The Martlet - Issue 20 by THE MARTLET

POLITICS

Trump, Turkey and Terrorists; A Tumultuous Trinity

GAMES

Are Video Games Spawning Killers?

WINTER ISSUE

REVIEWS

Martlet book reviews - An Exploration into Geopolitics

Abingdon School’s Leading Newspaper

CRICKET

What Happened to England in The Ashes This Summer?

ISSUE 20

Democrats Hunt Down The President While He Attacks Democracy Samuel King explores the two most damaging consequences of the Trump Presidency on American democracy in the midst of impeachment hearings.

IS THE EURO JUST A FAILED EXPERIMENT? P.5i

THE DEGRADATION OF A NOBLE CAUSE P.14i

HOW AND WHY LIVERPOOL WON P.15i

Upon President Trump’s election a sense of apocalyptic disbelief spread across the worldwide liberal movement, and was paralleled by the mainstream media’s reaction. At that point, the idea of re-election for the President was comical, yet now proves to be a strong possibility. The perceived inevitability that one or two months into his term the world would collapse did nothing but improve his potential credibility for the future amongst his fervently loyal voters. Additionally, impeachment of the President was inevitable for many speculators and presented itself as the minimum punishment for such a President. One or two years into his term this possibility appeared less likely. Yet now his critics are victorious. The criminal activity that was often thought to be the bedrock of his activities in the White House is being unveiled to be true; using the testimony given in impeachment hearings, particularly that of Gordon Sondland to judge the case. In excessively complicated proceedures for impeachment as too complex and contorted to go through at this point. The crux of the Democrat’s attack seems to be using previous Trump allies, such as Mr Sondland, who donated $100million to his inauguration, against the President. All the while the Republicans are challenging the reputability of

each and every witness brought forward. The situation is far from a ‘quid pro quo’ as Mr Sondland has instigated greater change. In his opening statement he very clearly stipulated that there was an alleged ‘quid pro quo’. However, he later clarified this exchange between the Presidents of Ukraine and America was regarding smear stories on the Bidens in exchange for a meeting, not regarding military aid. The other predictable angle to arise in the hearings, as a form of defence from the Republicans, is whether or not the President knew of the actions taking place, as well as the magnitude of his involvement. The well-known Watergate scandal that forced President Nixon to abandon the office of President only became a story about Nixon the man when Washington Post reporters Woodward and Bernstein were able to find direct implication of the President. Ambassador Sondland seems to have had a similar goal in his mind when delivering his opening statement. Trump’s phone call with the President of Ukraine is fairly damning in terms of implicating the President. However, the Ambassador made sure that there was no doubt over the issue saying ‘Everyone was in the loop. It was no secret’.

Continued on page 2

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

News

Letter from the Editor D

ear Readers,

In Voltaire’s Candide the protagonist of the novel defines optimism as ‘The obstinacy of maintaining that everything is best when it is worst.’ This appears to resonate with an uncomfortable poignancy in the seemingly disaster ridden news cycle of the 21st century. Donald Trump is becoming the fourth President of the United States to face impeachment inquiries, in what presented itself to some as an inevitable course of action. The world is glued to their tv screens as students struggle for survival in a barricaded Hong Kong university against the tear gas of police forces. Meanwhile, Australian residents are being evacuated from their homes as wildfires ravage their houses and lay a blanket of smoke over Sydney. Amongst these developments anyone advocating for optimism would appear to fall into Voltaire’s classification. Despite the disheartening list of current affairs this Michaelmas issue should be a source of comfort if not optimism. The headline piece deals with what is likely to dominate the news deadlines for at least the following months, assessing the root causes of this impeachment inquiry facing the Trump administration. Following the damning inquiries into Boeing’s activities Lachlan Jones explores the damage to the company and Rory Bishop gives us his take on what was possibly the most controversial moves of Trump’s foreign policy so far, pulling US troops from Syria. This is complemented

by Johan Nerlov’s answer to the question of whether the Euro has been a failed experiment. The news section is concluded by Jack Ward’s insight into the largest election of all time. The Features section also delivers with fantastic breadth of coverage. Nicholas Chan tackles with the challenging events unravelling in Hong Kong for his debut piece, while Harry Dawson and Sam Corbett look at both the problems and supposed solutions to the Climate Crisis. There is no shortage of video game content as Josh Jackson looks at the crunch in the industry and the violence weaved into the games is questioned. Worried about your GCSE choices? David Hrushovski taps into the inner psyche of years 10 and 11 across the country, asking about their approach to the exams and process of choosing subjects. And finally, the sports section gives you coverage of F1, cricket success and the fighting football clubs; delivered by Ben Lisemore and Ted Woodfin. As always, I would like to say a huge thank you to all our readers, the team and I hope you enjoy this edition. I encourage any budding young writers to consider joining the paper as it is a fantastic opportunity to improve one’s writing style and expand awareness of wider global affairs. Thank you, and enjoy! Samuel King

COVER STORY

Democrats Hunt Down The President While He Attacks Democracy Samuel King

Continued from cover page... Crucially, Sondland’s testimony proved to be such a blow to both the President and Congressional Republicans because it was a shock that he did not intend to defend Trump. After several hours of his questioning the consensus seemed to be that the Republicans had been caught off-guard. From a CNN studio, Mr Dean, while commenting on the hearing, at the time remarked that it was ‘a big day …because the truth has come out’. Currently, the clear demarcation between the impeachment hearings of President Nikon and President Trump is the support Trump has retained from Republicans. During the Watergate scandal Republicans eventually turned against the President however, they continue to support Trump. This is most likely due to the fact that no serious drop has been felt in his approval ratings as a result of

the hearings and since we live in an era where politics is polarised and party identities rigid. Largely the Mueller Report was unable to demonstrate to the American people a basis for obstruction of justice or impeachment. The evidence that Mueller uncovered was far from damning and almost always opaque. Defenders of Mueller and the accusers of Trump are not wrong when they say that impeachment hearings are rarely built around one action, but usually attempt to describe a narrative of a President from which obstruction of justice (or other accusations) is probable, but not a surety. Yet the story is dissimilar with Trump. Despite the fact that Michael Moore will always make his films where an American descent to a febrile Weimar Germany is predicted, the greatest damage he commits toward America’s democratic values

Nixon was forced to leave office after pressure from congresional Republicans. and institutions comes from lesser seen actions. Trump consistantly causes both an ideological shift across the nation and exercises criminal activities while in office, further complicating the situation. It is the later activity, according to his critics, that will likely cause his impeachment by the house of representatives. The course of actions is fairly inevitable: after impeachment by the house the Republicans, who hold a majority in the Senate by roughly 20, will block any further action. The damage Trump causes on American democratic values however, will last far longer and therefore, should be further examined. There is of course some form of

precedent for these actions of the President. In April 1861 President Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus (the right of every arrested individual to be brought before a court and not held indefinitely). This action – justified forcibly by the president as necessary during wartime - was a clear violation of the American Constitution, despite the fact that the court upheld the decision. Such historical incidents are reminders of how toughly American democracy has been tested since the USA’s founding in 1776. In their 2018 work, How Democracies Die, the Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt identify several indicators that illustrate a

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

President Trump is facing decisive impeachment hearings from the house of representatives. breakdown of the political norms in democracies, while also demonstrating that we find ourselves in a peak period of this phenomena, comparatively. Lincoln’s disregard for one aspect of his constitution during the American Civil War is one of many examples, which have increased in both regularity and magnitude during the Trump administration. There is diminishing uproar when the President challenges the civil liberties of his rivals, attacks the courts, denies legitimacy to an elected government or fails to reject violence. Although none of these tendencies pose the basis for legal action against Trump, they represent the breakdown of democratic norms as identified and likened to a “litmus test” by the political scientist Juan J. Linz when studying the demise of European democracy in the 1930s. For all the above listed tests, the President appears positive. Having famously said at a rally that he could “stand in the middle of Fifth avenue and shoot somebody” without losing any voters, Trump went on to promise legal action against Hillary Clinton, claimed he would deny election results if he lost and threatened to prosecute the media. He has elevated the nonsense notion of ‘fake news’ to commonplace. These actions continued after the inauguration of the President. Although Trump was elected without a mandate (losing the popular vote) this has been brushed aside by the President as he claims this can be accounted for by “millions of people who voted illegally”. This stance demonstrates an open challenge

to the electoral process. As stated previously, the President’s breach of norms is not without precedent when assessed objectively; however, the regularity with which he exercises

Impeachment of the President was inevitable for many speculators the actions was unanticipated before his campaign. Additionally, the power and extent of jurisdiction that is accompanied by the office of President had never been coupled with such extreme authoritarian tendencies, (a notable comparison being Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin whose pursuit of ‘communist influences and agents’ in American life terrified tens of thousands in the 1950s). The combination of these two factors illustrates the reasoning behind the fear for democracy that surrounds his Presidency. After considerable shock and presumably a few tears, the Democratic Party, and global liberals with them, moved

on to ask the question: How did this happen? A critique of voter turn-out and any shortcomings Hillary Clinton’s campaign made have had, for me, is an unsatisfactory answer. The moment Trump took the oath of office marked the culmination of a breakdown of political norms, as well as the failure of the democratic institutional safeguards which many thought would protect America against such a President. Therefore, to answer the question that shrouded everyone’s mind in the aftermath of the President’s election, we must look to history. Following this, a pattern of disregard for the unwritten rules that sustain American Democracy, namely partisan self-restraint and fair play, is evident. The 1998 impeachment of President Bill Clinton by House Republicans (an act that Trump will predictably have to face from House Democrats in the near future), illustrated the abandonment of requiring a bipartisan consensus for impeachment. Additionally, the anti-majoritarian practice of the Senate filibuster, previously understood to be used sparingly, is now a regular occurrence. Finally, the 2016 Republican Senate’s refusal to consider President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee offers, along with the two other examples, a harrowing portrayal of political existence void of partisan restraint. In other words, the polarized and institutional dysfunction which built up during the Obama presidency as opponents blocked most measures (forcing the president to use executive powers)

became a partial precedent for President Trump’s actions. The hatred of Obama amongst large segments of the electorate facilitated the election of an extremist Republican (who in turn could gain the Republican presidential nomination because of the highly individual-centred primary nomination process). Levitsky and Ziblatt have done an immense service in using comparative examples of democracies collapsing into authoritarian regimes to analyse the US under President Trump. Their Yale University colleague Stephen Skowronek has considered the same question and worries that the US’s impressive capacity of constitutional adaptation – to war, civil rights struggles, social planning and foreign affairs – has reached its limit. Putting the Trump presidency in historical perspective Skowronek speculates that, “through its own developmental processes, the political system seems to have eroded the ground for political agreement on any particular ordering of its constitutional principles.” A Trump presidency will undoubtedly test the validity of this adaptability process. Regardless of clips that are played on Fox News or CNN portraying spell binding moments of testimony in the impeachment process, the outcome, it seems, is fairly predictable. But, the damage from impeachment can be quantified to a far greater extent than the breakdown of political norms Trump has caused can be.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

News POLITICS

Trump, Turkey and Terrorists; A Tumultuous Trinity Rory Bishop questions the US President’s ever changing decisions on Syria.

n October 13th, Donald Trump made the declaration that America would be withdrawing its troops from Syria in the wake of the death of the ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. However, the exit of the US was soon cut short when it was declared less than a month later that troops would be re-entering, not under the objective to oppose ISIS alongside the Kurdish forces as they had been previously, but to protect the Eastern oil fields in an attempt to ‘deny [The Islamic State] of revenue’ in what Lieutenant General Pat White claimed was a chance to prevent them from reconstituting. The original withdrawal was already received very poorly, an opinion corroborated by the immediate mobilisation of Turkish forces into the area, killing 120 within a week and displacing upwards of 170,000 in the same time period. Defense secretary Mark Esper had previously made the statement that the Turkish were unlikely to move on American forces, and in that regard he was right. They had not moved on the US military, but once Trump’s defense team made, what they argued to be, an imperative move out of Syria, Esper’s statement was proved right, in a far more devastating manner. Although the US did not completely abandon them, leaving a limited number of troops and an established military infrastructure and

training equipment, most still questioned the rationale behind the move. When America opted to support the Kurds, the decision was undoubtedly probed by many, but justification behind the choice was also present. The Kurds are an ethnic minority from Iran who had consistently aided the US, such as

Yet this attempted pacifism has been counteracted twofold. First in the aforementioned reintegration of troops into Eastern Syria, and second as he concurrently sent troops back to the Middle East, albeit in Suadi Arabia, a mere two days after the withdrawal from Syria on October 15th. The latter move seemed to

anti Kurd and it is believed a correspondence between the US and Turkish presidents also motivated the Turkish movement in the last two months. Once again, Esper’s statement comes to the forefront. However, it now takes on a very different meaning. It is less so the fact that Turkey would not oppose America, then it

The looming figure of Turkey president Erdogan was not far behind

in the Iraq War from 2003 and Gulf War from 2008, before helping in the war of Syria starting in 2015. They proved crucial in the fight against the Islamic State. The Kurds were argued to be fundamental in the breakdown of ISIS and loss of associated land, but are said to have lost 11,000 men in the process. The death of al-Baghdadi seemed to be a further shift in a positive direction. This alliance had worked well until Trump argued that it was the right time for the US to dissociate themselves with Syria, which he called, in characteristically Trump fashion, an ‘area of sand and death.’

be financially motivated, and it is no coincidence that Saudi Aramco are about to take an action that could push them into the top three wealthiest, listed countries by declaring that they would be putting five percent of their stocks on the market in the very same week. The oil objective of the November mission seems to perpetuate this money motivated idea even more so, as the Middle East crisis once again sees itself revolving around precious oil. As is obviously the case in this crisis, the looming figure of Turkey president Erdogan was not far behind Trump’s actions. Turkey has always been adamantly

