Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Herausgeber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie diese Quelle zitieren möchten.
The verdict from the Bossier political establishment: lawfare.
Last week, Bossier City's Charter Review Commission imploded. It hadn't had a formal meeting in over a month-and-a-half despite a couple of attempts, with one featuring no members appointed by city councilors who opposed a strict term limits measure, and the other featuring no members appointed by councilors and the mayor who favored that. In the meantime, two members resigned and a citizen petition to put on the ballot a term limits measure of three lifetime retroactively was certified and readied to present to the Council the day after.
That petition mirrored a proposal accepted by the Commission at its previous meeting, where two of the members who had expressed opposition to the measure were absent and put the anti-measure commissioners into the minority. This brought a counterreaction from that group, who still maintained a majority, who at the intended meeting – which was not summoned by the acting chairman Shane Cheatham and because of its not having been scheduled at a previous meeting was of questionable legality – had anti-proposal member Secretary Sandra Morehart place the item for review with the intent of its removal. This would be facilitated by appointing two new members, apparently allies of the majority against strict limits, at the meeting as by state law. The strategy was either to have no term limits measure in the final product or a watered-down version that could override the petition's version on the Dec. 7 ballot.
At least this meeting actually came to order with all present commissioners attending, and then quickly degraded. It didn't even get to approving that agenda before Cheatham, citing the questionable legality and rushed nature – the Commission faced a deadline to reach the same ballot as the amendment that if it missed couldn't neuter the effort – quit the meeting, followed shortly thereafter by David Johnson, another strict term limits supporter. For the next hour haggling over the agenda occurred as Lee Jeter, the final strict term limits supporter remaining, argued to slow down the process, in particular that the appointees should have public vetting, but the remaining members unanimously rejected that and approved the agenda.
With Jeter's presence, a quorum continued to exist and business could be conducted, leaving the plan alive to use the panel as a cudgel to neuter the petition's demand. Except it never got there. A parade of speakers throughout normally perfunctory agenda items brought up a number of points that would bring into question various aspects of the Commission's operation, from its formation and membership through rules of conduct, which ended up accomplishing Jeter's request as it only made it through accepting the resignations, then stopped by deciding to schedule a later meeting to give time to collect and vet requests of replacements.
But this extension didn't jibe with the goal of strict term limits opponents on the Council, as they needed to have the whole revamping complete by the end of the month to have time to get it on the ballot to compete with the petition; otherwise, the panel was useless to them. So, when the next day Republican Mayor Tommy Chandler offered to add to the Council agenda at its meeting an item to disband the Commission, those of that bloc present – only Republican Jeff Free and Democrat Bubba Williams were – agreed and then approved the first vote to accomplish that. As it required an ordinance, the concluding vote will occur at its next meeting and all signs are it will pass, unanimously. Again, this demonstrates the one and only purpose of the Commission to the majority that established it – Free and Williams plus Republican Councilors David Montgomery and Vince Maggio plus no party Jeff Darby, all of whom except Maggio could not serve again under the successful petition's language – which happened right after a previous version of the petition gathered enough signatures but ran afoul of legal technicalities, was to subvert any other attempt to get a similar petition on the ballot. Having failed that, it was of no use to them.
That option out the window, the bloc's next strategy was to find some impairment to the petition in an attempted reprise of the fate of the previous one. Otherwise, they were boxed in because of the city charter's language: within 30 days of the date on a received a certified petition, meaning by Aug. 24, councilors either had to resolve to put the item on the ballot within 90 days, or the next election scheduled by law in this case Dec. 7, or to amend by ordinance the charter with that language themselves.
Chandler proposed that ordinance to amend the language of the petition into Charter, which then would require a ratifying election. At the meeting when the issue came up about whether an ordinance or resolution, which required only one vote, was necessary, Council Clerk Phyllis McGraw said it would need to be an ordinance which then would convert into a resolution.
This deviated from what Chandler did with the first petition, where he offered resolutions to bring that language to a vote an election. Again, the Charter states that either the Council do that or it must pass identical language as an ordinance to put it on the ballot. The state's election code mentions only a resolution to the State Bond Commission as the means by which for it to approve and forward to the secretary of state a ballot item, and typically the Council for tax renewals uses resolutions.
And even more interestingly, even though City Attorney Charles Jacobs asserted that a resolution would be required to send the matter to the SBC, the Election Code becomes ambiguous on that. In R.S. 18:1285, it does say that the SBC must forward that approval and mentions changes in home rule charters, yet in R.S. 18:1299 it says that preceding Section A of the chapter (6) that contains this language doesn't apply to elections involving home rule charters (Section B). This raises the question of whether the Charter has some kind of self-executing mechanism that could force a non-monetary measure to the SBC without the need of a Council resolution.
Searching for that desired defect, prior to the vote Williams mused openly about whether the retroactivity provision violated the state's constitution, but Jacobs opined that it didn't. This seemed to be the last salvo to find some kind of way out of the trap into which the successful petition and Charter had put him and his allies.
The subsequent vote stalemated at 2-2 with Free and Williams against. This means, given time constraints where action must happen at the next regular meeting only remaining was taking the second option through resolution (absent a special meeting) to stay in Charter compliance. But that the pair didn't just concede and get it over with would indicate they and the rest of their bloc are girding to vote against any such resolution at the Aug. 13 meeting, which if that's the case means they violate the charter yet again.
The cabal knows it ultimately will lose, as one way or the other the legalities behind the process will force the measure onto the ballot, where it almost certainly will win. Recall, however, that the goal isn't to try to defeat but to delay installation of strict term limits. As long as actions can be taken to prevent the measure's consideration prior to Mar. 29 city elections that would apply it to those, a potential final term can be won by any of the graybeards Darby, Free, and Montgomery (Williams has announced he won't run again).
Thus, the calendar becomes crucial if in fact by Aug. 24 the Council majority bloc refuses to call the election as ordered by the Charter. Presumably, immediately thereafter elements backing the petition would file for a declaratory judgment moving the matter to the SBC, so then it becomes a matter of how quickly a judge in 26th Judicial District issues that order – if one does; given the closed, clubby nature of politics in the parish whoever draws it may refuse to do so, or at least would engage in dilatory tactics to slow down the matter. If refused, then almost certainly the Second Circuit Court of Appeals would take up the matter and issue the order – and consider that appeals dealing with election matters are given expediency by courts with appellate jurisdiction.
Even so, all of this would take time. Assuming SBC approval is needed, technically the date for consideration for its Sep. 19 meeting comes prior to Aug. 24. But, practically speaking, historically the SBC without question accepts application up to a "10 day deadline" which is set at Sep. 4. Even so, frequently the panel will put something onto the agenda, especially if relatively straightforward as this would be, as late as 24 hours prior to the meeting.
Even if these dates were to be missed, the deadline for the secretary of state to receive the SBC approval is Oct. 14. If needed, the SBC can hold a special meeting to beat this.
Further, even if this date were missed, this doesn't preclude any of the judiciary closer to the election ordering it on the ballot, or a special election being called – if need be by the judiciary – prior to the Jan. 29, 2025 qualifying date for city elections, or for the courts to knock back the municipal general elections to the May 3, 2025 date of the municipal runoffs, having the term limits measure on the Mar. 29 ballot and then having a special election for any runoffs coming from May mid-June, with plenty of time to seat new city elective offices for Jul. 1, 2025.
In other words, higher courts displeased with the Bossier City Council's refusal to follow its charter and with lower court obstructionism realistically could defeat delaying tactics designed to prevent the substance of the term limits proposal from applying to upcoming city elections. Regardless, the graybeards and Maggio seemed poised to try to thwart this, abrogating their duty under the Charter. Citizens will have to go the lengths they shouldn't have to, in costing their time and money in legal battles, in order to secure their rights against a rogue cabal trying to serve its self-interests rather than the people's.
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Herausgeber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie diese Quelle zitieren möchten.
When Chinese President Xi Jinping arrived in France this week, the world's conflicts were top of mind. Press reports tended to fixate on whether French President Emmanuel Macron could press Xi to distance himself from Russia. But ultimately, the leaders' focus drifted farther south.In a wide-ranging joint statement, Xi and Macron "expressed their opposition to an Israeli offensive on Rafah," called for an "immediate and sustainable ceasefire," railed against the possibility of regional escalation, and even endorsed the idea of a worldwide truce to coincide with this summer's Olympic Games in Paris.The statement reflected a remarkable shift in China's diplomatic approach to the world — or, perhaps more precisely, a remarkable shift in how powerful states now treat Beijing. After decades of playing a secondary role in world politics, China is now getting used to the great power treatment, making itself visible wherever diplomacy is happening.Examples abound: Last year, China sent shockwaves through Washington when it oversaw the normalization of relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, a major step in reducing tensions between two of the most hostile powers in the Middle East. And, as the war in Ukraine drags on, China has dispatched a special envoy to push for negotiations, securing high-level meetings with officials on both sides of the conflict.Beijing has even taken on a larger role in that most sensitive of issues: the Israel-Palestine conflict. China hosted Fatah and Hamas — the leading Palestinian factions — for reconciliation talks last week, and observers expect that this mediation role could continue in the coming months and years.From Washington, this can all look a bit frightening. After three decades of unipolarity, many U.S. policymakers still cling to the idea that America and its allies are the sole guarantors of international peace. A rising China, in the minds of many, must mean a falling U.S.But experts say that a deep breath is in order. Despite these latest moves, Beijing still has a ways to go before it surpasses Washington in its ability to shape geopolitics. As China grows into its new role, there are no shortage of opportunities for cooperation on issues that matter deeply to each country, especially in places where the U.S. is no longer seen as a credible go-between. There may even be openings to influence Beijing's approach to the world in ways that gel better with U.S. interests.China's growing role in diplomacy is thus not a threat but an opportunity. The question remains: Will the U.S. seize it?Three cheers for stabilityAbove all, China and the U.S. share one essential goal in the Middle East: stability. Students of contemporary politics will note that neither side has done a particularly good job of securing that goal in recent years. But limited cooperation could help provide a path forward for the region.China has long professed support for the liberation of Palestine through a two-state solution, a goal that it sees as crucial to solving the problems that plague the Middle East. In the early days of the war between Israel and Hamas, Chinese officials walked a tightrope by maintaining trade ties with Israel while refusing to condemn Hamas. But it carefully avoided any direct involvement in the conflict.Now, China appears to be taking a more active role, expanding its criticism of Israel's actions in Gaza in what many experts view as an attempt to curry favor with the Global South through a topic in which the U.S. has taken a distinctly unpopular stance.The Beijing talks, however, signal more room for cooperation. Hamas and Fatah have for years failed to bridge the rupture created by their brief civil war that lasted between 2006 and 2007. After convening in Beijing last month, the groups thanked China for its efforts "to help strengthen Palestinian internal unity and reached an agreement on ideas for future dialogue," according to China's Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian.The direct impact of China bringing the factions to the negotiating table should not be overstated, according to Dawn Murphy, a professor at the U.S. National War College. When Beijing mediates, it prefers to act as more of a convener than a direct party to the talks, Murphy told RS. Think Qatar, but a lot bigger."The way in which [China] sees itself as contributing is by bringing the parties together, providing a platform for discussion and serving as a more neutral actor that has legitimacy in the eyes of all of the actors involved," Murphy said. In this sense, China is very much unlike the U.S. Washington has long made clear that it supports Fatah over Hamas, which much of the West views as a terrorist group. But Beijing's stubborn neutrality gives it the legitimacy to host credible talks that could promote reconciliation and help pave the way for a two-state solution in the longer term.China's commitment to neutrality is a reflection of its broader diplomatic strategy of maintaining balanced relations without getting directly involved in its partners' domestic politics. China is very averse to risking its own credibility, preferring to avoid siding with any particular state in a conflict, as Murphy noted.China and countries in the Middle East have significant economic relations that have only deepened over time through partnerships in energy, security and technology. Beijing is the biggest purchaser of Saudi Arabian oil and is also one of Israel's primary trading partners. It is also willing to engage with the Middle East in ways the U.S. won't: China sells military technology to Saudi Arabia that the U.S. heavily restricts, and provides heavily-sanctioned Iran with much-needed capital and trade partnerships, according to veteran journalist James Dorsey.Dorsey, who has written a book about China's role in the Middle East, notes that these partnerships help ensure that states in the region won't act against Chinese interests. Most Middle Eastern states have stayed out of the Taiwan issue and have not condemned the ongoing human rights abuses occurring in China's Xinjiang region. "That's one Chinese objective, and they've been very successful in that," Dorsey told RS.But that doesn't mean that China is all-powerful. For all of Beijing's rhetoric, it has not been able to alter the course of the current conflict wracking Gaza, Dorsey noted. When you look at negotiation processes for a ceasefire today between Israel and Hamas, as well as discussions about what the post-war world will look like, "China is not in the room."Murphy says it's in the U.S. interest to not dismiss China's desire to resolve these conflicts, citing the Iran-Saudi normalization deal that China helped broker. While negotiations were well underway before China got involved, the outcome of the talks was one that all parties, including the U.S., benefited from. China is in a unique position to seek further detente in the region, Murphy says. Because it has positive relations with every country in the Middle East, as well as legitimacy in the eyes of their rulers, Beijing could theoretically facilitate negotiations between most of the region's states.Indeed, the Biden administration has acknowledged this in limited ways, as Ali Wyne of the International Crisis Group told RS. "Growing instability in the Middle East benefits neither the United States nor China, so U.S. and Chinese efforts in the region need not be zero-sum," Wyne said. "[I]n recent months, the Biden administration has stated that it would welcome China's help in preventing the conflict between Israel and Hamas from metastasizing into a regional conflagration."Dorsey, for his part, warns that China's facilitation has not yielded concrete results thus far. China has also failed to show a willingness to take risks by taking more tangible action, Christopher Chivvis of the Carnegie Endowment told RS."China has demonstrated that its willingness to make sacrifices to try to bring peace and stability to the region is pretty limited," Chivvis said. For example, China doesn't encourage restraint from Iran despite the leverage its relationship with the country provides.If China could match its actions more with its rhetoric, it would serve both Beijing and Washington, Chivvis said. "It would be in China's interest to try to demonstrate that it's willing to actually pay some costs in order to deal with some of the global challenges that are out there," he argued.The Ukraine problemIn Europe, China has had less room to maneuver. Despite its efforts to push for peace negotiations, Beijing has faced strong criticism from the West in recent months for allegedly supplying tech that supports Russia's military invasion in Ukraine. As Chivvis told RS, China has tried to walk a fine line between its close ties with Russia and its need to maintain access to European markets and capital. Close trade ties with Europe allow China's domestic economy to grow at a pace that promotes stability at home, Chivvis noted. This careful balance has been hard to maintain amid China's indirect support for Russia's war. Relations with Europe have been further strained as Chinese goods flood EU markets and price out European producers. But some steps in the right direction are being taken. This week, during Xi's multi-stop visit to Europe, he and Macron surprised observers when they agreed to back a worldwide truce during this year's Olympics — a pause that could serve as a jumping off point for peace talks in Ukraine. "French officials hope Xi's endorsement is a sign that he could use his influence to persuade Russia to reach a truce when President Vladimir Putin travels to China later this month," Reuters reported. The French also said Xi made clear that "Beijing did not intend to supply weapons to Moscow and that it was ready to look into the issue of dual-use materials that enabled Russia's war effort." As China's military and economic partnerships grow, the wars in Ukraine and Gaza have provided China with an opening to increase its diplomatic efforts, according to Wyne of ICG. Nonetheless, Beijing "does not presently seem positioned to make breakthroughs." Chivvis agrees, saying that significant cooperation between the U.S and China is a long way off given the contentious state of relations between the two powers. But there's no denying one obvious truth: It would be far easier to solve the Ukraine war with China's help than without it. It's now up to the U.S. to decide whether it's willing to face that fact.
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Herausgeber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie diese Quelle zitieren möchten.
In the past two weeks, the U.S. has carried out at least 10 rounds of airstrikes against Yemen's Houthis, who have responded with more attacks on Red Sea ships. The Biden administration argues that a "sustained campaign" of strikes is now necessary to protect the continued flow of global trade."These assaults, notably the unprecedented use of anti-ship ballistic missiles, have significantly disrupted the free flow of commerce and navigational rights in one of the globe's most critical waterways," a senior Pentagon official said Monday. There is some data to support this argument. So far, the Houthis have hijacked one ship and launched at least 34 attacks, none of which have led to casualties or major damage to the vessels. Fully 90% of container ships that would usually travel through the Suez Canal are now going around Africa, according to some analysts.The disruption also led to a 1.3% drop in global trade in December of last year, and uncertainty about Red Sea shipping has made it all the more difficult to get international aid into Sudan. Even China — not exactly a U.S. ally — has called for de-escalation in the Red Sea to get shipping back on track.But do the Houthi attacks really pose a major threat to world trade, as the Biden administration claims? If so, is that a good enough reason to risk further escalation by bombing the Houthis when less risky options are still available?RS put these questions to Eugene Gholz, a political science professor at Notre Dame University and an expert on the relationship between economic policy and national security. The following conversation has been edited for length and clarity.RS: You wrote in a recent article for the Cato Institute that "the cost of diverting shipping away from the Red Sea is not very significant in the grand scheme of the global economy." Can you tell me more about this argument?Gholz: It's easy to talk about huge increases in fuel and personnel costs in percentage terms. They could go up by 100%, which makes it seem like a dramatic increase in shipping costs. But those costs are actually quite small compared to the cost of the cargo on an average cargo ship. A full load of fuel for a medium-sized container ship costs a couple of million dollars. Having to say, sail around Africa instead of going through the Red Sea, even if it doubled the fuel cost, that would only add a couple of million dollars. Amortized across a billion dollars of value of cargo on an average container ship, it's a very marginal change in the cost to consumers of getting their product delivered. If you had two shipping lines, one of which bore twice as high a fuel cost as the other, that would have a significant competitive effect in the shipping liner industry, not in the industry of the cargo that's being carried. If everyone's fuel cost goes up in the shipping industry because they're all sailing around Africa, or if everyone's shipping cost goes up because they're paying slightly higher insurance premiums for going through the Red Sea, that doesn't have a competitive effect in the shipping industry. And it doesn't cause a big effect in consumer markets, because the cost of the consumer products is very, very marginally affected.RS: Do we have any data yet on how this is affecting the global economy as a whole? Or of increases in prices for regular people?Gholz: You would need very fine-grained data to try to find any effect. You see articles that say consumer prices have gone up in the last couple months. The Red Sea issue has been happening, but that's hardly the only thing that's been happening in the global economy, right? Disentangling the effects of the cost of sailing through the Red Sea or avoiding the Red Sea from all the other effects in the global economy is not plausible. What you have to do is think about directly measuring the marginal increase in costs due to the alleged disruption or adaptation for the Red Sea, rather than looking for the very blunt outcome measure of average global prices.RS: Do you have a sense of how expensive this operation is for the Pentagon and how it's affecting our stockpiles?Gholz: The military operation is kind of expensive. It's much more expensive than the cost of riding out shippers' adaptation to the Houthis' disruption. And it's much more expensive than what the Houthis are spending to try to create whatever disruption they can, which is very minimal. The Pentagon has released numbers into the current U.S. budget debate. They say that since October, they've spent $1.6 billion on this mission. That's a funny number. It includes a pretty substantial operations and maintenance cost, like the fuel for the ships and the aircraft that are operating in the Red Sea. They are using more food and fuel and maintenance.But the main cost is the weapons that they're expending, which are not part of the $1.6 billion that is in the current budget debate in Washington. We might fire multiple missiles to try to intercept one incoming Houthi missile, or we might fire multiple missiles or drop multiple bombs to try to hit one Houthi target to reduce their capability to launch missiles. Each of those missiles that we fire, let's say they cost a million dollars or more. That adds up.Let's say we attack a Houthi radar. Well, the Houthi radars are cheap. Some of their radars seem to be modified private commercial radars, things you could pick up at Bass Pro Shop for going out boating. They cost a few thousand dollars apiece, and we're hitting them with million dollar missiles. This is a bad cost trade-off.There's also risk. If this gets some Americans killed, if the Houthis got a lucky shot and they actually hurt someone, that's a huge cost. If the United States gets drawn further into the maelstrom of Yemeni politics, or if the American hawks satisfy their wildest dream and leverage this into getting the United States to attack Iran, that's an incredibly costly thing.RS: What would the economic impacts be if this spread to the Persian Gulf beyond the Red Sea?Gholz: Again, the cost of our likely response is much higher than the cost of the economic disruption. I've done a bunch of work about the real limits on Iranian military capability to disrupt shipping in the Persian Gulf. If it's just the Iranians taking potshots at oil tankers or container ships in the Persian Gulf, it's not a huge threat to the global economy, or it doesn't need to be unless we panic and overreact. But the cost of a war with Iran is potentially enormous. There are a whole lot of potential stages between full-blown regime change war and doing nothing, which is probably the economically effective response. There are some that are relatively low-cost responses, which are also probably not the likely U.S. responses, even if they would be more effective on a cost basis.RS: How do you respond to those who argue that the U.S. does have an essential responsibility to safeguard the flow of global commerce?Gholz: Well, we don't have a responsibility. We choose to claim that mission for ourselves, even though there isn't a lot of threat to global commerce. And we don't really protect global commerce. It's not like we run a convoy system for delivering commercial cargo all around the world and protecting them with American frigates. This is not the British-Spanish competition over the Treasure Fleet that led to the Spanish Armada.Shippers make routine decisions all the time about what routes to take, which risks to accept, which cargo to carry or not carry. They don't think about the role of the U.S. military in those things. The U.S. Navy is a big military, but it's not everything, everywhere, all at once. Shippers are just on their own.If you're deciding about a particular threat to commerce that you think is something that you could use gunboat diplomacy to respond to, the question you have to ask is, does it cost enough to global commerce to make it worth it for the United States to try to respond?There is an argument that, when the U.S. is making that decision, it should only think about the cost of the disruptions to the U.S. and the costs the U.S. would have to pay to stop them. There's also an altruistic view that says we should think about the cost to the global economy because we are the world's dominant power. If it doesn't cost us too much, we should gracefully and benevolently provide the service to the world of protecting the world's commerce. But even if you think the United States should be providing this global public good, that doesn't make every possible action effective and wise.RS: What would a better approach look like?Gholz: A better approach from the beginning would have been to let shippers make reasoned decisions about whether to transit the Red Sea or go around Africa. We should basically just leave the Houthis alone. If they take a few ineffective potshots that don't really hurt anybody, it's not worth it to respond.Yes, I would rather the Houthis weren't doing this. If we ignore it, maybe it'll go away; maybe it won't. But it doesn't cost that much to just leave it alone. The right response is to let people whose job it is to make decisions about ship routing, about insurance rates and evaluating risks, about time to market for different products, let these people do their job. This is their day-to-day, normal business. Many of them are good at it.
