1
Finding Pride within the Qur’an
6
Does it matter? My European Leitkultur PRIDE and YOU.
12
Proud of being... European
14
Are you proud to be British?
16
Purple Dreadlocks, hoop earrings and white leggings
18
Back on Track.
21
FIFA 2.0 or Blatter 2.0?
25 2
9
The Diplomat
18 21 6
16
Pick a Pride 3
Do you like our articles? Then visit us at diplomat.unsamAASTRICHT.ORG
Do you enjoy our work? consider joining us next year - follow our fanpage for future updates UNSA Maastricht
4
From the Editor Here it is. In your hands you hold the last edition of The Diplomat in this academic year. And what a year it has been. It’s safe to say that when we were beginning our adventure as the Journal Committee of the UNSA, not a single one of us truly believed that Donald Trump would eventually become the President of the United States. It’s hard to believe how many topics we managed to cover in our articles since October – whether it’s the excesses of Donald Trump himself, making a case against the space colonization or even trying to capture the infamous Maastricht Syndrome in form of lyric poetry. This time we come back with yet another topic that, we believe, perfectly relates to the current political events and narrative. Pride. Everyone is proud of something. You may be proud of your achievements, decisions you made in life or apparently even the fact that you had your breakfast in the morning. You may also be proud of the country that you come from, to the extent that makes it impossible for you to actually look beyond your national interests. Is it something that shall be condemned? Not necessary. In this issue of our magazine, we want to focus on your choice. We want to emphasise that at the end of the day it is you who picks a pride. It is you who answers the question – what values, what people and what choices make me feel like a good person. In the following articles, we explore these ideas so come on, join us. As always, I’m absolutely sure that you’ll find at least this one exceptional article addressed to you. Enjoy the read. And with the summer coming, I would like to thank you on behalf of the whole Journal Committee of the UNSA for sticking with us. Even if only for this one issue. Have a great summer!
Jakub Biernacki
5
Finding Pride within the Qur’an: Virtues, practices and beliefs
Bill Pemberton-Bennetts As a foreword, this article does not aim to defame nor ridicule a belief system held by many across the world, it is merely a critique and exploration of a belief system that contrasts that of the likely readers of this article. It is a shame in a modern Western liberal society that a foreword along those lines is needed, but such is the rather queer relationship that some in our society have with those of the Islamic faith that we protect it far more vehemently than we do our own; it should be open to the same criticism. In a 10,000 person survey conducted by Chatham house, in ten European countries asked, all agreed that there should be a stoppage of Muslim immigration. Spain had the smallest amount of Yes’s, with 41% in favour (32% against), with Poland having 71% in favour. 74% of French people think that Islam is incompatible with their society. Rather than engage with attitudes of whether Islam is a force for good, a force for integration or a force for change, one must go to the root of difference: The Qur’an. I do have to apologise first though, before I have even written this article I have already sinned. The Sin in question happens to be reading the Qur’an in English, which is prohibited by Mary 19 and Al-waqi’a 77-80; I do apologise but learning Arabic will somewhat cause me to violate the deadline of this article. Islam’s William Tyndale was in fact a man named Alexander Ross, a grammar school teacher who translated the Qur’an from French to English, allowing me to sin today. The Qur’an is divided into 114 Sura, which are further divided into aya which in Arabic rhyme. When approached with the first page of this book, one is addressed in a way that becomes very familiar as the book goes on, as every Sura starts with “in the name of God, the Lord of Mercy, the Giver of Mercy”. This small sentence reflects the intense nature of the book itself, that God is central to everything. Now one may think that this obvious, but going further into the book one realises the intensified relation one must have with God to become a Muslim.
6
This rather all-consuming relationship is reflected in the nature of the Qur’an, it is comprehensive in its desire to direct the life of every individual who follows it. For example, aya 226-232 of Al-Baqara offers a comprehensive breakdown of divorce proceedings, there is a four month period where the two must live apart, and the wife must wait three months before re-marrying. The next part of Al-Baqara (233) even stipulates the time in which babies may drink breast milk (2 years if you were wondering). Perhaps instead of getting bogged down in arbitrary rules set down (of which there are a lot), one must look at the virtue of the book itself. The earlier sections of the Qur’an press on the equality of all believers, regardless of religion. Al-Ma’ida (The Feast) aya 12-15 is fervent in God’s (the Muslim one) love of all people who do good, and wipes away their sins. This rhetoric is shared amongst all Suras within the Qur’an, that Muslims, Jews and Christians may be forgiven if good is undertaken on their part. However, and this is a big however, the next few pages of Al-Ma’ida are quite confronting. Aya 51 specifically states that “You who believe, do not take the Jews and Christians as allies: they are allies only to each other”, it goes on to state that God will triumph over them. The explanation of this within my translation is that later verses 57-59 exonerate this; the translator claims that these verses limit God’s vengeance on Jews and Christians to only those who ridicule and are against Islam. The problem with this is that the author admits the hard part of Arabic is its separation of the word “You” (i.e. singular or plural), in this case it is not clear which “You” the Qur’an is using, even the author couldn’t detect in its original Arabic. So aya 51 could be related to verses 57-59 in that prohibiting being allies is limited to those who mock Islam, or it could be just two different rules: do not make allies with Christians/Jews and those who mock Islam. Although given the context of the previously mentioned aya 12-15, it can be given the benefit of the doubt.
