Americas – Pike & Hurricane

The Battle of the Grandmasters

Franziska Fink — Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:10:56 +0000

Whilst reading a newspaper, one will often stumble upon catchy headlines such as “What Is the End Game of US-China Competition?” (The Diplomat), “Russian lawmaker on US-China power game: Don’t play us ‘as a card’” (Nikkei Asia) or “Erdogan’s great game: The Turkish problem on the EU’s doorstep” (The Financial Times). Each of these examples makes use of a metaphor depicting politics as a game of some sort. Of course, those headings are phrased as enticing as possible to win the reader’s interest. But by the same token, they subtly (and, most likely, unintentionally) reveal a core feature of political theory and practice.

It is not by a whim of nature that state leaders, transnational corporations and even whole nations are repeatedly referred to as “players” within the discourse of global politics. There is even an entire political and economic theory which is built around the analogy of politics as a game, the classic game theory. Scholars of International Relations, for example, make frequent use of this theory to showcase how international conflict and other political phenomena occur as a result of decisions made by people.

This politics-as-a-game allegory is even further underpinned by one of the oldest and most successful games known to humankind. Chess, which used to be especially popular among the Shahs of Persia and has since enjoyed great renown as a sophisticated leisure time activity of known politicians and state-leaders (Napoleon, Queen Elisabeth II, Willy Brandt and Jimmy Carter to only name a few), is currently enjoying a revival even outside political circles (which, to be fair, might have to be accredited to the less sophisticated leisure time activity of us mortals watching The Queen’s Gambit on Netflix, an exceptionally well-made show that follows the life of an orphan chess prodigy, Elizabeth Harmon, during her quest to become the world’s greatest chess player).

Chess is often described as a battle-game, during which both players are attempting to beat their opponent by taking down the king. But the king is of course very well protected and in order to get him into a position from which he cannot flee anymore (to put him in checkmate), you need to move around your pieces on the board tactically and follow a thought-through strategy. It is important to think long-term and often it is an enduring, nerve-racking process during which many victims and losses will occur.

Basically, chess is a miniature version of world politics. This might explain its frequent use among journalists, since the usage of chess terminology is an easy yet helpful way of breaking down complex events into vivid game metaphors. This comes in especially handy when trying to make sense of geopolitical issues.

Even though the Cold War was officially frozen for good by 1991, a new tension between the East and West has become more and more visible. With the difference however, that the Soviet Union has now been replaced by the new warily observed opponent of the US: China. Since 2013, China has massively invested into the establishment and expansion of its intercontinental trade and infrastructure networks. Within the framework of the One Belt, One Road initiative (BRI), China is subtly yet determinedly reaching for a shift in the balance of power among the world’s political players in its own favour. What on the surface seems to be nothing more than an infrastructure project, is actually an immense use of soft power executed by the Chinese state.

To translate this into the world of chess: If the US hegemony was the black king on the chess board, even though still well-protected by its many pawns of economic and military superiority, the white army, China, would be bringing its figures in a seemingly innocent, yet threatening position …

One of the many “points of attack” of the BRI that China is working on can be found in Nicaragua. Through a country that is rather rarely mentioned in the major international headlines, China is building a canal with the purpose of connecting the Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean. This is neither a new nor a groundbreaking project, since it has already been realized in close proximity to Nicaragua. The Panama Canal has the exact same purpose and has furthermore already been in place since 1914. Why are the Chinese building another one, you ask? Remember: in chess, no unnecessary moves are made. They all have a purpose and follow a grand strategy. In this case, it is to pose a direct threat to the US which is a great ally of Panama. Together, the American and Panamanian marine are securing the Panama Canal. So even though the canal itself is an internationally neutral corridor, its passage depends on the benevolence of the US.

Of course, as an ambitiously ascending superpower, China does not put up with that and instead simply builds its own canal.

Yet, Central America is not the only arena where the two world powers are settling their disputes. China’s massive BRI investments in Africa, for example, have been given much more attention in the international press coverage. It is nevertheless crucial to maintain a global perspective, in order to keep track of all the moves the two grand masters are making during this enthralling game of East versus West.

Related articles:

A game of chess at the Greek-Turkish border

Between waters: the dilemma of the Nicaragua Canal

Photo credits:

Putin vs Obama by Svenn Sivertssen (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-76052-0335 by Ulrich Kohls (CC-BY-SA 3.0)

The post The Battle of the Grandmasters appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Nowhere to Stay Home

Maya Diekmann — Fri, 22 Jan 2021 19:03:56 +0000

It is a challenge to find positive side-effects that a deadly global pandemic may bring to the world. With so much uncertainty, pain, fear, exhaustion, and death immediately surrounding us every day, the silver linings are hard to spot. Often, these silver linings turn out to be temporary: Healthcare workers that reaped applause from the balconies of this world several short months ago, are now expected to treat the organizers of anti-lockdown demonstrations with the same means as someone who has, for the last ten months, tuned down their personal whims in favour of a safer and more effective pandemic response. Those states that once delivered personal protection items and financial aid to less well-equipped parts of the world, are now hoarding vaccine doses that don’t even exist yet. How can you see the opportunities that an economic crisis might bring for the implementation of a promising European Green New Deal, if you have just lost your job and don’t know how long you can provide dinner for your family? How can you see some of the most effective responses to homelessness in years, while simultaneously so many people around the globe are pushed to their existential minimum, to the brink of losing their own homes?

The ones who cannot stay home

Upon giving out their first lockdown orders, many European governments quickly realized that to stay home, one must have a home to begin with. In one of their most rapid homelessness policy executions in years, the UK’s government ordered for almost 15,000 persons without permanent shelter to be relocated to empty hotel rooms, student dorms, and vacant housing. Similar governmental projects have been undertaken in France, Australia, and the U.S. In Germany, where coherent nation-wide policies on homelessness solutions not just during the corona pandemic are sparse and slow, non-governmental organizations have taken the lead when it comes to organizing hotel rooms for persons in need.

The message conveyed by a response such as the U.K.’s makes apparent how far policies to combat homelessness, provided they are backed up with sufficient funding, can come. Yet, it is also obvious—and so it has been for years for those engaged with this issue—that one emergency response upon another is not enough to overcome the issue once and for all. The urgency with which the matter has been addressed during times of crisis needs to become a new normal, if homelessness is to be confronted successfully.

Addressing homelessness is as complex as the diversity of the problem’s root causes. Among the main factors that push people on the street are stagnant wages and unemployment, matched with a lack of affordable housing and healthcare, discrimination, domestic violence and family problems.

4 Million people in the EU are homeless, 700,000 people sleeping rough every night—a figure that has increased by 70% in the last ten years alone. The disproportionate development of housing prices and inflation rates on the one hand and minimum income on the other put more and more individuals inside the EU in precarious situations. Over the past 10 years, the EU consumer price index (CPI) has increased by about 15%—inflation that remains unmatched by the increase in minimum wages, averaging 4.4% in the same time span. On top of this, housing costs in major European cities are skyrocketing: Rent has increased by 35% in Barcelona between 2010 and 2018, by over 50% in Paris between 2004 and 2019, and by over 70% in Berlin between 2004 and 2016.

