eurovisie
a publication of the study association for european studies
SERVILE NO LONGER BANE OF ESTABLISHMENT CRYPTO REFORM - HOMEBOUND URBAN CRISIS - A NEW RECKONING TEENAGE REBELLION
March 2021 / www.ses-uva.nl /eurovisie@ses-uva.nl
IN THIS EDITION... 3 - REDIRECTION FOR THE CRYPTO REBELLION GEORGE BANDY 6 - ILLUMINATING YELLOW NICOLAE ODAGIU 10 - THE CRISIS OF URBAN ATTRACTION LARA KRISTJANSDOTTIR 13- SCROLLING OUR WAY TO A RECKONING ÓRLAITH ROE 15 - FALLING OUTSIDE THE JURISDICTION OF TEENAGE REBELLION ARIANNE ZAJAÇ
Imprint Editorial office: Kloveniersburgwal 48, room E2.04/2.05, 1012 CX Amsterdam Editor-in-chief: Jyry Pasanen Editors: George Bandy, Arianne Zajaç, Sterre Schrijver, Frederique de Ridder, Órlaith Roe, Nicolae Odagiu, Lara Kristjansdottir Design: Julius Sieburgh, Nicolae Odagiu
page 2 | eurovisie | march
eurovisie Volume 16 Issue 3 March 2021
Editorial Jyry Pasanen Dear reader, In a 1844 letter to Arnold Ruge, Karl Marx called for “a ruthless critique of everything that exists”. Now, without forming an editorial line on the man himself, I would suggest, humbly, that our newest issue of Eurovisie belongs to this curious tradition that calls into question all tradition and authority. Whether aimed at city developers, big tech, or Soviet apologists in Moldova, our editors have spared no words. Here at Eurovisie, we do not worship golden calves. Our targets are big. In her article, Lara takes on anti-gentrification struggles in Berlin, where developers and real estate investors have driven up rental prices. This problem is of course not limited to the German capital; the housing crisis is a global affair. Likewise for George’s bugbear: cryptocurrency. The likes of Bitcoin, Ethereum and others are attractive in part because they are not beholden to any government, national or otherwise. But as George points out, the path to decentralisation conceals an environmental calamity that’s yet to be tackled. Órlaith is perhaps our most fearless editor: her hit list includes everyone from Facebook to the Irish government – all of whom profit from our dependence on social media and other evils emanating from Silicon Valley. Similarly scathing is Nicolae’s article: he takes aim at the corrupt political elite of Moldova, whose frauds and schemes he lays out for all to see. Finally, in a thought-provoking article, Arianne thinks about the role of rebellion in adolescence, calling into question the usual clichés and subverting the all-too-common assumptions around so-called teenage delinquency. Call us angry. Call us overly ambitious. Call us quixotic. But unlike Cervantes’ foolish knight we embrace the windmills. Through our ruthless critique a positive vision emerges: read it and join the fight. Stay mad, Jyry Pasanen.
Redirection for the Crypto Rebellion George Bandy The exciting price volatility, celebrity endorsements (notably the Elon-phenomena), tax-escape-ism, and their additional “futuresque” quality have spurred investments into cryptocurrency in the last few months, leading to record price surges and some very pleased investors. The profits have further enticed a new wave of novice buyers wanting to try their luck at crypto - no longer just a sport for professional financiers and tech enthusiasts. Google Trends shows the popularity of the search “how to buy bitcoin” reached its peak in early January 2021, following a profitable December where investors would have seen around a 40% return. The cash train kept chugging along in January - as the price per coin went up by another 30% - at this point hovering around the €30k mark. Evidently then, everyone wants to get on board. It is not only the search for profit that drives people to cryptocurrency. The nature of crypto as a decentralised monetary system has value in itself. Whilst it’s not so apparent, or necessary, for those of us who can rely on our euro being worth the same tomorrow as it is today, other national currencies are far less reliable. Google Trends shows that the most popular place for new bitcoin searches was Nigeria, where the Naira is at a four-year low after suffering three successive devaluations by the central bank only in the last year - leaving its holders roughly 20% less well off. Other currencies have seen it even worse. Venezuela’s Bolívar, for example, still faces monthly inflation of roughly 2500%. Cryptocurrencies thus provide a potential way out, a chance to escape national economic fallouts, and hopefully protect your hard-earned cash. By forming a parallel monetary system, both borderless and de-
centralised, it forms an international resistance against failures of established governments and central banks. Whilst currently far more volatile than the traditional boltholes of gold or silver, it’s more accessible due to its borderless nature and can also enable quick transfers. As more individuals adopt cryptocurrency, its current volatile nature is also likely to subside, with less potential for large market fluctuations.
