stateless

No place like home – what becomes of the stateless?

The UN estimates that there are at least 12 million stateless people in the world today. In the past 6 months, I’ve met at least three of them. Prior to this, I admit, I was largely unaware of the peculiarly crippling nature of their existence. Without basic identity documents, many doors simply remained closed to you. Think about how many times you have been required to ‘bring identification’ for anything from joining the library to booking a flight or opening a bank account. For the stateless, all of these are difficult, if not impossible.   

Statelessness affects those living in both wealthy and poverty-stricken nations. I spoke with two Syrian refugees now living here in the Netherlands whose families were originally from Palestine. However, two or three generations later, they are no  closer to Syrian nationality. In the case of ballet dancer, Ahmad Joudeh, who now lives in Amsterdam, his mother is Syrian but this does not entitle him to Syrian nationality. A number of countries in the Middle East and North Africa, discriminate against a woman’s right to confer nationality on her child. So Ahmad and his siblings grew up in a Palestinian refugee camp in Damascus.

‘If I get a nationality in my life, it will be Dutch.’ – Ahmad Joudeh

Now living in the Netherlands, he has begun the process of acquiring Dutch citizenship. This will take at least 5 years, during which time he is unable to travel to countries like the US and the UK. This in spite of the fact that he has received numerous requests to perform  in these countries. His attitude is philosophical; ‘If I get a nationality in my life, it will be Dutch.’ But admits that ‘I hope these doors will still be open to me when I am finally able to travel’.

Patrick Ocen from Uganda is a former child soldier. Now twenty-four years old, he visited the Hague last week, where he spoke about his situation and that of many like him. Describing himself as ‘a child of war’ he explains how he was born to a teenage mother, a victim of rape, during the brutal twenty year rebel insurgency by the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) in Uganda. Starting in the north of the country, the LRA became notorious for child abductions. A UNICEF report estimates that almost 20 000 children were forcefully recruited during the 19 year conflict.

For someone like Patrick, whose mother died before he was five and whose father will forever remain unknown to him, a birth certificate was never issued. When he was finally released by the rebels, he found it extremely difficult to gain access to education or aid of any kind because of a lack of documentation. He tells us that some like him, are not even able to establish in which country they were born, as the rebel forces also had camps in Sudan. This further complicates their situation and is used as a basis for denial of citizenship.

The #IBELONG Campaign aims to end statelessness by 2024.

The issue of statelessness is not new. In 1954 and 1961, Statelessness Conventions were held in an effort to encourage nations to address the problem. In 2011, to mark the 50th anniversary of the Reduction of Statelessness Convention (1961), there was another push for more countries to sign up to this convention. Most recently, the #IBELONG Campaign was begun in 2014 with the goal of ending statelessness by 2024. A noble aim that is proving difficult to achieve.

The majority of statelessness people were born in the countries in which they have lived their entire lives. This means that apart from war and resulting changes in territorial borders there are entrenched legal practices that perpetuate this problem. The issue of nationality is one. Some countries confer nationality according to place of birth, others according to lineage. For countries like the Netherlands for example, a child gains nationality from his/her mother or father. This means that even if you are born and grow up in the Netherlands, you are not necessarily entitled to Dutch nationality. The law in 25 countries around the world does not allow women to confer nationality on their child. Again, this causes problems if the father is stateless, unknown, missing or deceased.  

Statelessness continues to be used as a political tool.

Statelessness also continues to be used as a political tool to discriminate on the grounds of ethnicity, religion and even sexuality. In India’s eastern Assam province, almost two million people were left off the National Register of Citizens in August of this year. Many of them are originally Muslim refugees from neighbouring Bangladesh but have lived in India for decades. In order to ‘make the cut’ applicants were required to prove their residence status in India before 24th March, 1971. This is the day before Bangladesh declared independence from Pakistan.

Critics see this as one aspect of a wider bid to discriminate against Indian Muslims by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu Nationalist party. However complaints that ethnic Bengali Hindus have also failed to make the list, highlight the fact that the issue of documentation is often key. As Head of Amnesty International India, Aakar Patel, said, ‘It is unreasonable to expect people fleeing violence and natural disasters to preserve half a century-old original identity documents.’  

A stateless child is born somewhere in the world at least every 10 minutes – UNHCR.

Nation states clearly face substantial challenges when it comes to dealing with stateless. The European Union successfully persuaded some Eastern European states to modify their nationality laws, by making it an admission requirement. However, almost all nations are guilty of failing to address statelessness. Both Britain and the Netherlands have recently adopted revamped frameworks for dealing with stateless persons. But these are far from fool-proof.

Clearly many poorer countries are often unwilling and unable to accept responsibility for large numbers of displaced people when they are struggling to provide for their own citizens. However, withholding nationality on gender, racial or ethnic grounds is clearly unjust. Addressing this issue alone would significantly improve tens of thousands of lives. There is also the criteria of residency. If a person or family has been living in the same country for decades, surely this entitles them to some rights in this place? The issue of statelessness promises to become increasingly acute as large scale movement of refugees to Europe and North America rises.   

Maryam Namazie on the freedom to choose.

I met Maryam Namazie at the Celebrating Dissent festival in Amsterdam recently. As co-organiser of this unique gathering, it soon became clear that Maryam was seen by many of the participants as something of a mentor, even a mother figure. A veteran campaigner for human, especially women’s rights, Maryam, now 53, speaks with the eloquence and quiet confidence that comes with years of sustained activism on issues ranging from Islamophobia, to blasphemy, misogyny and sex apartheid. Maryam’s well-modulated voice and pleasant demeanour, belie a tireless determination to protect and advance the rights of others.