Housing is becoming an especially disproportionate burden for low-income earners: In 2018, over one third of those households at the risk of poverty in the EU spent 40% of their income on housing. This makes livelihoods extremely prone to economic hardships—such as unemployment, furlough, or short-time allowance. U.K. authorities are gloomily predicting that “as many as half a million households could be at risk of homelessness once the full economic impact of the coronavirus is realized.” In other words: Mix unaffordable housing with a weakened economy, as we see it in times of the corona pandemic, give it a good stir and you have the perfect potion for a very real crisis.

The case of Vancouver provides a tragic example of the damage such an explosive cocktail of unaffordable housing and stagnant income can cause. The cut of governmental support for housing in the 1980s kicked loose a wave of homelessness that even caused the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (UNCESCR) to urge the Canadian government to declare the situation a national emergency. Within three years, between 2002 and 2005 the number of those without shelter in the Vancouver area nearly doubled, from 1,121 to 2,174. While the growth has been significantly slowed down since 2005, the trend has not yet been reversed and the most recent count in 2019 marked a peak of 2,223 people living on the streets of Vancouver.

In Canada, emergency responses, such as overnight shelters, have long been at the centre of homelessness management. While indispensable to addressing the issue, they are no sustainable solution to combat it in the long run. Unconditional access to permanent housing, known as the Housing First approach, has been identified as a key contributor to improve the situation of homeless people and communities in Vancouver. The Vancouver at Home (VAH) study, investigating a Housing First trial among homeless adults suffering from mental illnesses, has found that Housing First as compared to standard responses “produce significant benefits for participants, improve public safety and reduce the use of crisis and emergency resources.”

The City that Never Sleeps Rough

Similarly positive attitudes toward a readily accessible housing market are reflected by organizations around the world who stress that those provided with permanent shelter are more likely to seek help in other areas of their lives, too. One of the flag store implementations of the Housing First approach can be found in Finland: by investing over 250 million euros into affordable housing and support workers, the Finnish state, together with regional and non-governmental actors, has one of the most successful homelessness response mechanisms and prevention systems in the world. As a result, Finland is the only EU member state in which numbers of homeless are decreasing, with its capital Helsinki having virtually eradicated rough-sleeping.

While there are multiple success stories of individual cities’ and regions’ approach to homelessness—such as that of Trieste in Italy tackling homelessness by improving its mental health care system—the only lastingly effective approach is a systematic one. Only with common standards within a given state, or even beyond, can homelessness be eradicated once and for all. And what better way to create common standards than through common institutions? In a resolution from November 2020, the European Parliament urges the EU and its member states to end homelessness by 2030. While a detailed agenda is yet to be published, the Parliament recommends better access of homeless individuals to the labour market and healthcare, and a shift of focus from emergency responses to Housing First and prevention mechanisms. Concerning the latter, they recognize the pressing problem of unaffordable housing in European cities and announce a proposal to guarantee more inclusive housing markets. It might be just another policy proposal. But at least it is the long-overdue first step towards solving a problem that has been invisible, yet ever present on the horizon, for so many years.

In the summer of 2020, Barcelona cracked down on companies owning vacant apartments in the city by implementing a law that would allow the city to buy empty apartments at 50% of market values. In an unprecedented effort to create affordable housing, local authorities presented companies with an ultimatum of either renting out available apartments within a month or be subjected to compulsory sales at the described conditions. Paris, where as of 2017 over 26% of apartments are vacant, is imposing harsh fines on apartment owners breaking rules for Airbnb rentals, which “encourage property speculation and reduce the housing available to residents.” Berlin has implemented a temporary rent freeze for the year of 2021 and a permanent rent cap that regulates the allowed increase in rent in the following period.

The author Jonathan Safran Foer once wrote: “It’s always possible to wake someone from sleep, but no amount of noise will wake someone who is pretending to be asleep.” The pandemic has unleashed a crisis on so many different levels, producing so much noise that it becomes difficult to decide which problem to focus on first: healthcare professionals—to mention just those essential workers most immediately linked to the question of life and death—are ridiculously underpaid and undervalued, yet they remain equally taken for granted. Shutting down an entire economy, or at least having it run on low power mode to unburden healthcare workers, threatens the livelihoods of small businesses and their owners while feeding into the hands of enterprises. Limiting children’s right to education—while absolutely necessary when classrooms become a turnstile for a deadly virus—bears and exacerbates immense inequalities in opportunity. Living in a city and losing one’s job in the middle of all this very easily becomes an eviction notice. But all this noise, as overbearing as it might be, has also opened many eyes. We have to keep treating the invisible crises that the COVID-19 pandemic has brought to light with the urgency they deserve. We have to make sure that people can stay home. We must not go back to sleep.

Related articles:

Such a big world and still not enough space to live?

Photo credits:

By The Humantra on Unsplash

“On the scrapheap”, by Jon Berkeley on behance, CC BY-NC 4.0

“Balconies”, by unitednations on Unsplash

The post Nowhere to Stay Home appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

An Ideology of Selfishness — How Misinformation Propagates Inequality

Filip Zahariev — Mon, 02 Nov 2020 15:26:39 +0000

Since the 2010s, a sharp uptake in the levels of misinformation can be observed, in the push for so-called austerity, in the war on facts, in the bold attempts of different socio-political organizations to exchange fact for opinion.

The mechanisms of propaganda have mastered their most powerful array of tools yet––social media. That’s not to say misinformation hasn’t gone hand in hand with print media; it has walked hand in hand with factual information, since as long ago as the fifteenth century, when the printing press took off. In the intervening centuries, human society has, collectively, found ways to combat misinformation through methods of verification which, the hope was, the Internet would make foolproof. But rather than provide a higher standard, the rise of the Internet (and of social media, in particular) has seen the decline of hard journalism along with the printed press.

Nowadays, criticism is systematically dismissed as “fake news”––if not outright silenced––, no matter the source or topic it is aimed at. It would be easy to pin the blame on a name or on a score of them. Easy but misguided. The Trumps and Bolsaneros of the world are a symptom of an economic system at odds with itself, much like the ouroboros swallowing its own tail, at once hungry and suffering from agonising convulsions.

Marilynne Robinson, in a piece for the NYRB in June, “What Kind of Country Do We Want?” described this economic system as:

“…the snare in which humanity has been caught––great industry and commerce in service to great markets, with ethical restraint and respect for the distinctiveness of cultures…having fallen away in eager deference to profitability.This is not new, except for the way an unembarrassed opportunism has been enshrined among the laws of nature and has flourished destructively in the near absence of resistance or criticism.”

This is, Robinson writes, a “system now revealed as a tenuous set of arrangements that have been highly profitable for some people but gravely damaging to the world”. And not just the world––growing economic inequality is as high as it has ever been.