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Herausgeber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie diese Quelle zitieren möchten.
In recent months, Israeli officials have gotten into the habit of equating Hamas with ISIS. This framing has obvious benefits for Israel, which hopes to garner global sympathy by comparing its enemy to a group widely viewed as the pinnacle of early 21st century evil.But it also leads to a thorny question. If Hamas is indeed as bad as the Islamic State, then why should its leaders continue to find shelter in multiple Arab states?In the case of Qatar, where Hamas's political leaders have been based since 2012, the answer is pragmatic. Israel needs a reliable mediator in order to reach a deal for the return of Hamas-held hostages. Doha has already shown its worth by facilitating talks that secured the release of 105 hostages during a week-long ceasefire in November.But that arrangement may have an expiration date. Israeli security officials have threatened to kill Hamas leaders wherever they are, even if that means an attack on Qatari soil. More moderate Israeli voices argue that Doha's arrangement with Hamas simply can't last."The United States and Israel still need to lean on Doha to use its leverage with Hamas to achieve some essential wins — even if Qatar must ultimately cut ties with the organization," Yoel Guzansky, a former Israeli security official, recently wrote in Foreign Affairs.As wars rage in Gaza and Ukraine, neutral states are coming under increasing pressure to pick a side. Switzerland, once thought of as the prototypical global referee, has joined sanctions on the Kremlin and even closed its airspace to Russian planes. Finland has joined the NATO alliance, and Sweden could follow suit by the summer. Qatar — long seen as the ideal Israel-Hamas mediator — may soon have to pick between its American patron and the Palestinian militant group.This is natural to some extent. When it comes to neutrality, war is where the proverbial rubber hits the road. Belligerents almost always view their conflict in terms of true good vs. total evil, a framing that neutral states call into question by their very existence."Under just war theory, neutrality is not possible," said Pascal Lottaz, a professor at Kyoto University and an expert on neutrality. "Whenever good fights evil, not fighting evil is equal to being evil."Yet war-fighting states have long leaned on neutrals as mediators, especially when military force shows limited chances of success. So what happens if the neutrals disappear?Switzerland by any other nameIn some ways, Qatar came upon neutrality by accident. The tiny Gulf state was seen as a Saudi dependent until the mid-1990s, when it embarked on an ambitious plan to protect its security by making friends with just about every other country in its fractious region. A few years into this project, Doha realized that it now had a significant competitive advantage. "It allowed them to be strategically positioned to act as a conduit between actors that didn't otherwise talk to each other," said Mehran Kamrava, a professor of government at Georgetown University Qatar. Pragmatic as they are, Qatari officials played to their strengths and started to pitch themselves as an Arab Switzerland. By the late 2000s, Doha had already mediated major peace talks in Chad, Sudan, and Yemen. Despite crises stemming from the Arab Spring and a later spat with its Gulf neighbors, Qatar's reputation for neutrality has stuck. Its diplomats have led high-profile talks between the U.S. and its most bitter enemies and even helped secure the release of Ukrainian children taken to Russia. Of course, Doha isn't neutral in the traditional sense. For states like Switzerland and Austria, neutrality is a formal commitment to stay out of the fighting that allows them to preserve their security without going to war, according to Lottaz. The arrangement is passive: If you don't mess with me, then I won't mess with you. Qatar's version of neutrality is both less formal and more ambitious. Like traditional neutrals, Doha's primary goal is to stay out of danger in a conflict-prone region. But a second key objective is to raise Qatar's profile such that the tiny state can have an influence over major geopolitical disputes without losing its independence. This helps explain why Qatar's highest officials often participate directly in mediation. When Hezbollah threatened to tank negotiations during a Lebanese political crisis in 2009, the emir personally called Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad and asked him to pressure his ally to break the deadlock. This type of neutrality relies on a stream of diplomatic fictions. Yes, Qatar has a major U.S. military base on its territory, but that doesn't make it a member of the Western bloc. Yes, Qatar hosted Taliban leaders, but that doesn't make it an Islamist ally. In a black and white world, Doha is infuriatingly gray. In practice, Qatar takes every chance it gets to build geopolitical leverage, backstopped by the country's seemingly endless supply of liquid natural gas. This brings us to Doha's relationship with Hamas. Qatari officials say they invited Hamas's political leaders to Doha in 2012 at the behest of the Obama administration, shortly after the militant group fled from Syria amid tensions with Assad. (The earliest Hamas-Doha ties date to 2006, when the Bush administration asked Qatar to open communication channels with the group.) Qatar jumped at the opportunity to both improve ties with the U.S. and improve its competitive advantage as a mediator. But that wasn't enough to shield the Gulf state from criticism after the Oct. 7 attacks. U.S. officials undermined Qatar in the days following the attack by pulling out of a Doha-mediated deal through which Iran got access to billions of dollars in frozen assets following a U.S.-Iran prisoner swap. Hawkish voices in Congress and the American press also leaped to condemn Doha for supporting Hamas, using as evidence Qatar's policy of paying civil servants in Gaza (with Israel's approval). Andreas Krieg, a security studies professor at King's College London, says this is mostly bluster. He describes the rhetorical pressure on Qatar as little more than a "circus in Washington to be seen as being supportive of Israel no matter what." The U.S., Krieg says, has not taken any concrete steps to pressure Qatar on this front. Rather, Washington has given Doha extra leeway to pursue talks. And even if Hamas is somehow destroyed by the war, Qatar will be a prime candidate to mediate with whatever new Islamist movement takes its place, Krieg argues. Only time will tell. Qatari neutrality could face a deep crisis if Israel follows through on its pledge to hunt down Hamas leaders "in every location." But Qatar is nothing if not pragmatic, and Kamrava of Georgetown predicts that Doha's leadership would gladly assent to kicking out Hamas leaders if it meant strengthening ties with the U.S., the most powerful state over which it has significant leverage.The question we're left with is whether this is good for America. Mohamad Bazzi of New York University argues that it's not. "[I]t would be a mistake to force Hamas leaders out of Qatar," Bazzi wrote in a recent op-ed. "[T]hey would probably go to Iran, Lebanon or Syria – and Israel, the US and Europe would have a harder time negotiating with them indirectly." In other words, kicking Hamas out of Qatar would likely make one of the world's most complex conflicts that much more intractable.Cold wars and hot peaceQatar's problems are a microcosm of trends playing out across the world today. The UAE and Turkey have brokered major deals between Russia and Ukraine — deals that less independent states could never have pulled off — and the West have largely repaid them with sanctions and condemnation. To some extent, it should come as little surprise that powerful states balk at neutrality. "It's usually the stronger party of the two belligerents that will put more pressure on the neutrals," Lottaz said. "The weaker one, the one that has more to lose, usually has more to gain from keeping others neutral." He points to the Ukraine conflict as a case in point. The U.S. and its allies condemn neutrality toward the war both on moral grounds and because they see their side as stronger. Russia, for its part, knows that it can benefit more from states remaining neutral than it ever could from its allies voicing their support for Russian policy. Some states have managed to dodge angry powers by keeping a low profile, as in the case of Oman, a rarely mentioned Gulf state that played a crucial role in the talks leading up to the Iran nuclear deal in 2015. But quieter neutrals are not exactly quick to get involved in intractable conflicts that don't affect their vital interests, leaving them outside of most issues entirely. Qatar, by contrast, seems to revel in the chance to take on well-known conflicts, even when — as in Israel-Palestine — the chances of success are limited. Neutral states, Lottaz reminds us, are intimately involved in the causes they mediate. To the extent that Doha views its mediator image as crucial for its security, it will aggressively seek out leverage points in every conflict it can. This worked reasonably well when the U.S. was the only true great power on the world stage. But aggressive neutrality is a tougher sell today as Washington has come to view its ties with both Moscow and Beijing in increasingly zero-sum terms. The dawn of a new cold war has given states some room to balance these powers against each other, but the space for forceful independence — especially for smaller states like Qatar — has begun to shrink. A few hot wars have certainly not helped. So is neutrality dying? It's tough to say for sure. But it's hard to shake the feeling that powerful states will miss it when it's gone.
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Herausgeber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie diese Quelle zitieren möchten.
Nearly two months into the war in Gaza, the Biden administration finds itself in a bind. International support for Israel, once strong in the aftermath of Hamas' brutal October 7 attacks, has given way to broad condemnation as Tel Aviv's campaign has left at least 15,000 Palestinians dead in addition to 30,000 injured and 1.8 million displaced.The White House's answer to this anger has been twofold. In public, President Joe Biden and his allies have emphasized the need for Israel to follow international law in its campaign to destroy Hamas but avoided weighing in on whether Israel has already violated the laws of war. In private, officials have urged their Israeli counterparts to "fight more surgically and avoid further mass displacement of Palestinians" after the temporary truce ends, according to the New York Times.But what does it mean for Israel to conduct a "surgical" war against an enemy embedded in an area roughly the size of Philadelphia with more than two million residents? And what does international law mean to a state whose leaders appear committed to destroying Hamas by any means necessary?Few thinkers are better equipped to answer these questions than Samuel Moyn, a professor of law and history at Yale University and a non-resident fellow at the Quincy Institute, which publishes RS. Moyn has long grappled with the relationship between war and morality, most notably in his 2021 book "Humane: How the United States Abandoned Peace and Reinvented War."RS spoke with Moyn about how U.S. policymakers think about war and what the Gaza conflict means for the future of international law. The conversation has been edited for length and clarity.RS: U.S. officials have reportedly admonished Israel to be more 'surgical' in its war against Hamas in Gaza. How do you interpret that call? What does it tell us about how officials view war more broadly?Moyn: It seems as if American policymakers are pushing on Israel their own solution to a controversial war, which is to combine an unlimited right to self-defense with a humanization of the conduct of the hostilities. Now, the truth is, Israel probably got to that combination before September 11, 2001, and the United States learned it from Israel in the first place. But given that America is Israel's patron and protector, it's now in a position of teaching the lesson to Israel that it learned from it. Now, I'm all for saying that these wars — the War on Terror, the campaign in Gaza — are parodies of humanized war because they're so costly in civilian lives. But they're not as bad as they could be because of this new policy — it's still largely rhetorical, but it's policy too — of containing the collateral damage and saying that that makes the war more tolerable.RS: Why is the U.S., and the Biden administration in particular, so focused on questions of international law in war? To the extent that they have placed checks on Israel, it's been to suggest that international law is the thing that they must be holding to, rather than a broader sense of morality.Moyn: Well, it's really only a part of international law, which is itself very interesting. Claiming an unlimited right to self-defense isn't just a moral claim; it's also a legal claim, and it's wrong. It was wrong in the War on Terror, and I think it's wrong when Israel asserts it today. We could get into the details on that side of the equation, but you're right that in our debates, international law has become something that for many listeners means constraint not of the right to wage war but of how it's waged. I think that Joe Biden, in his so called 'bear hug' strategy, thought that once it became clear how controversial this war was going to be, he would push humanitarian concern as a way of not interfering with Israel's claimed right of self-defense, [just as] America didn't tolerate those who said its wars were illegal while sometimes accepting the criticism that the way it conducts them is illegal.RS: How, both in its justification and in its conduct, does this war differ from the wars that the U.S. carried out following 9/11?Moyn: It is more similar to the ground campaigns that America fought in Afghanistan and Iraq, which involved a pretty substantial commitment of troops and a lot of blood spilled just because ground warfare is bloody, especially when it involves cities like Fallujah or Gaza City. It's not similar to the absolutely no-holds-barred phase of the War on Terror where the George W. Bush administration asserted that international law just didn't apply to what it did to detainees. The whole point of humanized warfare is that Israel is claiming that it's following the law. But it's also not similar to the later, so-called "sustainable" phase of America's War on Terror when America pulled out troops even while extending its drone campaign and special forces deployments and then claimed to sanitize that phase of the War on Terror without all the messiness of American troops on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq. Israel's currently in a phase that combines lots and lots of violence with claims to still be following international law. It has had phases of its struggle against Hamas that involved just bombing or its own use of special forces that were about conducting the struggle but making it as antiseptic as possible. It's just that Israel can't conduct that kind of campaign while promising to remove Hamas from power altogether.RS: Do I understand correctly that, generally, law of war questions only concern conduct within the war and not whether the broader goals of a war are appropriate or inappropriate? Doesn't it leave those questions entirely to the discretion of states?Moyn: It depends on how you define laws of war, but what we call international humanitarian law, or the laws of armed conflict, is really exclusively about how you fight. And there are other laws about when, whether, under what circumstances you can fight at all. You could call that body of law part of the laws of war, but it wouldn't be what most people mean when they use that phrase.RS: I guess I'm thinking about the question of proportionality.Moyn: The reason that's a tricky concept is that it applies in both stages of the analysis. In the so-called jus ad bellum analysis — when the resort to force in the first place or on a continuing basis is legal — there's the question of whether the exercise of a self-defense right is proportional. That is a totally different inquiry than what has generally been talked about in terms of proportionality because that's in the jus in bello — the laws of war about the conduct of hostilities. And there the question is, does the collateral damage in any particular attack outweigh the anticipated military advantage of that attack? We could argue that Israel is being disproportionate in the war in general, on the first part of the question, or we can argue with regard to any particular attack whether its attacks are disproportionately harmful to civilians.RS: Guardian columnist Nesrine Malik recently wrote that the lesson of this war is "brutal and short: human rights are not universal and international law is arbitrarily applied." Do you agree with that take?Moyn: No, because it was a lesson that the whole history of human rights and international law already taught.RS: Can you tell me more about that?Moyn: Well, there was never a time when human rights weren't selectively applied, and there was never a time when international law wasn't the law of the powerful. This campaign seems like a rather late date to learn what has always been obvious.RS: Is that a fundamental problem for international law? Or is there a possibility of a more effective international legal system in the future?Moyn: Sure, it's not as if there isn't a struggle within politics, and therefore in law, to make the law different than it has been. I could say that American law works to the advantage of the powerful and against the weak, and that would be true, but that doesn't mean we can't change it for the better.I think international law has been changed for the better at times, but it's never been freed from this syndrome that it's a body of law of, by, and for states, framed with their approval, and interpreted by them to suit their ends. We can struggle to make it more constraining in more ways, but never is it apart from the political context. Never will it transcend selectivity and inadequacy.RS: You've already written a book-length answer to this, so I'll forgive you if it's not the easiest one to answer quickly, but do you think that international law can be a tool to fight for an actual end to war? Or is it simply a tool to manage war into the future?Moyn: I do think there are a lot of resources in it. It is revolutionary that we can make claims not just that states are fighting brutally but that they're engaged in illegal war-making. The trouble is that, if we prioritize the first claim, the second claim gets lost in the shuffle. I think that's what's happened in our time through the War on Terror, with the emphasis on torture and later civilian death in drone campaigns. It seems to be repeating itself in this situation, with the emphasis on civilian death, which is not dishonorable, but in the end there's only a political solution, which means we should focus at some point on who's in the right, who has a just claim, and what would make political violence something of the past.Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn't cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraft so that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2024. Happy Holidays!
Die Inhalte der verlinkten Blogs und Blog Beiträge unterliegen in vielen Fällen keiner redaktionellen Kontrolle.
Warnung zur Verfügbarkeit
Eine dauerhafte Verfügbarkeit ist nicht garantiert und liegt vollumfänglich in den Händen der Herausgeber:innen. Bitte erstellen Sie sich selbständig eine Kopie falls Sie diese Quelle zitieren möchten.
