James spoke to The Times about the enduring power of “Z” and the joy of going back to the beginning of the album’s origins to give himself and his fans a new appreciation for the groundbreaking sound the band created.

The rerelease of “Z” was prefaced earlier this year with a full-album show at the Palladium. What was it like revisiting the album on stage first before it came out (again) on vinyl and streaming?

This is our fourth album now to hit the 20-year mark. So we’ve got some experience now doing these album shows. And it’s funny because some of the earlier albums we don’t play all the songs from them so we had to go back and relearn a lot of songs. But the songs from “Z” we pretty much play all the songs all the time. So it’s pretty hilarious how it involved no effort. It just involved playing them in that order of the sequence of the album. But we kind of laughed about that. We’re like, man, we don’t really even have to do any research or anything. We were all kind of reflecting just on how grateful we are that we like playing all the songs still. It’s such a great feeling to play songs for 20 years and never really get tired of them. People still want to hear them and there’s still excitement there, and they still feel fresh. It’s really a beautiful thing.

This was your first album using an outside producer. What was that like for you as the songwriter to step in the studio with John Leckie to help you realize your vision with “Z”?

It was so great, because I really needed somebody who could work with me and not let our egos clash too much. John was just really great about coming in and respecting what I wanted to do, but also voicing his opinion and what he liked and what he didn’t like and when he thought we could do better. And it was just really so refreshing and so good for us to have him there. I mean, his track record speaks for itself, he’s somebody who you can trust right off the bat, just because of all the things they’ve done in the past. He’s such a soft-spoken gentleman but he also has this hilarious, brutal honesty about him, which was always really great.

Your lineup had also changed between the previous album “It Still Moves” and “Z” — adding keyboard player Bo Koster and guitarist Carl Broemel who are still in the band today. So was that like stepping in the studio with the “new guys” for the first time?

It was really nerve-racking and really exciting all at once. We had some touring experience under our belt with Bo and Carl, so we kind of knew that it was working out on that level, but we’d never really recorded before, so it was a real test for all of us. And I think we all knew that. So everybody brought their A game to the session and we took it really seriously, but we also had a lot of fun and just really kind of got to know each other. That was good to do that out in the middle of nowhere, out there in the Catskills, up at the studio. It gave us some time to really bond without a lot of the real-world stuff coming in or other people coming in. So I think that was really important, that we did it that way.

Do you remember what song came out of the sessions first?

“It Beats 4 U” was the first one, because that was one we had already played live before we started recording. So I think that was the first song that we started messing with. But I think they all were kind of coming to life around the same time. So by the time we got in there to start unpacking them, I had already written them and kind of made the demos of them and stuff.

It’s great that you included so many demo versions of your songs on this rerelease. What was the process like of locating these, sifting through and sequencing which ones you wanted to put on the album?

Well, I love demos for a lot of my favorite bands — I love it when I get to hear the demos from the albums. So I’m always saving all that stuff; with my own stuff I’m always compiling all the demos, because that’s half the fun to me. Because sometimes you get this just like a beautiful glimpse into the song. Quite often, I end up liking the demo more than I like the actual album, song because you get a whole, whole new view of it. It’s also interesting when you’re sequencing for vinyl, because you don’t have unlimited time so you kind of got to pick and choose, and that kind of forces you to just choose the best. There’s a whole other round of band demos and then there were my demos, so there were a lot of things to choose from. But it kind of helps me to look at it in vinyl format. There’s still something about the vinyl time limit that helps with quality control. Just kind of pick the ones that I feel are most effective and then try and make a fun sequence so that hopefully, if somebody’s into them, it’s kind of like you get a bonus album that you can listen to.

We had four true songs, B-sides, that we really love too, that weren’t demos. So that was really nice to finally get those out, because those had been on different soundtracks. And then one wasn’t even released. So I don’t think that those weren’t even on streaming or anything for years and years. So it’s really cool to have those out kind of everywhere now, because I’ve always liked all those songs and been proud of those songs too. And I think most bands know the feeling of you know when you make a record. Sometimes songs just don’t fit the record, even if you still love the songs.

MMJ during the “Z” era.

(Sam Erickson)

Were you playing any of those live at the point where you released the album the first round, or did you shelve them for later?

We’ve always played “Where to Begin” live — off and on. We’ve also tried “Chills” a couple times, and I think we did “How Could I Know” a couple times. We’ve never played “The Devil’s Peanut Butter,” we kinda forgot that one existed until this whole [album rerelease] process started, and I found that song again. So we’ll probably play that one somewhere out on the next leg.

Was this process something that you enjoy doing, like, in terms of your how to, sort of like, reexamine an album?

I really love it because I just feel so grateful that anybody even gives a s–, you know? I mean, so there’s that part of me that’s just so grateful to even still be in the game, talking about this. But beyond that, it’s really cool for me because it’s like jumping in a time machine and going back and looking at that point in my life and getting perspective on where I am now, and seeing how I’ve grown and asking “where have I changed? Where have I not changed?” I look back and with all of these albums as they come up to this 20-year mark, and I see I’ve always been really mean and hard on myself, on Jim, but I know that Jim was doing the best he could at each time. That’s the one thing I’ve always kind of been able to see, to get myself through, to not be too hard on myself. I know I was giving it everything I had, so whether I would change things about it as I am today or not — we all look back on the past, and maybe there’s things we’d do differently, but it gives me a lot of comfort to know that I was trying as hard as I could, and all the guys in the band were trying as hard as they could. It really makes me feel proud of us for just putting in the time and effort.

Al Jazeera’s Ibrahim al-Khalili reflects on the two years since Israel’s war on Gaza began, sharing a personal story of displacement, loss, and suffering.

THEY say that a cat has nine lives – and this particular one has used up several of his.

For the life of Cat Stevens, the singer-songwriter who became Yusuf after converting to Islam, has been shaped by his brushes with death.

8

8

8

The first of them happened in his early teens when the teeming streets — and inviting rooftops — of London’s West End were his playground.

One night, while out gallivanting with his best friend Andy, he found himself clinging by his fingertips to a ledge, several storeys up, near Prince’s Theatre on Shaftesbury Avenue.

Fall and his short life would be over but, as “the dark abyss” beckoned, Andy stretched out, grabbed his arm and pulled him to safety in the nick of time.

“It was the moment I first faced up to mortality,” Yusuf tells me, casting his mind back to the early Sixties.

