Written by Christian Hazes, Staff Writer

It is safe to say that ample initiatives coming from American presidents have miserably failed. Ronald Reagan’s intense acceleration of the War on Drugs, originally commenced by President Nixon, and its devastating impact on incarceration rates and especially the Black community, is probably one of the most fitting epitomes of those unfortunate initiatives.

Sometimes, though, a hidden gem comes to the surface. Unlike several other Wars On something started by the United States, the War on Poverty and particularly its 1961 re-introduced food stamps system received critical acclaim. It was President John F. Kennedy that suggested the food stamps system as a pilot and eventually secured sufficient and healthy nutrition for a staggering number of American families living below the poverty line. Up to this day, a vast amount of Americans continues to rely on what is now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), preventing widespread hunger across the country including all of its disastrous consequences. In 2016, a staggering 45 million Americans benefited from SNAP.

However, if current president Donald Trump has his way, getting food on the table will soon be a difficult task for a large portion of Americans. Envisaged budget cuts for 2019 jeopardize a precious and effective American welfare component, thus leaving many American families in peril.

Trump aims at trimming the SNAP-related spending severely over the next decade. Approximately a quarter of the current program’s funding will have to be cut according to the president. What this boils down to is the fact that a significant number of current SNAP recipients will lose access to this invaluable social safety net. In the case that Trump is able to fulfill his wishes, the aforementioned number of 45 million Americans that participate in SNAP will drastically decline.

Unsurprisingly, SNAP has always been a vexed topic within U.S. politics. The debates on SNAP make a longstanding and notorious schism in American culture come to the surface once again. On one side, liberals laud the bulwark of the American social safety net, emphasizing that the program spares millions of American households from misery. On the other hand, (mostly Republican) conservatives tend to detest the program due to its alleged motivation-stifling nature.

Obviously, every individual is allowed to have a certain ideological preference. But, the primarily positive effects of SNAP cannot be denied. More importantly, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights explicitly guarantees freedom from hunger, thus making access to food a human right.

SNAP’s first and foremost goal, quite evidently, is to reduce food insecurity. In other words, the nutrition assistance aims to prevent having uncertain or insufficient access to food. Research consistently shows that participating in SNAP is accompanied by a decreased risk of food insecurity. What’s more, the height of the sum that participants get plays a huge role: the higher the benefit received, the lower one’s food insecurity risk is.

But SNAP does more than simply put food on the table of the needy; its positive long-term effects are likewise noteworthy. The incidence of babies born underweight – a tragic event that comes with a slew of complications during later stages of life – fell relatively drastically; roughly 10% fewer occurrences were measured after the inception of the food stamps program. Seeing as access to nutrition assistance in early life stages is vital, health problems dawning in adulthood can be circumvented by ensuring access to SNAP in utero and during early childhood.

SNAP’s reach extends to the economic domain as well. The initiative lifts numerous American households out of poverty, as well as many out of deep poverty (those living below half the poverty line). But that’s not everything. Food stamps have become an automatic stabilizer of the American economy. The program stimulates the economy by virtue of a larger enrollment rate when the economy slumps and many families need nutrition aid. On the other hand, when the economy overheats, SNAP participation decreases. Furthermore, essential expenses such as medical bills and rent can be maintained more easily when food is being provided by the government.

Fortunately, SNAP can expect much support in its battle for survival. SNAP is part of the Farm Bill, a bill supporting the demand, thus boosting production, for food. The food industries and agricultural lobby groups would be far from happy with shrinking the size of SNAP. In addition, the vital function of the nutrition assistance as a social safety net is much appreciated by many Americans. Cracking down on the already minimal welfare provisions of the U.S. will not be a very popular decision amongst the needy and the liberal. Cutting back on SNAP expenses will maybe even mean political suicide for Trump; a great deal of states that chose Trump over Clinton have a population that relies heavily on SNAP.

Despite the moderate chances of passing, the attempt to cut back on SNAP funding is worrisome. Concentrating on ambitions, goals, and desires instead of an empty belly is so important in life and many people would not be able to develop that part of themselves without food stamps. SNAP remains, somewhat uniquely, one of the most successful initiatives within the U.S. Cutting back on SNAP would not fix something that is broken, rather, it would break something that actually works.

