51st edition – Relations – Pike & Hurricane

Little Havana: a generational divide?

Elena Wasserzier — Mon, 06 Jan 2020 21:14:26 +0000

Why do many Cubans living in the US tend to be Republicans and how is it shifting nowadays? Miami, Florida, where the largest group of Latinxs are exile-Cubans, and you can feel it at every corner. The streets are full of little Cuban cafecitos and panaderias. But it is not only their original food that they are known for, but also their political attitude, with which they tend to shift Florida to the right. Over 50% of Cuban Americans in Florida, voted for Donald Trump in 2016.

What is the reason for this establishment?

In the beginning of John F. Kennedy‘s presidency, who was a well-known Democrat, the CIA supported the counter-revolutionaries and their attempt to overthrow Fidel Castro who led the communist revolution in Cuba, 1959. Elderly Cuban Americans, so called “exile-Cubans” started to consider the Bay of Pigs invasion as a symbol of treachery by Democrats and leftist Americans. Moreover, Cuban immigrants of the first generation, who fled the communist revolution got quick opportunities to engage in voting and politics through the 1966 Cuban adjustment act.

Having almost no trust in left-wing politics, many Cuban immigrants were drawn to the Republican party which peaked in their votes for Ronald Reagan in the 1980s. The former president won against his opponent Carter by 17 points through the votes in Florida. This specific time in history is often referred to as the one where many exile Cubans solidified their “belief” in the Republican party after Reagan’s policies proclaimed to bring down the Soviet Union. Another huge part plays their resentment towards Fidel Castro, to whom many exile Cubans lost their whole companies and funds. They connect this resentment with the Democratic party. “Cubans in the U.S associate Hillary with communism, they make a parallel between her and the Cuban government“, Johan Carlos Sánchez, 53, artist, says.

In Trump’s case, many of his Cuban supporters are acknowledging his economic policies and his patriotism. The mayor, Carlos Hernandez, Diaz-Balart, 57, mentions, that the community‘s support of the GOP intensified under Trump, which polls by the Washington Examiner can confirm. The midterm elections showed that president Donald Trump is favored by Cuban Americans with 61%. Furthermore, he concludes that democratic policies and their approach to “socialism” occurred to show signs of resistance within the Cuban community but also among Venezuelans in Florida who are, as of right now, witnessing a formerly functioning and democratic, socialist regime’s destruction. A huge majority believes that replacing Trump with a Democrat would lead to an age of socialism in the United States as seen in Venezuela. They fear their past to become the present.

The change?

Unlike their grandparents or parents, many young Cuban Americans are having a different point of view on politics, while a lot of analysts claim, that Cuban conservatism in Florida is decreasing. Andy Vila, a 21 year-old, Florida-based Cuban American used to prefer the Republican party but changed his mind during the 2016 Trump campaign. Particular reasons were for instance the hostile stance towards immigrants. Andy Vila says: “Cuban Republicanism is mostly just tradition… A lot of ideas I grew up with, didn’t make sense…“

His family is against his beliefs, thinking that he supports the ideology hey fled from. Relatives would “look at me funny and say, ‘We’ve escaped that.’” Andy Vila belongs to a group of young Americans, who are in favor of socialism even though they grew up in the mostly, on Cuban part, anti-left Miami. Interpreted in many different ways, the socialist idea has a growing following among millenials and Generation Z. These voters are supposed to make up 37% of the 2020 electorate in the United States.

While the majority of Americans still reject socialism, studies have shown that 43% of the surveyed would be in favour for some socialist parts in American politics. The political sociologist Edwin Amenta from the University of California-Irvine concedes: “Younger Americans are less threatened by socialism than older generations, who might associate it with Soviet or Chinese rule… Today’s socialism for younger people means the Canadian health system and the Swedish welfare state.“

New generations are already showing their shift to the Democratic party, but a permanent change has yet to be reached. Cuban Americans remain Republican supporters and voters. Future elections and polls will indicate what is going to happen. As often wisely said, time will tell.

by Elena Wasserzier

Photo Credits

America, Thomas_H_foto, CC BY-ND 2.0

Miami – Little Havana, simplethrill, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Ronald Reagan Library, Thomas Hawk, CC BY-NC 2.0

The post Little Havana: a generational divide? appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Nambia: Is the “i” silent in “dplomatc relatons”?