In a far from shocking twist, Putin decided to involve himself in the international incident.

is that America would withdraw at the mere sight of oncoming Turks. Despite the efforts of Trump’s somewhat amusing leaked email, Turkey stuck by their word and advanced, whilst the US did the inverse, to the mass controversy of pretty much everyone, hence why Trump’s administration has sidelined the withdrawal and America has begun to return to the area. The vacant hole the US left in Syria was even further complicated when Russia, somewhat inevitably, decided to step in and further complicate the international incident, by allying with Turkey against the Kurds. Trump, however, seemed indifferent at first, even going as far as to support the actions of Erdogan, and tacitly endorsed the slaughter by empowering the Turkey leader (and by extension ISIS) in the betrayal of the Kurds. This leads us back to Trump’s return to Syria a few weeks later under the pretense of this alleged oil protection. It is largely agreed to be a façade to manage the wider problems at stake, or at a minimum some sort of attempt at economic gain. The US has left much unresolved, including aspects like the Syrian Democratic Forces’ (SDF) holding of in excess of 10,000 ISIS troops, which America had sent only 300 men to help with. The American ‘accelerated withdrawal plan’ has now come to what seems to be a halt, as the forces are stuck in an inter-conflict limbo with poorly outlined plans. Not only have political and moral questions have been left in the air, but even the legality of it. Many American troops been left asking what they can really do, as most remain in a state of confusion as to what the next American actions may be.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

News AVIATION

Boeing in Crisis

Lachlan Jones discusses the catastrophe and defamation at Boeing.

oeing is unquestionably a titan of US industry, with one of the most diverse international customer bases as not only an aeroplane manufacturer but also a defence contractor of communication systems. Despite an impressive list of accolades, including largest aircraft producer in the world, owner of the largest building by land mass, and their assembly hanger in Washington, the last two years have been arguably the worst in the companies history, with issues regarding the brand new 737 MAX, which resulted in hundreds of deaths as a result of technological failure.

ness were also heard in Congress, sparking outrage, particularly from grieving families present at the hearing. During this startling admission by the company, concerns have also been levied at the FAA and their certification process, whose role as a civilian organisation and branch of the Department of Transport will be under renewed scrutiny at the hands of a Congress who initiated a Special Investigation Committee, as well as the Department of Justice for these issues. Those critical of both organisations, including those involved with one of several lawsuits by families against Boeing, have speculat-

The last 12 months for Boeing have been scarred by several major, international disasters

The last 12 months for Boeing have been scarred by several major, international disasters that have quickly attracted concern from governments and airlines alike. The most important of these has to be the issues with the 737 MAX aircraft, and most notably the two incidents that occurred in quick succession involving the brand new aircraft; Lion Air Flight 610 in October 2018 and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 in March 2019 in which a combined 346 people lost their lives. Following this tragic loss of life, the estimated 350 aircraft were deemed unsafe and internationally grounded, prompting investigation by multiple agencies, including the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Indonesian National Transport Safety Committee. On October 25th, the latter of these released a damning 353 page report heavily criticising Boeing’s procedure and implementation of technology, particularly the Manoeuvering Characteristics Augmentation System, that is thought to have been responsible for loss of control in both crashes. Information that pilots had known about issues with the system during testing was also released by Boeing at a similar time, prompting outrage from Congress, where Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenberg faced an assault of questions, particularly over his refusal to resign and questioning safety procedures within the company. Furthermore, several test pilots’ testimonies claim that they had essentially ‘lied to regulators (FAA)’ over the aircraft’s airworthi-

ed lobbying power as being outsourcing of safety checks from the FAA to Boeing. As a corporate entity, Boeing has vast potential lobbying power, with 135,000 employees and annual revenues of over $100 billion. According to federal records, $15 million was spent on lobbying in 2018, including to members of the Senate’s Transportation Committee. Some argue the FAA, acting on governmental instruction, expedited safety

testing to ensure the launch date of the 737 MAX in January 2016. What is not speculation, however, is that the FAA deemed the aircraft airworthy

Royce Trent 1000 blade cracking problems that have resulted in the grounding of over 50 aircraft internationally. Although the estimated $1 billion cost to Rolls Royce did not

It damaged corporate reputation due to affecting key customers such as British Airways until 13 March 2019, nearly 6 months after the Lion Air crash and two days after the Ethiopean. This was considerably later than many other international agencies, such as the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority who grounded them the day of the crash. This ban has remained in force since that time, and looks set to continue until at least 2020, much to the concern of key operators such as Norweigan Airlines who are being forced to keep operating more elderly aircraft while their new orders are gathering dust, with Boeing being handed a $4.9 billion dollar bill by airlines in July. This has forced Boeing, with a 4,500 order bill, to slash costs in other areas, most notably recently scaling down production of its larger 787 Dreamliner aircraft. The 737 MAX issues have not been the only problem blighting Boeing recently. Issues have also occurred with their 787 aircraft and their engines, specifically the Rolls

Approximatly 350 aircraft have been grounded indefinitely.

directly affect Boeing, it certainly damaged corporate reputation due to affecting key customers such as British Airways, and has exacerbated the slowing for demand of the aircraft, as indicated by limited production as announced recently. Despite these controversies however, Boeing’s market position, particularly in regards to its biggest rival European conglomerate Airbus, appears to still be strong. Despite quarterly profits halving to $895 million and outrage from airlines, orders for new aircraft such as the 777x have increased to record numbers, indicating the trust the industry holds for the corporation. Many have also drawn parallels to previous aircraft generations, such as the 727 in the 1960s and the British Comet, the first jet passenger aircraft, that both proved popular despite initial loss of life. But one thing is for certain; you’ll be grateful you won’t be flying a Boeing 737 MAX anytime soon.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

News

The Lost Hopes of 1989 EUROPE

Johan Nerlov explores why liberal democracy seems to have stalled in Eastern Europe.

rexit has blown up many of the certainties we held dear, whether one was a Brexiteer or a Remainer. As such, it has led to much of the British populace and the press being consumed by it - presumably in search of answers to the plethora of questions we all have. However, this has also caused us to be somewhat oblivious to many developments both on the continent and across the wider world that could well have serious implications for the geopolitical, economic and social balance of the world today. One such, is the continuous backsliding of liberal values and democracy in Eastern Europe, namely in countries such as Hungary and Poland. Recently, Hungary, which for the best part of the last decade has been under the iron fist of Viktor Orban, has come into the European Union’s firing line and in early 2018, the European Parliament very nearly voted to suspend its voting rights within European institutions - the gravest punishment the EU can enforce on a member state aside from expelling it from the bloc. Poland’s government meanwhile, for almost five years headed by the infamous Law and Justice Party (PiS) has been accused of trying to influence its judicial system in order to support its own set of objectives. All of this could be seen as isolated examples happening in different countries but, for many, it is a symptom of Eastern Europe turning its back on liberalism and bucking the trend that many took for granted after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and then the Soviet Union in 1991. So, is there something actually happening?

ples that ultimately threw the spanner in the works of great ‘multi-ethnic’ empires - such as Austria-Hungary. When communism took sway, be it voluntarily or not, following the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 where, once again, ethnicity became the centrepiece of one’s identity, such divisions seemed to cease. With its strong emphasis on complete equality, a common cause and collectivism, communism managed to somehow unite people that had for centuries been at odds. Well, if it wasn’t the ideology that united them, the strongmen such as Tito in Yugoslavia or János Kádár in Hungary seemed to do the trick. Despite all this, it seems that the ethnic identities that had been around centuries prior persisted to some extent. In Czechoslovakia for example, the union of the Czechs and Slovaks never proved an easy one to square and tensions between the two groups did sometimes come to the surface, though never in a directly confrontational manner. When the Wall fell, however, a slow-burning fuse was lit. In the immediate aftermath of the end of communism in Eastern Europe there was, as can be expected, a great deal of excitement in a large part of society. For decades they, throughout the region, had been tantalised by ideas of freedom and material wealth in the West - it sparkled in front of them and, after all, who could refuse? As was seen from Russia to Poland, Romania to Hungary, dictatorships melted away and give way to nascent but still relatively stable democracies. The West, of course, joined in. For us, the end of the Cold War seemed like a clear mes-

Dictatorships melted away and give way to nascent but still relatively stable democracies

The fall of the Berlin Wall brought about renewed optimism in Eastern Europe.

To try and understand this we must first examine what this region was like historically, especially during the days it spent under communism and the USSR’s ever-watchful and overbearing gaze. Prior to the two World Wars, the region was marked by strong ethnic divides and even stronger affiliations to religion. Indeed, it was these stark divisions between peo-

sage that our ways, of democracy, free markets and multi-cultural inclusiveness were destined to appeal to all throughout the world - we, in a way, had won not only the war for power but the war of ideas. With relative speed, we egged on newly freed Eastern Block nations to reform and open up their markets, allowing billions worth in investments. As a result, almost

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

all economies in Eastern Europe began to soar - Poland, for one, saw constant growth rates usually well above 4.5% a year, reaching over 7% in 1997. This soon gave many reasons to think that, perhaps rightly, it was time to allow nations in Eastern Europe to join the common market and, after the dawn of the new millennium, the European Union. This would allow these countries and their people to fulfil their goals of prosperity - integrating ever closer to the West and, in a sense, emulating its past successes. The Balkans war, a bloody conflict that ran from 1991 to 2001 also gave the EU ever greater reason to bring Eastern Europe into the fold.

The rise in populist support across the continent isn’t, as we might like to believe, for no reason

What the war had shown us was that it was imperative to give everyone on the continent a common goal and narrative something to aspire to and a reason to be united rather than fight. It seemed, and indeed it was, a noble gesture, to expand the Union and hence give also Eastern and South-Eastern Europe that same goal and cause. It was with these principles in mind that, on May 1st 2004, the first wave of EU enlargement occurred, to be followed by further enlargement in 2007, 2011 and finally Croatia in 2013. It was here that, one could say, the problems began. If there is some sort of connection between all of the recent incidents of

that the region has had to endure in the last thirty years. In adapting to the Western model at such speed, the region most certainly left behind many of its own ways of doing things and also had to somewhat give up much of its culture in order to, in other words, ‘be more Western’. Yet, that underlying connection to ethnicity that is so widespread in the region has most certainly not gone away. For evidence, look only to Hungary’s complete ban on refugees - despite EU agreements committing them to take them in - for fear of ‘diluting their culture’. Poland’s programs to boost the birth rate of their ‘ethnic population’ in order to avoid the ‘great replacement’ of their population gives a small taste of strongly held views. In short, one could say that the anger in Eastern Europe is at having to accept Western values of multiculturalism when they, at least for now, seem to not share them. As such, it is not surprising that some in Eastern Europe now regret joining the European Union and wish to do without it or, at the very least, wish to see its policies shift to better match their views on the world. Some at this point may well be asking how any of this anger necessarily leads to support for fundamentally undemocratic leaders and parties. However, one only needs to looks at the message such politicians are putting out to their voters to understand. Fundamentally, many in Eastern Europe see these ‘strongmen’ as the only way to properly defend their culture and way of life from encroaching liberal values on one hand and newly arriving migrants from other parts of the world on the other. It could be said that people vote for the Orbans, Morawieckis and Zemans of the world in a desperate attempt to protect what little they see left of their history and way of life - what, they believe, makes them and their country what they are. Another pertinent question a reader should probably be asking themselves right now is why any of this should affect us in Britain or the wider Western part of Europe. The simple answer is that this could well happen here too. Of course the circumstances of what led many Eastern Europeans to feeling the way they do are unique to them, but the fundamentals are, well, fundamentally the same - rapid

Viktor Orban, Prime Minister of Hungary. rope for well over 50 years. The arrival of new cultures due to increasing migration and the ever-changing labour market due to globalisation, not to mention the new power structures that dominate Europe and the world at large, have left many feeling disenfranchised with what they see around them. The rise in populist support across the continent isn’t, as we might like to believe, for no reason at all, but, rather, for several highly complex and difficult to manage problems that affect millions of our fellow Europeans. Alas, a solution is yet to be found, and even the idea that

there is one is far from certain. But, if we all remain complacent and do nothing to reach out, understand the other and try to bridge the stark divides in our society then we might well see what is happening in Eastern Europe here too. Liberalism is not over in Europe be it East or West and many, especially young people, still find hope in it. That said, it seems clear that the lost hopes and dreams of 1989 has not only led to the serious danger of democracy failing Eastern Europe but it could well, somewhat ironically, threaten our own democracies in the West too.

