One Social Europe: an extraordinary journey of discovery (part 1)

Road trip through Europe in search of social projects
Discovery of Europe and its people through social projects (copyright by Viktoria Hautkappe & Felix Junker)

Having finished their studies, Viktoria and Felix decided to start an adventure: In a 6-month trip they wanted to visit all 26 navigable countries of the European Union with their van. During this period, they presented different social or charitable projects on their website and via their facebook page. Spotlight Europe is happy to present an exclusive interview with Viktoria and Felix about their project ‘One Social Europe’, and congratulates them on their adventurous and social spirit.

Tell us a little bit about yourselves please.
Felix: Hi, I’m Felix. I’m 26 and for the past years I’ve been living in Cologne. I studied Eventmanagement and I am working on different projects round the world.
Viktoria: I’m Viktoria, 25, and I came to Cologne for my studies, as well. I’m a freelance cultural educator and last year, Felix and me both finished our studies . We decided not to start working directly, but to do a big trip through Europe. We started the project “one social europe” and are very proud to present it to Spotlight Europe today!

Can you briefly describe your project One Social Europe?
Felix: The idea was quite easy: in a 6-month trip, we wanted to visit all 26 navigable countries of the European Union. During these 6 months, we wanted to present different social and charitable projects all around europe.
Viktoria: We wrote a blog on our website and got in contact with our followers via Facebook, as well. In the end, not everything turned out, as we planned it, but still we are happy how the project developed.

One Social Europe brought Viktoria and Felix from the seaside to the Alps (copyright by Viktoria Hautkappe and Felix Junker)
‘One Social Europe’ took Viktoria and Felix from the seaside to the Alps (copyright by Viktoria Hautkappe and Felix Junker)

How was the idea of One Social Europe born?
Viktoria: The very first idea was to have a time-out after our studies. But soon we realized that we wished to have some more value in this time. We did not only want to travel, but get in contact with the locals.
Felix: As the idea of Europe was inspiring us, we mixed this inspiration with our joy for travelling and our long-term social commitment in a Catholic Youth Organization: and one social europe was born.
Viktoria: Our goal was to inform, how Europeans are involved in several social projects. We wanted to find out, what motivates them and what kind of projects are spread throughout europe to form one social continent, which means to form one social europe.

What was your motivation to drive through Europe in a van?
Felix: Freedom and being indepent.
Viktoria: Yes, and to be able to get as close to the locals as possible.
Felix: The van we used, was often the first thing we talked about with other people, because most people connect these old cars with freedom – and we did so, too.

How much preparation did you need in advance?
Felix: Not much.
Viktoria: In fact we didn’t have the time for a long-term preparation. We decided around February to do the trip and started at the 2nd of August. And Felix went to Brasil for three months in this time.
Felix: So we needed a good schedule and a lot of help from friends and family.What about logistics?

Was your trip prearranged or rather spontaneous?
Viktoria: Rather spontaneous!
Felix: We had an idea about the route and we prebooked some ferrys. But we had to change these bookings after the first problems with the van.
Viktoria: And in the end, we didn’t take any of the pre-booked ferrys.
Felix: Even the route changed. For example we didn’t make it to Greece and some other countries.

Thanks for the interview, Viktoria and Felix! We will present one of your projects in more details next week, and the interview will be continued as well! If you cannot wait, you can already have a look at their website: www.one-social-europe.com.

About the interview partners:

IMG_3725 Viktoria (25) and Felix (26) are inspired by the idea of Europe: peaceful coexistence of different countries and cultures, the cooperation of the European countries, the freedom to travel – to experience Europe as a social continent.

With the project ‘One Social Europe’, their goal was to inform how Europeans are involved in social or non-profit projects and how they bring their country, their society or Europe further – on the way to become one social europe.