“The nature of crypto as a decentralised monetary system has value in itself.” Given its potential, crypto is unlikely to go away anytime soon, and will almost certainly be playing a larger role in our futures (even if it’s behind the scenes). However, there is a current catch. Sadly, the golden goose has an energy problem. It is currently estimated that Bitcoin consumes 129 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity annually. For perspective, that’s almost on par with the whole of Sweden (131.7 TWh), and 17% higher than the annual consumption of The Netherlands (110.6 TWh).
In the absence of a centralised Bank or authority, cryptocurrencies need a safeguard to ensure that transactions are carried out correctly and that no-one tampers with funds such as by spending more coins than they have or altering transaction information. Rather than a central authority, cryptocurrencies rely on blockchain. The blockchain is a ledger of every transaction made with the currency, as well as how much of the currency each holder has. Every ten minutes or so a new “block” is added, which contains all the new bitcoin transactions that have been made - much like adding a new folder in your filing system. Shortly after, this block is locked in, it can’t be altered at all, and becomes part of the chain. So, in theory, if you were able to edit the block before it is added, then you could rewrite what transactions were made, etc. etc.
The first thoughts on digital currency, having done away with paper money and physical banks, is not normally on its resource usage. Much like sending emails or searching the web, the resource-hungry data centres powering these services are often tucked away and dissociated from the service itself. Bitcoin, and others built on the same procedure, have their own resource demands. What rockets the energy demand of bitcoin to that of a country is a central part of its design. In short, it’s the part that makes sure the system stays “honest”.
eurovisie | march | page 3
To prevent this, the blockchain system underlying bitcoin runs on a mechanism called ‘Proof of work.’ Without complicating it, the mechanism is a reward system. Interested entrepreneurs “work” by contributing computing power to authenticate the ledger, and more importantly, to try and solve a puzzle. Roughly every ten minutes a new puzzle is automatically set. The puzzle is more a guess-the-number game, though a very large number. The person who solves the puzzle is rewarded with (currently) 5 newly minted bitcoin, worth around €200k at the time of writing, and additionally, must add the next block to the chain. The individual is coaxed into honesty by the fact that the prize bitcoin will be removed if the block’s contents prove to be inauthentic. Add that to the difficulty of solving the puzzle in the first place and you have a system that makes compliance the profitable option. The power needed to solve the puzzle is the energy black hole. With the size of the prize up for grabs, bitcoin mining, as it’s called, has become quite a profitable enterprise. It has driven interested entrepreneurs to invest in more computing power to be in with a better chance of being the first to crack the puzzle. This is what leads to the racks on racks of GPU units stacked in warehouses that you may have seen in the news. You may expect in this instance that the puzzle is cracked faster & faster as the tech power put towards it increases, which would mean more prizes given out. If this was the case, Bitcoin would face a devaluation as new coin numbers would grow uncontrollably. To manage this, the puzzle adapts to the amount of computing power on the network - making itself harder to crack. This maintains the average time of 10 minutes. It creates an infinite loop as entrepreneurs continue to increase their computing power to get a better chance of cracking the puzzle, with the puzzle responding by requiring more computing power to crack it. All of which re-
page 4 | eurovisie | march
sults in an incredible expenditure of electricity which will continue to grow until a plateau is reached where energy costs outweigh the potential profit.
