The Martlet - Issue 12

9

NEWS

What will Syria’s future be and what can we learn from its past.

WINTER ISSUE

17

COMMENT

Is current policy on insurance for young drivers fair?

20

SPORT

Is football hooliganism making a return?

23

FEATURES

Dudley returns one last time to tackle New Year Resolutions

Abingdon School’s Leading Newspaper

ISSUE 12

He’s In

Blake Jones looks at which of his personalities Trump might be

D

FRENCH PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS P.7i

onald Trump is now the 45th President of the United States.

Like many, it is not the result I was hoping for. Yet he will still be President for at least the next four years and that is a reality we have to face. There has been avid speculation and endless articles about what Trump has said and what his presidency may be like, and I feel there is little more I can add. It is hard to know what Trump’s presidency will be like, with many different ways it could go. There have been many sides to Trump’s character shown from when he first rose to fame to now when he has been sworn in. Therefore I shall pick through the different personalities of Trump and in trying to predict the nature of his presidency, look to answering the question: Who is The Donald?

The Bully

THE CHINESE ZODIAC EXPLAINED P.12i

SIX NATIONS PREDICTIONS P.22i

The persona which the world was shown throughout the election campaign. Trump has mocked a disabled reporter, insulted the family of a veteran soldier and, most significantly, risen to power through villainising the religious and ethnic minorities of America. His approach has been one of facing the rest of the world aggressively and not backing down. Whilst the brute version of Trump may be his most likely character, it is also the most potentially damaging. Getting elected can be aided by the bull in a china shop mentality, but for leading a nation, consulting with other powerful countries and facing great stress, this is worrying. However, I believe that

despite everything, there must be some sense in Trump for him to get where he is, which may mean there is more to him than just brash competitiveness.

The Businessman

There is the glaring question of why Trump would have said the offensive and aggressive things he has said if he did not mean any of it. Though he could have believed it all, there is the possibility that Trump was simply being tactical. There was a gap in the market of US politics, made of great resentment for PC culture combined with rural Americans struggling more than they used to. Trump was saying things that our politicians had avoided and was thrown into power by a newly energised movement. If a rich strategist wanted to win and did not care about what they stood for, the Trump way was how to do it. This may mean that in his presidency he makes much smarter decisions than we expect. However, in his inauguration speech he was continuing on the wave of rhetoric that got him elected.

The Republican

Trump is known for not being a traditional Republican. Yet his cabinet has many traditional Republicans with a typical right wing political agenda, despite Trump’s promise to ‘drain the swamp’. Half of the cabinet is made of non-politicians, but this is in no way an attempt to remove the

Continued on page 2

2

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

News

D

Letter from the Editor

ear Readers,

Welcome to the twelfth edition of The Martlet. It is the start of 2017, and to reflect this we feature a number of pieces looking back at the lows and highs of 2016.

There is also plenty of speculation, and some conjecture, about what 2017 holds in store.

Our cover story could hardly be anything other than the inauguration of President Trump. With the bulk of the media quick to jump on this event as a black mark on our era, Blake Jones offers a speculative look at Donald Trump’s character. This will either comfort you in the face of despair or add to your rejoicing.

Our news section features a round-up of 2016 compiled by Kofo. It includes some stories which have either been forgotten or overshadowed by bigger headlines. As a counterweight to this, Ben Ffrench and I offer some uncertain predictions for the year ahead, with some rather more decisive assertions from Ben. Looking back to the past again, Samuel King gives his account of Obama’s legacy, while Will Stewart compares the various populist uprisings of the last twelve months.

Jacob Lillie’s features section opens with a full history of the Republican Party from Washington to Trump, narrating their curious evolution of policy and personality. Meanwhile, Weihan Huang describes the the Chinese Zodiac whilst, with controversy still raging about the lack of proportionality in British and American politics, Piers Mucklejohn asks what would be the best voting system for us to use.

Finally, on a issue that may be relevant to many of our Sixth Form, Dan Alcock ponders whether the rate of insurance paid by younger drivers is fair or an example of exploitation.

The sports section leads with a profile of apparently notable skateboarder, Blondey McCoy, with Sports editor Dan Brown chronicling the sportsman’s life and times in sport, clothing and art. This is followed by a few predictions for the sporting year ahead including Will Stewart’s forecast of the likely result of 2017’s Six Nations as well as veteran sportswriter Toby Jupp asking whether England can win the ICC Champion’s Trophy which, he argues, could be a perfect rehearsal for the Cricket World Cup when it comes in 2019.

That leaves only to once again thank the relentlessly hardworking and tireless Martlet team, notably the section editors, Ben Ffrench, Jacob Lillie and Dan Brown as well as the design team of Blake Jones, Pea Sermsuk, Jate Jaturanpinyo, Felipe Jin Li and, now, Sam Penrose. The Martlet Online is also being constantly updated so please do not forget to check there for further reporting and analysis.

Thank you and enjoy, Nick Harris

COVER STORY

He’s In. What Now?

Blake Jones looks at which of his personalities Trump might be Continued from cover page political elites. The people he has chosen include investors, sons of billionaires and army generals, reflecting not necessarily ties to the Republican Party, but reflecting very clearly the Republican ideals and typical members. Trump may be of the altright and not the typical elephant, but he is still part of the right wing and we will see the effects of that in his campaign.

The Protector

Perhaps Trump should be considered our protection from Ted Cruz. Whilst Ted Cruz gained recognition for work with DOMA (Defence Of Marriage Act) and trying to prevent actual laws which many Americans support, Trump dealt with cultural attitudes and not people’s rights to divide and conquer in a less strictly damaging way. He may have simply upped his game to stop Ted Cruz. However this is unlikely.

With a collection of worrying events, such as taking down the White House Website’s statement on climate change and LGBT+ rights, promising to significantly reduce the number of immigrants in America and starting the process of dismantling Obamacare.

The Artist

Again unlikely, but this could be one great

statement on modern society. Though his inauguration would be the place to do the great reveal, imagine if Trump had planned this as an artistic piece. Trump was not elected because of the things he did, but because many of the people of America chose to support him. In a Black Mirror style twist, this may have been Trump’s way of showing America how high levels of xenophobia were and what could happen if the liberal and conservative sides did not work together, teaching America a lesson on the importance of unity. Nevertheless, I think this idea will have to be left for a few decades and saved for use in a historical fiction.

Will Trump be able to rake back the support he once had by making more balanced decisions and have the a-list world support him once again? Or will he not care, and moreover, not need them?

The Dr Jekyll and The Mr Hyde The American

Trump had been a very different man up until his campaign began. A reality TV star, a billionaire, cameo maker in Home Alone 2, two time SNL host and long-time friend of the Clintons. If there is a man of the elites and the A-list celebrities, a few years ago it would have been him. However his inauguration concert told a different story.

With many big names refusing to play, there was no one there that I recognised and for Americans it would have been a disappointment. He has become the dismissed and discarded man, so toxic that Jennifer Holiday received death threats for agreeing to sing at his inauguration.

Make America Great Again! The focus has always been on America. Trump reiterated at the inauguration his two rules: buy American and hire American.

The message he gave in his speech was that America is his focus and the rest of the world will only matter once it kicks up a fuss, in a short speech filled with the word America over 30 times. Trump may have an international heritage and an international family, but he seems intent on reflecting back to rural Americans the kind of America they see, rather than presenting an America which the world stage will approve of. His inauguration concert

reflected the focus on country Americans.

Whether out of want or necessity, the concert reflected every day Americans in right wing states who want more hope.

Jackie Evancho, and several other acts who performed, came from a humble background and rose to success through talent competitions or viral popularity.

The Mormon Tabernacle Choir performed at their seventh inauguration, representing a traditional focus on American culture. Together these acts represented the America which is often not seen on the world’s televisions, but Trump was at the heart and ready to be the American his supporters want, for better or for worse.

Which version of The Donald is he? We do not know, but over the coming weeks and months we shall begin to see. Then this will either become an odd chapter in history or the start of a long line of politicians who could be described as Donalds.

3

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

News POLITICS

The Year of the Underdog: 2016 in Review

Kofo Braithwaite looks back on the most eventful year of the century

I

think I can confidently say that 2016 was one of the most significant years in my lifetime, and probably in most of yours. Whether it be politics or the world of entertainment, a lot of stuff went down. We saw Britain vote to leave the EU, one of the biggest constitutional changes we have ever witnessed. We saw Donald Trump become leader of the free world after beating his opponent, Hillary Clinton, in an unprecedented and unconventional (and most of the time, rather absurd) election. We saw the demise of the Labour Party under the ineffective leadership of Comrade Corbyn, who has destroyed Labour’s chances at the next general election and created the threat of an SDP-esque split as seen in the 80s. It was the year that saw the likes of Muhammad Ali, David Bowie, Carrie Fisher, Prince – all huge names – pass away. Whether you deem it a good or bad year, here are the highlights and heartbreaks:

Panama Papers

In April, thanks to German newspaper, Süddeutsche Zeitung, politicians and celebrities were exposed following an unprecedented leak of 11.5m files from the database of the world’s fourth biggest offshore law firm, Mossack Fonseca. The documents show the myriad ways in which the rich can exploit secretive offshore tax regimes legally. 143 politicians, of which 12 were world leaders, were exposed in this huge scandal that led to the resignation of the Icelandic PM, Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson. Others involved in the scandal included Vladimir Putin, David Cameron, and Petro Poroshenko, President of Ukraine.

Brexit and populism in Europe

A political earthquake struck Europe on June 23, when we voted to leave the European Union in a referendum. The vote, I believe, was a measure of widespread unease over immigration, unemployment and the perception that bureaucrats in Brussels were calling too many of the shots. The result of the vote upset a lot of people, as one would expect, and in what seemed like an attempt to reject the will of the British people and our democratic process, it led to failed efforts to overturn the result from Gina Miller and others. Following the referendum, Nigel Farage resigned as UKIP leader.

However, Britain is not the only country roiling with energised populist sentiment.

Nationalists across Europe, in Germany, Denmark, Austria, Hungary, Italy, France and elsewhere, were riding the same wave of populism that seemed to propel Donald Trump into power across the Atlantic.

David Cameron is dead: Long live Theresa May

Following a rather swift leadership contest following David Cameron’s resignation, former home secretary, Theresa May, swooped into Number 10 with a great task at hand. Mrs May will have the pleasure of negotiating Britain’s exit from the EU, and will either be the prime minister that made Britain great (again) or the prime minister that broke Britain (again). An emphatic change in policy suggests Mrs May has a very different view of what direction this country should be heading to her predecessor. She favours the introduction of policies such as grammar schools, while Philip Hammond has vowed to loosen the straitjacket of Osborne’s austerity. She shows determination for what is being dubbed a ‘hard Brexit’. Theresa May will need a much larger majority than the Tories currently have in order to pass the legislation proposed, so the possibility of a snap general election looms.

President Erdogan narrowly survived a coup earlier in the year viduals without charge for up to 60 days.

Tens of thousands have been arrested and at least 120,000 public workers have been suspended from their jobs on suspicion of being linked to the failed coup.

proved a force to be reckoned with, and will play an essential role in global politics, particularly with regard to Iraq and Syria, relationships with Russia, and battling Islamic State.

Labour isn’t working

Donald Trump was propelled into the White House on a wave of antiimmigrant sentiment Erdogan or Erdogone?

The Turkish military issued a statement late on July 15 proclaiming it had seized control of the country. A bomb exploded at the parliament building in Ankara, and civilians urged onto the streets by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan confronted soldiers on Istanbul’s Bosphorus Bridge. After a long night of turmoil, Turkish television reported that the coup was over. Afterwards, a state of emergency was imposed, enabling the government to detain indi-

US elections

Had we caught him on Election Day, Trump’s pollster, Tony Fabrizio would have been heard to place Clinton’s chances at 55%. Clinton’s own aides would have put her chances higher, as would nearly all independent analysts. But it was not to be. Donald Trump was propelled into the White House, having obliterated his Republican opponents riding a wave of anti-immigrant sentiment, protectionism, isolationism, and populism. Mr Trump

The Labour Party has proven itself undeserving of its vital role as the main opposition party. Under the control of its weak, unelectable leader, Corbyn, Labour has experienced a monumental drop in the polls with most analysts suggesting if a general election were to be held in the near future the Tories would increase their majority by some 100 seats. Factions within the party have threatened to break away and form their own party, reminiscent of the SDP split in the 80s. While all this may be good for the Conservative Party, it certainly is not good for the country. Strong and effective opposition is an essential prerequisite to good government but the Tories are currently having to seek that elsewhere. After Labour MPs issued a motion of no confidence in Jeremy Corbyn a series of resignations from the Shadow Cabinet ensued, leading to another leadership contest. Jeremy Corbyn defeated his rival, Owen Smith, but as long as he does not have the support of the parliamentary party, he cannot credibly ask for the country’s support.

4

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

News

2017: What Could Happen?

POLITICS

T

hose who attempted to predict anything in 2016 seemed to get it all wrong. Radio 4’s programme looking ahead to 2016 suggested that Marco Rubio would now be President of the United States, Britain would be staying in the EU, and England would have got through to the semi-finals of Euro 2016. Ben Ffrench and Nick Harris are willing to put their reputations on the line to share their thoughts on how this year will pan out. gered. These two facts of parliamentary arithmetic, combined with Mrs May’s controversial domestic agenda, point to an early election this year or next. Only by boosting her parliamentary majority can Mrs May hope to achieve anything, let alone pass any Brexit legislation.

