The Diplomat A Growing Network spring 2016
Â© Hendrik Jaschob
Note from the Editor People of UNSA Maastrichtâ€™s best-kept secrets: The Oscars Edition Developing Independence Stopping the Zika Virus Debunking the Global Village Digital Relationships? La Matassa (Poem) The Western Angst A firm defence of open European borders Living Utopia? Growing network, growing responsibility? So you graduated from University?
4 6 7 10 14 16 19 21 22 25 28 31 34
the Editor 4
Whatsapp, but since when did the sound of an incoming message become a good replacement for someone’s real voice?
The world is shrinking. If you have enough money, you can have breakfast in Tokyo, lunch in Paris and dinner in New York. Distances that seemed huge in the past have become only a small obstacle now. Globalisation is the descriptive term of our society. At least that is what we could say from our western perspective. Is it like this everywhere? For sure not. Our growing network seems to widen the gap between poor and rich, or somewhat shedding a greater light on it.
The world is becoming more and more accountable for its actions. The threat of the climate change has become more and more evident, yet how much has really changed in our behaviour? The world is facing crises, most current the refugee crisis, especially affecting Europe. Now it remains to be seen whether the growing network, that we in the western world profit so much from can also be a benefit to the less privileged ones The world is growing closer together. Everybody looks at the upcoming elections in and help them start over again. the United States. Will Donald Trump really be the candidate of the Republicans? The out- The phenomenon of globalisation is what this come could affect all of the world’s peoples, spring edition of the Diplomat aims at shedeven though the United States just account for ding some more light at. Do we really live in a around 4,4 % of the world population. But not global village? What happens in the developonly politically, also the whole social process ing countries? What are the effects of dating has been revolutionised. Feeling lonely? Go Apps on society? These and many other queson Tinder and maybe find your true love. Want tions will be addressed in this edition. to share some thoughts during a boring lecture? The Jodel community will always listen. The world is ever changing. But in this growing network, how much do we “One day our generation is going to rule the actually really nurse our personal networks? population”. So in fact, it is up to us now to People rather send texts than talk in person. decide what to do with this growing global Hours are spent on Snapchat, Instagram, network.
Alice Nesselrode chief editor 5
Diya Dilan 1st year BA European Law
“In what way has globalisation affected you most positively?”
Constanze Grees Advisory Board Alumni Coordinator
Francess Orobo Fundraising Development Committee
“Globalisation affected me most positively by UNSA Maastricht. In this tiny place in the Netherlands I met people from Brazil, New-Zealand, Poland, Cyprus, Lebanon, Israel, Greece, the US and from many more countries. Thus, UNSA epitomises globalisation for me by bringing together inspiring people from all over the world!”
“It has helped me get to know different cultures. Communication has improved generally. You build up friendships all over the world also because of student exchanges programs. In addition, such international friendships grow into networks of influence that help with getting employment in the rapidly expanding supranational nature of the global job market.”
Amy Kaufmann Permanent Delegation “Globalisation affected my life most positively in giving me the opportunity to connect with so many interesting and fascinating people from all over the world. In my opinion, UNSA and the entire Model United Nations idea only has become possible of globalisation. This definitely jazzed up my life.”
Berta Bonastre Rodriguez Marketing and Communications “Globalisation affected me most positively in giving me the possibility to study abroad at a University with a great international environment, here in Maastricht.”
Konrad Eickhoff Head of Volunteering Network Development Committee “Globalisation has brought my family from different corners of the world together. In simple terms, without globalisation, I would not exist.”
Mindy Asamoah Head of EuroMUN Registrations “Globalisation is the process of the world becoming increasingly interconnected. It has resulted in being able to get products from all over the world everywhere. I see this when I go to my local supermarket. But not only goods, I am now able to talk to friends from all around and gather information from all over the world.”
Maastricht’s best-kept secrets:
the Oscars edition Lize de Potter 2nd year BA European Law
We are well into the new year, and despite our thorough efforts in the last Diplomat edition, you are still only frequenting Maastricht’s most obvious hubs. Drinks at Basilica, sandwiches at the Student Service Centre or the library, French fries at Lucky Luke’s after a night out in the Platielstraat. Which is nice. Nice and safe and comfortable. But here is a newsflash for you. Predictability is a bore. Luckily, the Diplomat has your unadventurous backs. Under the rubric ‘Maastricht’s best-kept secrets’, we will explore and introduce you to our beloved city’s hidden gems and upcoming hotspots. Newspapers are filled with predictions as to potential winners (is Leo finally getting one?), biopics and historical dramas dominate the cinemas, hashtags accusing the organization of lack of cultural diversity are trending, and haute couture brands have conveniently just released their new, red-carpet worthy, collections. Safe to say, Oscars season is most definitely upon us. For this edition, The Diplomat happily jumped on the bandwagon of celebrating the world of film, and turned the city of Maastricht upside down, looking for locations that might as well have been used as décors for major motion pictures. While it is hard to imagine the Revenant being filmed anywhere other than the Americas, or the Danish girl anywhere but, well, Denmark, Maastricht once again did not disappoint and proved to also harbour a considerable amount of hidden movie location treasures. Moving past the obvious, such as Breakfast at Bijenkorf or the SBE Riot Club, here is a list of hidden or overlooked locations which made us think of particular movies, and which are definitely worth a visit.
Not a potential arena at all (we kindly redirect you to the MECC during Inkom-week if that is what you are into), but a bakery where we could see Peeta, baker’s son and male tribute for district 12, happily kneading some dough or decorating some impressive gateau. This water mill powered bakery seems to breathe craftsmanship that would even spark jealousy in Peeta’s gentle Katniss-worshipping heart, as its specialty, the typical Limburgse vlaai or fruit cobbler, is simply mouth-watering.
James k Bond We are aware that Sex and the City technically was a tv-series at first, but we thought the iconic Cosmopolitan is a cocktail only the James Bond martini – shaken, not stirred- could rival in fame. And behold, Beez serves both and much more. Mojitos, gin-and-tonics, caipiroskas and caipirinhas. You name it, they shake it up for you. In this trendy cocktail bar, we can perfectly picture both 007 and Carrie and co. blissfully nipping their favourites. The nachos also happen to be quite heavenly.