Inequality – A Cancer Eating Away at Society

Inequality affects “more than 70% of the global population,” according to a UN report, but nowhere is it more jarring, more on focus than in the richest, most powerful and prestigious countries in the world. To this end, it’s time to turn the reader’s attention to several recent developments, first in the USA and then in the UK.

Robinson describes the USA as “having been overtaken with a deep and general conviction of scarcity, a conviction that has become an expectation, then a kind of discipline, even an ethic. The sense of scarcity instantiates itself. It reinforces an anxiety that makes scarcity feel real and encroaching, and generosity, even investment, an imprudent risk.”

It is this sense of scarcity that drives society towards polarization, which Robinson in turn characterizes as “a virtual institutionalization in America of the ancient practice of denying working people the real or potential value of their work.” This institution couldn’t work without popular support. It is here that the mechanisms of branding––dare we call it by its non-politically correct name, propaganda?––enter into the scene. With them come their main beneficiaries, would-be demagogues whose interest lies in reinforcing the status quo.

Through the benefits of unified branding, large swathes of the population are persuaded to vote against their own interests. This branding rarely has a basis in fact, as is the case with perceptions of economic competence in the USA, for example. Every Republican administration from Reagan onward has overseen a recession, and every Democratic administration has overseen a strong recovery and an economic boom. Do Americans trust Democrats more to do a good job with the economy? On the contrary: the GOP enjoys a durable advantage, recently at eight points. The pandemic may agitate sentiments and approval numbers, but even in the chaotic era of President Trump, Americans irrationally trust in the GOP’s longstanding image as the party of practical, “fiscally conservative” businessmen who know how to run things efficiently and profitably. (Joseph O’Neill, “Brand New Dems?” for the NYRB)

This is no small feat of misinformation, but a wilful spread of what is equivalent to a mass delusion over decades. So, too, with migration; despite migrants performing jobs the vast majority of Americans do not want, their contribution to society is denied.

A Universal Problem

This is not a uniquely American issue, though the USA is perhaps the most extreme example––and the richest country in the world. If we turn to the UK, much the same can be seen, both in terms of a push for austerity and in the divorce from facts. For a decade now, British austerity has gutted the NHS (National Health Service)––in a time of a pandemic, the fault lines of this act couldn’t be more pronounced.

The “Leave” campaign was successful on the grounds of false claims, as well as racism and a perceived economic victimhood of the English (more so than any other group) at the hands of migrants. At the UK’s great economic loss over membership taxes to the EU, as well. Why is it, then, that British farmers were faced with the possibility of their harvest rotting, unpicked, on trees? This is an issue exacerbated by the coronavirus, certainly, but with its roots in the Eastern European migrant labour force that so offended English sensibilities, despite performing a job that no Britons are interested in.

And in February, Business Insider estimated that by the end of 2020, the British government will have spent £200 billion to leave the UK, more than all its payments to the Union over forty-seven years of membership. One cannot help but wonder what these funds might’ve accomplished, were they aimed at reducing economic inequality within the UK, rather than spent on a divorce bill.

What becomes clear through these examples––and many more like them––is that the drive towards ever greater profitability at the core of our economic system is not only flawed, it is a pandemic more deadly, more divisive than COVID-19 could ever be. Its tools seek to propagate an ideology of selfishness. And it is easy to drink its bitter message in. What’s required is only passive consent, a wilful lethargy, an unwillingness to look away from the screen.

Or… a different choice can be made. We can examine humanity through a prism not of its greed or rugged individualism, but through an outrage for the injustices embedded in our society, and most of all, through a shared human experience and selflessness.

Related articles:

A Stark Case of Propaganda

The Social Network of Ethnic Conflict

Photo credits:

Astroturf by hanne jatho, CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

INEQUALITY by Teeraphat Kansomngam, CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

Paul Harrop / Poster site, New Bridge Road, Newcastle / CC BY-SA 2.0

The post An Ideology of Selfishness — How Misinformation Propagates Inequality appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

“Gender ideology”: The case of Colombia

Tanya Rahozina — Mon, 02 Nov 2020 15:12:13 +0000

In this interview, I talked to my former classmate Diana Rocío Rodríguez Benítez who specializes in the evolution of ‘gender ideology’ as a phenomenon pertinent to the Americas and Europe. In particular, Diana’s academic interest lies in discovering the role which anti-‘gender ideology^[1] has played in Colombia since 2016. This was the year when the landmark peace deal between the government and FARC (the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) was signed but did not come into force, as the referendum on the deal turned out to be the victory of the no-vote. However, after the revision of the agreement, which removed gender focus from the document, it was ratified by both Houses of Congress. As Diana researched the subject in-depth, I wanted to hear her opinion on the role of ‘gender ideology’ misperception within the scope of the entire nation and whether one might expect the situation to change in the foreseeable future.

Tanya: Could you please say a few words about your master’s thesis?

Diana: I wrote about ‘gender ideology’. It was a discourse analysis based on four actors because all these actors were against this so-called ‘gender ideology’. This created the political agenda against diversity. Everything that seems different is something that you cannot accept within what is considered to be right.

T: Could you make some examples of how the actors that you talk about use ‘gender ideology’?

D: The first thing I would say is that the whole gender ideology is a fake construct. It is not something that is legit in academic terms. Today everybody knows its meaning, but before 2015 it was something nobody knew about. It was created by the Catholic church, and then it evolved into the whole movement.

Secondly, here in Colombia it is linked to the decision by the Constitutional Court that every school had to review their Code of Conduct keeping in mind that every school should have an inclusive environment. To which they (anti-gender agents) said that this was the violation of the schools’ and parents’ autonomy to teach kids about sexuality and diversity.

It was a decision based on the precedent. There was a very sad case of the teenage boy Sergio Urrego. At the school he studied the director and the psychologists found a photo of him and another male student kissing. They then forced the two of them to come out publicly, which they hadn’t done before. And because of that Sergio killed himself.

In Colombia we have this legal mechanism: when your fundamental rights are violated you can write a piece of paper and then send it to the Supreme Court. Sergio’s mom did that, and then the Constitutional Court issued a ruling which guaranteed the rights that were violated. Based on this ruling they created different orders, and one of them was the one I mentioned regarding the Code of Conduct^[2]. All of this happened during the referendum and peace agreement negotiations, and the referendum had this strong gender focus. The four actors whom I then analysed in my dissertation also said that peace agreement was going to turn our kids gay, and was filled with gender ideology, which was not true––it was fake.

T: How unpopular was the decision and how big was the anti-gender ideology movement?

D: A lot of people went out to protest it. The leaders were far-right politicians, and the Catholic church together with other Evangelical church. And it was huge. I remember reading and watching the news, and there were a lot of angry people protesting. At that time the Minister of education was a lesbian woman. The protesters went around saying that she is lesbian who is trying to mess our kids. It was quite huge not only in Bogota, but all over the country.

T: Did they achieve anything?

D: There is no causal relationship, as there is not enough evidence to link one event to the other, but this topic was without a doubt something that people talked about and feared. I don’t know if they achieved their goal, but, for sure, the no-vote won, and this ruling is not being executed. I am doing volunteer work with the mom of Sergio. She created an NGO^[3]. And nothing has changed during these four years. The decision is not on hold, but there is a lack of the political will.