Many a prime minister with a slim majority has been held hostage by the right and the left, a fate best avoided.

Labour Party Internal Conflicts

Following the UK’s vote to leave the EU but Scotland’s vote to remain, Nicola Sturgeon has a new mandate to fight for independence

German Federal Election

Germany is one place where any kind of people’s revolt has not been predicted, not even on Facebook News Feeds, and quite rightly so. Recently, Germany has tended towards moderation and centrism so much that for the last four years it has been governed by a grand coalition. This comprises the main right-of-centre party as Mrs Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union, and Germany’s main left-of-centre party as the Social Democratic Party.

The AfD (Alternative for Deutschland) has been touted as another UKIP or Front National with its anti-immigration rhetoric and its respectable poll share of 15% at present. However, between them the CDU and the SDP still control over 50% of the votes, and although the AfD’s popularity may cause policy shifts from the two main parties, and so the AfD gaining a position of serious power is unlikely. Thanks to Germany’s semi-proportional voting system, however, it may gain a voice in the Bundestag.

Trump Presidency

Trump’s victory bred some extreme predictions for his term in office, including thermonuclear war with Russia, the end of NATO, and even something as awful as reconciliation between Britain and America after Obama’s frosty presiden-

cy. But for journalists to take Trump’s campaign rallies at face value always was disingenuous. Everything announced since Trump’s victory is a less extreme version of the kind of populist rhetoric heard from every American election campaign. The promise to ‘tear up trade deals’ has been watered down to American withdrawal from TPP, a move supported by all, including Bernie Sanders.

The infamous promise to ‘build a great, great wall on our southern border’ and ‘have Mexico pay for that wall’ is now an initiative to stiffen up immigration control. After just one meeting with Barack Obama, Trump announced that rather than scrapping the ‘complete disaster’ of Obamacare, he would retain certain elements. Trump’s actions so far suggest a dilution of his campaign promises, set to become a recurring theme in his presidency.

will inevitably be complicated. Although Labour supports the activation of Article 50, they also support membership of the Single Market through, presumably, membership of the EEA. This goes against Mrs May’s policy of a proper exit from the EU followed by a free-trade deal and restoration of border controls.

A group of around forty Conservative MPs, the ‘new bastards’, who are against leaving the Single Market, will be an-

The Labour Party is in poor condition, but I refrain from characterising it as abominable, heinous, vile or give-up-now as this is rather hasty. History’s lesson is cautionary and we are far too quick to make grand statements instead of reflecting properly. Take Iain Duncan-Smith’s leadership of the Conservative Party and Michael Foot’s leadership of the Labour Party. Both were disastrous leaders who seemed to spell doom for their respective parties, but both Labour and the Tories recovered eventually, responded to wishes of the electorate and won elections. All political parties have weak, introspective phases where it seems impossible that they will ever capture the electorate again. If Labour was able to achieve the 1997 landslide after four electoral defeats in the 80s and 90s, then Labour is perfectly capable of recovering now, with promising faces on their benches including Dan Jarvis, Chuka Umunna and Sir Keir Starmer QC. The best Labour can hope for is a general election. Following his defeat Corbyn will have to go. Then they can recover just as they did under Neil Kinnock, and as the Conservatives did under Michael Howard. Until then, they must sit and wait. -NH

Brexit Progress

There has been talk and speculation since the Brexit vote, but it is all smoke and mirrors. Nothing can happen until Article 50 is triggered by Theresa May or an Act of Parliament. We are told this will happen before the end of March.

Then our negotiations for withdrawal begin and will continue for two years until March 2019. Mrs May’s fabled ‘deal’

Chuka Umunna is a rising hopeful for future Labour leadership

5

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

German Federal Election

Merkel faces the greatest threats to her chancellorship yet: a tough fight with the ever-increasing anti-immigration movement, led by the AfD (Alternative fur Deutschland). Cities such as Dresden have reacted defensively against the refugees that Merkel bravely and nobly allowed into the country, and this feeling grows with every passing incident. Terrorism and other incidents have strengthened the rhetoric of the right in what is becoming a tough fight for liberalism inside the very bastion of the EU. The election will test Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU). Fortunately, complacency is off the agenda, and Merkel must fight for her values, and defend them to the end in one of Europe’s most influential nations.

She must not let the far right control the message. If she stands firm, Germany will be secure against the hard right.

Trump Presidency

Donald Trump’s presidency sent shockwaves, and forced the world’s political elites to take notice. This year will reveal America’s political direction. Though the world praised Barack Obama (myself included) he left behind a country bitterly divided between the haves and the havenots. His attitude to progress was patient, but too soft, centrist indecision blighting his leadership. Many overlook this due to successes in health insurance and the Iran nuclear deal. His treatment of climate change was flawed: a lot of rhetoric with little action, even agreeing an Antarctic oil deal. Obama also failed to deliver on race relations. Donald Trump doesn’t promise better, but Americans look to him for protectionism and the defence of their livelihoods, damaged by previous presidents’ trade deals. It is a damning indication that the ‘American dream’ has turned sour, and the world must awaken to Trump’s legacy and learn vital lessons. His foreign policy promises to be erratic, but much will be made of his relationship with Vladimir Putin. The impact remains to be seen, but Syria will define his foreign policy.

If Labour was able to achieve the 1997 landslide after four electoral defeats, then Labour is perfectly capable of recovering now

Frauke Petry and the AfD are recieving increasing support ahead of the German Federal Elections

Brexit Progress

Theresa May has clarified her priorities and thrown the British economy and British livelihoods into jeopardy. A ‘hard brexit’ was always on the cards, but the implications for Britain are enormous; the Union itself is now at risk. Nicola Sturgeon has always pressed for ‘Indy ref 2’, and with over 60% of Scots voting to remain in the referendum, the announcement of a clean break from the single market and customs union puts the Scottish first minister in a strong position. Britain’s future of world trade is questioned: Donald Trump became the first to offer Britain a trade deal post Brexit in a grotesque meeting with Michael Gove. Other deals look distant, and much suggests that freedom of movement creates jobs, livelihoods, and trade deals with the EU and elsewhere. Indian leader, Narendra Modi, suggested to Theresa May that increased student visas and other job and education opportunities would accompany any new trade deal.

Subsequently, Boris Johnson’s prediction of a Nike tick on the prosperity graph looks far-fetched. However, Britain has not left the EU yet, and we are yet to feel the true impact. This year, Britain will experience not the rhetoric but the reality of Brexit.

Labour Party Internal Conflicts

Speaking as a Labour party member, 2016 was a difficult year. 2017 promises to be no easier. An increasingly unpredictable electorate and political system mean that nothing is certain, and everything is possible: Labour can win the general election in 2020. Brexit showed how divided Britain is; years of neoliberal austerity have bled the country dry, while over-

paid bankers see their bonuses soar, and corporation tax plummet. For too long, the Tories have oppressed Britain’s communities. It is time for Labour to offer the alternative: a party to stand up against

Merkel faces the greatest threat to her chancellorship yet

vested interests, a party to stand up for the weak and disenchanted. Jeremy Corbyn’s recent ‘2.0’ reinvention provoked amusing headlines. Through his recent actions, Corbyn has proved that he can make the political bellwether: an impassioned attack on Theresa May on PMQs forced the Prime Minister to admit serious and unpopular failures in the NHS. Furthermore, Corbyn’s recent proposals for public sector pay ratios and even maximum wages led to a strong political conversation. Many obstacles remain.

The support of the Labour backbenches is lukewarm, and more big names are needed to support him on the frontbench.

Only Labour itself is hindering the party’s success. An alternative British system is needed, based on investment, happiness and prosperity. If Labour unites behind this with a fixed position on immigration, nothing is impossible. -BF

6

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

News

Obama Leaves Office

Obama in a fiscal meeting

T

he election of the first African-American to the White House in 2008 marked the fulfilment of Dr Martin Luther King Jr’s dream. Without Dr King and the civil rights movement’s struggle to win voting rights in places like Selma, Alabama, and Birmingham, Mississippi, there could not have been an African-American president.

President Obama’s election was one of the most important events in American history. Its symbolism was enormously important for all Americans, black and white, as it marked a new era in US politics. Its impact was proved when many white Americans voted for Trump through opposition to the Obama presidency and resentful of losing their white privilege.

The Economic Crisis

After eight years in the White House, President Obama has left a distinct legacy in domestic and foreign policy. When he entered office in January 2008 he hit a

POLITICS

Samuel King looks back on Obama’s eight years in office

brick wall as the Great Recession savaged American jobs and economic growth.

Obama pushed an economic stimulus through Congress with great speed to resolve the situation, but his policy aims were much more ambitious. The Democrats had not had the majority in the House of Representatives in fifteen years.

Therefore not enabling them to have significant influence on the laws that were passed. Obama wanted to exploit this new opportunity

Healthcare for All Americans

After the stimulus package Obama wanted to fulfil a major promise that he made during his campaign. This was to bring healthcare reform to America, an ambition which had eluded many of his predecessors. This goal of universal healthcare insurance was opposed by many Republicans who argued that voters should provide their own health insurance. They objected to government involvement

in healthcare delivery. This was one of Obama’s most ambitious bills but would become one of the most beneficial.

Bringing about the Affordable Care Act in 2010 was immensely complicated.

Normally in Congress the draft of a bill is sent to both the House of Representatives and the Senate. However, on this occasion different drafts were sent to the two chambers. After a laboriously long debate and discussion process they reached a bill that they both agreed upon, though not finalised.

Then there was a disaster in the Senate; the reason that Obama and the Democrats were pushing the bill through Congress was because they had a majority in the House and there was a 50/50 split in the Senate. The Democratic Senator for Boston Massachusetts unexpectedly lost her Senate race because she insulted the fans of the Boston baseball Team (The Red Socks), and was defeated by her Republican

challenger, Scott Brown. The Republicans now had the majority in the Senate, and were therefore able to prevent the bill from passing. Obama then had one clear path out of trouble. He had to get the House to agree to the draft that the Senate proposed. The House members were persuaded to amend and accept the Senate’s version of the bill in the reconciliation process. Wavering Democrats voted for the bill in exchange for additional spending on Pell Education grants. Pell Education Grants are financial grants to poor university students named after the senator Claborne Pell who devised the scheme in 1978 under President Carter. President Obama and his team breathed a sigh of relief: they had just passed the most significant reform to America’s health system ever.

Changing Banking Practices

President Obama’s second major legacy in national politics was his reform of the

7

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

Getting Out of Afghanistan and Iraq

Obama was successful on troop reduction. He reduced the number of US troops in Iraq from a huge 160,000 in 2008 to 150 by August 2012. This number has not increased since. In Afghanistan, Obama initially increased the number of American troops in the fight against the Taliban but then reduced the American presence. In both Iraq and Afghanistan, President Obama prioritized helping the governments of these two states to build up their own security strength and standing armies so that the US led coalition could withdraw. By 2015 there were about 10,000 American troops in Afghanistan helping the Afghan government to train its own soldiers, down from 97,000 American soldiers in 2011.

The End of Osama Bin Laden

On May 2 2011, US Navy Seals succeeded in locating and assassinating Osama bin Laden, the Al Qaeda leader who orchestrated the hijackings and attacks on New York City in September 2001, killing 2,977 of Americans. This major foreign policy triumph helped Obama’s popularity in his election to a second term in 2012. Voters liked his decision to order the raid.

The Middle East Foreign Policy Conundrum

Michelle Obama has helped extend the President’s popularity financial system, especially banking and mortgage lending. He and other Democrats believed that a major reason for the Great Recession in 2008 was the bad behaviour of banks in giving loans to borrowers who could not afford to repay them. When all these loans were called in, the financial system collapsed (vividly depicted in the film The Big Short). Named after its House and Senate proposers, the Dodd-Frank law (the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act) was passed in 2010.

The law introduced two major measures. First, it imposed new conditions on banks about how much they could lend to customers and mortgage borrowers.

Banks now have to demonstrate that they have a lot of cash available to cover any failure by borrowers to repay loans. This is called new capital requirements. Second, the law created a new government agency called the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which tries to stop banks from giving loans to people who don’t have enough money to pay them back, known as mis-selling. Both measures were hugely important reforms which President Obama implemented to help ordinary voters manage during the economic crisis.

President Obama tried to do other things. He asked Congress to introduce new gun control laws but failed. He appointed the first African American Attorney Generals in America’s history and

he tried to promote racial equality, but his greatest achievements were in healthcare and financial reform. Regrettably, both of these reforms may be cancelled by President-elect Trump who campaigned to abolish them.

President Obama entered the White House concerned by major challenges in the United States, such as giving more people access to health insurance and helping unemployed workers find jobs, but he had made one big foreign policy

Foreign policy is immensely complex and President Obama faced many new problems in his second term. The main issue was continuing struggles in the Middle East, centred on Syria where an internal war raged and where the new Islamic State terrorist group based itself. Repeatedly asked to send American troops to Syria, President Obama resisted. He based his reluctance on the chaotic aftermath and numerous casualties experienced in Iraq and Afghanistan when he entered office in 2008. There is no easy answer to the question of whether President Obama’s reluctance to intervene militarily in Syria was wise or cavalier. Obama has approved extensive American airstrikes on IS territory.