Café Madrid by
VOLVER Bredestraat 18
Nobody can conjure images of the Spanish culture, family life, tropical weather, desire or passion quite like Oscar-winning director Pedro Almodóvar can. The closest thing our city has to offer is the tapas bar Café Madrid. Calamares, patatas bravas, boquerones or chorizo. All equally greasy but still delightfully appetizing. Raimunda, Penélope Cruz’ character from Volver, would certainly approve. The best part? You will not be crying bitter tears of poverty, nor will your monthly allowance dip below zero anytime soon after visiting Café Madrid, as this tapas bar is genuinely affordable, even for our meagre student incomes.
Granted, the deer in the Stadspark are not really an unknown secret to the majority of Maastricht’s student body. But no movie-related list is complete without Walt Disney’s work being mentioned, the Diplomat makes no exception. And what better way to reminiscence your childhood then to pay the deer in the Stadspark a visit and mourn Bambi’s late parents? Take a break from your endless study sessions in the library and admire the deer from afar while sitting on top of the city walls, or get closer and boost your good karma by chasing away people who are trying to feed the animals.
Sick and tired of fighting for a study spot in the library during exam times? With mixed feelings, namely twothirds reluctance and one-third pride, we give you the study hall in the Regionaal Historisch Centrum Limburg. This truly hidden gem is not really meant for students, but the receptionist usually turns a blind eye if you are polite enough. Stuff away your jacket in one of the lockers, and then enter the magnificent library that would fit right into Harry Potter’s Hogwarts. If you happen to spot students wearing red-and-yellow scarves, waving around replica wands and mumbling incantations, kindly return to your studying and never mention this to a living soul. This study hall, unlike the library, is hereby declared a judge-free zone, where the Diplomat staff would like to continue releasing their inner Potterhead without social repercussions, thank you very much in advance.
Angelle Stamper 2nd year MA Medicine
Developing Independence Technology and innovation are not the strongest assets of developing countries. Even so, it seems that the emerging countries are catching up, by continuously making progress, at a steady rate. The use of mobile devices and social media are on the rise. In those countries, mobile phones are more commonly used since they are generally cheaper than computers and laptops. Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, there has been a steep increase in cellInnovation is the mirror of a countryâ€™s devel- phone ownership in developing countries. For opment. Parallel to this development is the some reason, the society has skipped the masgrowth of networking, which is based on re- sive use of landlines and moved directly to molationships and communication. It is almost bile technology. natural to assume that developed societies are at higher exposure to resources facilitating the In developed countries the majority of peoacts of connection and communication be- ple are visually oriented in their use of social media, such as posting pictures and videos on tween multiple parties. Living in the modernized part of the world, Facebook or Twitter, due to the ownership of we are consumed by the all the media around smartphones. In the developing countries, they us. We use Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, are still getting by with the more affordable Whatsapp, Instagram, and more. Access to in- basic or feature phones, only capable of callformation and communication technology is ing, texting and maybe basic internet surfing. part of activities of daily life. Wireless internet Nevertheless, it is a matter of time before this connection is available to us the majority of the changes. Indeed, about one-fifth of mobile time. Therefore, the media focus is often set on phone users in developing countries already the continuous progress of the highly advanced possesses a smartphone. countries. The rapid development of information and communication technologies has revolutionized the process of networking and information exchange. Today, it is difficult to visualize a world without any digital interaction. The phenomena of innovation continue to spread itself around globally and therefore makes it possible for different entities around the world to establish and maintain new connections.
Technology has the potential to pave the way to progress for people living in poverty. By means of social media, information can reach anyone who has access to it. In developing countries, people that live in remote areas, with little access to established services can obtain, among others, mobile health, financial and educational services. Many health services use social media to rapidly inform citizens about disease outbreak. By the monitoring of social media, disease outbreaks can also be predicted, which enables intervention to begin at an earlier stage than traditional methods would allow. Reports have shown that Twitter tracked cholera outbreaks faster than health authorities and frequently predicted flu outbreaks. While Twitter is an online social networking service which helps spread news to a large connected audience, MedicMobile is a non-profit organization specialized in direct mobile health care. Health workers track every pregnancy, keep stock of essential medicines and inform about emergencies. By means of digital communication, they can provide more efficient antenatal care, in order to reduce maternal and infant mortality rates. Health workers make use of MedicMobile to increase the coverage of childhood immunizations through automated SMS messages sending reminders of appointments to pregnant women, mothers and other health needing citizens. It facilitates communication on disease surveillance between different clinics. Slowly, citizens in developing countries are gaining more perspective on the health care that can be available to them. Farmers are often unknowing of the ongoing prices for the crops they are growing. Finance corporations are providing them with current market information via SMS messaging. This way, farmers are empowered to make informed decisions when buying and selling their crops, resulting in greater gains. Mobile banking is also being more frequently practiced in different areas. People are more eager to start businesses and invest in education. History and culture are being published on different types of social media platforms, helping preserve stories, songs, art and other resources valuable to local communities.
â€œInnovation is the mirror of a countryâ€™s development.â€? 11
More and more, people use social media to educate themselves on political and other societal concerns, which gives them the tools to organize and execute protests and strive for fairness. Information is spread through videos and campaigns against rebel leaders, such as Joseph Kony in Uganda. It is now more feasible to capture images and share acts of injustice and brutality. Different internet platforms have been created to help inform the users of their voting rights and obligations, which also enables them to monitor the legitimacy of the elections. Web sites are being used to monitor and expose corruption happening by authorities. Furthermore, political parties can communicate their ideals to potential voters through social media, increasing their chances of winning elections. Social media gives citizens a voice by mobilizing public opinion on important issues. We have long seen the poverty-stricken nations through the eyes of the prosperous. International organizations are constantly speaking on behalf of the needy as if they do not own a voice. The dream of every country is to exist in independence. As technology
slowly invades developing grounds, the citizens will possess more seeds to cultivate their own future. Social media connects the fellow populations on a political, social, educational and health care level. It provides them with better knowledge of educational and employment opportunities that fall in their reach and comfort zone or beyond. They could make more informed political choices and have more control of their own healthcare. Technology and social media would also help the developing countries reach out to the world outside, creating a more realistic point of view and therefore opening doors to more effective collaboration between the different branches of humankind. The question remains: Is social networking a consequence of development or will social networking empower development? Knowing that innovation is the mirror of a countryâ€™s development, we could say the use of social media reflects the actual progress of a country. Concluding, we could say technology, innovation and social networking provides the opportunity for developing countries to develop that independent state.