The events in Niger over the past few months have been alarming to watch. What began as a military coup now risks spiraling into a wider war in West Africa, with a group of juntas lining up to fight against a regional force threatening to invade and restore democratic rule in Niamey.The junta have explicitly justified their coup as a response to the "continuous deterioration of the security situation" plaguing Niger and complained that it and other countries in the Sahel "have been dealing for over 10 years with the negative socioeconomic, security, political and humanitarian consequences of NATO's hazardous adventure in Libya." Even ordinary Nigeriens backing the junta have done the same. The episode thus reminds us of an iron rule of foreign interference: Even military interventions considered successful at the time have unintended effects that cascade long after the missions formally end.The 2011 Libyan adventure saw the U.S., French and British governments launch an initially limited humanitarian intervention to protect civilians that quickly morphed into a regime change operation, unleashing a torrent of violence and extremism across the region.There was little dissent at the time. As Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi's forces battled anti-government rebels, politicians, the press and anti-Gaddafi Libyans painted an overly simplistic picture of unarmed protesters and other civilians facing imminent if not already unfolding genocide. Only years later would a UK House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee report publicly determine, echoing the conclusions of other post-mortems, that charges of an impending civilian massacre were "not supported by the available evidence" and that "the threat to civilians was overstated and that the rebels included a significant Islamist element" that carried out numerous atrocities of its own.Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.), Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), and John Kerry (D-Mass.) all called for a no-fly zone. "I love the military ... but they always seem to find reasons why you can't do something rather than why you can," complained McCain. The American Enterprise Institute's Danielle Pletka said it would be "an important humanitarian step." The now-defunct Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) think tank gathered a who's who of neoconservatives to repeatedly urge the same. In a letter to then-President Barack Obama, they quoted back Obama's Nobel Peace Prize speech in which he argued that "inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later."Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, reportedly instrumental in persuading Obama to act, was herself swayed by similar arguments. Friend and unofficial adviser Sidney Blumenthal assured her that, once Gaddafi fell, "limited but targeted military support from the West combined with an identifiable rebellion" could become a new model for toppling Middle Eastern dictators. Pointing to the similar, deteriorating situation in Syria, Blumenthal claimed that "the most important event that could alter the Syrian equation would be the fall of Gaddafi, providing an example of a successful rebellion." (Despite Gaddafi's ouster, the Syrian civil war continues to this day, and its leader Bashar al-Assad is still in power).Likewise, columnist Anne-Marie Slaughter urged Clinton to think of Kosovo and Rwanda, where "even a small deployment could have stopped the killing," and insisted U.S. intervention would "change the image of the United States overnight." In one email, she dismissed counter-arguments:"People will say that we will then get enmeshed in a civil war, that we cannot go into another Muslim country, that Gaddafi is well armed, there will be a million reasons NOT to act. But all our talk about global responsibility and leadership, not to mention respect for universal values, is completely empty if we stand by and watch this happen with no response but sanctions."Despite grave and often-stated reservations, Obama and NATO got UN authorization for a no-fly zone. Clinton was privately showered with email congratulations, not just from Blumenthal and Slaughter ("bravo!"; "No-fly! Brava! You did it!"), but even from then-Bloomberg View Executive Editor James Rubin ("your efforts ... will be long remembered"). Pro-war voices like Pletka and Iraq War architect Paul Wolfowitz immediately began moving the goalposts by discussing Gaddafi's ouster, suggesting escalation to prevent a U.S. "defeat," and criticizing those saying Libya wasn't a vital U.S. interest.NATO's undefined war aims quickly shifted, and officials spoke out of both sides of their mouths. Some insisted the goal wasn't regime change, while others said Gaddafi "needs to go." It took less than three weeks for FPI Executive Director Jamie Fly, the organizer of the neocons' letter to Obama, to go from insisting it would be a "limited intervention" that wouldn't involve regime change, to professing "I don't see how we can get ourselves out of this without Gaddafi going."After only a month, Obama and NATO allies publicly pronounced they would stay the course until Gaddafi was gone, rejecting the negotiated exit put forward by the African Union. "There is no mission creep," NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen insisted two months later. Four months after that, Gaddafi was dead — captured, tortured and killed thanks in large part to a NATO airstrike on the convoy he was traveling in.The episode was considered a triumph. "We came, we saw, he died," Clinton joked to a reporter upon hearing the news. Analysts talked about the credit owed to Obama for the "success." "As Operation Unified Protector comes to a close, the alliance and its partners can look back at an extraordinary job, well done," wrote then-U.S. Permanent Representative to NATO Ivo Daalder and then-Supreme Allied Commander in Europe James Stavridis in October 2011. "Most of all, they can see in the gratitude of the Libyan people that the use of limited force — precisely applied — can affect real, positive political change." That same month, Clinton traveled to Tripoli and declared "Libya's victory" as she flashed a peace sign."It was the right thing to do," Obama told the UN, presenting the operation as a model that the United States was "proud to play a decisive role" in. Soon discussion moved to exporting this model elsewhere, like Syria. Hailing the UN for having "at last lived up to its duty to prevent mass atrocities," then-Human Rights Watch Executive Director Kenneth Roth called to "extend the human rights principles embraced for Libya to other people in need," citing other parts of the Middle East, the Ivory Coast, Myanmar and Sri Lanka.Others disagreed. "Libya has given [the mandate of 'responsibility to protect'] a bad name," complained Indian UN Ambassador Hardeep Singh Puri, echoing the sentiments of other diplomats angry that a UN mandate for protecting civilians had been stretched to regime change.It soon became clear why. Gaddafi's toppling not only led hundreds of Tuareg mercenaries under his employ to return to nearby Mali but also caused an exodus of weapons from the country, leading Tuareg separatists to team up with jihadist groups and launch an armed rebellion in the country. Soon, that violence triggered its own coup and a separate French military intervention in Mali, which quickly became a sprawling Sahel-wide mission that only ended nine years later with the situation, by some accounts, worse than it started. According to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, the majority of the more than 400,000 refugees in the Central Sahel were there because of the violence in Mali.Mali was far from alone. Thanks to its plentiful and unsecured weapons depots, Libya became what UK intelligence labeled the "Tesco" of illegal arms trafficking, referring to the British supermarket chain. Gaddafi's ouster "opened the floodgates for widespread extremist mayhem" across the Sahel region, retired Senior Foreign Service officer Mark Wentling wrote in 2020, with Libyan arms traced to criminals and terrorists in Niger, Tunisia, Syria, Algeria and Gaza, including not just firearms but also heavy weaponry like antiaircraft guns and surface-to-air missiles. By last year, extremism and violence was rife throughout the region, thousands of civilians had been killed and 2.5 million people had been displaced.Things are scarcely better in "liberated" Libya today. The resulting power vacuum produced exactly what Iraq War critics predicted: a protracted (and forever close-to-reigniting) civil war involving rival governments, neighboring states using them as proxies, hundreds of militias and violent jihadists. Those included the Islamic State, one of several extremist groups that made real Clinton's pre-intervention fear of Libya "becoming a giant Somalia." By the 2020 ceasefire, hundreds of civilians had been killed in Libya, nearly 900,000 needed humanitarian assistance, half of them women and children, and the country had become a lucrative hotspot for slave trading.Today, Libyans are unambiguously worse off than before NATO intervention. Ranked 53rd in the world and first in Africa by the 2010 UN Human Development Index, the country had dropped fifty places by 2019. Everything from GDP per capita and the number of fully functioning health care facilities to access to clean water and electricity sharply declined. Far from improving U.S. standing in the Middle East, most of the Arab world opposed the NATO operation by early 2012.Only five years later, Clinton, once eager to claim credit, distanced herself from the decision to intervene. "It didn't work," Obama admitted bluntly as he prepared to leave office, publicly deeming the country "a mess" and, privately, "a shit show." The New York Times collected the damning verdicts of those involved: "We made it worse"; "Gaddafi is laughing at all of us from his grave"; "by God, if we can't succeed here, it should really make one think about embarking on these kind of efforts."Libya offers numerous cautionary tales about well-meaning U.S. military interventions, from the way they rapidly escalate beyond their initial goals and limited nature, to their penchant for unforeseen knock-on effects that are hard to control and snowball disastrously. As Obama's "success" in the country now threatens to spark a regional war in Niger that could even drag the United States into the fighting, it should remind us that the consequences of military action and rejection of negotiated solutions last much longer than, and look very different years after, the initial period of triumphalism.
The article deals with the analysis of the researches of some stages in the history of the formation of the tax system of modern Ukraine: the antique period of the Greek policies on the Northern Black Sea coast (VII-I centuries BC), the period of the early Middle Ages – the times of kingdoms in Central and Eastern Europe (III-IV centuries), proto-states of the White Croats (VI-IX centuries) and the times of the Khazar Khaganate (VII-X centuries). As a result of the analysis, it has been determined that the researchers of the history of tax law of Ukraine in the majority avoid the study of tax law institutions that were present in the fiscal relations of these periods. This causes gaps in the historical and legal science regarding the study of this issue, makes it impossible to assess the effectiveness of ancient tax systems, as well as to form a complete reliable picture of the genesis of tax law in modern Ukraine. The purpose of this article is to identify unexplored issues related to the history of the formation and development of the tax system in Ukraine, to identify perspective areas of scientific research in this part of historical and legal science. ; Sergey Kuznichenko - Одесский государственный университет внутренних дел (Odessa State University of Internal Affairs, Ukraine) ; Anastasiya Boksgorn - Одесский государственный университет внутренних дел (Odessa State University of Internal Affairs, Ukraine) ; Sergey Kuznichenko: kuznichenko_s@ukr.net ; Anastasiya Boksgorn: boksgorn1996@gmail.com ; 199 ; 2 ; 216 ; «Деяния венгров» Магистра П., которого называют анонимом / перевод В.И. Матузовой, вступительная статья и комментарии М.К. Юрасова, Санкт-Петербург 2007. // «Deâniâ vengrov» Magistra P., kotorogo nazyvaût anonimom/perevod V.I. Matuzovoj, vstupitel᾽naâ Stat᾽â I kommentarii M.K. Ûrasova, Sankt-Peterburg 2007. ; Агбунов М.В., Античная лоция Черного моря, Москва 1987. // Agbunov M.B., Antičnaâ lociâ Černogo morâ, Moskva 1987. ; Артамонов М.И., История хазар. Ленинград 1962. // Artamonov M.I., Istoriâ hazar, Leningrad 1962. ; Багрянородный К., Об управлении империей [Греч.] текст, пер., коммент. / Под. ред. Г.Г. Литаврина, А.П. Новосельцева; – 2-е изд., испр, Москва 1991. // Bagrânorodnyj K., Ob upravlenii imperiej [Greč.] tekst, per., komment. / Pod. red. G.G. Litavrina, A.P. Novosel᾽ceva; – 2-e izd., ispr, Moskva 1991. ; Бибихин В.В., Введение в философию права, Москва 2005. // Bibihin V.V., Vvedenie v filosofiû prava, Moskva 2005. ; Боднар А.В. Историко-правовые основы формирования и развития государственности в Хазарском каганате в VII–X вв.: историко-правовой аспект, Санкт-Петербугр 2008. // Bodnar A.V. Istoriko-pravovye osnovy formirovaniâ i razvitiâ gosudarstvennosti v Hazarskom kaganate v VII–X vv.: istoriko-pravovoj aspekt, Sankt-Peterburg 2008. ; Брайчевський М.Ю., Вибране: у 2 т. Т. 2, Київ 2009. // Brajčevs᾽kij M.Û., Vibrane: u 2 t. T. 2, Kiïv 2009. ; Буданова В.П., Готы в эпоху Великого переселения народов, Москва 1990. // Budanova V.P., Goty v èpohu Velikogo pereseleniâ narodov, Moskva 1990. ; Гавриленко О.А., Античні держави північного Причорномор'я: біля витоків вітчизняного права (кінець VІІ ст. до н.е. перша половина VІ ст. н.е.). Харків 2006. // Gavrilenko O.A., Antičnì deržavi pìvnìčnogo Pričornomor`â: bìlâ vitokìv vìtčiznânogo prava (kìnec᾽ VII st. do n.e. perša polovina VI st. n.e.). Harkìv 2006. ; Голб Н., Прицак О., Хазарско-еврейские документы X века / Пер. с англ., Москва, Иерусалим 1997. // Golb N., Pricak O., Hazarsko-evrejskie dokumenty X veka / Per. s angl., Moskva, Ierusalim 1997. ; Готье Ю.В., Железный век в Восточной Европе, Москва, Ленинград 1930. // Got᾽e Û.V., Železnyj vek v Vostočnoj Evrope, Moskva, Leningrad 1930. ; Гумилев Л.Н., Древние тюрки, Москва, Киев 1993. // Gumilev L.N., Drevnie tûrki, Moskva, Kiev 1993. ; Гумилев Л.Н., От Руси до России, Москва 2003. // Gumilev L.N., Ot Rusi do Rossii, Moskva 2003. ; Евнампий. Продолжение истории Дексиппа // Известия древних писателей греческих о Скифии и Кавказе // собр. и изд. с рус. пер. В.В. Латышев, Т. 1, Санкт-Петербург 1890. // Evnampij, Prodolženie istorii Deksippa // Izvestiâ drevnih pisatelej grečeskih o Skifii i Kavkaze // sobr. i izd. s rus. per. V.V. Latyšev, T. 1, Sankt-Peterburg 1890. ; Економічна історія України. Історико-економічне дослідження в двох томах / Баран В.Д., Баран В.К., Бунятян К.П. та ін., Т. 1. Київ 2011. // Ekonomìčna ìstorìâ Ukraïni. Ìstoriko-ekonomìčne doslìdžennâ v dvoh tomah / Baran V.D., Baran V.K., Bunâtân K.P. ta ìn., T. 1, Kiïv 2011. ; Заходер Б.Н., Каспийский свод сведений о Восточной Европе, в 2 т., Т. 1, Москва 1962. // Zahoder B.N., Kaspijskij svod svedenij o Vostočnoj Evrope, v 2 t., T. 1, Moskva 1962. ; Заходер Б.Н., Каспийский свод сведений о Восточной Европе, в 2 т., Т. 2, Москва 1967. // Zahoder B.N., Kaspijskij svod svedenij o Vostočnojevrope, v 2 t., T. 2, Moskva 1967. ; Зінковская И.В., Королевство Эрманариха в истории Восточной Европы VI века, Воронеж 2010. // Zìnkovskaâ I.V., Korolevstvo Èrmanariha v istorii Vostočnoj Evropy VI veka, Voronež 2010. ; Ибн Хордадбех, Книга путей и стран / Пер. с арабского, коммент., исслед., указатели и карты Наили Мамедали кызы Велихановой (Велиханлы) 1986. // Ibn Hordadbeh, Kniga putej i stran / Per. s arabskogo, komment., issled., ukazateli i Kartynaili Mamedali kyzy Velihanovoj (Velihanly) 1986. ; Історія податків та оподаткування в Україні / Ф.О. Ярошенко, В.В. Павленко, В.П. Павленко; за заг. ред. А.М. Подоляки, Київ 2012. // Ìstorìâ podatkìv ta opodatkuvannâ v Ukraïnì / F.O. Ârošenko, V.V. Pavlenko, V.P. Pavlenko; za zag. red. A.M. Podolâki, Kiïv 2012. ; Кведлинбургские анналы // Немецкие анналы и хроники X–XI столетий / Перев. И.М. Дьяконова и В.В. Рыбакова, Москва 2012. // Kvedlinburgskie annaly // Nemeckie annaly i hroniki X–XI stoletij / Perev. I.M. D᾽âkonova i V.V. Rybakova, Moskva 2012. ; Ковалевский А.П., Книга Ахмеда ибн-Фадлана о его путешествии на Волгу в 921–922 гг., Харьков 1956. // Kovalevskij A.P., Kniga Ahmeda ibn-Fadlana o ego putešestvii na Volgu v 921–922 gg., Har᾽kov 1956. ; Коковцов П.К., Еврейско-хазарская переписка в Х в., Ленинград 1932. // Kokovcov P.K., Evrejsko-hazarskaâ perepiska v X v., Leningrad 1932. ; Коровкин В.В., Очерки истории государственного хозяйства, государственных финансов и налогообложения в Древнем мире, Москва 2009. // Korovkin V.V., Očerki istorii gosudarstvennogo hozâjstva, gosudarstvennyh finansov i nalogoobloženiâ v Drevnem mire, Moskva 2009. ; Кудимов А.В., Исторические этапы формирования и развития финансовых отношений в России с IX по начало XX вв. (историко-правовой аспект): автореферат 2006. // Kudimov A.V., Istoričeskie ètapy formirovaniâ i razvitiâ finansovyh otnošenij v Rossii s IX po načalo XX vv. (istoriko-pravovoj aspekt): avtoreferat 2006. ; Літопис руський (За Іпатським списком) / Переклад Леонід Махновець, Київ 1989. // Lìtopis rus᾽kij (Za Ìpats᾽kim spiskom) / Pereklad Leonìd Mahnovec᾽, Kiïv 1989. ; Магомедов М.Г., Образование Хазарского каганата, Москва 1983. // Magomedov M.G., Obrazovanie Hazarskogo kaganata, Moskva 1983. ; Мызгин К.В., Некоторые аспекты политической и экономической истории на-селения днепро-донецкой лесостепи во второй четверти I тыс. н.э. по нумизматическим данным // Germania-Sarmatia. Древности Цен-тральной и Восточной Европы эпохи римских влияний и переселения народов / Калининград 2008. // Myzgin K.V., Nekotorye aspekty političeskoj i èkonomičeskoj istorii naseleniâ dnepro-doneckoj lesostepi vo vtoroj četverti I tys. n.è. po numizmatičeskim dannym // Germania-Sarmatia. Drevnosti Central ̓noj i Vostočnoj Evropy èpohi rimskih vliânij i pereseleniâ narodov / Kaliningrad 2008. ; Нагірний М., Внесок білих хорватів у процес етногенезу Українців // Емінак: науковий щоквартальник, Т. 1 (січень-березень), №1(13), Миколаїв 2016. // Nagìrnij M., Vnesok bìlih horvatìv u proces etnogenezu Ukraïncìv // Emìnak: naukovij ŝokvartal᾽nik, T. 1 (sìčen᾽-berezen᾽), №1(13), Mikolaïv 2016. ; Новосельцев А.П., Хазарское государство и его роль в истории Восточной Европы Кавказа, Москва 1990. // Novosel᾽cev A.P., Hazarskoe gosudarstvo i ego rol᾽ v Istorii Vostočnoj Evropy i Kavkaza, Moskva 1990. ; Опря Є.А., Історичні аспекти формування та розвитку податкової системи в Україні // Університетські наукові записки, №3, Хмельницький 2005. // Oprâ Ê.A., Ìstoričnì aspekti formuvannâ ta rozvitku podatkovoï sistemi v Ukraïnì // Unìversitets᾽kì naukovì zapiski, №3, Hmel᾽nic᾽kij 2005. ; Плетнёва С.А., Хазары, Москва 1976. // Pletnëva S.A., Hazary, Moskva 1976. ; Седов В.В., Славяне. Историко-археологическое исследование, Москва 2002. // Sedov V.V., Slavâne. Istoriko-arheologičeskoe issledovanie, Moskva 2002. ; Ставерська Т.О., Іванюта О.М., Історія фінансів: навчальний посібник, Харків 2013. // Stavers᾽ka T.O., Ìvanûta O.M., Ìstorìâ fìnansìv: navčal᾽nij posìbnik, Harkìv 2013. ; Тихацова М.А., К вопросу об обмене и торговле в эпоху черняховской культуры // Краткие сообщения института археологии, Москва 1974, Вып. 38. // Tihacova M.A., K voprosu ob obmene i torgovle v èpohu černâhovskoj kul᾽tury // Kratkie soobŝeniâ institutaarheologii, Moskva 1974, Vyp. 38. ; Толкушкин А.В., История налогов в России, Москва 2001. // Tolkuškin A.V., Istoriâ nalogov v Rossii, Moskva 2001. ; Толочко П.П., Кочевые народы степей и Киевская Русь, Киев 1999. // Toločko P.P., Kočevye narody stepej i Kievskaâ Rus᾽, Kiev 1999. ; Тортика А.А., Северо-Западная Хазария в контексте истории Восточной Европы (вторая половина VII – третья четверть X вв., Xарьков 2006. // Tortika A.A., Severo-Zapadnaâ Hazariâ v kontekste istorii Vostočnoj Evropy (vtoraâ polovina VII – tret᾽â četvert᾽ X vv., Xar᾽kov 2006. ; Три еврейских путешественника XI и XII ст. / Пер. и примеч. П.В. Марголина, СПб 1881. // Tri evrejskih putešestvennika XI i XII st. / Per. i primeč. P.V. Margolina, SPb 1881. ; Уколова В.И., Поздний Рим. Пять портретов, Москва 1992. // Ukolova V.I., Pozdnij Rim. Pât᾽ portretov, Moskva 1992. ; Українська мала енциклопедія: 16 кн.: у 8 т. / проф. Є. Онацький. Буенос-Айрес 1963. // Ukraïns᾽ka mala enciklopedìâ: 16 kn.: u 8 t. / prof. Ê. Onac᾽kij. Buenos-Ajres 1963. ; Фрадинський О., Машко А., Еволюція надзвичайного оподаткування: від давньогрецької ейсфори до вітчизняного військового збору // Світ фінансів. Вип. 3, Тернопіль 2016. // Fradins᾽kij O., Maško A., Evolûcìâ nadzvičajnogo opodatkuvannâ: vìd davn᾽ogrec᾽koï ejsfori do vìtčiznânogo vìjs᾽kovogo zboru // Svìt fìnansìv. Vip. 3, Ternopìl᾽ 2016. ; Хозарський каганат // Енциклопедія історії України: у 10 т., Т. 10, Київ 2013. // Hozars᾽kij kaganat // Enciklopedìâ ìstorìï Ukraïni: u 10 t., T. 10, Kiïv 2013. ; Цимбал П.В., Податки, податкова система України, податкова злочинність: історія, теорія, практика, Ірпінь 2007. // Cimbal P.V., Podatki, podatkova sistema Ukraïni, podatkova zločinnìst᾽: ìstorìâ, teorìâ, praktika, Ìrpìn ᾽2007. ; Czegledy K., Khazar Raids in Transcaucasia in A D 762–764, "Acta Onentaha Acad Scient Hungaricae" 1960. ; Dunlop D. M., The History of the Jewish Khazars, Princeton 1954. ; Gluhak A., Porijeklo imena Hrvat, Zagreb 1990. ; Golb N., Pritsak O., Khazarian Hebrew documents of the tenth century, Ithaca 1982. ; Hansen T., Die gotische Bibel, ed. W. Streitberg, Hejdelberg 1965. ; Hudud al-Alam, The regions of the world a Persian geography, 372 A.H.-982 A.D., trans. V. Minorsky, Cambridge 1982. ; Ludwig D., Struktur und Gesellschaft des Chasaren-Reiches im Licht der schriftlichen Quellen. Masch. Diss, Münster 1982. ; Mesudî. Murûc ez-Zeheb (Altın Bozkırlar), ed. D.A. Batur, İstanbul 2004. ; Saxo Grammaticus, Dänischen Geschichte, Bd.VIII, B. 1990. ; Szymański W., Dąbrowska E., Awarzy, Węgrzy, Wrocław 1979. ; Zosimus, New history, ed. R, Ridley, Canberra 1984. ; 19