It is not surprising that some in Eastern Europe regret joining the European Union

democratic backsliding and illiberalism in Eastern Europe it could be said to be a form of backlash to the rapid changes

change. In Italy, France and Spain many voters are fed up with the rapid change that has been happening in Western Eu-

Pro-Democracy protests in Warsaw, Poland 2015.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

News POLITICS

Narendra Modi Wins “Battle for the Soul of India” in the Biggest Election of All Time

Jack Ward examines the Indian Elections of 2019 and what Modi means for India.

arendra Modi has been re-elected as leader of India. So, what does this tell us about India, and more importantly, what does it mean for India and the rest of the world? Modi’s landslide victory in the 2019 Indian elections secured him another 5 year term in office. His party, the BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party), had won 303 out of the possible 543 seats in the Indian Parliament which dwarfed the 54 seats of their main opposition party, the INC (Indian National Congress) headed by Rahul Gandhi. Roughly 600 million of the 900 million eligible electorates (67.1%) cast their votes in the elections, making it the biggest election of all time. Modi’s triumph may come as a surprise for some observers however, given the record high unemployment rate, plunge in industrial production, and demonetisation problems that took centre stage during his previous administration. However, his campaign makes it clear that Modi is selling something different to have struck such a chord with the Indian people: nationalism. To truly understand the significance and the causes of the results of these elections, and the appeal of Modi and the BJP, a dive into recent Indian politics is required. Modi, having won an emphatic majority in the 2014 elections, the first majority in the Indian parliament for 30 years, pledged to build a “New India”, one built around ‘Hindutva’. Hindutva is a cultural ideology (or even ‘creed’ as coined by The Atlantic) that holds vital the idea of Indian and Hinduism tradition, culture, and society and its superiority to westernisation; a loose translation is essentially ‘Hinduness’. Originated by Veer Savarkar over a century ago, Hindutva is more aptly described as an identity or philosophy rather than a theology. This identity, the idea of one unified and indivisible India, was not particularly appealing in the early 20th century, however a desire for exactly this kind of mandate seems to now resound with the populus at a time when it is perhaps needed most. All of this hasn’t simply brought to question the potential demise of a secular India, but also the worrying pattern of similar politics that the popularity of such policy accentuates. Critics have drawn comparison with Trump, Brexit, and the victory of the National Coalition party in Australia when searching for echoes of politics which contribute to the emerging nationalist and ‘strong leader’ trend.

What’s more, Modi’s decisions and policy have reflected this in an ominous fashion. Modi made a point in 2017 of appointing militant priest Yogi Adityanath the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, India’s largest province. Pragya Singh Thakur, who was connected to a series of 2008 bombings carried out by a Hindu terrorist group, was also appointed as a minister. Both won their constituencies. More recently the escalation of ongoing tension between India and Pakistan has provoked a more hardline (and much hailed) stance from Modi who cancelled peace talks with their border nation earlier this year amongst other policies viewed by Pakistan as aggressive. Furthermore, during BJP’s campaign Modi frequently referenced the “love jihad” conspiracy which theorises that Muslim men are impregnating Hindu women to increase the Muslim population in India. The most prominent and most foreboding policy was the Citizenship Amendment Bill which was unsuccessfully passed through parliament by Modi and declared that only non-Muslim refugees had the capacity to become citizens after migrating to India. It is hard to ignore the conspicuous similarities in rhetoric and policy with Trump. This combination of xenophobia, nationalism, and fundamentalism has prompted many to claim that Modi, much like other recently elected political leaders, has ridden the ‘wave of hate’ to success. On the surface, one would think such a nationalist (and debatedly radical) sentiment coupled with the failure of many of Modi’s reforms would surely repel voters. But is would appear that Modi’s rhetoric is actually expertly catering to the qualms of the Indian people. For a

Modi campaigns in Bombay. country not unfamiliar with oppression, the novelty of this brand of muscular politics must come as a breath of fresh air. It would be easy to brand Modi as a fear monger who claimed victory by merely inciting hatred in his supporters in a climate of fragility and unrest, however India’s people would beg to differ. When journalists took to the streets of Varanasi, Modi’s own constituency, during the election process, to gauge the mood, voters did not mention “love jihad”, Hindutva, or Pakistan. Instead, they spoke proudly of what Modi had already achieved at a local level, such as repairing roads and investing in local businesses. There was a sense of hope and progress rather than embitterment and resentment. While it would be wrong to compare Narendra Modi to Mahatma Gandhi, the ‘man of the people’ persona that Modi has adopted does in some way echo his predecessor and has apparently set him apart from his competitors, by a long, long way. In spite of all this, there is still much opposition to Modi both domestically and outside India. Many are in disbelief that

Narendra Modi during campaigning in Mumbai.

Modi’s disastrous first term could have ever been excused and been upstaged by his right-wing politics, and this has led to numerous accusations being levelled at Modi claiming a distortion of reality. These accusations state that through the employment of a tainted narrative, bullish charisma, and the exploitation of India’s media, Modi has fabricated his own favourable version of events and pulled the wool over the eyes of the struggling Indian electorate. In other words, he has ‘tricked’ the people. Whether it is a sign of systemic corruption or not is not clear. Regardless, Modi’s media presence and his insistent credo of a “New India” undoubtedly has played a dominating role in his victory. One can only speculate when answering the question of Modi’s credibility, indeed if Modi has been waving the flag of nationalism in order to conceal his government’s shortcomings, the one certainty is that we will find out soon enough. The self professed ‘watchman’ of India can no longer hide behind optimistic campaign placards, India is in his hands.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Features GAMES

Are Video Games Spawning Killers? Ian Ip and Nicholas Ko investigate whether violent video games are actually making teenagers more aggressive.

s modern technology advances, it is becoming more and more common for teenagers to have a mobile device, which allows them to play video games more frequently with a swipe of a hand or a press of a key. This can certainly be linked to the question - Do video games actually make you more violent? Recently published are many reports concerning teenagers getting more short-tempered, and even more violent after playing video games. Even some cases of school shootings are said to be related to the perpetrator playing these games. Researches have been conducted to find out whether they increase violence. However, we will look at whether video games are the main cause of teenagers getting more aggressive. First of all we need to explore why there is a perception that video games are making teenagers more violent. People started

to get concerned after the President of the United States, Donald Trump, made a bold statement on his personal Twitter account - “Video game violence & glorification must be stopped—it is creating monsters!”. Again in February 2018, in response to the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, President Trump stated that “the level of violence in video games is really shaping young people’s thoughts.” He didn’t make these statements without having any support. According to the Taylor Aggression Paradigm (TAP is a frequently used laboratory measure of aggression) conducted in 2004 by Iowa State University, there is an indication of people getting more aggressive after exposure to violent video games. In the experiment, participants are shown a word with missing letters within it. Participants are asked to put the missing letters in to make a word. Before doing that, some of the participants are assigned to play 30 minutes of violent

video games. The results showed that people who played the violent games are more likely to form “aggressive words” with the letters provided. An example of this is: M _ _ _ E R. If you immediately think of the word: MURDER, then you are more aggressive than other people who thinks of other words like MOTHER. Another research by Craig A. Anderson from University of Missouri - shows that there is an increasing lev-

games are the main cause of the increasing amount of teenage violence cases, researchers from the University of Münster and Leibniz-Institute for the Social Sciences seem to have another view, as their study states that: ‘The frustration–aggression hypothesis can be applied to the use of digital games and that game’s characteristics alone are not sufficient to explain effects on aggression.’

The diﬃculty of games aﬀects levels of aggressiveness el of aggression after playing violent video games by conducting a test called the Competitive Reaction Time test in the year 2000. In this test, 2 participants will be invited to play either a violent or non-violent video game for 30 minutes, after which they will be told to do a reaction time test. Whoever’s reaction time is faster, gains permission to punish the other participant. It is found that the person who played violent video games will give longer and harsher punishments than the other person who played a non-violent game. This shows an increased level of aggressive behaviour and feelings. However, although it seems like video

Video games have always had violence, however, it has become more realistic in recent history.

What explains the volume of studies proving that violent video games are the main cause of teenagers becoming more violent? It may be the case that violent games chosen for the studies are actually harder to master compared to the non-violent games. To have a more reliable experiment, a study was published in 2014 in which many methods were used such as changing the controls of a video game controller or giving more difficult and complex versions of games to different players, and then recording their aggression. The results show that players with an altered controller or harder game are more likely to be violent. This indicates that the difficulty of the game affects levels of aggression. As well as that, they created two identical First-Player-Shooting games with different levels of violence. In the more violent version, the players who were shot had to have a brutal death. On the other hand, when a player got shot in the non-violent version, the player simply disappears. Despite the game’s violence levels being significantly different from each other, there is no difference in violence level after different people play the 2 games, suggesting that violence in video games is actually not the main cause of teenagers becoming more violent after playing the games. Instead, the difficulty or complexity of a game is the main cause of this problem. Overall, video games do cause aggressiveness in the short term, although it is not necessarily the violence of the game that causes this aggression; it’s the level of difficulty and frustrations caused by the gaming process. Hence video games are not to be blamed for making people violent.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Features POLITICS

The Belt and Road Initiative: Neocolonialism or Economic Boom? Lachlan Jones and Johan Nerlov explore the decisions and rationale behind the Chinese mega-project.

he Belt and Road Initiative (BR) is a global, Chinese backed, infrastructure and investment programme that aims to have major trade routes span much of the developed and developing world. Also called the One Belt One Road Project, and described as the 21st Century Silk Road, this major feat of diplomacy and trade is undoubtedly controversial, but one that could have multiple benefits for nations involved. The BR Initiative was announced by Chinese President Xi Jinping in 2013 during a visit to Kazakhstan. Since then the project has grown to have operations and contractual agreements with 126 countries and half the world’s population. An estimated $1trillion has already been spent on the project, and a further projected $300billion in the next eight years. Improving the capacity of trade routes has been cited as the primary focus of this huge economic investment; expanding and acquiring ports as part of the sea route based ‘Road’, as well as investing in land routes through railways and creating the ‘Silk Road Economic Belt’ which includes the ‘New Eurasian Land Bridge’ through Central Asia. The Belt The Belt initiative is an ambitious project. Aims to link Europe with China and

Southeast Asia by reliable rail networks traversing trading and economic hubs in Central Asia and Africa are on a scale only comparable to the United States Marshall Plan after the Second World War. The target date for this aspirant project’s completion is set to be 2049, to coincide with the 100th anniversary of the formation of the People’s Republic. However,some nations are already questioning the long term impact of investment through the effects of ‘debt trap diplomacy’. The use of rail as a trade route is the primary tool of the Belt project. The Eurasian Land Bridge is the name for China’s rail links to Central Asia; countries such as Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, as well as Iran and Russia all currently have rail links to China, and this corridor is expected to be expanded upon in the coming decades with Chinese gauge railways to expand to Western Europe. This would achieve the Chinese government’s aims of having a Beijing-London high speed line with a travel time of two days. Railways are also rapidly expanding in East Africa as well, such as the Mombasa-Nairobi Chinese gauge railway in Kenya, contracted to the China Road and Bridge Corporation (CRBC) at the cost of $3.8 billion, 6% of Kenya’s GDP. Crucially, 90% of the debt is owed to the Export Import Bank of China. However, since its completion in 2018 passenger numbers are at an unprecedented 1.4 million, and

Gwadar Port in Pakistan was recently leased to China for a minimum of 40 years.

Kenyan railways officials claim the project will break even by 2020. Whether this trend will continue along the planned 2,700km of track between South Sudan and Tanzania, and whether Chinese government backed companies will be contracted, remains to be seen. Pakistan is an example where reliance on China could have unwanted economic and political consequences. The country

a minimum of 40 years. This resulted in Pakistan losing the majority of the profits from their second busiest deep water port in the country. The implications of Chinese investment do not end there. The Chinese Pakistan Economic Corridor of $62billion in investment in power plants and hydroelectric dams, is a concern considering China already accounted for 42% of Pakistan’s international debt before the

Politcal clout over vulnerable developing nations

is strategically important for both aspects of the initiative; its northern railways are vital links between China and Iran, and the deep sea ports of Gwadar and Karachi open up vital sea routes for the ‘Road’ that extend into the Persian Gulf and beyond. In 2016, the Chinese Overseas Port Holding Company bought a 91% stake in Port Gwadar, which is ultimately leased for

CPEC. With the economic and political uncertainty that comes with being sandwiched between adversarial India and sanctions crippled Iran, it may be that Pakistan has no other choice if further development of their country is to remain on the agenda. The Road, a one way street? Italy has a long maritime history that stretches back even prior to the rise of the Roman Empire. Italy was the Western terminal of the Ancient Silk Road that enabled global trade as far back as 2,500 years ago. In the Renaissance, the great Italian port cities of Genoa and Venice spearheaded the West’s culture of openness and trade, sending out the great explorers, such as Marco Polo, to the far East and West. They met and interacted with new cultures and returned with treasures new to Europeans. With that in mind, it would not seem at all strange that Chinese President Xi Jinping should have visited Rome in March this year to see Italy sign up to the New 21st century Silk Road. However, as plentiful as the opportunities for trade appeared to be, it seems that, unlike previously where trade flowed East and West, all the roads are firmly pointed towards Beijing. Quite rightly, many fear this project could end up being a one way

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

street. Some might simply see the Belt and Road Initiative as China being a kind and helpful host to the world’s poorest and hardest hit countries, aiding them in their development or, in Italy’s case, recovery. For many others this whole grand strategy of worldwide economic development is rather centred at turning China into the planet’s undisputed trading and commercial juggernaut. However, what evidence is there really that any of this is ture? Can China really be trying to secure the whole

veloped and industrialised nations. There is, however, a more worrying trend that is linked to the increasing levels of debt in developing nations: ‘debt-trap diplomacy’. This form of diplomacy, which some accuse China of using widely as part of its Belt and Road initiative, aims to gain economic and political clout over vulnerable developing nations by lending them billions in loans for infrastructure projects that are too much for those nations to repay within any practical time frame,

Aims to have major trade routes span much of the developed and developing world

of Europe, Asia and Africa in its grip? No one truly knows but, a potential key can be found by shedding light on a less than picturesque side of the Belt and Road, namely the debt. It is important to mention that several nations utilise owning other states’ debt as a form of geopolitical power. For example, China (PRC) owns $6.06 trillion of US debts and uses this as leverage in trade negotiations but also as a form of bait in case of disagreement. This practice is very widespread, particularly among de-

placing them in severe debt and under immense pressure to agree to China’s demands. When eventually they concede that they cannot repay, the lender, China, strikes a deal where they take over strategic assets such as ports or railways or get specific agreements giving rights over mining or fishing. Of course, many could see this as mere Western imperialistic conjecture, yet, that said, there is some worrying evidence that it might not be that far away from the truth. Examples of this can be seen with

The Mombasa-Nairobi Railway, built by the China Road and Bridge Corporation.