Louise Arathoon 2nd year BA Liberal Arts and Sciences
Stopping the Zika Virus There has been a lot of media attention lately on the spread of the Zika virus, but what exactly is it and how can it be stopped? Zika is a member of the flavivirus family that is transmitted to humans via the mosquito Aedes aegypti. Previously, Zika was not seen as much of a problem because it only appeared to cause minor symptoms that only lasted 2-7 days, including mild fever, skin rashes, muscle and joint pain. Because of this, research into finding a vaccine has been very limited. However, with links to serious neurological conditions such as microcephaly and Guillain-BarrĂŠ Syndrome being recently confirmed, the need to to eradicate the virus has become a lot more urgent. Furthermore, as the geographical range of the Aedes aegypti mosquito spans many countries around the world, the virus has the potential to become a global pandemic if the spread is not halted.
positives of wiping out Aedes aegypti are very attractive, not only would it stop Zika but the mosquito is also a carrier of the deadly dengue fever virus, which causes 20 000 deaths each year. Clearly their extinction would alleviate much suffering across tropical regions.
In order to wipe out an entire species of insect would require the genetic modification of male mosquitos so that they can only produce sterile offspring. Once released into the wild these mutant males would mate with females, and within only a few generations, the males would have propagated enough to ensure that the species dies out- a pretty quick and simple solution. However, the risks of wiping out an entire species could have profound implications for ecosystems. Mosquitoes are food for some bird and fish species, and as the Aedes aegypti species is so widespread, it is not really predictable what the The traditional method of combatting viral infec- knock on ecological effect could be for other species tions is to develop a vaccine. However, this is not in the food chain. always straight forward, and if a successful vaccine is developed, it is still a lengthy process that requires More recently, a similar idea has been developed that extensive safety testing before a vaccination pro- uses the modern gene editing technology of CRISPR. gram can be widely rolled out. Currently, research However, instead of killing off the mosquitoes, the teams in Canada, Brazil and the US are hoping to hope is to just change their genome slightly so they develop potential vaccines for initial clinical trials no longer are capable of carrying the virus. CRISPR by the end of this year. But, if successful, it could works like a search and replace tool for editing gebe at least two years before these will be available netic code. If the genes responsible for the viral-host to the public, which offers little help for the current relationship can be identified and changed, then the outbreak. Zika virus would no longer be able to survive within the mosquito host, and therefore, would not be But are there any other ways that the spread of Zika able to be passed to humans. Again male mosquitos could be stopped? could be genetically modified with this technology, ensuring that all sired offspring also carry this new A more radical idea that has been posted is to erad- genetic resistance to the virus. The Aedes aegypti icate the Zika transmitting Aedes aegypti mosquito species would continue to exist but would now be completely using genetic modification. Although new and improved and harmless to people. Again, this idea sounds extreme, it has been considered for this idea doesnâ€™t come without hidden risks, not to many years in relation to the Anopheles mosquitos, mention the ethical question of whether it is right which are responsible for the spread of the malar- for humans to be editing nature in order to suit our ia parasites that kill 700 000 people every year. The own needs.
The possibilities for these new technologies are exciting and intriguing, however, it is unlikely that we are going to be purposefully causing the extinction of another species anytime soon. For now, it is the unexciting preventative measures, such as increasing public awareness about the use of insect repellent and mosquito nets, that may be the best hope for slowing the spread of Zika.
Debunking the global village James Mackle
3rd year BA European Studies
Academics and journalists alike insist that the defining characteristic of our age is somehow globalisation. Indeed, the term ‘globalisation’ is one that has not just economic and political implications, but cultural and social ones too. We have the impression that we are somehow more in touch with the social aspects of other societies, and have easier access to their culture due to the compression of time-space that has occurred throughout the industrial and digital revolutions. Yet, one feels that the challenge to this accepted outlook in very “globalised” environments such as academia, multinationals and a Belgian-Dutch border town in an English-speaking University. Add to this scenery the numerous, somewhat repetitive stories of trips to exotic locations that involved trying to find the local McDonalds for Wi-Fi, and engaging in profoundly Western practises (i.e getting arrested for drunk and disorderly behaviour on a Friday night – although this could be a truly global phenomenon). It may be with a tinge of envy that these words come out. There is something attractive about a parenthesis in our life, where we explore without limits and feel on top (or Down Under) the world. But there is a profound sense of artificialness in the practice as well. Guy Debord, one of the forefathers of media theory and the role of media in society, referred to tourism as what he called ‘pure spectacle of making the banal seem interesting’. The statistics of globalisation are – like most statistics – a matter of interpretation. When you google “Globalisation statistics’’ the first set of stats that come up are from UNCTAD, a shadily named UN institution that deals with world economic performance. When measuring globalisation, they predictably show levels of capital flow. Very little data on how many goods or, perhaps more importantly, economic migrants, are shuttled around the world. Surely these two observations count more than currency when talking of world economic integration?
The reality, though, is that while global finance may be integrated as such, there is very little to indicate that we live in a global community, other than in our merchant class. If we go back to Aristotle, he viewed the rapprochement of individuals into cities as a means of exchange. Merchants were therefore the prime occupants of cities as they had more to gain from an expansion of their network. The tag bourgeoisie most famously used by Marxists refers to the burger or citizen class. The ancient concept can be applied to our current world: the reality is for the moment that the driving force behind globalisation is the age-old profession of barter and banking. The question we need to ask ourselves then before we criticise globalisation (on an economic level), is whether this globalisation is present throughout all the echelons of our societies? Bar a few professions, most notably the academic one we currently inhabit, labour mobility across the world is still very restricted. The Erasmus programme set up by the EU was supposed to bridge this: your global cultural appropriation was to be done in 6-12 months in your early twenties. This is a bit like an action movie director using his best set piece at the start of the film: you are gripped with excitement at the prospect of being international, then you end up stuck in the same seat waiting impatiently for the film to give you its latest twist, and for many it fails to deliver. Still, Erasmus is responsible for over 1 million European
babies, so you are given this kind of token sex scene to explore your awkward sexual fantasy during the film of your life. There is a very strong argument that even though many people do not pursue a post-nomadic existence, there is no doubt that we are culturally more aware of our global community. It is true that my Facebook feed is more interested in Donald Trump than the local mayor, and youths listen to playlists comprising gangster rap, Spanish guitar and the fiercely irritating (and offensive) fetish-songs from Asian artists such as PSY. The memetic appeal of mass media narrative disguises a different world than the one that we are actually conscious of, though. Take the example of the billion-dollar circus that is the US Republican primary above. Despite my interest in the American political scene, an American friend of mine told me not to bother with it, because most Americans do not bother with it either. The role of the state in society is so reduced in American society that most people only worry about politics a day every four years, go back home “safe under the knowledge that the government will not tolerate this’’. The result is that the presidential hopefuls can get away with pure spectacle politics and robbing the American electorate blind with political stunts. We see the flame-haired quasi-fascists up against Bernie Sanders’s band of heroic belligerents. Behind this façade is a people who could not care less.