“I already considered myself as a thinker by then and, as such, you can’t help thinking that one day you won’t be here.

“Whether it’s through an accident or illness or by dying in your sleep, it’s all one thing. You leave this world.

“That to me was a problem. I just had to understand more about it.”

So began a spiritual quest that Yusuf has carried with him to this day.
Two more narrow escapes followed.

In 1969, he contracted a life-threatening bout of TB which required months of recuperation.

With time to ponder his existence, he underwent a rapid transformation from Carnaby Street-styled pop star to tousle-haired, guitar-toting troubadour.

His thoughtful but hook-laden songs began flowing freely — Father And Son, Wild World, Moonshadow and Peace Train among them — and they made him a global superstar and bedsit pin-up.

Then, in 1976, he nearly drowned while swimming    off the coast of Malibu, California.

As his life ebbed away, he looked up to the sky and prayed, “Oh God, if You save me, I’ll work for You!”

At that moment, a wave rose up and nudged him towards dry land. He sensed that, “God was right there”.

Not long afterwards, his brother David Gordon bought him a copy of the Qur’an for his birthday.

It had a dramatic effect, prompting Cat Stevens to embrace Islam, change his name to Yusuf (a variation on Joseph) and begin a lengthy retreat from music.

He says: “I was like, ‘This is actually it’.

“Everything I’d been writing in my songs was converging into this one new message. It overtook everything.”

And yet, as we know, there was a second coming.

For the past two decades, Yusuf has rekindled his passion for songcraft — releasing acclaimed albums and keeping his timeless Cat Stevens songs alive with gigs around the world, including the Glastonbury “legends” slot.

‘BLANK CANVAS’

Now he has documented his singular journey in a heartfelt, detailed, illuminating, funny, sad, often profound memoir, Cat: On The Road To Findout.

There’s also a hits album celebrating his various eras, and last weekend he embarked on a book tour of the UK and US, described as “an evening of tales, tunes and other mysteries”.

That means I’ve been given another chance to speak to Yusuf via video call.

With his neat grey/white hair and beard framing still handsome features, the 77-year-old greets me warmly before diving into subjects closest to his heart.

After our chat ends, I realise we’ve covered his faith, his family, his music, the impact of those near-death experiences — all the things which have moulded Yusuf/Cat Stevens.

If I had to pick his defining song, I know which one I’d go for and I think the man himself might agree.

It’s the fourth track on side two (I’m going vinyl here) of his classic 1970 album Tea For The Tillerman.

Called, as you might have guessed, On The Road To Find Out, it serves as his mission statement — an early acknowledgement of his spiritual journey.

Recalling its creation, Yusuf says: “I had scraped my way through a lot of life’s difficulties and challenges but they were the things which built me and prepared me.

“So I was already feeling like a receptacle for some kind of inspiration to be my guide.”

I watch as he recites the opening lines of the song he’s sung so many times, “Well I left my happy home to see what I could find out/I left my folk and friends with the aim to clear my mind out.”

He maintains that when he wrote On The Road To Find Out, not being tied to one religion proved “very, very useful”.

“I wanted a blank canvas,” he says. “I didn’t want to be influenced by my background or wherever I was situated in society.”

8

Yusuf draws my attention to the end of the song and adds: “It’s incredible really. It says, ‘Pick up a good book’.

“I was absolutely determined to write ‘a’ good book, not ‘the’ good book. I didn’t want people to think it had to be The Bible.”

His thoughts turn towards his childhood, his first encounters with spirituality and the parents he writes so affectionately about in his memoir.

His “handsome, bold” Cypriot cafe owner father Stavros was Greek Orthodox and his “beautiful azure blue-eyed” Swedish mother Ingrid was a Baptist.

They sent their youngest of three children, Steven Demetre Georgiou, as he was known then, to St Joseph’s Roman Catholic elementary school and he also attended Mass.

Though this was the first time he came “close to God”, he still felt like an “outsider” as a non-Catholic.

“Sometimes, the church itself can be a barrier between you and your creator,” muses Yusuf.

“When Jesus was asked how to pray, he didn’t say go to church. He said, ‘Pray direct to God’.

Mum taught me how to love and dad taught me how to work

Yusuf/Cat Stevens

“I was fortunate not to be tied to a strict religion.

“That gave me flexibility — I achieved my observer status as far as spirituality was concerned.”

As a child, Yusuf was given a lively introduction to the world.

“Growing up in the West End had a big impact on me,” he says.

“It felt like the whole world was crammed into this little area of London where everything happened.

“You didn’t necessarily learn how to climb trees, but you did learn how to climb roofs,” he adds with a rueful smile about the time he nearly fell.

Next, I ask him to share memories of his parents.

“Mum taught me how to love and dad taught me how to work,” he replies.

Yusuf says that his mother Ingrid “had a massive impact on me”.

“Swedes have a characteristic which is beautiful in a way. It is called ‘lagom’ which means equality — you don’t need everything, you just need enough.

8

“From that, you can develop your attitude towards charity and all sorts of things.”

He continues: “Mind you, Dad was also charitable. He used to give cups of tea to tramps.

“It was part of the culture of the family to appreciate having food on the table.”

Yusuf describes how his father Stavros “first went from Cyprus to settle in Egypt”.

“Then he went to America and, from there, he passed back through Greece to the UK — you know, to the Empire, because Cyprus was connected to Britain at that time.

“He gave me the traveller’s bug and also a work ethic. I certainly know how to wash dishes!”

Yusuf credits his parents to a certain extent for his love of music and performing.

He remembers writing a “sweet Swedish lullaby” with his “naturally musical” mother while they sat at the piano.

The final couplet translates as, “Come will you take my hand and lead me away/The way to my heart is so short.”

In the book, Yusuf describes Ingrid’s strength of character when she discovered her husband was having an affair with a waitress, leading to their separation.

She whisked her children to her hometown of Gavle for five months, where young Steven was the only “dark-eyed, black-haired lad in town”.

‘SO FORTUNATE’

Yusuf says his “extrovert” father probably gave him the characteristics to command a stage.

“He was extremely sociable to customers and an expert at Greek dancing with glasses of water balanced on his head.”

One of the most moving passages in the book arrives when Yusuf gets to 1978 and his dad has only days to live.

Stavros had called him “Stevie” from the day he was born but, as he lay on his deathbed, he whispered, “Where’s Yusuf?”