Born into a largely secular family in Tehran, her family were forced to flee the country in 1980 when Maryam was just thirteen. In the wake of the Iranian Revolution (1979), she and her mother had left Iran for India, where Maryam was to attend school. Namazie’s mother was set to return to her husband and younger daughter in Iran when word came from her husband to stay in India with Maryam. Some months later they were joined in India by her father and younger sister. ‘It was not supposed to be final. So that’s what’s heart-breaking for me’ Maryam explains.

‘At the time, I didn’t think I would never go back, never say good-bye to my friends, my grandmother, never see my home again…’. Maryam and her family were not allowed to stay in India, so they went to Britain where they remained for a year before having to leave again. Finally, they travelled to the US where two of Maryam’s uncles had already settled. Although their passports were confiscated upon arrival in the country, seventeen year old Maryam and her family managed to stay there. This is where she completed her education and began her work as an activist.

‘The future revolution of Iran is clearly a female one’ – Namazie

Maryam Namazie explains that her politics was shaped by the Iranian revolution and by worker-communism. ‘To me, that revolution is unfinished. The future revolution of Iran is clearly a female one.’  She became an activist as a result of her own life experiences. As a young immigrant in the US, she worked at McDonald’s while her father, who had been a journalist in Iran, worked as a courier and a security guard, anything to make ends meet. ‘One feels sorry for the older generation’ Maryam tells us, ‘because they gave up everything for us and then we go ahead and become blasphemers and apostates!’. This last comment is made in jest as are a number of other stories of her family and childhood.

Namazie tells us about her great grandfather who was a Mullah. In his picture, he ‘looked like the Taliban, but even scarier!’. Her grandfather was an Islamic scholar who taught Arabic at a university in Calcutta and led inter-faith prayers, including non-Muslims. He did not insist that his wife or daughters wear the veil. Her own father was brought up in a strictly Muslim manner – no alcohol or pork, prayers five times a day. But again, Maryam explains how her father has been one of her staunchest supporters in her role as an activist. Although she was born a Muslim, Namazie has never read the Quran nor entered a mosque in Iran. ‘Religion was never imposed upon me until the Islamic regime of Iran came to power’ she explains. It was at this time, that she realised how destructive it is as a method of governance.

Maryam Namazie’s light-hearted description of her life as a young immigrant in the United States belies what she later admits was ‘the trauma of losing everything and starting all over again’. After finishing her studies in the US, the young Maryam worked with Ethiopian refugees in Sudan. However, she returned to the US after the newly established Islamic state discovered she had begun a clandestine organisation called Human Rights without Frontiers. She was threatened and forced to leave Sudan in 1990. The more refugee work she did, the more Maryam began to question why so many fled from Islamic states. ‘There’s a reason why women don’t want to live in an Islamic state, why gay people don’t want to live in an Islamic state, why young people don’t want to live there. Because everything is controlled and restricted.’ Back in the US, she co-founded the Committee for Humanitarian Assistance to Iranian Refugees. She travelled to Turkey in 1994 to work in Iranian refugee camps there. Namazie was then elected Executive Director of the International Federation of Iranian Refugees.

‘Islam, like any other belief system, has to be open to criticism’ – Namazie

Maryam Namazie’s leadership skills are quickly noticeable and stem from a combination of confidence and an abiding concern for others. During the short time I spent with her at the festival in Amsterdam, it is soon clear that taking responsibility is as natural as breathing for Maryam. This must have been both a blessing and a burden as she began her tireless battle as activist, commentator, broadcaster and spokesperson. She admits however that she has always enjoyed the support of her family. ‘That’s why it’s been easy for me to be an activist. Also, my partner is an activist. I’ve really always had a lot of support.’ As an atheist and spokesperson for the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain, One Law for All and Fitnah – Movement for Women’s Liberation, Namazie defends the rights of those who leave and/or criticize Islam. ‘Islam, like any other belief system, has to be open to criticism’ she maintains calmly.

For Namazie then, the separation of religion and state is fundamental. She is unequivocal in her denouncement of Islam as a far-right movement. For her there is no difference between the fascism of white nationalist movements and the Islamists. She points out that religion is a key factor shared by the fundamentalists. White nationalists use Christianity – groups like the Ku Klux clan see themselves as Christian knights. While the Islamists rely on Islam to control and stifle dissent. ‘Religion is a very useful tool to control people’. This is why Maryam Namazie insists on the importance of celebrating dissent. ‘We don’t celebrate dissent enough, often we vilify and demean it.’ The rise of what she terms ‘the religious-right’ has ‘opened up a space’ for reactionary control and the repeal of women’s and minority rights everywhere. Nowhere is this more obvious than the rolling back of abortion rights in the US. c

‘Why are human rights only for white people?’ – Namazie

The activist understands that she will always be a target for Islamists and the far-right. But her real concern is what she calls ‘good people’s’ difficulty in seeing Islam as part of this far-right movement. She draws our attention to a preference to view Muslims in the West as a minority group that requires protection.  Yet it is more complicated than this. Namazie argues that as soon as dissenters within homogenised groups start speaking up and demanding equal rights of the kind enjoyed in the West, by Westerners, support for them diminishes. ‘They only like us if we’re quiet, submissive, if they can paternalistically protect and save us. But not if we go too far and stand up for ourselves’. Namazie tells me about experiences she has had with both the press (the BBC and Guardian) and some of the UK’s leading universities. Many universities no longer invite her to speak as she is seen as a ‘security risk.’ Although ‘one hasn’t done anything wrong’, this sort of ‘victim blaming’ as the activist calls it, means that ‘the bullies win’. 