I have a Dream that one day my four little children will one day live in a World where they will not be judged by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character

promise to voters: to take the United States out of Afghanistan and Iraq, invaded in 2003 after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York City. Obama was a critic of these foreign wars in which 4,491 of American soldiers died.

Iranian Success

But the Middle East did yield a significant foreign policy success. Working with the United Nations, Russia and other partners, the US under President Obama negotiated a deal with Iran in 2015 to limit the country’s use of nucle-

ar power to the production of energy and not nuclear weapons. This nuclear deal was a huge triumph for America for several reasons (though President elect Trump has already challenged the policy). First, Iran had been a foe of the United States since 1979 when it seized US diplomats as hostages in Tehran embassy (see the movie Argo). This was a new diplomatic relationship. Second, any effort to restrict the use of nuclear weapons in the Middle East is important, and as one of the major regional powers getting Iran to change policy was a major achievement. In return, the United States and other countries lifted economic sanctions that had been imposed on Iran from 1980.

Tackling Climate Change

Of great importance for the whole world, President Obama made progress on the problem of climate change and global warming. He had promised to address this issue during his campaigns to be elected to the White House. The policy aim was to forge an international agreement under which governments would reduce fossil-fuel-based carbon emissions in order to slow down global warming.

International agreement proved difficult to achieve, since many poorer countries were reluctant to give up the use of fossil fuels and argued that only rich countries in Europe and North America could afford to develop renewable energies or nuclear reactor plants.

President Obama negotiated a US-China agreement in 2015 under which each of the two states would work to reduce carbon emissions. This agreement was the basis for a major international initiative organized within the United Nations, and confirmed at its Climate Change Conference in 2015. The agreement commits all UN members to reducing carbon emissions. Like the Iranian nuclear reduction agreement, US participation in climate policy may be reversed by the new president.

Cuba, Russia and China

President Obama’s foreign policy included several other major initiatives which form part of his legacy as president. In 2015 he opened relations with Cuba, a communist country ostracized by the United States ever since the revolutionary takeover by Fidel Castro in 1958.

Diplomatic relations were opened and direct flights re-established.

Finally, President Obama’s efforts to build a strong relationship with Russia were destroyed by the country’s authoritarian leader, Vladimir Putin. President Putin shocked the world by recklessly annexing Crimea from Ukraine and disregarding the sanctions imposed on him.

Despite international condemnation Putin’s Russia is a major force which will preoccupy Obama’s successor. The warm relations achieved between President Obama and China’s President, Xi Jinping, look much more precarious under the new White House incumbent.

8

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

News

France: The Crossroads COMMENT

F

Ben Ffrench analyses the most important presidential election in a generation

rance has always led the way when it comes to drastic change. It was one of the first countries to abolish the monarchy; great sweeping reforms followed. A forerunner of secular society, it championed change in an otherwise christian Europe.

Today, nothing is different: the upcoming presidential election looks set to be the turning point in a global political upheaval like no other.

The global tides have been turning for some time. France faces a stark choice. A global anti-establishment feeling poses a strong threat to the established political elites. The fate of the European Union itself may be at stake. The very existence of the Republican and Socialist Party political monopolies is endangered by the Front National, and their firebrand presidential candidate Marine Le Pen, as well as a set of others looking to tip the political applecart of Europe.

France is a country that has been rocked to the core, facing difficult times.

January 2015 saw the Charlie Hebdo attacks on a provocative, but quintessentially French example of free speech, resulting in a global outpouring of emotion, and further terrorist attacks in Nice and Rouen split the country down the middle.

Divisions were exposed in French society, exploited by the forces of fear.

Fear and division were quickly seized on by Marine Le Pen. A vigorous, anti-immigration message followed, and refugees were portrayed as dangerous, economic migrants, even potential Islamic extremists. Anger over Muslim and foreign integration was whipped up while stagnating wages allowed Le Pen to sow the seeds of discontentment. A dangerous future for France was emerging, giving this leader increasing power and perhaps even a presidential bid.

In a situation played out all across Europe, the politicians started paying attention. The results were startling. An anti-liberal, authoritarian message was cowardly played out for political gain as Manuel Valls, the Prime Minister, preached strong border controls and attacked Islamic values in a despicable move of intolerance and hatred. A ban on the burkini, a garment worn by Muslim women at the beach, was implemented by many local authorities, egged on by the cynical Valls. Intimidation of Muslims and the harsh prohibition of the beach garb grew. By the time of the November Paris attacks, France was in a fragile state.

France is in a mess, and how it acts now will be closely judged by history.

All across France, the main parties are taking notice. The Republican Party is a prime example. Nicolas Sarkozy, the last Republican who was president, and

the popular Alain Juppe were decisively beaten by a man not dissimilar to Marine Le Pen herself, but tinged with a hard, conservative, Thatcherite outlook. The firebrand candidate proposes to slash public sector jobs and taxes on the rich, attacking trade unions and waging a war on Islamic extremism, with an increasing anti-immigration fervour. His drastically backward looking draconian policies are a threat to the liberal values France holds so dear. Francois Fillon has never been more powerful, and must be stopped.

The centre of French politics meanwhile has its own radical firebrand.

Emmanuel Macron is a man with a strong independent reputation, some would say a useful trait in a climate of political distrust. A former economy minister under Francois Hollande and Manuel Valls’ Socialist government, Macron resigned his post to run for the presidency under a new centrist movement, en marche! Macron’s unique proposals include strengthening the welfare state, economic de-regulation, and making it easier for bosses to hire and fire workers. Although these policies may seem attractive, many others of Macron’s policies are not appropriate, especially at this time. In an unstable climate with weak wages, further economic deregulation will fuel discontentment and an even more unequal society will emerge.

His attempts to weaken workers rights in defence against the vested interests of trade unions are extremely ill-advised. He is not the way forward.

Other outsiders have entered a clustered and tightly fought presidential race. The cautious pragmatism of French Green candidate, Yannick Jadot, is gaining some support, with his strong

Primary Candidate Benoit Hamon promises a bright future for France presidency is the logical next step, in a But the Socialists must make a choice. timeline including Brexit and Donald In the runoff, Valls faces the Socialists’ Trump. The dissolution of Europe and and France’s best hope for President: the EU could follow.

Benoit Hamon. Defeating Valls by nearly 5 But it can be stopped, despite the odds. percentage points in the first nomination In a climate of despair, hope is needed. round, Hamon must now defeat Valls in At the ballot box, that responsibility the run off. Promising to ‘make France’s falls to the ailing Socialist Party. Just like heart beat’ his bold, brave and revolutheir Labour counterparts in Britain, tionary universal basic income proposal, the party has been forced to embark on promising 750 euros a month for every a long, soul-searching journey. Their citizen by 2022, is just what an unequal outgoing president, Francois Hollande, France needs. His pro-worker policies are faces disgrace and humiliation, following welcome, giving hope in a world climate a series of cheating scandals, leading to of fear and austerity- although critics say a 4% approval rate. The party is a wreck, he has provided little detail on universal destroyed by infighting. income costs (The plans could amount to France’s only hope lies with the up to 400 billion euros) he has ignited the left. It is time to ignite the country.

Francois Hollande has let France down. Despite a 75% top rate of tax, his pro-business policies included a €40 billion corporate tax break for the wealthiest, with rising unemployment at a rate of 30,000 a month. His pro refugee outlook was admirable, but the country he has created was not happy about any quotas.

High inequality and injustice were the ingredients for a great backlash. As a great bastion of Europe, France must do better.

Socialists, and they must deliver with a The Socialists must win, against all odds.

Presidential candidate like never before.

Fear is a potent force in difficult Hollande’s resignation leaves January times, but there must be no acceptance 2017’s presidential primary election as an of it. Those who do so, such as Francois opportunity to find their vision again. The Fillon, will face dreadful consequences, President needs to represent hope, and but a leader that brings the whole counchallenge the rotten rhetoric of Fillon and try together against the forces of terror Le Pen, with an alternative, inspiring eco- with inspired policies and does not allow nomic vision, with an open, and pro-refu- division will reap the benefits. A healer gee emphasis. The hard right must not be is needed for the deep social divides pandered to. The favourite, Manuel Valls, France has experienced for the sake of will not provide this, as his decisions as a happier, stronger country. Hope must prime minister have proven. triumph over fear.

Fear is a potent force in difficult times, but there must be no acceptance of it greenpeace background and strong opposition to TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership), a harmful international trade deal affecting food product standards commendable. On the far left of the spectrum, Jean-Luc Melenchon is rising. The battle hardened radical leftist has an anti-EU position, supporting a strong, anti-corporate message, and worker cooperative system, which France should take notice of.

In an increasingly tight race, Marine Le Pen is the obvious favourite. Her

9

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

News

A Future for Syria MIDDLE–EAST

Alex Thulin explores the history of the Syrian civil war and how we can move forwards

T

he Syrian civil war has ravaged the Middle East for five years.

The migrant crisis has divided countries while major violations of human rights on all sides have rendered a positive outcome almost impossible. However, the results of the American election could bring about a new era in Syria. The future is still uncertain, but a new foreign policy could either be the shake-up that finally brings peace to the war-torn Middle East or the earthquake that sends it over the edge.

Within hours of the announcement that Donald Trump had been elected to become the future president of the United States of America, two major players in the ongoing warfare in Syria, President Assad and President Putin, proclaimed their intent to work with the new president. Assad claimed that Trump would be a ‘natural ally’ in the war on terrorism and Putin claimed, ‘Russia is ready and wants a restoration of full-fledged relations with the United States.’

The history of the civil war is scarred with injustice from day one. The war sprang from an uprising in 2011 against the autocratic dictator, President Assad, after teenagers who painted revolutionary comments on a school wall were arrested and tortured by Assad’s brutal police force.

The protests were met by the Syrian army, opening firing on the protesters causing many deaths which only escalated the conflict. Around the country people took to the streets to demand Assad’s resignation, numbering into hundreds of thousands by July. As the uprising progressed the protesters began to form up into more organised groups to actively fight against the government forces and attempt to take over major cities. By 2012 the fighting had reached the capital of Damascus. The conflict took a huge death toll, and by 2015

The civil war has lead to some of the most horrific war crimes in history the number was estimated at 250,000.

The fighting has caused global outrage due to its indiscriminate nature. Both the rebel forces and the Syrian Army have been seen to regularly bomb dense civilian populations en masse in an attempt to hit rebel gatherings. The Syrian Air Force is infamous for its use of ‘barrel-bombs’, metal barrels filled with high explosives designed for large scale imprecise destruction, which the UN has likened to a massacre. To complement these war crimes the Syrian government has repeatedly been proven to have used chemical weapons against their own citizens; hundreds were

This could either finally bring peace to Syria or be the earthquake that sends it over the edge killed in an attack on Damascus using the deadly nerve gas, sarin, which kills its victims by paralysing the lungs, leading to suffocation. Even a non-lethal dose can leave anyone who inhales it with permanent neurological damage. Naturally the substance is banned by the Chemical Weapons Convention which Syria has signed, meaning that government forces are contravening a treaty that almost every

country in the world has signed.

The chaos in Syria has led to the rise of one of the most dangerous terrorist groups the world has ever seen: the socalled Islamic State. Rising out of the ashes of Al-Qaeda, so- called Islamic state has emerged as the dominant threat in the Middle East. The increasingly brutal methods of the terror group have earned them scorn from even Al-Qaeda, but their numbers are still increasing. During the civil war IS formed into a faction distinct from the rebels and the Syrian government, fighting solely for itself. Their control over many of Syria’s cities remains at the centre of ongoing conflict within the country.

Throughout the civil war America has always provided aid to the rebel forces.

However, the Trump administration is perhaps beginning to side with the Assad regime; comments made after the election result suggest as much. Assad’s reference to America as a ‘natural ally in the war on terrorism’ suggests that Syria is taking a more active role in the global war effort.

In the past, Syrian and Russian attacks on terrorists have often targeted rebel held areas, and atrocities committed by the Syrian government in the name of the war on terror still take place today. Assad cannot be allowed by the global community to continue to abuse human rights and violate peace treaties unpunished.

Donald Trump has made it clear that his administration’s chief goal in Syria will be to defeat so-called Islamic State. The Obama administration has been fighting a war on two fronts, trying to combat the terrorist group as well as the Syrian government, but it appears that Trump will not back the Syrian rebels. Trump has made no announcement about the future position of Assad, but for the time being we can be fairly certain that until the threat of IS is eliminated Assad is staying

firmly in power.

Nobody is in the right in the Syrian Civil War. Some media portrays the rebels as the saviours of Syria but this is not the case.

Although the government is notorious for brutal executions of those who try to stand up against the regime, and the number of civilian casualties has caused global outrage, the rebels use similar methods. Car bombs have been widely used to take out key government figures without any care for collateral damage. At the most extreme level, the Alawites, the sect of Islam to which the Al-Assad family belongs, have suffered massacres at the hands of rebels near the port of Latakia. Reports suggest that rebel forces ransacked over seven villages, causing far over a hundred and thirty casualties, and these are only the reported incidents. This brutality from the rebels means that Assad is still popular among the Syrian middle class. They simply feel that he is the better option.