It was an act of acceptance for Yusuf’s Muslim faith for which he is eternally thankful.

He says: “You called your son one name all your life, and that’s the one you chose for him.

“Then, at the end, you accept his path and his identity. You don’t detach from it, you embrace it.

“My God, I was so fortunate. I was so lucky to have a dad like that.”

Now it’s time to turn our attention to music… after all, it’s what made Yusuf/Cat Stevens famous.

In the autobiography, he recalls buying his first single, Baby Face by Little Richard, how much he loved Buddy Holly and how later on he was blown away by John Lennon’s mighty holler on The Beatles’ cover of Twist And Shout.

8

He tells me with a laugh: “You can just imagine the Queen at the Royal Variety Show watching The Beatles and wanting to pull off her pearls and diamonds and dance in the aisles.

“But I’m afraid she couldn’t.”

So what compelled him, already a gifted visual artist, to venture into the music business and adopt the “hip” stage name Cat Stevens?

“I felt I had something to offer,” he replies. “I felt that people should get it.

“It wasn’t just a career choice or business decision. It was more than that — it felt like a calling.

“I responded to it and it responded to me. My songs, everything, came so easily.

“I wrote The First Cut Is The Deepest when I was 17 [in 1965].

“My brother David also had a big hand in it because he was the business head of the family.

“He was instrumental in getting me contacts.”

After a run of hits including I Love My Dog, Matthew & Son and I’m Gonna Get Me A Gun, Cat Stevens went through his dramatic change of tack, prompted by him contracting TB.

“It was an opportunity to take another stab at life — from a new, inspired position,” says Yusuf.

As human beings, our way forward is to understand that we’re all the same in our dreams, our visions and our hopes

Yusuf/Cat Stevens

“By that time, I’d read a very interesting book dealing with metaphysical issues of the spirit, the soul, the beyond, the divine. It put me on another plateau.”

One of the songs written by the “new” Cat Stevens was Where Do The Children Play?, as relevant today as ever.

He says: “There’s a very poignant line pointing to what we are facing today, which is assisted dying.

“I say, ‘Will you tell us when to live/Will you tell us when to die?’.

“I mean, God Almighty, you’ve got a chance to live. You don’t want to lose that.

“When you look at the way the corporate world is moving, it really is designing life for the people of this planet.

“And it may not be the best life because we’re detached from nature so much of the time.

“Where Do The Children Play? is a song about nature and children are perfect examples of human nature.”

Before we go our separate ways, I ask Yusuf about the long hiatus from music after his conversion to Islam.

It was a time when he was dragged into various controversies.

One headline, which he repeats in the book, even read, “Cat Stevens Joins The Evil Ayatollah”.

“It’s just prejudice,” says Yusuf. “And that is something we have to be very careful about.

“As human beings, our way forward is to understand that we’re all the same in our dreams, our visions and our hopes.”

This comment reminds him of “what we’re seeing right now in Palestine”.

8

8

“These are people, these are families,” he says. “They’re not from an alien planet.

“That’s why it’s good to see the response from ordinary grandparents and ordinary kids, responding to the devastation people are facing.

“You may argue about the term genocide, but you can’t argue about the term infanticide.”

Returning to his break from music, he says: “I have no regrets at all. I chose the name Cat Stevens and was content with that.

“That was my success but it was not the success I was yearning for overall in my life.

“The biggest thing for me was finding my identity — and that’s twice as difficult when you have a show name.”

It was Yusuf’s son Yoriyos, one of his five children with wife Fauzia (a sixth died in infancy), who encouraged him to make his comeback.

“He got what I was about and he said, ‘This cannot be buried’.

“It wasn’t a case of reinventing, more of reviving the spirit. He saw it as a pure, good thing — and it inspired me.”

Finally, I ask Yusuf if he’s still on the road to find out.

He answers: “There’s a saying in the Qur’an — ‘If all the seas were ink and all the trees were pens, you would never exhaust the words and the knowledge of God’.

“So, yeah, no fear about drying up here.”

Thursday marks the 24th anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks that saw two planes flown into the Twin Towers in New York, killing nearly 3,000.

Kevin Danni was there. The St. Francis High graduate and father of Golden Knights linebacker Luke Danni reflects back every anniversary on how he escaped from the 61st floor of the South Tower.

“I’m so lucky there were so many who sacrificed to save me,” he said.

Danni told his story to a rapt audience earlier this week at a meeting of the YMCA of the Foothills QB Club, where he is president.

He was 22 years old, a recent graduate of Occidental College and had been sent to Morgan Stanley in New York to begin training at the Twin Towers on Sept. 10, 2001. The next morning, a training meeting ended up being 15 minutes late because a speaker went too long, so during a break, he decided not to go to the observation deck on the 107th floor.

Instead, he looked out a window and saw what he thought was confetti flying around, It was papers from the aftermath of a plane running into the North Tower. Soon he saw a fire. At first, evacuation from the South Tower was not recommended. But Danni said the head of security, Rick Rescorla, overrode orders and told everyone to leave.

When Danni reached the 55th floor walking down the stairs, he heard an explosion. “The walls cracked,” he said.

It was a plane hitting the South Tower.

“I knew it was a terrorist attack,” he said. “I started to descend and passed firefighters going up the stairs. It took 45 minutes to evacuate.”

When he went outside, he said, “I saw both on fire.”

He went to find a pay phone so he could call his loved ones and tell them he was OK. Then the towers started to collapse.

“I heard a rumble,” he said. “It was 57 minutes since the plane hit. I saw the dust cloud. I turned and ran.”

Danni said he learned the security man, Rescorla, after escorting employees outside, went back up to make sure all had been evacuated from the office. The security man and 343 firefighters perished trying to help others.

“I got to see so many acts of heroism,” Danni said.

He was dating his future wife, Helena, at the time. They eventually married and their son, Luke, was born. This week he’ll be having fun watching Luke play quarterback for St. Francis on Friday night against Muir.

“Every 9/11, he says, ‘Dad, I’m glad you’re here,’” Kevin said.

This is a daily look at the positive happenings in high school sports. To submit any news, please email [email protected].

RENO, Nevada — The history of Mexican boxing features names that transcend generations. From Julio César Chávez, recognized as the pinnacle of Mexican boxing, to legendary figures such as Juan Manuel Márquez, Rubén ‘Púas’ Olivares, Salvador Sánchez, Ricardo ‘Finito’ López and Carlos ‘Cañas’ Zárate — all have proudly carried the name of Mexican flag to the peak of the boxing world.