 

 

Worries of one born in Europe – part II

i'm worried II

I am worried that some of us who are for the traditional family, for honesty, loyalty, personal sacrifice, modesty and respect in marriage and relationships may be considered outlandish by those who just want to tear down frontiers for the sake of immediate pleasure, and “redefined” progress of society. I do not agree that those that are for full human dignity, for the right to life from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death might be in any way diminished in their right to exercise their choices and to promote them in schools, media, politics, just because “progressive” laws have been approved that allow professionals to euthanase or make abortions to people in their care.

I am appalled that some people are so much in favor of the protection of animals (me too, I myself have a German shepherd dog, which I dearly cherish and value) but these same people can be simultaneously in favour of the abortion holocaust. Abortion is no contraception method. How can we defend an animal and not a human being? Euthanasia has become lawful in Holland, and not just there. It is allowed when infants suffer from sickness that causes stress and suffering to their parents… so, the decision is given: the child’s life is to be ended! I personally know a child that used to have breathing problems in his early years; this naturally caused suffering to his parents. He is now a healthy, lively eight year-old boy.
I am terribly apprehensive that only little action is taken against the persecution of Christians or to understand the why of the boat immigrants.

“Being a white person does not make you a person of less importance than a person of another race, the same if you are a Christian and not a Muslim, a man and not a woman, a hetero and not a homo”

I wish for a Europe where those that respect God, those that are for conservative or politically incorrect views, feel Europe is their home, not a foreign country where they have a smaller voice or become ghettoed in political decisions and law making. I wish we have a Europe where the concept of hate crimes against a specific group, be it of religious or gender or ethnic origin, has no place, because the common law against robbery, rape, damage of any sort, applies to everyone. The same crimes, the same penalties under the law. Being a white person does not make you a person of less importance than a person of another race, the same if you are a Christian and not a Muslim, a man and not a woman, a hetero and not a homo… Defamation is defamation, robbery is robbery, rape is rape, no matter who the victim was.

“The fact that someone disagrees does not give him/her the right to minimize the other person’s point of view or resort to mockery or ridicule”

Well, of course you can disagree. But the fact that someone disagrees does not give him/her the right to minimize the other person’s point of view or resort to mockery or ridicule as I see some people are doing because they are irreligious or too liberal to be tolerant towards minorities or unfashionable points of view.

 

About the author:

Teresa Fernandes is a teacher in Lisbon, Portugal.

 

 

Government surveillance will only strengthen the roots of radicalisation

Do you care about your data and privacy?
Do you care about your data and privacy?

Why we should all be afraid of the ‘nothing to fear’ brigade

Freedom, tolerance and the rule of law are widely accepted as the foundations of any just, progressive and equitable society. It thus follows from this that governments should have a hard time compromising these values, which would unequivocally be the case were it not for the now globally elusive and seemingly misguided pursuit of national security and safety. Since the commencement of the war on terror, propositions for a series of restrictive and intrusive measures aimed at policing non-criminal activity, behaviour and even thought have become the norm amongst an increasing number of western states.

Most notably and recently amongst European leaders, British Prime Minister David Cameron wasted little time following his party’s electoral success to brazenly deride British society for having been ‘passively tolerant for too long’, arguing that a new era was needed in which simply obeying the law would no longer be enough to stave off government suspicion and intervention. Whilst Cameron’s vision for a big-brotheresque society and proposals for a so called ‘snoopers charter’ have attracted a plethora of criticism from human rights and libertarian groups, the public outcry which has followed is arguably far from proportional to the extent of which its liberty is actually at stake. The root of this apathy is most conceivably rooted in the general public’s collective confidence that they simply have nothing to hide – and as the oft-repeated saying goes, if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear. After all, why would the amicable and passive majority of a nations population worry about anonymous government institutions analysing the most banal aspects of their life if such measures would ultimately help protect them from the type of violent and organised attacks which have plagued the likes of Paris and London in recent years?