“Given its potential, crypto is unlikely to go away anytime soon, and will almost certainly be playing a larger role in our futures...” So, something evidently has to change. The majority of cryptocurrencies work on the proofof-work system developed for bitcoin, though there is a growing number that employ an alternative honesty system, termed ‘proof-of-stake’. The blockchain element is the same, the only difference is in the way the system moderates who can add to the chain. This system does away with the energy-intensive puzzle and rather requires individuals to “stake”, that is risk, their own assets in order to contribute to the blockchain. Again, the individual is rewarded for contributing to the chain, and the more assets they have staked, the more chance they have to contribute. Any undue interference in the chain, such as tampering with the transactions, results in the individual losing their reward, along with their staked assets. This maintains the quality that honesty is the profitable policy. In comparison, by doing away with the puzzle aspect, current proofof-stake cryptocurrencies require no more energy than what’s provided by a wind turbine or two. Bitcoin was ground-breaking at its inception and continues to surprise the traditional establishment with its increasing adoption. The touts of the new bitcoin rich may be what garner the headlines, but really, its longterm value is in proving a haven from national politics and the failures of government, a way to transcend financial borders, and to help more people participate in the globalised world. Sadly,
Bitcoin is now a dinosaur - it’s the old diesel guzzler that’s in need of a serious hybrid update. The proof-of-work model which supported the currency’s first steps is not sustainable in the long term - not for the currency itself nor for our climate. The proof-ofstake model is potentially the key to crypto’s sustainable future. What’s needed now is redirection - it’s time to turn crypto green.
Illuminating Yellow a look back home NICOLAE ODAGIU
I
n 1989, in the aftermath of Gorbachev’s perestroika and glasnost programmes, the Moldovan Soviet Socialist Republic managed to declare its sovereignty in order to later proclaim and declare on the 27th of August 1991 the independence of the Republic of Moldova. A déjà vu if we revise the rhetoric of events following the fall of the Russian Empire, when after the Bolshevik Revolution and Lenin’s encouragement of the self-determination principle, Bessarabia, in 1917, succeeded in breaking away from the Russian yoke and constitute the Moldovan Democratic Republic. The componence of the first and only legislative organ that headed the state, Sfatul Tarii (Country council), was democratically elected. The subsequent national awakening of pro-unionist movements which occurred on March the 27th 1918, triggered Sfatul Tarii to vote for the union between the republic and the ‘mother country’, Romania. As a consequence, the Country Council dissolved itself. Many wonder why this rhetoric was impossible to put in practice in 1991. Some say that this is due to the political instability in the mother country, shivered by the bloody revolution against Ceausescu; others refer to the Kremlin’s hand which executed a dominating control over the events in the country, making sure that the pro-unionist values were not propagated. The political uneasiness continued in the next three decades when the republic’s gained sovereignty was met with a separatist war, resulting in the creation of the autonomous region of Transnistria, the crisis in the late 90s, the emerging communist nostalgia in the early 2000s, the Revolution against the communists in 2009, the European path redefined in the 2010s, the grand theft that followed, corruption, poverty, falling confidence in a
page 6 | eurovisie | march
European future and…
“somehow… there is still hope.” Let us go to 2014 first. It was a year that represented a significant milestone for RM as it signed the Association Agreement Treaty with the European Union, establishing a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA), the removal of import duties for most goods, and broad mutual access to trade and services between the signatory parts. The Agreement also put into operation the liberalization of the visa regime. In theory, the treaty represented a step further in Moldova’s strivings towards European integration. The Agreement officially set the path to closer ties between RM and the EU, allowing for further convergence by implementing reforms in the judicial system, other matters regarding the national legislation, education system, and energy infrastructure. These measures facilitated the entire process of “Europeanization” through strengthening the economy as more opportunities opened for exports and foreign investments in the country. The closer ties with the EU were met with harsh critics from Russia, when earlier in 2013 an imposed embargo on Moldovan wine was extended in 2014 to fresh and canned fruits. The bilateral relations or the axe EU – RM – Russia concludes once again the existential crisis and the dilemma that Moldova faces since its independence. To top it all off, in November 2014, what was later called the “Grand Theft” obstructed the entire process of European Integration as it was proven that political figures, members of the government, and even essential figures in the judicial institu-