The tradition of Aztec dominance has been continued in a big way by Saúl “Canelo” Álvarez, who on Oct. 29 will celebrate a historic 20-year professional career that began when he was just 15 years old, when he made his professional debut against Abraham González. Two decades later, with a legacy built on titles and big stages, Álvarez paused to reflect on his development from red-headed teenager who dreamed of being the best in the world to the current king of Mexican boxing with 63 victories.

Canelo Álvarez, left; UFC CEO Dana White, center; and Terence Crawford, right, speak during a news conference at at T-Mobile Arena on June 27.

(David Becker / Getty Images for Netflix)

“I’ve achieved everything in boxing, imagine how satisfying that is for me,” Álvarez told L.A. Times en Español during his training camp in Reno, Nev.

The celebration has already been planned and, like everything else involving Álvarez, it will be private but “on a grand scale.” The magnitude will likely depend on whether he emerges victorious when he defends his four belts against the undefeated Terence Crawford (41-0, 31 KOs) Saturday (6 p.m., Netflix), at Allegiant Stadium in Las Vegas.

“I think I’ve done some really good things in boxing and I’m very proud of that kid who started out with the dream of being the best in the world,” said the 35-year-old from Jalisco.

That kid, as his brother, Ricardo, recalls, was no different from any other teen in Guadalajara, except for an unusual obsession: to succeed in a brutal and demanding sport. His journey began in local gyms, under the tutelage of Chepo Reynoso and his son, Eddy, who saw extraordinary potential. It was there that Canelo Álvarez heard the words that would forever mark his destiny.

Boxer Canelo Álvarez, center, poses alongside his trainers Chepo Reynoso, left, and Eddy Reynoso, right, at MGM Grand in Las Vegas in 2018.

(Ethan Miller / Getty Images)

“‘With the talent you have, you’ll get wherever you want to go,’ is what they always told me, and it stuck in my mind,” Canelo said, recalling his early days with Chepo, his trainer since he was 14 years old.

Two decades later, Canelo says that advice is still the message he would repeat to himself if he could travel back in time. Because those words not only fueled his hunger, they gave him conviction.

“I would just tell that kid what he already knows, that ‘you’re going to get wherever you want to go,’” Canelo said.

Two decades later, that kid not only fulfilled his promise, but exceeded it. He became a champion in multiple divisions, a global icon and, above all, a man who continues to look ahead.

The story of Canelo Álvarez is not just that of a boxer, but of a dream fulfilled through discipline, sacrifice and faith. And yet, as Ricardo often says, “he still has a long way to go.”

Canelo’s journey has not been improvised or meteoric, but rather a project shaped by patience and discipline. Eddy, who has also been Canelo’s trainer since adolescence, recalls constantly learning alongside Canelo.

“In 2000, I started training boxers with my dad — first amateurs and then professionals. We formed a group of kids and teenagers, and that’s where Saúl came from,” Eddy said.

That connection, forged in the gyms of Jalisco, was the beginning of one of the most successful partnerships in boxing history. Eddy was inspired by figures such as Julián Magdaleno and Rafael Mendoza, coaches who instilled in him the ambition to be someone great in the sport.

Canelo Alvarez celebrates with his family after defeating John Ryder at Akron Stadium in 2023 in Zapopan, Mexico.

(Hector Vivas / Getty Images)

“I always imagined myself being someone important in boxing,” Eddy said. “And with Saúl, we’ve achieved that.”

In his two-decade career, Canelo has moved up in weight class, stage and demand. He has done so by facing Miguel Cotto, Floyd Mayweather Jr. and Gennady Golovkin, against whom he fought a memorable trilogy.

Although he suffered his first career defeat in 2013 against Mayweather, it was the fight that paved the way for his success not only as a champion, but also as an entrepreneur and businessman.

However, it is the second fight against Golovkin in September 2018 that holds a special place in Canelo’s heart.

“It was very emotional for me because of many things surrounding the fight,” Canelo said. “Confirming that I was better than him, everything that had been said. [It] was a very special moment.”

Eddy agrees that that night was a high point.

“I saw him very happy when he beat Golovkin in the second round. Also, when he beat Miguel Cotto, or even in his early four-round fights. Every win has had meaning, but that victory over ‘GGG’ was special.”

Little by little, Canelo learned from his mistakes and cleared his path to become the economic and sporting powerhouse he is today. Along the way, he fell out with Golden Boy Promotions and Oscar De La Hoya in 2020, with whom he first became a superstar, and made a miscalculation by moving up to light heavyweight and losing for the second time in his career, this time to Dmitry Bivol in 2022.

The darkest moment of his career came in 2018 when he was suspended for six months by the Nevada Athletic Commission for testing positive for the banned substance clenbuterol. According to Canelo’s team, this was because of contaminated meat he ate during a visit to Mexico. Clenbuterol is sometimes used in cattle feed to increase muscle mass.

Beyond the belts, the million-dollar purses and the fame, Canelo’s career has been supported by his unwavering family, particularly during the difficult times.

“It’s been a long 20-year career,” said Ricardo, one of Canelo’s six older brothers. “We’ve always been united in supporting him. He’s become the star of boxing, the face of boxing. We’re very proud of him, and he’s very proud of what he’s achieved and what he still has to achieve. He was born for this, I’ve always told him, he was born for this.”

The family has celebrated every victory and accompanied him through every obstacle. For them, the fight against Crawford is not just a sporting challenge, it’s also a family reunion.

“We are going to celebrate with great happiness, with the family, more than anything else united, with friends and team. All together, as always,” said Ricardo.

Canelo Alvarez hits Jaime Munguia during a super middleweight title fight on May 4, 2024, in Las Vegas.

(John Locher / Associated Press)

In the Álvarez family’s memory, there are moments that define their history, anecdotes that serve as symbols of everything that was to come. Ricardo remembered one of them with particular clarity: the night they went to the movies to see “Cinderella Man,” the 2005 film about James J. Braddock, the boxer who persevered during the Great Depression and fought for a world title.

As they left the room, Ricardo asked his younger brother, “Can you imagine fighting on a stage like that one day?”

Canelo recalled telling his brother: “I wanted to succeed like that boxer, but with a different ending, fighting in world championships on the biggest stages.”