Namazie’s frustration is evident when she says, ‘What is really painful, is when you’ve got people who should be on your side, standing with you, stabbing you in the back.’ This brings her to the issue of Islamophobia. She fights against those who attempt to define it as a form of racism. Quoting the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslim’s definition of the term, she questions the notion of ‘expressions of Muslimness’. She sees little difference between this and ‘expressions of Britishness’ that underpin xenophobic movements such as Britain First and UKIP. Movements which have, ultimately, fed into Brexit. Such definitions of Islamophobia certainly work to limit criticism of Islam and Islamism in the West. Maryam Namazie herself has been barred from Warwick University, harassed by Islamic Society students at Goldsmiths, and had her talk cancelled at Trinity College over the same accusations. Yet she is undeterred. Her work with the One Law for All organisation in the UK highlights the unequal treatment of minority groups who are ‘pushed towards religious courts’ under the guise of tolerance.  

‘Identity politics has pushed us backwards’ – Namazie  

Maryam Namazie returns more than once to the issue of identity politics. Particularly, how it has worked to further divide people who should be standing together to fight for universal human rights. ‘People think that human rights are Western – and are associated in some cases with neo-colonialism. But for us, human rights are universal. For Namazie, the rise of the far-right in Europe is particularly worrying. Islamism and fascism are one and the same. ‘The battle against white nationalism is similar to the battle against Islamism’. From such a perspective, Namazie describes Brexit as ‘very dangerous’ as it is ‘fundamentally based on the hatred of the other’. This human rights activist is clear, ‘We’re going to need to wake up and fight against all forms of fascism.’

The close relationship between identity politics and religion is particularly dangerous for women and minority groups like LGBT. When asked about veiling and the anti-veiling protests that have gained ground in her native Iran, Maryam Namazie is unequivocal in her response. Women may submit to wearing the veil, or comply with veiling regulations but take away the climate of intimidation, violence and fear and see how many will really choose to do so. There may, of course, be some women who choose to wear the veil, just as there  are some women who choose to stay in violent relationships. But this doesn’t mean we should not be able to have open, frank discussions about these issues’.

‘Religion kills and should, like cigarettes, come with a health warning’. – Namazie

Maryam Namazie has dedicated her life to the protection and extension of universal human rights. She sees all forms of organised religion as a threat to such rights and is unequivocal in her position.  ‘Religion kills and should, like cigarettes, come with a health warning’. As with many apostates and blasphemers before her, Namazie faces opposition on many fronts. She admits that ‘sometimes, we feel like we’re the only ones fighting’. It is clear from the short time I spent with them in Amsterdam that this group of secularists and free thinkers are deeply supportive of one another. Although many of them are separated geographically, culturally and even professionally, they are united in their common commitment to universal human rights and an end to what they see as the tyranny of religion.

‘Obedient women never make history – but we intend to.’ – Namazie

Maryam agrees that the internet and social media have been a huge source of support for them and that they could never have made the kind of progress they have done, without it. She also points out that ‘social media and the internet are doing to Islam what the printing press did to Christianity’. Her faith in governments as agents of change is limited. ‘I think any real social or political change in any society, has come about by people pushing for it, to the point where governments are forced to back down.’ Maryam Namazie practices what she preaches. ‘Obedient women never make history – but we intend to.’

polish polonaise

Polish polonaise – stately steps in the right direction?

Yesterday, the Nobel Prize for Literature (2018) was awarded to Polish writer,  Olga Tokarczuk . I attended a celebration at the Polish Embassy in the Hague marking the 450th anniversary of the Union of Lublin. Some call it the precursor to the European Union. On Sunday, national elections take place in Poland where right wing, Law and Order party is expected to win another term in office. As one of the largest countries in Europe with some of the most dramatic history, Poland’s future and past merit attention.  

Lublin is the largest city in eastern Poland, it sits near the border with Ukraine and Belarus. In 1569, it became the site at which two sovereign countries – the Kingdom of Poland and the Duchy of Lithuania merged to form a Commonwealth. The two nations agreed to be ruled by a single monarch, elected jointly by both nations in free elections. Like the European Union of today, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth had one currency and conducted foreign affairs and defense policy jointly. However, government departments specific to each country were preserved as were their official languages, armies, treasuries and judicial systems.

At its zenith, in the early 17th century, this dual state covered almost 1 million square kilometers and sustained a multi-ethnic population of 11 million people. Indeed the Commonwealth was marked by relatively high levels of religious tolerance, guaranteed by the Warsaw Confederation Act of 1573. Although Catholicism was the dominant religion of the state, freedom of religion for other faiths including Islam and Judaism was granted.

Celebrating and problematizing diversity.

Perhaps it is not so surprising that Nobel Prize winner, Olga Tokarczuk’s most recent novel, The Books of Jacob is set in the early years of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Described by its English translator, Jennifer Croft, as a rewriting of history designed to  ‘celebrate and problematize diversity of faith, gender, language and nation’, the book follows the life of Jacob Frank. He is a Jew of Sephardic origins who was born in Poland but grew up in Romania and the Ottoman Empire.  In the summer of 1579, he led the conversion of thousands of Jews to Catholicism in what is now the Ukraine. Seeking to establish himself as the new Jewish Messiah, he adopted elements of Catholicism and Islam in his teachings.