T: Are there a lot of similar cases?

D: Not a lot, but this case was huge because there was the decision of the Constitutional Court. Not a lot, but a few. Not only in school environments, but also other contexts when people are the victims of discrimination, which is a crime.

T: Can people seek any legal help in such situations?

D: Of course. If there is a judicial proof that someone was discriminated based on their sexual orientation or gender identity, religion, ethnicity, then yes, the offender can face jail time.

T: Are there any legal instruments that can support them?

D: There are. We actually have a lot of legal instruments and institutions, which on paper look very good and progressive and guarantee rights. But I would say we are not there yet. We are not a progressive society. You have all of these mechanisms, legal and disciplinary, but when the time comes for you to validate your rights, it is hard. If you go to a state institution, most of the people there have no clue about gender focus or what LGBTQ stands for. It is hard, but the instruments and mechanisms are there.

T: Would you call it a problem of a conservative mindset and the lack of awareness?

D: Yes, this is a country which is very conservative. We don’t see us as a cohesive society, we don’t stand for our rights. We have never done this. We have this word in Spanish ‘’arribista” which means that you always want something for yourself, something that you don’t have. You want to go to the best school, you want to have the last iPhone, this superficial lifestyle, but it is not only about the iPhone. I do think that these things are connected to each other. We are a very unequal country. Going to school here is a privilege. Reading the news in English is an incredible privilege. Most people see what the local news show.

T: You stress the fact that Colombia is not a very wealthy country, however did you find any similarities between Colombian case and developed states?

D: I think that ontological security is the key. It is how people feel insecure when their basis is being disturbed. If your whole life you have had a certain mindset, and then all of a sudden, although it has been years of progress, but people think that it is all of a sudden, then they say something about gender, diversity and inclusion, different ways to do things and the structures. But definitely there are countries where institutions are not strong and people are not that educated, then things tend to stick more.

T: Are there any examples of people waking up and realizing that it is actually a delusion that is being promoted? Or are we in a hopeless position?

D: I don’t think people realize that it was a delusion. Here it was crazy because by the time of the referendum there was this person who was the press secretary of the whole no-campaign. After the vote, he gave an interview in which he literally said that people were tricked, and they used different discourses based on the socio-economic levels. Here we have numbers. Houses are ranked on the scale from one to five, one being the poorest and five being the richest. So, if you live in a house, but you don’t have access to education or social care, then you are one. If you are middle class, you are three. They created strategies depending on this division. He said to the poorest ones that the deal was going to spread the ‘gender ideology’ because they knew that people were afraid of it. There are people who believe that ‘gender ideology’ is true. It is something you have to be aware of. One of them being my aunt. You don’t have to look any further. Even in my family. I am quite hopeless.

T: You often underscore that you have a strong belief in the youth. Do you think with the change of generation it might be different?

D: I hope so, I really do. I am doing some volunteering work with the Truce Commission, and I am working with a couple of interns. Surely, they are privileged, but still they are pretty smart and aware of all of this. I also think that one thing is here in Bogota, women who are privileged, and a completely different thing if you go to the jungle, the Amazon region, or to other places where you don’t even have running water. So, I wouldn’t dare to have an answer to that as I am not in touch with the younger generation. We will see. I really hope so.

Notes:

[1] ‘Gender ideology’ is the phenomenon in which people defend the traditional family values, where female and male roles are established. The term is closely connected to the debates within the Catholic Church. Anti-’gender ideology’ is directed against gender, and counteracts questioning of the binary gender model.

[2] On the website of the Constitutional Court of Colombia they refer to the codes as “manuals of coexistence”

[3] Fundación Sergio Urrego

Related articles:

Gender Is Bending and We Should Embrace the Change

Photo Credits:

Bandera arcoiris, by Natalio Pinto, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

By Crawford Jolly on Unsplash

The post “Gender ideology”: The case of Colombia appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

The legality of abortion

Elena Wasserzier — Mon, 02 Nov 2020 14:50:09 +0000

On the 28th of September, the Amnesty International Student Association of Malmö University hosted a movie screening about the fight for safe abortion rights in Ireland, since the date also hallmarks the international day of safe abortions. The association made use of the occasion to remind people all over the world of women’s reproductive rights.

Additionally to the movie screening, a song written by Robin Atiken about “the legality of abortion” was performed. The song renders facts that can be found on the official website of Amnesty International and it constitutes a display of circumstances and reality for women across the globe.

The lyrics are presented below:

The legality of abortion is seen as somewhat crude

but listen as I sing, it will help you out dude

A quarter of pregnancies,

end in this procedure

So take that at your leisure.

If safety’s your worry then listen don’t hurry

25 million unsafe abortions,

Are done each year

This whole issue brings me a harsh tear

It it were safe,

Women would be saved

Are you hearing me quite clear?

A medical error called

the “chilling effect”

Where the line of abortion is not

scientifically checked

Post abortion care goes down

That makes all of us some clowns

If you shun the operation

A stigma will be the occasion

Our culture will be shamed

And we’ll all be to blame

CHORUS: x3

Why fight?

It’s a woman’s right.

If you disagree you can choose as you please.

People are delusional, when they think we have already achieved equality in regards to the sexes. This is not the case and the world still struggles to change old patriarchal patterns towards equity and equality for all. Even as recently as 2020, reproductive rights remain a major element in women’s fight for equality in multiple countries across the globe.

As depicted in the movie “When Women Won”, Ireland has just allowed the right for safe and legal abortions in 2018, which is only two years ago. Before that, women had to travel to England, literally cross a country border, to receive a safe abortion and be able to decide over their own body and their reproductive rights. The referendum which was adopted on the 28th of May 2018, granted the repeal of the almost constitutional abortion ban.

This illustrates that the world is very far from the progress women’s rights advocates aspire to see. Literal baby steps are taken in regard to women’s reproductive rights, because Ireland is not the only country which is late in history. The USA, for example has shown in the last couple of years that history can also go backwards in its timeline, when a couple of states, e.g. Virginia, decided to ban abortions and to deem it illegal. When this did not work out completely, the state aggravated its abortion laws, which made it a lot harder for women to seek an abortion when needed.

However, Virginia was eventually sued over their unfair abortion laws by Planned Parenthood, Center for Reproductive Rights, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia. The lawsuit considered the following laws as “burdensome and medically unnecessary”:

Second trimester abortions must be performed in a hospital;

Abortions must only be performed by a physician;

Medical facilities providing more than four first trimester abortions per month must undergo strict licensing requirements;

Patients must undergo an ultrasound and counseling 24 hours before an abortion, requiring them to make two trips to a clinic; and

Abortion is a class 4 felony if the requirements are not followed

The plaintiffs claimed that “the Commonwealth of Virginia has spent over four decades enacting layer upon layer of unnecessary and onerous abortion statutes and regulations.”