Samhällets ingripande och däri beslutsfattanden gällande barn i socialt utsatta livssituationer är något av det mest svårhanterliga som välfärdssystem har att handskas med. De yttersta besluten är här de som görs med grund i tvångs-lagstiftning där barn mot föräldrars och/eller sin egen vilja omhändertas för samhällsvård. Även hanterandet av beslut om frivilliga insatser påverkar dock barn och familjer, och situationen för det enskilda barnet kan vara lika allvarlig vid frivillig vård som vid tvångsvård. Det finns troligen inte något system som är bäst på tillgodose samtliga utmaningar vilket innebär att det strävas efter ba-lans eller kompromiss mellan olika vägledande principer och hänsynstagande. Var tyngdpunkten i denna balans ska ligga har bestämts något olika i olika län-der, där de nordiska länderna är intressanta inte bara för denna olikhet utan också för att viktiga förändringar genomförts som påverkar ramarna för besluts-fattandet. Syftet med studien är att beskriva och analysera lekmännens roll inom myndig-hetsutövningen för social barnavård i Norge, Finland och Danmark. Av särskilt intresse är graden av lekmannainflytande i olika instanser som hanterar place-ring av barn för vård utanför hemmet. Grunderna för systemförändringar som rör beslutsfattandet generellt och specifikt lekmännens roll samt vad som är känt om effekterna av dessa belyses och sätts i relation till den svenska mo-dellen samt aktuell forskning av betydelse för området. Från syftet följer tre huvudsakliga frågeställningar: (i) Hur ser graden av lekmannainflytande inom den sociala barnavården ut i de nordiska länderna? (ii) Hur har frågan om lekmannainflytande inom den sociala barnavården diskuterats och vilka kompetenser anses betydelsefulla i besluts-fattandet i de olika nordiska länderna? (iii) Vilket inflytande och delaktighet har barn och familjer i besluts-processerna och vilken betydelse har dessa haft i förändringar av respektive system? Övergripande finns många likheter i hur den sociala barnavården organiseras i de nordiska länderna Norge, Finland, Danmark och Sverige. På nationell nivå formuleras lagar och övergripande policys. Alla länder organiserar en mer gene-rell kontroll och tillsyn över hur arbetet genomförs på regional nivå medan handläggningsarbete huvudsakligen sker på lokalnivå, företrädesvis i kommu-ner. Trots dessa likheter kan vi se att beslutsformerna organiseras på olika sätt och framförallt skiljer sig relationerna mellan olika aktörer och deras ansvar åt. Detta inte minst efter de reformer och den omorganisering av den sociala barna-vården och dess beslutsorgan som genomförts i Norge, Finland och Danmark de senaste 25 åren. Ett ledord i förändringarna har varit ökad rättssäkerhet för de individer som kommer i kontakt med den sociala barnavården. Länderna har dock valt något olika lösningar för att uppnå detta. Det handlar exempelvis om skillnader i vilken kunskap som bedömts vara relevant för att kunna fatta de bästa besluten för enskilda individer. Därmed finns också olika krav på sak-kunskap hos de aktörer som getts beslutsmandat. När det gäller frivilliga insatser i öppenvård ligger mandat att fatta beslut, i alla länder, på kommunal nivå. I de fall det direkta beslutsmandatet inte ligger på handläggande socialarbetare finns många gånger möjlighet att delegera besluts-fattandet till denna funktion. När det handlar om frivilliga placeringar skiljer det sig dock åt där det i Sverige är lekmän i socialnämnden som har beslutsrätt i de allra flesta fall medan det i Finland och i Norge är ledaren för den sociala barna-vården på kommunal nivå, och i Danmark upp till varje kommun att bestämma, vem som har beslutsmandat. Vid beslut om placering utan samtycke är en gemensam nämnare att det krävs inblandning av juridisk kompetens för avgörande beslut. Utöver detta kan sak-kunniga och lekmän delta. Eget beslutsmandat ges dock inte åt någon aktör i nå-got av länderna, utan beslutsfunktionen innebär en form av balans mellan olika kompetenser. I Finland fattas beslut gällande vårdinsatser med tvång över-vägande av ledamöter med juridisk kompetens stödda av sakkunnig med kun-skap om barn och barnskydd. Även i Danmark har jurister stort inflytande då det förutom i det ordinarie beslutsorganet, børn og unge-udvalget, krävs juridisk kompetens vid beslut om akuta åtgärder. Det är ordförande i børn og unge-udvalget som har beslutsmandat för denna typ av beslut. I Norge och Danmark ingår juridisk expertis, sakkunniga och lekmän för det avgörande beslutet om tvångsvård, medan sakkunniga saknas i det svenska och lekmän i det finska systemet. Sverige skiljer sig åt, dels genom frånvaron av sakkunniga i beslutsfunktion. Dels genom frånvaron av socialfacklig professionell kompetens med formell beslutsmakt vid frivilliga placeringar. Dessutom finns ett tydligt lekmannainslag som inte existerar i de andra länderna. I Sverige är lekmän, i form av nämnds-/utskottsledamöter utsedda av politiska partier, de enda aktörerna med formellt beslutsmandat gällande frivilliga placeringar. De har även beslutsmandat gäl-lande ansökan om tvångsvård. Vid behov av beslut om akuta insatser är det ord-föranden i detta utskott som konsulteras och fattar besluten. I Norge, Finland och Danmark är beslutsfattande gällande frivilliga placeringar i de flesta fall i stället lagt på tjänstemän. I Sverige dominerar lekmän dessutom i antal över den juridiska expertisen (domaren) när det kommer till aktörer med beslutsmandat i förvaltningsdomstolen. Utöver jurister, sakkunniga och lekmän kan socialarbetare utöva stort infly-tande över beslut, oberoende av om de har formellt beslutsmandat eller inte. Socialarbetarrollen har stora likheter i alla länder på det sätt att den innebär ett ansvar för hur den utredning som ligger till grund för beslut genomförs, både beslut om frivilliga insatser och tvångsbeslut. Utredande socialarbetare påverkar till viss del också om och när ansökan om tvångsomhändertagande ska göras. De specifika förutsättningar de arbetar under samt deras handlingsutrymme varierar dock. Skillnaderna handlar både om tillgång till stöd, exempelvis i form av andra professionellas kunskaper. Det handlar också om hur deras arbete granskas och kontrolleras, exempelvis av socialarbetare i ledningsposition eller av sakkunniga kommittéer. Det verkar dock också finnas lokala skillnader inom länderna på grund av den grad av kommunalt självstyre som på något sätt finns i alla länder. Förutom rättssäkerhet har frågor om barn och föräldrars delaktighet i den soci-ala barnavården angetts som ett viktigt mål med de förändringar som genom-förts i Norge, Finland och Danmark. Men även i Sverige har så väl lagstiftning som allmänna råd och riktlinjer utformats med intentionen att öka barns delaktighet. Det finns tecken på att förändringarna gett resultat och att barn involveras i allt högre grad i det sociala barnavårdsarbete som berör dem men bilden som ges är inte entydig. Trots barns stärkta ställning i lagtext, styrdokument och me-toder så involveras inte barn i den utsträckning som riktlinjerna anger (Berrick, Dickens, Pösö & Skivenes, 2015a; Strandbu, 2011). En möjlig orsak till detta kan vara att handläggare inom socialtjänsten ges utrymme att själva tolka vad delaktighet under en utredning innebär och att de sinsemellan kan ha olika före-ställningar om delaktighet. Men det uppmärksammas att det även i domstolar som hanterar beslut om tvångsåtgärder finns brister i hur barns rätt att komma till tals hanteras. Barn och föräldrar kan också uppleva en domstolsprocess som mycket krävande och svår att förstå vilket då innebär en risk för att upplevelsen av delaktighet minskar snarare än tvärtom. I denna studie framgår dock inte tyd-ligt i vilken grad barns eller föräldrars delaktighet påverkas av hur balansen mellan olika aktörer i beslutsorganen organiseras. När lekmännens inflytande minskat i Norge, Finland och Danmark, har detta inte enbart skett till förmån för handläggande socialarbetare eller till den social-fackliga kunskapen generellt. Framförallt gäller det i beslutsprocesser som handlar om tvångsvård där professionaliseringen har inneburit ett ökat infly-tande från andra professioner, kanske framför allt från jurister men också från sakkunniga med psykologisk expertis. Trots att det ökade inflytandet från olika typer av expertis har setts som något positivt har det samtidigt framförts viss kritik mot att vissa expertgrupper fått mer inflytande än andra. Det finns exempelvis invändningar emot att psykolo-gisk sakkunskap fått en särställning framför annan expertis (Barne-, likestil-lings- og inkluderingsdepartementet, 2015). Det saknas dock säker kunskap om hur de olika aktörernas förslag till beslut skiljer sig åt. Därmed vet vi inte heller om lekmännens förslag till beslut skiljer sig åt från de förslag som getts av pro-fessionella utredare eller från andra beslutsfattare. Sammantaget innebär det att även om diskussionen om lekmännens roll inte verkar vara lika aktuell i Norge, Finland och Danmark som i Sverige, just nu, lyfts andra frågor kopplade till be-slutsfattandets olika aktörer, deras inflytande, kompetens och balansen dem emellan fram, både vad gäller frivilliga beslut och beslut om tvångsåtgärder. Även om målet är ett rättssäkert beslutsfattande är svaret på hur beslutsorgan och beslutsprocesser ska organiseras i den sociala barnavården därmed inte självklart. Synen på vilka kompetenser ett beslutsorgan bör innehålla och hur denna kunskap ska balanseras varierar även om det i Norge, Finland och Dan-mark finns en idé om att olika kompetenser krävs för att tillförsäkra väl avvägda beslut vid tvångsåtgärder. Skillnaderna visar sig också i tillvägagångssätt, stöd och kontroll i processen som leder fram till ett beslutsunderlag. En sak som är gemensam är dock diskussionen om att socialarbetares kompetens och erfaren-heter varierar vilket kan påverka beslutsunderlagens kvalitet. Frågan om hur ett rättssäkert beslutsfattande ska skapas kanske därmed måste innefatta en diskuss-ion om alla involverade aktörer samtidigt? Denna studie har varken möjlighet eller avsikt att slå fast vilket system som är bättre än något annat. Det finns studier som visar på olika potentiella problem och svårigheter med alla de system och organisationer som här uppmärksam-mas. Med det inte sagt att organiseringen av hur och vem som ska genomföra utred-ningar, göra bedömningar och fatta beslut kan göras kvalitativt olika och vara mer eller mindre rättssäkra. Lekmännens roll är dock inte bara avhängig synen på behovet av deras kunskap och expertis utan också hur behovet av andra aktö-rers expertis bedöms. Om lekmän har tillräcklig kunskap för att fatta beslut be-ror också på hur den sociala barnavården kan klara av att organisera arbetet med de beslutsunderlag som ligger till grund för beslutsfattandet.
In a previous note on these same pages, we made reference to Obama's unpredictable use of executive power and his tendency to overuse it for certain domestic policies, while deferring to the military and foreign policy establishmenton issues he is ambivalent about, such as the international use of force. We also alluded to his tendency to isolate himself and rely excessively on his own judgment in shaping policy, to the detriment of his relations with staff, cabinet and other leaders. The long-drawn decision to seek Congressional approval before striking Syria is a case study of these proclivities.After resisting calls for intervention in Syria by Senate Republican "hawks"and foreign policy specialists since 2011, a year ago Obama conceded that, in spite of his aversion to intervene in "sectarian struggles",certain actions such as the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian regime against the opposition would constitute a "red line" which, once crossed, would automatically bring about an armed response by the United States. This week he had to face the consequences of his own words.Whenrobust evidence of the use of sarin gas by Bashar Al Assad's forces in rebel occupied territory was produced, the President had no choice but to spendthelast week of the month of Augustfrantically building a case for immediate intervention. Acting simultaneously as Chief Executive, policy shaper and his own spokesman, he used several venues, including an NPR interview, to announce to the American people that the time had come to act.But while Secretary of State John Kerry made a compelling speech on the need to act swiftly to punish the "moral obscenity" committed by the Assad regime, Obama appeared much more circumspect in his appeals to the American people. His early words conveyed both his outrage at the disproportionate actions by Assad as well as his empathy with the war-weary American citizens. In private, he confided he had qualms both about the legality and the political legitimacy of military action. In public, his argument focused on the violation of an international convention prohibiting the use of chemical weapons and the absolutely unavoidable duty to enforce it. But the fact that UN inspectors had not completed their field report on the attack, coupled with the refusal of the UN Security Council to consider armed action, gave him pause and forced him to confront his own doubts once again.In the meantime, momentum was building in the United States where, according to press reports, it was all but certain there would be a military strike to "punish and deter" the Syrian regime, by Labor Day weekend. GOP Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham were vocal in their support of intervention but demanded more than just a punitive strike and showed some impatience towards the President's pondering an action that should have been decided long ago.Abroad, Turkey, Israel and Saudi Arabia were in favor of the US action. As it is widely known, Russia was against it and that is why the US had to bypass the UN Security Council where Russia has veto power. While NATO allies all offered strong support (indeed, both France and Britain were the first to insist on support for the rebels a year ago), Prime Minister David Cameron was delivered a strong blow when he lost a vote in the House of Commons, with some of his own backbenchers voting against intervention. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, facing a coming election and against the perennial background of German Basic Law constraints, had already told the President that Germany would stand in the sidelines, while offering moral support. The long shadow cast by the Iraqi war around the world once again became evident. But the French President, not required by the Fifth Republic Constitution to consult the legislature, and encouraged by France's recent successful actions in Mali and Libya, remained firm.By Friday, Obama's tortured deliberations came to an end as he abruptly changed courses. Against the advice of his National Security and political advisors team, he made a dramatic announcement from the Rose Garden: his decision on the need for a narrow punitive action against Syria had been made, he said, but he had decided to ask for Congressional authorization first. As Commander in Chief, and in spite of the War Powers Resolution of 1973, he is not obligated to do this. He thus appears to be shifting responsibility onto the legislature while simultaneouslybuying some time to explore diplomatic solutions in the upcoming G-20 summer.The cerebral constitutional law professor and the risk- taking politician in him have made a Faustian bargain. If Congress authorizes the use of force, he will have both legal and political cover for his action while at the same time fulfilling his moral duty of punishing a violator of the Chemical Weapons Convention and of Humanitarian law. If they vote No, he can just blame them for his own lack of action and use all the power of the Presidency on his domestic agenda.It is, in any case, a big gamble, one that has the potential of weakening him and turning him into a lame duck for the rest of his Presidency. The GOP is internally divided on many issues, among them foreign policy, where conservative ideologies run the gamut from minimalist /isolationist to neo-cons/regime- change interventionists and all the shades in-between. And the far left in Obama's own party is against intervention. So there is no guarantee he will get Congressional approval. The cost of losing this vote is enormous: it may set a strong precedent in diminishing Presidential prerogatives.To be fair to the President and his vacillating stance, this is not an easy decision. None of the world leaders have made a compelling public case for a strategic need of intervention in Syria. The proposed limited "punitive" strike will most likely be inconclusive: it will not deter further extreme actions by Assad, who has now been given time to disperse his military assets and capabilities. The strike will not significantly degrade his capacity to fight, and there will be little change in his main goal, namely, to destroy the opposition and regain total control of the country.This is a fight to the end by both sides. If overthrown, Assad and his Alawite supporters (as well as the Christians who have traditionally been under his protection) will be massacred. There are no desirable outcomes in this conflict. The rebels are divided and the biggest group is that ofthe jihadists with strong support of Al Qaeda. While Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Israel are on the side of the United States and want a moderate alternative to the Assad regime, Iran, to an extent Iraq, and Hezbollah in Lebanon are on the dictator's side (as, incongruously, is Venezuela). The Palestinian group Hamas, previously favoring Assad has now changed sides and is supporting the rebels. So in many ways this is a war by proxy that could become a generalized regional war. There is no indication that the President or anyone else has a political plan or a diplomatic effort in mind for the post-strike scenario.However, US inaction at this time undermines the security of its allies, especially Israel. Even though Netanyahu has adopted a "no comment" stance and hasn't, accordingly, said a word on this issue, other Israeli politicians are worrying out loud about the implications the US lack of resolve will have on other "red lines": Will the United States act when Iran crosses the nuclear threshold? Or will Israel find itself facing Iran alone?They bitterly remind themselves of Obama's speech in Jerusalem, in March this year, when he said in Hebrew: "Atem lo levad" ("You are not alone"). They are very skeptical, now more than ever, that the President will match his lofty rhetoric with action.In the United States the momentum is gone, Congress won't reconvene until September 9, and the President is using the last week of summer to energetically lobby House and Senate leaders and persuade skeptics through intelligence briefings. Urgent issues in the domestic agenda will thus have to be postponed.What no one, either at home or abroad denies, is that the credibility of the Presidency and with it, that of the United States, is at stake. International support for the operation is unlikely to improve. A negative vote by Congress will further weaken the President and may complicate the White House legislative agenda, where he will have to spend all his political capital and still,perhaps, fall short.In a keynote speech to the National Defense University earlier this year, Obama expressed the need to chart a new way in American foreign policy, one that would end the "perpetual wartime footing" that characterized the post 9-11 era, after G.W. Bush got a virtual blank check from Congress in the use of military force and intelligence gathering. So far, Obama has ended two protracted unpopular wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it is clear he will not engage in regime change. But a new foreign policy strategy has not crystallized yet. There is no Obama doctrine, no overall framework to guide his decisions and give predictability to his actions.His whole approach to the Middle East, the most explosive region in the planet today, is misconceived. His tepid reaction to the Egyptian situation had already given some approximation of how reluctant he is about taking sides in conflicts in the region. Syrian use of chemical weapons has confirmed his ambivalence and exposed his indecision. At the same time, it has provoked a collapse of American credibility abroad, anduncertainty about its reliability as an ally. Regardless of what follows after this week, his hesitancy will have dire consequences for American foreign policy into the future.The larger problem that looms over the heads of world leaders and that few seem to acknowledge is that this is not about Syria or Egypt or Libya or Yemen or Tunisia as separate conflicts; it is a regional conflagration that has to be addressedcomprehensively, within the larger regional and international context. All major actors, whether it is Europe, Russia, or China and of course the United States, have a stake in the region and it is in their interest to define the rules of the game and together find an overall solution to this predicament.