7
“Allah defends those who are true” Al-Hajj, Verse 38 The problem with this is that the author admits the hard part of Arabic is its separation of the word “You” (i.e. singular or plural), in this case it is not clear which “You” the Qur’an is using, even the author couldn’t detect in its original Arabic. So aya 51 could be related to verses 57-59 in that prohibiting being allies is limited to those who mock Islam, or it could be just two different rules: do not make allies with Christians/Jews and those who mock Islam. Although given the context of the previously mentioned aya 12-15, it can be given the benefit of the doubt. The most prolific and worrying criticism the Qur’an offers is that of its criticism of disbelievers, people who believe neither the Qur’an nor anything else. In Muhammad, aya 8-12 rather bashfully outlines the fate of those who refuse to believe in God. It outlines how no matter the deeds done by these individuals, even if they live perfect moral lives, God has before “destroyed them utterly” and will do it again. To be fair, it does justify this by saying that if you don’t believe in God then you don’t believe in being protected by him, which is fair. One bit that is quite funny (I know, ridicule, according to 45:10 means Hell lurks behind me) in Al-Fathiya aya 7-9 is that it calls disbelievers arrogant for questioning whether God was the creator. I found this particularly rich coming from someone who claims he created everything. I do find it is rather kind to other parties of God, regardless of belief. It also promotes a care of society, family and elders, which is a nice thing to read where such hate is also offered to non-believers. The Qur’an doesn’t explain all divisions present in society regarding Muslims, but it does go someway to explain how the Muslim communities can suffer from self-induced isolation. To wrap up this rather short exploration, I must conclude that after reading it, the Qur’an is a very arduous read. Where many Holy books carry morals with stories, the Qur’an a lot of the time brushes over narrative with persistent rule making. The Bible aids its rulemaking through the vessel of narrative e.g. Moses finding the ten commandments and bringing them down, the Qur’an simply states the rule and offers no relief. I found that the Qur’an is reflective of a civil code in comparison to the Bible, which contains rich narrative. The Qur’an reflects a different system of belief and thinking, whilst most Christians in our modern liberal society consider their faith as a part of their life, the Quran offers an intense experience of faith and the belief that virtue should play a role in all parts of life.
8
Does it matter? My European Leitkultur
Greta Koch Pride. There are many things one can be proud of. Your last good grade on a test. The fact that you managed to actually go jogging this week. Proud to find a job. Proud to be the mother of your child. Proud to be the child of your mother. Many things we say we are proud of are connected to where we come from. Throughout history, the pride we take in where we come from has taken us to the darkest paths. Nevertheless, where we come from is always part of our identity, has been challenged over and over again. The refugee crisis seems to be another challenge to national identities in Europe. Many politicians calls on refugees to be welcome – if they integrate properly. But what does proper integration entail? Is it to learn the language in the country? Is it to know its history? Is it to respect its culture and celebrate its traditions? Is it to give up on your very own national identity and take on another? And what exactly is the culture that needs to be respected? The minister for internal affairs in Germany, Mr Thomas de Maizière, wanted to answer these questions. In an attempt to define what the German culture entails, he formulated 10 theses which to his mind express what characteristics a German identity is made of. He called it “Leitkultur” – a guide to German culture. I will try to quickly summarize what he said.
1
Social customs represent our attitude: we shake hands and we do not cover our face. We are an open society. “We are not Burka”. Education is a value and not an instrument. Thus, students should not restrict their education to what they need for their future employment. General knowledge and its conscience are important in our country.
9
2
Any achievement is something to be proud of, whether in sports or in society. We demand effort, because effort and quality create welfare.
4
We are inheritors of our history with all its ups and downs. Our past influences our present and our culture. We are a “culture nation”. Very few countries are as coined by culture and philosophy as Germany. It influences the cultural development of the entire world.
6
Religion ties us together instead of tearing us apart. The church shows this with all its community work. Our culture is coined by Christianity. We live in religious peace, with laws above any religious rules.
7
We have a culture of compromise to resolve conflicts. It is part of our democracy. We protect minorities, and respect and tolerance are important. We accept different lifestyles, but we do not accept violence. Violence has nothing to do with honour. We are enlightened patriots – we love our country, but do not hate other countries. Although we had many problems with patriotism, this is not part of our present. Our patriotism lies in unity and rule of law and freedom.
9
3 5
8
We are part of the West, culturally, intellectually and politically. NATO protects our freedom. We are important partners with the US. Germans are also Europeans, and German interests are often best represented within Europe. On the other hand, Europe will not develop further without a strong Germany. Maybe we are the most European country in Europe.
We have a collective memory for places and events, for example the Brandenburger Tor and the 9th of November, but also Carnival and festivals. We are connected to certain places and traditions.
10
10
Don’t worry, I’m not going to go through each of these points and criticise every little thing about them, many people have already done that and you can do that very well by yourself. What I want to look at is the rationale behind it. It cannot be denied that integration needs strong improvement, in Germany as well as in the rest of Europe. De Maiziére also emphasized that the point of this “leitkultur” is not that a migrant is only fully integrated once he memorized each of these ten thesis, but that it is supposed to be a guide in what German culture entails and what customs are important to prevail. The whole “We are not Burka” discussion would be worth an article for itself and as badly as it is formulated, the point that freedom of expression needs to be protected is indeed something I consider as important for my culture. But do we really need any migrant to inherit the German historical past? Do we really need to point out that Germany is a culture nation and Bach and Goethe are important to Germans? Do we need to pledge our allegiance to the United States of America with what we express as German culture? Do migrants need to celebrate carnival? And since when is Germany the most European country in Europe?