Hambanthota Harbour in Sri Lanka where China has gained total control thanks to a 99 year lease on the most important port in the country. One could also point to the first Chinese overseas military base in Djibouti, newly opened following an agreement to wipe over half of Djibouti’s debt clean. Similarly in 2008 China was granted mining rights over some of the most valuable resources in Zambia and Madagascar. Worryingly, in the last few years, several reports have found severe human rights violations in these mines by some Chinese nationals 31 of who were arrested for illegal mining practices in June 2017. All this being said, one must remember that China may well be the keenest user of this strategy but is by no means the only one. The United States employed this strategy in the past in Afghanistan and Iraq to gain both favour with the locals and control over the government - both of which, I think we can safely say, failed spectacularly. Crucially, we must realise that not only do these practices hamper the economic development of nations but it also degrades their political and economic independence, tying them to another country’s economy and banks and failing to help developing nations in advancing and improving their own market or in educating their own workforces. As such, this strategy benefits the nations that lend money rather than those who receive it. It is here that we must also consider more closely the ‘Road’ part of the Belt and Road that, somewhat confusingly, en-

compases what Xi Jinping referred to as the ‘Maritime Silk Road’. China’s strategy here is much like that described with road and rail developments. China has been increasingly exerting its claim over the highly disputed South China Sea, a vital stretch of water that essentially is the world’s shipping trade mega highway, through building illegal artificial islands to ensure that it alone can exert influence and control here. China’s push to build new aircraft carriers and building up its navy could be viewed as evidence of its eagerness to become the new major force on the world’s oceans, controlling trade and, by consequence, much of the geopolitics of the modern world. What should we make of these recent developments? Of course, it could all end up being mere misguided conjecture by frightened westerners envious of China’s growing influence and importance in the world - and one cannot help but be in awe of China. And yet, something tells me, and indeed many scholars and analysts that spend their days studying this area, that China is determined, fairly or otherwise, to tip the scales of world trade and power in its favour. If they succeed, for the first time in almost over one hundred years, the most powerful country in the world will not be democratic, western or capitalist. Is that bad? I don’t know - no one does. But, what I believe can be said for sure is that the West has not had to fight for its political, military or economic dominance of the world for some time - it might be time we started.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Features

The Degradation of a Noble Cause CURRENT AFFAIRS

Nicholas Chan explores the Hong Kong protests and why they they are so pivotal for China.

rerequisite

This piece may stress the importance of the politics of Hong Kong, but it is vital to recognise that the issue also lies in social problems to a dramatic extent. It is also important to recognise this piece will be reflecting the writer’s own opinions and ideas, in an attempt to evaluate this issue in a fair and measured way. The Martlet encourages readers to explore this topic for themselves Hong Kong in crisis Ever since these protests have swayed away from opposing China’s encroachment on Hong Kong’s autonomy and into violent anarchy, I’ve been in vehement opposition to them. Establishing change effectively has to be done intelligently, through rhetoric and a coherent understanding of your situation. Winning the minds of the public, the media and the international community, should have been the aim of the protestors but that is decidedly not what they have done. Many

of the protestors have tried to justify their violence by stating that it is the only way to make their voices heard, however that’s not an effective way of broadcasting your ideas as, in the case of Hong Kong, the message has been lost entirely in the violence. Violence is a barrier to progress and change because when one side uses violence the other will be forced to escalate it and the cycle will continue. Using violence makes the protests completely and utterly futile and it is not an effective form of protesting. Another thing that has informed my opinions is the baselessness of this violence. Throwing petrol bombs at a police station will not bring any change, harassing an elderly man in an airport will not bring any change, frankly, none of the protesters’ actions will bring any feasible change. The many problems that Hong Kong faces cannot be solved by simply introducing democracy, we already have a democratic system and we still face numerous socio-economic problems. The protestors have also rallied under 5 core demands: 1.The full withdrawal

of the extradition bill 2.An inquiry into alleged police brutality 3.Retraction of protestors as rioters 4. Release and exoneration for arrested protestors and 5. Resignation of Carrie Lam and the implementation of universal suffrage for Legislative council of Hong Kong (Legco) elections and the election for chief executive. Their actions may also spur China to reintegrate Hong Kong back into the mainland, for 50 years the one country two systems has worked to near perfection, and one left wondering what possible solutions are left? A brief history of Protests in Hong Kong The Occupy Central Movement and Hong Kong electoral reform are fundamental to these issues, and to understand them is to understand these current protests Occupy Central This is a complex issue, and opinions are divided both internally in Hong Kong and in the international communities. To fully understand how a revolution starts you have to go beyond the day it officially starts, the events that triggered this protest have to be examined in detail as well as the psychology of the city and the context in which these protests take place. After the NPCSC (The permanent body of the national people’s congress of China which has legislative power over the state) issued decisions regarding proposed reforms to the Hong Kong electoral system, it was met with mass discontent, being argued as highly restrictive to the people’s universal suffrage. The Hong Kong Federation of Students and Scholarism initiated protests, protesting at government headquarters and blocking major intersections and roads throughout the city. Hong Kong is going through a period of turmoil and conflict that it has never experienced before and frankly, it is difficult to convey the amount of chaos and destruction that has occurred. One country, two systems

Chaos reigns in Hong Kong.

Hong Kong’s political system is incredibly intricate, but one clause many Hong Kong residents have taken issue with is that the chief executive is not voted for by the people. The chief executive is elected

by a 1200-member committee, which in essence is an electoral college consisting of individuals and bodies who are selected within 28 functional constituencies. However, the chief executive is not responsible for making the laws, that is the job of the legislative council. This is a legislature with democratically elected representatives totalling 70 members. The majority of which are either pro-china or pro-democracy. In every election, parties upholding anti-establishment and pro-democratic values have won the popular vote. However, when the people of Hong Kong vote, they’re only voting for 40 of the 70 seats, the other 30 are chosen by the business communities of Hong Kong. Due to the fact that these seats are voted on by major corporations who have an incentive to be friendly to China in order to do business, these 30 seats are predominantly pro-government. Hong Kong also has a “one country two systems” principle, meaning Hong Kong is still a part of China but it is still allowed to retain its own economic and administrative systems as an autonomous state. Therefore, Hong Kong still retains its own Government for economic and financial affairs independent from China. There have been many incidents where Hong Kong’s autonomy has been threatened, which has led to the 2014 umbrella protests and students demanding more political freedom in response to China’s reforms to the Legislative council. Hong Kong is a democracy on a superficial level but the actual power of the people is limited substantially. What has instigated these issues in recent years? The cause of these protests are both direct and indirect but the most clearcut inciting incident is the murder of Poon Hiu wing, and the proposed amendments to the fugitive offenders ordinance as well as the mutual legal assistance in criminal matters ordinance (MLAO). On February the 8th Poon Hiu Wing and her boyfriend ChanTong Kai visited Taiwan on vacation, but on February 17, 2019, Chan Tong Kai exited their hotel alone along with a pink suitcase. After Chan’s Arrival and departure cards were discovered at Poon’s residence, the police proceeded to interrogate Chan, and, under interrogation, Chan confessed to the murder of Poon.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

However, even with this confession, the Hong Kong authorities were unable to prosecute Chan because he had committed the crime in Taiwan and Hong Kong would not be able to extradite Chan without an extradition treaty between Hong Kong and Taiwan. This is where the amendments come in, as potential changes to the pre-existing law would create a mechanism that would allow the chief executive to extradite fugitives to jurisdictions which Hong Kong lacked a treaty with. The inclusion of China in the amendments alarmed many pro-democracy groups as they believed that this law would give China a legal foothold in Hong Kong, eroding the one country, two systems principle that had been in place. Social media then began to play a large role in spurring people to action. Media outlets, like Apple daily news, portrayed the amendments as an opportunity for China to regain and install authoritarian control over Hong Kong, and the Hong Kong Bar Association released a statement regarding their reservations about the bill, citing China’s record of human rights abuses. Groups like Amnesty International and the Hong Kong human rights monitor also declared their opposition to the bill, claiming it could be used to intimidate critics of the Hong Kong and Chinese government as well as peaceful activists and human rights defenders. The Hong Kong journalist association also reported that this bill ‘would not only threaten the safety of journalists but also have a chilling effect on the freedom of expression in Hong Kong.’ Ever since the handover Hong Kong has had a mixture of Chinese nationalism

People swarm the streets as the issue engulfs all of Hong Kong. proximity of these events to one another, meant emotions ran deep in Hong Kong. The failure and inaction on the part of the Hong Kong government further made people distrustful of their own government. The youth of Hong Kong has also played a vital part in these protests. Throughout the years as the gap between Hong Kong and the Chinese people began to grow, many of Hong Kong youth have stopped identifying as Chinese because of the substantial social, cultural, and legal differences. The dissociation between the

Opinions are divided both internally in Hong Kong and in the international communities

as well as animosity towards China. The 2019 protests occurred only four and a half years after the 2014 Occupy Central Movement that arose after proposed reforms to the electoral system that were largely deemed restrictive. However, the sentiment behind the occupy movement has since erupted in the 2019 protests, with the imprisonment of three Hong Kong democracy activists in 2017 further increasing distrust in the Government. People began to fear the long arm of the Chinese government when five staff members of a bookstore in Hong Kong were punished in China for seemingly selling political books that were deemed sensitive and banned in China. The close

two relations has thus increased the likelihood of conflict. The looming arrival of 2047, where Hong Kong’s basic law is set to expire, as well as the one country two systems principle, being also set to end, make the future of Hong Kong uncertain, hence the significance of the young citizens in the matter. Effects on society and the economy The majority of Hong Kong has always been split into two groups “Yellow” (Pro-democracy) and “Blue” (Pro-government), but the recent protests have exacerbated the rift between the two groups, with violent clashes becoming

more frequent between members. The mistakes of chief executive Carrie Lam’s administration have enabled the protests to escalate, and the many mistakes that the administration has made has resulted in historic lows in both approval ratings and trust in the government. Similar to the occupy movement, the discord between parents and youth who have attended these protests has soured massively, with many arguing over how their actions might cost them their future, or their political stance, as well as concerns over the effectiveness of the protests. The police force has also been impacted quite heavily. Foot patrols have been cancelled due to the fear of officers being attacked, and most police officers have faced public humiliation from members due to allegations of police misconduct. Their families have also been subjected to this humiliation, with many of them even being targeted online. The Hong Kong economy has also taken a major hit in the recent months, Hong Kong has slipped into a recession and the economy has shrunk in the second and third quarters of 2019, retail sales have declined and consumer spending has decreased. Fitch ratings downgraded Hong Kong’s sovereignty rating from AA+ to AA over doubts over the government’s ability to maintain the one country principle, this is a huge blow to Hong Kong’s future as investors will no longer trust in the autonomy that Hong Kong holds. Subsequently, the economy will continue to shrink if the protests continue to erode the foundations that have established Hong Kong as the financial centre of Asia. Hong Kong will become an economic husk of itself if the protests continue. What exactly does this all mean and what will be done?

In essence, the sentiment that drove the Occupy Central protests of 2014 has never left, and Hong Kong’s youth has lost faith in their Government. For many Hong Kong might seem like a glittering utopia, whilst in actuality, it is riddled with issues such as the huge wealth gap with 1 in 5 people considered poor in Hong Kong, and high rents of over 10,000 a month for a 3 bedroom flat. Throughout the years due to numerous gaffs by the administration, the people and particularly the youth of Hong Kong have become disjointed with their government, the economic problems have not helped either and these protests are years of frustration reaching the tipping point. However, by August the protests have changed once again. On the 4th September Lam officially withdrew the bill, only to find the protests still raging on. The tactics and methods of the protestors have reached an unjustifiable point, and their message has been lost amidst the chaos. Protestors have thrown bricks, petrol bombs, Molotov cocktails, and corrosive liquid at the Police whilst shops have been subject to vandalism and arson. Protestors have also initiated vigilante attacks on individuals deemed hostile, as well as doxxing (doxxing refers to the act of identifying and publishing private information, in Hong Kong this has been used to attack police officers and their families both online and in the streets) and harassing police officers and their families, by releasing their personal information online. The focus is no longer on the bill and what it might imply for the autonomy of Hong Kong, but it seems to have now devolved into a meaningless rampage masquerading as a fight for democracy. Very rarely is the political aspect even mentioned or discussed and the focus has shifted to social media propaganda site on both sides.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Features THE ENVIRONMENT

The Current Climate Crisis : What the Planet is Doing Wrong

Harry Dawson investigates attitudes towards our rapidly changing planet.

nless you’ve been living under a rock for the past few years, then you will have heard the two words climate change being thrown across social media posts and headlines around the world. From car adverts promising the least emissions, to snacks made with sustainable ingredients, the time for change and the need to ‘act now’ is surrounding us. The current climate crisis is something nobody, it seems, can escape. However, is all the urgency really needed? Is there really a need to panic? Do we really have as little time left as the experts claim? On May 1st, 2019, the UK government declared a climate emergency. Put forward to the government by environmental activist group, Extinction Rebellion, it was a result of weeks of protests. This

One victim is the earth’s clean water source. It’s a finite resource, with over 1 billion people in the world without it, but it’s still an asset that is used in huge volumes for almost every item or product made. One example of the enormous amounts of water used in production is in the meat industry. According to the Guardian, it takes 15,415 litres of water to produce just one kilogram of beef. That number seems almost out of proportion, and yet people still keep buying it unaware of the consequences , with the UK spending over £3 million on beef alone in 2015. But it’s not just agriculture using the world’s precious resources; it’s every industry. Using and wasting so many resources is just one of the many things we are doing wrong and need to change.