Of course, there is an argument that the foreign policy of the US has a deep effect on us all, not only justifying why we should follow the circus, but also the existence of our global village itself. The ripple effect one White House resident can have on the whole world is seen as an example of globalisation at work, and there is some truth to that, particularly if you consider globalisation to be a matter of politics. But the cultural argument, that we have become a more Americanised society, falls short. We think that because a multinational burger chain or a record label seeks to enter a different market, this is cultural assimilation. France even requires its radio stations to play a quota of French songs, so fearful are they of losing la chanson franรงaise. This seems to be only a mediatic perception of what we think is American, and therefore is hip. This is very different from authentic cultural exploration, in the same way Chinese food in different in Europe than its origin. The Global Village then, as a concept, remains one concerned with satisfying a demand for appearing to be global and cosmopolitan from a select few. In terms of substance, though, we have seen that very few people are actually affected by the perceived global integration of economic, political and cultural affairs. We are definitely at a relatively tighter network than before, but we are still at what I would call proto-globalisation, and there is no guarantee that we are on an endless path towards the Kantian paradise globalists would have you swallow up with your TTIP treaties and mutual friends in Timbuktu on Facebook.
Marie Peffenköver 2nd year BA European Studies
Digital Relationships? The Good, the Bad and the Inevitable In an age of constant live connections, the central question of relationships is drifting from ‘Who are you?’ towards ‘What are you doing? Tom Chatfield British author and technology theorist
Are we being digitalized? At least since the revolutionary development of the Smartphone that combines a phone, music player, camera and Internet explorer in one technical device, the network of human relationships has spread over the entire globe; its meshes have tightened. Currently, a friend of mine who is spending a year in Zanzibar which is about 11,000 kilometres from here has tagged me under a facebook video that she wants me to see. Indeed, this gives me the feeling that she is still only a stone’s throw away and that we can communicate whenever, wherever and about whatever we want to. Geographic distances do not play a role for social relations anymore. If we think about this, this is actually a paradox: for most people all over the world, travelling, may it be abroad or within one’s home country, has become a natural activity. Work relationships, romantic relationships – the distances that our communication needs to bridge today have indeed increased. Experts even regularly predict that, according to some, even within less than two years, our entire social life will be processed online. In fact, digital communication nowadays accounts for 63 percent of our day, while non-digital social contacts have decreased to only 37 percent in 2011. And another trend can be observed: the digitalization of love. Ever since the beginning of time, people have been fascinated by romantic love stories or the tragic damnation of a star-crossed love. After passing on such narratives through a play in Ancient Greece’s
theatres, orally in the Middle Ages or in written form such as Shakespeare’s “Romeo and Juliet”, the modern times offer two new mediums which change the character and image of relationships entirely: first, relations have entered the realm of television. While only fifty years ago most movie relationships were based on love at first sight, the image of relationships has transformed hand in hand with the feminist movement. She can hold her own hand – independence is the new black. Second, there is the online app Tinder that everyone is talking about at the moment. “Didn’t find the right one yet?” the website gotinder.com asks and promises that “dates, relationships and everything between [...] starts here”. With 50 million estimated users, more than a hundred million downloads since its creation in 2012 and 26 millions of matches so far, the app seems to keep its promises.
Of course, there is controversy. Are our relationships becoming too superficial? Can it even happen, as the New York Times has suggested, that we won’t be able to communicate without any technical device in the near future? And is our social life, which is becoming more and more transparent through social networking sites, accelerating? There is both good and bad about the “Tinderization” of relationships. First thing first, it does help you to meet new people from all around the globe that you otherwise would not have met. Leon, 20, from Australia, likes sports just as much as I do, whereas Tim, 21, from Utrecht is also interested in politics. Distances, different languages, different cultures – they do not play a role anymore. You can make it happen. Moreover, you can directly look at similarities that connect you two and on the first date, you already have things you can talk about. Following a survey of 300,000 Tinder users in November 2015, Tinder’s CEO Sean Rad revealed a surprising result: About 80 percent of the meetings end in more than just casual sex; 20
percent of these relationships even become longterm affairs, with some ending with a marriage proposal. Thus, it seems to work. And even if it does not – head up then, at least you made a new acquaintance. Yet, there is also the creepy side of Tinder. Stalkers, weird guys and pushy girls can really give you a hard time. Once a guy sent a friend of mine pictures of his genitals with a tape measure next to it. I also once read the story of a girl who had just accepted a guy on Tinder. At four o’clock in the morning, this same guy stood under her window, throwing stones at it and telling her that he loved her when she opened. It is also questionable how long these relationships really last and how intense they might get. Yes, Tinder itself has announced that 80 percent of all matches become real relationships. Two months earlier, however, the Huffington Post came to the complete opposite result: about 60 percent are just random hook-ups and that 34 percent of all users actually already have a partner.
No matter which side we believe and whether we think that Tinder is good or bad, it is clear that the digitalization of relationships is occurring. Yet, by relationships, I do not only mean love liaisons. Relations can be social or economical, educational or even diplomatic among two or several countries. Communication is the main pillar all these relations are built on; exchanging information is central to being human. Thus, it is natural that we transform our being together to the digital level. Hence, are we being digitalized? Yes, we are. In the age of high-speed Internet, Smartphones and social media, this is how we communicate, how we exchange information and how we might find a partner for life. From Tinder to television, from Smartphones to social websites or from the Internet to integral - it is undeniable that a huge part of our lives is happening digitally. Those who are not reachable online often run the risk of social exclusion. Relationships are the networks we construct around us within which we tie other people to enable a living together. And because any relation, albeit friendship, love or work, centers on the way we communicate, our relationship-building reflects the environment we are living in. It is thus time for a new paradigm for constructing connections: the â€œdigitalizationâ€? of relationships. And no matter whether we find this good or bad, it is simply inevitable.
