Listening to the the suave propaganda pouring from the lips of Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander, and other government apologists over the last 24 hours, I am struck by the persistence of the 'deficit denial' theme - and the fact that it seems to have won over a significant portion of the public. This does not make what is being said any more factually sound, ethically substantial or intellectually rigorous, of course.

The strongly pro-government sections of the UK media, not least the Mail and Express, will by tonight - in all probability - be fulminating about the "thugs and trouble-makers" who have taken to the capital's streets to show that the alternative to a massive delayering of the national and local state and swingeing cuts in public services is... well, hooliganism. This will be the case even if it is tiny handful who misbehave, and in spite of the fact that hundreds of thousands will peacefully join the TUC-led march against the cuts, and their impact on the poorest and most vulnerable in society.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) cannot be accused of being a radical think-tank, but its probing of the government's economic policies since May 2010 has been shaped by a social and environmental awareness (it has cooperated with businesses and researchers on a 'green budget') and by a determination to move below the surface of political posturing to examine what the data is and how it is being used. The picture it offers is rather different to the coalition's spin.

Today is the 31st anniversary of the death of Archbishop Oscar Romero, gunned down on 24 March 1980 by a government-backed death squad, while he was saying Mass in San Salvador, the capital of El Salvador.

"Is it ever right for Christians to support military action in places like Libya?" That was the question posed to me on Premier Christian Radio this morning, alongside the pragmatic issue of what is happening following the Western bombing raids and what the wider implications are.

The recent history of western military interventions in the Middle East is hardly encouraging. Yet British PM David Cameron has clearly been itching to begin the bombing in Libya, and US President Obama has also sanctioned armed action - in spite of serious warnings from advisers in and outside the White House.

Sensible discussion about the role of different beliefs in the public square is frequently skewed by the reluctance or inability of the more ideologically-driven participants to listen properly to what is actually being said.

When the late Professor Fred Halliday made the case that the London School of Economics should not accept a £1.5 million Qaddafi Foundation grant, his expert and political/moral opinion was met with an air of polite condescension from on high. The 'realists' of course knew best. Except that now they realise they didn't.

Whether you find him inspiring or exasperating (and I sometimes find him both!), the work of US theologian Stanley Hauerwas provides a challenging alternative vision of church as subversive, exemplary community - rather than the cement or glue of society, as in the top-down Christendom model.

What has really been happening on the streets of Cairo, and who are these pro-Hosni Mubarak 'supporters' who have suddenly emerged, after many days of genuine protest, to throw rocks and hand-bombs at citizens and demonstrators alike?