The post Oh SNAP! Food Stamps are Under Pressure appeared first on Pandemic Magazine.

Being Dutch is inevitably accompanied by a couple of long-lasting stigmas and traits. According to outsiders, but often also according to ourselves, every Dutch person loves cheese, uses a bike to get from A to B, and probably the most notorious habit: “going Dutch” on the bill.

A tradition the outside world is less acquainted with, but that an abundance of Dutch people detests, is what we call zesjescultuur. The fact that the term entails the Dutch word for the number 6 (zes) already makes it a bit more convenient for you to guess the habit’s gist. It is simply the Dutch equivalent of the culture of mediocrity plaguing education. A culture of obtaining a grade that barely meets the threshold to pass a test or a course reigns in the Netherlands.

Unsurprisingly, a lot of prominent Dutch newspapers write about the highly vexed topic of education. Newspapers such as De Volkskrant, Trouw, and De Telegraaf identify challenges, unveil problems and provide recommendations for the future concerning the Dutch education system. What caught my attention is the Dutch newspapers’ tendency to (over)emphasize the prevalence of the zesjescultuur. Lately, it seems to be the only thing they can discuss.

In my opinion, the tradition of the zesjescultuur in the Netherlands is largely non-existent: a contemporary Dutch myth.

There seems to be not a culture of mediocrity, but the opposite: a culture of having to excel in school. This myth is reinforced by the perpetual stream of news that argues that education has to improve and that the majority of the Dutch students are towards education.

Photo by Jonas Jacobsson

Together with the dawn of the efficiency pivoted thinking in Dutch education, particularly universities (companies that strive for profit, students are merely products and need to be fabricated as quickly as possible), the two amalgamated into an acceleration of the solidification of the culture to academically excel, including far-stretching consequences. Academic pressure takes its toll, mostly in the form of depression. Many students struggle psychologically; succumbing to the daunting pressure of having to perform. In South Korea, the leading cause of death amongst Koreans aged 15 to 24 is suicide thanks to extreme academic pressure.

Hopefully, the Netherlands (and elsewhere in the world) is able to circumvent such an extreme fate. The first signs are not hopeful. Recently conducted research in higher education in the Netherlands produced baffling figures: a quarter of the students copes with burnout symptoms, 1 out of 7 students face depression and suicidal thoughts which also frequently occur. Oftentimes, the detrimental effects of excessive academic pressure on mental well-being are less overt, but not less harmful. The instilled urge to perform and excel academically kills both self-esteem and happiness, and stifles creativity.

Severe academic pressure negatively affects physical health as well, ample research suggests. Insomnia, increased cardiac risk and an increased blood pressure are all valid concerns. The fact that a lot of students turn to coping mechanisms such as drugs or alcohol does not help either. What’s more, due to the increased focus on performance, education has become substantially more expensive. Many students build up a considerable debt at a young age, especially now that the Dutch government stopped funding students.

The obligation of (excessive) striving and prospering throughout one’s academic career is indoctrinated from a young age on. Many Dutch elementary schools have joined the quest for eradicating the lethargic youngsters. Schools sell and promote themselves with award-worthy marketing, promising to turn your little boy or girl into the next Nobel prize winner. At an age of about five, kids get exposed to government official tests for the first time. A flood of others will follow in the years to come. Most fascinating is the implementation of student-based rankings. A huge in-class billboard shows in which category a pupil belongs. The bright students are identified as “stars” (or something else in a similar vein), those who still need to make considerable progress are called “rockets,” and the hopeless belong to the category consisting of “moons”. But do not panic! If you work hard, outdo your 8-year old peers, and perform well, you can climb the ladder and reach the class’ upper echelons.

Parents can contribute a lot to the solidification of academic pressure. Their role can be summarized with one simple, yet powerful, sentence: there are not a lot of gifted children, but there are a lot of parents with gifted children. Parents to (intentionally) overestimate the abilities of their kids. Parents obviously want the best for their offspring, but the academic pressure they impose on their children might backfire. Children undergo intense pressure in order to fulfill dreams that are sometimes not even their own.