The list goes on: El Salvador and Nicaragua, in Central America, still enforce discriminatory laws that ban abortions in almost all conditions. More than 40% of the world’s women in childbearing age live in countries where, abortion is medically either very restricted, not accessible at all or banned and illegal, with partly grave penalties as a result of violation of the law.

Related articles:

Politics of fertility

Politically conscious art as backlash: Amanda Palmer’s “There Will Be No Intermission”

Picture Credits:

The Handmaid’s Tale, by Victoria Pickering, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

The post The legality of abortion appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Delusive Donald

Franziska Fink — Mon, 02 Nov 2020 12:42:00 +0000

The next time people start talking about Donald Trump, I want you to conduct a little social experiment. As soon as you hear the name of the current US president, try to observe the change in the face of the person you are talking to. You will inevitably notice how they roll their eyes, how a condescending smirk scurries over their lips or how they give an amused shake of their head. Maybe someone will point out Trump’s latest ridiculous statement or how particularly orange he looked the other day.

What started out as an absurd event as Trump won the 2016 election and moved into the White House, underwent a rough, yet somehow subtle adaptation period in which the world more or less came to terms with the former reality show star stepping into the role of the “leader of the free world”. Nonetheless, even after almost four years in the most powerful position that one can hold, Donald Trump remains nothing but a joke to many. So do the people who marked a cross next to Trump’s name in 2016. This is largely due to non-US media coverage in which the president is often depicted as a kid that happens to have its playground on the premises of the White House, and which correspondingly presents his supporters as irresponsible parents who, first of all, brought this child upon us and second, now fail to be strict and hold it accountable for its misbehaviour. Moreover, they even seem to be proud parents and actively encourage all of his actions.

A person consuming regular news outside of the United States is thus very likely to succumb to this image of Trump. Given the fact that US politics are seemingly far away from the average daily life of non-Americans, this person will probably be amused rather than concerned. This exact point is where it gets dangerous. When Donald Trump is seen as something to only laugh or sigh about, rather than as the most powerful man in the world, a critical space opens up between a perilous delusion and reality.

The Two Sides of the Medal

Within the medical field, delusions are a pathological state of mind, characterized by “fixed beliefs that are not amenable to change in light of conflicting evidence”. Unfortunately, politics are not as clear as psychological definitions when it comes to “evidence”. We tend to obey the fixed belief that Trump has failed as a president. This belief is fuelled by current news, which show the United States as a nation more polarized than ever; this became even more visible in the outbreaks of the “Black Lives Matter” protests and in Trump’s response of sending national troops to fight against their fellow citizens. Additionally, the coronavirus continues to rage across the country, having left more than 200 000 people dead. Yet there has still not been a clear strategy implemented on how to best fight COVID-19 under the Trump administration. All of this does not look too well on the president’s record, further reinforcing his image of
ineptitude for the office he holds.

Nonetheless, this is only one side of the coin. Its backside is characterized by a significant block of loyal Trump supporters who have the power to heave him into the Oval Office for yet another four years. It is not that they are uneducated or blind to the events which are tearing their country apart. They simply see other aspects as well. Even though political measurements like the “Trump-O-Meter,” which track the actual implementation of Trump’s election promises, show a fairly different image (49% of promises broken, 24% kept), in the eyes of the president’s supporters, Trump has delivered, nonetheless. His most famous promise, to build a wall at the border to Mexico (and make Mexico pay for it), actually never exceeded the construction of 170 km out of the 800 km promised, as Mexico did not pay a penny and Congress did not agree to its funding.

Most of the immigrants who try to enter the US illegally come from the very poor countries of Central America. Trump hence declared states like Honduras “safe countries of origin” and made Mexico oblige to secure its borders more strictly. Within a year, the number of illegally picked up immigrants saw a decline of more than 80%. A big success for Trump, and not the only one.

His campaign motto “America First,” was underpinned by various actions, for example the withdrawal of American troops from Germany or Syria. Likewise, Trump pressured NATO member states to “pay their bills” and insisted on a fairer distribution of the alliance’s costs. Before Trump’s presidency in 2016, the US share of NATO budget amounted to 72%. Yet, while NATO’s total budget grew over the last few years, the US share declined to 70%. With these actions, Trump reacted to a popular feeling which the majority of US citizens share, namely being taken advantage of by the rest of the world.

Another crucial topic under Trump’s presidency is the economy. Under Trump, the country’s economy was thriving. He cut taxes and requirements and, in the end, even Democrats had to admit that they were profiting from Trump’s economic policies. Moreover, unemployment rate dropped to 3.5%, the lowest value in 51 years.

An unexpected Twist – The Corona Virus

Many analysts claim that, if the Corona virus had not occurred, i.e. forcing the global economy to shut down and accounting for a decline of a stunning 4.8% of the US economy, then Donald Trump would certainly be re-elected. COVID-19 has added an unpredictable twist to that assertion, because all of a sudden, Trump has to prove himself as a determined leader in times of crisis. This worked out semi-optimally with Trump refusing to acknowledge the danger of the disease in the beginning, downplaying the pandemic, and doubting the effectiveness of wearing masks to help contain the spread of the virus. The situation got devastatingly worse, with Trump suffering from Corona himself. The realization of the Trump campaign that this pandemic could hinder the re-election of the incumbent led to a series of disturbing and, if actually implemented, dangerous threats to democracy.

To mitigate the spread of COVID-19, many Americans consider postal voting. Regarding Trump’s currently low approval ratings (42,6%) and the related expectation that many voters will thus vote for his opponent Joe Biden, Trump continuously insisted on how postal ballots will lead to voting fraud and even suggested a delay of the election. On top of that, he has not yet confirmed a peaceful transfer of power in case he loses. Since Trump has so far kept his word on his most important promises, chances are he will keep this one too.

All of these are worrying developments. The Democracy Report 2020, published by the V-Dem Institute at the University of Gothenburg, actually measures global democracy based on hundreds of variables and has found the United States to be undergoing “substantial autocratization” in the Trump era.

Next time people start talking about Donald Trump, keep in mind that this man has the substantial support of loyal followers who embrace everything he says and does. Even when these words and actions are slowly turning one of the oldest democracies of the world into an autocratic regime. Do not succumb to the delusion that he is nothing but an angry orange joke which does not have to be taken seriously, but rather accept that he is a powerful president that tends to keep his word.

Related articles:

Tightening the Grip: Is Experience Necessary for a Successful Autocrat?

Photo credits:

Trump, by IoSonoUnaFotoCamera, CC BY-SA 2.0

Donald Trump with supporters, by Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 2.0

The post Delusive Donald appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Lessons on democracy: the blank vote

Merle Emrich — Sun, 14 Jun 2020 15:30:02 +0000

It is easy to claim that low voter turnout during elections is due to complacency, indifference and a lazy attitude of taking democratic rights and freedoms that others died, and are still dying, for granted. However, low turnouts, spoilt ballot papers and especially blank votes can be political statements in themselves.