Whatever unthinkable acts the Syrian government has committed, strong relations with Assad may be the key to peace in Syria. United Nation communication with Syria has always been difficult due to its powerful ally, Russia. Many attempts to authorise sanctions on Syria have fallen through due to Russia’s strong position in the UN, but the potential for closer relations between America and Russia could create global political influence in Syria for the first time in years. America’s war on two fronts cannot be maintained. To secure peace, so-called Islamic State must be destroyed. To do this we need to stabilise Syria. The chaos caused by the civil war has allowed the terrorist group to thrive and become the largest terrorist threat the world has ever seen. Certainly the Assad regime will need to either change radically or fall, but for the time being, Assad may bring the stability Syria needs to recover.

10

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

Features POLITICS

The Rise of Populism

William Stewart looks at the rise of populism and asks why so many people are turning away from the experts’ advice

T

here has been a clear trend in recent years that has seen populist politics emerge. Why have these events happened and what could happen next?

The first major event in the rise of populism was Brexit. On June 23rd 2016, the United Kingdom defied all predictions and voted to leave the European Union. However, why did the majority of voters in the UK vote to leave the European Union? Was it because of a lack of sovereignty or maybe because of immigration? It could be argued that false facts in the Leave campaign unfairly persuaded some voters towards wanting to leave but perhaps the involvement of technocrats had a negative effect rather than a positive one. How could anyone believe that a lecturing tone from Barack Obama, Christine Lagarde and others would really convince the British public to fall into line behind the establishment view? There is no doubt that immigration was a factor in the referendum outcome, but I believe that the real reasons were less obvious.

The second major event in the rise of populism was Donald Trump’s shock US election victory over the favourite, Hillary Clinton. On 9th November, the world found out that Hillary Clinton had lost the US presidential election to Donald Trump, a man who is no doubt an extremely successful businessman but perhaps not the best suited man for arguably the most powerful position in the world. Throughout Trump’s campaign he caused controversy over his radical views about immigration, women and of course his promise to build a wall between the USA and Mexico. Despite Hillary Clinton’s many flaws and her email scandals, the majority of people believed that she was the best candidate out of potentially the two worst candidates in US history. She clearly won the popular vote. However, it was Trump who won in the Electoral College and he will become President on January 20th 2017.

Why was Trump so popular with so many Americans and what were the key reasons that he won? Republican hatred of Hillary Clinton was obviously a factor in why people voted against her but I believe there were more significant reasons behind Trump’s victory. The recent terrorist attacks in America and in France may have caused some Americans to adopt a more radical view towards immigration. The British vote to leave the EU and Nigel Farage’s support for Trump’s campaign may have had an effect on the vote too. In fact there were striking similarities between the key policies in Trump’s campaign and those in the Vote Leave’s campaign in the EU Referendum.

In France, the rise of Marine le Pen as the leader of the right-wing National Front has caused widespread shock throughout Europe and the rest of the world. She too is a populist leader and is now one of the favourites to win the French presidential election in 2017. In the election of 2012 she finished third after Hollande and Sarkozy, but since then has gained significant ground. The terror attack in Nice in the summer of 2016 and the other attacks within France’s borders since then have increased le Pen’s publicity since she promises tighter immigration controls.

Her populist ideology and nationalist attitude are no longer out of place in a turbulent political period, where the Brexit vote and Trump’s victory have shocked the world. It would no longer seem a surprise if le Pen were to win the French presidential election.

Austria and Italy have both held recent elections where populist sentiment has been a key factor. Results were mixed; in Austria, Norbert Hofer of the Austrian Freedom Party (founded by ex-Nazis) failed in his bid to become the Austrian President. He had called for a complete end to immigration in a bid to preserve the country’s “ethnic culture”.

In Italy, however, populist opinion was successful and led to defeat for Renzi

Rising populism could lead to a less global world

who was trying to push through several constitutional reforms and revive the country’s lethargic economy. Leaving the European Union is not a direct possibility of this vote in Italy but could be a knock on effect. Italian banks now look to be in crisis. This Italian result may well be the third big populist win after Brexit and Trump. Adding further to establishment fears, populism is also spreading elsewhere across Europe.

In particular, Geert Wilder’s Party for Freedom in the Netherlands is becoming increasingly powerful and in Greece, the Golden Dawn party has grown significantly, especially during the country’s economic crises.

What could happen in the future?

The spread of populism across Europe

Donald Trump’s election victory shocked the world could see more EU Referendums and sis levels. Net wealth has fallen in places so, if more major countries like the UK such as the North East of England. There vote to leave, this could see the fall of is now disillusionment within traditional the EU. In more general terms, a popu- politics. list ideology may lead to an increase in What are the implications of popuisolationism and protectionism. People lism? Rising populism could lead to a less may become more anti-immigration and global world where countries are pera nationalist sentiment might begin to haps more inward looking than outward develop. Trump’s election victory could looking. There may be a greater threat of lead to a change in US foreign policy, wars because countries are more likely whereby their stance may be pro-Russia to put up barriers between themselves and perhaps anti-China. and the rest of the world, which could But why is this trend towards pop- provoke conflict. A lack of globalisation ulism taking place? During the Brexit could result in lower incomes and poorer debate, Michael Gove famously said that, prospects for the younger generation.

“Britain has had enough of experts”. Peo- The whole world order established post ple don’t necessarily always want tech- World War Two could well see massive nocratic advice and in many cases they change with institutions such as NATO have turned against this advice since it is now being publicly questioned by Dontheir choice and not the experts’. In the ald Trump. minds of many voters, the financial crash The ultimate implications of popucan be attributed to these “experts”. lism remain to be seen. Trump has only Increased austerity, especially in the UK, just become President and the Brexit Italy and Greece has made life difficult negotiations will continue to develop for many families. over the course of the next 2-3 years.

Globalisation is also an important fac- The French election result is also yet to tor because it has led to lots of jobs being happen so until these key events actually lost abroad, for example in the Rust Belt kick into effect, we cannot really know in the USA. Populism often appeals to the true implications. In my opinion, those who are unemployed or are suffer- populism may continue to grow but I ing at the expense of government poli- don’t believe that it will have a long-lastcies, and so in the case of the US election, ing effect on the world. This could just Trump’s appeal to white, working class, be a phase in world politics and the non-college-educated men may have foundations already laid in promoting a been a crucial turning point. The widen- more global world may be too strong to ing wealth gap is also highly significant. ever be removed. While populism may The Bank of England’s Andrew Haldane have negative impacts in the short term, has warned that regional inequality in I believe that once we are through this the UK is becoming more pronounced phase, improvements will occur and and that London and the South East are a more outward looking world can be the only places in the UK where income restored that would be the best outcome per head is back above pre-financial cri- for my generation.

11

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

Features

North Korea Going Nuclear DEFENCE

N

Does North Korea threaten our future, and that of our world? Johan Nerlov asks

orth Korea was recently alleged to have carried out nuclear tests. The world was in shock, and many feared for peace and prosperity. In fact, North Korea has a little known, dark history of nuclear weaponry, and the threat is larger than we would like to imagine. This threat to global security has been around for decades, but only now is it starting to show its true potential.

North Korea’s nuclear history stretches back to the Korean war of 1950-53: the fight that decided which half of the war-torn and divided Korea should control the peninsula’s industrial heartland in the deep North. After the war, the North had managed to obtain the upper hand, and at some point had control of almost the entire peninsula.

They controlled much of the industry of the Korea and, for a while, had a GDP almost twice the size of South Korea’s, which seemed to be only growing. How times have changed, now the North produces no more than 2% of the peninsula’s GDP, and is often forced to accept aid from her southern neighbour, though they often dismiss these claims. Though the struggle to win superiority endures, regardless of how pointless it may seem, and a major aspect of that feud lies in its nuclear arsenal. Albeit slowly, the North has been, grudgingly, perfecting its weapon of mass destruction.

Its first step towards this fantasy was taken in 1962, when North Korea began her new policy of ‘complete-fortifica-

tion’, to hyper-militarize the country and make it into a true world superpower, this was highly inspired by its communist ideal of ‘Juche’. In 1963, North Korea asked the Soviet Union for help 17 times, but to no avail. Some members of the new Communist Party were even considering ‘applying’ for membership to the Soviet Union, though this was highly discouraged by its first leader, Kim Il-Sung.

However, the Soviets agreed after years of negotiations to a ‘peaceful nuclear program for energy development’. Even the casual observer could see through

were scaled down during this period, and the nuclear program was no exception.

Most of the funding and labour force were withdrawn. Only the missile program and a handful of minor ‘high tech’ programs were saved. Under these circumstances it is remarkable that North Korea launched her first missile in 1993, capable of carrying a small nuclear payload. It was calculated, using official figures, that the launch of one missile cost around 1,234 deaths.

The weapon was first fired into the sea of Japan, and brought short-lived success.

It would have been discarded altogether

The threat is larger than we would like to imagine this thinly veiled scheme that aimed to develop nuclear weaponry.

The seventies and eighties were prosperous times for North Korea, but with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, things took a turn for the worst. Widespread famines brought a death toll of c. 2,500,0000 people, though many within North Korea itself argue the number exceeded 3,000,000. Many government programs

if it weren’t for the purchase of 300 units

by Iran in the late 90’s. Over 500 million dollars had been spent in its development, but the North Korean designers learned much from their first attempt at a nuclear weapon payload carrier.

From 1993 to 2006, the program lay dormant, until on October 9th North Korea stunned the world with the successful detonation of its first nuclear

bomb. Another soon followed in 2009 and another in 2013. How North Korea achieved this is without the world’s notice is a secret that, most likely, we’ll never know, and it would be pointless to speculate . Although the exact capabilities of these weapons is disputed to this day, the fact remains that North Korea possesses its own nuclear bomb, and could soon have the means to use it against a rival on another continent. It is difficult to say what the future holds. It is nevertheless alarming that North Korea has is developing nuclear weapons with some success, and could soon be capable of wreaking havoc on a global scale.

Does a nuclear-armed North Korea pose a threat to world security? It should be considered that this nuclear program is as slow as any we could imagine. After 50 years of tests they have successfully launched 500 missiles and detonated a total of four bombs, while the USA detonated more than ten in 1956 alone.

In terms of competition with our allies, there is no cause for concern. It is possible that soon the North Korean nuclear program might cease to exist altogether. In any case, there have always been threats to global security, and there always will be. For our part, we will continue to fight for good and strive to get the better of our enemies. Perhaps a better question is whether North Korea poses a threat to the what we hold dear in this world. The simple answer is ‘no’. It does not, nor will it in the future.

12

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

Features POLITICS

The History of the Republican Party

I

Jacob Lillie examines the Republican Party’s past as it reaches a watershed moment in its history

n the light of the US election result, it appears that a watershed moment of sorts has been reached in terms of the party system, marking the next stage of the Republican Party’s curious evolution. Over time, the Republican Party has changed dramatically. This is perhaps most simply elucidated in the idea of party switching. Over time, the Republican Party has adopted the traditional Democrat platform (small government, states’ rights etc.) and vice versa.

It isn’t quite as simple as that, since Donald Trump and the recent direction of the party can’t be equated with the traditional Democratic Party. Nonetheless, an ideological evolution of sorts permeates the party’s history, and with it, its support base has changed over time. The result of this in the present day is a party which dominates US politics not only at a national level with control of Congress and the White House, but also holds a sizeable advantage at the state level. 31 Governors are Republicans and 32 state legislatures are Republican controlled. This change in ideology has also changed the electoral map itself. What was once a party which drew the majority of its support from the North is now virtually unchallengeable in the South. The election of a Republican in 1860 triggered the Southern states to secede and a Civil War, whereas nowadays the election of a Republican would be welcomed with enthusiasm in the South. The Republican Party has a proud history, with many of America’s most famous presidents being

Founded in 1854, the Republican Party emerged from the ashes of the Whig Party Republicans, including Lincoln, Reagan, Nixon and Eisenhower to name a few. This proud history deserves to be examined.

Founded in 1854, the Republican Party emerged from the ashes of the Whig Party, which had collapsed due to infighting over the issue of slavery in the territories of Nebraska and Kansas. As growing sectionalism between the North and South pushed the US towards the precipice of civil war, the Republicans emerged as a collaboration of anti-slavery activists, modernists, ex-Whigs, and ex-Free Soilers (those

opposed to extending slavery to the territories), overcoming the nativist abolitionist Know-Nothing Party, which at one point seemed as if it would be next to oppose the Democrats. In antebellum America slavery dominated the political sphere, the legality of slavery in new territories and states, or slavery’s future in general. Cases such as the Missouri Compromise, Dred Scott vs Sandford, the Wilmot Proviso, the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the Compromise of 1850 suggest a constantly changing and confused governmental position on slavery. The Republicans took a clear stance on slavery where the Democrats and Whigs had previously been indecisive. A party often attacked as a “white man’s party” was once heralded as the modernizing party to cast off the yoke of slavery. The 1860 Republican policy towards slavery was one of containment rather than outright abolition. While the Republicans did not wish for slavery to grow, they were not going to force the Southern states to give up slavery, as such a demand would inevitably break the bonds of Union, and could be seen as a violation of the Constitution inasmuch as it infringed on people’s property rights - a case of realpolitik if ever there was one.