This ‘climate emergency’ may sound important, but doesn’t mean much at all so-called climate emergency may sound important, but in reality, the declaration hasn’t proven to mean much at all. The government has ignored this sense of urgency coming from their people, suggesting targets and strategies that have been branded ‘weak’ and ‘unrealistic’ by some people. This could be one reason why so many young people have been taking matters into their own hands. There are currently many young activists, such as Greta Thunberg (16), as well as activist groups like Extinction Rebellion, who are trying to macerate climate politics as we know them and change them for the good of the future. Nevertheless, there remains a tremendously widespread lack of action from the government, and, to a certain extent, the people too. In a world where everything comes to us instantly, people expect more and more from big corporations, including everything from fast food to fast fashion. The clue is in the name, but manufacturing products so quickly and in such vast quantities has a huge toll on the planet.

To have a deeper understanding of the current climate, I interviewed my classmate David. I wanted to get someone else’s outlook, so I asked him a few questions:

make changes], representatives like Elizabeth Warren or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are doing things, namely trying to get new greener deals that will hugely benefit the US ecologically. They’re trying to go carbon neutral in 10 years, but Trump, who has massive power, doesn’t think it’s real. This goes to show it really matters who’s in power, but not enough is being done. What do you think when individuals say ‘one person can’t make a difference?’ Imagine that each of us are a grain of sand. Alone we can’t make anything, but together we can combine to make better things. At first, it seems that you’re alone, but slowly and surely we can rise to create a positive change. An example has already been set, all we need to do now is to follow it, and even start leading ourselves. I hope people can do that. A lot of people have the attitude that it doesn’t affect them specifically, but it affects the whole world, so people should start taking responsibility. Individuals need to start stepping up. How do you personally think the impacts of climate change can be reduced? I think that there are two main types of actions that can be taken: things that you can do as an individual and things that governments can do. Governments obviously have way more power than individuals, but [they] depend on the people to get voted in, so they try and do what they

think people want. I think the government should put things into perspective. Improving infrastructure or focusing on Brexit; they’re just setting deadlines. With climate change, there is no such thing as a deadline. We’ve nearly reached the tipping point. Our [current] government doesn’t take these things into account. They say that we will be carbon neutral by 2050, but they don’t seem to realise that it’s not soon enough. If they don’t start acting soon, like people have been telling them to do, then we’re going to have a really big problem. Personally, I recycle as much as I can, I don’t get fast food and I try to buy items made as responsibly as possible. I also use many energy-saving techniques, such as short showers and using LED bulbs. My biggest fear is that people won’t believe that we’ve gone too far. People should be scared, I don’t think enough people are responding. Over the coming years, a lot of change will face the human race. Many of us find change hard, but everyone on our earth needs to join together to protect it. It’s much easier said than done, and it can sound cheesy when people say things about coming together and uniting, but it’s the truth. Sustainable and reusable solutions need to be found and used in order to keep the beautiful Planet Earth and nature as we know it! David Attenborough once asked, ‘The question is, are we happy to suppose that our grandchildren may never be able to see an elephant except in a picture book?’ Could this be our future?

What are your opinions on the socalled climate crisis? I think we’ve been having a climate crisis for the past couple of years. Before people existed, the planet went through stages such as the Ice Age. It underwent lots of [changes], but the difference is that those changes were natural and these current changes are completely caused by humans. I think there could be another mass extinction if we don’t change things. Do you think enough is being done by people in power to tackle the climate crisis? I think some governments are doing a lot more than others. For example, in the US government, there are people trying [to

Extinction Rebellion Protests in Victoria, London have peaked in number in 2019.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Features GAMES

The Crunch Crisis: The Human Cost Behind Your Favourite Video Games Joshua Jackson investigates the poor work conditions that game developers are regularly subjected to.

aking video games in the current market is becoming a more and more complex and labour intensive process, with customers requiring complexity and content that could make a game last months under the main story, let alone extra features. Take, for example, the most recent game released by Rockstar titled “Red Dead Redemption 2” where the main quest can take 50 hours to complete. Furthermore, if you include all the extra content you can only fully complete the game in about 161 hours. This is a colossal amount of programming, designing and bug testing. All of this content took the developers seven years to compile, involving a team of over 3,000 people. However, this game is a shining example of workers’ rights in the game developing scene with many workers coming out in support of the time they were given by the studio in comparison to previous projects such as Grand Theft Auto V which they were given much less time to complete. Over the past year, workers from studios across the industry have come out to shine light on the terrible working conditions known as the ‘crunch’. These are the last few weeks before a game is set to come out and it has workers pulling 100 hour a week shifts to try and get a game to a decent quality before it hits the shelves. This is mainly composed of small bug fixes and playtesting which have to be conducted extensively to make sure the customers’ experience with the game is as smooth as possible. However, some drastic changes might occasionally be demanded by the higher-ups in the company which could throw the whole system out of balance. Take, for example, Canadian video

Bioware’s game ‘Anthem’ entered the market plagued with problems due to its chaotic development cycle. mal link to the already half developed story. This meant that the title’s relevance had to be shoehorned into the plot. This took focus away from making a game that played well as confused developers were preoccupied with having a game with a coherent theme. EA then forced the game’s early release towards a sea of negative reviews such as a 55 on Metacritic (Bioware’s lowest ever score). This is a common trend with larger studios, who opt to force out an incomplete game on the pre-scheduled date and fix it later with updates and purchasable extra content. Games like ‘Destiny’ and ‘No Man’s Sky’ were released while failing to achieve the promises that were given about their quality and were rampant with bugs and failures. However, since launch, both of

EA forced the games early release towards a sea of negative reviews

game studio Bioware’s newest development ‘Anthem’. Its original name was ‘Beyond’ due to its theme of leaving a futuristic settlement’s walls to explore the outer world. However, Bioware’s parent company, EA, was unable to secure the copyright for such a title so it was changed to ‘Anthem’, a vague title with a very mini-

these games have had major improvements and have been even more successful although this has tainted the image of these companies and any games they produce in the future. This is certain to happen again with ‘Anthem’, as Bioware has promised bug fixes post-release. The ‘crunch’ that these workers have

to undergo to make these drastic fixes and adjustments can lead to poor mental and physical health as announced by many of the employees of the industry. One drastic example of this is Masahiro Sakurai, famous Nintendo Head Developer, during the development of the fighting game ‘Super Smash Brothers Melee’ released in 2001. The game had a 13-month development cycle, as developers were pressured to have the game completed for the release of their new console the ‘Gamecube’ to draw customers in. Sakurai said in a Japanese game magazine column “On a personal level, Melee had an extremely gruelling development cycle, “I worked on that game for 13 months straight, after all, without a single Sunday or holiday off that whole time. During parts of it, I was living a really destructive lifestyle — I’d work for over 40 hours in a row, then go back home to sleep for four.” Thankfully since then Nintendo has eased up on their rigorous schedule and has given developers more time to work on the projects to completion. An example of this is the currently unreleased ‘Animal Crossing’ game for the Nintendo Switch which has been delayed to March 2020 when it was forecast to be released during 2019. A prime theory for the overworking of these game developers is the lack of restrictions and public scrutiny of game studios and the way they treat their workers. With much of the public nowadays spending some of their time playing digital games, there is some fantasy of a videogame developer in the public eye due to how fun these games are to play. Players draw the conclusion that because this game is fun to play, it would be fun to create. However, many

I’d work for over 40 hours in a row, then go back home to sleep for four

people don’t seem to understand the monotony of game developing and just how gruelling it truly can be. Ultimately, this eruption of confessions from developers can only be a good thing. Companies will be called out on these abuses even more and the effects are being felt already with the brutality of mass layoffs in studios such as ‘Telltale Games’ being brought to the spotlight as soon as they happen, instead of fading away as they used to do. Many consumers now understand the cost of these games to the people that make them and the pressure is beginning to ease up upon these developers. Hopefully, this trend continues as this industry grows further.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Features EDUCATION

Are We Being Taught the Wrong Things About GCSEs? G David Hrushovski gets an insight into students’ attitudes about their GCSE exams.

CSEs are one of the biggest steps in English schooling. They are most commonly taken at the end of Year 11, at the age of 16. Throughout the two-year course that students take in preparation for these intense exams, their importance and practical connotations are hammered into their minds nonstop. Getting into a good university, finding a job, and one’s overall quality of life are all perceived to be correlated with GCSE success. With all that in mind, what attitude to students take towards the GCSE subjects that they choose, and the exams in general? To get a legitimate insight, The Martlet interviewed two fourth-year students, Harry Dawson and Rahul Singh, about how GCSEs affect their lives. The first question was a simple one: What GCSEs have you chosen? For Harry, the answer was Spanish, Religious Studies, Geography, and Design Technology; for Rahul, Religious Studies, Geography, and Electronics. Already we can see a pattern; RS is the most chosen non-compulsory subject, and Geography is the third1. What do you want to be when you grow up? This is one of the most common questions to be asked as a child, but for two teenagers it obtained an underwhelming answer. “To be honest, I don’t really know,” was Harry’s reply. “I think I’d quite like to work in the airline industry.” Rahul wasn’t sure either. At first, he said he “quite liked the idea of a lawyer”, but then remembered marine biology, and settled on that. None of the two had a fixed idea of what their future profession was going to be just yet.

when you hear GCSE?

The words nervousness and stress featured in both Harry’s and Rahul’s answers. Anxiety and pressure were the other two, even after I had asked them to think of a more positive angle. Something isn’t right. For an event that’s built-up as much as GCSEs are, the reaction towards them is far too negative. They are portrayed to us as one of the biggest occurrences in our lives, yet the only advantage pupils see to taking them is that they’re the key to finding a job. Not only is a job not everything in life, but most young people don’t know what they want to be at the age of 16, let alone 14. Even if they did, most people statistically change jobs around 12 times in their lifetime; so what good is it to select subject choices so early on? As students get older, learning becomes less for the sake of learning, and more about “is this going to be on the exam?” and “do we need to know this?” As a result, the jubilant excitement that came with one’s first day of school morphs into more of an ongoing routine. If a six-year-old was to choose their GCSEs, they would probably choose subjects that rouse them; but 14 year olds have to factor in what would look good on their CVs, when most don’t even know

Eight and a half hours of your day are taken-up by something you associate with stress, anxiety, and nervousness

what they want to be yet! We’re not sitting our GCSEs for ourselves, but someone else; whoever we’re going to be in ten years’ time. Shouldn’t we be putting our time and energy into what we love doing, rather than what we’re being pressured to do because choosing too many non-academic subjects looks bad? At the same time, unavoidable signs telling us to be ourselves appear all around this school. But it’s hard to be yourself when eight and a half hours of your day are taken-up by something you associate with stress, anxiety, and nervousness. It wouldn’t be right to say that GCSEs are a completely flawed system. Overall,

exams in one form or another are needed in order to evaluate learning. The question is whether they really evaluate learning, or just memorising, rooted in the incessant pressure that’s applied to do well. 86% of Headteachers reported the exams led to sleepless nights among their students, while 40% said they provoked suicidal thoughts. Perhaps, if students were doing subjects that they chose because they had a genuine passion towards them, they would want to study on their own, and this immense pressure would be gone. The problem is that, for some of us, that genuine passion is long gone.

How will your GCSEs help you in life? “I don’t actually know” was the extent of Harry’s answer. The case was the same for Rahul. For all the talk and attention the tests receive, their benefits remain unclear. What can you do if your GCSEs don’t go to plan? How will it alter the path of your life? Harry took the getting a job mindset, stating it would make the task “a lot harder”, due to a lack of qualifications. As for his life, Harry recognised it would be “quite upsetting”, and “hard” to recover. Rahul also immediately thought of the employment implications: “Marine biology needs Geography, Maths, English, and Biology,” he reflected, “so as long as I do well in a few of those...I can just work really hard on the others if I don’t perform in them.” What three words come into your mind

Student Mental Health and the New GCSE System according to a 2018 study by Tes.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Features HEALTH

Why Practice Veganism? Jake Morris investigates into the depths of veganism.

should think that most of us know what veganism is - not using any products derived from animals, including the animals themselves. However, the reasons for one deciding to be a vegan are certainly more complicated. Firstly, a bit of history. Although vegetarianism can be traced all the way back to 3300BC in India, the first known proponent of veganism was Al-Ma’arri. Al-Ma’arri was a blind poet born in 973. Despite controversy regarding his lack of religious views, he is hailed as one of the greatest classical Arabic poets. Although well received in Baghdad, he decided not to sell his works, making it difficult for him to live. He lived a solitary life, and said he was a ‘double prisoner’ of blindness and isolation. Towards the later years of his life he decided to become a vegan,

Vegetarianism can be traced all the way back to 3300BC in India

writing a poem about it, with an extract here: ‘Do not unjustly eat fish the water has given up and do not desire as food the flesh of slaughtered animals, or the white milk of mothers who intended its pure draught for their young, not noble ladies.’ He believed in the sanctity of life and preserving all life.. Another prominent figure, or the prominent figure in the history of veganism, is Donald Watson, who coined the term veganism in 1944. Watson often spent time at his uncle’s farm where he observed the killing of a pig. He completely reassessed his meat eating habits and became a vegetarian, making a New Year’s Resolution at the age of 14 never to eat meat, or fish, again. After several members of the Vegetarian Society approached a newspaper, to write a section on ‘non-dairy vegetarianism’ and were rejected, Watson established The Vegan News, a quarterly newspaper. Watson chose the word vegan himself, saying it marked the beginning and end of vegetarianism. With his wife, and two other friends, Watson set up The Vegan Society. Eventually it became clear than Watson did not stand for the use of animals in any way, not just in diet. Generally between 1%-3% of people practice veganism. Israel has the highest vegan population with 5% of their population choosing to adopt a vegan lifestyle. Some famous vegans include Ariana Grande, Benedict Cumberbatch, Bill Clinton and Venus and Serena Williams. There appear to be three main reasons for becoming a vegan. These first is the

cruelty to animals. Vegetarians and vegans alike will agree that animals should not be killed just to be eaten by us. Despite it generally being done in a humane way, the death of animals is something that is

lots of water. It takes around 7000 litres of water to make a single pound of beef (around 454g!), around 200 times (on average) the amount of water it would take to raise a pound of plant-based foods.