Progress and the need to perform in school are undoubtedly important and justified. The youth needs to be motivated and stimulated in order to develop, not just for their own sake but also for that of the world. Education is invaluable and its fruits are sweet. At the same time, striving comes at a price and poses an inescapable trade-off. Should we always strive for the highest attainable or rather take it easy and aim for general well-being and happiness? A healthy balance should be found, especially when taking into consideration the rapidly enhancing intense nature of society and contemporary life. A step in the right direction might come in the form of pursuing the Humboldtian education ideal. The leitmotif of this school of thought is academic freedom, which is a two-fold concept. Universities should be independent from governmental influence and external economic constraints. But there should also be academic freedom from within, meaning that students themselves are pulling the strings of their educational journey.

Education might be the blueprint for successful living, but let’s refrain from an excess of zeal.

The post Learning Insanity appeared first on Pandemic Magazine.

It was a bold move from Emmanuel Macron to visit Morocco as the first Maghreb destination, shortly after having been elected president. Macron’s predecessors frequently opted for visiting Algeria first, instead of its long-standing regional rival Morocco. Both countries constituted the invaluable core of the French empire in North and West Africa and the post-independence relationship between colonizer and colonized has been complex and often ambivalent.

Nevertheless, Macron’s choice to promote Morocco to France’s first state visit destination is not totally a surprise. Aside from some periods of accumulating tension, France and Morocco have always been on good terms with each other. This relationship caused both countries to substantially influence one another in an abundance of facets.

French involvement in Morocco is especially evident and worth taking a closer look at. The former colonizer, who granted Morocco independence in 1956, remains Morocco’s largest trading partner as well as its chief investor. Two fitting illustrations of France’s endeavours are the recently erected Renault fabrication plant in hub-city Tanger, and the establishment of a Moroccan equivalent of the Train à Grande Vitesse. This high-velocity rail service is the commencement of fulfilling Morocco’s wish to modernize its infrastructure. The “fastest train in Africa” will make traveling by train in Morocco considerably less time-consuming. Macron has vowed to ensure France’s commitment to the Moroccan cause of realizing economic emergence, industrial development and the implementation of political and institutional reforms. A logical consequence is that France has the honor to call itself Morocco’s paramount bilateral donor.

When it comes to the political sphere, one does not have to search long to unveil French influence. Strong Franco-Moroccan political ties have the by-result of spawning a growing stream of concerns regarding the return of ‘Françafrique’. French general consulates are in abundance in Morocco, a phenomenon not quite unique to the country. The extensive network of French embassies and consulates across much of Africa is a remnant of colonial times. Less overt, or obvious, instances of the French finger in the political pie of Morocco are the joint action programs on climate change, combating terrorism, and the growing presence of French cultural institutions.

Even the more trivial Moroccan domains couldn’t escape the French claws,inevitably bearing the mark of its former colonizer. During a meeting in Marrakech, I asked a young Moroccan sports journalist who had just recently launched the site League Live for his opinion on the fact that many football trainers for the Moroccan squad are born and raised Frenchmen. He confirmed that the Moroccan football federation has a tendency to appoint French trainers, but that it doesn’t stop there. French staff is also deployed to train the Moroccan youth squads. Not merely in the light of the national squads, but also concerning that of the Moroccan clubs. As expected, the French style of playing has now become the status quo in Morocco.

Not unimportantly, when asked for Morocco’s chances at surviving the group stage of the upcoming World Cup, the journalist advocated for discarding the French way of playing. Instead, “parking the bus”, a highly defensive tactic that aims at conceding as few as possible goals, ought to take precedence.

Is France driven by genuine goodwill? Or are there underlying motives that hint to self-interest? A mixture of both? Could that be possible?

Like any other country, France craves expanding its operations into broader markets, and Africa is the “new” El Dorado. The continent’s riches, when it comes to natural resources, attracts an abundance of foreign partners. Morocco possesses a great deal of natural resources itself, such as phosphate reserves and fish, but the kingdom is also seen as a potential portal and connector to the African hinterland.