However, as is often the case when contextualising proposals and relations between governments and their publics, the underlying realities are substantially more sobering than what could be concluded at face value. Far from tackling the root causes of extremist violence, intrusive and targeted invasions of privacy in the long-term ultimately serve to reinforce the societal divisions and tensions which have facilitated the rising radicalisation within marginalised sectors of society – essentially strengthening the same vein of disenchantment triggered by conflicts overseas, police brutality and political & economic alienation amongst other factors of varying political and social contexts.

The reformation of privacy and liberty envisioned by the likes of Cameron extends way beyond investigating known terror suspects or groups. Theoretically everyone would be under the spotlight to some varying degree, with profiles being created on the basis of patterns of behaviour, association, political inclinations and thought. Peculiar yet definitive suggestions from Britain’s most senior Muslim police chief that shunning Marks & Spencer’s and abstaining from the celebration of Christmas could be pin-pointed as possible radicalisation alarm-bells amongst young Muslims provides just one case study as to how easy it could be for perfectly innocent, peaceful and law-abiding citizens to find themselves demonised as potential enemies of the state under Cameron’s new vision for British society.

Furthermore, in what can only be described as a worrying and somewhat disturbing sign of the times, the scrutiny under which an East London council has found itself under after asking primary school children to fill in ‘counter extremism’ questionnaires is emblematic of the inevitably discriminatory and divisive nature of the big-brother era. With questions seemingly intent on skewing the religious beliefs and upbringing of the pupils, it has been difficult for Britain’s Muslim community to view this particular incident as anything less than an attack implicitly intent on criminally profiling its youth on the basis of nothing more than personal belief and thought.

Aside from the potentially devastating impact on community cohesion and government-public relations, forsaking our liberty for the sake of state-intervention also poses a grave danger to the rule of law and the provision of fair & impartial justice. If behavioural information extracted from one’s personal life could be viewed as sufficient to provoke suspicion, it in all likelihood may also be used to influence the prosecution of defendants, no matter how ordinarily legal that behaviour may be when considered in isolation.

Legislative measures as reformative as those proposed by Cameron and his peers also help to create a considerable political precedent, and it is far from far-fetched to fear existing legislation being taken advantage of by progressively authoritarian governments to gradually widen the realms of what is understood as ‘extremism’, which as currently re-defined by British Home Secretary Theresa May now includes ‘non-violent extremism’ – a term essentially vague enough to cover everything from hate speech to political anarchism. It conclusively seems that irony is the major theme in the never-ending battle between liberty and security, as embodied by the worn-out tune of ‘free-speech’ being hummed by those same leaders intent on strengthening the chokehold of government monitoring – it was in fact just five months ago that David Cameron joined world leaders for a march in Paris to symbolise the unquestionable sanctity of free-speech in light of the Charlie Hebdo terror attacks.

Is a tightly controlled and highly interventionist society one that an increasing number of governments appear to be aspiring to? Or is it one in which liberal privileges are reserved for the conservative, elite and powerful sections of society only? Either way, it appears that in seeking to protect our supposedly most sacred values from those that aim to destroy them, our governments are intent on destroying them first.

 

About the author:

Hassan FiazHassan is a 22 year old graduate from Lancaster University, UK. He possesses a considerable interest in human rights, conflict resolution and issues of community cohesion within European societies.

 

How can we “youth up” European policy making?

"Youth up” European policy making! (Flickr: Pete<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" target="_blank">CC BY 2.0</a>)
“Youth up” European policy making! (Flickr: Pete/licensed under CC BY 2.0)

The EU has done a lot for young people: we can move freely (well, quite freely!) to live, work and study in the country of our choice, we are the most mobile generation than any that came before us. Yes, times are tough for us: youth unemployment within the EU is still staggeringly high and this needs to be tackled, but there are some mechanisms in place for this such as the Youth Guarantee, which we at the European Youth Forum fought for sometime. Things can and should though be improved for young people in Europe. That is why it is so vital that young people speak up and have their voices heard!