tions were involved in the theft of more than one billion dollars from three Moldovan banks, which exposed a shadow ruler, a puppet master who had total or opaque control on almost all public institutions in RM, Vlad Plahotniuc. The theft consisted out of more than one billion dollars that suddenly vanished from three banks. The affair was possible due to the pressure and control over the judicial and anti-corruption institutions, and the lack of transparency in the banking system. The millions disappeared due to multiple loans given by these three banks to bizarre and shell companies owned by people whose identity remained anonymous in an elaborate scheme of offshore corporations, who disappeared with the loaned money. This happened at a time when the European Union remarked Moldova as a “success story”, “a poster child” and front-runner of the Eastern Partnership (EaP), Moldova receiving the highest amount of EU aid per inhabitant of all the EaP members. The oligarch that remained at the base of the laundromat machine allegedly looted some four billion of EU funds through the control over members of the pro-European coalition. The entire theft operation led to losses of almost 12% of the GDP. The effects surfaced once the National Bank raised the base rate, Moldova experienced a sudden inflation and a depreciation of the Moldovan LEU (MDL). Furthermore, the public response was detrimental to the idea of a European future. EU funds were suddenly frozen, and the failed government remained almost in the same format until 2019 when Moldova experienced one of the most acute political crises following the long-awaited parliamentary elections. The year 2019 was considered
to be decisive in the potential course of events. The pro-Russian Socialist party managed to gain most of the votes in the election. However, they didn’t manage to form a parliamentary majority, forcing them to sit at a round table with the other parties that formed the componence of the Parliament, more precisely the political block ACUM, consisting of Maia Sandu’s PAS and Năstase’s DA, Plahotniuc’s Democratic Party, which was still controlling all the institutions in the state, and Sor’s Party. Ilan Sor is another personality who according to an investigation performed by Kroll, was also involved in the billion-dollar theft. According to the Constitution of Moldova, if the Parliament is non-functioning, unable to form a government in 3 months, it can be dissolved. In this case, the Socialist Party decided to postpone the negotiations until the last day of this period, surprising everybody with the decision of forming the government with ACUM, the party advocating for Moldova’s European future. This alliance aimed to break through the captured state of the country. This strategic move was well received by both the European and Russian officials. It finally presented a promise towards positive evolution. Maia Sandu, a Harvard graduate, a former adviser to the Executive Director at the World Bank, was elected by the Parliament as prime minister. From the beginning onwards, it was apparent that the entire coalition and government would not be long-lasting due to the parties’ contradictory political visions. The breakup
occurred after Sandu decided to take personal responsibility in naming the General Prosecutor. In response, the Socialists accused her of violating the coalition treaty, which specified that the prosecutor would be selected through a contest. As a result, Sandu’s cabinet of ministers was dismissed by a motion of censure, which was supported by the Socialists and the Democrats, revealing the real face and objectives of the Socialists:
“You are so cowardly that you cannot say openly that you are afraid of true justice. You betrayed not only a government, but also the people who put their hopes in you...” Sandu stated in a speech delivered in the parliament before the no confidence vote. The newly established government was meant to satisfy the Socialists’ needs and wishes as well as those of the pro-Russian president, Igor Dodon. Interestingly enough, the inadequate policy response against the emerging Covid-19 virus created disturbances in the ratings of the Socialists and the president. This was remarked during the presidential election in November 2020, when Dodon lost in front of the pro-European Maia Sandu, who became the first woman to take over the presidential post. Even if Mol-