ÂŠ Hendrik Jaschob
The only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Franklin D. Roosvelt
The Western Angst Right up front: This is not one of those “the-people-above-are-against-us” articles. That is for others to discuss. This article is simply reflecting on the question, why there is indeed this flux of “us” being exploited by “them”. After all, at least if we talk about democracies, all leading figures should be only marionettes of the people's will. And yet, polls suggest a trend in which populist parties are gaining which claim to speak for the people against those elites in ministries, lobby groups and academia. Fears of refugees, terrorism, economic decline and social security are spreading, growing and shaping the public discourse. Why do we observe this fear? What makes people believe that the future is a dark dystopia? After all the western democracies have experienced growth and increased wealth, despite economic downturns as in 2008. There is virtually no evidence that Europe and North America will impoverish in the next decades, neither is a catastrophe like the Second World War imaginable. Our societies are stable; our technological and social infrastructure enjoys still a huge comparative advantage to other non-Western societies. And yet, fear remains persistence. German satirist Volker Pispers once described this as a very German phenomenon: “No Change! Germans cannot stand the idea of change! After all, something could turn out better than before.” This is the core belief of the Alternative for Germany (AFD). No risks should be taken, even if it bears a great opportunity like the Willkommenskultur for Refugees. And we can observe this everywhere in the Western world. With the rise of UKIP, Front National and Donald Trump, the German Angst has evolved into a Western Angst.
Johannes Schroeten 2nd year BA European Studies
What is the reason for this fear? The answer lies in the phenomenon of Globalization. The digital revolution, blurred borders, cheap flights and cultural exchange have created a world with very few boundaries. As students of Maastricht, we experience internationalisation and globalization every day. But so does everyone else, by buying electronic devices assembled in China, visiting other continents or chatting with friends from all around the world. And yet, Globalization has a Janus-Face. Increased poverty, terrorism and migration movements are the logical consequences of world inequality. Ultimately, national governments are no longer solely in charge of the domestic and foreign affairs. A market decision made in China can influence small businesses in France. A terrorist attack in the US may have deep impact on the whole international security structure. This negative face of a closer world is the core of the problem. The more complex and international problems become, the more governments struggle to explain why they decided for certain political steps. Greece was not kicked out of the Eurozone, because the consequences were incalculable. Germany opened its borders to refugees because otherwise a humanitarian catastrophe on European soil would have been inevitable. We live in a political era in which governments make most of the decisions behind closed doors. Be it the European Council or the Munich security conference, most decisions require the involvement of other external actors. As during the Euro-Crisis, national parliaments are often left out of the decision-making process and are only supposed to give consent, resulting in a lack of transparency and, ultimately, a short-coming of democracy. In many ways, the political sovereignty of a nation state has irreversible suffered in the past decades. Any event in any part of the world can influence any policy in any country. These are quite a lot of variables and even the heads of governments struggle to control and guide these unpredictable forces. This is the great struggle of our post-industrial, interconnected, globalised world. The failure of elected representatives to justify their decisions to the public created a dangerous pattern. Let us turn again to Germany. Chancellor Merkel experienced a lot of disapproval for her reasoning of policies like the Euro bail-out package or the clean energy revolution with her infamous statement that these decisions were â€œwithout alternativeâ€?. Instead of arguing in favour of her policies, she simply put it as the only possible option. However, it is virtually impossible for a policy to be without alternative. The war on terror, social welfare cuts and the bail-out for banks â€“ theses policies were always presented as the only possible option in almost every western democracy.
It is therefore obvious that at one point political parties would emerge which promote the exact alternatives which traditional parties ruled out. The simplicity of solutions for problems of enormous complexity is the key of success for these populists. The most recent and perhaps extreme examples are the proposal to build a “huge” wall along the border to Mexico by Donald Trump and that shooting refugees trying to cross the border is the ultima ratio, proposed by Frauke Petry, leader of the AFD. Both are highly unrealistic and morally questionable proposals. Yet they embody a simplicity which is appealing to those who have no longer confidence in the political establishment. How can democracies be sustained in a world in which more and more interdependence between states jeopardize transparency and political discourse? Attempts have been made! The European Union is the most developed example of a union of sovereign states trying to overcome the globalised pressure by acting unilateral. But, despite European elections, the disapproval of the EU in the European public is stronger than ever. Most common is the accusation of being non-transparent and undemocratic. TTIP, the Euro-Crisis and the Refugee-Crisis – all stand as evidence that the European Union has a serious problem of legitimacy. The untouchable network of the political establishment which we all know from summit pictures shaking hands and delivering joint statements has become a threat to democracies and liberalism. Not by making undemocratic decisions or trying to destroy democracies, but by failing to allow debate, criticism and involvement of the public. The more efficient and quick decisions have to be made, the less likely will
the public give its consent. A recent poll found that 80 percent of voters in the United States are angry or very angry. Mirrored in the presidential candidate elections, Hillary Clinton, already considered as the only option for the democrats, struggles against the left populist Bernie Sanders. And Jeb Bush as representative of the Republican establishment has virtually no chance of being elected against Donald Trump or Ted Cruz who both keep emphasising their detachment from Washington. If we want to preserve western democracies, we have to re-emphasise the political debate. The voters responsibility should not only be to make their cross every four years. However, involvement of the public discourse takes time and is inefficient. It is a contradiction which will be hard to overcome. Nonetheless, as former Chancellor Willy Brandt said in his acceptance speech in 1969: “Let us wage MORE democracy!”. But, the crumbling of democracy has already begun. First, low voter turn-out and a withdrawal of the public from the political life were the most common symptoms. Now, we enter a second phase in which all those who feel to have been left out turn to populists. At the end of this stage could stand a defragmentation into radical bi-partisanship. And yet, if western political establishments manage to incorporate their citizens again in their decision making processes and the Western Angst transforms into optimism for the collective future, the second message of Willy Brandt's speech might become true: “We are not at the end of our democracy, we are just about to start!”