“By not voting young people are counting themselves out of having a say in the issues that affect them”

But only 27.8% of young people voted in that the last European elections. By not voting young people are counting themselves out of having a say in the issues that affect them and, even worse, by not making our point of view clear, politicians do not target us and therefore do not make policies to help win our vote. It is a vicious circle! That is why, in 2013, a year ahead on the European elections, we launched the League of Young Voters in Europe. The aim was both to encourage young people to vote – to explain why it is important for them to do so and to help them to navigate the rather complicated landscape of EU politics with easy to use online tools. The aim was also to raise up their concerns to those in power. Leagues were set up in pretty much all EU member states by the Youth Forum’s member organisations and many of these have gone from strength to strength: the British Youth Council, for example, had a very vocal and high profile campaign in the run up to the UK general elections this month. And the number of young people that cast their ballot in the British elections stood at 58%, significantly up from the election before (44% in 2010).

“We would like to see civic education about democracy and voting to be compulsory as part of young people’s education”

Beyond encouraging and educating young people about voting, we also want the voting age to be lowered across Europe to allow 16 and 17 year olds to vote. We feel that by empowering young people earlier on and granting them the democratic right to vote, they would become more engaged and excited about the whole process and would continue to vote as they grow older. There have been some recent examples which show that by giving young people this power, they take it seriously and turn out at the ballot box in very large numbers! In the Scottish referendum, for example, 16 and 17 year-olds came out in force to make sure that their view was taken into account. This shows that if an issue is important enough, if it matters to young people, then they do vote. This must not, though, happen in a vacuum and we would like to see civic education about democracy and voting to be compulsory as part of young people’s education.

What is very clear from our work in encouraging youth participation is that young people are indeed interested in politics and in the decisions that affect them, but that many of them are engaging in non-traditional forms or outside of the current system. If the traditional media are not keen to hear the youth voice, then young people are turning to social media where they are running viral campaigns to get the word out there about the issues that matter to them! If the system does not take them into account then young people are taking action outside of the system!

That is why this year, the European Youth Forum is launching YouthUP, an open-source campaign aiming to empower and bring together all initiatives for better youth political participation across Europe. We will be looking for young people, partners and activists to build together resources and campaigns to help young people join democracy and political life in the way that they should be able to. This will become a resource for all young people in Europe to use and build on and with which the Youth Forum can help their voice be heard! To become part of this movement, sign up on the website.

 

About the author:
EYF Board and Secretariat, Brussels.  Copyrights www.michaelchia.eu 2014
Johanna Nyman, EYF Board and Secretariat, Brussels. Copyrights www.michaelchia.eu 2014

Johanna Nyman (25) is the President of the European Youth Forum. Johanna lives in Helsinki where she studies environmental change and politics at Helsinki University.

Johanna has a long background in youth organizations. She joined the scouts at the age of twelve and held various positions within the Scouts and Guides of Finland. She was an activist in the school student movement, and acted as Vice-Chair of the Swedish-Speaking School Student Union of Finland. In 2013-2014 she was a board member of the YFJ.

A Ghost Is Haunting Europe

florriebassingbourn_flickr_ukip
UKIP wants the United Kingdom to leave the EU (Flickr:florriebassingbourn/licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

A ghost is haunting Europe. It is the spirit of Euro-skepticism. In almost all western countries, and now with the rise of the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) also in Germany, Euro-skeptic parties are on the rise. The United Kingdom, some sort of Mecca for Euro-skeptics, is close to leaving the Union altogether.

What went wrong?