dova is a parliamentary country, Sandu stated that she would pressure the current government and parliament and that the only solution in this crisis would be to snap parliamentary elections. Another controversy however, was that the Socialist government also considered a questionable loan agreement between RM and the Russian Federation. This 200 million EUR loan could have negatively impacted Moldova’s external financial and political relations. The affair, in concept, represented a support package in response to the pandemic crisis. However, in practice, it was intended to finance the electoral projects of the current pro-Russian government on the edge of parliamentary elections, which were expected due to the Parliament’s incompetence to form a strong coalition. The agreement raised several questions with regards to its financial provisions and non-financial conditionalities. Even if the agreement was presented as a budget support loan, the Moldovan authorities should have allocated the money in joint financing projects with the Russian Federation, and these decisions also had to be taken together with the Russian side. The repayment terms, including the 2% interest on this loan, seemed to be among the toughest on the list of all financing agreements that Moldova had in force. It was also discovered that in the budget law for 2021, there were no funds allocated for the procurement of vaccines against Covid-19. The Constitutional Court intervened and stated that the loan agreement
was unconstitutional. The events that followed could be considered rather bizarre. Ion Chicu, the prime minister who had been in charge since the no-confidence vote on the Sandu cabinet, after negotiating with Dodon and the president of the Moldovan Parliament, Zinaida Greceanîi, decided to resign along with the entire cabinet of ministers because the Socialists pronounced themselves in favour of early elections. Interestingly, now, at the end of the 3-month term in which the Parliament should vote for a new cabinet in order to avoid being dissolved, Socialists claim that snap elections are not a solution anymore. According to the Constitution, the Parliament is supposed to vote upon a candidacy for the prime minister’s post, which is submitted by the president of the country. Also, president Sandu, in this case, should submit a candidacy that the majority in the Parliament would therefore accept. The main problem is that after the breakup of the ‘unholy coalition’ between the Socialists and Blocul ACUM, the Parliament functioned, despite an officially formalized majority or coalition, which in this case, would be responsible for advising the president with suitable candidacies for the prime minister post. From the Socialists’ perspective, it is totally ironic. Why would somebody give up the government it already had in order to fight to regain it one more time? These events were followed by Maia Sandu’s proposal to the Parliament only to respect her
page 8 | eurovisie | march
presidential attributions provided by the Constitution; the rejection of the candidacy being the main objective foreshadowing the probability of snap elections. Furthermore, after the Parliament voted against the proposed candidate, the Presidency of RM received a letter signed by the Socialists, members of the OR party and former Democrats, with their own candidate for the prime minister post. Despite this, Sandu decided to reject their proposal and proposed the same candidate for the second time. According to the Constitution, once the Parliament fails to form a government twice, it can be dissolved. However, in this situation, the Constitutional Court expressed its point and decided that Sandu’s decision to put forward the same candidacy twice was unconstitutional. In response to the Court’s decision, Maia declared that she is not going to propose any other candidate and that the only solution out of this political impasse would be snap elections or a referendum. But, two weeks later, after repeated consultations with party members, Sandu submitted another candidacy with the same intention of prompting parliamentary elections. Currently, the entire outcome is still being awaited. There are many questions regarding this situation. Would an impeachment be possible? Is Maia’s decision constitutional? Answers are yet to be discovered, but the current situation represents the core problem. For decades the country has been in this
stagnating situation, without any economic growth, with a system that would satisfy the needs of oligarchs.
“Not to mention, the limits that it had reached, the corrupted roots that were established are too costly to give up.” Too much is at stake now, and the Socialists understand that they might totally lose control in the case of elections. When Sandu won the presidential elections in November 2020 there was droll association with the Pantone Institute’s announcement, which declared Illuminating Yellow one of the two colours of 2021. By coincidence, the representative colour of Sandu’s party is also yellow. Maybe that’s a sign.