A firm defence of open European borders Martin Alberdi
2nd year BA International Business 1st year BA Arts and Culture
In the frustration of feeling indifferently treated, under the agonizing need of escape, the refugee flees from the forces that oppress him, the forces that take away his liberties. Meanwhile, in the calm patience of comfort, Europe slows down a vertiginous process by discussing numbers, causes and consequences, while simultaneously others, under the silence of marginalization, confront the uncertainty of despair. While Europe sleeps, a war is unleashed: A war of multiple sides, where precisely the refugees flee from what we Europeans fight: oppression, terrorism, death. The succession of events, after a massive exodus of Syrians, has overwhelmed European politics. Europe, unprepared and undecided in this situation, searches for responses where they are most difficult to be found: Within Europe and not outside of Europe. The last terrorist attacks in Paris, where one of the terrorists fled into Europe meddled under the refugee mass, and the unexpected amount of asylum seekers, has raised
a question under the European political strata: Is the restoration of borders within the European Union an adequate response to assure the Europeanâ€™s safety? I believe the restoration of borders within the European Union would evaporate decades of social progress and manifest a counterproductive message: Europe betraying its original solitary values and succumbing to the irrational fears of terrorist propaganda. Despite the difficulty to define an integral and coherent European identity, there has been indisputable progress in the construction of a united and solidary Europe: The Schengen passport-free zone and the single market represent a free Europe, a Europe of a free flow of persons and capital. Repeatedly, memories of our values serve as an empathetic exercise to understand the other but concurrently fall into gradual obsolescence.
The exodus of refugees for a better existence offers essentially worship to these values: The pursuit of liberty, of freedom, of the will of self-empowerment regardless of the obstacles and circumstances. Borders represent the opposite of what we proclaim; the sharpening of the distinction, the opposition of us against them and, more importantly, a self-declared defeat to overcome the difference. Memory also reminds us that Europe is a product of centuries of immigration and this is what a civilization might precisely be: People that move, leave their trace and continue their journey towards a prosperous outcome.
Moreover, Europe responds to a political dilemma without actually recurring to politics. The refugee crisis is articulated around the politics of fear. Politics of fear describe the political self-conscious manipulation of anxieties to achieve certain political objectives. In the era of globalization and openness in trade and capital, an irrational fear infiltrates into society through infinite holes. Fear is represented by the uncontrollable, the unknown, and the acceptance of impotence to solve our problems. Fear is exactly what the construction of borders represents, the simplest solution to an utmost complex problem. Politicians
articulate a consenting discourse by which, paradoxically, they equate the politics of fear with the fear of politics, as the construction of borders represents exactly the rejection of political discussion to achieve a solution. Global networks exist in virtual and physical space and this applies accurately to the migrant crisis, which requires a global resolution. By consenting to the politics of fear we accept our incapacities to regain political action to problem solving. Yes, political consensus requires thoughtful action and creative solutions, but so does the migrant crisis.
Europeanâ€™s political apathy precisely translates into what exactly borders attempt to prevent: Insecurity. Up to forty thousand migrants have died in transit since 2000. Time does not halt and in a restricted situation, a reaction is needed. This fact confirms that immigration is not a new phenomenon and that outer borders provoke what they should avoid: Death. Under the European prism of solidarity, the problem starts when the refugee reaches the border. The moment the refugee reaches Europe, dead or alive, his exhaustion and desperation dissuade the fight for salvation. Real solidarity means transporting
The arrival of refugees to European territory represents a unique opportunity to prove to ourselves that our humanitarian responsibility overcomes our human incomprehension of the other. The fear of the otherness is solely a defence mechanism that blinds what we essentially are: Humans, singular, and despite different, very similar. Europeans present is nothing but the outcome of cultural blending, of constructive dissent and, more importantly, the acknowledgement of difference as a virtue, not a defect. The present grants us
them responsibly from their countries to ours, to rescue the refugees from the forces of war and death. Far too many times the arrival of salvation for the refugee has the opposite effect and results in a new nightmare, a nightmare far away from home. Impenetrable borders have proved to be ineffective in providing security for the migrant and in any instance ignore and postpone an unavoidable issue, the reality and actuality of the refugee crisis. An effective border control is perfectly compatible with a European inner open border policy.
the possibility of replicating our heritage in the future. Moreover, open borders open a range of political possibilities from which a new leadership can emerge, a leadership that comprehends the importance of solidarity, of real solidarity. A conception of solidarity that is consequent with what it proclaims and which is not circumstantial or opportunistic. The negation of asylum would honour our selfishness and the history that is happening today, right now, would judge us all.
Living Utopia? A Growing Network of Alternative Communities On 4 February 2016, German news channel n24 published a report that should have given most of us a cold sweat: real wages are predicted to sink in 2016. What it entails is that employees are becoming poorer. And, since our world is all about the money, this is worrying. But now, dare a short thought experiment: What if money did not exist? What if, instead of measuring and weighing all our goods and deeds in monetary terms, we would exchange what we have against something we need? What if social interaction would be free of the inner anxiety to have more than one’s neighbour? Although this is very difficult to imagine for most people, there are indeed lots of alternative cultural communities who already follow this ideal. And with the number of these groups increasing rapidly over the last decades, a true “network culture” has formed. We had met two of these groups, the students Juliette and Azia of the Mandril in Maastricht and Tobi Rosswog, an initiator, activist and
speaker of the movement “living utopia”. This scene is active in the entire German-speaking area (Austria, Germany and Switzerland), so we conducted an interview with them. How do they see our current society? What do they criticize and what do they wish to improve? For Tobi of “living utopia”, we would all be better off with relying on presents and exchanges of goods instead of using money as counter value. “The actual paradox of our world is that we are endlessly striving for accumulating more commodities in a finite world although we are already living in abundance’’, he explains. ‘’But if we would dare to relinquish money, if we would not ask ‘what’s my gain of this?’ but simply exchange what we already have instead of buying new things, our society would develop a completely new dynamism: Humans exchange out of joy. We have a natural desire to help.” With “living utopia” which regularly organizes money-free participatory events, he already has positive experiences.