Considered by many to be the Nobel prize winner’s masterpiece, it was published in Polish in 2014 and remained a national best-seller for over a year afterwards. By delving into the multi-ethnic world of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, the novel raises questions that are highly pertinent in today’s Europe. Although her book sold 170 000 copies in hardcover and was winner of Poland’s biggest literary prize, Tokarczuk attracted harsh criticism. Denounced by nationalists as a traitor, the author received death threats and her publisher had to hire bodyguards for her. “I was very naive. I thought we’d be able to discuss the dark areas in our history,” Tokarczuk admits.

Readers are encouraged to re-examine their own histories as its plot and characters both celebrate and problematize diversity. It speaks to the issues of tolerance and inclusiveness that the current refugee crisis has raised. Particularly in countries like Poland where the ruling Law and Justice party (PiS) has taken a strong stance against the influx of migrants. Indeed the European Commission has just referred a third case to the European Court of Justice on threats to the rule of law introduced by the PiS. Tokarczuk’s 1000 page novel has yet to be translated into English. Publishers in the United States hope to have an English version ready by March 2021. In the meantime it is worth considering the hostile reactions by the ethno-nationalists in Poland. The country’s ruling Law and Justice party are set to triumph in Sunday’s national elections.

An increasingly divided society.

Working from a strong Catholic base, the PiS prides itself on its conservative stance. Party president, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, has stated that PiS exclusively recognises families as ‘one man, one woman and children’. Unsurprisingly, their stance on  LBTQ rights is largely intolerant with some local councils in Poland declaring ‘LGBT-free zones’. I recently spoke with human rights activist, Elzbieta Podlesna, who temporarily fled Poland for refuge in Belgium, after  her involvement in the so-called ‘rainbow madonna’ incident. This involved appropriation of the iconic Black Madonna with a halo of the LGBT rainbow colours. Podlesna and others believe that Polish society is increasingly divided along conservative/liberal lines. The current government has also used strong rhetoric against the EU’s refugee policies and came under attack for limiting Poland’s refugee quota to just 150, mostly Christian Syrians.

The first codified constitution in modern European history.

Shortly before its demise, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth adopted the first codified constitution in modern European history, the second (after the United States) in modern world history. So advanced was the May 3rd Constitution (1791) in terms of the liberties it provided for its citizens, that its creation caused immediate reaction amongst neighbouring states. Russia, Prussia and Austria all took the opportunity to go ahead with the third and final partition of Poland. So that by 1795, not only the constitution but the state of  Poland itself, had ceased to exist. It would be 123 years before Poland would come into existence once more – just in time for the Second World War, followed by decades of Russian communist rule.

Given the turbulent history of this country, it is understandable that nationalism has flourished. It provides the sort of clear, reassuring narrative that has been largely absent from Polish history. Yet, writers like Tokarczuk , provide other less comfortable but far more impressive narratives. Ones that celebrate diversity, dissent and tolerance. In time, Polish politics will hopefully reflect this rich history and in so doing, help to further enrich Europe, as it did 450 years ago.  

A tale of new cities – what will define them and who should design them? (5 min)

‘The purpose of the city is human flourishing’, so wrote Aristotle more than a millennium ago. His words seem prophetic given the exponential growth of cities in recent centuries. Indeed the UN predicts that two thirds of the global population will live in cities by 2050. But what is the future of cities? Are they already a thing of the past as some philosophers suggest? Do they carry in them the seeds of their own destruction or, are they hubs of plurality, transformation and resilience?  I recently investigated the 100 Resilient Cities initiative – a global project involving over 150 million dollars of funding by the Rockefeller Foundation. Its goal: to help cities prepare themselves for the future.  

The first cities grew up in Mesopotamia, modern day Iraq, around 7500 BC. Although there are differing opinions on how exactly one defines a city, most agree that they initially took the form of dense settlements, often around a stable water source such as a river or natural springs. The benefits of these concentrated settlements included the sharing of ideas and natural resources, large local markets, reduced transport costs and even amenities such as running water and sewage disposal. There were disadvantages too of course – increased living costs, traffic and pollution and higher crime and mortality rates. Not so different from today.

‘A Europe of cities is an alternative to a Europe of fatherlands’ – Ramoneda

Cities have also tended to be centers of political power, seats of statehood. Philosophers have long recognised the importance of cities in the development of societies run by civilians rather than the aristocracy and religious leaders. Today, large urban centers attract a wide variety of people and ideas that make them hubs of plurality and freedom. Catalonian intellectual, Josep Ramoneda, describes cities as ‘spaces of political articulation’ and argues that they might hold the key to a more integrated Europe. He sees ‘a Europe of cities as an alternative to a Europe of fatherlands’. And argues that ‘a city generates much less patriotism than a nation’ while still providing a focus for individual and group identity.   

Cities have traditionally been defined in contrast to the country or rural areas. The town vs country trope is common in literature and film. Both positive and negative interpretations abound, particularly with the advent of the Industrial Revolution. In his famous poem, ‘Composed upon Westminster Bridge, 1802’, William Wordsworth celebrates the majesty of the city of London. Its ‘mighty heart lying still’, bathed in the morning light. Socrates himself wrote, ‘I’m a lover of learning and trees and open country won’t teach me anything, whereas men in the city do.’ But as urban sprawl increases and virtual spaces take over from concrete notions of territory, communities are increasingly linked by information highways, rather than streets and squares. What does this mean for our sense of identity as citizens and taxpayers? Research in the US shows, for example, that the sharp decline in community newspapers in the last decade has fractured senses of community.