Generally between 1%-3% of people practice veganism

quite disgusting for vegans. Using animals for our own benefit is not something that should happen for them, whether it is for a leather belt or a Sunday roast. Many animal farms try to cram as many animals into their plot of land as possible, especially in the USA. However, even though there are egg, dairy and meat producers claiming that they have the animals run ‘free range’, these foods are actually even worse for the environment, which brings me onto my next point. The second reason is the pollution produced by farming meat for us to eat and the methane that the animals produce. Livestock produce generally is accountable for up to 18% of the greenhouse gases produced in the world. Many people also don’t have access to clean water, and as we go on into the future, we will certainly not have as much. Livestock use

The third reason is the healthy lifestyle that veganism brings. Although it can be dangerous if one doesn’t have a well thought out diet, a vegan diet brings about weight loss due to the smaller fat intake, as there is not just the meat that has been cut out, but the high fat from dairy products as well. Vegans have a much lower risk of some diseases; compared to meat-eaters. Vegans weigh less, have lower cholesterol, and lower blood pressure. They have a 30 per cent lower risk of heart disease, and they have much lower rates of cancer, especially prostate and breast cancer. A vegan diet generally consists of a lot of vegetables, with soya as a main source of protein. After eating one of Greggs finest Vegan Sausage Rolls’, I’m sure I would be happy to convert to veganism...well for some items at least.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Features

Martlet Book Reviews - An Exploration into Geopolitics REVIEWS

im Marshall’s 2016 Prisoners of Geography has been met with much critical acclaim since its initial release in 2016 and subsequent updates. The majority of this praise is wholly justified, as Marshall delivers a ten chapter summary incorporating geopolitics, history and physical geography into a book that provides a bit of something for everyone, as he concisely condenses a myriad of issues and ongoing debates into a comparatively short amount of text. The book’s form is an intriguing one,

Rory Bishop reviews Tim Marshall’s Prisoners of Geography. specific topic where the whole text is not necessary. The chapters focus on specific areas of the world, opening with China, then journeying through the likes of Africa, The Middle East, and Latin America before concluding in the Arctic. One credit to the book is the ten maps it includes. The book’s subtitle promises ‘ten maps that tell you everything you need to know about global politics’ and whilst this may be a degree of marketing hyperbole, the simplicity of the maps are commendable. One might expect a myriad of trade maps, and excessively complicated

The breadth of topics and areas of enquiry allow a greatly accessible text for many

albeit much to its benefit. The chapters are not chronological and are mostly independent of one another. This enables a drop in, drop out book, wherein you can just read any one chapter at a time without being lost, or if one’s focus is on a

pieces of geographical data, however they are but mere atlas pages, highlighting any key features from the chapter. Marshall does cheat himself with the occasional extra map, but this is in no way to the book’s detriment.

A politically aware book, that delves into current issues with great precision depth of geopolitical knowledge.

Despite being published in 2016, the revisions to the book ensure it is current. One such case is that of the Trump administration. Perhaps the most fascinating aspect this highly political background slip in, of Prisoners of Geography is its focus on albeit subtle as he presents ambiguities topography. Geopolitics and history can as complete fact in order to prove a point. only bring one so far, but Marshall’s exIts exploration of history and associated ploration of physical influences on counhistoriographic research are sometimes tries is a unique aspect of this book that lacking and one might prefer to mereis so pertinent to the world we know, but ly pick up a specifically historical text rarely explored in other books. For example, it speaks of how the Himalayas have sculpted Asia politics, and Sino-Indian relations, or how a lack of warm water ports and the North-European Plain have prevented much of Russia’s tangible and trade expansion. This is not to say its geopolitics is lacking however, as it explores world trade over the years, the impacts of global warming, and even Trump in most recent editions of the text. The chapter structure,however, is a fundamental flaw in the book. Although the order makes coherant sense, it does not lend itself to its literary form. By starting the book with Russia, China and the US, Marshall has pigeonholed his most topical and fascinating chapters instead, especially when focusing on before one has even reached page 100. certain areas. On the other hand though, Although highly engaging, this led to a he presents a good entry level text for trailing interest in the book as it proceed- many if you wish to get an introduction ed, as the momentum couldn’t be susinto any one topic. tained and chapters such as that of Korea Prisoners of Geography is a partially and Japan, seemed to falter in compariflawed, but generally strong, piece of son. He does manage to pull it back to a nonfiction which breadth of topics and limited extent with the final chapter on areas of enquiry allow a greatly accessithe Arctic, however, this does not excuse ble text for many. For anyone studying the weaker middle chapters which are any sort of humanities, at any age, it is a bookended by more interesting topics. useful text and resource of reference that The writing is also sometimes weak. can either serve as an introduction or Marshall’s background is impressive, expansion for a topic. Tim Marshall has serving as a BBC correspondent for rightfully earned the considerable prowmany years, however sometimes we see ess this book has brought to him.

The simplicity of the maps are commendable

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Features

Tripping at The Tate POLITICS

Kit Matthews writes a critical review of the Tate Britain’s William Blake exhibiton.

any-headed demons loom titanically, sinners scream in the brimstone fires of hell and a shimmering Tatiana and Oberon prance in ecstatic joy. Exceptionally presented, the Tate’s exhibition portrays the progression of William Blake’s life and art from classical artist to transcendental visionary. His paintings and engravings become increasingly psychedelic until they come to resemble the brainchild of a madman’s acid trip. The Tate Britain’s William Blake: Rebel, Radical, Revolutionary is a grandiose vision, pervaded with the gothic sensuality of his fantastical art. The figures stretch their arms out to the heavens, to their inventor - Blake. It’s potent and often intensely weird. Blake is the product of 18th century ambition and a devotion to his art. As well as being an artist of arresting brilliance he was also a giant of philosophy and literature. Blake was a paragon of the so-called Georgian man; an eccentric workaholic, but was mostly unrecognised during his lifetime. Born in 1757, to a fairly successful shopkeeper in Broad Street, Soho, he began to show artistic promise from a young age and his family indulged his passion by funding his drawing lessons and his training as an apprentice engraver. In 1779 he enrolled at the Royal Academy of Arts, an institution based on a formal and classical artistic education. Despite the fact that Blake was never considered a great artist by his snobbish contemporaries, the Tate refuses to share this assessment in their recent exhibition

in size, however, they provide a window into a vision that is breathtaking in its scale and grandeur. It is ironic that his art explores these immense celestial struggles and grand scenes from myths and legends, however, he is forced to express them in small engravings or in the margins of his illustrated books. Displaying an annoying capability to be brilliant at everything, Blake is not only an exceptional artist but a visionary. His literary work is iconic, from Tyger, Tyger to the poem Jerusalem he has shaped all British culture in the wake of his pen. Having grown up in working class London, he was an artist of the people, noble in his philosophical ideals and nevertheless retaining a heretic faith in humanity. His life spanned over a exceptionally turbulent era in British history and Blake’s art often covers topics such as Slavery, The American Revolution and the war with France. But most importantly, he understood the struggle of school, and I find that his poem The Schoolboy hits the nail on the head;

Towards the end of his life Blake reportendly experienced insane visions.

“But to go to school in a summer morn, O it drives all joy away! Under a cruel eye outworn, The little ones spend the day In sighing and dismay” After seeing the exhibition at the Tate packed full of crowds of elderly critics all jostling and glaring angrily at each other, I developed an intense respect for the artist. Even though he passed unnoticed in his time, he is London’s 18th century rock-

Shaped all British culture in the wake of his pen

of his work. One of the most striking paradoxes of Blake’s art is the stark contrast between the grandeur of his vision and the modesty of the media with which he is forced to work. Blake is an artist who transcends beyond the frames of his pictures. His small engravings and illustrations often measure no more than a few centimetres

star, his art is modern and has a hair-raising quality to it. The most poignant aspect perhaps is that you realise, as a viewer, that in depicting these mythological stories and hallucinogenic scenes he is reflecting our inner psyche. All those twisted horrors and temptations reside within us, making Blake’s work raw and human.

Blake was a passionate opposer to the slave trade.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Features

What Constitutes Art? ART

David Hrushovski explores the different ideas surrounding what art actually is.

rt is everything. It is painting, film, literature, sports… and so much more. Everything that someone does can be considered art, and everything that is art can speak to different people. However, the visual arts are the type most widely known as “art”, painting, ceramics, photography and so on. But, how can we tell what is what? Why is a painting art, when a random scribble isn’t? Where should we draw the line between art, and ‘not art’? The main thing that constitutes art is the motivation that lies behind it. For example, if someone poured all of their energy into a painting which took them years to complete, they are an artist. It could be that no-one likes their work, or that in never catches even the slightest bit of attention but, if they occupied themselves with making a piece of art for what could be years, a piece of art is what they made. Alternatively, someone could have spent five seconds hurriedly scribbling some-

thing down, and forgotten all about it then, when their scribble was discovered, attach some form of meaning to it. Even if they do make millions and millions from this, they will not be making money from art, but from a made-up scheme. So, not only does the motivation define art, but the reaction being sought does as well. Over the years, art has developed so much that the grounds on which we judge it has to change. For example, Suprematist Composition by Kazimir Malevich and Ilya Chashnik sold for £65.43 million in New York in 2018, 102 years after its creation! It took so long for the painting to sell for this much, as in today’s artistic climate not only are people much more open to various different styles of art, but there are more people willing to spend such large amounts of money on it. In older days, pieces may have been dismissed on religious, personal, or scientific grounds, which could practically ruin the chances of a painting selling. Now, however, there

Suprematist Composition (1916) is a type of geometric abstraction and nontraditional form of art.

is such a wide market that anyone can back anything up with their own personal opinion and make a case for any art, especially with the internet giving so many people a newfound voice. In the past, many criteria have been placed on the definition of art. Plato developed the Mimesis theory, which states we can judge art by how well it replicates what it is trying to show or, how well we can understand what it is. However, with the cultural rise not only of modern art, but also of art carrying a much vaguer meaning, this fails to capture the entirety of the artistic universe. The fact is, artists like Joan Miro and Picasso saw wide success even though some of their art was abstract - it didn’t recreate anything, or meticulously trace something out for it to be realistic. A different approach to evaluating art is the Expression Theory. According to this, art gains its credit with the reaction it gets, essentially the more it makes someone feel, the better it is. This solves the issue of the Mimesis theory, as the art isn’t judged based on its content, but on its response, it doesn’t matter what you produce, as long as people like it. However, this raises on more problem - what if no-one sees your art? Or, even worse, what if no-one appreciates it? It

could be that, like Malevich and Chashnik’s composition, it takes over a century for what you made to be fully appreciated. This is the problem with judging art based on public response, people change, but a work of art doesn’t. So, another way of assessing art was put forward. The theory of Form, developed by many people, including Immanuel Kant, says that a piece of art should be judged on its formal qualities not the response given to it. This is a good way of judging art, as every technical part of it is broken down and evaluated individually. However, this is again quite subjective, it’s fine to judge something based on its qualities, but who’s to say if these qualities are good or bad? It is indeed very difficult to evaluate art, and each method of doing so has its positive and negative attributes. If each piece of art was assessed using every single method and criteria, it could be said that it was judged fully. However, it’s so hard to do this, especially with more and more works of art being made each and every day. In the end, what constitutes art is the story behind it; the motivation, the context, the meaning… that make it what it is. If we could all see the good in art, and not dismiss it, the world would truly thrive as a place of creation.