Nina Kolarzik — Mon, 06 Jan 2020 19:46:27 +0000

Two years ago, the president of the United States of America managed to give debates on his competence and capacity for remembering new fuel. At a meeting of the United Nations, when he spoke to African leaders, Trump was referring twice to the country “Nambia”, praising its increasingly self-sufficient health system. The world wide web quickly picked up on it since no-one knew about a country with such a name. While Zambia, Namibia and Gambia are real countries, some rumours suggested that the US president was simply inventing a new country. In an official transcript that was published later by the White House although, the error was corrected and it became clear that the Trump was referring to Namibia, which he mispronounced. Twice.

Next to criticism specifically in regards to the US president and his lack of knowledge or interest in a whole continent, this incident also raised questions about dependency relations that are often inherent in developmental assistance aid.

A critical case of foreign aid

One would expect a wide outrage as a reaction to such an ignorant mistake on a high diplomatic level. Imagine the reaction if the Namibian president Hage Geingob was calling Trump the president of the “United States of Amrica”. But on the official level no outrage followed. Geingob, who was present during the speech, showed no reaction. While this could be due to diplomatic protocol, it is also suggested that it was for the sake of good relations between Namibia and the US. For the latter speaks, that also in the following the Namibian government did not respond to it and the issue of “Nambia” was remarkably absent from the conventional Namibian media.

Developed and developing: unequal relations in foreign aid

Let’s use this case as a reason to look into the unequal relations that can be inherent in foreign aid, or official development assistance (ODA) as it is often called. Bilateral ODA (means through states or their agencies) is the most common aid flow. There is a wide range of scepticism when it comes to foreign aid regarding efficiency, conditionality or distribution and the global aid system is criticised as in-transparent, corrupt, in need of reforms and even as a new version of colonialism and imperialism. One major critic is written by Dambisa Moyo in her book Dead Aid.

One critical point is the intention behind ODA. Is it primarily intended to benefit the receivers or the donors? The motivation is often oriented towards the economic, political and strategic objectives of the donors and it becomes problematic latest when additional problems for the receiver emerge. Of course it is hard to see the true motivation and to differentiate between developmental and non-developmental reasons, official statements and truth. Roger C. Riddell, author of Does Foreign Aid Really Work?, compares ODA with a Trojan Horse. Common knowledge tells us that nothing is given without costs but that for the things we seemingly get for free, we often have to pay a high price in the end.

The United States: the helping hand to the world?

In context to the mentioned relation between Namibia and the US agency USAID, it is time to talk about the creation of dependency. Power inequalities in the global aid system come into being due to economic and political structures that are created to keep the poor receiver countries poor and give the donors power over them. One example to visualize this is trade. While on one hand developing countries are demanded to bring about market liberation, OECD countries on the other hand have tariff barriers to block free market access and protect their economies. This serves donors own trade interest.

Their domestic markets are increasingly mature and suffer from under-consumption, therefore they search for markets overseas. In less developed countries there is more consumption potential that only waits for more spending power. Aid provision serves here to increase the ability to consume. Dependency structures are built even more clearly when it comes to so-called tied aid, for example when it comes with the condition to consume goods and services from the donors. It makes the receivers not only dependent, but also increases costs instead of empowering the local market. These structures aim at preserving the status, wealth and power of the donor countries.

In the emerging discussion of China as an increasing donor of ODA in African countries and a future competition about access to natural resources between Chinese and Western interests, the discussions around ODA gain new relevance.

At the moment, the US is still the biggest bilateral donor. According to its state agency USAID, the twofold purpose of its ODA is “furthering America’s interests while improving lives in the developing world”. On its website, USAID stresses that self-reliance and improving the capabilities for the partners to develop themselves are the key objectives. The aid is linked to security, to the creation of democratic, stable societies and expanding the US export market. With that, USAID is part of the US foreign policy and puts its own interest first. America first. When USAID head Mark Green compares the agency to the Chinese approach it is highlighted that China is building dependencies.