Sinclair writes about his new book, "The Way Out: What Lies Ahead for America." He also write a great deal about his book "Upton Sinclair Presents William Fox", and its influence on not only the United States but the world as well. He also writes about various opinions on the book, including praise from Congressmen and foreign leaders. Sinclair also writes about his film "Thunder Over Mexico". ; UPTON SINCLAIR LOS ANGELES WEST BRANCH CALIFORNIA May 1933 Dear Friend: I didn't expect to send you another circular this spring; but it appears that I have written another book! So many persons have been asking me for something on the present crisis, and the way out. What do I think about Roosevelt and his policies? Is this the final breakdown, or can capitalism make one more boom? I wrote a short article on the subject, "An Open Letter to the American People' and sent it to Fulton Oursler, editor of "Liberty,' who called me on the phone from New York, calling it "the greatest piece of statesmanship since Lincoln's Gettysburg address." "Liberty" is to publish it in the issue of June. 10. I decided to cover the subject in more detail in a little book. It is the same kind of thing as "Letters to Judd;" except it is addressed to a young capitalist of my acquaintance, one who is troubled by the problems which have fallen onto his shoulders. "Letters to Perry," I called it, but later decided on a more explicit title: "The Way Out: What Lies Ahead for America." My arguments are addressed, not merely to capitalists, but to all business men and professional people, the white collar class who make up the greater number of my readers. I tell them what they are up against, and what they have to do about it, whether they like it or not. The book is to be published by Farrar & Rinehart in New York, and I will have my own edition. The price is one dollar postpaid. Some of my friends have protested that the price of "Upton Sinclair Presents William Fox" is too high for them; I cannot yet reduce the price, since I haven't paid my debts to the publisher, but I can give you a combination price. You may have the two books, both clothbound and also a cloth copy of "The Spokesman's Secretary," one of my stories of which I have an oversupply; all for $3.05. You may be interested in news regarding the Fox book. A new edition is ready, with index, and a new jacket, prepared by an expert in New York. It is printed on a better quality of paper--I don't know about these matters, but some of my friends attended to it. Nobody has tried to ban the book, and nobody has sued me for libel-a great relief to my wife, who is more concerned with taking care of her husband than with selling a hundred thousand copies of a book. The great press of New York boycotted the work for the most part ; but papers all over the country-not quite so close to Wall Street-have been giving it a great deal of attention. The editor of the Bridgeport (Conn.) "Herald' telegraphed me, asking my price for serial rights, and I answered that I would leave it to his conscience. This suggested an idea, and I sent a circular to the managing editor of every daily paper in the United States, and to many weeklies, also labor and farm papers, offering them the book. In a few days I have received more than 500 replies, asking for a copy for examination. The book broke into the Congressional Record, Page 4922, Issue of February 23, 1933. I quote: Mr. Borah: Mr. President, may I interrupt the Senator? The Vice President : Does the Senator from Nebraska yield to the Senator from Idaho? Mr. Norris: Certainly. Mr. Borah : I want to ask the Senator if he has seen a book just published by Upton Sinclair on Wall Street, entitled. "Upton Sinclair Presents William Fox?" Mr. Norris: Yes, I have seen the book. Mr. Borah: I think it is one of the most remarkable stories in regard to such matters that I have ever read. Mr. Norris : I have not yet read all of it. but the part which I have read indicates that it is a very remarkable story. Recently I received a letter from Congressman Brooks Fletcher of Ohio. saying that many congressmen wanted to read the book, but could not get it because of the demand for the copies in the Congressional Library. If I had been a good business man, I might have suggested that the Congressional Library place an order at our wholesale rates. But being more concerned with making the book known, I sent a free copy to every congressman and senator, a total of 531 books. Congressman Fletcher stated that they wanted to read it "before legislation may be presented dealing with the matter which your book treats. Many of us feel that legislation on the issues presented in the book is of vital importance at this time." The sales of the book have been good, considering the state of the country. Seventeen days after publication Brentano listed the book as number 2 among the best-selling non-fiction books-and then went into bankruptcy, owing me a trifle over $500 ! On March 20 the New York "Times" listed it among the three best-selling nonfiction books in half a dozen of the leading New York bookstores. You might ask the New York "Herald-Tribune Books," the New York Sun and the "American," why they have not reviewed this best-selling work. Also, don't overlook "Time" and the "Literary Digest;" also the "Christian Science Monitor," which not only has failed to review the book, but rejected a paid advertisement which 1 submitted to it. (I have just received a very courteous letter from the editor of the "Monitor," promising to review this decision. I await the out come.) My English publisher is afraid of the book, and apparently I am not going to get a publisher over there. I sent out review copies, and am receiving columns of reviews all of them enthusiastic. "Everyman" gives the book an entire page. The Birmingham "Gazette" says: "If only a tenth of the facts given are true, the book is a damning record of crookery in the highest places. Let Wall Street read it-and writhe!" From Moscow comes a two column review in the "Daily News,' the English-language paper, which says: "No more daring exposure of the machinations of high finance -with the names of innumerable worthy living gentlemen included, despite all laws of libel-has ever been penned. It is undoubtedly the most detailed and vivid recording that I have ever read or am likely to read of the means by which finance capital works." 1 wrote in my last letter that I had added the German ex-Kaiser to my list of readers. Now I am pleased to enroll the King of Belgium. Writing in the New York "Times," Leo Ferrero quotes King Albert as follows: "America has, also, a great many first-rate artists in every field. Her novelists interest me especially; they are so intensely alive, so full of strength. Dreiser, for example, and the two Sinclairs-I mean Sinclair Lewis and Upton Sinclair." They are burning my books now in Germany, but as several million copies have been sold there, I doubt if the Nazis can find them all. While I am writing this, Gandhi is in the midst of a three weeks' fast, and my readers will be interested in the following passage from a letter by Lewis Browne, author of "This Believing World," "Blessed Spinoza," etc. Browne, who is making a tour of the world, writes from Colombo, Ceylon : "We've just come down from Sabarmati in the Jugerat Country where we lived for some days in Gandhi's Ashram – a Sanskrit word meaning monastery. There his closest followers live in starkest simplicity. . We went there to learn what we could of the fight for India's freedom-but stayed to tell about Upton Sinclair. For we at once discovered you were-judging by the books in the small library of the Ashram -the favorite author of those people. Narainadas Gandhi, a nephew of the Mahatma, informed us that the great man had read most if not all of your works, and was intensely interested in you as a person. We traveled 400 miles to Poona in the hope of talking with Gandhi-his followers told us to be sure to tell him what little we knew about you while in his presence-but the prison authorities absolutely refused to let us come near him." I am happy to tell you that the Eisenstein Mexican picture, for which my wife and I assumed responsibility two and a half years ago is at last completed, and is a gorgeous work. Rob Wagner tells me that he is citing it in "Liberty" as a "four-star picture." He writes concerning it: "In my opinion 'Thunder Over Mexico' will prove to be one of the great, if not the greatest, picture of 1933. It has the beauty of 'Tabu,' terrific drama with the feeling of absolute authenticity, and as thrilling a finish as I've ever seen." I don't yet know how this picture will be released, but you will hear about it before long. Try to get it in your local theatres. I have a share in the profits, and hope it may enable me to carry out my long-delayed plan of putting a set of my books into public libraries throughout the world. I got the Sinclair Foundation ready for this purpose, expecting that the picture would be completed in less than a year. We have been through a long series of trials, but at last here is "Thunder Over Mexico,' a masterpiece of the film art, and millions of people will be rewarded for our troubles as promoters. Sincerely, Upton Sinclair P.S. Booktrade please note to order "The Way Out" from Farrar and Rinehardt, New York
Pädagogische Fachkräfte nutzen Social Media-Plattformen als professionelle Handlungsräume. Diese Nutzung umfasst die Grundformen pädagogischen Handelns, wie Arrangieren, Animieren und Informieren/Beraten. "Wenn ich als Pädagogikprofessor in einer Straßenbahn Eltern Ratschläge gebe, wie sie mit einem offensichtlich übermüdeten Kind umgehen sollen, dann handele ich vermutlich anmaßend, aber nicht professionell, denn die Tram ist nicht der Ort meiner Profession." (Giesecke 1997: 47) Wie sieht es aus, wenn die Orte pädagogischer Profession nun aber gezielt ausgedehnt werden, indem pädagogische Fachkräfte in Sozialen Onlinenetzwerken (SONW) pädagogisch agieren? SONW werden somit zu neuen pädagogischen Handlungsräumen. Der Beitrag zeigt anhand ausgewählter Fallbeispiele, wie SONW von pädagogischen Fachkräften der Offenen Kinder- und Jugendarbeit (OKJA) als pädagogische Handlungsräume genutzt werden. Noch nie zuvor haben so viele junge Menschen und Erwachsene das Internet täglich genutzt (mpfs 2017; Projektgruppe ARD/ZDF–Multimedia 2017). Angesichts dieser hohen Bedeutung stellt sich die Frage, inwiefern auch die Soziale Arbeit die Potenziale des Internets und besonders die Potenziale von SONW für sich nutzen kann. Eine Vorreiterrolle bezüglich der Nutzung von SONW als pädagogische Handlungsräume nehmen die pädagogischen Fachkräfte der OKJA ein (JFF 2011). Zunächst wird in diesem Beitrag anhand einiger Situationen aus der OKJA verdeutlicht, wie SONW als pädagogische Handlungsräume genutzt werden. Die verwendeten Beispiele entstammen qualitativen Interviews mit Fachkräften, die im Rahmen des Dissertationsprojekts der Autorin geführt wurden. Der anschließende Abschnitt beschäftigt sich mit der Frage nach der Wahrnehmung und Artikulation von SONW als pädagogische Handlungsräume durch die Fachkräfte. In einer Zusammenfassung werden die geschilderten Situationen hinsichtlich der Grundformen pädagogischen Handelns nach Giesecke kategorisiert. Der Artikel schließt mit einer Positionierung zu den Herausforderungen durch SONW und einem Ausblick. Exemplarische Situationen der Nutzung von SONW Im Folgenden werden ausgewählte Situationen der alltäglichen Nutzung von SONW und deren pädagogische Implikationen vorgestellt. Der erste Beispielkomplex zeigt dies am Beispiel der Postings von Jugendlichen. Dadurch, dass die Jugendarbeiterin Clara auf Facebook mit den Jugendlichen befreundet ist, erfährt sie von Beleidigungen und Streits und hat die Möglichkeit Einfluss zu nehmen: "Dann hab ich gemerkt, die fängt dann an mit der zu chatten und auf die Startseite: 'Und du bist so doof' und haste nicht gesehen [zu schreiben]. Und dann konnte ich natürlich im Vorfeld schon eingreifen. Und wenn sie dann kamen, dann hatte ich eine Information, die ich sonst nicht gehabt hätte und hab sie mir dann alle ins Büro geholt und hab das ganz offen angesprochen." Bei Streits zu intervenieren ist für die pädagogischen Fachkräfte in der OKJA alltägliche pädagogische Arbeit. In einem ersten Schritt wird die Situation beruhigt und in einem anschließenden Schritt mit den Beteiligten in einem pädagogischen Rahmen bearbeitet. Clara kann situativ entweder mittels Kommentar direkt in die Interaktion im SONW einsteigen oder zu einem späteren Zeitpunkt ein Gespräch in der Einrichtung forcieren. Sie bewertet es als sehr hilfreich, Dinge indirekt zu erfahren, da sich das o.g. Mädchen vielleicht nicht von sich aus an sie gewandt hätte. Clara erhält durch ihre Facebook-Freundschaft auch Informationen, die nicht explizit an sie adressiert wurden, somit obliegt es ihrer pädagogischen Kompetenz, sensibel mit diesen Informationen umzugehen und zu entscheiden, ob sie sie aktiv nutzt oder die Situation passiv beobachtet. Der Jugendarbeiter Felix hat ein Bild kommentiert, das zwei Mädchen gepostet hatten. Auf diesem Bild inszenieren sich die Mädchen auf Straßenbahnschienen sitzend. Felix schien es erforderlich dies zu hinterfragen: "'Okay, das ist nicht so ganz eindeutig, was wollt ihr mit diesem Foto sagen? Wollt ihr sagen, dass euch das Leben nicht mehr gefällt und ihr wartet darauf, dass die nächste Straßenbahn kommt und euch überfährt?'" Die Mädchen erfahren Selbstwirksamkeit, da der Jugendarbeiter auf das Foto reagiert. Durch das offene Thematisieren der Bildbotschaften werden sie zum Reflektieren ihres Handelns angehalten und somit Bildungsprozesse angeregt. Felix ist zudem sensibilisiert und kann zu einem späteren Zeitpunkt ggf. eine Beratungs- oder Informationssituation initiieren. Informationen, die Clara aus den Postings der Jugendlichen über diese erhält, nutzt sie, um in der Anschlusskommunikation ein Gefühl emotionaler Verbundenheit hervorzurufen: "Und wenn du dann zum Beispiel bei Facebook schon gesagt hast: 'Finde ich toll, du hast ein neues Kleid'. Dann kommen sie an: 'Mensch Clara, wirklich? Ist das ein schönes Kleid? Sag mal ehrlich.'" Die Jugendarbeiterin reagiert hier wertschätzend auf Dinge, die für die Jugendlichen aktuell von Belang sind und zwar im Einzelfall, aber ebenso auch bereits durch die Tatsache, dass sie sich auf die Kommunikationsweise der Jugendlichen einlässt. Sie erzeugt dadurch ein positives Klima und ruft ein Gefühl emotionaler Verbundenheit hervor. Clara selbst beschreibt dies als Intensivierung der Kontakte. Oder anders gesagt: Sie nutzt die SONW unterstützend, um die Beziehung zu den Jugendlichen kontinuierlich weiterzuentwickeln. Diese Grundlagen für den Aufbau einer vertrauensvollen Arbeitsbeziehung werden von der Jugendarbeiterin arrangiert. Im zweiten Beispielkomplex werden die pädagogischen Implikationen und Intentionen anhand der Postings der pädagogischen Fachkräfte vorgestellt. Felix verfolgt sowohl pädagogische als auch administrative Absichten, wenn er Aktionen der Einrichtung mittels Bildpostings in SONW dokumentiert. Die Postings haben zum einen den Zweck ein Zugehörigkeitsgefühl zur Einrichtung zu fördern, indem gemeinsame Erlebnisse positiv erinnert werden und die Jugendlichen animiert werden, diese Emotionen zu reflektieren und zu verbalisieren. "Also wenn ein schönes Foto natürlich da ist und dann die Reaktion drauf kommen würde: 'Ja, ich war dabei. Das war total geil.' Dann wäre damit schon sehr viel erreicht." Außerdem möchte Felix einen Dialog über diese spezifische Aktion unter den Jugendlichen anregen. Er eröffnet mit der Kommentarfunktion eine niedrigschwellige Möglichkeit und motiviert die Jugendlichen damit, sich zu artikulieren. En passant erhält er durch die Kommentare Feedback und kann weitere entsprechende Angebote arrangieren. Zugleich hat sowohl die Dokumentation als auch der Anschlussdialog der Jugendlichen Signalcharakter nach außen: Außenstehende erhalten einen Eindruck von Angeboten und Zielgruppe sowie einen Eindruck davon, wie die pädagogischen Fachkräfte arbeiten; Lebendigkeit und Offenheit wird signalisiert. Sowohl Clara als auch Felix nutzen die SONW, um alltägliche pädagogische Angebote oder besondere Erlebnisse zu arrangieren und initiieren. Einen Vorteil sehen sie vor allem darin, dass sie mittels Postings in kurzer Zeit eine große Zielgruppe, nämlich alle mit der Einrichtung verbundenen Jugendlichen, erreichen können. Deutlich wird dies in Felix' Einrichtung, in der täglich das aktuelle pädagogische Angebot gepostet wird. Dadurch erreicht er auch eine Zielgruppe, die sonst nicht die Einrichtung besucht, sondern lediglich punktuell zu Außenveranstaltungen kommt. "Wie zum Beispiel jetzt im Sommer, wenn wir irgendwo Baden fahren dann wird das gepostet." Das Werben für den Badeausflug mittels Postings in SONW ermöglicht den o.g. Jugendlichen einen Zugang zur Einrichtung bzw. zu dem pädagogischen Personal und die Teilnahme an den pädagogischen Aktionen. Felix kann dies wiederum nutzen, um mit den Jugendlichen in Kontakt zu treten und Vertrauen aufzubauen. Außerdem kann eine andere Umgebung einen guten Rahmen bieten, um Barrieren zwischen den unterschiedlichen Besucher_innengruppen abzubauen und neue gruppendynamische Prozesse anzustoßen. Clara hatte beispielsweise Karten für die Castings von X Factor und Supertalent und postete: "Ich hab Karten. Wer will […] mitkommen?" bzw. "Ich hab keine Karten mehr." Sie ermöglicht den Jugendlichen damit, etwas Besonderes, nicht Alltägliches, zu erleben und schafft Möglichkeiten für Bildungsprozesse. Das Arrangieren der Teilnahme an besonderen Erlebnissen und pädagogischen Angeboten impliziert dementsprechend auch pädagogisches Handeln und ist über ein massenmediales Werben hinausgehend. Das pädagogische Handeln in SONW und SONW als pädagogische Handlungsräume Die vorherigen Explikationen haben den pädagogischen Gehalt im Umgang mit beiderseitigen Postings aufgezeigt. In einigen Beispielen wurde direkt im SONW interveniert, womit deutlich wurde, wie dieses als zusätzlicher, pädagogischer Handlungsraum der OKJA genutzt wird. Weiterführend stellt sich nun aber die Frage, inwiefern die beiden pädagogischen Fachkräfte die SONW als pädagogische Handlungsräume wahrnehmen und in dieser Deutlichkeit als solche bezeichnen. Nach ihrem Begriffsverständnis befragt, definiert Clara pädagogisches Handeln als "alles Handeln, was du in Bezug auf Jugendliche erzieherisch ausübst". Als Beispiel benennt sie das Eingehen auf Konflikte auf Basis von pädagogischen und entwicklungspsychologischen Fachkenntnissen, also "zu wissen, was damit gemeint sein kann und das dann eben ansprechen". Dabei verwendet sie einen aufrüttelnd-provokanten Sprachstil, sog. Modulationen (vgl. Cloos et al. 2009), um den Jugendlichen ihr Verhalten und dessen Konsequenzen bewusst zu machen. Für Clara findet sich diese Art pädagogischen Handelns fraglos auch in den SONW wieder. Sie verdeutlicht dies am weiteren Beispiel eines männlichen Jugendlichen, der sich in Bodybuilder-Pose fotografiert hat: "Und ich sage, 'Meine Güte, jetzt machste aber einen auf Muskelprotz!' und mach das mit so'nem Smiley hinten dran, so dass der eigentlich weiß, was ich damit meine." Auch hier verwendet sie Modulationen, um den Jugendlichen zur Reflexion seines Verhaltens anzuregen und ihm die Wirkungen des geposteten Bildes vor Augen zu führen. Zusätzlich hätte Clara die Möglichkeit die Interaktion auf Facebook für spätere Anschlusskommunikation innerhalb der Einrichtung zu verwenden. Auffällig an Claras Verständnis von pädagogischem Handeln ist vor allem, dass sie den Fokus im Schwerpunkt auf konflikthafte oder problematische Situationen richtet. Pädagogisches Handeln umfasst für sie somit korrigierendes Handeln. Darin unterscheidet sich ihre Definition von der Gieseckes. Dieser definiert pädagogisches Handeln als positive Beeinflussung des Menschen hin zu einer mündigen Persönlichkeit, indem man Gelegenheiten zu Bildungsprozessen bietet (vgl. 1997: 22ff.). Felix definiert pädagogisches Handeln als das Arrangieren von Workshops, das Animieren oder das Vermitteln von Toleranz in der Gruppe. Damit bezieht er sich allerdings lediglich auf die Face-to-Face-Arbeit innerhalb der Einrichtung, denn Felix bezweifelt, dass pädagogisches Handeln auf SONW übertragen werden kann: "Und bezogen auf Netzwerke lässt sich wirklich die Frage stellen, ist das eine Form von pädagogischem Handeln wenn ich das veröffentliche, die Angebote? Weil das ist ja wirklich eigentlich nur Öffentlichkeitsarbeit, Informationsarbeit". Obwohl er also durchaus in SONW pädagogisch agiert, reflektiert und artikuliert er dies nicht dementsprechend. Für ihn sind SONW weniger zusätzliche pädagogische Handlungsräume als vielmehr Werkzeuge, die administrative Aufgaben erleichtern. Auch Giesecke grenzt den Informationsoutput von Massenmedien von pädagogischem Handeln ab und hält fest, dieses finde immer von Angesicht zu Angesicht statt. Lediglich in den ggf. daran anschließend hergestellten, interaktiven Situationen könne pädagogisch gehandelt werden (1997: 47f.). Wie die Explikationen aber deutlich gemacht haben, ist dies auf Grund der Interaktivität von SONW heute keine grundlegende Bedingung für pädagogisches Handeln mehr. Felix nutz zwar in der Handlungspraxis diese Interaktivität, in der Reflexion und Artikulation spielt die Interaktivität jedoch keine Rolle. Anhand der beiden Fallbeispiele wird deutlich, dass die Reflexion pädagogischer Implikationen in der Nutzung von SONW nicht unbedingt die Praxis abbildet. Laut Giesecke ist der Gegenpol zum Handeln stets die Reflexion (1997: 45). Sein Konzept der Grundformen pädagogischen Handelns sieht er als Instrument, das Handeln zu reflektieren (1997: 17). Diese Grundformen (1997: 76ff.)1 dienen nun als Struktur, um das pädagogische Handeln der Explikationen reflektierend zu verdeutlichen. Arrangieren (1): Indem die pädagogischen Fachkräfte die vielfältigen Kommunikationskanäle von SONW nutzen, arrangieren sie die Voraussetzungen für vertrauensvolle Arbeitsbeziehungen oder arrangieren Situationen, die Bildungsprozesse ermöglichen. Animieren: Die pädagogischen Fachkräfte animieren die Jugendlichen zur Teilnahme an pädagogischen Arrangements wie Ausflügen und weiteren pädagogischen Situationen. Ebenso animieren sie die Jugendlichen sich in SONW zu artikulieren. Informieren/Beraten: Das Informieren und Beraten kann sich einerseits in den SONW abspielen, andererseits aber auch lediglich inhaltlich auf die SONW bezogen sein und offline/face-to-face stattfinden. Beide pädagogische Fachkräfte merken an, dass aus ihrer Sicht ein Face-to-Face-Gespräch aufgrund der Kanalreduktion nicht durch Nachrichten über SONW zu ersetzen und es daher wichtig sei, stets "zweigleisig" (Clara) zu arbeiten. Im Folgenden werden Herausforderungen und Reflexionsbedarfe, die sich aus den obigen Beispielen ergeben, erörtert. Herausforderungen und Ausblick SONW sind keine Jugendräume. Firmen sind dort ebenso präsent wie Erwachsene, die dort beruflich und privat netzwerken. Dementsprechend ist die Frage, ob sich pädagogische Fachkräfte in SONW aufhalten sollten, hinfällig (vgl. Stix 2014). Wichtiger ist es, einen Umgang miteinander zu entwickeln, der weder den pädagogischen Fachkräften noch den Jugendlichen zum Nachteil wird. Um die Jugendlichen zu erreichen, nutzen die pädagogischen Fachkräfte die bei jungen Menschen angesagten SONW-Angebote. Diese sind in der Regel kommerziell und wenig transparent oder reguliert, was den Umgang mit Nutzer_innendaten betrifft. Dies erfordert aus pädagogischer Sicht das Prüfen und Abwägen von Vor- und Nachteilen. Dementsprechend kann es nicht nur aufgrund der Kanalreduktion wichtig sein, ein Gespräch über ein sensibles Thema face-to-face zu führen und dies den Jugendlichen zu vermitteln. Ein reflektierter und sensibler Umgang mit Daten gilt auch für die Dokumentation von Aktionen, wie Felix ihn schildert. Beim Posten von Bildern muss er das Persönlichkeitsrecht der Jugendlichen beachten und prüfen, ob und ggf. welche Informationen möglicherweise unbeabsichtigt preisgegeben werden. Des Weiteren stellt sich die ethische Frage, inwiefern sich pädagogische Fachkräfte Informationen aktiv aus SONW besorgen und nutzen dürfen (vgl. Kutscher 2015). Eine weitere Herausforderung ergibt sich aus der Frage, ob nicht Jugendliche, die keinen Zugang zu SONW haben, ausgegrenzt oder benachteiligt werden. Dies zu reflektieren ist eine Aufgabe pädagogischer Professionalität. Die Nutzung von SONW birgt pädagogische Chancen. Zugleich ergeben sich daraus auch neue Verantwortungsdimensionen für das professionelle Handeln pädagogischer Fachkräfte. Das Handeln in SONW muss hinsichtlich möglicher negativer Konsequenzen für die Jugendlichen reflektiert werden. Die Entwicklung einer eigenen (medien-) pädagogischen Haltung sowie eine Rahmung durch Träger und kollegialer Austausch können dabei helfen. Pädagogisch professionell zu sein bedeutet auch, die Trends der jungen Menschen zu kennen und pädagogisch darauf zu reagieren. Im Falle von Social Media bewegt sich die Masse seit 2015 zu Angeboten wie WhatsApp und Instagram (mpfs 2016: 32f.). Es bleibt spannend, ob sich auch WhatsApp mit seinen anderen Strukturen mittelfristig als pädagogischer Handlungsraum etablieren und wie das pädagogische Handeln dort konkret aussehen wird – und welche Konflikte dies zu fachlichen Logiken und Standards mit sich bringt (vgl. Deutscher Bundestag 2013, S. 394), die zu reflektieren und in die Gestaltung pädagogischen Handelns einzubeziehen sind. (1) Ausgenommen das Unterrichten, von Giesecke verstanden als das Erklären von relativ komplexen Sachzusammenhängen in einem längeren Argumentationsprozess (1997: 79). ; Pedagogical professionals use social media platforms as professional spaces for action. This use includes the