It would be too easy to revile the audience and accuse people of not being on par with the noble idea of Europe. There will always be a few backwards looking Euro-skeptic elements in society, but the current events go far beyond the usual. The thriving of critique aimed at Europe can partially be blamed on the failure of political and economic elites. This can be seen in France especially. Who should the pro-European yet critical citizen vote for at the moment? The socialists of President Francois Hollande perhaps? He has failed on all issues in his two and a half years in office and has driven the country into economic turmoil with his tax policy, all the while blaming the Germans and their supposed austerity, the so-called l’austerité, for France’s struggles. More Europe – for Hollande that means accepting his debt policy. In the race for presidency, his predecessor Nicolas Sarkozy of the conservative UMP is preparing to challenge the President. He gets along much better with Germany – but his title Monsieur “Bling-Bling” hints at his lack of integrity and seriousness. With his notorious proximity to the rich and the beautiful, he seems rather unfitting to reestablish trust in the political class of France. It is sad for France and Europa alike that the only remaining serious alternative seems to be the right-wing Front National with Marine Le Pen at its head.

The situation is particularly difficult in France but the underlying problem persists throughout Europe: The elites have pushed the European idea but failed to take the people along. The current President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker, in light of his involvement in and partial responsibility for recent events in Luxembourg a symbol for failed EU policy, has once admitted how he fancies European policy making: you pass a law without asking the people, and if there is not too much opposition, you simply continue. One could add: This system prevails until the European Union has become a wild conglomerate of 28 member states of which many do not fulfill the criteria for membership.

The statement of former Head of Commission Jacques Delors bases on the same principle. He once said that EU policy making is like riding a bike. A bike has to continuously move forward. If it stopped, it would simply fall over. This approach has caused an increasing detachment of EU policy making on the one hand from EU member states and their citizens on the other.

Spotlight Europe Anti EU
Anti-EU-sticker in Malmö, Sweden (Flickr:jonsson/licensed under CC BY 2.0)

It essentially laid the basis for the mistrust brought forward towards the EU and Brussels that then downright exploded with the onset of the financial and debt crisis. Since then, an unrestrained fight over how far the European community of joint liability should reach and in how far it should impact the basic needs of citizens has begun.  While Greece is in a state of emergency and even cancer patients cannot be guaranteed to receive appropriate treatment, the Germans fear to be held liable for the failures of the Greek state. It did not even tax its richest members of society – and thus is bankrupt.

The southerners plus France bad-mouth the Germans as misers due to their reservation, the Germans retaliate by calling the other side lazy and wasteful. What can be done to counter this weariness with Europe?

There can be no doubt that Europe is without alternative. However, errors need to be admitted openly, and competencies need to be redirected towards member states and their national parliaments. Democracy functions best and predominantly at the root. The bigger an entity the less influence and identification of the individual with it. Only if EU politicians are open to relentless self-criticism, the course can be adjusted and lost trust won back. The appeal to European integration’s role in bringing peace to the continent, as recently renewed by former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, will not be enough. People have to really believe, feel and sense that Europe is important.

Currently, Europe resembles a flat share in which friends have moved together for the best of reasons but have begun fighting over everyday problems (who cleans? Who does the shopping? Who stuffs the fridge?). Those friends should not dissemble the flat share but urgently need to discuss the basis of living together and develop a healthy ratio of closeness and distance. Only then Europe will be able to regain its strength.  Europe has just proven how great it can be with its joint space project, the Rosetta mission. Unity is the only way to compete with the giants USA and China and make its voice heard.  That does not mean, however, that all European countries need to hum the same tune on all issues. Europe needs to leave room for solos of its member states. Only diversity can bring competitiveness and true solidarity.

Maybe it would not even be too bad if currency issues, in the event of a continued reliance on the Euro, would be approached with a greater level of independence of member states as is currently the case. If, however, the monetary union is to become further densified and extended, common rules need to be found and compliance with them strictly enforced. That would certainly be the better approach – and maybe we could overcome the ideological contradiction of growth and austerity after all.