But is the US ODA itself free from dependency structures? Fact is that Namibia was in its fight against HIV/AIDS greatly supported by US aid, thanks to the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) that was established with Bush and is set to continue with Trump. The question cannot be answered in this article, since the factors mentioned here are only few of all the relevant ones, but the facts are enough of a reason to raise the the question.

#Nambia

The purpose of this article is not to say there are no altruistic, humanitarian reasons, no empathy and morality. But the potential of aid is bigger then its real effect, since US ODA for example is structured in a way that helps only as long as it is beneficial for the US interests. This can end in politicians of small countries like Namibia not speaking up against the US president, as we have seen.

You could say that state leaders are also just humans and make mistake. That implies although, that they are to be corrected, as everyone else. Since Trump’s administration showed more interest in battling half of the world instead of caring about the international relations to African nations, people were not much surprised by the incident. The citizens of Namibia reacted with both anger and humor, making the best out of a situation, that put their country for once into the spotlight. They now use the hashtag #Nambia to promote their own country.

by Nina Kolarzik

Photo Credits

“USAID Relief supplies arrive in Port au Prince”, USAID_IMAGES, CC BY-SA 2.0

“#USAIDTransforms_1600x800_Quote-White_Pictograms_6”, USAID_IMAGES, CC BY-NC 2.0

“NaBo11_d60_2834a”, jerryoldenettel, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

The post Nambia: Is the “i” silent in “dplomatc relatons”? appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Gendered power relations: the toll of austerity

Merle Emrich — Mon, 06 Jan 2020 19:24:00 +0000

Angela Merkel is not only one of Germany’s longest serving chancellors – next to Konrad Adenauer and Helmut Kohl – but also the country’s first female chancellor and arguably the world’s most powerful woman. And yet, one could say that she is far from being a symbol of female empowerment. Rather than challenging patriarchal structures, she fits into them while power positions and influence remain difficult if not impossible to reach for most other women, and the austerity policies continued or introduced by Merkel’s government are, to a great extent, placed on the shoulders of women, thus counteracting progress in the field of gender equality.

European austerity

The European Women’s Lobby (EWL) warned in a 2012 report that European austerity policies are an infringement on women’s rights and gender equality since they lead to a perpetuation of existing and a creation of new inequalities . In 2017, the then shadow equalities minister Sarah Champion (Labour) presented number showing that, since 2010, 86% of the burden of austerity policies had been placed on women’s shoulders. And while Theresa May claimed the Conservative party to be a stronger advocate for gender equality having produced the country’s only two female prime ministers, Mary-Ann Stephenson (co-director of the Women’s Budget Group) pointed out: “The chancellor’s [Philip Hammond] decision to continue with the decisions of his predecessor to cut social security for these low income families, at the same time as cutting taxes, is effectively a transfer from the purses of poorer women into the wallets of richer men.”

In Germany, austerity measures that prevailed in Europe after the 2008 financial crisis had already been implemented as of 2002. The neo-liberal reforms of the Agenda 2010, introduced by the Social Democrat/ Green party government preceding Merkel’s successive Christian Democrat-led governments that continued these austerity policies, increased the German economy’s resilience and competitiveness allowing Germany to recover quickly from the 2008 crisis. Yet, Oxfam highlights that at this policy approach shifted “the balance of power between capital and labour considerably in favour of capital.” It is a shift that comes at a high social cost, particularly for women and especially for those belonging to minority or marginalised groups.

Economy and human rights

Be it employment, the care and health system or general women’s rights, women are particularly affected by austerity measures. Not only are men’s jobs usually prioritised over women’s employment, but cuts in public sector job lead to women being more affected than men as women constituted by far more than half of public sector employees. Women are thus increasingly pushed into precarious employment situations with very low wages and little or no social security or protection of workers’ rights.