basic forms of pedagogical action, such as arranging, animating and informing/advising. "If I, as a professor of education, give advice to parents in a tram on how to deal with an obviously overtired child, then I am probably acting presumptuously, but not professionally, because the tram is not the place of my profession." (Giesecke 1997: 47) But how does it look when the places of pedagogical profession are now deliberately extended by pedagogical professionals acting pedagogically in online social networks (SONW)? SONW thus become new spaces for pedagogical action. The article uses selected case studies to show how SONW are used as pedagogical spaces of action by pedagogical professionals in open child and youth work (OKJA). Never before have so many young people and adults used the internet on a daily basis (mpfs 2017; Projektgruppe ARD/ZDF-Multimedia 2017). In view of this high importance, the question arises to what extent social work can also use the potentials of the internet and especially the potentials of SONW for itself. A pioneering role with regard to the use of SONW as pedagogical spaces for action is played by the pedagogical professionals of OKJA (JFF 2011). First of all, this article will illustrate how SONW are used as pedagogical spaces of action by means of some situations from OKJA. The examples used are taken from qualitative interviews with professionals conducted as part of the author's dissertation project. The following section deals with the question of how professionals perceive and articulate SONW as pedagogical spaces for action. In a summary, the situations described are categorised with regard to the basic forms of pedagogical action according to Giesecke. The article concludes with a position on the challenges posed by SONW and an outlook. Exemplary situations of SONW useIn the following, selected situations of everyday SONW use and their pedagogical implications are presented. The first set of examples shows this with the example of postings by young people. Because the youth worker Clara is friends with the young people on Facebook, she learns about insults and arguments and has the opportunity to influence them: "Then I noticed that she starts chatting with them and writes on the homepage: 'And you are so stupid' and hasn't seen it [to write]. And then of course I could intervene in advance. And then when they came, then I had information that I wouldn't have had otherwise and then I got them all into the office and addressed it quite openly." Intervening in disputes is everyday pedagogical work for the educational professionals in OKJA. In a first step, the situation is calmed down and then dealt with in a pedagogical framework with the parties involved. Clara can either directly enter into the interaction in the SONW by means of comments or force a conversation in the facility at a later time. She finds it very helpful to learn things indirectly, as the girl mentioned above might not have approached her on her own. Through her Facebook friendship, Clara also receives information that was not explicitly addressed to her, so it is up to her pedagogical competence to deal sensitively with this information and to decide whether she uses it actively or observes the situation passively. The youth worker Felix commented on a picture that two girls had posted. In this picture, the girls are staging themselves sitting on tram tracks. Felix seemed to need to question this: ''Okay, that's not so clear, what are you trying to say with this photo? Are you saying you don't like life anymore and you're waiting for the next tram to come and run you over?'" The girls experience self-efficacy as the youth worker responds to the photo. By openly thematising the picture messages, they are encouraged to reflect on their actions and thus educational processes are stimulated. Felix is also sensitised and can initiate a counselling or information situation at a later stage if necessary. Clara uses information that she receives about the young people from their postings to evoke a feeling of emotional connection in the follow-up communication: "And if, for example, you have already said on Facebook: 'I think it's great, you have a new dress'. Then they arrive: 'Gee Clara, really? Is that a nice dress? Tell me honestly.'" Here, the youth worker responds appreciatively to things that are of current concern to the young people, in individual cases, but also by the very fact that she engages with the young people's way of communicating. She thus creates a positive climate and evokes a feeling of emotional connection. Clara herself describes this as an intensification of contacts. Or in other words, she uses the SONW in a supportive way to continuously develop the relationship with the young people. These foundations for building a trusting working relationship are arranged by the youth worker. In the second set of examples, the pedagogical implications and intentions are presented based on the postings of the pedagogical professionals. Felix pursues both pedagogical and administrative intentions when he documents actions of the institution by means of picture postings in SONW. On the one hand, the postings have the purpose of promoting a sense of belonging to the institution by positively remembering shared experiences and encouraging the young people to reflect on and verbalise these emotions. "So if a nice photo is there, of course, and then the reaction to it would be: 'Yes, I was there. That was totally cool. Then that would already achieve a lot." Felix also wants to stimulate a dialogue about this specific action among the young people. With the comment function, he opens up a low-threshold possibility and thus motivates the young people to articulate themselves. En passant, he receives feedback through the comments and can arrange further corresponding offers. At the same time, both the documentation and the follow-up dialogue of the young people have a signal character to the outside: outsiders get an impression of the offers and the target group as well as an impression of how the educational professionals work; liveliness and openness are signalled. Both Clara and Felix use the SONW to arrange and initiate everyday educational offers or special experiences. They see an advantage above all in the fact that they can reach a large target group, namely all the young people associated with the institution, in a short time by means of postings. This becomes clear in Felix's facility, where the current educational offer is posted daily. In this way, he also reaches a target group that otherwise does not visit the facility, but only comes to outside events selectively. "Like now, for example, in the summer, when we go swimming somewhere then it is posted." Advertising the swimming trip by means of postings in SONW enables the above-mentioned young people to gain access to the facility or to the educational staff and to participate in the educational activities. Felix can in turn use this to get in touch with the young people and build trust. In addition, a different environment can provide a good framework to break down barriers between the different groups of visitors and to initiate new group dynamic processes. For example, Clara had tickets for the X Factor and Supertalent auditions and posted: "I got tickets. Who wants to come [.]?" or "I don't have tickets anymore." It thus enables young people to experience something special, not ordinary, and creates opportunities for educational processes. Arranging participation in special experiences and educational offers accordingly implies pedagogical action and goes beyond mass media advertising. The pedagogical action in SONW and SONW as pedagogical action spacesThe previous explications have shown the pedagogical content in dealing with mutual postings. In some examples, interventions were made directly in the SONW, making it clear how this is used as an additional, pedagogical space for action by the OKJA. However, the question now arises as to what extent the two pedagogical professionals perceive the SONW as a pedagogical space for action and describe it as such. When asked about her understanding of the term, Clara defines pedagogical action as "all actions that you carry out educationally in relation to young people". As an example, she mentions addressing conflicts on the basis of pedagogical and developmental psychological expertise, i.e. "knowing what can be meant by this and then addressing it". In doing so, she uses an evocative-provocative style of language, so-called modulations (cf. Cloos et al. 2009), to make the young people aware of their behaviour and its consequences. For Clara, this kind of pedagogical action is unquestionably also found in the SONW. She illustrates this with another example of a male adolescent who has photographed himself in a bodybuilder's pose: "And I say, 'My goodness, now you're being a muscleman!' and do it with a smiley face on the back, so that he actually knows what I mean." Again, she uses modulations to encourage the young person to reflect on their behaviour and to make them aware of the effects of the posted image. In addition, Clara would have the opportunity to use the interaction on Facebook for later follow-up communication within the institution. What is striking about Clara's understanding of pedagogical action is that she focuses on conflictual or problematic situations. For her, pedagogical action thus includes corrective action. In this, her definition differs from that of Giesecke. The latter defines pedagogical action as positively influencing people towards a mature personality by providing opportunities for educational processes (cf. 1997: 22ff.). Felix defines pedagogical action as arranging workshops, animating or teaching tolerance in the group. However, he only refers to face-to-face work within the institution, because Felix doubts that pedagogical action can be transferred to SONW: "And in relation to networks, the question can really be asked, is this a form of pedagogical action when I publish the offers? Because that is really only public relations work, information work. Although he does act pedagogically in SONW, he does not reflect and articulate this accordingly. For him, SONW are less additional pedagogical spaces for action than tools that facilitate administrative tasks. Giesecke also distinguishes the information output of mass media from pedagogical action and states that this always takes place face to face. Pedagogical action can only take place in the interactive situations that may subsequently be created (1997: 47f.). However, as the explications have made clear, this is no longer a fundamental condition for pedagogical action due to the interactivity of SONW today. Felix does use this interactivity in the practice of action, but interactivity does not play a role in reflection and articulation. Based on the two case studies, it becomes clear that the reflection of pedagogical implications in the use of SONW does not necessarily reflect practice. According to Giesecke, the antithesis of action is always reflection (1997: 45). He sees his concept of basic forms of pedagogical action as an instrument to reflect action (1997: 17). These basic forms (1997: 76ff.)1 now serve as a structure to reflectively clarify the pedagogical action of the explications. Arranging (1): By using SONW's multiple channels of communication, the pedagogical professionals arrange the conditions for trusting working relationships or arrange situations that make educational processes possible. Animate: The educational professionals encourage the young people to participate in educational arrangements such as excursions and other educational situations. They also encourage the young people to articulate themselves in SONW. Informing/advising: On the one hand, information and counselling can take place in the SONW, but on the other hand, it can also be related to the content of the SONW and take place offline/face-to-face. Both pedagogical professionals note that from their point of view, a face-to-face conversation cannot be replaced by messages via SONW due to the reduction of channels and that it is therefore important to always work "on two tracks" (Clara). Challenges and needs for reflection arising from the above examples are discussed below. Challenges and outlookSONW are not youth spaces. Companies are present there as well as adults who network there professionally and privately. Accordingly, the question of whether educational professionals should be in SONW is moot (cf. Stix 2014). It is more important to develop a way of dealing with each other that is not detrimental to either the pedagogical professionals or the young people. In order to reach the young people, the educational professionals use the SONW offers that are popular among young people. These are usually commercial and not very transparent or regulated when it comes to handling user data. From a pedagogical point of view, this requires checking and weighing the advantages and disadvantages. Accordingly, it can be important to have a conversation about a sensitive topic face-to-face and to communicate this to the young people, not only because of the channel reduction. A reflective and sensitive handling of data also applies to the documentation of actions, as Felix describes. When posting pictures, he has to consider the young people's right to privacy and check whether and which information might be revealed unintentionally. Furthermore, the ethical question arises to what extent educational professionals may actively obtain and use information from SONW (cf. Kutscher 2015). Another challenge arises from the question of whether young people who do not have access to SONW are excluded or disadvantaged. Reflecting on this is a task of pedagogical professionalism. The use of SONW offers pedagogical opportunities. At the same time, it also gives rise to new dimensions of responsibility for the professional action of educational specialists. The actions in SONW must be reflected on with regard to possible negative consequences for the young people. The development of one's own (media) pedagogical attitude as well as framing by the responsible body and collegial exchange can help here. Being pedagogically professional also means being aware of young people's trends and reacting to them pedagogically. In the case of social media, the masses have been moving towards offers such as WhatsApp and Instagram since 2015 (mpfs 2016: 32f.). It remains exciting to see whether WhatsApp with its other structures will also establish itself as a pedagogical space of action in the medium term and what pedagogical action there will look like in concrete terms - and what conflicts this will entail with professional logics and standards (cf. Deutscher Bundestag 2013, p. 394), which need to be reflected and included in the design of pedagogical action. (1) Except for teaching, understood by Giesecke as explaining relatively complex factual contexts in a longer process of argumentation (1997: 79).
In: CIC Colangelo, Mathew, Sarah, and Anna 1-1 - Final.pdf
Part one of an interview with Matthew, Sarah, and Anna Colangelo. Topics include: Matthew attends school at Applewild in Fitchburg, MA. What it is like growing up in a house with parents who immigrated to the United States from Italy. Matthew's Italian identity while living in America and American identity while visiting in Italy. How life is different in the U.S. as compared with Italy. Matthew's thoughts on immigrants coming to the U.S. Matthew's grandmothers: one lives in the U.S. and the other is in Italy. The importance of carrying on Italian traditions. Matthew's religious beliefs and practices. The importance of education. Sarah discusses her education and area of study. Sarah gives a family history and discusses how life is different in Italy from life in the U.S. What it was like for Sarah being in Italy during the September 11th attacks. ; 1 INTERVIEWER: Kelly [unintelligible - 00:00:02]. It's Wednesday, December 26, 2001. We're at the home of Anna Canlangelo. First interview is with Mathew, her son, at 42 Leominster Road in Lunenburg. Tell me a little bit about yourself as far as when you were born, where you were born. MATHEW: I was born in America in [1997]. My parents both come from Italy. They both come from the town of [Corfinio] in [el Bruto] in Italy. I've gone to Applewild School for 10 years. We go to Italy every summer to see relatives there. I have probably -- three-fourths of my family live in Italy. So… INTERVIEWER: Tell me a little bit about the Applewild School. MATHEW: The Applewild School is in Fitchburg, Massachusetts. It's a private school from kindergarten to ninth grade. After ninth grade, usually kids apply to other private schools [unintelligible - 00:01:10] schools. But… I mean, there are foreign languages you take at Applewild; they're usually French and Latin. There's no Italian. But… INTERVIEWER: Do you speak Italian? MATHEW: I wouldn't say I'm fluent in it, but I can definitely get by, usually. INTERVIEWER: Dialect, or…? MATHEW: No. INTERVIEWER: Okay. Father speaks Italian in the home? MATHEW: Well yeah. They -- my parents speak it in the home. I mean, they speak it with my relatives all the time. Especially going to Italy, you know, I've really picked up the language. So yeah, I guess over 14 years, I picked up a little bit. INTERVIEWER: Yeah. Can you write in the language, or is it really just speaking? MATHEW: It's just really the speaking. [Unintelligible - 00:01:58] either. INTERVIEWER: Uh-huh. Oh, I understand that your, your grandfather is an immigrant. He was born in Italy. Your father was born in Italy. And so how long has your father lived here in America? 2 MATHEW: He's lived here ever since my parents got married. I don't know the exact year, but I'd say… about 23 years, I'd say. He obviously speaks English. He picked it up fairly quickly. He went to school in the US for a little while. INTERVIEWER: Okay. So getting back to Applewild, I just wanted to ask you a few more questions about that. Is that a boarding school? MATHEW: No. It's not. That's a day school. INTERVIEWER: A day school. MATHEW: But usually after Applewild, kids go to boarding schools. INTERVIEWER: Mm-hmm. But you are [Unintelligible - 00:02:49]? MATHEW: Yes. I would like to go boarding school too. [Unintelligible - 00:02:53] in Massachusetts and New Hampshire. INTERVIEWER: Top choice? MATHEW: Top choice. Probably St. Paul's or Exeter. INTERVIEWER: Exeter, is that where your uncle went? [Unintelligible - 00:03:05] MATHEW: He went to [unintelligible - 00:03:06]. INTERVIEWER: Okay. All right. So your sister went to Exeter? Tell me a little bit about growing up in Lunenburg as the son of really immigrant father. Do you think you had a different experience than your friends who maybe their parents are…? MATHEW: As opposed to friends that parents aren't immigrants? INTERVIEWER: Right, mm-hmm. MATHEW: Well, I mean, it's not as different as maybe one may think, but it's a whole -- in that cultural aspect, it's very different just for the simple fact that I go to Italy over the summer, and I travel maybe more than other kids might. But otherwise, it's not very different, because of course you're surrounded by a lot of people that are not from such a cultural background, they're not from -- parents are non-immigrants. So my life wouldn't be different. Maybe inside the house it could be different, but outside the house with other friends and just in society, it's not different at all.3 INTERVIEWER: Not different. What about in the house? How is it different? MATHEW: Well, in the house, I mean, you're talking Italian sometimes. Other families might not. Most of the families only speak English. Maybe someone else speaks another language, but they won't speak it in the house. So you kind of have that, like, dual side of the family. You have an English side and an Italian side, but when you put it together, inside the house, it makes the whole atmosphere very, very different than just a family that only speaks one language, only communicates in one language. INTERVIEWER: As well, the different traditions and the fact that your father did grow up in Italy, he obviously must have different notions of family life, of how a teenager should act, what a teenager should do. MATHEW: Well, it's funny. When he came to America, his whole idea about a teenager going -- because he pretty much was a teenager when he came to America. I mean, he was 20 some odd years old, okay? But pretty much plus or minus, like, five years, so he was still teenager, post-teenager age. So he really developed his notion of how a teenager should act in America. He's more open to the fact that teenagers should talk about different things just like adults should talk about them. So he's not a very restrictive parent, I should say. Maybe some other American parents are, but… INTERVIEWER: Do you see any differences though between your parents, your mother growing up here, all of those years growing up in America compared to your outlook? MATHEW: His outlook on…? INTERVIEWER: Maybe just on family. MATHEW: Well, in Italy, family is, like, really strong. They're all together. Like for instance, in Corfinio, all my family lives within, say, even like an acre, like really close together. I mean, immediate family, like grandparents, aunts. I mean of course, some other aunts live 4 in other parts of Italy, but it's very close family. In United States, maybe families could live across the country. There's no like boundary almost in United States for a family, different parts of the family could live. I think that's pretty important about Italian families is that they all are very closely -- all live very close to each other. INTERVIEWER: I guess I was wondering too—this is kind of what I was thinking of—is that your dad growing up in the confines of that small village. Here he is with aunts and uncles and grandparents and extended family living practically on his land when I [unintelligible - 00:07:30]. And the potential of his son and his daughter going away to private school; that must be very, very different thinking. MATHEW: Well, he's pretty open to the idea. He's always encouraged me and my sister to go to boarding school and to live away from home. I think that's pretty important for him to see us live away from home. I think it's important to us as well because we're never going to be able to live with our parents for such a long period of time, so I think it's important for us to go live outside the house. And of course, I think us, as a more Italian-American family, we're almost prone to spread away from the family when we grow up as opposed to an Italian family in Italy living really close together. It's kind of different in America. It's like we're the first generation of people who would take away from this Italian culture, I guess you could say, just for the simple fact that we're not full-blooded Italian. INTERVIEWER: That's interesting, because you really are full-blooded Italian, right? You're an American citizen. MATHEW: American citizen, but -- full-blooded Italian, but in the sense I'm not considering all of my principles are based in America. But yes, I'm full-blooded Italian. 