About the author:


STF_0110s-800x1200pxDr. Dieter Sattler is Head Editor of the Politics department at Frankfurter Neue Presse. He studied Politics, German and Philosophy at Goethe University in Frankfurt.   more…

Should Turkey become a member of the EU? (2/4)

This is the second part of a 4-part series, discussing the pros and cons of an accession of Turkey to the European Union from all angles. Check the blog regularly or sign up to our newsletter to be notified as soon as the following parts are available. You will find the first part here.

In the previous article, I tried to clarify why Turkey should become a member of the EU from the EU’s perspective. In the second part, I will look at the issue from Turkey’s perspective instead.

7574046808_8f029dba9f_k
The Bosporus – Geographical Border of Europe and Asia (Flickr:sammsky/licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0)
Promoting democracy in Turkey via EU reforms

Turkey has been transforming itself into a more democratic country. Throughout its political history, Turkish people have seen 4 military coups, which made Turkey weak, but for a long time, Turkey has been enjoying that there has been no possibility of a new military coup. To be honest, this is due to the EU reforms made by today’s government. For example, the National Security Council was at the centre of Turkish politics because it was clear that it was often acting above the Grand National Assembly. When the negotiations between Turkey and the EU started, this issue (power of the Council) was one of the arguments against Turkey. The EU was right because in EU member states there is no such an institution which has more power than the National Assemblies. Today, Turkey is more democratic. Furthermore, the human rights record is much better; women’s rights are discussed every day; children’s rights are daily life’s debates and indeed animal rights are more visible… Thus, today, if we talk about rights, freedoms and related topics, the positive changes are due to the EU reforms, so when Turkey is a member, these values will be upheld better.

Travelling Europe without any visa

The most important benefit of being a member of the EU is of course “travelling Europe without any visa”. I, as a university student, like seeing new places but unfortunately since Turkey is out of the EU, I have to get visa every time. This makes me unhappy because every time I have to pay money, I have to collect documents, and I have to wait. However, when Turkey becomes a member, from Istanbul, an impressive city in Europe, to London, Paris, Berlin, Brussels, Amsterdam, Lisbon, and many other capitals in the EU member states, the Turkish people will be able to travel more…

Working together for global peace

“Turkey cooperates extensively with the EU on almost every policy field including foreign policy issues. Turkey’s contribution to the EU’s security and defence policy is really clear. The EU is Turkey’s main economic and political partner.  As a factor of stability in its region, Turkey’s membership to the EU would also contribute to regional and global peace and stability as well as the dissemination of universal values to a wider geography.” (1)

A greater voice in international arena
Europe-Turkey.svg
Turkey is the European Union’s gateway to Asia (The Emirr/licensced under CC BY 3.0)

When Turkey becomes a member of the EU, it will have a greater voice in the international arena because the EU as a whole would include 29 countries. Instead of being alone in issues, Turkey with its friends within the EU will rule with a common foreign policy. This will make Turkey stronger because the problems of Turkey will be shared by other members like the problems of the EU will be shared by Turkey.

Also, although Turkey is not a member of the EU, it is a member of the Customs Union. The EU is Turkey’s main trade partner. 40% of Turkey’s total trade is with the European Union. Every year, total trade between Turkey and the EU increases. This underlines the importance of the EU as a large and secure market for Turkey. By the way, Turkey as a member will have more shares in international trade.

All in all, Turkey has been a part of the European family for a long time. “Since the foundation of the Republic, Turkey has taken part in almost all European institutions, in most of them as a founding member. Turkey has made considerable contributions to the formation of the current European architecture through the constructive role it played within international organizations such as the Council of Europe, OECD, NATO and OSCE.” (2) So the membership of Turkey to the EU will be based on a “win-win” situation. Everybody will be more pleased…

References:
  1. http://www.mfa.gov.tr/questions.en.mfa (20.20.2014)
  2. http://www.mfa.gov.tr/questions.en.mfa (20.20.2014)
About the author:

haci mehmetHacı Mehmet Boyraz (21) is a student of International Relations with Political Science and Public Administration at Gediz University in İzmir.