So what then is the function of a city? This question has been much debated by city leaders, town planners, philosophers and citizens for centuries. Senior Planning Officer at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, UK, Ben Hockman, told me about some of the most influential ideas regarding the design and function of a city. The notion of the ‘Garden City’, brainchild of Ebenezer Howard, was inspired in 1898 by a desire to ‘marry town and country’. This involved the creation of self-contained communities surrounded by green belts (a feature we still see today) containing proportionate areas of industry, residence and agriculture.  

‘Putting all our stock in Smart Cities is probably not the answer – Hockman.

New Urbanism, which grew up in the United States in the 1980’s, focuses  on the creation of ‘walkable’ neighbourhoods. Blocks and streets are therefore pedestrian friendly and housing and shopping are in close proximity to accessible public spaces. The focus is thus on human-scale urban design. Moving further into the future is the concept of the Smart City. By integrating information and communication technology, these urban centres use the Internet of Things to collect data. This is then used to optimally manage relevant assets and resources. As Ben points out however, ‘putting all our stock in Smart cities is probably not the answer’. But he does support the banning of cars and stresses the importance of cities working with and from their strengths, as few can ‘start from scratch’.

With this in mind, I decided to investigate a recent (2013 – 2019) world-wide initiative, funded by the  Rockefeller Foundation. The 100 Resilient Cities project places the concept of resilience at the center of their model for cities of the future. Focusing on the key question: how can modern cities be more resilient, it includes exploration of issues ranging from security and community, to transport and sustainability. I spoke with the Hague’s Chief Resilience officer, Anne-Maire Hittipeuw, about how this medium size, Dutch city is responding to the increasingly complex needs of a 21st century city. ‘Cyber attacks, digitization and segregation are all challenges that many cities, including the Hague, face’ she told me.

‘Being part of a large network of cities makes it really easy to exchange ideas’ – Hittipeuw

With this in mind, the Hague city council has developed a range of small projects designed to foster larger ideals. These include, empowering citizens, creating livable, cohesive neighbourhoods and promoting justice. So the Hague Buddies app has been designed to encourage interaction between long-time residents of the city and refugees. Its format is similar to that of a dating app but the intention is to promote friendly interactions between individuals, based on age and interests. The city council also encourages the adoption of solar energy and greening efforts by subsidizing solar panels, green roofs and white spaces for citizens. Co-housing, co-working and co-living spaces in unused buildings is another initiative to promote integration between different age and race groups. There are many more.

As British poet, William Cowper, once wrote, ‘God made the country and man made the town’. The city has been and always will be a space for humanity. But exactly what shape and form that will take, remains to be seen.

Community currencies should be about time, not money. (5 min)

Community currencies have existed for decades but with the advent of localism amid rising concerns about climate change and globalisation, they’re gaining ground worldwide. The backing of a digital ‘City Currency’ by the 100 Resilient Cities project including London, Tel Aviv and Cape Town, highlights this trend. But are card, paper-backed or even crypto-based community currencies really so different from hard cash? What about a system based on the exchange of time?  I recently investigated Timebanking in the Hague – this system places time rather than money at the center of exchange, with surprising results.  

Community currencies are not new, nor is there a shortage of them. Forbes magazine claims there are more than 10 000 currently in operation worldwide. One of the first such currencies was created in Switzerland as far back as 1934. The WIR currency was introduced to ease problems with liquidity in wake of the Wall Street Crash and the Great Depression. It is no coincidence then that community currencies have multiplied since the 2008 financial crisis.

Community currencies can help reduce banking charges.

The idea behind many of them is to encourage spending on local businesses thus strengthening local industry while keeping the money in local circulation. With ever increasing concerns about climate change, specifically the reduction of our carbon footprints, fostering local business seems even more important. Reduced banking charges also make it attractive for small local businesses. There is also the social aspect of fostering an increased sense of community. Some, like Samen Doen in the southern Netherlands, are designed to include social incentives that encourage civic-minded activities such as helping the elderly or cleaning the local park.  

New technologies like smart phones and  blockchain have the potential to transform community currencies. I recently learnt about digital currency Colu. Designed by a company in Tel Aviv, it uses cryptocurrency to increase economic activity within communities. Supported by the Rockefeller Centre’s 100 Resilient Cities project, Colu was founded in 2014. It already runs four community currencies in Tel Aviv, Haifa, London and Liverpool. How does it work exactly? Colu issues a local digital currency specific to a community within a major city. This currency is pegged to the city’s national fiat currency and can be used at all participating local businesses.

Digital community currencies – bringing cryptocurrency to the masses?

Colu runs on a smartphone app. Although the company maintains that its long term vision is to ‘create strong local communities by bringing cryptocurrency to the masses’, the system is profit based. Businesses at the end of the community currency chain must pay 1.5% to cash-out back to normal currency. Although this digital currency is free of the financial overheads associated with paper currency and provides financial incentives to attract new users, there are some drawbacks. Most notably the profit-based nature of this venture raises questions about what would happen if it no longer made a profit. There are also the potentially alienating effects of its app-based nature, which might work against the creation of a stronger sense of community.  

What if we exchanged time instead of money?