5 INTERVIEWER: I think that your mother had mentioned that you used to [unintelligible - 00:09:08] Fitchburg, or Lunenburg, you -- Leominster right now? MATHEW: Lunenburg. INTERVIEWER: Lunenburg, okay. That you consider yourself, but you're an Italian; but when you're in Italian, you're an American. MATHEW: Yeah. INTERVIEWER: Yeah? Can you explain that a little bit? MATHEW: Well, in America there's so many different cultures. There's so many different backgrounds of people from so many different countries, people come to America. It's funny that no one in America is actually considered American. I'm considered an Italian, or someone else an Irish, or whatever. But when you go to Italy, most of the people in Italy are considered Italian. So, when you go there, especially for me because I don't really speak Italian fluently, so I can't communicate, like, every single time to say something. So in that aspect, I am considered an American. It's hard to say if I'm really an Italian or really an American. So I think that's where you consider yourself an Italian-American from standpoint. INTERVIEWER: When you go back to Italy -- first of all, do you have cousins in Italy? MATHEW: Mm-hmm. INTERVIEWER: Do you ever wonder…? MATHEW: Oh, definitely. Life would have been much different. As I said before, your family, you would all be really close together; but in America, you're more spread out. I mean, just a whole life in America as opposed to in Italy, and I think that's why my grandparents came to America is that the whole point is that in America, you're free to do so much more and you have so many more windows of opportunity than in Italy. I'm not saying that 6 Italy is in any way like a Third World country or anything, because it's not in any way. It wouldn't be better or worse, you could say, because there's also many good things about living in Italy. But I'd say that living in America, it's just more open, and you're free to roam wherever you like, I guess, is a good way to say it. INTERVIEWER: Your family would probably have different expectations of you. Do you have someone that's about your age and male? MATHEW: Sure. Male? No. INTERVIEWER: No? Oh, so… MATHEW: I mean I have friends there. INTERVIEWER: So how were the expectations different? What are their goals compared to…? MATHEW: Well, especially in Corfinio nowadays, they don't really set a high bar for themselves, especially the males around my age. The education can be compared. It's not horrible, but like, it seems to me that they don't really strive for good education. Like for my cousin that's like a female per se, it can be like very opposite. They strive for like a good education, and they try to, like, do something with their life, I guess. But… yes, I mean the education in Italy is they pinpoint, you know. You go to a high schools that's for languages, or you go to a high schools that's for math and science. So that's just another way that you can say that in Italy, you're not really free to do what you want as much as before. INTERVIEWER: Is that because the jobs, there aren't as many jobs available? MATHEW: Well, there definitely are jobs available, especially in the north, but no, I wouldn't say that. I think they're just trying to push the kids towards a specific trade so that they can do much better. INTERVIEWER: Do you think that your cousins would stay in Corfinio [unintelligible - 00:13:11]? MATHEW: If they had the chance to move to the US? INTERVIEWER: Mm-hmm.7 MATHEW: Right now, I'd say they definitely would not, considering their whole family lives in Italy, but -- and also they don't speak English that well. They have courses in English, but they don't speak it that well. They've grown up in Italy, but if you would say, like, if they had a chance to grow up in America as opposed to growing up in Italy, probably, I would say. Just for the fact that like America over there seems to be this whole big deal, coming to America is considered like -- America is something they don't know about, so I think, yeah, definitely. They would choose to love to grow up in America. INTERVIEWER: And do you think that they have hopes to stay in the village, or they want to move to the north where the opportunity…? MATHEW: Well, I think -- I mean, the size of the town is dwindling. It kind of used to be -- the population used to be as high as about 3,000. Now it's about 900. I mean, it's hard to say. You see a lot of kids around my sister's age moving out of the city, going to, like, Rome, places like that. You also see a few of them staying in the town and working in, like, little shop, like little restaurants or something. But I think, yeah, I think many people had kind of moved away from the town as opposed to staying in the town and preserving the traditions of the southern or the central… INTERVIEWER: Have any of your cousins had the opportunity to travel to America just to visit? MATHEW: Yes. My older cousin, Francesca, has come twice. My younger cousin, Augusta, she's about my age. She's 14. She has never come to Italy. My aunts have come twice. I mean, yeah, definitely. They come back and stay. They like coming to America. I mean, it's certainly different from living in Italy. But I think they would choose to live in Italy at this point rather than 8 coming to America, and I don't blame them. I mean, if I was in their shoes, I would also rather live in Italy than live in America. INTERVIEWER: Tell me why. MATHEW: Well, as I said before, your whole life you lived in Italy. If I was them, I wouldn't really feel ready to move to America; because in America, then you have to set up your whole life to get, like, find a house, just to find everything, whereas in Italy, you have everything all set up for you. INTERVIEWER: But beyond that, what about lifestyle? MATHEW: Lifestyle? I'd say that… I mean, if you live in Italy for that long, the lifestyle, you get used to it. For instance, at night, you're always outside. You're walking around there in the piazza. You're always doing something, whereas in America, at night you're always in the house. So in that aspect, social life, Italy would be more open; but in many other aspects, it would be really [ripped in], really closed off in a way. So for the social aspect, yeah, definitely I think at the end of the day, it's much more free, definitely. It's really comforting, and you get to see your relatives only for a month in a year. I would choose the social life in Italy over the social life in America just for the simple fact that it's much more involved and you can go outside and not worry about anybody doing anything to you or anybody getting in your way or anything. In Italy, they're all outside. Everyone is outside at night, and it's normal for them; whereas in America, it seems like no one goes outside anymore. INTERVIEWER: [Unintelligible - 00:17:41] events of September 11th. MATHEW: Sure. Yes, especially my father. My sister came back from Italy a couple of weeks. Of course, they feel bad about it, but I don't think their ideas… I don't think they stray much from the whole world aspect of what happened on that day. I mean, they're 9 certainly not only afraid but disgusted at Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden. And I think on a world [political] stage, Italy is becoming very forceful, and they've become a stronger nation in the world platform, I guess you can say. On their views, they're being heard much more. And, like, Italy actually sent in about 2,000 troops to Afghanistan, so they're actually pushing and working. They're taking initiative to create a stronger nation. So I think that's good. But their ideas about September 11th though stray much from ours. INTERVIEWER: What is your viewpoint? How did you feel? Do you and your friends [unintelligible - 00:19:08] and how the world has changed? MATHEW: Sure. Definitely. I mean, I personally don't worry a lot about going on airplanes now, but you realize how so many people would worry and be afraid, especially what happened a couple of days ago with the flight going to Miami. But it's definitely a scary thing. But I don't think you can really worry about it that much. You can't help that cause. They're doing that just for that simple reason. The terrorists are doing that just [unintelligible - 00:19:49]. So… yeah, I mean, my feelings about it are pretty strong, I believe. I definitely feel that United States took the right action against the terrorists. And I guess we just have to feel [unintelligible - 00:20:11] from there. I mean, we're in the process of it. We're not looking back on it yet. We have to wait a little longer to look back on it because we're still in the middle of it. INTERVIEWER: [Unintelligible - 00:20:25] what life must have been like for your grandfather [unintelligible - 00:20:30]. MATHEW: Yeah. INTERVIEWER: Do you speak about that?10 MATHEW: Sure. Well, life was much harder then, especially during World War II. Especially for my grandfather coming to America and living, like now, it's a total change for him. I think that was the reason for why he came to America. I mean, you don't realize it now because Italy has improved much over the years. But if you look back and how life is in Italy back then and you compare it with the life in America back then, coming to America is a big step. And also like an economic and socioeconomic background standpoint, definitely. I think that's just the will to improve and the will to thrive in America when you're coming in as an immigrant, because if you're an American back then, you could take things for granted or you could say, "Oh yeah, I'm an American. I can see all these people coming in." It's like nationalism. These people shouldn't deserve this, but them coming in, they think, "Oh yeah, we really have to work," because they know that's what the people are thinking, the Americans that have lived in America for a longer period of time. INTERVIEWER: Well, that brings up an interesting point. How do you feel? Or are you complacent, do you think, than someone -- let's say, a father at 14? MATHEW: Well… I wouldn't say complacent, but I obviously have a much different life than he did. I'm living in America, and I've lived in America. And America itself has also grown over, like, these 60 years. But I wouldn't consider myself the people from America back then, when my grandfather came to America feeling that these people shouldn't be here or whatever, simply because I'm a grandson of a person who came to America. So it's kind of different for me to be more complacent or less complacent. In a way, I'm very similar to him, like, if thinking lies about the whole subject. 11 INTERVIEWER: So what about coming from nothing basically, and he wanted to secure money just to live, but now he's become viably successful? How does a grandson get that drive by that much? MATHEW: I guess the drive to succeed would obviously be less than maybe him coming to America, but you kind of have to build that up as you go along, and you can't let it be less. You can't -- you have to motivate yourself to do something. And you can't just say that just because he was more motivated, he would do better things than a person that would stereotypically be less motivated, because that person could motivate themself to be more driven to succeed. So I myself would obviously consider myself less driven to succeed than he was at that stage. INTERVIEWER: So getting back to your grandfather though, what kinds of stories has he shared with you about living in Italy and how difficult it was? MATHEW: It's funny, he never told me. He never exaggerated or said anything about how difficult it was. He was always talking about family, always talking about the good things about living back there. But then you looked back upon it and you say no, it couldn't have been that good. Okay. Or else why else would you come to America, you know? But yeah, his stories are usually good and not denouncing Italy, or not saying anything bad about Italy or the social life. I mean, his stories really form a foundation in my thinking about living back then in Italy in the '40s and even the '50s. I would say that it definitely has changed over the past 60 years, and that it's not as bad as people might have thought it to be. INTERVIEWER: Back to your friends or your grandfather when he [audio glitch 00:25:42] things like that, and you said you may have a different view of that; and the recent immigrants the people you may either hang out with or associate [audio glitch 00:25:50] thinking your grandfather coming over and having those… 12 MATHEW: You mean other people coming over? INTERVIEWER: Other people coming over. MATHEW: Sure, definitely. I'm not in the position to say that these people have a better chance than I do. There's no reason for me to be angry at these people from coming over especially if my grandfather went through that when he came to America. But I think it's a totally different world these days. You can still have your place with all the immigrants and all the people coming to America now—not that there's as many as before, but there are more opportunities in America today, so you still have the same amount of chances as you would have back then as an American living in America. I mean, even more. So I'm not sure you should really afraid that these people will take your jobs. You have just as much jobs open, just as many windows of opportunity open for you. INTERVIEWER: But there's also a segment of the population that they feel as though maybe [audio glitch 00:27:05] education, welfare, all kinds of social programs. MATHEW: That's tough to say. I mean, could you specify or be specific? INTERVIEWER: Well, I guess what I'm getting at is—and you may not know this because of course you're living within [audio glitch - 00:27:21]. If I were to interview another 14-year-old immigrant, parents, grandparents, maybe not going to a private school, they would have a totally -- they may [audio glitch 00:27:30] different perception of ethnic growth, most probably have a different attitude [audio glitch 00:27:37] they lived in. MATHEW: Yeah, sure. It's very similar to that last question of -- you know, you can't really say anything bad about the people coming in because they're coming for the same reason that my grandparents came to America. So you almost think that they should have this same right as any American living in America now. So I wouldn't 13 say that most Italian-Americans my age would think that they're, like, inferior or would think that they government is giving them too many opportunities, too many rights, because I couldn't speak for all of them. I personally don't think that they're being given too many rights. INTERVIEWER: [audio glitch - 00:28:26] grandmother like? MATHEW: My grandmother? Well, she's one of the Italian grandmas. She cooks. She's really nice. Italian grandmothers don't really stray. They're not very different from… She's funny. [Unintelligible - 00:28:50] adjectives. INTERVIEWER: Go ahead. Now, this was your mother's mother you're talking about. MATHEW: Yes. They're living in America. She's just, like, happy to be around. She's never down. She has a good attitude about things, I would say. It's exactly the same for my grandmother living in Italy. INTERVIEWER: I was going to ask you to compare them. MATHEW: Yeah. They're very similar, and you would think that considering they both come from Italy. She thinks that there's no reason to be angry at anyone. There's no reason to be mad. She's… INTERVIEWER: How do they spend their days? I mean, is there a difference in how they spend -- let's say their leisure time, your two grandmothers? MATHEW: Yeah. They cook a lot, spend time cooking. They're usually around the house. My grandmother in America goes out a little more, but usually they stay in the house and don't go very far. They'll move around. INTERVIEWER: [Unintelligible - 00:30:05] your grandmother in Italy have a lot of people coming in and out and more associations than possibly… MATHEW: No. INTERVIEWER: No?14 MATHEW: Definitely not. My grandmother in Italy I would say has more. Most of the people coming in and out of my grandmother's house in Italy are the relatives, or especially -- that's what I see when I go over there. INTERVIEWER: Yeah. MATHEW: But that could also just be because the relatives are brought together more because we're there. But I would say that my grandmother in America, she sees more people than my grandmother in Italy, or has more connections to social life, you could say, other people her age. INTERVIEWER: Or they're socially the same? And what about your mother, how can you compare your mother to your American grandmother? MATHEW: Well, I would say my mother is more American than my grandmother. Her ideas about life are just more, I guess, American. And I use the word "American" saying, almost like a stereotype of the first generation, second generation of immigrants coming in. She doesn't think in an Italian sort of way, like my grandparents, or my grandmother, especially. But I think she has kind of transformed in a way to the more open and more… I'd say open and… not as… it's kind of like redundant [audio glitch 00:31:57] mind, and not as specific and restricted way of thinking. Because in Italy, everything is the way it is, and nothing really changes. Whereas in America, with all the different cultures, there's so many things that change over the course of the year, so you can't really be thinking the same way throughout all your years. INTERVIEWER: Do you mean in the tradition? MATHEW: Old traditions. Yeah. Well, I mean just the fact that there's so many different cultures in America that you can't think in one way. You can't just think there's only Christmas because there's Hanukkah, whereas in Italy, it's mostly like yeah, just Christmas, 15 just like this and just that. So yeah, I would say my mother is the first generation of a family that's starting to think in the more American way, a truly diverse aspect. INTERVIEWER: And I interviewed many, let's say, elderly; and they either came over here for -- most cases they tell me that their parents worked so hard, or what happened is that their kids went on to school, they got better homes; but with that progress also comes kind of disassociation, and they're no longer at grandma's house sort of thing. So I'm wondering, how do you feel about that progress that your family has made? Or maybe you don't really see it? MATHEW: We talked about it a little before, at how, like, in Italy you're very close together. Coming to America, you kind of -- someone said before disassociate yourself from the family and from the traditions that it holds. I mean, I can't say a lot because I'm not my mother in that sense. I won't have a firsthand view, that view of that. But from viewing what I can view, I would definitely say that that is true. You kind of disassociate yourself from the Italian society, the whole Italian traditions. Whether or not you become richer, you have bigger cars and bigger houses, that's one thing. That can be true and that can't be true; but anyway, to think that you disassociate yourself whether or not you become richer or poor. INTERVIEWER: Oh, it's important to yourself to keep the traditions going on? MATHEW: Sure. I mean, there's no reason why that they shouldn't be continued. But they're no longer men traditions, the whole [unintelligible - 00:34:45] so long ago. Of course we still go to my grandmother's house for dinner once in a while, whereas in Italy they go every single night. INTERVIEWER: Every night?16 MATHEW: Yeah, definitely. Every night. Now, there's just not as many traditions to hold onto as there were back when my grandparents came to America… INTERVIEWER: [audio glitch 00:35:08] family hold on to? MATHEW: Well, we still go to my grandmother's house for Christmas. We used to go for Easter. Once in a while, we'll go for dinner. But that's not very often. I would say maybe a couple of times a month. INTERVIEWER: A couple of times a month. MATHEW: A couple of times a month. INTERVIEWER: Yeah. MATHEW: A month, like a few times a month. But I think our family is pretty close as opposed to other families of different cultural backgrounds. INTERVIEWER: How about religion? Do you go to church or belong to a parish? MATHEW: Well, it's hard to say I belong to a parish because I've been to about three different churches in the area; and I think it's an important thing to say too. This generation, my generation, I think we're not being pushed as much—or at least, I am not being pushed as much to go to church; whereas if like my grandmother, most likely because she goes to church every Sunday, pushed my mother to go to church, and I kind of get that from my mother because my mother wants me to go to church, but then you're just like, you know, "Why am I going to church?" And I think that's also from other kids living in America now. They also think, "Why do I want to go to church?" So it kind of rubs off on you, I guess. I mean, religion played a much bigger part before than it does now. INTERVIEWER: Do you consider yourself Catholic? MATHEW: I consider myself a Catholic. I don't consider myself an atheist. I definitely believe in some figure, some dominant figure out there, 17 but I don't go to church a lot. But I don't think that matters whether you call yourself Catholic just because you don't go to church every Sunday. I mean, they don't go to church as much as they did 60 years ago also. Now, over the summer when I'm there, I almost never see them go to church. Of course, some people still will, but it's not the norm to go. Maybe I'm not the one to be asked that question because I don't know so much about it because I'm not there all the time. I'm only there during one season. It's the season that no one has school, and everyone is just out doing things. No one has anything to do. Maybe certain questions like that might be better answered by my grandfather. INTERVIEWER: When you go back to Italy, I get the impression that your grandparents are there too? Do they travel back every summer? MATHEW: Usually every summer. INTERVIEWER: How's your grandfather treated in the village? MATHEW: He's not treated bad at all. He has friends just everyone else has there, and he has [unintelligible - 00:38:17] friends from a long time ago. He does hang around them all the time. He's treated as one of them when he comes back. He's not treated as anything different [unintelligible - 00:38:27]. But yeah, he's not treated any differently as if he just stayed in Italy for his whole life. INTERVIEWER: You talked a little bit about your grandmother and then your mother, and obviously, there's some rejection of values from one generation to the next. You talked a little bit about religion, possibly rejecting a little bit… MATHEW: Not really rejecting, it's just more like -- I mean there's a difference in rejection and just, like, it feels disassociation from it. I mean, I'm not rejecting religion. I'm not saying that I don't want to ever go to church anymore, but it's just more like it's almost 18 more natural than that. It's like we don't go because it's not our tradition. INTERVIEWER: Well, are there other values that perhaps you think differently than…? MATHEW: Sure. I mean, just the whole lot of things, I guess. On a more, like, social background I guess, maybe my grandparents—and you must hear this a lot—I mean, they would be more, like, strict as opposed to now, parents, especially my mother, are more lenient. They let you do more things, and I think that compensates for the fact that in Italy, you can go outside and do whatever you want but then your parents are so strict and saying you have to do this, that, do this, whereas I say -- yeah, it compensates. I mean, for specific values, I mean, it's hard to say because it varies from family to family. But to give you, like, specific values, I wouldn't be a good one to answer that because I can't compare it with anything, because I don't really know how life was like back then. INTERVIEWER: Do you feel as though your grandparents may have different expectations? MATHEW: Not at all, nowadays. Before, maybe, especially my other -- they would expect the male to do more with his life, I guess, you can say. Do more and just be more proactive and take the initiative and just go forward. But I can't speculate on it and say that all the time, males are favored and females aren't favored. And today especially, that's not the case. INTERVIEWER: So is your father's father is still alive? MATHEW: No. INTERVIEWER: Do you think your grandmother in Italy has… MATHEW: No. Not at all. INTERVIEWER: No?19 MATHEW: She's open to like new ideas, and I didn't know her and I haven't heard as many stories about her growing up way back 50 years ago, 60 years ago. But what I see from her is that she's no different than any grandmother living in America. [Audio glitch 00:42:00] speaking in the language, she doesn't differ from other grandmothers, especially my grandmother living in America now. [Unintelligible - 00:42:12], like, combine and become one. The Italian culture is starting to, like, disintegrate in Italy. Now, you see McDonald's coming to Italy, and just the culture is slowly and gradually becoming, like, destroyed. [Unintelligible - 00:42:28] as much as Italy, but France and Germany. INTERVIEWER: Are there certain things in this area that are considered Italian but then when you go to Italy… MATHEW: Italian food. INTERVIEWER: Yeah. MATHEW: Like if you go to an Italian restaurant, like in Leominster or whatever, maybe people -- especially people that aren't Italian, like, think it's an Italian. But in Italy, it's just not that they think it's not Italian. They take it [unintelligible - 00:42:54] as an insult to Italy. They're saying like, "Oh yeah, this food is Italian or whatever," or just like shrimp scampi or something, or just something like that they'd kind of be insulted. But I mean, in another country, if they try to serve American food, there's nothing to be insulted with because they don't really have a specific culture in America, because America pretty much, as I said before, is like a whole bunch of cultures just combined together, different sects and different parts of the town. INTERVIEWER: Anything else? Not just food, but… MATHEW: Not just food. But that's the one I can relate most with. INTERVIEWER: Okay.20 MATHEW: Of course, they want me to do well. No other parent, I mean, no parent would not want you to do well. But they don't -- yeah, I mean, that's their main focus. They want me to succeed. They want me to do something with my life and… INTERVIEWER: What would that be? Does that mean in your profession or your social life? MATHEW: I mean everything, especially growing up. They don't want me to just, like, be down and not do something with my life. They want me to succeed not only like a professional, like that standpoint, focus, but a whole range of things in life. It's pretty general. But take it for what it is, just life. They want me to succeed and become a better person. INTERVIEWER: What about educationally? MATHEW: Education is very important to my parents. They want me to have a good education. I myself, I want to have a good education. I think it's really important. It's almost like it gives you a certain power. It's pretty cliché when you say, like, knowledge is power. I don't take my education for granted. I want a good education, so I strive and I'm applying myself to what I'm doing more than things that doesn't focus on education throughout their life or throughout their childhood. INTERVIEWER: I think that you'll just keep going, but what do you feel that -- are there any expectations for you to work in your grandfather's business? MATHEW: Maybe for him, he might expect me to work there, but I don't expect myself to work there just for the simple fact that I'm not very interested in something like that. If I was, sure, I might work there; but it's like some things won't interest you so you just have to think of something else to do. I don't want to have to rely on that. I'll do something for myself and I'll do whatever. I'll work 21 for myself and I'll do something. I don't want to have to rely on him to provide me a profession. INTERVIEWER: Do you ever go in and learn anything about the plastic industry? Does he bring you in and give you a tour to show you how things work? MATHEW: Sure. I've been on tour for the facility. Both in Leominster—I haven't been to Dallas or Georgia. But I've been to the ones in Leominster, both the holiday and the [unintelligible - 00:46:31]. He shows me around. He showed me how things work. I think he wants me to be involved with the plastic company, like that's what he says to me. He's kind of like pushing me to go in there, but I'm not very interested in it. Sure, it could be a part-time job or something, but I wouldn't rely on that. But definitely, he gives me tours and he shows me around. Yeah, sure. INTERVIEWER: So what are your interests? MATHEW: European history. I wouldn't say modern European history, like World War II, but I would say more like 19th century or 18th century; English, and I'd say Math. I'm very interested in theater. I do a lot of theater outside of school, but I wouldn't want to become an actor. I wouldn't think it's very reliable to become an actor. Plus, also I'm very interested in other things, not just acting. But I think acting is more fun for me when I do other things, something else besides what you're doing for yourself, especially now, like education doing in school. We covered just about everything. INTERVIEWER: [Unintelligible - 00:47:54] your sister. I think so. Thank you. SARAH: Sarah Calangelo. INTERVIEWER: Okay. Hold on. This is the second interview with the Calangelo family. This is Sarah Calangelo and sister of Mathew. You're only here until the first of January and then you're back to Italy? SARAH: I leave the 3rd.22 INTERVIEWER: Leave the 3rd? What are you doing in Italy? SARAH: I got a Fulbright grant after my graduation from Brown. INTERVIEWER: No, it was. It was on standby. I'm sorry I have to ask you about it again. SARAH: Sure. INTERVIEWER: Okay. SARAH: I got a Fulbright grant to go to Italy and about culture, women's art, movies, that kind of stuff as well. Well, it was definitely part -- it sprung from both my studies during college, which -- I studied history, modern history; definitely also from stories about both my grandparents, all four of my grandparents, told me pictures that I saw. INTERVIEWER: [Unintelligible - 00:49:02] soft voice like myself, but you have to keep testing this to you. So what is the most interesting thing that you found best? I'm sure that there are many. SARAH: Right. I guess my argument is that although women were very much oppressed during the regime, there was a lot of space for women to have social clubs to create art, to read literature, to really create their own subjectivity in a sense. That's pretty much what I've been planning out, but a lot of it is through stories of women, no one that I know. INTERVIEWER: Do you have family journals or diaries? SARAH: It's mostly pop culture items, like I haven't really interviewed anyone because that's not really what my research is about. It's not about women's life during the war necessarily. It's about, like, beauty magazines, films, novels, pop literature during the regime. Not necessarily about interviewing the women that participated in the [unintelligible - 00:50:30] or any of that kind of stuff. I grew up in Leominster. We were in that house [unintelligible - 00:50:36], and then we moved here, maybe [unintelligible - 00:50:40]. 