Blank votes and democratic dissatisfaction

Who can be surprised by low turnouts, symptomatic for a lack of confidence in party politics, when policies do not overlap with rhetoric? When elections are presented as an opportunity to evoke positive change but positive change does not come. When the choice offered on the ballot paper seems to be that between plague and cholera. When people feel they need to vote tactically or that their vote does not count due to a winner-takes-it-all system or percentage barriers. Thus, low turnouts don’t necessarily hint at an increasing political indifference in Western society but at an increasing disillusionment with the representative democratic system as it is which makes people turn to informal rather than formal means of political participation.

This trend goes hand in hand with the increasing number of protests as well as blank votes. In the Spanish elections of 2011, 300 000 blank votes (ballot papers that have been left blank), 300 000 spoilt votes (ballot papers that have been filled in or submitted incorrectly) and 100 000 votes for the blank vote party Escaños en blanco (‘blank seats’) were counted which represents about 3 percent of the voters. In the second round of the 2017 French presidential elections 11.52 percent of the ballots cast, more than ever before, where either spoilt (3%) or blank (8.52%). As single cases they hint at the people’s dissatisfaction with the candidates in a specific election, when it becomes a trend it becomes evidence for more fundamental dissatisfaction with the system, says Chiara Superti (Columbia University).

Illusions of democracy

The solution certainly cannot be to brush of all those who do not vote or vote blank as indifferent or even undemocratic. Instead, non-voters, blank votes and spoilt ballot papers can offer insights into citizens’ political opinions. Lessons can be learned from them if we take a step back and reflect on our understanding of democracy.

In The UNESCO Courier sociologist Alain Touraine identifies two prerequisites for democracy: 1) freedom of political choice which makes possible a system in which power is distributed based majority decision, and 2) social conflict, for instance the workers’ movement. Granted, it would be a mistake to adopt a black-and-white thinking in which there exist only democratic and non-democratic systems instead of recognising the multitude of forms and levels of democracy. And, at the same time, if we critically inspect people’s freedom of political choice and democratic representation, we must admit to ourselves that our representative democracy is far from perfect.

In his video on democracy, the YouTuber Oliver Thorn (Philosophy Tube) presented a re-calculation of the Brexit referendum result taking into account the people who were not allowed to vote (prisoners and non-British residents). According to his calculation only 71.2% of the people who have an interest in the UK’s future were allowed to vote on it. Thus, merely 26.6% of the people living in the UK voted to leave the European Union. All debate about Brexit aside, it is fair to say that in this case, as in others, it was not a majority who made a ‘democratic’ decision. And even among those who are able to vote, the majority can overrule the voices of minorities and marginalised groups reducing the democratic system to democracy for the rich and the privileged.

The blank vote

Voting blank as political protest or statement is not a recent phenomenon. It can be traced back to the beginnings of modern Western democracy: in the 1881 French legislative elections around three percent of the votes were voided and in some areas up to 20 percent of the ballot papers were spoilt. Many of the comments that were scribbled on the ballot papers were written in a sophisticated language and showed an understanding of complex political concepts which suggests that the votes had been spoilt as protest based on an informed decision.

However, in many cases blank votes are not taken into consideration. In countries like the UK they are considered spoilt votes. And until recently this was also the case in France. Since 2014 blank votes are counted separately from spoilt votes but have no impact on the election results. Countries like Italy, the Netherlands, Costa Rica and Brazil have the same approach. Blank votes are in these cases merely symbolic. Yet, their recognition would have a real impact on election results. In 1995, Jacques Chirac would not have won the majority in presidential elections, and neither would have François Hollande in 2012, had blank votes been calculated into the election results.

Only few countries recognise the blank vote, and many of them not fully. In Sweden blank votes are only taken into account in referendums. And while Switzerland recognises blank votes, they merely have a noticeable impact in certain local elections since a relative majority is sufficient to win the presidential elections. In Spain blank votes are taken into consideration when calculating the participation threshold, yet only valid ballot papers are used to calculate the seat distribution in parliament. It is in Latin America where we can find countries that fully recognise the blank vote. In Colombia blank votes can invalidate an election making it necessary to repeat it. This second round, however, cannot be invalidated. Likewise, in Peru blank votes can bring about a repetition of the elections if they represent two thirds of the votes.

Recognising the blank vote

While the recognition of the blank vote might lead to voters favouring rejection over approval votes and a high number of blank votes might result in a political crisis, it can benefit democracy in many ways. It would not only better reflect the political will and opinion of the voters but might also lead to higher turnouts. The option of voting blank would provide additional incentive for politicians to present election programmes and policies that convince the voters rather than presenting nothing more than the lesser of two evils.

In countries like Italy, Chile and Colombia, Chiara Superti argues, often more votes are cast blank than are given to many minor or extreme parties that are generally considered the choice of protest voters. Politicians should see the blank vote as a sign of the people’s discontent before it augments to a level that erupts in widespread protests, says Olivier Durand, founding president of the Association pour la reconnaissance du vote blanc. He promotes the adoption of a system of recognition of blank votes in which a certain percentage of blank votes would lead to a third round in the French presidential elections with different candidates.

The debate on the recognition of the blank vote in France reemerged in the context of the Gilets jaunes movement. But its history predates the recent wave of protests. Since 1958 there have been 60 law drafts concerning the blank vote. In 2017, seven presidential candidates expressed their support for its recognition. And only Emmanuel Macron (La République en Marche), François Fillion (Les Républicains), Marine Le Pen (Rassemblement National) and Philippe Poutou (Nouveau Parti anticapitaliste) did not mention the blank vote in their election programmes.

The recognition of the blank vote might make elections more complex and complicated. Yet it might also make our democracies more democratic. And no matter which side we take in the debate on the blank vote, there is one thing at least that we can learn from it: democracy is not singular. Democracy contains multitudes of different forms and levels of democracy. It lives of constructive debates that do not hold on to the current form of democracy as the one truth, the ultimate democratic achievement but that are open to change in order to improve lived democracy.

by Merle Emrich

Photo Credits

What type of a democracy…, Tim Green, CC BY 2.0

Democracy, Nico Hogg, CC BY-NC 2.0

Brexit, Ungry Young Man, CC BY 2.0

The post Lessons on democracy: the blank vote appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Back from the borderlands: taming and framing COVID-19

Louis Louw — Sun, 19 Apr 2020 09:01:20 +0000

Since Covid-19 has begun to spread across the globe, cries for re-establishing, re-enforcing, generally making less permeable, or even shutting down borders have rung louder than ever in recent years. However, this raises the question as to whether Covid-19 can be effectively combatted and curbed by these extraordinary securitization measures along national borders in the times of globalization and its eclectic flows of human interactions and migration.

Scratching the surface for a tentative answer, quarantining certain areas has indeed proved to be effective in restraining the virus from spreading across certain communal, provincial, national, and regional borders. Take the example of the quarantined Chinese province of Wuhan, which seems to have stemmed the tide in one of the heaviest hit regions in the world. Indeed, as from mid-March, life seems to be returning to normal as shops, schools, and other public institutions re-open while the workings of daily life are once again taken in stride.