The Crisis of Urban Attraction LARA KRISTJANSDOTTIR
I
n Europe a vast discourse has been built around the refugee and immigration stream into the continent’s cities, focusing on the implications of the alleged increase of economic burdens and unfavoured multiculturalism. But other developments, perhaps rather from a different perspective, have become widely contested as well. Although certainly not a new phenomenon, gentrification has become a vexed plight to the many Europeans disheartened to see their home cities in a process of weighty socioeconomic and subsequent cultural change. It is no secret that the present-day largest city of the European Union is experiencing such developments which have generated nervous anxiety of longer-term inhabitants. Berlin has namely experienced an extensive influx of young people (expats – not! immigrants!) desiring a taste of the city’s famously alternative culture, with the reputation of being so distinctively different from that of other European, and world capitals. People come for a ‘slower life’, unmarked by capitalism’s schemes of how one should live life, in a place where everyone can be who they are. Where it is socially acceptable to have a few beers on a weekday noon instead of having to hustle to a respectable job in an uncomfortable suit on the London tube or Paris metro. Although not many seem to stay, as if the ‘unique lifestyle’ proves too abnormal, or anxiety triggering to be sustainable in the long run, many arrive with the living costs of pricier cities in mind and are thus not startled at prices no long-term Berlin renter would consider admissible or affordable. As a matter of fact, the 85% of Berliners who remain renters and have watched the market prices rise significantly, are likely to contrast this development to the
page 10 | eurovisie | march
still relatively recent post-unification years characterized by what seemed to be unlimited freedom. Many have probably in some form heard stories of the city’s ambiance during the nights around the ninth of November 1989. I got my share from my father who during the celebrations (figuratively or not) was offered several housekeys of those exhilaratingly, at last, being able to leave their homes in the East for opportunities on the other side. This unlimited freedom was not solely viewed in terms of housing vacancy and a vast number of squatters but in terms of a culture, the ensuing notorious underground wilderness, the legacy of which remains to this day. Niche, alternative culture was great – and is still considered so, in contrast to the official culture which lies on the surface. Certainly, an eternal form of rebellion in itself. Returning to the present – when the days of the 90s and early 2000s remain in the dreams of those who remember, as well as of some who do not. The current housing crisis is currently being met with a controversial five-year rent cap adopted by the government, but perhaps more significantly by widespread, desperate grassroots movements and revolts. Countless signs hang outside people’s windows stating that housing should not be a commodity, along with posters and graffiti clamouring for a halt of Berlin’s fast road towards becoming ‘like London’. Local protests are held on a frequent basis and outcries are heard, for the city not to lose its essence, its character as the living of people who have made the city to be its multicultural, artistic, and ‘poor but sexy’ self, is tangibly being disposed of. Evidently, the urban crisis represents an existential distress deeply embedded within the discourse on the dominance of
capitalism and neoliberalism. Yet, what interestingly marks Berlin’s attraction is an impression that the city is precisely not that, that it is not as commercialised and ‘sold out’ as so many other places – that there remains an advantage to be taken not only of an alternative culture but an alternative way of life. Such crises thus cannot simply be ascribed to the forces of venture capitalists and property developers but even more tangibly to the embourgeoisement of the ‘aspirational class’, allured not by business or financial opportunities, but rather by cultural and societal ones. A small bookstore owner in a particularly gentrified area of the former West-Berlin district so pointedly noted:
“It’s a contradiction that people come to Kreuzberg for its spirit, but their presence is destroying it”. Whether this spirit is destined to fade in the long run or would prove able to withstand the form of co-existence in which one group’s potential comes at the expense of the mere living of another, the once-divided city in due course faces new splits. As the rapidly developing gentrification has become so greatly pronounced and palpable, it achieves a particular acceleration of deep social vexation and despair. The crisis raises the urgency of the propounding concern whether districts or cities in which seemingly everyone wants to live can be sustained without conspicuous socioeconomic and cultural alterations – or whether co-existence to such an extent can be reduced to merely a utopic ideal.
Scrolling Our Way to a Reckoning Órlaith Roe
T
he other day I found myself mindlessly scrolling through various social media apps, jumping from one to the other, and ending up on Twitter. I clicked into a Variety article: “Twitter Targets 315 Million Daily Users by End of 2023, Expects to Double Revenue”. The article goes on to explain Twitter’s new long-term targets and revenue projections for the coming years. In that instance I became acutely aware of the many other millions currently scrolling through the app, jumping from article to article, tweet to tweet. Like sheep, we were being herded by the addictive algorithms of Big Tech companies, and with dwindling self-control, toward the direction agreed upon by social media CEOs and profit-driven projections. From the self-confessing tech magnates of Netflix’s 2020 documentary The Social Dilemma to the almost banal use of the words Big Tech, we are increasingly surrounded by an abundance of awareness around the issues of encroaching social media. Yet it continues to envelop us in a restrictive hold; we seem unable to shake its addictive nature even when we acknowledge the negative aspects of its daily use. There are undeniable upsides to social media: connectivity, education, and global outreach to name just a few. But the all-consuming environment of the current tech monopolies has reached unprecedented and worrying levels. Questions about privacy and ethics have entered into the public sphere at an increasingly alarming rate; the politicisation of technology has further bolstered the dicey nature of right from wrong, blurring the lines between what society deems as necessary progress on the one hand, and an infringement of the privatised realm on the other.