I believe Thomas De Maizière misunderstood the whole concept of a European community. If he did, he would not need to write a German leitkultur, but would revert back to what really matters: the values Europe is built on. There is no most European country, and immigrants do not need to become experts in the culture of the country they live in. Europe is a continent built on the rule of law, compromise and democracy, and thus freedom of religion and expression are held most highly. Europe is coined by diversity, that’s why tolerance, respect and protection of minorities are self-evident. Europe does not need to choose a side between East and West, it should build a strong unit for itself. Europe is very much indeed united in diversity. It does not matter what traditions you celebrate and you can be proud of from where you come from, as long as you do not take away what Europe has fought for in the past centuries: freedom, justice and peace. If enlightened patriotism is part of my “German” culture, I do not need to be proud of Bach or Goethe. They can inspire me, but what I could be really proud of is that in my country, and on my continent, we manage to live in peace and prosperity. And that is what matters.
11
PRIDE and YOU. Eszter Sailer
Thinking about the word pride, three questions popped up in my mind: What is pride? What are we proud of? And what makes us proud? To make it more local, I figured I should ask Maastricht students the third question, ask them what makes them proud. It sounded like a good idea to me, nothing harmful, easy peasy (at least easier than defining pride). When the students had trouble coming up with an answer and I looked up the definition of pride, the whole concept did not seem so bright anymore. The meaning of pride, or the word Pride is sociological. Cultural. Historical. One person on their own might find it difficult to define. The first definition on dictionary.com says pride is “a high or inordinate opinion of one’s own dignity, importance, merit, or superiority, whether as cherished in the mind or as displayed in bearing, conduct, etc”. The first result on merriam-webster.com is “1: the quality or state of being proud: such as a: inordinate self-esteem, conceit; b: a reasonable or justifiable self-respect; c: delight or elation arising from some act, possession, or relationship”. It struck me that both dictionaries placed the negative side of pride on the very first line. When I thought of my idea, it did not have any negative connotation to me. There are definitely negative sides to pride, it just surprised me that the first thing that would come up in professional minds would be one’s inordinate opinion of themselves. Turns out it was a good idea not to ask the first question from students. The second question that pride made me think of, namely, what we are proud of, could also have a difficult connotation. Stating what we are proud of is often thought of as bragging. Even if being proud of something does not mean that it is bound to us, that it is one of our achievements per se, people can find it hard to answer because the question immediately gives off a personal vibe, something they would rather avoid (unless of course they are narcissists).
12
By default, and by my own personal preference, the third question; "what makes you proud?", was left to be answered. It seems like it is just as hard a question to answer than the first two. Most of the people I asked needed time to think about it and told me “it is a tough one”. It surprised me, because if anyone asks me, I could give them a dozen of things that make me proud, just from the top of my head. This made me think. Maybe, the reason why people think it is a difficult thing to do is because to be proud of something, you have to achieve something. To be able to be proud of something and be able to say it without sounding arrogant, you also have to be able to say it without sounding snobbish or attention-seeking. Even though at the very start of each of my messages I told students that it can be anything and that I am not looking for life-long heroic achievements, I needed to be patient. After all, they needed time. The fact that I did not ask the first two questions, but instead went with the (in my opinion innocent) third one, did not seem to matter. It was just as difficult to answer as the others. Maybe if I would have asked the first two questions, it would have sounded the same, it would have meant the same to the students. That was not my goal. After stating that their answers are anonymous, the tension loosened up a little, and the answers started flowing in. “I am proud to have amazing friends that are always there for me”, “I am proud of my achievements and those of the ones that are close to me, especially if I helped them”, “I am proud of my country, because despite our differences we still stick together”, “I am proud of being a member of the Journal Committee”, “I am proud of my parents that are musicians, and of my little sister who is great at sports”. These answers all had something in common. They all started with “I am proud of ”, even though they could have – maybe should have – started with “it makes me proud that”, given the fact that that was my question, and that all these answers took time to be formulated (which could be explained by the fear of sounding arrogant). The impression I got was mixed. On the one hand I was glad to hear these answers, they all sounded nice and mostly included someone other than the student her-/himself. I do not know if this was because students did not want to include their own achievements or because these answers were the first things that popped into their minds. On the other hand, I felt like they tried to be too modest, to hide their own achievements because of the – maybe built in – negative connotation the word pride has. So hereby I would like to give an advice, which admittedly is based on my personal opinion: there is nothing wrong with being proud of your own achievements. You can state them without sounding like a snob, without having an “inordinate” picture of yourself. You can even be proud of things that are not based on achievements. There is a reason why we have LGBTQ+ PRIDE events, Women’s Marches and national days. All you did was born in a certain way or at a certain place. Still, there are always reasons to celebrate being proud of something, maybe even more so if you’re fighting for your own pride. Do not hesitate about what makes you proud. There can be hundreds of reasons, and trust me, not everything has to have a negative connotation. But if you are hesitant to brag about your achievements, you will not come across in the wrong way anyway. Let’s celebrate you. Let’s celebrate pride. And with that, let’s celebrate the last printed edition of this team that I had the pleasure to be a part of. That is what makes me proud.