Photo by J. Audema, 1905

During colonial times, the French only shared their hegemony on the African continent with the British. Now in 2018 a lot has changed. France’s near total domination has vanished into thin air. With Germany, the United States, and most notably China and India joining the fray, France has receded substantially compared to their position only a decade ago. France’s deteriorating competitiveness is a chief culprit, which is mostly due to the floundering French economy. The economically booming states of China and India easily outgun France when it comes to financial means. But it is primarily the former Francophone Africa turning its back on France that proves to be fatal for the latter’s languishing domination in Africa. From Senegal to Madagascar, they yearn to reduce their dependence on Paris. This also explains why many African countries turn to non-French investors and benefactors.

It is, in addition to the already strong bonds, Morocco’s envisaged role as the gateway to the new El Dorado that explains France’s reinvigorated interest in bolstering its partnership with the kingdom. In 2013, King Mohammed VI explicitly stated that the African continent is Morocco’s top-priority in light of international relations. The kingdom’s expanded political and economic footprint in Africa marks the inception of a new era in multilateral collaboration between Morocco and the other, predominantly Sub-Saharan, African states. Morocco’s recent return to the African Union and its accession in some regional cooperative pacts couldn’t have a better timing.

Obviously, France cannot miss out on this opportunity. France’s narrative is one that emphasizes the shared quest that both countries are to embark on: pursuing joint interests, involving multiple facets of life.

Former French Prime-Minister François Mitterand stated in 1957 that “Without Africa, France will have no history in the 21th century”. The daunting fear of losing Africa is still relevant to contemporary France. This says a lot about the current relations between the two. Although de jure decolonized, Francophone Africa is still of the utmost importance to France. Plus, it remains connected to its former colonizer as if nothing has changed ever since the struggles for independence were ultimately rewarded with independence.

Admittedly, France preserves various and important stakes in the cultural, political and economic ties between Africa and the self. But this is nothing in comparison with the power and status that it once enjoyed in the African Backyard. Regardless of the still evident French influence, it is slowly waning.

It is the latter and a hint of optimism that make me conclude that the fear that Mitterand voiced is finite.

The post The Gateway Kingdom appeared first on Pandemic Magazine.

Unintentionally, Zaire defender Mwepu Ilunga achieved football immortality during one of the group-stage matches of the 1974 FIFA World Cup in Germany.

Having lost against Scotland and Yugoslavia, Zaire had already been eliminated from the tournament. On the other hand, Brazil had already reached the second stage of the tournament after picking up two convincing wins. In other words, the final game between the two countries would be a mere technicality. While in the concluding minutes of that last game of group B, tournament first-timers Zaire were down two to nothing against reigning champions Brazil.

In these final minutes, Mwepu Ilunga succeeds in doing the impossible: leaving the divine team Seleçao flabbergasted. The Brazilians are preparing to take a free-kick, while Zaire forms a wall to attempt to block the shot. Shortly after the whistle by the referee that signals Brazil is good to go, defender Mwepu Ilunga breaks free from the wall, sprints towards the ball and before the Brazilians can blink, kicks the ball away as far as possible. Brazilian football gods Roberto Rivelino and Jairzinho looking on with their jaws dropped remains a unique scene. One of the strangest moments in football history just took place.

The fact is the reason for Ilunga’s action had nothing to do with ignorance concerning the rules of the game. No, Zaire’s players, nicknamed the Leopards, are perfectly aware of the rules. Instead, the daunting fear of going home is what drove Ilunga’s action. The clearance was simply a tactic to buy some invaluable time as well as an act of protest.

Zaire was a Belgian colony up until the year 1960, officially known then as Congo. As is the case for the vast majority of the exploited colonies on the African continent, the legacy left behind by former European rulers is far from convenient. Five years after gaining independence, Mobutu Sese Seko cunningly turned the precarious and inchoate Sub-Saharan state into a dictatorial regime. Mobutu’s Popular Movement of the Revolution dominated the one-party state that Zaire had become for over three decades, leaving the country devastated. Under the aegis of “the Father of the Nation”, the people of Zaire had been trapped in a totalitarian system dripping with Mobutism.

Mobutu’s influence also reached Zaire’s football culture by virtue of recalling players that had moved to Belgium, prohibiting playing abroad, and pumping huge sums of money in the game’s development. It must be admitted, though, that Mobutu’s intervention was highly fruitful, in addition to snatching the only African ticket for the contest after a grueling group-stage, the Leopards also became victors of the 1974 African Cup of Nations. As a sign of gratitude, the benign Mobutu awarded every team member with a house and a green Volkswagen car.