2nd year BA European Studies
2nd year BA European Studies
But is this really feasible? What about people who exploit others, who take a mile when offered an inch? “We always need to wonder”, Tobi elaborates, “Why are people doing this?”. According to him, no one is born evil, but “we are all socialized by our achievement-oriented society to accumulate riches. If we take this pressure away, we can make very positive encounters with humans.” Indeed, this “monetary coercion” suggests needs that we actually do not have: Sometimes, if we feel sad, we go shopping. If we are lonely, we eat. If we are bored, we might go on holidays. “Money leads us to believe in this remedy”, so Tobi. “We are chasing after the illusion that we can mask social fundamental needs through a material value. Yet this is not curing the origin of our problems, it is just curing the symptoms.” Hence, we have to ask ourselves: Do I really need this? The Mandril Cultural and Political Centre, an alternative community for creative culture and lifestyles in Maastricht, promotes similar ideas and has become increasingly popular among students. We interviewed Juliette and Azia, both UM students who are active in the Mandril community, to find out more about their views on contemporary society and culture. In line with the “living utopia” movement, they criticized the liberalist-capitalist system’s assumption of economic progress as a linear progress, stressing that “development, meaning qualitative change and sustainability, are equally important and indispensable to real societal progress”. Applied to our every-day life, we should ask ourselves: Do consumption and the accumulation of economic goods and riches
really lead to satisfaction and happiness? Or do we actually find ourselves in a vicious circle of infinite dissatisfaction and unrest, in a continuous struggle for recognition and status? Aren’t we continuously striving to satisfy needs that are imposed on us artificially through advertisement and superficial stereotypes of “a successful life”? For many people who are concerned with questions like these, alternative communities like the Mandril in Maastricht or the “living utopia” movement in Mainz offer an opportunity to think differently and to counteract these “mainstream” tendencies. However, most of them do not regard themselves as “resistance identities” isolated from society, but rather as “cultural free-zones” and creative communities - being a distinct, but inherent, part of society. When asked about the recent trends towards more critical consumption, for example, the increased popularity of organic and “fair-trade” products as well as veganism and vegetarianism, Juliette and Azia welcomed this development in general. Nevertheless, it still remains to be seen whether this increased popular awareness of issues such as sustainable consumption is also accompanied by a deeper-seated change in people’s individual norms and beliefs. This is also an interesting question to ask ourselves: Do we buy organic or fair-trade products out of real conviction, or is it just to make us feel better in our consumption? Do we really care about the consequences of our consumption for the environment or animal welfare, even if we decide to consume more critically?
When answering these questions honestly, most of you – including us two – will probably conclude that we do satisfy materialistic needs that indeed have mainly been artificially created and imposed on us through advertising and that we do not think about our behaviour’s consequences for everything we buy and consume: ranging from food to clothing and the choice of means of transportation. This is not supposed to be an offense – everyone should have the right to decide individually about his lifestyle and its consequences for society and the wider environment. But we should be aware of these consequences, and scrutinize “mainstream society’s” assumptions more often. The growing network of alternative communities such as the Mandril and the “living utopia” movement are proof of this development.
Only one question remains: All these ideas about a world without money, an environmentally aware and thoughtful society, community life and cultural unfolding – can they become real? Isn’t this too idealistic? Perhaps. “We just have to place one foot in front of the other”, says Tobi. “Step by step, we have to realize ourselves.” Could the utopia maybe be the path in itself?
Utopia Utopia, she looms on the horizon I move two steps towards her and she goes away by two steps. I do ten further steps and she goes away by ten steps. So, what is she good for? That’s what she is good for: to go. Fernando Birri
Growing network, growing responsibility? Marie- Isabel Theuwis
2nd year BA European Studies
Over the last centuries, our span of consciousness has expanded from our village to the world. Advanced means of communication and transport have enlarged our network from the local to the global. That idea is most probably not new to you. Yet, its consequences on our perception of responsibility perhaps are. The question I’m asking in this article, therefore, is: How does a growing network affect our feeling of responsibility? Did we become moral beings and feel responsible ourselves for what happens in far-away places? Have we given up on our local responsibility and become global citizens? Or are we just indifferent towards far-away places? Needless to say, responsibility is very personal, and I certainly do not wish to generalise in any way. Yet, I do want to get a taste of what academics and individuals consider the overall impact of globalisation on our cherished morals. Peter Singer, one of the leading moral philosophers of this era, has introduced a theory called ‘The Expanding Circle’. It is centred around the fact that a massive increase in educated and literate people has taken place throughout the last decades. Consequently, many people have gained a greater ability to reason and to be objective (or, at least, aim at being objective). Many came to conclude that all beings with the capability to feel joy or pain should be treated as equals. We have thus become more empathic due to our ability to reason. Reasoning has made us look further than only kin and reciprocal interest: our circle of responsibility and consciousness has expanded. Singer describes humans as having become some kind of ‘rational altruists’: we feel responsible for a large circle of individuals simply because we don’t have any reason to regard ourselves as more important or better human beings.
But are we really altruistic because our objective mind tells us so? Are we really that selfless? This is the point which the criticism of the Canadian philosopher Peter Danielson addresses. He rejects the claim that we feel responsible and care for other human beings simply out of rationality. Danielson rather calls us ‘rational egoists’: we know that being impartial and objective is highly regarded by others, who also aim at being objective. Therefore, we try to be as objective as possible and, in doing so, create some kind of ‘moral elite’. People who contribute to this idea of universal equality and altruism are part of that elite. We are thus, ironically, altruistic out of self-interest, concludes Danielson. However, many people express their disagreement with the idea of worldwide altruism on the Internet. It is seen as against our very own human nature. Aren’t we, deep inside, selfish beings, only interested in things directly affecting us? Isn’t today’s feeling of global responsibility just forced upon us? We have a false Western sentiment for having to care about all the sorrow in the world. Still, this (false?) sense of a world brotherhood is not the problem. The problem is, while caring about the world, we blindly forget our own close environment. We forget our grandparents in the retirement home, we forget the poor in our streets, and we forget our neighbours living in poverty. A large amount of people joining a local organisation and the recent resurgence of nationalism and regionalism are proof for the longing to return to the local. Many scholars support this view of universal altruism being opposed to our nature. Alain de Botton claims that actually most people don’t really care about that war in Africa. They don’t really care about that new UN resolution. The ease of communication and the increase in government transparency has turned the news into a great programme for decision-makers. However, its content is often not directly relevant to our own lives. Yet, habit has closed our eyes to the strangeness of this development. So stop wondering why people are sometimes bored by the news, it is just not their fault.
laws, don’t receive massive attention because they are not very entertaining or amusing to us. In a recent article, the Philosopher’s Mail addressed the fact that the legs of Taylor Swift received more attention than a warning message on the melting ice caps. Of course, Taylor Swift’s legs are of little significance in comparison with the fate of the planet. Still, most people prefer to read a piece on their favourite singer rather than a piece of the bitter truth about our climate. What de Botton suggests: news-makers should make important news, such as the climate change, not just important, Moreover, issues that do matter to us person- but also beguiling. Only then will these issues ally, such as global warming or new national receive the attention they deserve.