13
Proud of being... European Cristina López-Perea Villacañas
I was born in 1995, which means that the European Union has been part of my entire life. However, it also means that I do remember the beginning of the Euro when my dad gave my siblings and me the new coins and we all looked at them without realising this was the beginning of the greatest change. I remember walking down the supermarket with my grandmother and seeing the prices in both currencies – the new one, the Euro, and the old one, the “pesetas”. I think it’s funny how it all worked out. Spain, my country, had been given the same status as other nations such as Germany and France. We were told that we were part of the European Union, that we shared the same currency, the same values. That we were supposed to be proud of being Europeans. But we were barely starting to feel proud of being Spanish, and the “European question” was quickly forgotten. When I came to Maastricht to study European Studies, I became aware of the gap that divides citizens from what I like to call “truly” European countries – such as Germany, France, The Netherlands, Belgium… – and citizens from countries like mine. Countries where we claim to be Europeans but we have no idea of what that actually means. In Spain, we do not learn European History. We might spend one academic year in High School learning about the First and Second World War but we always go back to our nation’s own history: to the Roman Empire, the Kingdom of Castile, the conquest of America and the Spanish civil war. We are not taught about the creation of the European Union and the Franco-German tensions that fostered it. We do not learn about the institutions, the theories of integration, the Schengen Agreement. Why should we, right? After all, we are Spanish. The European Union is just some entity that our politicians have to deal with. Every time I go back to Spain, I have to answer the same three questions. They never change and I am starting to develop an automatic response for each one of them. The first one, “So you study European Studies… is that a real degree? I mean, why would anyone study a degree focused on that?” (keep in mind that in Spain we are quite straight forward and thus, it doesn’t sound as rude to me as it may sound to you). The second one, “I could never live in the Netherlands. How do you get used to the cold? And the food? And they eat so early!” (at this point, I always want to explain that most of the countries in Europe have dinner at 18h00-19h00 and that we are the exception, not them).
14
Finally, the one that always makes me roll my eyes and leave: “Why would you leave Spain, though? I get that Europe is okay but you can´t compare it with what we have here” (also, if I’m not fast enough, this answer is usually followed by a fourth one that is the inevitable “So, when are you coming back to Spain?”). Don’t get me wrong. I love my country and I’m grateful I was born in Spain. After spending almost two years abroad, I’ve come to appreciate several things such as how close Spanish families are, how great our gastronomy is. I miss our weather, our lifestyle. I do miss it. But I’ve also seen how things work in this part of the continent and I must admit that every time I go back to Spain I get annoyed when I have to wait hours in the queue to sort something out with my bank. When I listen to the news how most of our politicians are corrupted but they are still in power. When they don’t really care about Brexit, about the rise of right-wing parties in Europe. Sometimes I get the feeling that when I take that two hours and a half flight, I land in a different dimension, in a different universe. It is hard to feel European, to feel proud of everything we’ve accomplished when you come from a country so focused on creating a national identity. I don’t blame them, though. Our history has been a difficult one and we are still trying to figure out how to forget the past and create a new united future. But I think there’s still hope for us, for them. In fact, I would like to finish the article with a short anecdote. In the first course I had in Maastricht, my tutor asked us if we were proud of being Europeans and whether or not we acknowledged the European Union as part of our identity. Everyone said that yes, in fact, they did. I was the only one that said no. I explained that I was 100% Spanish and that, even though I loved the idea of the European Union – I must admit I only said that because I did not want to sound too harsh– my identity was reduced to my nationality. My tutor smiled and told me that he would ask me the same question at the end of these three years and I nodded, convinced that my answer would still be the same one. A month ago I had to go to the hospital and when I came back home, I realised that just by showing my Spanish ID and my health card I had been able to get the same benefits as a Dutch citizen. And that’s when I understood what my tutor had told me that day. In just 20 months, my whole perspective had changed. I was European. I was indeed proud of being part of the European Union. So now, the next time a relative asks me one of those three infamous questions, I will just smile and reply that yes, it is a degree. Yes, everyone can get used to living in The Netherlands simply because it’s not that different from Spain. No, studying abroad was the best decision I ever made and no, I might not go back to Spain after I finish my studies. I might move to another country and enjoy the benefits of being part of the European Union. Of being a citizen of the system.
15
Are you proud to be British? The only time I’ve ever been asked this question was probably one or two weeks before the vote for an Independent Scotland in September 2014. One boy in my class, who was well known throughout the school as a member of the youth Conservatives (right leaning political party) had been actively campaigning for Scotland to remain. On this particular day, he decided to ask everyone in the class, one by one, this question; a conveyer belt of forced, uninterested Yeses followed. Then it got to me, and the assembly line came to a jarring halt. Do I feel proud to be British? Honestly, I didn’t know, in that moment, what being proud to be British actually meant. In that moment I saw British Pride as something inherently English, as something that wasn’t compatible with something that is and was already prolific and iconic worldwide: Scottish Pride. Throughout the world, if Scotland is mentioned, a questionable impression of Mel Gibson’s “FREEEEEDOM!” will likely follow; that or a Groundskeeper Willy impression that would be questionable if the original accent was vaguely accurate rather than a strange combination of Irish and gibberish. On the global stage, Scotland’s identity is tied very closely with the mistreatment it has received throughout the years by the English. Whether it’s King Edward I’s cruel treatment of the “puppet King” of Scotland John Balliol leading to the Wars of Independence; the banning of traditional dress (tartan as an indicator of family, and its kilt form) and the bagpipes by the Westminster government in Scotland as part of the Dress Act 1746; Thatcher’s Poll Tax that was unfairly implemented on Scotland before the rest of the UK; or even the recent events of the Independence referendum that should have resulted in increased devolved powers that were never delivered: there are plenty of examples to choose from. It seemed to me that our global identity has been shaped as the “rebellious Scots”, the underdogs constantly striving to gain their independence from the ruthless English.