Not surprisingly, therefore, Zaire arrived at the World Cup ‘74 on a high. Some bookmakers even deemed the Africans potential outsiders.

The start of the tournament proved to be promising. Under the supervision of a vast Zairean delegate, including important ministers, high-ranking army officials and a battalion of witchdoctors, the team held up remarkably well against a strong Scottish equipe. Nevertheless, Zaire’s world cup debut culminated in a 2-0 loss.

Unfortunately, the close loss against the Scots turned out to be the apex of Zaire’s participation during that World Cup. Ahead of their next game, financial problems surfaced that proved to be the last drop to make pot boil over. The Zairean players did not receive their match payments.

In stark contrast with the present-day conditions, several decades ago football players often lived in financially uncertain circumstances. The fact that corruption was common in Mobutu-led Zaire made the players suspicious of the Zairean entourage. Mwepu Ilunga and consorts could assume the delegate had seized the match payments.

Photo by Jannik Skorna

The players of Zaire decided to strike back. Not merely because of the unreceived match bonuses, but also to address the larger problems of their home country. The World Cup would be the perfect stage to raise awareness concerning the fact that they were living in a full-blown dictatorial regime.

According to some sources, as a last resort to avoid a tarnished image of the tournament, the FIFA promised to pay 3000 Deutsche Marks per player as a means of compensation. All-out mutiny by Zaire was circumvented, but the tension didn’t fully dissipate.

The second match of Zaire with Yugoslavia as the adversary was amongst the worst in the whole history of the tournament. Exhaustion after days of arguing amalgamated with feelings of anger and resentment left the Leopards extremely demotivated. The result? Zaire experienced complete annihilation: 9-0.

This is when the situation really got out of hand. Mobutu was furious, Zaire had experienced humiliation on the international stage because of the players. Presidential guards were dispatched to threaten the team with a clear message: lose with 4 or more goals to Brazil and you better not come home.

The message surely resonated with the team. Knowing that their lives were at stake, the Zairean footballers gave it all they got against those Gods in yellow. In order for himself and his teammates to survive, Mwepu Ilunga was even willing to make a joke out of himself in front of the whole world.

The sacrifice made for survival is large. Abruptly breaking free from the wall of men in green, with a feral gaze that radiates determination, and hoofing up the ball across the pitch resulted in being universally ridiculed. But, when being able to see your family and home again are at stake, the “by any means necessary” mindset prevails.

When the final whistle had been blown, a score of 3-0 in favor of the Brazilians stood on the scoreboard. Mission accomplished.

Despite being allowed to go home, many of the ‘74 Leopards did not go home for the simple reason that they did not wish to live under a dictatorial regime which considered them pariahs.

After becoming aware of the true underlying motivations for Ilunga’s clearance, it might seem inappropriate to laugh about the incident. I do not fully agree. Obviously, the state of 1974 Zaire is not funny at all. Nor did Ilunga’s sudden action do much to increase the chances of not conceding a goal. But, the free kick farce is one of the best examples of political protest through sports. The metaphorical middle finger towards Mobutu is not only unique; at the end of the day, it is mostly very heroic.

And that is worth a smile.

The post Ilunga’s Game appeared first on Pandemic Magazine.

I have had the privilege to enrich my life with numerous fascinating trips. Be it the vast and pristine landscapes of arctic Norway or the quaint, calm and sun-soaked French villages; every journey is unique and provides a different experience. Lately, however, I started to realize that all these trips have one thing in common: that there is one ever-recurring question that is dropped shortly after telling people that I was born and raised in Amsterdam. I am talking about the simple and obvious question, fired at me before I can finish my sentence:

“How is the trip?”

I refrain from snapping and answer politely that the trip is amazing, ditto for the country and people, before being bluntly interrupted again:

“No dude, I’m talking about the drugs! You’re from Amsterdam!”

In my mind, images of me facepalming myself play; I ought to know by now this is to be expected. It’s proof that the Netherlands, and predominantly Amsterdam, are still the very embodiment of everything that comprises vice and complete liberty for many outsiders. Question is, for how long will I be confronted with drug-driven curiosity?