Nevertheless, many people do have the feeling that they should care about everything they see in the news. They feel like they should be conscious of all big events happening in the world. And that is exactly the nasty thing about the news: it is rather jealous. It asks for our attention by making itself seem very important, thereby often distracting us from a private sense of purpose. Stephen Covey warns for caring too much about things we cannot change because that will make us sad or frustrated. If our Circle of Concern, the things we care about, is much larger than our Circle of Influence, the things we can actually change, we not only become frustrated, but our Circle of Influence also shrinks because our energy is spent on pointless worrying. Nowadays, with all the news and information we receive daily (our Circle of Concern), we should focus on
the events which genuinely appeal to us and which we can actually influence from a local level. In that way, we enlarge our Circle of Influence and become proactive. Rational altruists, rational egoists, selfish beings, bored beings, or very concerned beings. What are you? All these types have some truth in them. Especially Covey’s theory forms a good piece of advice for the future. In this world flooded by information, it is good for us to consider what issues really move us, and then focus on and try to influence those. And while doing so, remember that it is okay not to care about issues you can’t influence or which don’t move you. If everybody takes some responsibility for what he or she thinks is important, all together that would be a great change. To sum it all up with a cheesy but wise sentence: Think globally, act locally.
2nd year BA Liberal Arts and Social Sciences
‘La matassa’ is an Italian word for a skein or a bundle made up of strings of wool, used for knitting
La matassa says she wills a sudden change of things. She has safely secured her strings To pull us into her networking-scheme. She has laughed At our sleepy dreams And knitted her way In a connected regime La matassa canvassed reality’s portrait While unleashing the strings She attached along the way. Now we are closer Yet constrained By the fabric we have framed while playing with matassas alike kids along the lane.
So you graduated from University? Congrats! And now? Joost Veth
2nd year MA Economics and Financial Research
It all starts very easy. The decision for your primary school is made by your parents. So far so good. Then you choose a secondary school. Often not too difficult either, just the school closest to home, or the one all of your friends are attending. Choice of a university was already more difficult. Which direction? Which study best fits my qualities and interests? Stay in my country, or go abroad? Yet, the realm of this search was still somewhat limited. Most of us had at least some idea what we wanted, and we received a lot of help in the decision-making process.
How different this is after your studies. There is no clear path to follow anymore, no brochures with a clear list of all jobs you can take, and definitely no guarantee that after your study you can just start. To many of us, this feels like a wall that needs to be overcome. As I am almost finished with my master, I encountered this wall myself already. In this article, I want to share with you how I managed to break through this wall.
After my bachelor, I had no idea what I wanted to do as a profession. To the inevitable question “what are you going to do after this” I could only answer “I do not know yet. Something non-profit. The government or something”. That would clearly not get me anywhere… I needed to get more specific. So I just started googling. I knew I was interested in the government, and the international environment of Maastricht always attracted me, so I decided to start at the website of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. There were several interesting internships listed, but one immediately grabbed my attention. An internship at the UN in Genève. Four months in the Swiss city to represent ‘the Kingdom of the Netherlands’. I already pictured myself accomplishing world peace. And so I started writing my motivation letter.
I handed the letter in in September, together with my CV and a grade list. Then came the waiting. And the waiting. Sending an e-mail again, no reply. More waiting. Just when I thought I would not hear anything anymore: an answer. I was invited for an interview! But the date was not ideal. During my holiday in France. Awesome. So I sent an e-mail again, asking for another date. Did not get an immediate reply, so decided to go cycling. I came back at 16:15, and found out they replied. If 17:00 the same day would work. Ehhh, sure. So 45 minutes later, I had my first ‘job interview’. Just enough time to shower and iron my shirt, definitely not enough time to prepare. Luckily they understood that, so they were not too hard on me. It was quite a good interview. I would know the outcome in 2 weeks.
So waiting again. After three weeks I sent an e-mail again, after four weeks I called them. Both times no reply. So the image of me establishing world peace started to fade away. Time to continue my search. This time, I applied for two embassies, the Dutch embassy in Paris and in London (I had no direct need for an internship, I could also start my master thesis, so why not aim high?). Unfortunately, within a couple of days, I was rejected for both positions. And eventually, I was also rejected for the position in Genève. So far the bad news.
Now the better part. A couple of weeks after my rejection for London, I received a phone call. The lady on the phone told me I was invited for an interview for the internship in London. Huh? “I am sorry, madam, I am a little bit confused. I thought I was rejected for that internship?”. “Oh no, that was another internship, the ministry of foreign affairs sent your cv to us, they thought you were a good match”. Well, okay then. So I suddenly had an interview for an internship I did not apply for. I went to the interview, with the expectation that it was more of a ‘getting to know each other’-meeting than an actual interview. Wrong! Very difficult questions, followed by ‘cases’ I could barely answer. Okay, they said I seemed an ‘honest’ person, but I thought I ruined it. Given the tough competition, I was sure I did not get the position. The good thing was, that by that time I already had my mind set on my thesis, so I did not really mind.
But I just started with my thesis. So I indicated I would rather start after the summer. The man understood that and promised me to get in contact with me again just before summer, to see what the options would be at that time. In fact an ideal outcome for me. Now I could just start with my thesis. A week later, I received the phone call for the internship in London, which would probably tell me I did not get it. ‘Great, then I can proceed with my thesis’. Only, that was not the message. I was given the job!
In short, I had no idea what to do after my studies, so I just started looking around. I was very interested in a position at the UN, just applied for it, then tried some embassies, and now I am suddenly moving to London next month! In fact, today I received the confirmation that I can take the place I put my hopes on. Then over Christmas, I received an e-mail from The last hurdle is now taken, I am ready for my the embassy in Paris. That I was invited for an 5 months internship at the European Bank For interview! For another position at the Embas- Reconstruction and Development! sy. No idea why, but apparently my motivation letter and CV were interesting! This interview Moral of the story: just search for something was via Skype again. The conversation went you like, and go for it! Who knows where you very well, there seemed to be mutual interest. end up? Nothing ventured, nothing gained!
Meet Our Team
The team in no specific order Alice, Annick, Marie-Isabel, Vincent, Marie, Diya, Padraic, Leon, James, Monica, Martin, Lize, Milli, Hendrik, Elysia, Fiona, Christian, Eszter, Johannes, Marta, Jakub,
Missing on the photo Louise, Joost, Angelle