16
Fiona O’Hara
Even this sentiment is mostly lost on me. Apart from the friendly rivalry at Calcutta Cup rugby matches, which we will inevitably lose, there is no animosity I feel towards the English. While there are most likely many Scots who dislike the English, there are an equal amount who probably like England more than Scotland. And as someone with many English relatives and friends, English animosity is not as an important part of my identity as a Scottish person. However, one does not need to feel hatred towards the English to see the unfairness of Scotland’s position within the UK. How can a whole country vote majorly for one party and yet be ruled by one that has historically been deeply unpopular in the region? This is exactly what happened in the 2010 General Election, creating a whole nation of disenfranchised citizens. How can a whole country vote to stay within Europe and still be forced out by the decisions of citizens in a different country? It’s definitely hard to defend this kind of system, and easy to see why there is a building resentment. Obviously these examples are very different and often simplified, but they highlight how different the worldviews within the UK actually are, and that in situations like this, solidarity stops at the boarder. So now you’re maybe thinking that I will start advocating for Independence, but to me it’s not a black and while decision. Moving to the Netherlands has given me a unique perspective to view my country with its politics and culture as an outsider, and that has changed me. Finding the commonalities with my English friends and sharing jokes and memories only we could understand has shown me that no matter how much difference there is, we are all a lot more connected and similar than it may appear. This perspective has pushed me to support a truly United Kingdom, but I recognise how this conclusion resulted from my very privileged circumstances. I have been given many opportunities that would be considered rare in Scotland; I don’t feel many of the negative effects of the government that others in Scotland do with full force. On March 13th 2017, Nicola Sturgeon, First Minister of Scotland, announced that she will propose a second Independence Referendum to the Scottish people, as the terms of the last referendum have changed greatly due to the Brexit vote. While this has seen by many as exasperating the problems we are already facing, it has been welcomed by many Scots as their saving grace. And it just goes to show that the minute Westminster starts its patronising over-authoritarian rhetoric telling Scotland what it can and cannot do; the “United” Kingdom becomes an enemy of the people. Because no matter our similarities, we will still be treated differently, treated like the meddling Jocks who can’t think for themselves and have to be spoon-fed. Whether it is the national parties supporting independence, or the establishment that looks down on us, there are forces from all directions trying to divide us, whether that’s within the UK and within Scotland itself.
17
So what am I trying to get across here? Hopefully what I’m highlighting is how complex the idea of a “British Identity” is for the Scots, and that it’s definitely not a given. When I think of my close friends’ back home, I remember some who were decked in Union Flags and loved the Queen more than anything, but I also had friends who are still counting down the days till Scotland does gain its independence. So when people talk of Scottish pride and British pride, they to me seem to be only affiliated with a faction rather than the whole nation. But there is one thing that I want to end on: a friend of mine spends a lot of time travelling; she highlighted that there were three places that stood out as the proudest of who they were as a people, and one of them was Scotland. Another friend of mine has spent many nights explaining his Scottish heritage and how he owns a square foot of land in Glencoe with great pride. So even if we are all squabbling with each other on the inside, at least we can celebrate the love we receive from those on the outside. I’ve never felt more proud to be Scottish since being exposed to so many people who wish that is what they were, or just have my accent for that matter. So I’m not really able to answer the question of if I feel proud to be British, but I am definitely proud to be a Scot, and this can be the springboard to work on the former.
Purple Dreadlocks, hoop earrings and white leggings on cultural appropriation
Belle Prinsen Last year in the Diplomat, Monica Kurl posed the question of cultural appropriation and appreciation with the yearly festival attire as an example. This article, and any others written on the subject, never quite seem to reach magazines like Vogue, or designers like Marc Jacobs. As a consequence, 2017 already has a long list of scandals for us to debate over. Although most cultural appropriation is as easily recognisable as the average SBE student, somewhere between purple dreadlocks and hoop earrings, I started to wonder if certain accusations didn’t go a bit too far. Then I started to wonder if I was racist for thinking so, after which I wondered how much my opinion on the topic was worth anyway, as I am a very, very white person. I have never faced discrimination, I have no ties to a family history of oppression due to ethnicity and thus my opinion is probably not the most valid one in this case. Naturally, this led to me deciding to write a 1200-word article on it.