Without a doubt, the marriage of Amsterdam with weed is largely a result of the coffeeshop – and they are an endangered species these days. Despite still being omnipresent in the typical streetscape of Amsterdam, the number of coffeeshops is in swift decline.

In 1995, there were 350 coffeeshops in Amsterdam. Since then, 183 Amsterdam coffeeshops had to shut up shop, predominantly due to political pressure from governing bodies. That’s about half. In The Hague, the Dutch political capital, ferocious plans have been devised to combat the soft drugs industry in the Netherlands. However, in the case of Amsterdam, the approach has merely led to the deterioration of the situation and, due to its numerous adverse effects, cannot only be characterized as deeply flawed.

Amsterdam has a reputation for being one of the most liberal and progressive places in the world, which has a long history. The Netherlands was a hub for early enlightenment thinkers, among them Baruch de Spinoza, Erasmus of Rotterdam or Hugo Grotius. Already in the 17th century, the Dutch embraced individualism and had a dynamic entrepreneurial class. And the harbor town had state-enforced laws to make its diverse citizenry engage in their different religious practices and respect other faiths. So one would assume that some core liberal principles such as tolerance are embedded in Dutch culture.

Notwithstanding the fact that there is some truth to the claim, this point of view is not wholly correct. Especially in relation to the present-day Netherlands and Amsterdam. When it comes to soft drugs, tolerance has its limits, and they are tighter than one might expect. Many refer to the supposedly detrimental effect of consumption on society and particularly abhor the cannabis industry that attracts tourists to Amsterdam en masse. Amsterdammers are sick and tired of tripping over and confronting the near-comatose tourists that overflow the streets. Even Eberhardt van der Laan, the beloved-and-habitually-permissive former mayor expressed his concerns back in 2014, saying to the then-incumbent mayor of London, Boris Johnson, that he should visit Amsterdam and watch his compatriots loudly running around scantily clad. Despite the subliminal mocking sentiment, it is clear that the situation is getting out of hand and it is hardly to be denied that the soft drugs industry is mainly a tourist attraction.

And yet, the number of tourists that visit the Dutch capital is rising. One in four of these tourists will visit a coffeeshop. The perceived negative effects of soft drugs and surging drug tourism in the Southern parts of the Netherlands, have pushed the Dutch government to come up with an action plan to eradicate drugs tourism, and reduce the scale of the soft drugs industry. A policy that forced many coffeeshops to close makes it compulsory for coffeeshops located in Amsterdam to be at least 250 meters away from schools. Allegedly, young people would then be less exposed to soft drugs. Furthermore, a project called “Project 1012” aims at improving the image of the area of de Wallen, the center of Amsterdam’s Red Light District, required the closure of multiple coffeeshops. Also worth mentioning, the city council of Amsterdam employs a “no-growth policy” which means that the city will not give out any licenses for new coffeeshops at all.

Amsterdam’s coffeeshop supply is rapidly declining as a result of the advocacy of those that seek the end of the weed industry. On the other hand, it’s not blowing smoke if we say that the path chosen by the Dutch government is not heading in the right direction. In part because the demand for coffeeshops is skyrocketing to unparalleled heights.

But isn’t the elimination of competitors a blessing for the surviving coffeeshops? At first glance, yes. In reality, the decimation of Amsterdam-based coffeeshops has numerous grave drawbacks. The remaining coffeeshops are unable to facilitate the enormous demand. Increased appetite for the good stuff culminates in several undesirable consequences, such as people smoking on the streets due to a lack of space and coffeeshops turning into cannabis supermarkets instead of being cozy and serving a social function. Moreover, imbalanced supply and demand increases the number of illegal street dealers and this exacerbates the degeneration of neighborhoods; exactly what Amsterdam was trying to prevent. Lastly, the amount of cannabis a shop is allowed to have in store is limited, so shops must resupply multiple times on a busy day, increasing the probability that couriers will be robbed. The current policy approach is simply riddled with cracks.

Amsterdam prevails when it comes to attracting tourists and having a reputation for being one of the most tolerant, open-minded and liberal places in the world. So the only way I can see to avoid the “How is the trip?” question is to never bring up my roots, but I’d rather do that than see the city continue on its restrictive path.

The post Up in Smoke appeared first on Pandemic Magazine.