Come the end of the Civil War, the Republicans didn’t pursue issues of slavery as tenaciously as they had done, even though they held a virtually continuous string of presidencies until Roosevelt’s election in 1932. Only three presidents during this time were Democrats.

Abraham Lincoln’s election in 1860 marked the first Republican presidency of the USA. Since then, the USA has had 19 Republican presidents (including Trump). During its rise to prominence in the political arena, the Republican Party didn’t derive support from all states as it does now. The Republicans found virtually all of their support in the Northern States.

Whilst some party platforms unavoidably had certain policies that weren’t favourable for both the North and the South, the Democrats and the Whigs were able to court support from both parts of the US in past elections. On the other hand, the Republicans found their electoral victory in 1860 with support from all the states above Pennsylvania, the Northwest, and Oregon and California, whilst not carrying any Southern states. Nowadays, constraints on the Republican party’s electoral possibilities don’t stem from geographical and locational characteristics, but rather from race and class. Nonetheless, the Republicans are able to court support from all states around the country unlike before. In contrast to Lincoln who could only gain support from the North and Free States, Reagan was able to carry every single state except Minnesota in the 1984 election, highlighting the evolution of the Republicans into a truly national party.

The Republicans established themselves as the pro-business party following the Civil War. Generally speaking, they retained the Whig economic views that the government should intervene in the economy. That meant financing infrastructure and education and protecting native industries, policies promoting commerce and rapid job growth. They were the forward looking, innovative party; they were the “big government” party and, ran policies that promoted big banks, big industry and big business. They were the party of the Gilded Age, who sought to modernise the USA, built railroads all over the country and enacted protectionist policies while being relaxed on regulation, fuelling the capitalist excess of the era. The early Republican Party approved very much of big government and strong federal oversight.

Nowadays the Republicans identify as opposed to big government. As Reagan said in his inaugural address, “We are a nation that has a government, not the other way round.” This hostility towards strong federal power emerged in the 1930s, when Republicans were alarmed by the increased power that the federal government was amassing to put the country right again after the Wall Street Crash in order to weather the Great Depression. However, such sentiments had been brewing within the Republican Party before. Many Republicans were divided over how far they were

Abraham Lincoln to conspire with big business. As a result, the Republicans became factionalised, with a “Progressive” wing which advocated strong federal economic intervention, and a more financially conservative wing.

The party made a strong turn towards fiscal conservatism in the 1912 election, when the party’s composition was shaken up and when Theodore Roosevelt and the Progressive Republicans broke away to run on an independent platform. This growing fiscal conservatism manifested itself in Herbert Hoover’s policy of a balanced budget during the Great Depression. In 1931, this policy cut federal spending by $125 million. Such policies were regarded as having exacerbated the nation’s economic woes, and the Republicans were to pay by waiting until 1953 for another president.

As with its economic policies, we often associate the Republican Party with a more conservative social outlook, not necessarily hostile towards immigrants and minorities, but definitely less supportive of them than the Democratic Party. Commencing 1932 with Roosevelt’s New Deal, the Republicans began to “bleed” African-American support. In 1932, Robert Vann captured the historic turn of black politics by saying, “I see millions of negroes turning the picture of Abraham Lincoln to the wall.” This shook up voter demographics markedly. In the 1964 Presidential Election, Republican nominee, Barry Goldwater, expressed his

13

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

Ronald Reagan opposition to the Civil Rights Act of that same year, ostensibly out of opposition to the expanded federal government powers that it would entail. The legacy of the great emancipator, Lincoln, was not enough to ensure party loyalties, and African-Americans deserted the Republicans for the Democrats in droves. For many African-Americans, the term “States-rights” is code for a federal government that will acquiesce to discrimination. However, the changing constituencies of support for the Republicans didn’t stem entirely from a changing party platform. In what is essentially a two-party system, the actions of the Democrats had a marked effect on the Republicans as well. In 1964, Lyndon Johnson was partially responsible for the growing white support of the Republicans.

Johnson’s endorsement of the Civil Rights Act drafted by JFK and his pledge to push it forward ended one of the longest marriages in US political history: that between the Democrats and southern whites. The tough-on-immigration stance taken by the Republican Party has made supporting the Democrats not only an African-American tendency, but also attractive to many minority groups. In fact, in the 2012 election, Barack Obama took 71% of the Hispanic vote. The social conservatism of the Republicans doesn’t manifest itself solely in the issue of race relations. Most Republicans are opposed to Roe vs Wade (a court case legalising abortion) and gay marriage, with Vice President, Mike Pence, a strong critic of homosexuality and a supporter of gay shock therapy. Changes to the 2nd Amendment are also anathema to most Republicans, deemed by many an integral safeguard against government tyranny.

Such stances mean that today, Republicans tend to court the votes of the elderly, with the average Republican voter aged 50 compared to 47 for a Democrat voter.

The ranks of the Republican Party hav-

en’t always followed the same structure. At times, the Republicans consisted of marked factions who had distinct ideologies, separated from the rest of the party, but still retained a strong influence and pushed the party in certain directions. During the Republican Party’s beginnings, the group that fitted this bill would be the Radical Republicans who existed from its foundings until around the end of the Reconstruction Era. The Radicals strongly opposed slavery during the war (abolitionists), and after the war they distrusted ex-Confederates, demanding harsh punishments for the former rebels, and emphasised equality, civil rights, and voting rights for emancipated slaves. Radicals took a much less conciliatory tone, and wished to subjugate the South for their digressions on the issue of slavery, pushing for the uncompensated abolition of slavery, while Lincoln wanted to pay slave owners who were loyal to the Union. After the war, the Radicals were behind much of the political advances of the Reconstruction era. They initiated the various Reconstruction Acts and limited political and voting rights for ex-Confederate officials, military officers and soldiers.

They were also partially responsible for the ineffectiveness of Andrew Johnson’s presidency. They bitterly fought President Andrew Johnson by overruling many of his vetoes concerning congressional bills (15 vetoes of 21 were overruled), undermining his influence and attempted to remove him from office through impeachment.

Another distinct faction within the Republicans was the Rockefeller Republicans of the 1940s-1970s. Dwight Eisenhower used “modern Republicanism” to describe this wing of the Party and was probably the President who had the most similar political ideology, with a liberal social outlook exemplified in the Civil Rights Act of 1954 and the desegregation of Little Rock High School in 1957. Geographically, they were

concentrated on the East Coast, leading to the nickname “the Eastern Establishment”.

Economically, they opposed socialism and government ownership of businesses, but were supportive of the rights of labour unions, imposing regulations on business for the greater good of society and basic aspects of the New Deal, that is still integral to modern day American capitalism. Similar to modern Republicans, they favoured balanced budgets. Though unlike modern Republicans, they wouldn’t balk at the prospect of raising taxes to do so. In addition, they were strong supporters of Wall Street and big business, and many of their ranks came from the world of finance and business. This faction faded into obscurity after the nomination of arch-conservative Barry Goldwater in 1964 and its characterisation as a group of Eastern business elites catalysed the demise of its influence, the majority of which it lost soon after.

It wasn’t until the 1980s that we really saw the Republican Party begin to resemble its modern state.

Ronald Reagan drew together the various strands of support that we would see as

key constituents of the Republican Party: businesses, Christian evangelicals and anti-Communists. On the foundation of Reagan’s platform of American greatness that overturned the malaise of the Carter years and removed the liberal excesses of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society program, the Republican Party transformed into the more patriotic and hawkish of the two parties, characteristics that were preserved under the administrations of George HW Bush and George W Bush.

With Donald Trump soon to assume office, the Republican Party whilst definitely shaken by the events of 2016, still has a strong grounding of support. Donald Trump is unlikely to change the direction of the Republican Party, being too much of an outside force, but will likely act as a wake up call to the Republican establishment of the need for reform. The future of the Republican Party isn’t as secure as the election results would suggest. The Republicans rode to victory partly on the back of a highly unpopular opponent in Hillary Clinton.

In an ever-more diverse United States, the Republican Party needs to broaden its base of support, and shed this image that it exclusively represents the interests of White Americans. This wasn’t a problem during this election because of the image of the Democrats as establishment-elitists, which leads to much dissatisfaction. On the other hand, with this election’s result disproving the ideas of identity politics with a surprising number of women and minorities voting for Trump, such criticisms have been seemingly weakened. Overall, a narrow support base won’t mean the death of the Republican Party, but it isn’t a tenable position.

Dwight Eisenhower

14

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

Features

The Chinese Zodiac CULTURE

Weihan Huang delves into the intricacies behind the Chinese Zodiac and its extensive influence on Asian countries

T

he Chinese Zodiac is a twelve-year cycle based on the lunar calendar that assigns a particular animal sign to each year. According to Chinese legend, these animal signs and their order were determined in a race organised by the Jade Emperor (the Chinese Emperor of heaven) who wanted the first twelve finishers to guard a year of the cycle each. As a result, the signs are in order: rat, ox, tiger, rabbit, dragon, snake, horse, sheep, monkey, rooster, dog and pig.

The reason why the small, unimpressive rat was able to claim the coveted first place in the Chinese Zodiac was that it rode on the back of the ox throughout the race before jumping off at the end, pipping the ox to the post. This legend also accounts for the long-running animosity between cats and rats. It states that the rat forgot to wake the cat up for the race, costing it a place in the Zodiac, resulting in continual hatred

between these two animals.

This year on 28th January, Chinese communities across the world will celebrate the Chinese New Year, specifically the upcoming year of the rooster. Traditional activities during these celebrations include family gatherings with heaps of food, lion dances, firecrackers and small red envelopes containing money given to the younger generation to bless them with good luck. These celebrations help to preserve Chinese cultural identity and are an excellent opportunity to foster relationships with relatives.

As for the superstitious aspect, an individual’s fortune during the year of the rooster varies depending on their own animal sign which is determined by the year of birth. Listed below are predictions specific to the animal signs. Please take them with a pinch of salt!

RAT (1912, 1924, 1936, 1948, 1960, 1972, 1984, 1996, 2008) People born in the year of the rat should expect a continuation of their good fortune from the year of the monkey as long as they are cunning and nimble enough to navigate through any potential problems they face.

RABBIT (1915, 1927, 1939, 1951, 1963, 1975, 1987, 1999, 2011) People born in the year of the rabbit should expect a challenging year, as rabbits do not share many traits with the rooster. Roosters are hardworking while rabbits like to relax. Thus, this clash of traits will inevitably bring them bad luck and they should reign in their ambition in all aspects of life.

OX (1913, 1925, 1937, 1949, 1961, 1973, 1985, 1997, 2009) People born in the year of the ox will enjoy harmonious relations due to common trait of being a farm animal that it shares with the rooster. Therefore, being business partners with people born in the year of the rooster will bring them wealth and success.

DRAGON (1916, 1928, 1940, 1952, 1964, 1976, 1988, 2000, 2012) For those born in the year of the dragon will come a continuation of the good luck and prosperity they experienced in the year of the monkey. The rooster and the dragon form a joint symbol of marriage in Chinese culture, making these two animals harmonious and this year an auspicious one for those born in the year of the dragon.

15

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

TIGER (1914, 1926, 1938, 1950, 1962, 1974, 1986, 1998, 2010) People born in the year of the tiger will have to be cautious and resilient as they recover from their ill fortune during the previous year of the monkey. This year will continue to be a turbulent one due to the impulsive nature of the tiger. Therefore, in order to strike balance in this year, people born in the year of the tiger must reign in their natural hot-headedness.

SNAKE (1917, 1929, 1941, 1953, 1965, 1977, 1989, 2001, 2013) The upcoming year of the rooster will be full of challenges and change.

Similar to how a snake sheds its skin in order to grow, success can only obtained through perseverance that will subject you to a lot of stress.

HORSE (1918, 1930, 1942, 1954, 1966, 1978, 1990, 2002, 2014) People born in the year of the horse will have to endure a period of difficulties before enjoying the fruits of their labour. Therefore, they will have to be diligent and meticulous in order to obtain success.

ROOSTER (1921, 1933, 1945, 1957, 1969, 1981, 1993, 2005) This year will be the year that people born in the year of the rooster mature. In order to do so, they must pursue every new opportunity with aggression and determination. However, they should avoid others born in the year of the rooster, as their good fortunes will clash. The good fortune they experience this year is essentially dependent on them, as their personality will prove to be particularly malleable this year.

SHEEP (1919, 1931, 1943, 1955, 1967, 1979, 1991, 2003, 2015) The year of the rooster requires one to be hardworking in order to succeed.

In contrast, sheep tend to rely on their charisma and social relations to succeed. Therefore people born in the year of the sheep will have to change their attitude if they want good fortune in the upcoming year.

DOG (1922, 1934, 1946, 1958, 1970, 1982, 1994, 2006) The characteristics of a dog are not similar to a rooster but are complementary to them. Therefore, people born in the year of the dog will be able to establish control over all aspects of their lives, making their luck and achievements dependent on their management skills.

MONKEY (1920, 1932, 1944, 1956, 1968, 1980, 1992, 2004, 2016) People born in the year of the monkey will have to be flexible if they want to succeed. In contrast to the previous year of the monkey that provided them with a plethora of opportunities for success, they will have to knuckle down and be more alert this year to be able to receive similar opportunities.