18
Cultural appropriation can be found anywhere and everywhere, but how can it be defined? As Oxford Dictionary states, cultural appropriation is the “unacknowledged or inappropriate adoption of the customs, practices, ideas, etc. of one people or society by members of another and typically more dominant people or society”. This sounds easier in theory than it is in practice, which is why the question remains: exactly when can you say something is cultural appropriation? I’ll spare you the “maybe’s”, “what if ’s” and the list of exceptions that will finally lead up to the inevitable conclusion: you can’t. However, just because you can’t doesn’t mean it’s not worth the debate. That there is no checklist for cultural appropriation does not eliminate its existence and, above all, its seriousness. To make the topic less abstract, let me elaborate on a couple of recent examples. For Marc Jacobs’ Spring 2017 collection, he choose to send Caucasian models down the catwalk with purple dreadlocks. This evoked a ton of criticism, mostly of black minorities. The designer himself was quick to defend his choice, saying that he was inspired by people and their look, adding that he didn’t see colour nor race, but people. Later he clarified that he, of course, ‘sees’ colour, but does not discriminate, and that he apologized for “the lack of sensitivity unintentionally expressed by my brevity”. Then we have Vogue dressing up white model Karlie Kloss as a geisha (to celebrate “diversity” at that) and painting model Lara Stone black for a cover shoot. These are just a few of the examples that could be seen as the work of artists being inspired by different cultures. Naturally, these artists use what inspires them and of course they don’t mean to discriminate, but here’s the thing: they do. The problem with this type of cultural appropriation is that there is not only often a history of exploitation behind it, but also a different standard for white people as opposed to people of colour. Whereas people of colour are, for example, judged for their dreadlocks, baby hairs or cornrows, and seen as “unprofessional” and “ghetto”, people of Caucasian origin are seen as “fashionable” and “bold”. Those labels are not only problematic
in themselves, but especially tragic because of the fact that a white person can always escape back to “white privilege”, whereas a person of colour obviously does not have this option (with the sole exception of Michael Jackson, R.I.P.). Apart from these prejudices, that show the still existing stereotypes and lingering discrimination in our society, the case of cultural appropriation in the fashion industry is worsened by another factor: the complete lack of ethnic diversity. If you are so inspired by black or oriental culture, why not have more models in your show or on your cover who actually represent these cultures? Why not hire an Asian model for a geisha shoot? Because Vogue’s current definition of “diversity” is not exactly, well, diverse. The only excuse not to do so is that there are not enough ‘good’ non-white models, which is, pardon my French, absolute bullshit. The problem is not that there are not enough qualified non-white models, but that there are not enough well-known non-white models. Using a well-known name brings in money, and there you go: Lara Stone painted black on the cover of Vogue. Cultural appropriation and the classic excuse to keep wearing culturally “inspired” clothes and accessories subtly exploit freedom of expression, or, with other words, the “I can wear whatever I want!” idea. This mindset seems logical and I certainly don’t disagree. You can wear white leggings as pants in combination with Uggs, for all I care. The problem with freedom of expression is that it can easily been taken too far and cross the border to the “lack-of-respect” zone. Now I know that political correctness can be like that annoying little cousin at a family get-together, but there’s a reason it exists. Its preciseness and carefulness is confusing and tiring, but every now and then, it is necessary to bring in some nuances. Pointing out details that at first may seem irrelevant and incredibly minor may lead you to the problem that lingers under the surface. In this case: discrimination and exploitation, as well as a general lack of cultural and historical awareness.
19
Such a thing as discrimination may have many different faces that we won’t be able to recognize, because we are blinded by our ego and our conviction that we are by no means racist, sexist, or prejudiced in any way. You cannot always know when something is culturally appropriative, but you can become aware of historical events and above all at least try to listen to voices that question your fashion choice without going straight for defence. That said, certain cases that are criticised for being culturally appropriative may have gone a bit too far. A group of Latina students at the Pitzer College in the USA recently told white girls to “take of their hoops”, referring to the hoop earrings they perceived to be characteristic of Latin and black culture and a symbol of resistance against white supremacy. Hoop earrings are globally popular, but indeed occur mostly in certain subcultures of ethnic minorities. However, they are not solely part of black culture, but were already worn in, for example, ancient Greece and Western Asia. The same accusation thrown at Marc Jacobs could here technically be used against the accusers themselves: know your history before you make a claim, verbally or through your appearance. In addition, for both sides, tone it down with the know-it-all-attitude, otherwise debates on cultural appropriation will turn into a simple clash of egos instead of into something that could help us move to a more equal world. Because I like to think I give very good advices, I’ll take my own for now, and temporarily shut it with my know-it-all demeanour. Have a great day, but please, think twice before you paint yourself black for your annual Vogue-shoot. PS: freedom of expression is good, but for the sake of your own dignity and public order, do not wear white leggings as a replacement for pants.
20
Back on Track. Wiktor Pinkwart After a political disturbance on the old continent caused primarily by Brexit and spill-over of Trump’s elections in the US, the hope for the EU seems to be back on track. Emmanuel Macron won the presidency with a confidence getting the support of 65% French voters. It is hardly believable remembering Macron who hold an office of the Minister of the Economy in the previously hated government of François Hollande. Moreover, his contribution to these bad mark-ings is essential pointing the fact of being blamed for the riots caused by the introduction of his law on the working conditions. Despite the experience, which would be surely considered by Trump as a “bad experience”, he was still given trust for the most important position in the French Republic. During the visit at my friends studying currently on Erasmus in Bordeaux, I was able to see the elections from the inside because the dates match. My expectations were high. However, the reality turned out to be disappointing leaving me with the observation of a general, political reluctance. The majority of French people did not affiliate with any of the candidates. I heard people saying that Macron is not their candidate either, however, “out of the choice of lesser evil, he is predictable”. More optimistic French spoke of his young age as an advantage. In consequence, the turnout was lower than ever before because around 5% points of the French voters gave up on giving this choice with regards to the previous elections.
21
The backroom debates of this election run are still relevant but the choice has been made and Ma-rine Le Pen voice has been muted on the political scene. She has remained an extremist Europar-liament Member with no major influence rather than the leader of the sovereign country. What mat-ters now is the leadership of Emmanuel Macron and his energy to lead the French and European nations. With Macron as a President, speculations of the EU break-down do not sound realistic anymore. We are still waiting for the parliamentary elections in France and Germany scheduled respectively on 18th of June and 24th of September. However, there seems to be no risk of the extremists or populist victory. I feel hope rather than certainty, however, some decreasing trend can be noticed with regard to the populism on the political scene. If we have a look at the country of our residence, Netherlands seem to be a place where the new European populism was born and consequently has been stopped. Geert Wilders - a person in-volved in the Dutch politics for almost two decades and third biggest party in the Dutch Parliament since 2012 - has been a phenomenon difficult to explain for the rest of Europeans. How in the Country known of its welfare and low criminality, a radical politician, punished for giving hate-speeches, found such a support? The problem is that it does not seem surprising anymore, howev-er, imagine the world with “impossible Brexit� and trump as an eccentric millionaire / tv showman. Not so long time ago, hm?