At the same time, women are forced to fill the gaps created by the state in the care and health system by cuts to public spending. As state funded care work decreases, especially in an aging society, care is reprivatized, and traditional gender roles are reinforced. Once occupied with unpaid care work, these women have less time for paid employment, free time activities and political engagement. On top, women’s voices are further marginalised by destroying gender equality institutions in stride with austerity measures that pose a struggle to organisations ranging from advocacy groups to service providers such as organisations supporting survivors of violence.

Yet, while austerity policies are a stumbling block in the way of the advancement of women’s rights and gender equality, as well as creating general economic imbalances within the Eurozone, among others the German government under Merkel’s lead holds on to their aim of a balanced budget. The social consequences of this goal will continue to be a burden that is dumped on women, especially single mothers, young women, women with disabilities, older women, migrant and refugee women, LGBTQI+ women, women belonging to ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, women in rural areas and those who live in poverty or extreme poverty.

“Discriminatory economic policies cannot be justified on the basis of the need to achieve macro-economic target and without regard to the human rights of women and gender equality”, Juan Pablo Boholavsky, and independent expert on foreign debt and human rights, argued in a report to the UN General Assembly. In a 2018 report, the OHCHR recommends a series of measures to improve gender equality. Among others the report called on governments to recognise unpaid care and domestic work as valuable work, invest in public services such as care services to redistribute care and domestic work “not just from women to men but from individuals to families to state-funded provisions”, and to strengthen women’s working rights and social security through targeted policies.

To be continued…

While the number of female leaders is growing, austerity policies – particularly when implemented by one of these female leaders such as German chancellor Merkel – highlight feminist, journalist and author Susan Faludi’s statement: “You can’t change the world for women by simply inserting female faces at the top of an unchanged system of social and economic power.” This is not to say, that no progress is being made – in Germany where reforms were undertaken introducing i.e. paid parental leave for fathers as well as mothers, or elsewhere. However, the gender pay gap, female under-representation in positions in politics as well as in business and austerity policies standing in the way of gender equality continue to be a considerable social issue.

by Merle Emrich

Photo Credits

Hands Fingers, Karl-Heinz Gutmann

Austerity isn’t working, wandererwandering, CC BY 2.0

Stew and Sympathy, Neil Moralee, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

The post Gendered power relations: the toll of austerity appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

The single rebellion and its happy lonely riders

Kristina Bartl — Mon, 06 Jan 2020 19:11:33 +0000

Way too often being single is seen as an unintentional stop on the way to a next relationship that will lead to a fulfilled life with a long-term partner. It seems to be easily forgotten that being single can also be your chosen final destination. It almost confuses people, when someone tells them that they are not dating with the main purpose of finding a partner. And this reaction is not surprising, when there are studies out there that display an image of sad and lonely millennials. Some even claim that our lack of (or too little) income and too much stress at Uni or work are the reasons for the high number of singles in our generation. The same factors are also used to explain why we choose renting a place over buying it. If I didn’t know better I’d almost believe that we are a generation of broke and highly depressed loners with commitment issues. Anyhow, there are other studies and articles that paint a picture of self-empowered individuals. Tinder published a survey that showed that 72 percent of the 1000 participants made an active choice to remain single. A generation of young people that don’t need a traditional relationship to feel fulfilled. Is it just a coincidence that the most educated generation is also the one that says farewell to traditional life-goals?

About relationships and happiness

The celebration of singledom has become an empowering movement over the last years. If we take a closer look, we will see that the main voices behind it have some things in common: They are all twenty-somethings, single (or in non-traditional partnerships) and identify as female. Before you pity any of them or even call them bitter single ladies, you should know that unmarried women without kids are the happiest group of people. Ironically men are healthier, when they are in a stable relationship. Taken this terribly outdated binary-based gender approach aside, it seems as if being in a heterosexual relationship is a rather unhealthy decision for women.