23 INTERVIEWER: It's the house that you lived in for 19 years. SARAH: 130 Grove Ave. INTERVIEWER: Okay. SARAH: Yeah. INTERVIEWER: Fitchburg? SARAH: Yeah. INTERVIEWER: And then you went on to… SARAH: When I boarded for two years at Exeter, [unintelligible - 00:50:53] Exeter, and then I [unintelligible - 00:50:55], and then I transferred to Brown. INTERVIEWER: Tell me about your maternal grandparents. SARAH: They came here in -- they immigrated in [unintelligible - 00:51:04] exactly, but… INTERVIEWER: It's okay. Just tell me about them personally. What are they like? SARAH: My grandfather is very much like a working man. Everyday he's in the office, maybe even Saturdays as well. He comes home for lunch or does lunch at some of these three or four restaurants in the Leominster area, the same ones usually. But pretty much the way I've seen him during my life is very much like a routine sort of life going to the office, very active, working a lot. My grandmother is also really active for a woman her age, I think. [Unintelligible - 00:51:58] drives the car even now. Even if she has sort of pain or whatever—she just went through a surgery. She used to walk, really doesn't feel bad for herself ever, sort of -- doesn't work, but she did, I believe, when she first came here. But when my mom and my uncle were… INTERVIEWER: Always lived in Italy. SARAH: I guess first of all I would say my grandparents here have seen much more of the world, out of different countries, moved along a lot of different continents as well, whereas my dad's mom has pretty much stayed in not only her town, but I mean, not only her 24 region but her town. She's come here maybe, I don't know, once or twice. There's a major difference in just -- it's one side have seen more of the world than the other. My maternal grandmother has also worked hard, and I think she's like my other grandmother. She still has the sort of -- not really complaining when you have pain, keeping oneself busy. A lot of those things are definitely similar. Also, the importance of family, family gatherings, I mean, I think maybe the differences I see may have to do with just modes of transportation that are available here, financial resources, that kind of stuff. But a lot of the cooking, family, these sorts of things are definitely similar. INTERVIEWER: [Unintelligible - 00:53:46] your grandmother coming here to visit? SARAH: I do, but through photos, not from my own memory. The last I have [unintelligible - 00:53:53]. One is 19. There's a lot more pressure here probably with getting into a good college, [unintelligible - 00:54:03] of the resume, is pushed here not there necessarily. I feel like here you're expected to travel by either after high school or after college. A young person would have gone in some sort of trip, colleges offer exchange programs. They too have pretty much led not an insular life, but just travelled a little bit less. But I don't know if that has to do necessarily with their being from Italy. It's hard to put my finger on what that could have been. But usually when -- I mean, they may not have money to go on luxurious trips over the summer or to see other countries often, but they definitely -- I mean, they've been to Switzerland. They've been to France. The expectations aren't -- I mean, I feel like here we're expected to by 18 or 20 to go out with friends, to travel the world. There, it's a lot different. You may 25 travel with family or you travel with your class. Because Europe is so small, their class trips are actually to other countries. INTERVIEWER: What about the expectations for college? SARAH: They're definitely different because college there is a completely different phenomenon. It's usually a seven- or eight-year process, and it actually has much higher value than the American BA. It's pretty much equivalent to an MA. So it's different. It's considered much more intense. It's not privatized in Italy. You have to really do your work independently. You have to almost fight to make it through the seven years, where here you go to an American college -- but even a college that's big, pretty much your teachers are watching you. They're taking roll class in class. It's definitely much more cozy and easy in the sense that if you're slipping, someone's going to catch you. Here. There, no one normally cares. I mean, I'm taking classes there and you don't have to pay for them, you just sit in. I've never [unintelligible - 00:56:31] being around accounting university student that a lot of them do go back home almost free weekend that they have, which is really different from my experience here. American campus is one that sort of provides social activities, movies on the main green, these sorts of things. So you want to stay there during weekends. I even remember teachers maybe during orientations they say, "Parents, let your kids stay the first two weekends here on campus." It's really different in Italy. Most kids do go home because they have also a lot more ties to their village or to their small town, whatever. They almost can't wait to go back. I mean, I think it's changing. I don't want make Corfinio all of Italy. Do you know what I mean? INTERVIEWER: But it's a village except… SARAH: I mean, it's an incredibly small village, just like 900 people. But I've noticed just being in [unintelligible - 00:57:30], a lot of kids 26 are starting to move out now, got their own apartments by the time they're 25. Definitely, it's not to such an extent as here, you're expected to be out of the house at 18 and sort of -- I mean, I guess they know that it's a thing that exists mostly in France [unintelligible - 00:57:54] such schools. But yeah, I don't think they could have -- I think it's something difficult themselves going through. They are a lot more tied to their family I guess. Yeah, I think so. I feel sort of caught in the middle too, because I don't feel quite Italian-American either, because I consider that really different than just Italian. I feel like they're two different cultures. The Italian-American way of life has almost created its own, like, myth, its own idea of what Italy is like. But, like -- I don't know how to explain, I guess I can go to Italian-American events here but knowing that I guess just having that experience Italy firsthand, almost living there during the summers too, so I see the differences between Italian-American people here but what Italy really is now there. INTERVIEWER: Can you describe it a little bit more? SARAH: Like I feel like stuff in Leominster, like [unintelligible - 00:59:08] is sort of like very stereotypical Italian, and obviously are completely different from the reality in Italy. I feel like people that have been in the States their whole lives they've, never seen Italy, only heard stories from great grandparents or great grandparents, are going to have a skewed vision of what Italy is sentimental-wise, I guess. Or I mean, something I've noticed is that what people say is Italian-American or the Italian -- I don't know exactly where I'm going with this, but I'm just saying that it's a major difference, like two cultures are incredibly different. That for sure. Yeah. They 27 expect less of me because I may not know the language as well, but I feel like I'm competing with Italian [audio glitch 01:00:17]. INTERVIEWER: I'm thinking more of… SARAH: It's a lot. It's definitely much more strict there in terms of -- gender differences are much more… I mean, even liberal Italian women still have [unintelligible - 01:00:38] in their head of how to do certain things, how to behave. It's definitely a lot more sort of loose in the city than it is in the village, I've noticed. Definitely in Corifinio it's very limiting. As a woman, I feel that I can't really do much there. [Unintelligible - 01:01:02] late, if you're out with a big group of kids, there should be at least one or two other girls there with you because if you're only with guys, that would be strange. So there's definitely little rules like that. I feel like in the village especially, the men sort of control the social center. They control the piazza. They play cards there. It's sort of their space. And if I'm there past 2 or 3 o'clock, it's a little strange, like I should be home. [Unintelligible - 01:01:36] Yeah, I always sort of pose, like, hypothetical to myself, I guess— what would I be like if I lived my cousin's life? I mean, I guess I see the actual results from my cousins. I feel like I could have easily been them. INTERVIEWER: So what was the… SARAH: I mean, I don't think I would like it. I think when I was young I really liked the village. They give me freedom because you can stay outside until midnight. Everyone knows each other. It's completely safe. You like it until you're maybe 17 or so, and you realized that it's almost suffocating. It's always the same stuff going on every year. I felt like it would be too [audio glitch - 01:02:32] to leave the village, like the transportation systems aren't necessarily [audio glitch - 01:02:36]. 28 And you form most friendships there, which are really great; but at the same time, the loyalties are so strong there that you feel like you need to stay there. I mean, I understand why a lot of these Italian kids go back to their small town. So much of their personalities were shaped there. So many of their friends are there, like everyone knows each other so there's that very comfortable feeling there. I don't think I would like to live that kind of life. INTERVIEWER: Generally speaking… SARAH: Oh, I think they feel [thankful] as well. Definitely, my older cousin is starting to at this point branch out, have friends in bigger cities near the town. She definitely wants to go away to college. I mean, I think the entire -- all of this globalization that's taking place as well is affecting young people in these small towns too because they're on the Internet. They ponder their own sort of isolation too, so they see that they can -- they say, "Oh geez, well, that looks neat. I want to go to [unintelligible - 01:03:57] here. So maybe I'll go to this big city," or "Maybe next weekend I'll go to Rome." So they're starting to definitely have more options. INTERVIEWER: And how do their parents…? SARAH: I mean, I feel like my aunts are pretty open to that kind of thing. They [unintelligible - 01:04:10] go places that they can. I mean, my grandmother didn't want me to come back to the States for this vacation, because she was really scared about the terrorist hijacking, probably planes in general. So my grandmother is definitely much more -- because she hasn't travelled too much, she has a lot more fears about traveling because maybe she hasn't really [unintelligible - 01:04:34] very much. So she's a lot more, sort of, nurturing and scared about younger family members traveling. But I think she accepts it as well. She understands it's a natural part of my life to move around like this. INTERVIEWER: … certain age that you're expected to get married, or even if you…29 SARAH: I don't think so. I think the village – people that stay in the village their entire life are people that haven't… that did not get a university diploma. But stay there now—I'm talking now because this wasn't the case 20 or 30 -- that they stay there now are probably going to get married with other people either in a nearby town somewhere in the [unintelligible - 01:05:27] area, probably going to work. If the woman doesn't work, she'll be a housewife, just have kids. But it's the same as a small town in the States too. If you didn't go to college, you're going to work or just going to start a family for the hell of it, because you're bored, because it's just the way things are. I don't think there really is any different from a small town here. I think that actually, a lot of women there are starting to marry later. Most kids are marrying in their early thirties, whereas here, I'm seeing a lot more early marriages among even my friends. Now, in Italy the [mortality] rate is negative or close to negative. A lot more kids, even kids from the village, are getting married later. They're enjoying their single life for a period of much longer. I have a lot of friends that are 27, 28, and they're in relationships but they're not married; and they're going to think about having a family later on. Definitely, these people are in long -- like for instance, these people are in long relationships that span, not going away to Bologna or Rome or Milan for school. So kind of in this town and this is your boyfriend, and you're going to get married in five years to this person and start a family, but may have to live in here as well. It's definitely strange. I felt really out of the loop, and I mean, I was reading in my room and got a phone call from a journalist. And it must have been maybe 45 minutes after the first time hit. Well, I want to know an American response to [audio 30 glitch 01:07:30]. I want to know what Americans think. I don't have any problems with other Americans. I had no idea, and of course, that's not something that you would imagine. You wouldn't sort of actively think of as -- so I said, "What do you mean? Do you mean like the embassy attack the past year in Africa? What are you talking about?" And she goes, "Oh wow, you don't know. I don't even want to tell you over the phone. I feel so bad. Why don't you turn on your television and just watch TV? Something horrible had happened." So I was sort of scared. I turned on the television and watched, and then she called me back in about two hours' time and wanted to get my response. I mean, I immediately felt more American than Italian when it happened. You sort of -- it was a time when I sort of realized my loyalty's to the States, and I sort of wished that I had been with my family at the time. I told her that it was terrifying. I told her that I was trying to track down friends in New York, but that my family members were all safe. In Italy? The Italians are very sympathetic of what happened. They were constantly talking to me about it; they wanted to know how I felt about it. And from the beginning, they're very much a part of the war effort, if you want to call it that. But there were a lot of [unintelligible - 01:08:59] left the city. There are a lot of peace demonstrations, anti-war demonstrations. But generally, the people around me were very sympathetic asking me, "How do you feel exactly? Are your friends okay? Is your family okay?" I definitely want to come back to the States and I don't think I would -- living in Italy has been great, but it's also sort of opened my eyes to a lot of things that I don't like about Italy, or don't like being a woman in Italy, for instance. I think right now I'm ready to come back here. I mean, after July, after my grant is over. I 31 think my place right now is here for at least a couple of years and then work and other things. But I wouldn't mind doing -- who knows what the future holds? I may live in Italy. I may live somewhere in Europe or elsewhere, but I think definitely right now, I'd like to live in the States. I don't think it really had much to do with September 11th. If anything, I feel safer in Europe than I do here. I felt incredibly safe in Bologna, whereas I was worrying about my family here, especially with bioterrorism and getting scared about water [unintelligible - 01:10:16]. There, I really wasn't too worried about it. Yeah, I mean I feel like the way I grew up and the values that my parents have are definitely slightly different from other people's parents. I feel like, especially my dad, pushing the whole independence thing far less than other parents do. I have a lot of friends that really -- they go home, but their bedrooms had been changed into a parent's office. I know that my bedroom here will pretty much always be my bedroom and that all of my old clothes will be in the closet, and I won't have to ever really clean out. I feel like most of my friends have moved all of their junk out of their rooms and set up an apartment elsewhere. But even when I do have an apartment -- say, I had an apartment in Providence. Even when I do have an apartment, like, my home is still here, and my home address is still 42 Leominster Road. That will probably change in five years or so, or less, but it was far later than my friends. INTERVIEWER: Do you think your friends [unintelligible - 01:11:35]? SARAH: About me? INTERVIEWER: Yes. SARAH: I mean I think some of them, my very close friends, certainly see that parenting has been maybe a little different in this house. But a 32 lot of my friends are also [unintelligible - 01:11:51] Chinese immigrants or Russian immigrants or et cetera, et cetera. So they have had similar experiences. So we may get together and just talk and laugh about the different values that they have. But my dad is very like family-oriented. When I do come back home, he wants me to stay home. He doesn't want me to immediately take off and go to New York with friends or back to Providence to see old college friends. He wants me to talk to my brothers and to sort of get back into the groove of maybe family life before I left to go to boarding school. He wants to sort of prove that kind of -- I feel like both of my parents are a little protective. If I take a car out or if I go out with friends, they still want me to call when I've arrived. That's a little difference from some of the things that my friends do. My friends don't necessarily have to call once they arrive at their destination points. I mean, small things, I probably take them for granted. That's why it's so difficult to kind of list them, but we eat dinner together at the same time usually most of the time here. That's changing now a little bit as everyone, as my dad is becoming a little bit more Americanized. My mom has started busying herself with the museum, with Fitchburg State, so she's often out of the house. But definitely when I was younger, we would eat lunch and dinner together. And we talk and would be a time for us to talk to go over each of our days. INTERVIEWER: What are the…? SARAH: … the holidays. Like Christmas is incredibly important in our house, what we eat. Pretty much they're trying to -- I feel like they're trying to preserve what they had in Italy; and in the end, it's not very different than -- I mean I spent the New Year's and Christmas in Italy with my dad's side of the family, and it's very similar. The meals are almost exactly the same. The fish, I've 33 eaten [on then], the dinner on Christmas is pretty -- they're all for sure. INTERVIEWER: Anything else… SARAH: It's like religion, we have much more part of daily life. The calendars there, I mean just the small detail, the calendars there have all the saints' days written on them. The saints, definitely the saints. And so I mean, that's a perfect example of just like every day you wake up and you look at the calendar, you see like a saint's name. It's just part of -- it doesn't mean that they're more religious. It's just a much more a part of their daily life. I would even say that because it's so a part of their just daily fabric, the fabric of their daily life, a lot of them, it's almost become they take it for granted. It's becoming much more of a cultural thing but not necessarily a spiritual thing for many. I mean, I know friends in Italy -- I mean, from my experience the youth don't necessarily go to church. They go through the motions, but they don't talk about religion. Here, I feel like it's your -- because you have much more of a choice in what religion you choose to follow or just -- your options of worship are more vast here. I feel like once you do choose that path, you're going to do it with a bit more intensity. But maybe [unintelligible - 01:15:50] because I don't really go to church. I haven't gone to church. [Unintelligible - 01:15:54] something and when I do, unfortunately it's only to really make everyone -- my dad's mom is religious, but she doesn't go to church every Sunday by any means. They say prayers at night. I mean, I feel like she feels the religion very much, I can tell. She'll have, like, pictures of little saints arranged in the house with little religious house frames. But she doesn't necessarily go to church. And I feel like people here in the States sort of want to equate going to church with religious fervor or with Christian morality or Catholic 34 morality. I think there, a lot of people, especially the older women, may not go to church necessarily, but it's so part of their way of thinking. I feel like here, it's become like a community thing, Church [unintelligible - 01:17:09] events, like, that people do to kind of get all the youth together. It's almost forced here. In Italy, it's very natural, a way of life. I feel like the youth now in Italy is less involved than my parents or my grandparents. I don't think so. When I was younger, I definitely thought that I should, because gosh, if I married an American, then how would everyone understand each other? But as I'm getting older -- I just thought that. It wasn't -- I don't think, a pressure. But I just thought, "Well, if everyone is speaking Italian at this table, and when my husband's home, you know, what's he going to do?" Now, I don't feel that way, not really. I feel a little pressure to marrying an Italian. It would be nice, especially for my dad's side of the family, to understand what any sort of husband is saying, my future husband would say. But it wouldn't change my plans to… INTERVIEWER: It was working, and then all of a sudden it slipped to the… SARAH: Both my grandmothers were never necessarily dependent from their husbands. They went from being [unintelligible - 01:18:50] by their fathers to be [unintelligible - 01:18:52] by their husbands. That doesn't mean that they were unhappy by any means, but I feel like my mom is very different from my grandmother. And she makes more financial decisions. And I'm even more independent than that in the sense that I travel around, [take life] here and there, visit friends, things that probably my mom didn't do when she was immediately out of college. I mean, I feel that -- I don't feel any pressure to get married even. I mean, that's how, I guess, extreme things have gotten around here now. 35 Really, because that sounds a little harsh, but I learned how to make -- like I know the cooking at this point, like I know how to cook meals. And I love Italy. I'm there studying for a year. It's not that I don't like Italy, but I don't have this obsession to…/AT/jf/fu/es