Symptoms of the borders as antidotes for the state

Despite this initial success, it does not follow that national borders truly are the solution, part and parcel, for combatting Covid-19. In all probability, murky waters will crystallize with the benefit of hindsight as further qualitative and quantitative data is collected and presented. Therefore, I believe it’s too early to dwell on the exact implications of national border securitization as it stands. However, I also believe that it’s important to understand how the discussion of national border securitization frames the idea of the state in relation to its citizenry, by differentiating and (dis)qualifying the citizen from the non-citizen or denizen. What I mean specifically is that the question at hand shouldn’t solely revolve around whether or not national borders are effective in their materiality to protect the citizenry from contagion, but rather that the threat of Covid-19 to this materiality has led to a distinctive and unprecedented comeback in the theoretical and figurative capacity of borders to frame and embody the power of the state. Again, this re-emergence of stately power further draws the line between (non-)citizen, and denizen.

It’s not a border if it’s open, dummie!

In the immediate aftermath of the WHO declaring Covid-19 a pandemic, it was not and still is not uncommon to hear a familiar line of argumentation, which at once carries with it a sense of grief, a pang of anger, and a hope for betterment:

“Why haven’t they shut down the borders!?!”

By ‘they’, of course, national authorities are implied, and it is in this evocation of the state as the guardian of the citizenry, in which the discussion of Covid-19 ultimately proves problematic. In order to protect the body politic, the borders themselves become seen as the infected organ marked for incision through the state’s scalpel. After all, in terms of its effectiveness, the discourse centring on border securitization to curb the spread of Covid-19 is not necessarily wrong. It might indeed impede the rapid spread of the virus, and therefore the means possibly do justify the ends. But the question then arises whether this incision at the borders is the most effective method to combat the spread of the disease? Or if there are any other courses of action that could be just as or even more effective?

From the angle of global problems requiring global solutions, over-reliance on the national state as the sole protector of the citizenry arguably diverts attention and the resources that flow with it from the actual concern at hand, namely, how to engage with global problems through transnational cooperation that benefits people, that is, all people, and not capital? Imagine de-regulating the healthcare sector while slapping fat prices onto its services in the name of efficiency in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic. Where has the trust in the universally prescribed forms of development gone, which in their first instance were supposed to secure borders and thus the prosperity of Global Northern states? In terms of global crises, it appears that the chickens are coming home to roost.

The Covid-19 effect

And in this ultimately lies the great conundrum of Covid-19’s impact on modern thinking. If national borders do work, then only because they are valued over the global perspective as the model to fall back on during a crisis. Even more so, as the global system of deregulated and precarious standards set by development practices, well, they don’t seem enticing enough to be co-opted when the fat hits the fire. The theoretical implications are immense. What does it mean and what does it take to think outside a privileged national polity, and what does that mean for non-citizens in general (especially as they potentially already live outside the realm of regulatory dignity) and denizens in particular, who are fed into the machinery of labour and transnational value creation but are yet denied to draw from its surplus, one instance amongst many being dignified health care?

In sum, the impact of Covid-19 will of course be remembered in the overall symptoms it measures, the deaths it sentences, the financial disintegration it exacerbates, the medical innovation it anticipates, or any other effects it entails and produces for that matter. In effect, it will be remembered in how it was tamed. However, for better or for worse, the true legacy of the contagion will find its expression in how it will come to frame the relationship between the state and its (non-)citizenry. That is, in the ways emergencies accentuate, infuse, engender, or mitigate cries for sustainable development worthy of the name with future discussions of belonging to a state, in and for which borders matter more than ever as a first and, perniciously, last line of defence.

Photo credits:

Corona World, MiroslavaChrienova

Passport, OpenClipart-Vectors

The post Back from the borderlands: taming and framing COVID-19 appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

Politically conscious art as backlash: Amanda Palmer’s “There Will Be No Intermission”

Filip Zahariev — Tue, 24 Mar 2020 16:08:04 +0000

Amanda Fucking Palmer is loud, so loud it might seem like she’s screaming for attention – and some people on the Internet hate her for it. But guess what? She has a lot of things to say.

This has never been more evident than on Palmer’s third solo album, aptly named There Will Be No Intermission. Apt because, at twenty songs and seventy-eight minutes long, this album is resolute in delivering a powerful, politically-conscious message of resistance and survival. It is not only sorrowful, pained, even tragic; but also angry, breathless with fury. The cover, which features a naked Palmer brandishing a sword high above her head, anticipates the tone of the album in both its extremes.

Where Art Comes From

Time and time again, the singer-songwriter taps deep into her emotional experiences. Whether as a sister – “And I tried to call my brother || but he no longer exists” (Palmer lost her brother in 1996) in “Bigger on the Inside”; a mother – “I know it’s hard to be a parent || But this mess is so gigantic || I wonder if I should have had a child” in “A Mother’s Confession”; a friend – “I have never liked the box of knives || I took it to the oceanside the day you died || I stood out on the dock || No matter how hard I tried || I couldn’t drop them in || And I collapsed and cried: || What do I do with this stuff? || It seems like yesterday you were alive || And it’s as if you never really died” – in “Machete”; and a daughter – “Remember the daughter || And all that you taught her || She’s grown up at last || With a child of her own || She struggles alone || As the years all rush pass” – in “Look Mummy, No Hands”. But perhaps most striking are the songs which have a direct link to women’s reproductive rights, namely “Drowning in the Sound” and “Voicemail for Jill”.

The music video for “Drowning in the Sound” sees Palmer perform her sexuality, her role and experience as a mother and artist, even her role as a performer itself, to staggering effect, eerily resembling David Bowie’s performance of his own death in “Blackstar” and “Lazarus”, released a few days before Bowie’s passing from cancer.

“Voicemail for Jill” is a deeply emotional piece about abortion and the psychological effects of it – the video is difficult to watch because of its raw emotions at display, and the honest, powerful way the lyrics delve into the heart of the struggle to survive and continue living. Pregnancy becomes something a woman is expected to suffer through and be grateful, or end and be shunned, even persecuted for. Even so, the hopeful note the song ends on, the notion of support and some small measure of happiness reclaimed, these capture the heart of a vulnerable moment in the lives of many women, the struggle society often expects them to grit their teeth through in silence.

The message in “Voicemail for Jill” and the album as a whole comes at a time of organised assault against women’s reproductive rights in the United States of America, both on a federal and state level. A secular government uses religious justification to rob women of their hard-earned rights, fought for over the last century. What is a politically-charged artist to do about it? According to Palmer, the way forward is “to share the naked truth of [our] experiences”.

A Slide Back into the Middle-Ages

When these experiences include barbaric laws like the one passed last year by the governor of Alabama, which would see abortions permitted “only if the mother’s life is at risk or if the fetus cannot survive, but not in cases of rape or incest.” The bill was passed by legislators later in the month of May 2019 and was supposed to enter into effect on November 15. While it was temporarily blocked by a federal judge at the end of October, the authors of the bill seek to table discussion of the contested law to the Supreme Court. With Trump’s Conservative Supreme Court appointees tipping the balance in favour of so-called Pro-Life ideas, the likelihood of such a case being struck down in favour of the status quo is doubtful.