Before the electoral day of judgment, polls looked promising for Wilders. Regardless of his low chances for the coalition, which is inherent in the Dutch political system, due to the united opposing voice of all relevant parties saying no to possible cooperation with Wilders prior to the elections. The victory, next to its symbolic meaning, would be the continuation of the bad European patch. However, when it came to elections, an impressive turnout of 82% Dutch people felt this burden of responsibility and took matters into their own hands opposing to this scenario. Therefore, the chain of the European project failures, such as financial crisis or the Brexit, got broken.
22
That is why we might say that there is nothing to worry in the context of the future of the European Union. It seems that what people have understood, looking at the reality of 2017, is the value of the major aim which triggered the European cooperation in the first place - value of the peace. People have understood that tested and familiar government present a better solution for the problems States face. You can find comments that a lesson out of the US elections has been learnt in France. Predictability stopped having a negative connotation only. What French and Dutch Voters have recently understood is that it is better to make friends than enemies among the European Un-ion allies. The most pressing issues such as terrorism or refugee crisis are not possible to solve individually. Such approach is being taken by Macron who was considered the most European out of the top 4 almost equally strong candidates in terms of support in the first round of the French elections. Who is Macron going to work with? If the predictions come true, next elections in Germany will result in the choice between Merkel and Shulz. Both politicians seem to have a strong European spin. If French voters buy a mocking smile of the young Macron and France as an engine of Europe, EU will stay strong. Talks about the strong leadership of Germany and France have already been started introducing the electoral promise of Macron. Basically, related to the further integration and designation of spe-cial ministers responsible for the Euro-zone. Couple years ago such talks would not seem realistic in the inflamed light of the financial crisis.
23
We will see if the EU of the second half of 2017 is able to break the trend of euroscepticism. Not only media or streets had been the place you could feel it. It traces back its roots to the 90s and its development is pictured well by the reference to the constant decrease in the European Parliament election’s turnout. The next questions arise: will European optimism be spread all over the EU? What is going to happen to the Member States outside of the Euro-zone? What has really illustrated the division of Europe was the Brexit campaign. All European news pro-gramme viewers got involved with its peak moments during the election day and controversial re-sult followed with everyday coverages of reactions. Before the election day, there was almost no poll giving a shot for this outcome. It all turned to a big hype. The campaign itself made all Europe-ans ask questions about the EU with the front head issue on the immigration and contribution to the solution of the refugee crisis. This question was asked in all EU Member State regardless whether the State was affected by this topic fundamentally like Germany or Greece. In the other group of less concerned States discus-sions were as vocal with Poland and Hungary on the front opposing to a single refugee entering the country. With Macron as a president and his voice in the structure of the EU 2.0 strong, is there a risk or hope of these countries being excluded? It would be also the fulfilment of the next of his promise given during the race on the seeking for the punishment of the Member States who do not respect the rules. For some countries such as Poland punishment itself would be an exclusion from the integrated “western-European” countries plus the Member States who found a way to reach com-promises either on the refugee crisis or euro as a currency in order to join the alliance. One thing is certain, answers to questions derived from the Brexit campaign differ among the States. However, possibly bright future of the pro-european debate with the strong, European lead-ers who got elected by the majority of its subordinate to represent sounds like a hope. It is not a hope to force all Member States to integrate even further. However, it is a hope to chase the dark clouds away from the sky above the EU. The thunderstorm of the Brexit-debate passed and the financial crisis consequences became lighter. In the world of Trump and Putin, the EU can actually be seen as a great and pleasant place to live in. If predictability is being followed by the pragmatism and benefits of the cooperation became visible, especially in trade and security aspects, why there would be no European Optimism? As a consequence, maybe one day, being European would be considered as a something to be proud of. Next to Italian, Spanish or another nationality, European Identity would be formed. When would it happen? The answer to that and other questions in the Diplomat!
24
FIFA 2.0 or Blatter 2.0?