Many community currencies like Colu and its predecessors, continue to focus on money (albeit in somewhat different form) as the medium of exchange. But what if we used time instead? I recently investigated a small but fairly long-running initiative called Timebank as an alternative. Based in the Hague, Amsterdam and Brussels, this community-based initiative involves payment in Time Hours. Anyone can register via their website and once you’ve created a profile, you are ready to begin earning Time Hours. This is done through advertising skills/ services that you have to offer. All services are created equal. That is, one hour of gardening is equal in value to one hour of Spanish conversation class or website design.

Over the years, the Timebank community in the Hague has grown. It has recently gone into partnership with an organisation called Lekkernassuh (meaning ‘good grub’ in the local dialect). It describes itself as an organised community of people who are ‘working together toward the vision of a fair, local food system.’ Run by volunteers,  it sources seasonal fruit and vegetable from local farmers for weekly delivery in the Hague region. Previously paid with free veg, volunteers are now paid in Timebank Hours. The local Timebank economy has expanded as a result.

Nevertheless, as a Timebanker myself, I acknowledge that exchange on the Timebank system is slow. It can also be difficult to earn one’s first few Timebank hours. Both parties must find the time to complete the exchange, in some cases it can take a number of hours. For example, repair to the back wheel of my bicycle took over two Timebank Hours. While the building of a pizza oven took as much as 10 hours. Also noticeable, is the fact that the majority of exchanges are service-based. Bike repair, photography, painting lessons, proof-reading or babysitting, this system requires material goods to be purchased with Euros.

Timebanking encourages a shift of perspective.

Timebanking is definitely not the most efficient form of exchange. It takes time and payment would, ideally, be re-calibrated to reflect differing levels of skill and expertise. Nevertheless, it does create a shift in perspective. Placing time at the centre of exchange forces one to reassess one’s priorities. Is it imperative that one gets that hair cut tomorrow or could it wait until next week or even the week after?

I had to wait a while to get my bike repaired. Initially I felt frustrated by the inconvenience. But then I accepted the waiting time and realised that we have become conditioned to expect it all here and now. The faster, the better apparently. But with Timebank, the focus shifts from speed of service to the quality of exchange. One gets to know people in one’s local community. You learn to accept that not all services are perfect but this is ok. Paid services are seldom all perfect either. It’s clear that Timebanking could not stand alone as a system of exchange. But its ability to foster a sense of community via the prioritization of time over money is unique.

How to democratize Europe and prevent future Brexits.

Europe is in need of a ‘democratic transplant’. So says Sorbonne Professor, Antoine Vauchez, co-author of the Manifesto for the Democratization of Europe (2018), now translated into 9 languages.  Signed by over 100 000 people, the Manifesto to democratize Europe was co-written with world renowned economist, Thomas Piketty and two other French academics.

The manifesto has been followed by a draft budget for Europe. Fixed at 4% of GDP and composed of 4 key taxes (on high incomes, on wealth, carbon emissions and a harmonized corporate profits’ tax). With this money, the authors propose that four key social issues can be addressed: climate change, refugees, training and education and reimbursement for those eurozone countries hardest hit by the financial crisis. This manifesto grew out of the French elections of 2017, when Piketty was asked to provide the French socialist party with an outline for a European programme of reform.

‘Our ideas may not be perfect, but they do have the merit of existing.’ – Piketty

The manifesto to democratize Europe has since undergone several changes and revisions in light of feedback. But as Piketty pointed out in an article in the Guardian (2018), ‘Our ideas may not be perfect, but they do have the merit of existing. The public can access them and improve them.’ It was in a similar spirit that his co-author, Antoine Vauchez, spoke last night in Amsterdam. There is no doubt that many of the suggestions are bold, especially by the staid standards of the European Union. Perhaps most striking is the call for what is termed a new sovereign European Assembly.

National elections would be transformed into European elections.

This new European parliament would have substantial budgetary and legislative power. It would be made up largely of members of national parliaments (80%) with just 20% drawn from the existing European Parliament. This split is however open for further discussion. In order to democratize Europe, national elections would thus become European elections. It would also mean that national politicians would no longer be able to simply shift responsibility on to Brussels. They would be forced to explain to voters the projects and budgets they intended to defend in the European assembly.

‘ Britain will never truly leave the EU’ – Vauchez

The idea behind these proposals, is a reuniting of political and economic power at a European level. This would help ensure that Europe would be better equipped to deal with future crises of the kind experienced in 2007/8. It would also provide both the economic and political power to promote a more socially just and inclusive union. In such a Union the rise of populism, including Brexit, may well have been avoided, Vauchez agrees. The French academic told me however that he is not convinced that Britain will ever truly leave the EU. ‘There is simply too much shared history’ he maintains.

The underlying assumption behind this vision, is the importance of reconnecting ‘the economic governance of Europe with the representative project’ as Vauchez puts it. The French professor argued that the dominance of the economic governance of Europe, centering on the creation of the Euro itself, has resulted in a corresponding decline in issues of political governance. The political and the social have continued to function almost exclusively at national level. Perhaps this is not so surprising, since the Eurozone started as an almost exclusively economic project. The creation of the European Union was preceded by that of the European Economic Community (ECC) in 1957.

‘The European economic elite have helped keep democratic control at bay.’ – Vauchez

However as Vauchez pointed out, ‘our starting point for this Manifesto was that Europe has changed profoundly since the Maastricht Treaty and the creation of the single currency’. Piketty and his co-authors are concerned about the rise of a European economic elite. A group who have helped to create institutions that ‘keep democratic control at bay’ as Vauchez puts it. Irrespective of political orientation, few would disagree that the Eurozone has found itself ill-equipped to deal with a variety of significant crises in the past decade. These include the financial crisis, the refugee crisis and the Brexit crisis.