With a career that has taken Canelo to Madison Square Garden, the MGM Grand and T-Mobile Arena in Las Vegas, Canelo recognizes he made the goal come true.

“Now that we’ve talked about it after all these years, he says to me, ‘And what do you think? I’ve already fought on the best stages.’ And yes, he’s achieved everything,” Ricardo said.

Canelo Álvarez, left, with brother, Ricardo.

(HANDOUT / INSTAGRAM)

Saturday’s setting will once again be monumental: Allegiant Stadium in Las Vegas. Awaiting him there will be Crawford, who is considered by many to be the best pound-for-pound fighter today.

For Eddy, this fight represents a clash of styles and power.

“A huge fight is coming between two of the world’s greatest powerhouses, Mexico and the United States. We’re going to show that the Mexican school is the best,” Eddy said.

Ricardo also recognizes the magnitude of the challenge: “[Canelo] has had big fights, with Cotto, Golovkin, Mayweather. But you can feel what this fight means in the atmosphere. It’s the biggest fight today, and I’m sure it’s going to surprise people.”

Canelo, for his part, takes it in stride.

“It means a lot to me to continue fighting in big fights, in a stadium as important as Allegiant,” he said. “I’m happy and excited to be there.”

It’s still unclear how exactly Canelo will celebrate Oct. 29 and his two decades of boxing.

Eddy envisions joining the celebration with a resounding victory.

“We’re going to win this fight by knockout,” Eddy promises, “and then we’re going to have a big party in Mexico.”

This article first appeared in Spanish via L.A. Times en Español.

In an evening social media post about a supremely partisan battle that could reshape American political power for generations, President Trump sounded ebullient.

“Big WIN for the Great State of Texas!!! Everything Passed, on our way to FIVE more Congressional seats and saving your Rights, your Freedoms, and your Country, itself,” Trump wrote, of the nation’s most populous red state pushing a mid-decade redistricting plan designed to win more Republican seats in Congress and protect Trump’s power through the 2026 midterms.

“Texas never lets us down. Florida, Indiana, and others are looking to do the same thing,” Trump wrote — nodding to a potential proliferation of such efforts across the country.

The next day, Gov. Gavin Newsom — projecting a fresh swagger as Trump’s chief antagonist on the issue — stood with fellow lawmakers from the nation’s most populous blue state to announce their own legislative success in putting to voters a redrawn congressional map for California that strongly favors Democrats.

“We got here because the president of the United States is one of the most unpopular presidents in U.S. history,” Newsom said, couching the California effort as defensive rather than offensive. “We got here because he recognizes that he will lose the election, [and that] Congress will go back into the hands of the Democratic Party next November.”

In the last week, with lightning speed, the nation’s foremost political leaders have jettisoned any pretense of political fairness — any notion of voters being equal or elected representatives reflecting their constituencies — in favor of an all-out partisan war for power that has some politicians and many political observers concerned for the future of American democracy.

“America is headed towards true authoritarian rule if people do not stand up,” Texas state Rep. Gene Wu, a Democrat from the Houston area, said Friday on a call with reporters.

The race to redistrict began with Trump, whose approval ratings have plummeted, pressuring Texas to manipulate maps to secure more House seats for Republicans so he wouldn’t face a hostile House majority in the second half of his second term. It escalated when Newsom and other California leaders said they wouldn’t stand idly by and started working to put a new map of their own on the November ballot — formally asking voters to jettison the state’s independent redistricting commission to counter Trump’s gambit in Texas.

Those two states alone are home to some 70 million Americans, but the fight is hardly limited there. As Trump suggested, other states are also eyeing whether to redraw lines — raising the prospect of a country divided between blue and red power centers more than ever before, and the voice of millions of minority-party voters being all but erased in the halls of Congress.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom answers questions on Thursday after signing legislation calling for a special election on a redrawn congressional map.

(Godofredo A. Vásquez / Associated Press)

Of course, gerrymandering is not new, and already exists in many states across the country. But the bold, unapologetic and bipartisan bent of the latest redistricting race is something new and different, experts said. It is a clear product of Trump’s new America, where political warfare is increasingly untethered to — and unbound by — long-standing political norms, and where leaders of both political parties seem increasingly willing to toss aside pretense and politeness in order to pursue power.

Trump on the campaign trail promised a new “Golden Age,” and he has long said his goal is to return America to some purportedly greater, more aspirational and proud past. But he has also signaled, repeatedly and with hardly any ambiguity, an intention to manipulate the political system to further empower himself and his fellow Republicans — whether through redistricting, ending mail-in ballots, or other measures aimed at curtailing voter turnout.

“In four years, you don’t have to vote again,” Trump told a crowd of evangelical Christians a little over a year ago, in the thick of his presidential campaign. “We’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote.”

‘No democracy left’

The redistricting war has dominated political news for weeks now, given its potential implications for reshaping Congress and further emboldening Trump in his second term.

Sam Wang, president of the Electoral Innovation Lab at Princeton University, has studied gerrymandering for years, but said during the media call with Wu that he has never received more inquiries than in the last few weeks, when his inbox has filled with questions from media around the world.

Wang said gerrymandering reached a high point more than a decade ago, but had been subsiding due to court battles and state legislatures establishing independent commissions to draw district lines.

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott defends his state’s redistricting move while calling California’s “a joke.”

(Eric Gay / Associated Press)

Now, however, the efforts of Texas and California are threatening that progress and pushing things “to a new low point,” he said — leaving some voters feeling disenfranchised and Wang worried about further erosion of voter protections under the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which he said the conservative Supreme Court may be preparing to weaken.

Wu said allowing politicians to redraw congressional lines whenever they want in order to “make sure that they never lose” sets a dangerous precedent that will especially disenfranchise minority voters — because “politicians and leaders would no longer listen to the people.”

“There would be no democracy left,” he said.

That said, Wu drew a sharp distinction between Texas Republicans unilaterally redrawing maps to their and Trump’s advantage — in part by “hacking” apart minority populations — and California asking voters to counteract that power grab with a new map of their own.

“California is defending the nation,” he said. “Texas is doing something illegal.”

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott on Friday took the opposition position, saying Texas’ new map was constitutional while California’s was “a joke” and likely to be overturned. He also hinted at further efforts in other Republican-led states to add more House seats for the party.

“Republicans are not finished in the United States,” Abbott said.