Miriam Goldschmitt The 67th FIFA Congress from 10 to 11 May 2017 in Manama, the capital of Bahrain, was overshadowed by the dismissal of both chairmen of the Ethics Committee, the Swiss jurist Cornel Borbély and the German jurist Hans-Joachim Eckert. According to an official FIFA statement, the FIFA Council had officially nominated neither Borbély nor Eckert for re-election and by not being part of the official list for re-election, they could thus not be re-elected by the Congress. A FIFA internal document, however, stated that the Review Committee had been informed of the nomination of both Borbély and Eckert as candidates for the Ethics Committee. One could only speculate about the ulterior motives of the dismissal and a jurist should not speculate, as Eckert said. The same goes for the media! What can be said with clear certainty, however, is that the official FIFA statement and the FIFA internal document contradict each other and it thus seems as if something strange was going on (again) in the FIFA! Otherwise Cornel Borbély and Hans-Joachim Eckert would probably not have been informed of their dismissal by the media and only shortly after their landing in Bahrain. It also seems as if the current FIFA president Gianni Infantino played a not insignificant role in this context. Infantino opened the Congress with the words, “the ‘new’ FIFA is a democracy, not a dictatorship”. The 47-year-old hinted at the FIFA’s recent credibility crisis, amongst others and especially caused by the leadership style of its former Swiss president Sepp Blatter and his involvement in numerous corruption scandals. After Infantino’s election in February 2016 for a three-year term, the Swiss-Italian, being born in a neighbouring town of Blatter, had promised reforms in order to make the FIFA ethical and moral, clean and transparent. After little more than one year in office, the 67th FIFA Congress, however, made clear that Infantino’s
previous proximity to Blatter, at least in the geographical sense, has caught up on him and this has become visible to the public. Borbély and Eckert as the FIFA’s official face against corruption Cornel Borbély had been chairman for two years of the Ethics Committee’s investigatory chamber; Hans-Joachim Eckert had been head of its second chamber, the adjudicatory chamber, for five years. This supposedly independent judicial body is primarily responsible for investigating possible infringements of the FIFA Code of Ethics. Since 2015, the year of initial arrests of top officials in the city of Zurich, the investigatory chamber - according to its own testimony - had conducted 194 preliminary hearings and the adjudicatory chamber had sentenced more than 70 officials, amongst others the above-mentioned Sepp Blatter and the former UEFA president Michel Platini. Borbély’s and Eckert’s dismissal only constituted the peak of the re-structuring of the supervisory bodies: Miguel Maduro had to leave his position as chairman of the Governance Committee after only eight months in office; Navi Pillay and Ron Popper resigned shortly after, probably out of protest. Only two members of the Ethics Committee in total were not dismissed. This replacement of nearly the entire staff has the far-reaching implication that it is more than uncertain whether the current 100 pending cases will be handled by the successors. Probably not only the pending cases, but also much experience and know-how, as well as the approach in court will get lost. Fact remains that it will take some time for the new chairmen to familiarize themselves with the complex subject matter. Borbély himself pointed out during a press conference in a hotel in Manama that this decision would put an end to the reform process or at least set it back several years.
25
“The dismissal was unnecessary and thus solely politically motivated!”. Borbély went on, stating that the head of the FIFA would put its own and political interests before FIFA’s long-term interests. Borbély thus alluded to the hard line he and Eckert had taken with respect to the corruption scandal in the past years. Eckert criticised that the FIFA would soon only think about money again, but that football should be much more than that. There was apparently consensus among Eckert and the FIFA president on this point since Infantino’s initial words during the Congress were as follows: “Never again! If there is anyone in this room or outside of this room who still thinks that he can enrich himself, that he can abuse of football, I have one clear and strong message to tell him: Leave! Leave football and leave football now, we don’t want you”. The former chairmen of the Ethics Committee and the FIFA president, however, seem to have different regards of how this non-enrichment and non-abuse of football looks like. The FIFA’s reasoning for Borbély’s and Eckert’s dismissal Infantino pledged that the non-nomination of both Borbély and Eckert for re-election had been the result of a consultation process involving the president himself as well as the six confederation presidents. This reasoning was taken up again by a FIFA statement on the proposed committee members, published on 10 May. Moreover, it revealed that the members should reflect the geographic and gender diversity in a better way than was previously done with two male Europeans as chairmen. FIFA Council member and the president of the German Football Association Reinhard Grindel, however, told a German TV channel during an interview that Infantino had made his very own suggestions regarding the committees and Grindel thus emphasized that the non-nomination of both Borbély and Eckert had been the sole decision of the FIFA president. Grindel was indeed one of the few who abstained during the final vote on the Ethic Committee’s new leadership. The new list of candidates was confirmed nearly unanimously by the presidents of the national associations with 192 voting in favour, out of 209 Congress members entitled to vote. The elected successors of Borbély and Eckert are hence the Columbian jurist María Claudia Rojas and the Greek former president of the European Court of Justice Vassilios Skouris respectively.
Infantino as the mastermind behind the dismissal? If the dismissal was the sole decision made by Infantino, most of the members and especially the six confederation presidents would be unlikely to stab Infantino in the back. He is said to having had influenced elections and thus to have helped the respective president to reach the position he is currently holding. This allegedly seems to be the case with the current UEFA president Aleksander Čeferin or with the current CAF president Ahmad Ahmad. Infantino did everything in his power to distract from this ‘incident’: The FIFA president at times resembled the US president in his rhetoric during the Congress: “There are a lot of fake news and alterative facts about FIFA’S words circulating, FIFA bashing has become a national sport”. Infantino went on to underline that reforms had been undertaken during his presidency and demonstrated this by playing a high tech, very modern image video with FIFA’s achievements, such as the 2026 World Cup’s expansion to 48 teams, during the Congress session. Moreover, Infantino participated in an ‘official’ football match together with great men, such as Diego Maradona and Carlos Valderrama, instead of actually addressing verbally and concretely the allegedly undertaken reforms. “If you take strong positions on sensitive issues, this can harm you for the election” Gianni Infantino’s leadership style and stance towards reforms and towards the latest ‘dismissal incident’ can be summarized in his own words, as expressed during the Congress session: “If you take strong positions on sensitive issues, this can harm you for the election”. The FIFA president even referred back to this statement in the subsequent press conference by emphasizing again that there are “pressures from everywhere”. Although Infantino tried to use these - surprisingly truthful – insights to stress that he should get more credit for undertaking reforms in such a work atmosphere and felt some kind of pride for being this uncontroversial in his opinion, it was an unwillingly given, yet truthful explanation as to why both Borbély and Eckert had to be dismissed: As Eckert pointed out, independent and thorough investigations with regard to the corruption scandal could scare those officials who are the subject of the current 100 pending cases or those whose underhand practices might be discovered in the near future, whether Congress members, confederation presidents or the FIFA president himself.
And this indeed, in the words of Infantino, “can harm you for the election”!
26
Meet Our Team
27
28