Marine Le Pen and Anti-Seminitism

As I am assimilating myself with the French candidates while the first part of the election is rolling around, I have noticed that one candidate stands out the most to me. It is not because she is a woman, but it is for her far-right, anti-Semetic remarks. Marine Le Pen very recently made the news when she said France was not responsible for the Vel d'Hiv; this ironically occurred right after I visited the memorial in Paris that perfectly captured the essence of what happened.

Being the daughter of an open anti-Semetic father and a member of the far-right National Front party, I read that she has been working hard to separate herself from their racist associations. I recently ran across an interview she had with Anderson Cooper in March where many people were quick to call her "France's Donald Trump." In this interview, Anderson Cooper bluntly asked Le Pen if Muslim people should be allowed to wear headscarves. I viewed this as a simple question, yes of course they should be allowed, as it is their culture. However, to my surprise, Le Pen is very against Muslims wearing hijabs in public. She has even promised to ban any religious headdress in public if she is elected, this also includes yarmulkes.

She states that citizens of France have the freedom to practice their own religious but vows to ban religious wear in public because it simply "is not French." Although many believe she has tried to escape her father's anti-Semetic views, it is obvious that she still holds a few similar beliefs. I have been open to the views of all the candidates, but I think it could be detrimental for France to follow Le Pen to the end of the elections. I will pay close attention to how the country votes in the upcoming week.

Ireland... With(IN) or Without EU

This past week, I have spent the first half of my spring break on the gorgeous island of Ireland.  Ireland has long been a member of the European Union, longer than its old partner, the UK.  Although Ireland is a participating member of the EU, I noticed several glaring differences between Ireland and many of the continental European nations.

The most obvious difference was the security.  In Paris, you cannot go outside your home without seeing a member of the national guard or a police officer.  Every entrance to each building is manned by a security guard who checks you and your possessions.  This is not the case in Ireland, at all.  From the moment I landed in the Dublin airport, it was apparent.  In Paris (as well as other EU nations) the airport is the hot-spot for big-gunned security personnel.  I did not see a single one of these guards in the Dublin airport.  Furthermore, there were no guards patrolling the streets of Dublin, Ireland's capital city, only the occasionally cheery police officer.

Walking around the city, there are other things to notice as well, or, should I say, a lack of things to notice.  Every city has its homeless population.  Dublin had one, but the percentage of these displaced individuals were not refugees or foreign citizens.  The majority of these people were Irish who seemed to have run out of luck (no pun intended).  I would warrant that the most obvious of these reasons would be the physical barriers.  Ireland is now separated from the rest of the EU by the English Channel, following the landmass of Britain, and then the Irish Sea.  These are a considerable amount of barriers, both geographically and politically, that make it difficult for Ireland to receive displaced people, not to mention that they would have to travel through the EU-leaving UK.

These have been two major items I have noticed.  Ireland seems very much to be a EU nation in harmony.  It is not plagued as severely as its partners in some areas.  The prices were a bit high (slightly less than Paris in Dublin), but in the country the harmony was mirrored.  Our guide even boasted on the unemployment numbers, which have been looking better and better recently.  Ireland has always had a boom and bust economy.  They are hardened and prepared for hard times and no how to deal with them.  Although Ireland is an important player in the EU, they seem to have the long end of the stick when it comes to the universal problems each EU member faces.

Here's a picture of Bono:

Blog for April 6 Class

This week I visited Barrio Santa Cruz, a historic Jewish neighborhood in Seville. This area originated in the medieval times when a wall was built to separate Jews from the rest of the city. In 1248, Seville was conquered by the Christians, who welcomed the Jewish population. However, as society developed further, the Christians became less reliant on the money and assistance of the Jews, leading to tense relations. In 1391, the Jewish community was attacked and many synagogues were converted to churches. The presence of these conflicts in Spain relates to our discussion in class about how anti-semitism has a long history and was widespread throughout Europe, instead of being isolated in a few communities. I learned a lot from the readings for this week because before, I only associated anti-semitism with the Nazis and World War II. On the contrary, anti-semitism stems from ancient times.

Barrio Santa Cruz is a beautiful part of Seville with winding, cobblestone streets, white houses, and countless shops and restaurants. I found many gardens and churches within this area, but I do not recall seeing a synagogue. This could be due to the previously stated fact that in the fourteenth century all of the synagogues were converted to churches; however, it is probable that synagogues have been constructed in this area since then. Since it's a large part of town, the synagogues could have been located on different streets than the ones that I walked down. Had I not known that it was a historical Jewish area before I arrived, I would have not figured it out from my visit.