Two legal experts on the call expressed grave concerns with such partisanship — especially in Texas.

Sara Rohani, assistant counsel with the Legal Defense Fund, or LDF, said her organization has been fighting for decades to ensure that the promises of the Voting Rights Act for Black and other minority groups aren’t infringed upon by unscrupulous and racist political leaders in search of power.

“Fair representation isn’t optional in this country. It’s the right of all Americans to [have] equal voting power,” she said.

That said, “voters of color have been excluded” from that promise consistently, both before and after the passage of the Voting Rights Act, and “in 2025, it’s clear that our fight for fair maps continues,” Rohani said.

Major victories have been won in the courts in recent years in states such as Alabama and Louisiana, and those battles are only going to continue, she said. Asked specifically if her group is preparing to sue over Texas’ maps, Rohani demurred — but didn’t back down, saying LDF will get involved “in any jurisdiction where Black voters are being targeted.”

Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, said there are definitely going to be challenges to Texas’ maps.

By their own admission, Saenz said, Texas lawmakers redrew their maps in 2021 in order to maximize Republican advantage in congressional races — with the only limits being those imposed by the Voting Rights Act. That means in order to gain even more seats now, “they have to violate the Voting Rights Act,” he said.

Texas Republicans have argued that they are acting in part in response to a warning from the Justice Department that their current maps, from 2021, are unlawful. But Saenz noted that the Justice Department dropped a lawsuit challenging those maps when Trump took office — meaning any threats to sue again are an empty ploy and “clearly orchestrated with one objective: Donald Trump’s objective.”

Is there a legal case?

The fate of any legal challenges to the redistricting efforts is unclear, in part because gerrymandering has become much harder to challenge in court.

In 2019, the Supreme Court threw out claims that highly partisan state election maps are unconstitutional. Chief Justice John G. Roberts said such district-by-district line drawing “presents political questions” and there are no reliable “legal standards” for deciding what is fair and just.

It was not a new view for Roberts.

In 2006, shortly after he joined the court, the justices rejected a challenge to a mid-decade redistricting engineered by Texas Republicans, but ordered the state — over Roberts’ dissent — to redraw one of its majority-Latino districts to transfer some of its voters to another Latino-leaning district.

Roberts expressed his frustration at the time, writing that it “is a sordid business, this divvying us up by race.”

Some legal experts say the new Texas redistricting could face a legal challenge if Black or Latino lawmakers are in danger of losing their seats. But the Supreme Court conservatives are skeptical of such claims — and have given signs they may shrink the scope of the Voting Rights Act.

In March, the justices considered a Louisiana case to decide if the state must create a second congressional district that would elect a Black candidate to comply with the Voting Rights Act, and if so, how it should be drawn.

But the court failed to issue a decision. Instead, on Aug. 1, the court said it would hear further arguments this fall on “whether the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority Congressional district” violates the Constitution.

Justice Clarence Thomas has long argued it is unconstitutional to draw election districts based on racial lines, regardless of the Voting Rights Act, and he may now have a majority that agrees with him.

If so, such a ruling could squelch discrimination claims from Black and Latino lawmakers in Texas or elsewhere — further clearing the path for partisan gerrymandering.

Looking ahead

Given the intensity of the battle and the uncertainty of the related legal challenges, few of America’s top political leaders are thinking to the future. They’re fighting in the present — focused on swaying public perception.

In a YouTube Live video with thousands of supporters on Thursday, Newsom said Trump “doesn’t believe in the rule of law — he believes in the rule of Don; period, full stop,” and that he hoped it was “dawning on more and more Americans what’s at stake.”

Newsom said that when Trump “made the phone call to rig the elections to Greg Abbott in Texas,” he expected Democrats to just roll over and take it. In response, he said, Democrats have to stop thinking about “whether or not we should play hardball,” and start focusing on “how we play hardball.”

On Friday, Newsom said he was “very proud of the Legislature for moving quickly” to counter Texas, and that he is confident voters will support the ballot measure to change the state’s maps despite polls showing a sluggish start to the campaign.

A UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies poll, conducted for The Times, found 48% of voters said they would cast ballots in favor of temporary gerrymandering efforts, though 20% were undecided.

Asked if he is encouraging Democratic leaders in other states to revisit their own maps, Newsom said he appreciated both Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signaling that they may be willing to do just that.

“I do believe that the actions of [the California] Legislature will inspire other legislative leaders to … meet this moment, to save this democracy and to stop this authoritarian and his continued actions to literally vandalize and gut our Constitution and our democratic principles,” Newsom said.

Our Yorkshire Farm’s Amanda Owen was faced with extreme weather

Channel 4 broadcast a repeat episode of Our Farm Next Door: Amanda, Clive and Kids on Saturday evening.

The episode, which originally aired earlier this year from the second series, showed the farm facing harsh weather conditions as it became blanketed in snow, with the family struggling to safeguard their expectant sheep spread across the hillsides.

Clive expressed his worries about the snow, saying: “January and February were funny months, and anything can happen. That Beast from the East was quite nasty, the kids were little and we had no electric for a week.”

He continued: “You know, everybody gets a little bit of snow, but it can be absolutely unbelievable here, and you’ve got to be careful, otherwise it’ll have you out of business.”

Amanda shared her thoughts on the bitter snow conditions: “When that snow hits, it can be exhausting. It can be exhausting mentally and physically. Day one, day two, yeah, it is fun, day four, five, six, seven, and beyond, it is a real test.”, reports Gloucestershire Live.

Further into the programme, Amanda made a frank confession about farming, particularly during severe weather conditions.

Whilst caring for the horses, she revealed: “On a day like today, when you see that light shine through the window and you know that it’s icy and snowy out there, you don’t pull the duvet over your head; you’re like, ‘Let me at it’.”

She pondered: “Because that’s what you have to do. And I always think to myself, ‘the day that you don’t want to do that, you’ve got to quit’.”

Initially hitting our screens in 2018, Our Yorkshire Farm showcased the extraordinary way of life of Clive and Amanda Owen with their nine youngsters at their remote sheep farm in Yorkshire.

Amanda and Clive are mum and dad to nine children: Raven, Reuben, Miles, Edith, Violet, Sidney, Annas, Clementine, and Nancy. The beloved documentary programme concluded in 2022 after Amanda and Clive’s split.