This does not mean that everyone should be hating on the male gaze or relationships in general, neither does it mean that the unhealthy aspects of relationships are related to the genitals one is born with. It is more a problem of social constructs and, as a consequence of that, also of toxic masculinity. From an early stage on almost everyone is conditioned to fulfill certain roles. Women are supposed to suppress themselves and their needs. Men on the other side are conditioned into being strong, whilst also being taught to deny their emotional side. Both can be really unhealthy in the long run, but especially men and the role they are taught to fulfill can become highly toxic for their partners and their relationships. It can lead to an inability to communicate feelings and emotions or non-appreciation of partners and their actions. A consequence of that could be ending up in an unequal relationship, were one party nurtures the other one, without getting anything in return. And now it makes sense that women become miserable in relationships with men, when society, radically spoken, is teaching the male part of the world population that they are superior over everyone without a penis. But those beliefs and habits can be unlearned and therefore, the genitals one is born with shouldn’t be used as an excuse for being a bad partner.

Become a lonely rider

For a long time being single, especially if you were a woman, has been seen as an equivalent to being a failure. Not that long ago, it was even more “tragic” to be a pregnant single woman. In Ireland some unmarried and pregnant women were even brought to so-called Houses of Shame. Which were a dangerous and harmful environment for both, the babies and their mothers. To full extent it became clear, when investigations earlier this year showed that over 800 children died in Irish mother and baby homes from 1925 to 1961. As you can see shaming women for embracing life in all its aspects, regardless of their relationship status, has a long history and could even lead to ending up in life-threatening circumstances. Even though, those official organizations, which were established for the purpose to punish women for not fitting into the rules of society, are less common in most parts of the world nowadays, some women still think that it is safer for them to stay in relationships that make them unhappy, instead of breaking them up. But, as mentioned above, young people are more and more likely to see that being single offers you more than an unhealthy partnership could. I know that I am diving into a sensitive topic here, so please note that I am not talking about severe physical or emotional abuse. I am talking about about staying with someone, who does not fulfill you, makes you unhappy or is taking advantage of you.

The question that comes up now is, why do some people still stick with their partner even though there is no rational reason for it? Well, it is not always that simple and sometimes people need to be nudged into making themselves less miserable. Artist and writer Florence Given empowers people worldwide to dump their spouse. About one year ago she broke up with her boyfriend and since then she did not only motivate other people to end their unhealthy relationships, but also spread a positive message regarding singledom. Her work inspires people to see dating more as something fun and exciting, rather than an instrument to find a new relationship. Her journey showed that letting go of the need to find someone else will eventually lead you to become closer to yourself.

Reclaiming our sexual power

Another woman I admire from afar is Ruby Stevenson. The non-monogamous bisexual sex educator is spreading her sex positive vibe and body positivity. Both topics have to be mentioned when we are talking about single life. Not being in a relationship does not mean that someone can’t or shouldn’t have sex, even though, women are being called out for satisfying their sexual needs by themselves or with sexual partner(s) and embracing their body, regardless if it fits society’s beauty standards. Stevenson takes it one step further, as she explains in an Instagram post about one of her public talks: “Being a slut is an attitude, and transcends the number of people you’ve slept with or what your sexual preferences are; it’s about embracing your sexuality with confidence.”

So please - in case you ever recognize that someone is being slut-shamed or you are experiencing it yourself, keep in mind, that being a “slut” is nothing to be ashamed of. Reclaiming words that are used to shame certain groups of people is a powerful move. Not only words that have an openly negative association, such as bitch or slut, should be reclaimed. Also the relationship status “single” itself should no longer stand for being depressed and lonely, because it can be the exact opposite!

Wrap it up

So basically, as soon as you realize that being single has nothing to do with being miserable, you will see that there is nothing to be afraid of and you will learn to embrace the independence that comes along with it. If you are in a happy and equal relationship, that’s great! But you’re not weird for not wanting a relationship and guess what? You don’t need one! You want to see that movie and finally have dinner at this new restaurant? Take a friend out on a fun night or just go by yourself. You prefer casual hook-ups over relationships? Just make sure to get yourself tested for STDs from time to time, have safe sex and you’re good to go. Do whatever you want to do, as long as you’re happy with it. What I’m trying to say is, and I can not stress this enough, don’t let anyone ever tell you again that you need a relationship for anything.

by Kristina Bartl

Photo Credits

Blowin' in the wind, Rajarshi Mitra, CC BY 2.0

Rotten Banana, Christoph Schütz

Banana Skin, Photorama

Juicy Peach, Daria Głodowska

The post The single rebellion and its happy lonely riders appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

The Polanski affair: Should we differentiate the artist from his work?