In 2018 the European Union’s new data protection standards (The General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679) came into force and have been lauded by EU officials as the global benchmark for solid data protection; Europe regards it as a major achievement. Its proponents highlight various aspects such as bottom-line savings, mapping and expedited response times to data requests, and brand benefits as the upsides to the GDPR. Data protection within the EU differs greatly from that of its American counterpart across the Atlantic. Indeed, while the EU’s new data protection rules are far stricter than before, the actual enforcement of fines and penalties for breaking those rules is meek compared to the US. The Federal Trade Commission in the United States (the regulator in charge of enforcing America’s privacy rules) has been historically far from sparing in terms of handing out hefty penalties. In this aspect, the EU bases itself more around regulation, while the US focuses on enforcement. The room for growth and monopolisation for Big Tech companies in Europe has been allowed to flourish in recent years; corporate tax havens such as Ireland (12.5%) and The Netherlands (19%) have only encouraged the European expansion of American technology companies and the establishment of their various HQs outside of the United States. While WhatsApp, a Facebook subsidiary, is currently pending a fine between €30 million and €50 million from Ireland’s data protection agency in a decision expected later this year, Europe has been chronically slow in clamping down on privacy breaches and abuses of power from its Big Tech community. Perhaps the change of tone (harsher penalties and tougher enforcement for America’s tech monopolies) that is expected under President
Biden’s new administration will translate across the Atlantic, but Europe’s leniency in this regard could prove fatal. The thriving development of Big Tech and social media use seems to be eternally omnipresent. From the board rooms of Brussels to the village peripheries of Europe, the flourishment of online dependency is only growing, and so too is our inability to reckon with and rebel against the encroaching nature of social media. However, there is a paradoxical essence to this dilemma: a growing number of younger people, of Generation Z, are ‘logging off’. Amidst the technological era of smartphones and apps, a new group of social media dropouts is beginning to take root. Fed up with the all-consuming nature of modern online interactions and the struggle with social media identities, young people are in search of a reconnecting bridge to real life and its joys. Swathes of Generation Z are acutely aware of the watchful eye of Big Tech, of social media apps breathing down our throats and removing our ability to say ‘no’ to their advances. The allure of a tech-savvy lifestyle does not hold the same appeal for younger generations as it did a decade ago or so. The awareness of the internet’s cruelty and addictive nature has manifested itself into the psyche of Gen Zers with alarming speed (in most cases due to first-hand experiences). Pollsters continue to reveal the steady decline in the number of young people who say that ‘social media is important’ to them. But can these trends manifest themselves into something greater?
eurovisie | march | page 13
A revolution of sorts against Big Tech from the bottom-up? In our current frail capacity to turn away from compulsive scrolling, soaring procrastination, and dwindling self-esteem, one would certainly hope so. For many, social media was something that had to be learned and improved upon, a new novelty of sorts. Gen Z did not have to acquire any such skills - they grew up with the concept of smartphone apps and online lives. ‘Breaking into’ the skillset of technology and social media never had to be obtained for our generation, but perhaps the ‘breaking out’ of it is the necessary response. To suggest that younger people would become totally averse to the presence of technology is absurd. We are fully aware of the necessary and positive contributions it has made to society. However, it is the highly addictive algorithms utilised by profiteering tech companies, the invasion of personal privacy, and the pressures of an omnipresent internet culture that has driven large groups of younger people to mount a rebellion against Big Tech. The manifestations of new anxieties and a dependency on social media make it difficult to remove ourselves from its hold. While we may acknowledge our addictions and the evils of certain online applications, we still struggle to take the leap and rebel. The seedlings of new hope have been planted by those youngsters willing to go against the trend of conforming to Big Tech’s grasp on our daily lives. After all, we are the generation who contributed in leaps and bounds to the flourishing of social media. Who is to say we cannot be the ones to simultaneously transform it for the better? Keep scrolling, and perhaps we’ll find the answer.