These French academics argue that the current institutional framework of the European Union make dealing effectively with such crises almost impossible. In particular because the veto right of each country prevents any common fiscal policy. It is difficult to disagree. But this tension between political and economic sovereignty sits at the heart of the European project. The guarantee that member states would retain their sovereignty with regards to tax, pension systems and political structures, formed the basis for a willingness on the part of many, to proceed.

Northern member states reluctant to bail out their southern counterparts.

The so called North/South divide is evidence of this. Many Northern nations feel strongly that they will find themselves having to bail out their less prosperous southern counterparts. This is a highly complex issue that is further complicated by the inclusion of various East European member states. But it does not alter the fundamental question: has the European Union reached a point where further progress cannot be made unless member states commit to greater democratization? It is tempting of course to continue tinkering with the current structure as various members of last night’s panel suggested. ‘Looking for silver bullets’, Vauchez calls it. But history suggests that fortune tends to favour the brave.  

Secularism – the antidote to populism? (4 min)

This weekend I attended the Freedom Festival in Amsterdam. A three day event dedicated to what  the organisers called a celebration of dissent.  At the festival we heard from writers, activists, journalists and filmmakers who fight for human rights and equality. The majority are self-confessed atheists, many have suffered persecution, even death threats as a result. All  support secularism as a way to reduce religious persecution and defend the rights of women and minority groups. Although many also identified as ex-Muslim, their lives and work are now in the West.

Religious intolerance and populism are rising in tandem.

They told me they were fighting here too as religious intolerance and populism appear to be rising  in tandem. In Poland, Russia, America and even Britain, populism is on the rise. Russia is another, more extreme, example. With it, we also often see a rise in the power and dominance of a state sanctioned religion. What role does secularism have to play  here? Can it be used as an antidote not only to theocracies but also against the rise of populism that we see right here on our own doorsteps?

Secularism means the separation of religion and state.

Let’s be clear, secularism here is taken to mean the separation of religion and state. It has nothing against religion per se, but sees no role for it in the governance of a country or its state institutions. Atheism is not the same although many secularists  are atheists and visa versa. Atheism includes all those who question the existence of a god, any god.  Polish activist, Elzbieta Podlesna, told us how she was arrested and interrogated for hours after placing images of a ‘rainbow madonna’ around the town of Plock. She added a rainbow halo to the head of the Black Madonna in order to protest the Catholic Church’s intolerance for LGBT rights.

Accused of ‘provoking the tiger’ (understood to mean the Catholic Church in Poland), her actions were also taken as an affront against the Polish state.  Leader of the ruling Law and Justice party (PiS), Kaczynski, has explicitly equated attacks on the Catholic church with attacks on the state of Poland. He maintains that there is no history of Poland without the church. Indeed, Podlesna tells us that PiS came to power with substantial support from the Catholic Church.

‘Religion is the last barrier to gender equality’ – Shevchenko

Ukrainian activist, Inna Shevchenko, who lives in exile in France since her arrest and torture by the KGB, speaks too of the role of the Russian Orthodox Church in Putin’s Russia. A devoted feminist, she sees religion as ‘the last cultural barrier to gender equality’. She also recalls how, growing up in the decades after the collapse of the USSR, many people suffered and turned to the church for guidance.  The Orthodox Church has for centuries played a powerful role in the Russian state.

When Putin came to power in 2000, he lost little time in re-establishing its authority to bolster his own power base and present himself as a bastion of Western Christian values. Church and State have also presented a united front with regards to Ukraine. The decision of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church to break free of the Russian Orthodox Church after over 300 years of subservience was seen by many as part of the Ukraine’s wider bid for freedom from Russian influence. The split was facilitated by Ukrainian President, Petro Poroshenko.  

Strong links bind the Trump administration and Christianity – Annie Gaylor.

 Putin’s role as a defender of traditional Christian values has resonated with a number of conservative figures in America. Few can have missed the Trump administration’s championing of traditional Christian values which they view as the bedrock of American moral and cultural identity. Annie Laurie Gaylor, co-founder of the Freedom from Religion organisation (1978), the largest of its kind in the United States, spoke with us about the strong links between religion and the Trump administration. This is perhaps most clearly seen in the recent push by the Republican government to undermine abortion laws in various states.

But the Freedom from Religion organisation is fighting the Trump administration on a number of other fronts too. It is currently challenging Trump’s religious liberty executive order, which stops the IRS from revoking a church’s tax-free status if it chooses to support a political cause. “This financial threat against the faith community is over. No one should be censoring sermons or targeting pastors’ said Trump when he announced the decision. The appointment of  hundreds of ‘Christian friendly’ judges at various levels of the judicial system,  including the Supreme Court, is also cause for concern. Some of these appointments are for life, Gaylor explains. This means that these theocratic judicial nominations could continue to undermine equal treatment for non-Christians far into the future.

‘Britain is not a secular state.’ – Maryam Namazie

The rise of identity politics was a key issue of concern raised at the Freedom Festival. Veteran secularist and human rights campaigner, Maryam Namazie, involved in organising the festival, has spoken out in Britain against the involvement of religion with state and the resulting decline in rights of women and minority groups. The Iranian born, ex-Muslim maintains that Britain is not a secular state although it is a largely secular society. The Queen is the head of the Church of England, there are Bishops sitting in the House of Lords and they have prayers in Parliament. She also spoke out against the introduction of Sharia law councils in Britain as far back as 1984. Namazie sees identity politics as an essentially limiting force. One designed to control difference rather than embrace it.  She points to the Brexit party’s promotion of ‘Britishness’ which is fundamentally exclusive.