Continuing to enchant viewers, the Owens have made a comeback with the following instalment of their journey in Our Farm Next Door, following the family’s escapades as they restore a period farmhouse situated in the picturesque Yorkshire Dales countryside.

The 1800s dwelling sits in Swaledale close to Ravenseat Farm and bears the name Anty John in honour of a previous occupant called Anthony John Clarkson.

In the final instalment of series two, Amanda gathered the entire brood to unveil the most recent progress in their continuing restoration project following 20 months of grafting, highlighting “how far we’ve got and how far we’ve got to go”.

Our Farm Next Door is available to watch on All 4.

Kyiv, Ukraine – The Alaska summit between United States President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, was a masterclass in how a former intelligence officer uses his skills of manipulation on a self-centred narcissist.

That’s the impression Ukrainian analyst Maria Kucherenko got when watching the interaction between Trump and Putin during their summit on Friday, which broke no ground in stopping Europe’s hottest war since 1945.

Putin “worked [Trump] well”, the analyst with Come Back Alive, a Kyiv-based charity, told Al Jazeera, referring to the years Putin spent as a Soviet spy in East Germany recruiting informants.

On the tarmac at Elmendorf-Richardson, a Cold War-era airbase outside Alaska’s capital, Anchorage, Putin greeted Trump with a “good morning, dear neighbour,” referring to Alaska’s proximity to northeastern Russia.

Trump literally rolled out a red carpet for Putin, gave him a long handshake and a ride in “The Beast”, the presidential limousine – and Putin beamed from the backseat.

During a brief news conference, Putin kept thanking Trump, repeating and rephrasing what the American president had said about the talks, Ukraine and a possible peace settlement.

Putin flattered Trump, including by backing the US leader’s assertions – such as his claim that he could have prevented the Russian-Ukrainian war had he won the 2020 presidential vote instead of Joe Biden.

“Today, President Trump was saying that had he been president back then, there would be no war, and I’m quite sure that it would indeed be so,” the smiling Putin told reporters after the talks. “I can confirm that.”

And it was Putin’s manipulation masterfully disguised as saccharine flattery that ended the talks with Trump’s conclusion that “there’s no deal until there’s a deal,” Kucherenko said.

“He fed the narcissist with whatever one needs to feed a narcissist into manipulating him – endless quotes, the endless ‘how the American president said’, endless appellations to the topics [Trump] is interested in,” said Kucherenko, who authored analytical reports on Russia’s military and addressed the US Congress at a 2024 hearing.

‘Nothing concrete’

Putin’s remarks at the news conference after the talks lasted for eight minutes and included a lecture on when czarist Russia owned Alaska and how the Soviet and US militaries partnered during World War II.

He spoke more than twice as long as Trump, who talked for only three minutes and admitted that the talks resulted in an agreement to hold more talks.

“There were many, many points that we agreed on, most of them, I would say, a couple of big ones that we haven’t quite gotten there, but we’ve made some headway. So there’s no deal until there’s a deal,” the US president said.

Trump and Putin also refused to take questions.

As a result, the summit ended with “nothing concrete”, Kucherenko said, as Putin said the “root causes” of the war should be addressed before any ceasefire or real steps towards a peace settlement are made.

“In order to make the [future peace] settlement lasting and long term, we need to eliminate all the primary roots, the primary causes of that conflict, and we’ve said it multiple times, to consider all legitimate concerns of Russia,” Putin said.

“Root causes” is Putin’s code for rejecting Ukraine’s existence outside Moscow’s political shadow and denying its very sovereignty.

The China angle

However, the talks were not a total triumph for Putin, another Ukrainian observer said.

They lasted for less than three hours instead of the seven that Russian officials had announced, and there was no bread broken over a joint lunch.

And what was discussed behind closed doors went far beyond the war.

“Russia works through economy and geopolitics, offers Trump profit here and now, and also haggles over the topic of containing China,” Kyiv-based analyst Igar Tyshkevych told Al Jazeera.

“Based on that, the Kremlin is trying to gain political concessions that could help Russia confirm its ambitions for the status of a geopolitical centre, ” he said.

“And Ukraine is just a derivative part – an important but derivative one – of these processes,” he said.

As the White House wants to prevent the fusion of Moscow’s and Beijing’s interests, Trump finds it beneficial to negotiate business projects and political interactions with Moscow, Tyshkevych said.

“As a result, the United States is not interested in a total defeat and a crisis for Russia. Alas for us,” he said.

However, both Washington and Beijing wouldn’t agree with boosting Moscow’s geopolitical role to the status of a third global power, so the White House only “partially understands” Putin’s ambitions, he said.

What’s next?

For Ukraine, it all means more hostilities and attacks by Russian drones and missiles – while Moscow would boost mobilisation of men of fighting age, he said.

One of Ukraine’s pre-eminent military analysts, meanwhile, is pessimistic about the summit’s outcomes.

The very fact of a face-to-face with Trump on American soil means Putin was “legitimised” and raised from the role of a political pariah, Lieutenant General Ihor Romanenko, former deputy head of the Ukrainian military’s General Staff, told Al Jazeera.

“He was legitimised in an absolutely unacceptable way” while being an “international evil man who should be held responsible for his actions”, Romanenko said.

“Yet again, Trump didn’t fulfil his promises about sanctions [on Russia], didn’t reach a position on a ceasefire,” he said.

Ukraine, therefore, will have to continue its “complicated fight until Trump grows his willpower and political will”, the general said.

Russia will accelerate its attempts to break through Ukraine’s defence lines in the east and will resume its devastating air strikes with drones and missiles, he said.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian authorities will need to make strategic decisions to start a “full and just” mobilisation of men of fighting age and focus the economy on military needs, Romanenko said.

On May 21, as they left the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington, Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim were fatally shot, and because they were employees of the Israeli Embassy and the suspect was associated with pro-Palestinian politics, the story was reported in the familiar mode of Middle East politics.

The questions that reporters and pundits have been asking are: “Was this antisemitic?” “Was this killing a direct result of Israel’s starving of Palestinians in Gaza?” “Was this another act of pro-Palestinian terrorism?” “Is this the direct result of ‘globalizing the intifada’?” While these are valid questions, they miss a central part of the story.

Only in the eighth paragraph of the New York Times report are we told that the night before the shooting, according to officials, the suspect “had checked a gun with his baggage when he flew from Chicago to the Washington area for a work conference” and, further, that officials said “The gun used in the killings had been purchased legally in Illinois.” (The Los Angeles Times article does not mention these facts.) This tragic shooting, however, is not unique.