Though Alabama is singular in its draconian law, other states have introduced bills which seek to cut down the period in which women could get an abortion: “Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi and Ohio stopped short of outright bans, instead passing so-called heartbeat bills that effectively prohibit abortions after six to eight weeks of pregnancy, when doctors can usually start detecting a fetal heartbeat. Utah and Arkansas voted to limit the procedure to the middle of the second trimester.”

The most outrageous bill proposed yet, however, is one in Ohio. If passed, this bill would demand doctors do a “procedure that does not exist in medical science,” namely the re-implanting of an ectopic pregnancy in a woman’s uterus. Not only is this an impossible procedure to do, the refusal to do it would result in obstetricians and gynecologists being charged for “criminal charges, including murder”. This will be punishable by life in prison. Another new crime, “aggravated abortion murder”, is punishable by death, according to the bill. Such abortion laws would make women criminals for exercising their personal autonomy. The narrative told in “Voicemail for Jill” would look and sound much different if it were set in any one of these states.

Here again, Amanda Palmer’s words resonate: “frightening political climates make for really good, real, authentic art.” There Will be no Intermission is but the latest example of great art as backlash to a dark political reality. In her own words: “If the political climate keeps getting uglier, the art will have to answer. We will have to fight…We are sharpening our knives for a large buffet.” With the political landscape of both the United States and the world at large turning darker, the fight has only just begun.

by Filip R. Zahariev

Photo Credits

AFP, OpenEye, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Amanda Palmer Posters, Vladimir Zimakov, CC BY-NC-ND 4.0

‘Abortion Never’ Galway City, NationalPartyIE, CC BY 2.0

The post Politically conscious art as backlash: Amanda Palmer’s “There Will Be No Intermission” appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.

German hip-hop: misogyny in rap music

Elena Wasserzier — Tue, 24 Mar 2020 16:06:49 +0000

Rap has always been a form of radical expression. Artists would describe their living situations, childhood, relationships and politics in a form of recitative criticism, rap. While it has been and still is a channel for criticism and change, some directions of rap or particular rappers take a very derogatory approach to their relationships and women in general. Misogynistic and violent lyrics are on the daily.

#unhatewomen

Especially lately, there has been an uproar in Germany following the campaign #unhatewomen against misogyny in German rap. In a video by #terredesfemmes, several women read out critical verses and lyrics by controversial rappers and songs, which are intrinsically misogynistic and brutal owing to their glorification of violence against women; often labelling them as objects and “sluts”. The campaign was followed by drastic measures by the rapper Fler, who in order to “defend himself” and his image, threatened to hunt down a particular feminist who posted the campaign on Instagram, tagging several German rappers, including Fler to position themselves and react. No one would probably have expected him to start a bounty hunt, including offering money to whoever finds her and delivers her to his address. While this might just have been another provocative move, he definitely crossed a line by posting her on his Instagram and shaming and threatening her.

The whole situation is as unimaginable as it seems. It is just a representation of how seriously dangerous the issue is, and how they take what they sing as the truth. The issue is that many people read the lyrics as art and artistic expression that might be true and not every rapper means what he raps just in order to be provocative and sensational, it creates a certain image for many teenagers and young people, who are heavily influenced by contemporary rap. Although many have the ability to differentiate between lyrical fantasy and reality, there is going to be a flock of people that support the misogynistic point of view that these specific rappers represent and discuss in their so-called art. And it’s not only portrayed in German hip-hop. Misogyny and certain power structures, vocalized in rap all over the world, show the inherent patriarchy at a global level.

The rapper Snoop Dogg raps in his song “Bitches ain’t sh*t”: “Bitches ain’t sh*t but hoes and tricks / Lick on these nuts and suck the d*ck”, referring to what women’s dignity means to him. He is not the only one. Another example is probably one of the most polarizing rappers of the world. Eminem raps aggressively in his song “Kill you”: “Slut, you think I won’t choke no whore / Til the vocal cords don’t work in her throat no more?!“

The roots of misogyny in rap

In many cultures and nations rap is an expression of the authentic experience of the artist. Often it is considered normal that rappers objectify women in their songs and create stereotypical narratives. The subordination of women and the threat of violence secures the masculine ego and are supposed to reflect their environment. Derogatory names like “b*tch and wh*re” are commonplace and emphasize the devaluation of women. Furthermore, polarising lyrics and provocations sell better on the market anyway, and commercial success might follow.

Kanye West, an American rapper, even confirmed in an interview that misogynistic lyrics are an outcome of men “who’ve found themselves belittled, turning towards the women in their lives and lashing out at them in order to feel validated. In their jobs, the social life and everyday situations.”

Of course, not every artist produces misogynistic songs or is a potential violent person or rapist, rather the contrary since many verses can be seen as sarcastic, excessive and overdrawn.

Real-life consequences

Nevertheless, the influence on youth remains overpowering. A study by the Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications focused on how misogynistic song texts can influence listeners to be more willing to commit violence towards an intimate partner. Especially women in the age group 20-24 are most at risk to experience non-fatal violence by their partners. Half of their survey participants claimed that popular rap tends to shape the attitude of the listeners regarding domestic violence. This supports the thesis that “misogynistic music also serves as a means to desensitize individuals to sexual harassment, exploitation, abuse, and violence toward women” and “legitimizes the mistreatment and degradation of women”. Derogatory language and exposure of youth “increase hostile and aggressive thoughts,” which may correlate to “more permanent hostility toward women”. Equally over 50% of the survey participants believed that the language used in many rap songs also promotes aggression, violence, and disrespect towards women. The acceptance of the objectification of women by listening to misogynistic content might lead to an adaptance of similar behaviour.

But there’s also the manifestation of the “freedom of expression” that allows artists to express their sentiments in the way they intend or want to do that. Even Grammy executive Producer Ken Ehrlich approved that the industry is more concerned with allowing artists to express their artistic freedom and what is on their mind. Sayings like “don’t worry, it’s just a song”, are used frequently to defend derogatory songs when individuals complain or voice disapproval. Fact is that misogyny in music is still an issue to be battled, even in 2020.

Campaigns like #unhatewomen will help raise more awareness towards the issue, but might be forgotten if not constantly brought up. We have to talk about the process of desensitization and hate speech towards women that listeners are constantly exposed to in many songs. And whilst we as listeners of contemporary music and rap have a responsibility to continue listening and spreading the message against misogyny and subordination of women, the responsibility falls upon the artists, who should start changing their patterns, which should already have been shed decades ago.

by Elena Wasserzier

Photo credits

fight fist mic, OpenClipart Vectors

EMINEM rapping, Scott Kinmartin, CC BY 2.0.

See related articles

Rap music as a political message

Re-Metamorphoses: The Misogynistic Legacy of Western Mythology

The post German hip-hop: misogyny in rap music appeared first on Pike & Hurricane.