Salvator Mundi (1490-1500) is the most expensive painting in the world, and is worth 5 times more than Suprematist Composition. Even though art-types have progressed, this shows that what was relevant before still is relevant today.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Sport FORMULA ONE

New Tracks, New Drivers, New Speeds

Ted Woodfin looks into the next season of formula one racing and all its changes.

s the 2019 F1 season comes to a close it’s time to look towards the new 2020 season and all its rule changes, drivers and tracks. The main news for next season is the two new Grand Prixs in the calendar. These are Vietnam and the old returning favourite, the Dutch track Zandvoort, which saw historic moments such as the great James Hunt claim his maiden F1 win in 1975. There is also the ongoing battle for seats in all ten teams, which raises the question; will the drivers be safe or are we going to see a few new faces on the grid? The Formula One calendar is currently made up of twenty tracks, all of which throw different challenges at the drivers, but next season we are going to see two new tracks. The first of these is a new street circuit with long straights, looping bends and a sharp hairpin, which will push the teams power units to an extreme. The Hanoi Circuit in Vietnam will force teams to rethink their aerodynamics and strategies to make the most of one of F1’s largest straights, at one and a half kilometers long. This will make the race one of the most interesting as we will see qualifying stalemates and team orders as everyone tries to get their cars the quickest times around a track that relies heavily on a slipstream. The second of these circuits is a returning track where the Formula One saw the best of the best go wheel to wheel. Previously, drivers like Niki Lauda, Alain Prost and Mario Andretti pushed the tracks to its limits. Zandvoort will be a track full of overtake opportunities and will allow aggressive drivers

to its absolute limit. Formula One is the pinnacle of motorsport where only the best twenty drivers in the world race, which means that seats are highly sort after and young racers from all over the world are competing to knock the current drivers off their perch. During the 2019 season we saw some drastic changes to teams, such as the transfer of Kimi Raikkonen one of the sports favourite, from Ferrari to Alfa Romeo. We also saw some new faces in the likes of Alex Albon, Lando Norris and George Russel. But as the sport grows, teams are being given more options which means the 2020 line up has the potential to be completely different. So here’s a look at what could be the 2020 grid. Starting off with one of the English based teams, Red Bull, their driver line up is currently Max Verstappen and Alex Albon. Alex has only had half a season to show the team what he can do but the pressure on him was huge. Red Bull have made it very clear that they’re not scared of change as we saw them drop Pierre Gasly after just 12 races. Furthermore, there is also speculation that Sebastian Vettel might move back to Red Bull in his last years of racing. This would force Alex back down into Toro Rosso, Red Bull’s junior team, and put him back where he began. The potential departure of Sebastian Vettel from Ferrari would leave one of the most prestigious seats in the F1 up for grabs. However, there are only a few contenders who are really worthy of this title, the number one driver for this spot would be Daniel Ric-

Sabastien Vettle takes Red Bulls first ever win in the 2009 Chinese Grand prix. such as rookie Alex Albon and veteran Daniel Riccardo to showcase their late braking and entertain the grand stands. The Dutch Grand Prix will be the 12th race on the 2020 calendar which means all the teams will have had their first upgrades and will be stretching the track

cardo, who has a contract with Renault for a few more years, but in his contract it states that if a seat in Ferrari opens up he is entitled to go for it. However, Ferrari have the option to bring in the young super star Mick Schumacher from their Formula Two team. The change of

Opening lap incident at the 1978 Dutch GrandPrix. Sebastian Vettel would cause disruption in the F1 paddock, but give huge opportunities to a young driver. Renault are a team to watch out for next season as they are adding Esteban Ocon to their driver pair. Estaban has a huge rivalry with Max Verstappen, of which we saw

The modern day F1 cars are some of the most technologically developed machines in the world, which raises the questions to fans is the racing too easy for drivers? Well for 2020 the FIA, the heads of Formula One have decided to give the drivers a bit more responsibility. They

Formula One is the pinnacle of motorsport

the full rath of in Brazil 2018, when Estaban tried to unlap himself and as a result spun out Max who was the race leader, Max went on to finish second as a result. For the rest of the 2018 season the two drivers battled but Max had a huge advantage with his superior Red Bull. In 2020, however, Ocon will be in the agile and powerful Renault making it a level playing field. The arrival of Estaban will mean the departure of Nico Hulkenberg, who is a strong personality in the F1 and will be fighting desperately to confirm a spot in 2020. Robert Kubica is also out of his team Williams and is unlikely to make another team for 2020, which means his racing partner George Russel will likely see either Nico Hulkenberg or even a fresh face from F2 in the car next to him. There is only one other driver in the F1 who is at threat and that is the young Italian, Antonio Giovinazzi who races for Alfa Romeo a team with lots of academies and therefore lots of young talents who are eager to get themselves into the sport.

have done this by spicing up the race starts and adjusting the cars clutch management systems, meaning that instead of the car launching off heavily on its own the drivers have to be switched on, with their gear changes and their timing of the clutch. The FIA are also making sure that both shift paddles are identical and do the same job. There is also a debate going on about whether or not to allow two clutch paddles which makes gear changing faster and easier. Finally, to reduce teams advantages in races, the stewards will check that there is no additional fuel storage in the cars, which the drivers switch to towards the end of the race to gain an advantage. The 2020 F1 season will be one of the most exciting in recent years. Driver changes, new tracks and new rules ensure that this is going to be 26 races of new tactics and a whole new style of racing. So buckle up for the whirlwind of racing next year.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Sport CRICKET

What Happened to England in The Ashes? Ben Lisemore reviews where the Ashes went wrong for England this Summer.

ny cricket fan would have enjoyed the offering this Summer. England’s summer started off very well when Ben Stokes led England to World Cup success in the one day format with his memorable performance, helping England to tie the final twice but in the end winning on boundaries scored. The Ashes then followed and didn’t treat England as well as despite tying the series Australia retained the urn as they won the previous tournament in 2017. So, what went wrong this Summer and what needs to change before England play test series against New Zealand and South Africa this Winter with new coach, Chris Siverwood in control? England kicked off their attempt to win back the Ashes this summer at Edgbaston. Australia won the toss and decided to bat first opening with the duo of Warner and Bancroft who received a hostile welcome from the England fans after the ball tampering scandal in 2018. Warner went early for two getting trapped LBW to Stuart Broad, which was a recurring theme this Summer as Broad dismissed Warner seven times in the series. But Australia quickly recovered with Steve Smith, another man who received a ‘nice’ reception when entering the crease, but he let his bat do the talking and scored a superb 144 to guide his side to a total

of 284. England responded well as Rory Burns, who would end up batting on every day of the first test, top scored with 133 as England scored 374. Australia went even better as they scored 487, Smith with his second century of the match. England required 397 to win but fell 251 runs short as Nathon Lyon (‘Gary’) took six wickets. The first test proving that England felt the pressure and were unable to deal with a tricky spinner making the ball do lots on an old fifth day pitch. Moeen Ali was a man who struggled to find his form and

ning but rain and Marnus Labuschange, in as Smith sustained a concussion from the bowling of Jofra Archer, stopped them. The first day was completely washed out without a ball bowled meaning the toss took place on the second day in which Australia won again this time electing to bowl. England batted for most of the day before getting a chance to make a break through late on and take some early Aussie wickets. The breakthrough came in the evening, when Broad swung one into Warner and he played and missed

Ben Stokes gave a sense of déjà vu as he masterminded his way to a superb 135 not out did not feature again in the series. Jimmy Anderson would not feature again in the series either as a calf injury sustained before the series meant he only bowled four overs in the first test. The second test, at Lords, was much tighter and England came close to win-

Ben Stokes guided Engand to victory in the third test.

and the ball tickled the bails and Warner was gone. The morning session on the next day was very favorable to England as they picked up another three wickets Jofra Archer getting his first as he came in to replace Anderson. England fans would have been looking forward to their Lunch

after a thrilling first session, only for the heavens to open again and cause the umpires to decide that there shouldn’t be another ball bowled in the day. The Aussies started the fourth day strongly which was inevitable with Smith at the crease and by lunch had added a fair amount of runs to their total with the loss of only one wicket. After lunch Smith continued but was seemingly stopped short of another century when Archer struck him on the helmet. Smith left the field but was soon back when Australia looked like they did not have anymore batsmen to come. He entered the field and played like nothing was wrong and was stopped eight short of his third century in just as many innings. England were back in, in the evening and had a lead of eight which was not well defended as Jason Roy went cheaply with a leading edge, before captain Joe Root went the ball after getting caught behind. Denly and Burns soon followed and by the time England were four down they had a lead of a mere 79. Day five looked a daunting task if England wanted to win. They had to create a reasonable target before bowling Australia all out in order to win the match. In the end this proved too difficult and the match finished as a draw with England left wondering if they had more time could they have tied the series up.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Four days later and the teams were back, this time at Headingley, but the biggest change was the Aussies were without their star man Steve Smith after he had a concussion. What followed was one of the greatesr Test matches ever. Ben Stokes strolled into the crease in the evening session on the third day with his side requiring 218 runs to tie up the series and prevent Australia from retaining the Ashes, as at the very least England could only draw the series if they didn’t win this one. Time was not the issue just wickets as England had succumbed to Australia in the first innings scoring only 67 before getting all out which made Australia’s 179 in their first innings look a good score. So when Root went early and others soon followed it looked as though England were down and out. But one man stuck around. Ben Stokes gave a sense of déjà vu as he masterminded his way to a superb 135 not out to win England the third test, playing more like a T20 player towards the end. He was the one man when others went to show the determination to see his side through and give England a fighting chance. Stokes got all the headlines but credit must go to Jack Leach batting at number 11. When he entered the crease, with England requiring 76 runs to win, looking more like Where’s Wally than an England batsman people feared the worst. But he stuck around and allowed Ben Stokes to score freely at the other end, without looking nervous at all. He also created one of the most iconic sporting moments when cleaning his glasses before facing 90mph Pat Cummins and scoring one of the greatest one not outs. So the heroics of Ben Stokes, just like in the World Cup, saw England across the line and made sure England could still secure the urn so long as Australia didn’t win either of the remaining tests. This set up a finely poised fourth test at Old Trafford as if Australia won, they

hadn’t won the series yet but they would retain the ashes and if England won they would take it into the final test. Both sides made changes the most noticeable was the return of the Australian magician Steve Smith, whilst England welcomed the return of Craig Overton, and Jason Roy moved down to bat at number four in a hope to find his form. Smith was back and it was as if nothing had changed as he scored 211, which along with Marnus Labucschagne’s 67 guided the tourists to just shy of 500 before declaring. England’s response was good but not quite good enough as they were still 200 runs behind their opponents. The australian response was short and sharp, they reached 186 before declaring, Smith making 82 which looked like not much compared to the

bat out the fifth day and try and set up a deciding test at the Oval. However, this proved too difficult and not much of a fight to survive was put up as England were dismissed for 197. This meant England hadn’t lost the series but they had not won back the Ashes on home soil which was extremely disappointing for everyone involved. The Aussies were delighted as they had won the ashes in England for the first time since 2001 and had not only beaten them but crushed them in front of their own supporters. The fifth test was just being paid for pride as England wanted to not lose the series and try and put in a team performance to be proud of. They were successful as they batted solidly and the bowlers backed it up as they never once gave Aus-

A pretty dismal series in truth

rest of the series. England required 383 to keep their chances of winning back the Ashes alive but that seemed to be evaporating from their sights. Rory Burns went without making score in the evening session of the fourth day playing a very loose shot. Joe Root walked to the crease and England fans thought their captain was going to rally his troops and be an inspiration to win back the Ashes. What followed was the complete opposite when Root picked up his second golden duck of the series as Cummins cleaned up his off stump, sparking Autralian jubilation. England’s more realistic aim was to just

New coach Chris Silverwood with bowler Jimmy Anderson.

tralia the lead. Sam Curran was finally included in the eleven lotsts of people arguing it was one too many tests too late. One of the big surprises was restricting Smith to his lowest two scores of the series of 23 and 80, any batsmen would be proud to have those as their lowest scores in eight innings. England retained some sort of pride as they managed to beat the tourists fairly convincingly even with Smith playing,even with Smith playing. This gave supporters some sort of good feeling after what was a pretty dismal series in truth as England struggled to get going, didn’t know how to use lots of players and found

lots of payers to be out of form. England head South this summer to New Zealand and South Africa with a new man in charge. Chris Silverwood was the fast bowling coach under Trevor Bayliss for the best part of two years and has now been promoted to try and continue the good from the one day side but also revitalise the Test side. England struggled in the Ashes this Summer as they weren’t sure how best to use the players at their disposal. One example of this was Jason Roy who certainly proved he wasn’t a test opener. England have selected to young openers for this Winter in Dom Sibley and Zak Crawey who both performed well in the County Championship this Summer. England were also without leading wicket taker Jimmy Anderson whose Ashes experience alongside Broad and Archer, who were in good form would have created a bowling attack to almost match that of Australia’s. England need to find a batting line up they can stick to this Winter and need to show that under Silverwood they are a team who can be considered as a force to be reckoned with. They need to get back to the glory days of dominating Ashes series at home and being very competitive when they go down under. No matter what England didn’t do this Summer they can’t deny how good Australia were. The bowling fierce, the batting a masterclass. Through all this was there was one man who shone, Steven Peter Devereux Smith was a thorn in the England side with a batting average of 110 and England just had no idea what to do, the only way to get him to leave the crease was to give him a bouncer to the head and even then he came bounding back to the crease like a warrior. England were relieved to see the back of him and will be glad this Winter that they don’t have to keep asking the question, how do you get Steve Smith out?