PIG (1923, 1935, 1947, 1959, 1971, 1983, 1995, 2007) The year of the rooster will bring financial prosperity to those born in the year of the pig. Their common identity as farm animals provides good fortune.

However, they must be wary of being too involved in personal affairs and control their emotions in order to keep their life in check.

People of all animal signs can receive good fortune and be rewarded as long as they channel the traits of the rooster, such as diligence, loyalty, courage and dedication to family.

The reliability of these predictions is debatable as despite the fact that they do have some academic roots in astrology, most of it is based upon guesswork and assumptions regarding the various characteristics that the animals possess. Therefore, the Chinese Zodiac can either enrich your life or have an adverse effect on it, depending on the degree of your belief in these predictions.

Favourable predictions will naturally instil confidence and assurance in an individual and perhaps give him/her the necessary courage to leave his/her comfort zone and reap the rewards of doing so. However, negative predictions will make believers unnecessarily paranoid, adding to their stress and affecting their behaviour by adding an element of doubt to make them more cautious and less willing to take risks. Thus, predictions made using the Chinese Zodiac tend to be self-fulfilling

prophecies due to the extensive psychological impact it can have on those who are more superstitious.

Another more extreme and potentially problematic way in which superstitions sourced from the Chinese Zodiac influence people is that some couples may try to have children during the year of the dragon that is considered to be particularly auspicious. This is due to the fact that the dragon is often associated with power, wealth and nobility. Thus, parents hope that such traits will manifest in their children.

Consequently, birth rates in Asian countries such as China and Taiwan tend to rise during the year of the dragon, causing shortages in resources such as baby products and hospital rooms in the short run. In addition, this can also result in long-term problems such as over-competitive school problems.

The Chinese Zodiac is an essential part of Chinese culture that should be preserved and will prove beneficial so long as people do not nurture unhealthy superstitious beliefs or obsessions using its guidance.

16

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

Features

Many new drivers are unable to even get insured on more expensive cars.

TRANSPORT

New Drivers, More Deaths Dan Alcock investigates if the high price of car insurance for young people can be justified

D

riving is a popular topic among many of us at school.

Whether you’re in Lower or Middle School and discussing what you want your first car to be and whether you’re taking any junior driving courses, or in Sixth Form learning to drive or having passed your test. It’s impossible to deny that it is an exciting thought for a lot of people and something that the majority of pupils will partake in. However, there are a lot of controversies over drivers under the age of 25. Do they deserve the higher cost of insurance, or should this be calculated through other methods?

Does a lack of experience mean they’re worse drivers? Is a teenage driver who’s just passed the test more of a danger than a 30 year old who’s just passed their test? Should young adults even be provided licenses at all? This is a huge debate among many people our age, as many think the way the younger driver can be treated is unfair, but there are reasons for this.

Following research undertaken by the UK government in 2013, the government discovered that newly-qualified drivers under the age of 21 felt that the car industry was ‘greedy and corrupt.’ This is because of the extortionate difference insurance prices for these driver oppose to those who are older. According to the AA, the average annual motor insurance premium stands at a whopping £1743 for 17-22 year olds, and just £747 for those over that bracket. There’s no denying that both sums are huge amounts of money, but there’s a lot of uproar amongst the young adults, who are likely to be living with a lower income than those who are older.

The reason behind this is simply because of the amount of road crashes.

The Transport Research Laboratory claimed that 25% of crashes in 2014 in the UK involved a 17-24 year old. To add to the gravity of this statistic, in 65% of these

collisions a fatal injury was sustained by passengers or road users rather than the young driver. The Department for Transport announced in 2011 that an 18 year old driver is three times more likely to be involved in a car accident than a 48 year old. To round it all off, the Driving Standards Agency found that in the UK one in five new drivers crashed their vehicle in the first six months of driving since passing their test.

These statistics speak for themselves with the government citing reasons behind this such as that less experience in driving means that the drivers may panic in a dangerous situation, or that under 25’s may drive more immaturely and want to impress their friends.

Whilst this is not true of many, it is an assumption that is made. To really lower your car insurance a significant amount, you’ll need 8 years experience by the

The average annual motor insurance premium stands at a whopping £1743 for 17-22 year olds

time you’re 25 and then there will be a big drop in your annual insurance premium.

The question still stands though, why is insurance so much cheaper for new drivers who are over the age of 40?

Well, it’s due to statistics. Car insurers look very carefully at where their money

is spent, where the most accidents happen and who causes the most cars to be written off. Insurance-advisor website Car Claim shows that 16-24 year old drivers cause 40% of all deaths in road accidents, 25-35 about 30%, and then 3660 about 20% before the number rises as seniors cause an increasingly higher proportion of deaths on roads. This is exactly what is reflected in insurance premiums, a curve of decreasing price before rising again after 60. This is the most simple way for those companies to calculate who they should charge for what when it comes to insurance.

There are far fewer new drivers who are middle-aged than are teenage, and so their inexperience does not appear in the statistics as prominently. Young drivers are also involved in a greater proportion of drunk driving incidents, which does not help them in this case.

From a logistical point of view, the differences in insurance costs make sense. Younger drivers tend to have less experience than older, and so are more in danger of being in risk. Maybe the differences are unfair and too great, but it’s the insurance companies’ way of preventing as many young people on the roads and cause accidents as possible.

There is good news coming though, as times could be changing.

The car insurance industry is going through a transitional period right now, with changes in the law and technology making the cost of cover for teenagers potentially fairer in the future. In 2013, the European Gender Directive was implemented and told insurers they couldn’t take sex into account when setting premiums - teenage girls used to get cheaper cover than boys as they were, statistically, safer drivers. Black boxes are very popular now, using actual data about one’s driving to lower or raise or decide one’s car insurance quote, rather than setting premiums on assumptions on one’s driving based on age, gender,

experience and so forth. Finally, the UK government is looking at doing something about the high cost of teenage motoring. The Department for Transport has put together a Green Paper report looking at solutions to the problems.

It mainly suggests putting new drivers through more rigorous training and testing before letting them on the roads,

Younger drivers tend to have less experience than older, and so are more in danger of being in risk

and even restrictions on the number of passengers new drivers could carry, and curfews - although the conclusion from this is yet to be drawn.

Returning to the original questions I asked at the start of this article, it seems reasonably fair to price young people’s insurance higher than the older. There are many methods to cheapen this as much as possible from installing a black box to getting a car with a smaller engine. At the end of the day, all accusations aimed at young drivers aside, whatever the real reasons behind the extremely high pricing of insurance for us, we only have to live with it for a few years of our lives, and maybe we’ll drive safer because of it.

17

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

Features POLITICS

What’s the Best Way to Vote in a Democracy?

T

Piers Mucklejohn investigates what the best method of voting in a democracy would be

he US electoral system is centred around the Electoral College. Each state votes for representatives in the Electoral College who then cast their own votes to elect the president. Typically the representatives vote for the nominee favoured by their state, but they do not have to. Any one state grants a certain number of votes to the Electoral College depending on its population. This system

dominant nominee. This means in turn that in a hotly contested state a single vote is disproportionately valuable, for it could tip the balance and win many votes for the state’s favoured nominee. These states are known as swing states, and they include Ohio and Iowa.

It is problematic if your vote is less powerful depending on where you live.

It is also problematic that presidential nominees can simply target the swing

Trump and Clinton were both competiting for the most powerful job in the world is prone to error as Fairvote.org points out: ‘On average a state is awarded one electoral vote for every 565,166 people.

However, Wyoming has three electoral votes and only 532,668 citizens (2008 estimates). As a result each of Wyoming’s three electoral votes corresponds to 177,556 people.’ This means that a Wyoming voter is worth 3.18 voters from elsewhere. Furthermore, a voter in a predominantly Republican state

The votes of the people in Wyoming count for 3.18 votes by the average American

often has a vote worth less than a vote from a predominantly Democrat state.

This happens because Democrat votes in chiefly Republican states ultimately count for nothing, as the Electoral College should only vote for the state’s

states, promising uncertain things and concealing certain policies in a bid to win their votes. The system allows the Democrats to win more votes in a supporting state than the Republicans can, while suffering only minor losses in the other states. The upshot of this is that a nominee can have the support of more voters but still lose the election. This is precisely what happened in the 2016 US Presidential Election. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College vote. Donald Trump expressed his outrage over the Electoral College in 2012, calling it ‘a disaster for democracy’. His victory changed his viewpoint and he soon tweeted, ‘The Electoral College is actually genius.’

The United Kingdom’s voting system is flawed in a similar fashion. A vote is wasted if it is not spent on a front-runner party, giving rise to a similar situation to the USA. A party can receive more votes but end up with fewer seats in Parliament. This is what happened in the 2015 General Election, when UKIP gained 3.9 million votes (12.6%) but only gained one seat. In that same election the Scottish National Party gained 1.5 million votes (4.7%) and gained 56 seats.

Many people think because of this that the USA and UK should employ some form of Proportional Representation, in which the number of votes a party or presidential candidate earns is directly proportional to the amount of seats in Parliament or Congress. This system requires a party to win over 50% of the

vote, leading to many cumbersome and divided coalition governments. Others support the existing system because the party in control of the country will necessarily also have control over the majority of constituencies or states.

With Proportional Representation, the victorious party could actually have less representation in Parliament.

One fundamental issue with any form of voting is voter turnout. In this year’s US Presidential Election, graphs show that the number of people voting for the Republican nominee each year up until 2016’s election has not actually increased that much but the amount of Democratic voters suffered a big drop in 2016 and overall voter turnout was lower. This is also a problem for votes such as the United Kingdom’s referendum to leave the EU in 2016 which had a voter turnout of 72%. Although 72% is a high turnout, many people argue that it is not enough because if 52% of the 72% of eligible voters voted to leave the EU then it is not fair to see that an EU exit is ‘the will of the people’ as if every eligible voter had voted things could have been different.

Many people would then argue that it is their responsibility to vote and so by not voting you have to suffer the consequence of a decision you may not agree with. However, others counter this by arguing that if a vote is regarding a change in the status quo of a country, it should be treated more as a petition in which

might be less likely to go out and vote than if you want things to change. For these reasons, many people have argued that an Australian-styled voting system should be implemented in which voting

If you want to vote Democrat but your state is largely Republican then your vote will ultimately count for nothing

is compulsory and failure to vote results in a hefty fine; this way the true will of the people can be revealed.

A flawless democratic method for taking votes seems impossible. At best, a party or candidate should be able to get the majority of the votes equally from across the whole country, with each age

Hillary Clinton failed to become President despite getting over a million more votes you vote to leave the EU and don’t vote if you wish to stay as this is an accurate way to get an idea of how many people want to leave, this is because if you want things to stay the way they are then you

group voting majoritively. This is not a system which will be adopted because of the inevitable surge of coalitions. For the time being the ideal voting system is beyond our grasp.

18

Features

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

Need a Book?

CULTURAL

Freddie Marshall’s recommends some good reads

The aliens vision of earth in The Humans

Benzamir flies over what his world has become in The Lost Art

The Lost Art by Simon Morden

The Lost Art is a gripping book that goes deep into a concept that merges sci-fi with medieval and magical themes. The geography of the planet has been completely transformed, and any attempt to use science is looked upon as foolishness. All technology from the past has been locked away by the church in an attempt to prevent a new armageddon. The book features three main characters: Va is a murderer-turned-monk looking to start afresh with a life of devotion to his god, pushing his body to the limit no matter what gets in his way. When his monastery is raided and his fellow monks slaughtered, Va realises that some very important books have been stolen. We follow his frantic attempts to recover them. Benzamir fled the world when age old wars broke out. His quest is to find old enemies from the far reaches of space. He brings amazing technology to this world and tries to discover yet more technology hidden by the church. Solomon meanwhile plays a small part in the book, and he could have been better used to develop the plot. His character is intriguing and he plays a crucial part in the story. The Lost Art is very engrossing and fast-paced. However, the storyline is weak and the characters are underdeveloped. It is your basic quest novel, with a few twists and turns along the way. The plot is never very developed and is what the title suggests. It is just the quest to find the lost book of the church. The characters are interesting but by the end of the book you feel they were not developed as much as they could have been and sometimes they feel a bit wasted. If you are a fan of elaborate scenery and a creative, highly adapted world, then you will thoroughly enjoy this book.

The Humans by Matt Haig

The Humans begins when an alien inhabits the body of a professor who he has just assassinated. He doesn’t appear in his office as he had expected but in the middle of the road with absolutely no clothing. Andrew Martin, the professor assassinated, had made an unbelievable mathematical breakthrough. He had solved the Riemann hypothesis. The Vonnadorians, a hugely advanced alien species unknown to humans, believe that humans are not nearly intelligent enough and are too violent and untrustworthy to know about the Riemann hypothesis.

They believed they would soon have too much power. The Vonnadorian inhabiting the professor’s’ body has had trouble with the time travel that put him there and has no clue about human culture. He stumbles over to the nearest petrol station and is run over several times before doing so. He finally makes his way over to the university that the professor worked at. He is then arrested. The book carries on and touches on some very big questions and statements on humankind today. We become attached to the alien and he becomes attached to his family which proves a real challenge as his end goal is to kill them. The author tries to analyse the strange and odd ways of humans in a hilarious but also very engrossing and interesting way. If you enjoy developed characters and science fiction you will thoroughly enjoy this book. Matt Haig uses science fiction to describe many concepts of today such as free will. It is a brilliant book but will only be interesting to a certain age group; boys in Lower School might find it a challenge.