Aimée Niau Lacordaire — Mon, 06 Jan 2020 18:16:25 +0000

A big debate is back in France raising the question: “should we separate the man from the artist?”. In fact, Roman Polanski, the famous director, is accused of multiple rapes of minors. On 8 November 2019, the photographer Valentine Monnier accused Polanski to have raped and beaten her in 1975 which he disputes. However, she is the fifth woman to officially declare having been raped by the director since the Samantha Geimer case in 1977. To the case of this 13-year-old girl who Polanski allegedly drugged and raped during a photo shoot for Vogue magazine were added the more recent accusations of three actresses in the end of 2017.

The accusation of Valentine Monnier appeared only a few days before the release of the new movie of Polanski, aptly named “J’accuse”. So the question arises, can we go see this artistic work of an alleged rapist, repeat offender?

While Roman Polanski has been exclude by the Academy of Oscars in the United States, the French cinema community is regularly suspected of protecting. In fact, he was convicted by the American courts in a case of sexual abuse of a minor in 1977. Roman Polanski is considered by Interpol as a fugitive: following his conviction, after having served his first sentence in the United States, he fled the country before being sentenced again in the same case.

This is why some feminists have decided to boycott his movie, and some have mobilized to block the access to the film’s preview at the “Champollion” cinema in Paris. Polanski is protected by the state because he appears as a man of power and a great artist which is not acceptable. The boycott of his film is then the only weapon that the population has to campaign against this injustice and show their dissatisfaction with the French justice.

This problem has already arisen in France with Louis-Ferdinand Céline, notably known for his work “Journey to the end of the night”. But this famous writer was a racist and wrote antisemitic works.

The problem is quite recent because indeed before, it was a taboo and was considered as normal. So those artists, that we know to have done some criminal activity can no longer be tried and can no longer defend themselves in face of these accusations, recalling the presumption of innocence which says that “everyone charged with a penal offense is presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense.“

Understanding is not forgiving

If Polanski is a rapist, I think that as with every criminal, we need to interest ourselves for his history for a better understanding, but to understand is not to forgive.

Polanski was born in Paris in 1933, to a Jewish Polish father and a Russian mother. He lived in France for three years, but his family left for Poland after the German invasion of Poland. There, he was forced to live in the Warsaw ghetto where he escaped deportation but his parents and sister did not. His mother died in Auschwitz. He was interested in cinema since his childhood, he notably made one of his greatest successes with “The Pianist” which is adapted from the homonymous autobiographical novel by Władysław Szpilman in which he tells how he survived in the Warsaw ghetto, then after its liquidation, until the insurrection of the Polish resistance, and the Soviet invasion. His childhood story therefore strongly inspired Polanski to make this film.

In 1969, Sharon Tate, the wife of Roman Polanski, was assassinated by repeated stabbing in their house in Los Angeles while she was pregnant. The murder was organized by Charles Manson and perpetrated by his “family”, the name of the sect that the serial killer had founded.

So if we judge the artist in relation to his work it is important to look at and judge it in relation to his childhood and the traumatic elements that he himself suffered. Several artists have been accused of mistreatment like Chris Brown or paedophilia like Michael Jackson … You are free to boycott their works or not according to your convictions.

by Aimée Niau Lacordaire

Photo credits

Devant l’affiche de “J’accuse” (Polanski), Jeanne Menjoulet, CC BY 2.0

missing bricks, Warsaw ghetto wall, Nina Childish, CC BY-ND 2.0

The post The Polanski affair: Should we differentiate the artist from his work? appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.