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Sport FOOTBALL

The Growth of Football Clubs Alongside Their Cities Charlie Britton investigates the roots and history of our beloved football clubs.

s recorded by a monk in the 9th century, every Shrove Tuesday, the local youth went out to play “at the famous game of ball”. Since these humble beginnings football has exploded in terms of popularity, participation and investment. This has seen it blossom into the foremost monoculture of our society, a shared language throughout the world. However, we rarely get a chance to investigate how these prestigious and influential clubs arrive at the forefront of our consciousness, through workers unions, railway workers or shady Russian billionaires. Football continued to attract hordes of fans and players throughout early Medieval and Tudor history. This led to a host of problems such as the inability to properly officiate matches (examples include a player in 1321 dying from running into a sheathed blade). This was remedied by the crown issuing a statement banning peasants from playing football. As the centuries progressed members of the richer aristocracy began to organise matches, with prizes available, in order to promote a happier workforce. Rules we recognise today began to emerge in public schools during the 18th century. Cambridge University produced a revised set of rules in 1863 and the game we love began to come together. Two notable types of centre for the emergence of clubs were beginning to take shape, areas with lots of industrial work-force and large educational centres. Amateur clubs grew up in neighbourhoods with prominent factories, churches and intense local loyalty (Liverpool alone had more than 100 clubs in the 1880’s). Because the games were played out near the factories with which they were associated, they attracted large partisan crowds and the nascent growth of fierce rivalries, that often defined cities, became apparent. Northern cities such as Sheffield and Liverpool experienced the fiercest of club rivalries that still split these cities to this day. With games attracting larger and larger crowds and teams becoming increasingly hungry for success, the drive towards professionalism grew. Teams began to recruit players from far afield in order to compete in cups. Tottenham Hotspur won the cup in 1901 with no local players at all. Professional football players were paid a maximum annual salary of £400, significantly larger than

that of the average worker, and they began to be seen as working-class heroes. The growth towards what we recognise as football today was boosted due to factors such as: demands for more news spawning sports newspapers; the growth of the cigarette trade, boosted by the cult of the cigarette card and the exponential growth of gambling. However, the ‘English Disease’ continued to plague the game at home and internationally. From the 1960s English clubs gained a reputation for hooliganism. Since the disasters of the 80s and 90s this has been widely cracked down on by the government. The introduction of crowd separation was sparked by two main events in 1973. With Manchester United having been relegated to the second division, their hooligan firm,’The Red Army’, wreaked havoc all over the grounds of the teams they played that season. In another event a Bolton Wanderers fan stabbed a young Blackpool fan killing him during a match. Millwall, notorious for hooliganism, had a fullscale riot at a game against Ipswich in 1978. In March 1985, they were involved in more rioting in a match against Luton, prompting Margaret Thatcher to call a ‘War Cabinet’ against hooliganism in football. The nadir of hooliganism came when English clubs were blanket banned from all European competitions from 1985-90 after 39 Juventus

A football match in 1954. sborough standing out as a particular tragedy for Liverpudlians. The recent unpredictability and excitement of the Premier League has led to high viewing figures and, as a result, an unbelievably large new TV deal was agreed. English teams therefore gained access to huge new spending power. In fact, the Championship playoff final,

39 Juventus fans were murdered, crushed to death in their own stadium fans were murdered and crushed to death in their own stadium after Liverpool fans broke through the police line. Even more damningly, it was the family section of the Juventus stand that the Liverpool fans charged, the ‘ultras’ were at the other end of the ground. 26 Liverpool fans were charged with manslaughter. After roughly 20 years of good behaviour, hooliganism restarted when Millwall, yet again, clashed with West Ham in 2009, leading to rioting in the streets. These incidents of hooliganism have scarred the respective clubs and people they represent, with Hill-

where the winner is promoted to the Premier League, has the highest cash prize of any competition in world football. This has led to exorbitant spending from the clubs with Deloitte predicting that English clubs’ spending would one day surpass £2 billion in one transfer window. This has been called an unfair advantage by European clubs, suddenly finding themselves massively disadvantaged when competing for players’ signatures. This is perhaps a fair accusation, after all, the finalists in UEFA’s two main competitions this season were English. The other side of the argument is

the possibility that European clubs raise their asking price for a player when an English club comes round to buy, knowing they have the money to buy them anyway. The result of all this is to leave many traditional supporters out of touch with their local clubs; it is harder to emulate your working class hero when you don’t know him, don’t speak the same language and he is earning more in a season than you can expect to earn in a lifetime. This disconnect hits fans even more, now that very few clubs are owned and run by supporters boards, but rather by large foreign conglomerates and trans-national companies with less devotion to local support, raising prices for tickets and making it harder to travel to games. Football clubs have grown alongside their cities. Through their humble beginnings they have been supported loyally by generations of fans. Even through the worst of the hooliganism and socio-economic downturn, they have turned up in their thousands to support their clubs through thick and thin. These clubs have come to represent the identities of the city, and as such club and city are symbiotically linked, yet rocketing ticket prices have led to a more artificial and less partisan fan base. How this will affect the cities they live in and the many grassroots schemes that depend on the goodwill of the clubs is yet to be seen.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Sport

Liverpool’s Slow Climb to the Top of the Table FOOTBALL

Rahul Singh analyses Liverpool’s recent Champions League success.

iverpool’s last season in the Champions League was a very disappointing ending as they lost 3-1 to Real Madrid in the final due to a couple of mistakes from the Liverpool keeper Loris Karius. However Jurgen Klopp led his team, to bounce back from that disappointment and win the champions league with some hugely entertaining matches and some truly incredible victories on the way. It all started in the group stages when they beat PSG 3-2 with a last minute goal, starting the tournament perfectly. They then lost against Napoli, before thrashing Red Star Belgrade then later losing to them in the next game. They then lost against PSG and it was all down to the last game in the group stage against Napoli which they had to win if they wanted to qualify. They just about managed to beat Napoli after a great last minute save from Allison squeezing their way through. The game had a bumpy start with a close scare of being knocked out in the group stage, but they managed to get through to create a story that will never be forgotten. In fairness, Liverpool were very lucky to make it through the group stages, as there were two matches that they should have drawn, if it wasn’t for their last minute goal and last minute save. It was a great thing that they got

through as they made a wonderful story and as Liverpool were voted in the top ten most passionate fans, according to a vote done a year ago. This really did mean a lot to the fans and what had to come later on meant even more. After a 0-0 draw at Anfield in the round of 16 Liverpool managed to change their tactics to create a breakthrough in the second leg with a 3-1 win. They were very lucky to get a rather easy quarter final compared to the other teams against Porto. It was a very comfortable win with the score being 6-1, after 2 legs. Next came the semi-final. This was the biggest match Liverpool had to play so far. They made it even bigger with their incredible come back that they somehow managed to pull off. After the first leg against Barcelona Liverpool were 3-0 down. They didn’t deserve to be 3-0 down however. The goals were fair but Liverpool did have quite a few chances in the second half of the match. Liverpool did deserve a goal or two, but in the last few minutes Barcelona had a two on one to seal the game but they shot straight at the keeper and so it ended in 3-0 in the first leg. The second leg was a real thriller with many things to talk about. It started with a simple tap in for Divock Origi. Liverpool had to defend strong for the whole game if they wanted to keep up with the phenomenal Barcelona attack,

which is exactly what they did. No more goals came for the rest of the half but Liverpool were still doing everything they could to pile on the pressure. That is one of the amazing things about Liverpool, they are a team who never give up, which is how they have managed so many incredible comebacks. The second half started and Liverpool knew they needed goals.

Liverpool were very lucky to make it through the group stages

Georginio Wijnaldum rattled in two great goals in two minutes and they were back on level terms. If Liverpool were to concede, then two goals more would be needed to go through as the

team with the most away goals would wins. So a very important factor was not to let in a goal. They did this very well and the fourth goal came with excellent vision from the 20 year old, Trent Alexander-Arnold. He was walking away from the corner so another player could take it, but he suddenly ran back and crossed the ball into Divock Origi who completed the sensational comeback with a clinical finish into the top left hand corner. That then completed one of the best comebacks in Europe’s history. It was all down to what happened in the final to see if all of their hard work would pay off. The final was against Tottenham. Mo Salah scored a penalty in the opening few minutes of the match giving Liverpool the exact start they needed. There wasn’t very much action in the final, until Dicock Origi sealed the win in the 87th minute making it 2-0. Many described the final as a very boring match, which was most likely because of the skyrocketing temperatures. It was over 30 degrees and it seemed as if the players were struggling to run much in the extreme heat. But nonetheless the road to the final surely made up for the rather slow final. It was by no shadow of a doubt an easy road for Liverpool but with their dedication and hard work they managed to achieve something truly incredible.

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Humour

Maggie’s Muddles ADVICE

Lachlan Jones talks to a dog.

Dear Maggie, I come to you in my darkest hour. Abingdon is proving a tumultuous environment, in more ways than one. The back-stabbing between candidates and supporters in the run-up to the eagerly anticipated Mock General Election is proving divisive to say the least, and I cannot seem to align myself within these party groups in an already polarised school environment. It seems an unfortunate time of year for this pressure and national crisis (without even mentioning the B word), when attention should be shifting toward Secret Santa events and tasteful houseroom decorations. Indeed, these distractions are equally as bad for the teachers’ pantomime (assuming it’s not mothballed due to lack of enthusiastic cast members), as the goodwill and humour of this festive time will undoubtedly be detracted. What light can I see in the dark days ahead? Regards, Disheartened 6th former

Dearest 6th former, Try not to be woeful at the current political climate, both at a national and school level. If these matters cause you such concern, simply fill your mind with less demanding pastimes such as sports or drama (although the clock until you’re allowed to vote is ticking…). I personally would advocate a trip north to the Highlands while you can. Things may soon become much more tricky. On a sunnier note, there are naturally many school festivities you can busy yourself with, such as inter-house sports (touch rugby in the rain anyone?) and hopefully a warzone of a snowball fight on Upper Field. Keep focusing on your A levels naturally, and don’t let all this politics get to your head. Despite my renowned impartiality, you might want to advise your parents carefully on who to vote for in the near future. The loss of this institution of a school may put me out of a job, if a certain Leader of the Opposition has his way. Forgive me, it’s been a long term. Please don’t let this rant stop your letters; I have little else to ponder over on these long nights. With warmest wishes, Maggie

THE MARTLET MICHAELMAS ISSUE 20

Puzzle

Cryptic Crossword ADVICE

Ed Gill challenges readers to his latest Cryptic Crossword. Answers on left hand page.

Across

Down

1) Giving the go ahead to stir oaky gin (7) 5) One enveloped by rage becomes phantom (7) 8) Two of the French after UK / English’s instrument (7) 9) Allow what was nearly a fault (3) 10) Pass on pigment (so it sounds) (3) 11) Kelvin has drink made from vegetable (4) 13) Run abroad (7) 14) Beginnings of inaudible groan in quiet exhalation (4) 17) Children’s author on a first name basis swivels round to tuck in (4) 21) Observe cushion; perhaps somewhere to write this down (7) 22) Skilled turnaround of Mediterranean island (4) 23) Choose to place hotpot evenly (3) 24) Boy/Girl resembles dung (3) 25) Bruise across one becomes less dark and matte (7) 26) Two males and one who acts like them (6) 27) American exam trimmed; ruined (7)

1) Exclamation of Scottish king’s wife is to spout demand madly (3,6,4) 2) Fluid humour, say (7) 3) Downfall of a great ship found in a cheeseburger? (7) 4) Oil of Mediterranean country, so to speak (6) 5) Sounds like poor finale to a couple of days (7) 6) One thrown off of walkway to archipelago (4) 7) Success? Music of boy with backwards maxim to reach all time low (3,4,6) 12) Claim on property gets Nile redirected (4) 15) At first, Iain amazingly met big foot (4) 16) Road’s coated with syrup, in truth (7) 18) Suggested that brat told a fib (7) 19) Back in a building if we’re to believe our ears (7) 20) Entrance into part of heart (6) 22) Particle starts to absorb two other molecules (4)

The

{Protest}

Quiz

With younger and younger people taking the lead in protests for causes as diverse as road crossings to climate change, how well do you know what is going on in the world of protest? Quiz by Josh Li

1. What name was given to the mass walkout by stu- 8. What slogan did the Liberal Democrat party use to dents across the UK in protest at the lack of action on broadcast their policies during the European Elections? climate change? 9. What clothing item was worn by protesters in France 2. In which southern US state were mass protests against during their anti fuel tax demonstrations? a Pro-life law being signed by their governor? 10. What are the colours commonly seen on posters and 3. What dairy product was frequently lobbed at conser- pictures representing the Hong Kong protests? vative politicians during the build up to the European 11. Where did protestors gather before marching through elections? central London to rally against US president Donald 4. In which UK city were there demonstrations outside Trump? primary schools against the teaching of LGBTQ relation12. What was the main demand of the recent protests in ships in the classroom? Sudan? 5. After the Christchurch shootings, a right wing Australian senator was involved in an altercation with a teenag- 13. What was the Russian Government’s final decision er during an interview which went viral, what name did regarding Ivan Golunov? the internet christen this teen? 14.Russia and China recognise one Venezuelan leader as 6. During the 2019 Eurovision song contest, what did President while the US and more than 50 countries recthe anti establishment Iceland performers unexpectedly ognise another leader as its President. Who are the two leaders battling for power and international recognition? hold up live on air to protest to the host nation? 7. During the 2014 Hong Kong protests, what common 15. In 1936, 200 men marched on London to petition the government about poverty and mass unemployment in household item became their symbol? the North East. Where did they March from?

PUBLISHERS Emma Williamson Julia Preston EDITOR Samuel King DEPUTY EDITOR Rory Bishop PUBLICATIONS EDITOR Sam Penrose NEWS EDITOR Johan Nerlov

FEATURES EDITOR Lachlan Jones SPORTS EDITOR Ben Lisemore DESIGN EDITORS Sam Penrose Rory Bishop Matthew Viner

STAFF WRITERS Samuel King Rory Bishop Johan Nerlov Lachlan Jones Ian Ip Nicholas Ko Jack Ward Harry Dawson Nicholas Chan Sam Corbett

Joshua Jackson David Hrushovski Jake Morris Kit Matthews Ted Woodﬁn Ben Lisemore Charlie Britton Rahul Singh Ed Gill Josh Li

ONLINE SUPERVISORS

Rory Bishop Sam Penrose Samuel King

Printed by the Newspaper Club Initial design by Asten Yeo

1: The Extinction Rebellion 2: Alabama 3: Milkshake 4: Birmingham 5: Egg Boy 6: Palestinian flag 7: Umbrella 8: ‘Bollocks to Brexit’

9: Yellow vest 10: Black and white 11: Trafalgar Square 12: A civilian rule 13: They released him 14: Nicolás Maduro and Juan Guaidó 15: Jarrow