In November 2023, a Burlington, Vt., man was arrested and charged with shooting three Palestinian college students without saying a word to them. (He has pleaded not guilty.)

In October 2018, a gunman entered the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh and shot and killed 11 Jews at prayer.

In 2015, three Muslim students were shot and killed by their neighbor in Chapel Hill, N.C.

This brief and very incomplete list of the literally hundreds of thousands of people who have been killed by guns in the U.S. in the last decade does not include the racist mass shootings in Buffalo, N.Y., and at Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, S.C.; the mass shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Fla.; or the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history, at a music festival in Las Vegas in 2017. This macabre list also leaves out the thousands of people who have been shot and killed by law enforcement.

The elephant in the room — so fundamentally accepted that it largely goes unmentioned — is the deeply ingrained culture of violence in the United States. Gun ownership, police violence and abuse, and mass shootings are symptoms of that culture. However, the militaristic approach to international conflict (from Vietnam to Ukraine) and the disdain for nonviolent solutions are also grounded in this culture, as are the manosphere and the cruelty of predatory capitalism. Now we have a presidential administration that embodies this culture.

Kristi Noem, the secretary of Homeland Security, personifies this ethos of cruelty and violence when she is photographed in front of a cage full of humans in a Salvadoran jail known for torturous treatment of inmates or writing casually about killing her dog. Noem is a key player in the theater of cruelty, but she is not the only one, and the unparalleled star is of course President Trump.

Trump’s policy agenda is based on vengeance. He revels in the theatricality of violence of the world of mixed martial arts, and he signs executive orders that aim to destroy individuals, law firms and universities that have not bent the knee, and the economics of his “Big Beautiful” budget moves money from those in need to those who need for naught.

Now, the president wants a military parade on his birthday that will include tanks, helicopters and soldiers. Although Trump himself evaded the draft, and he reportedly called American soldiers who were killed in war suckers and losers, he likes the strongman aesthetic of an army that is at his beck and call. He exulted in the fact that “we train our boys to be killing machines.”

Although some want to draw a dubious line from pro-Palestinian campus demonstrations to the killings of Lischinsky and Milgrim, the direct line that should be drawn is the one that everyone seems to have agreed to ignore: a culture of violence coupled with the widespread availability and ownership of guns inevitably leads to more death.

The only way we get out of this cycle of violence is by addressing the elephant in the room.

Aryeh Cohen is a rabbi and a professor at American Jewish University in Los Angeles. @irmiklat.bsky.social

June 4 (UPI) — Argentina’s birth rate has declined by nearly 40% in the last decade, reaching its lowest level in more than 50 years in 2023.

Statistics from the Ministry of Health show that 460,902 births were recorded in Argentina in 2023, representing a 7% decrease from the previous year and a 41% drop compared to 2014, when the highest number of births was 777,012.

The crude birth rate in 2023 was 9.9 births per 1,000 inhabitants, marking a historic low comparable to that of European countries.

A report from the Austral University of Argentina revealed that the national fertility rate has dropped to 1.4 children per woman, well below the generational replacement rate. This implies a trajectory toward population aging and a possible long-term reduction in the total population if the trend is not reversed.

The analysis adds that the percentage of households without children younger than 18 years of age increased from 44% in 1991 to 57% in 2022. Furthermore, single-person households increased from 13% to 25% over the same period, and single-parent households, mostly headed by women, also showed a sustained increase.

President Javier Milei has expressed concern about the declining birth rate in Argentina, attributing it primarily to the legalization of abortion in 2020 and other progressive policies. During his presidential campaign, Milei expressed his intention to repeal the law and even mentioned the possibility of calling a referendum to do so.

So far, this issue has not been part of the government’s agenda. However, under the guise of reducing public spending, Milei’s administration has reduced the distribution of contraceptives and dismantled sexual health programs, delegating these responsibilities to the provinces. In contrast to the continued decline in births, “voluntary and legal interruptions of pregnancy (IVE/ILE)” have increased from 73,000 in 2021 to more than 107,000 in 2023.

Statistics for 2024 and 2025 are expected to continue to rise.

Although Milei points to abortion as a direct cause, experts attribute the decline in birth rates to a multitude of sociocultural and economic factors. Among these factors are inflation, job instability and the high cost of living, which lead many couples to postpone or forgo parenthood.

The average age for having a first child has shifted to 30-34 years, reflecting a trend toward prioritizing academic training and professional development.

Furthermore, among mothers with lower educational levels, births have decreased by 77% since 2005, while among those with higher educational levels, the decrease was 13% and 7%, respectively.

Research by the consulting firm “Sentimientos Públicos” in Buenos Aires reveals that 20% of those younger than 30 do not want to have children, prioritizing other aspects of their lives. This percentage is lower among millennials (between 30 and 44 years old), where it drops to 11%, and 10% of them cite economic reasons.

The sustained decline in birth and fertility rates in Argentina reflects profound demographic transformations, such as the population aging index, which increased from 29 in 1991 to 60.55 in 2025, and the percentage of people over 85 years of age doubled in 20 years. This change poses challenges for the health care system, education, the pension system, and the economy in general.

City need to get over this disappointment quickly because they have got a massive Premier League game against Bournemouth on Tuesday.

As things stand they are in sixth place and out of the Champions League places, so they really need to win it – in effect, it’s another cup final for them.

Whether they finish in the top five or not, however, I can see there being a big turnover of players in Pep’s squad over the summer.

We know Kevin de Bruyne is leaving and the writing appears to be on the wall for Jack Grealish as well – Guardiola preferred to bring a young kid, Claudio Echeverri, off the bench for his debut when he was desperate for a goal against Palace, rather than send on Grealish, a £100m player.

There could be a lot of other changes too, and there has to be really. This City team has been amazing but they have come to the end of their period of dominance and some fresh faces are needed to get them challenging for the Premier League title again.

Even if they spend big and bring a few players in, I am not sure whether they can get back to the levels they reached under Guardiola in the past few seasons, when they were the outstanding team in the country.

But some kind of improvement is clearly needed. Considering the heights they have hit, for them to be in sixth place with two games to go and without a trophy for the first time since 2016-17 has already made this a very poor season by their high standards.

Alan Shearer was speaking to BBC Sport’s Chris Bevan at Wembley.