The Chocolate War by Robert Cormier

In my opinion The Chocolate War is one of Cormier’s greatest and most mesmerising books.

It is about a common subject in literature: conflict in a rough secondary school. This would

Chocolate waiting to be sold by the schools children in The Chocolate War normally contain many brawls and end with the main character defeating the more powerful pupils, but Cormier twists this genre completely. It starts when Jerry, an average day boy at the school, starts a small revolt against the school’s harsh leaders and constricting environment.

It’s not much but he decides to refuse to sell any chocolates in the school’s annual fundraising campaign. However, teachers deliberately start dropping his grades and punishing him at any opportunity possible. It’s an insignificant attempt at a revolution but things start to get deadly serious when he challenges the schools most powerful mob, The Vigils. The Vigils are more powerful and have more authority amongst the students than even the teachers at Trinity High. These actions from Jerry lead to a full blown war amongst the school and the book climaxes with an intense and intriguing ending which will stay with you for a long time.

I strongly recommend this book if you like a fast-paced novel which is an excellent page turner and includes many important morals in the story. The characters are brilliantly developed and you can really feel for a few and become attached to many which makes for a more immersive book. Robert Cormier has written 18 fiction books and this is one of his most successful titles. If you enjoy this book and the author I would recommend Heroes and I am cheese.

Nation by Terry Pratchett

Terry Pratchett is renowned for his imaginative and creative series: Discworld. Many people know him for this series and will only read his Discworld books. What people don’t know is that he has written many solo novels, one of which is Nation. If you have never read any Terry Pratchett but don’t fancy plunging yourself into the marathon series Discworld then I suggest starting with Nation.

Nation is set on a small island in the middle of the great southern Pelagic Ocean. It is a world very similar to ours, but while the people are of the nineteenth century, the geography of the world is 50 years in the future. Mau, a small island boy, is making the ritual journey to a dark, desolate island and making his own way back. This will take him from boyhood into manhood. On his return to his home island a tsunami catapults itself over Mau and towards his island. Mau survives but when he returns home, his friends, family and every living human on the island has been annihilated by the tsunami. We learn much more about his religion and beliefs and later meet a stranded British girl called Ermintrude. Her ship has been wrecked and she has swum to Mau’s Island. Pratchett uses the communication barrier between Mau and Ermintrude to inject some comedy into the serious book. He also includes many quirky jokes which you will be familiar with if you have already read his other novels. Mau’s island begins to fill with immigrants which proves very difficult for Mau. They learn about many different cultures and start to build their own nation. After Mau has almost built his nation they are attacked by raiders and Mau realises he is going to have to lead his nation if they want to survive. This is a brilliant book for all years as it has many interesting topics on what a civilized nation would be but there are also plenty of jokes and action to entice any reader.

I think it is also an excellent book as it talks about religion and ghosts and asks philosophical questions about faith.

I would definitely recommend Nation to any audience of eager readers especially if they haven’t read any Terry Pratchett before.

19

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

‘Köln, Németország‘ by Elya is licenced under CC BY-SA 4.0

Sport

CRICKET

Why England should win the ICC Champions Trophy Toby Jupp explains why England have the best chance of winning the trophy

T

he lesser mentioned ICC Champions Trophy will be contested in England this summer. Taking the 50-over format, it will effectively be a mini World Cup, the perfect rehearsal for 2019 when England will host the quadrennial Cricket World Cup. This England side should win this tournament, but before delving into the reasons why, let’s have a look at the likely makeup of the squad, and some intriguing dilemmas for the selection committee: XI: Roy, Hales, Root, Morgan (c), Buttler (wk), Stokes, Ali, Woakes, Rashid, Willey, Plunkett; Billings, Dawson, Ball, Wood.

Most of these positions are carved in stone at this point, but three positions are still highly debatable, in this writer’s view.

Firstly, the fourth seamer is an increasingly competitive battle. Liam Plunkett held the slot at the beginning of England’s ODI revolution 18 months ago but has faced a fierce battle to hold onto it ever since, intermittently challenged by the likes of Reece Topley, Steven Finn, Mark Wood and most recently, Jake Ball. The latter two are likely to make the squad this summer, providing Wood recovers from his injury. However, for me it is Plunkett who should play, he has Wood’s pace (almost at least) and Ball’s

extra height and bounce, and he compliments best England’s seam attack, which is mostly made up of swing bowlers.

Then, there is a straight choice between Moeen Ali and Liam Dawson for the second spinner/all-rounder position at number seven. Ali would probably be the smarter option, as Dawson remains relatively inexperienced. However, Ali must improve his recent batting form,

and who would be a star batsman in any other national XI. However, this is the prospect facing Eoin Morgan. He still deserves to play in my opinion, but there is a very good case for bringing in Sam Billings, who has more than 150 runs in his last two innings for England.

With Alex Hales and Jason Roy breaking every record that an England opener has ever set and Joe Root continuing to be

They are the best white-ball team in the world, it’s as simple as that which has not been good enough in the shorter formats for England over the last year or so.

It is a mark of how much England have progressed since the World Cup that there can be question marks over the man who has led what has been dubbed ‘the best England ODI team ever’, a man who has overseen a complete transformation in the philosophy, attitude and fortunes of the side in white-ball cricket

Joe Root, there is little chance of them being dropped, and for me, Jos Buttler and Stokes can be no lower than five and six in the lineup. For me, Morgan has to play, but such is the undeniable talent of Billings and the leadership ability of both Root, Buttler or even Stokes, that his place in the side depends on him delivering the trophy for England this summer.

I haven’t even mentioned the likes of James Vince, Ben Duckett and Jonny

Bairstow who probably won’t even make the squad.

So why should England win? They are the best white-ball team in the world.

It’s as simple as that. They should have won the ICC World Twenty20 last year (without the most remarkable final over I’ve ever seen they would have) and that was played in India, the supposed graveyard for all England batsmen... and spinners... and seamers! Now the team is a year more experienced, has broken record after record (444/3 against Pakistan last summer), is playing in home conditions. They have achieved 3 out of 4 home series victories since 2015, and the defeat was a narrow 3-2 to recent World Champions, Australia, and the decider was played without Root, Buttler or Woakes, and captain Morgan had to retire hurt after scoring only one run.

With a team that bats all the way down to number 11 (not one player does not have a century in the above XI) and still has a six-man bowling attack, there is no doubt that England have the firepower to win.

The only thing that can stop is England is not AB de Villiers, not Virat Kohli, not Chris Gayle, especially since West Indies won’t be at the tournament after being replaced by Bangladesh in the top eight rankings. The only thing that can stop England is the national propensity to bottle it on the big stage.

20

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

Sport

Blondey McCoy: SKATEBOARDING

Not just an average skateboarder Dan Brown explores the life of Blondey McCoy

B

londey McCoy (real name Tom McCoy) is an incredibly distinctive figure: tall, slim, half lebanese but a natural blonde.

The London teenager has a wide range of talents but two things interest him the most: his sport of skateboarding and his fashion.

Blondey has been skating since the age of 13. Since then he has devoted his life to the skateboarding culture, whether that be missing days of school to do it or risking life and limb to master the most

His skating really began at London’s famous SouthBank difficult of tricks. His skating really began and developed at his favourite spot, London’s famous South Bank. While skating around the City of London he started to make a name for himself, and at the age of 15 he was skating for a Palace Wayward

Boys Choir (a crew he still rides for now), a highly prestigious skating crew with the likes of Benny Fairfax. Blondey got his first big break when he signed for the Skateboarding giants, Supreme, which is quite the achievement for the young skateboarder. Soon enough Blondey inevitably signed for the his local skate brand, Palace skateboards, which suited the teenager a lot more than the New York based Supreme. Soon after, Blondey was snapped up by big corporations wanting to sponsor him, such as Adidas and later Slam City skates. The long list of sponsorship Blondey had received by the age of 19 really demonstrates the amount of talent he possesses.

One of the most impressive things about one of London’s brightest teenagers other than his skating prowess is his promising career in streetwear fashion.

This is highlighted through Blondey creating his own brand, Thames, at the age of 15. The brand originated from the young Blondey just doodling and making designs, many of which were just a bit of a laugh for his mates. From the early days the clothes were never meant for buying and selling but just a way in which he could put his ideas into a bracket. However, from this point on the brand starting to make a name for

itself with iconic pieces representing the Queen which really stuck out. This distinctly British vibe occurs throughout the Thames collection and stems from Blondey’s love of the monarchy.

The creative flare of an already very talented skateboarder sets him apart from rest The point when the brand hit its peak was when Lev Tanju, owner of Palace skateboards, decided to help his young skateboarder out by providing the brand with it’s own team to assist Blondey and provide the brand with more advertising. This led to Thames pieces even being sold within the Palace shop in Soho. Another outstanding point for Thames was when they first collabed with Palace producing Thames x Palace skateboards.

Blondey’s career in streetwear is also emphasised by the amount of modelling he does. This side of his career started with his first brand, Supreme, but really hit the heights with Palace. His modelling is most prominent at Palace because he is essentially their poster boy. He will model the clothing for the company at each new release. This distinguishes him from the rest of the Palace skaters as they take no part in this modelling side of the brand as it is all left to Blondey.

Finally, to fully comprehend Blondey one must also delve into this artwork. The young skater has now had many successful exhibitions showing his art. One of the most successful was his Thames A.D exhibition which represented a lot of art within his Thames clothing and skateboards. This success resulted in HOME THE HERO which provided an all new bumper show of collages, paintings, sculptures and video. The skateboarder’s artistic style may not be to everyone’s liking due to the certain crudeness of it at times but a lot of it represents what Blondey believed it was like for a young teenager to grow up in London. Finally the creative flare of an already very talented skateboarder sets him apart from the rest. He excels at what he’s good at.

He is the real McCoy.

21

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

Sport

Is Football Hooliganism back?

FOOTBALL

Dan Brown reacts to recent acts of hooliganism as well as exploring its history within the sport

F

ootball hooliganism is at the forefront of many fans’ minds after the recent World Cup in Brazil. This was most clearly exhibited by the Russian ‘Ultra’ fans who derived their fighting culture from the English football fan hooliganism which originated in the early 1960s.

Hooliganism has existed in football since it began. From the start of football becoming a professional sport there would be groups of supporters at games who would regularly start fights. These were known as ‘roughs’.

These fights would more frequently and more significantly occur between supporters of clubs in the same city or local area: the derby matches. However, the seriousness of these fights started to get out of hand during the late nineteenth century when fans not only attacked the opposition fans but would also attack the players and referee. After this, mainly during the interwar period, football gained more respectful crowds and this extremist hooliganism began to die out, but not completely.

It was not until the early 1960s that hooliganism once again became a serious problem, particularly in the media. This was expressed as a part of the overriding culture of youth rebellion and moral panic at the time.

This came about as a result of rising juvenile crime rates, uncertainty about the future and new movements like the Teddy Boys. Many other serious problems stemmed from this new football culture, including racism.

During this time football stadiums would often become battlegrounds for groups which stereotypically emerged from working class housing estates within large cities across the country. Loose alliances were formed amongst young men on match days and they occupied the terraces behind the goals at

Football Stadiums would often become Battlegrounds

stadiums. This led to the development of a strong local feeling that had to be defended against other groups. A national network of rival gangs was built up and fights regularly took place inside football grounds.

Furthermore, I believe that football hooliganism hit its peak when gangs of fans

would not only fight within the football stadiums but also organise to fight outside the stadiums. This style of hooliganism was highlighted by the firms created during the 1970s and 1980s. This was a terrible time for football fans, when the firm members themselves just believed that were having ‘a bit of a laugh’ when in fact they were partaking in activities such as verbally abusing opposition fans and threatening them with attack.

Progress was made in the 1990s to restrict the amount of hooliganism occurring. This was sparked by the Hillsborough disaster after which all-seater stadia become a requirement for the largest clubs. Apart from the hardcore, this completely removed the fan violence within the grounds. Unfortunately hooliganism does still exist outside football grounds within the UK. Modern technology is used to organise fights between different groups of hooligans. In particular the internet and mobile phones have become the main weapon of the football hooligan.

A prearranged fight recently took place in Rochdale between Manchester United fans, who are noted for their lack of passion and corporate approach to football, and Leeds United supporters. Local derby games often lead to violent battles between supporters; the most recent examples are in Burnley and Sheffield. On the internet gangs from Queens Park Rangers and Arsenal taunted each other about fights after their FA cup game. It must also be remembered that football violence occurs at all levels of the game which was clearly exhibited by the Bishop Auckland support-

ers, recently invading pitches and fighting with police during an FA Trophy game against Burton Albion.

Although hooliganism is most readily associated with supporters of English teams it is not exclusively an English problem.