Perhaps a focus on individual rights rather than group rights is the answer. If religion and belief are recognised as personal matters, the rights of all individuals are protected. ‘The politics of difference (and superiority) have always been a pillar of fascist and racist politics whether that difference is based on race or – as we now increasingly see – ‘culture’’, maintains Namazie. A common respect for humanity, irrespective of background and belief is what secularism has helped promote. Let’s not lose sight of this fundamental achievement.  

Democracy: (still) the answer to Europe’s identity crisis.(4 min)

Is democracy in crisis? Looking at Britain’s Brexit, Trump’s America and Salvini’s Italy, it is tempting to say ‘yes’. Common explanations have located the rise of populism in a potent mix of globalization and financial crisis. Yet two eminent political scientists, Francis Fukuyama and Dominique Moïsi, point instead to a crisis of identity. Speaking in Amsterdam recently, the American and the Frenchman highlighted the European Union as a source of both hope and fear for the future of liberal democracy.

Fukuyama admits that identity is the ‘master concept’ of his most recent book of the same name. In it, he argues  that the rise of populism is linked to a crisis of identity rather than economics. It is linked to a rising need for recognition by many of those affected by globalization. The desire to be recognised is universal. Yet, right now, invisibility is pervasive in society, he maintains. ‘The older white working class are feeling particularly invisible right now’. Ironically, both capitalist and Marxist schools of thought closely associate recognition with material wealth. Fukuyama accuses both Marxists and contemporary free market economists of viewing the world in ‘the same narrow-minded, materialistic way – they ignore the power of ideas’.

Macron is too bright, too young and accomplished, too handsome. – Moïsi

For his part, Moïsi locates the roots of populism in three key words: Anger, Humiliation and Nostalgia. Similarly Fukuyama, argues that the crisis we now face in Europe is one of both ethics and identity. The anger at what he calls the elite, is in part a product of the ‘explosion in inequality, real or perceived’. This in turn is a result of the humiliation which is reflected in movements like the gilles jaunes in France. A little humiliation can be a good thing, Moïsi says, as it can inspire one to greater things. However too much humiliation is very bad. For those in Europe who feel they have been ‘left behind’ by everything that is young, new and global, their sense of humiliation is overwhelming. Someone like Macron, increases this sense of humiliation simply by being what he is – too bright, too young and accomplished, too handsome.

If one is confident, an individual has no problem being French or British or Bulgarian and European. He blames his generation for failing what he terms, ‘the interrogation of identity’. ‘We have failed to teach a pedagogy of freedom and peace to the new Europeans’. And in spite of the optimism of Chancellor Kohl of Germany in the 1990’s, that the Erasmus programme, together with a combination of Italian pizza and German beer would prove sufficient to create a generation of young Europeans, it has not proved quite so simple. Those who have always lived in peace and freedom have great difficulty in truly understanding the value of these things.

‘European citizenship is only metaphoric.’ – Fukuyama

Both writers agree that the nation state has traditionally provided the framework around which institutions of a liberal democracy can cohere and gain credibility. However, nationalism as a source of identity can and has caused problems. It is frequently linked to notions of ethnic and/or religious superiority. Moïsi makes reference to Brexit as a prime example of this phenomenon. ‘Brexit is an example of a country shooting itself in the foot in the most dramatic but illuminating manner.’ For Fukuyama, the European Union is a union of ideas/ideals more than anything else. As such it may well represent the beginnings of his own utopian vision for the end of history – an international community, regulated by global structures based on the rule of law. Yet he points to the fact that power continues to sit at the national level in the EU. As such, ‘European citizenship is only metaphoric’.    

But the European Union has the potential to represent the sorts of ideas/ideals around which people can come together, in order to create the kind of broad, inclusive identities that Fukuyama lauds. Often accused of being merely a technocracy, its liberal institutions and ideals are  designed to help protect the right of individuals to choose. The right to choose, Fukuyama maintains, lies at the heart of human dignity. Indeed democracy itself ‘is based on a recognition of this basic human dignity.’ Thus, notions of identity should be centered on ideas rather than ethnicity, religion or material wealth. However, he makes it clear that this process begins with a willingness to listen to and accept opposing views. He suggests that metropolitan elites are just as guilty of this as their less educated counter-parts.

‘Will Europe be at the table or on the menu?’ – Moïsi

Even among the younger generations, Dominique Moïsi highlights the lack of  enthusiasm and appetite for the European Union. They are far more engaged in the fate of the kingdom in Game of Thrones he notes with typical irony. But Moïsi is unequivocal in his response; ‘what is at stake, is the future of democracy’. In a world where there is less America and more China and Russia, the question for Europe is: ‘will it be at the table or on the menu?’. For the first time in centuries, the Western model is being challenged by China’s alternative. It is a model that  does not include liberal democracy. For Moïsi, China forces Europeans to defend what it is they truly believe in, unlike other threats such as migration. It forces one to be excellent.

Perhaps the key issue here is trust. As Fukuyama points out, the trust of voters can never be assumed, based simply on the moral superiority of liberalism. The ongoing democracy protests in Hong Kong, highlight similar issues, on the opposite side of the world. A sense of identity, separate from mainland China, is underpinned by a growing lack of trust in the city’s leadership. The outcome is difficult to foretell but as Moïsi said, ‘One cannot play with history lightly’.