page 14 | eurovisie | march
Falling Outside of Jurisdiction of Teenage Rebellion Arianne Zajac
R
ebellion can be considered the process of resisting authority. An opportunity to go against the rules, or against normal and accepted ways of behaving; to defy convention. Rebellion is something we all experience in our lives, varying from the mundane and trivial to the fundamentally life changing, be it the way we dress, how we do our work, or the morals and values we hold ourselves to. Rebellion is an essential part of human existence. As we go through adolescence, we seek to defy the adults around as an opportunity to form our true selves. However, no two revolutions are the same. Many factors contribute to what may be a rebellion. Ultimately, it hinges upon whether there is an authority to repress. How does this play out when a child finds itself surrounded by adults without the capability to discipline? Trying to navigate the perils of being a teenager without the guidance of an adult is tough. Parents caught up in their own difficulties become a ghostly presence, without any further information of their child’s life outside of institutional settings, they are unable to set boundaries or create a secure domain. In this perspective possible identifiers of teenage rebellion take on new meanings. Harmful behaviours suddenly take on softer tones. Hanging out in the ‘wrong’ crowd is simply a search for stability, while the habit of disappearing on Saturday nights, with
no clear time of return, provides routine. Knowing where one is and what one is doing, even if it’s at a party while intoxicated or inebriated, creates a new world of normality, in which the reassurance, that is not present in reality, can be found.
“Rebellion is an essential part of human existence.” Furthermore, how can rebellion take hold when those involved are trying to uphold the status quo. The dominant narrative surrounding teenagers often involves good grades at school for a good future ahead. Children are told to strive for better lives than the parents, to go to university, to get a career, to not make the same mistakes as they once did. When this pressure is applied in every aspect of children’s lives, it can become a pressure cooker for rebellion - ‘to go off the walls.’ However, it can also become a bind, so that no matter what else happens, these goals will always be achieved. Does it matter if teenagers are lucidly under the influence in the evening, if they’re up the next day for school? They have ticked the one required box from emotionally absent parents, they have conformed to what is expected; in their eyes, they have not rebelled.
Situations like this do not breed positivity. They often result in feelings of despair, disquiet, and dislocation. To battle with these kinds of emotions everyday significantly distorts life. Every aspect of what could be called rebellion changes yet again. To always be in later than when is meant, is the physical side of the escapism that happens every night. The thrill of disobeying even more authoritative powers, pushing every encounter, to see how much can be stolen, how many laws can be broken, without being caught, isn’t simply a result of animosity, it is a way to try and illicit ‘normal’ brain functions, to feel as if one is more than just the environment around them.
“The dominant narrative surrounding teenagers often involves good grades at school for a good future ahead.” Teenage rebellion is typically portrayed through drug-taking, school-absenteeism, and domestic disobedience. All of which are seen to be the behavioural responsibility of the child, who should be able to decide their own outcomes and choices in life. However, rebellion is a much more nuanced issue. It is an issue that has a deeply contextual background, which will affect how everyone involved sees their own action. Ultimately, while rebellion can be natural, or even encouraged, the ways in which it manifests should be carefully considered.
page 16 | eurovisie | march
SES Calendar Start of the Board applicaiton period, 29th of March If you want to have a one in a lifetime experience, develop your skills, work closely in a team, improve your leadership capabilities, meet amazing new people and just have a lot of fun, you should consider it! SES Conference, 8th of April Lustrum Gala, 18th & 19th of June On the 18th and 19th of June 2021, SES will be heading with our lucky former and current members to the South of the Netherlands, to dine, dance, and drink in a lovely and unique location: Kasteel de Berckt! The event is currently sold out but you can still sign up for the waiting list via the SES website. A Changing European Climate , 11th of June The time has come, our annual SES-Conference with major topics on current European affairs will take place on 1 June 2021. In this year’s online version - A Changing European Climate - we will explore the effects of current nationalist/ sovereign thinking in Europe and which impacts they might have on the prescribed European climate goals. Experts and politicians specialised in those fields will give introductory presentations, and students are given the opportunity to exchange their thoughts in short discussion rounds. Keep an eye on all SES-platforms for detailed information and to sign up! The Conference Committee is looking forward to seeing you there!
WANT TO WRITE FOR EUROVISIE? SEND YOUR ARTICLE TO EUROVISIE@SES-UVA.NL
(c) studievereniging europese studies 2021