Other countries also produce hooligans. In

Russian hooligans tend to be more disciplined and in better shape than their counterparts fact, in the early 1960s the English league did not want to participate in European club competition due to the perceived threat from foreign supporters. Although English supporters seem to be more likely to cause trouble abroad, there are serious problems in countries including Holland, Germany, Italy and Spain. This can be seen in recent European tournaments where German hooliganism was as much a problem as English hooliganism. German hooliganism has a particularly bad reputation as its groups are linked to far right organisations that have become more prevalent since the fall of the

Berlin Wall in 1989. Many football grounds have become a no go area for non-Germans.

This spread of hooliganism across Europe did inevitably reach the Russians and when it did they took it very seriously as we all witnessed in Marseille. The first attempt of Russian hooliganism, largely unnoticed at the time, occurred four years ago, when Russia played Poland in Warsaw at the Euro championship’s previous edition. Back then, a 5,000-strong Russian crowd marched from the city center to the stadium. A series of skirmishes between Russian and Polish fans followed, broken up by police who used rubber bullets and tear gas. Local authorities and the media blamed the incident on Polish fans, and it was soon forgotten. The Russian fans were clearly learning how to fight abroad as they were new to the experience.

Ironically, they were learning from the masters they would eventually fight on their big debut in Marseilles: the English themselves, whose behavior they imitated closely in the early 1990s, when soccer hooligan culture came to Russia following the collapse of the Iron Curtain.

With an emphasis on fitness and combat sports, Russian hooligans tend to be more disciplined and in better shape than their counterparts from nations with a longer tradition of organized soccer support. As images from Marseille showed, they tend to be fit, muscular men who clearly look like they’re adept at fighting and the Euro 2016, with their team playing England, the nation that invented soccer hooliganism, it was the perfect occasion to have a continental coming-out party.

22

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

Sport RUGBY

Six Nations 2017 Predictions

William Stewart discusses this year’s Six Nations tournament and makes some predictions of the potential outcome

T

his year’s Six Nations tournament promises to be one of the best so far. England, despite several injuries, are looking very strong and after a perfect start for Eddie Jones, winning every game, they look to be one of the favourites heading into the tournament. There is no longer a clear divide between the six teams and the once significantly weaker teams, Italy and Scotland, are stronger than ever. In this article I will briefly discuss each team’s strengths before deciding which side I think will win.

England are the reigning Six Nations champions and many would back them to defend their title. The former captain Chris Robshaw will miss the tournament, Manu Tuilagi will also be missing from the England squad and perhaps the area of most worry is in the scrum where both Joe Marler and Mako Vunipola will be missing. The lack of Billy Vunipola in the back row will also be significant as he is one of the main ball carriers for the team. Nathan Hughes may take his place and he is also a big ball carrier but the strength in depth that Jones’ side possesses may overcome this problem. The backs remain strong and fast and so I believe that once again, this strong England side will pose a big threat in this six nations.

Ireland are fresh from an historic victory over the All Blacks in Canada and they will be confident. Ireland have no major injury doubts and I would think that Joe Schmidt will choose a

similar side to that which beat New Zealand in the Autumn. Ireland are a great team to watch and their quick backline often score many tries. Their toughest test will be of course England but they have the potential to win the tournament, provided they produce the rugby that saw them dominate northern hemisphere rugby a few years ago. They should beat the so-called weaker sides with ease and if their best team manages to stay fit for the entire tournament they will surely be in with a great chance

before, in 2013 when Warren Gatland was also involved in Lions preparations so his experience may help the side. A recent introduction of younger players into the squad have improved their performances but going into this year’s tournament, they are not quite the side that they once were. They have a chance of winning but matches against England and Ireland will be tough.

France are a very unpredictable team. Some years they produce great running rugby and other years the team

This strong England side will pose a big threat in this Six Nations

of winning the Grand Slam. They play Scotland first on the 4th February.

Wales are usually a strong team but they had a below average Autumn Internationals series. Their team is very experienced and many players that have previously won the tournament are still in the side. They will, however, be without Warren Gatland as he is involved with the British and Irish Lions team that will tour New Zealand this summer. Rob Howley has stepped in

looks disjointed and they even suffered losses to Italy as a result. The new coach Guy Novès will hopefully add a different style to the side and perhaps the physicality of the likes of Mathieu Bastareaud will prove effective. It’s difficult to tell how successful the side will be since their domestic league is made up of so many foreign players but it would be hard to overlook a side that has 9 Grand Slam wins.

Scotland are an improving side that

have for so long been at the bottom end of the table. Their star player is full back Stuart Hogg who was named player of the tournament last year. Greg Laidlaw is a very accurate goal kicker and his leadership may be crucial in determining the side’s results. Their main aim will be to beat Italy and push for as high a finish as possible but in reality, I can’t really see them challenging England who have won their last 14 matches. A win over Argentina in the Autumn will give them hope but a side who has not won the Grand Slam since 1990 are definite outsiders for the title.

Last but not least are Italy. Their new coach is Conor O’Shea, an experienced coach with Harlequins in the English Premiership. Italy beat South Africa in the Autumn but their record in this tournament is not great. They are often associated with the wooden spoon and I believe they lack the strength in depth to pose a significant threat to the other sides. It would be foolish to rule them out completely, after a year where Leicester City managed to win the Premier League, but their track record is very poor and so most people would not predict them to win.

Overall, I think this year’s tournament should be a great spectacle and more competitive than ever. I think England will defend their title, with Ireland coming a narrow second. At the other end of the table, I think Italy will take home the wooden spoon. The matches start on the 4th February and they will hopefully be as exciting as ever.

23

THE MARTLET WINTER 2017 ISSUE 12

Humour

Dudley’s Dilemmas ADVICE

Dudley, the former Head’s dog, is tempted back in, having been abandoned in the UK, to fill his idle time dealing with the problems of Abingdon school members. Dudley was convinced to break the ethical principle of confidentiality by Henry Waterson and Blake Jones

Dear Dudley After your dramatic departure last year, I thought I was going to have to solve my problems myself. But then the school counsellor told me that I was beyond their help and should turn to you, since you are still around in the UK. As a result, for one more term I am turning to you for advice.

I am currently working hard for my A levels, but everyone around me is telling me that because the earth is in the same position relative to the sun as it was before, I should try to make my life better with a New Year’s resolution. I remind them that I do Latin and my life could not get any better. However I have been told that crying over a Livy unseen at one in the morning did not sound as good as I implied. I have realised that a more positive outlook could improve my general well being.

The problem is that I have not been able to find a resolution to give me a new spin on life. I asked around for ideas. The Head suggested in assembly to be more punctual, but being on time means risking more time in lessons so I want to avoid that. One teacher told me that their New Year’s resolution was to stop taking one bite of a sandwich and then putting it back in the MCR. None of these seem right for me though. Please help me Dudley, I want to find a new take on life but cannot think of anything. Give me suggestions on how to change.

Thank you, Anonymous Sixth Former

Dear member of Abingdon School, I had thought that I was done working through problems belonging to other people, but now that I find myself between jobs I need something to pass the time. You can have this one for free, but be warned, I am no longer contractually obliged to give legitimate advice.

It’s cheering to see that you’re studying hard for your A-levels, that’s good, but I fear you have developed one of the side effects: melancholy, leading you to seek drastic change in your life. As you are only just considering a New Year’s resolution so long after the New Year, perhaps the new Head’s suggestion is worth considering. Nevertheless, the ground is still fertile for a New Year’s resolution.

You correctly identified that taking one bite out of MCR sandwiches is not right for you (you shouldn’t really be touching the MCR sandwiches at all), but maybe I can suggest something that’s both sustainable and beneficial in the long term. Many sixth formers overcome the January blues by drawing in-depth revision timetable0s, mapping additional revision slots from now until the Summer exams. A study in America showed that pupils who revise more attain higher grades, and by inserting an additional 60 minutes of revision every Friday, Saturday and Sunday evening, you can achieve approximately 60 additional hours of revision by the time your papers come about. Not only will this resolution help you fulfill the societal role of a sixth former (grades), but you will feel much better for it. Inside your revision pod you are protected from the uneven surfaces, irregular temperatures, bright light and unpleasant smells of the outside world.

I would normally suggest a New Year’s diet to somebody in your position, but the fact that you’re doing translations at 1am tells me you’re probably thin enough already.

Although your devotion is admirable, this is a bad habit. As with all Latin unseen authors, when the fun stops, stop. I’m sure you strive to do your prep the day it set, but at no point were you told to run into the night as well. I know you have come this far in your education believing that to neglect a prep on the night it’s set is to step onto a slippery slope into slavery and death, but it is actually OK to leave it until early the following morning.

I hope you find what you’re looking for.

Dudley.

Watching you every day in Big School Lobby.

The

{2016}

Quiz

See what you can remember about the events of the last year with this quiz by Rory Bishop 1: What made US athlete Abbey D’agostino and Kiwi athlete Nikki Hamblin famous at the Rio Olympics?

2: “Gun violence requires more than moments of silence. It requires action. In failing that test, the Senate failed the American people.”- who said this in 2016?

3: Which famous singer sadly passed away on the 10th of January 2016?

4: What rapper produced the best selling song in the British charts in 2016?

5: After years of nominations who finally received their much deserved Oscar in 2016?

6: After the Brexit result another country considered leaving Europe, which EU country was it?

7: How many Golds did Britain win in the Rio Summer Olympics?

11: In the 2015/2016 Premier League who was the top scorer?

12: According to the Chinese calendar, 2016 was the year of what animal?

13: At the end of the 2016 Olympics, which country was announced as the 2020 host?

14: Scientists discovered that the earth has a second what?

15: Which celebrity, who wrote her tweets mostly in emojis, passed away this year at the age of 60?

16: Who did Hillary Clinton tell to delete their Twitter account in 2016?

17: What feature was removed from the newest iPhone 7?

8: Scarlett Moffatt won I’m a Celebrity 2016. What show made her famous?

18: What brand had the greatest annual revenue in 2016, at 482 billion dollars?

9: Usain Bolt got his 7th 8th and 9th Gold medals at the Rio Olympics, but for what events?

19: 9 out of 10 most-viewed UK TV episodes were Bake Off in 2016.

What was the other show in the top ten?

10: The top 5 best-selling films in 2016 were all distributed by which corporation?

20: What happened to the headmaster of Reading Blue Coat School in 2016?

FOOTBALL

Will Chelsea’s Luck Run Out? C Ben Hutchison discusses whether Chelsea are about to lose their cherished villain Bridge faithful, despised by rival fans, the brutish yet prolific striker’s departure from England would undoubtedly be a sad moment for the Premier League.

Until the turn of the New Year, Chelsea had been in dreamland. 13 league wins on the bounce - a feat only ever matched by one other team in the history of the Premier League - and sitting six points clear at the top of the table. They looked a transformed team from the one that had been humiliated

by Arsenal in September, and after switching his team’s formation to 3-4-3, Conte has seen his side flourish, receiving three consecutive Manager of the Month awards. The players have oozed confidence on the ball and showed aggression off it. It would seem that Conte has instilled a passion to his players that

1: They stopped to help each other in the middle of their 5000m race.

2: Barack Obama 3: David Bowie 4: Drake 5: Leonardo DiCaprio 6: France 7: 27 8: Gogglebox 9: 100m, 200m and 4 X 100m relay 10: Disney

ool in front of goal but fiery tempered, Diego Costa is never far from the headlines. But in recent days, the Chelsea striker has dominated the back pages as he is said to soon be departing the league leaders in a transfer to the Chinese Super League that would see him earning £30 million pounds a year.

Blues owner Roman Abramovich has made it clear that he will not accept the rumoured £80 million offer from Tianjin Quanjian, the Chinese side displaying interest in the Spaniard, because the Premier League leaders, who have recently sold midfielder Oscar to Chinese club Shanghai SIPG for £60m, do not need to raise further funds through selling players. However it is said that Costa himself is pushing for a move, having fallen out with Blues Boss Antonio Conte. Loved by the Stamford

seemed imperceptible under Mourinho last season. Costa in particular has been at the heart of the resurgence, leading the race for the Golden boot with 14 goals, and he has contributed an equally important 5 assists.

PUBLISHER Emma Williamson

NEWS EDITOR Ben Ffrench

EDITOR Nick Harris

FEATURES EDITORS Jacob Lillie

DEPUTY EDITOR Dan Alcock

SPORTS EDITOR Dan Brown

COPY EDITOR Henry Waterson

DESIGN EDITORS Blake Jones Felipe Jin Li MANAGING DIRECTOR Jate Jaturanpinyo Blake Jones Pawin Sermsuk

Want to read more of Ben Hutchison’s analysis of Chelsea’s most controversial player?

Go to https://martletonline.com/ to read this and much more from The Martlet Team STAFF WRITERS Alex Thulin Ben Ffrench Ben Hutchison Blake Jones Dan Alcock Dan Brown Freddie Marshall Jacob Lillie

Johan Nerlov Kofo Braithwaite Nick Harris Piers Mucklejohn Rory Bishop Samuel King Toby Jupp Weihan Huang William Stewart

ONLINE SUPERVISOR George Jeffreys

ILLUSTRATOR Michael Man

Initial design by Asten Yeo Printed by the Newspaper Club

Contact us at martlet@abingdon.org.uk

11: Harry Kane 12: The monkey 13: Japan 14: A second, much smaller moon 15: Carrie Fisher 16: Donald Trump 17: The headphone jack 18: Walmart (UK=Asda) 19: Planet Earth 2 20: He moved to Abingdon