When I read the article entitled "Europe's Anti-Semitism Comes Out of the Shadows," I was shocked that anti-semitism is still prevalent in modern day society and appalled that people in 2015 were yelling phrases such as "Death to the Jews." These sentiments stem from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; however, unlike the past, German and French government officials are condemning and fighting against anti-semitism.

Blog for April 6 Class

             For me, Lyon is without a doubt more diverse culturally than a lot of the cities I have lived in throughout my lifetime. It is not uncommon for me to see several women in traditional Islamic garb on the busses and metro both by my house and around Lyon. I have seen men in what I think is also traditional Islamic clothing. I have also seen men in the metro wearing Yamakas, but it is much less common.

               While I personally have not seen blatant acts of discrimination toward any one religion while here in France, I have heard of some cultural separation. When we were first getting to know the city, I took a course that allowed us to meet with the mayor of one of the arrondissments. We asked about the immigrant and refugee presence in Lyon, and his response was that depending on the location and the school, parents were pulling children out and moving to private schools to avoid contact with the Islamic religion and these people.

               In my courses here, there are two Syrians in my class. I don’t think either came here during the most recent crisis. A friend here, though, has a host-sister from the Brittany region who was extremely shocked to hear we had class with them. She was almost offended that a Syrian would make a home in France.

               My host-mom has similar sentiments. She has expressed opinions multiple times against the Jewish and Islamic presence in Lyon. She believes that they do not integrate into the French culture and they form communities of their own—a belief that reminds me of the reasons we discussed for the building anti-Semitic feelings prior to the Dreyfus affair and then World War II.

               I have not found any signs of Jewish memorials in the city, however, there are memorials for those who died for France and the resistance in general. In Bellecour, there is a memorial dedicated to the Armenian genocide. There is a building that was used by the Gestapo to torture prisoners that is commemorated with a plaque, however, nothing is mentioned particularly about the Jews.  

Memorials in Paris

This weekend I got to visit two memorials within Paris related to the holocaust and it's effect on the French people. Dr. Lasser has mentioned several times that the French do not harp on what occurred during World War Two as much as the Germans. They prefer to look toward the future instead of fully recognize what happened in their past. This fact was quickly proven to me when I looked up the locations of these memorials. Both happened to be two of the areas in Paris I have visited the most, yet I never came upon these memorials in the past.

The Mémorial des Martyrs de la Déportation is located behind Notre Dame. It is a memorial that is commemorating the over 200,000 French that were deported to Nazi concentration camps during the course of the war. The memorial was very sobering and was very precise in the information about the people being deported. The part I found the post interesting was a map of France with numbers in each county depicting how many people were deported from there. There was also a hallway with over 200,000 small pebbles lining the walls to symbolize all of the citizens that were deported, which really put into perspective all the lives that were affected by the movement.

The second memorial was the Memorial de la Shoah, which is actually part of a larger museum that was unfortunately closed when we tried to visit. Although we could not go inside, part of the memorial was visible from the outside. Part of the memorial that I found most interesting was a wall of names that depicted over 3,000 non-Jewish French people awarded with the title "Righteous Among Nations", for their assistance in helping Jews during the war. 

I am truly surprised at the memorials dedicated to the Jewish population within Paris's borders. I plan to visit the Vel d'hiv memorial and tour the Jewish museum very soon. 

WWII Memorials in Paris

This past weekend in Paris, I spent some time visiting several memorials in Paris to individuals who perished in the Holocaust as well as French citizens who risked their lives to save others.  The first one I visited, tucked almost discretely behind the flowering gardens on Notre Dame, was the Memorial des Martyrs de la Deportation.  The entree was free.  This memorial has a fairly profound effect on me.  As you enter, you descend a set of stairs to an open-air room that juts out to the end of the island.  One can barely view the water, as the stone window is guarded by sharp and jarring cast iron.  I figured this was it, but I turned around and saw a narrow passage way into darkness.  Following it, I found that the memorial opened up greatly on the inside.

Directly across from the entrance, a long hallway barred with metal rods greeted me.  A single flame flickered at the end of the hallway, lighting up thousands of incandescent pieces of glass that lined the somber, brown walls.  It was hard not to get caught up in the image.  You see a flickering light of hope, far but not too far, blocked by bars in the most traditional way.  This hallway was flanked by two dim, whitewashed rooms with similar bars.  When I peered inside, the humidity truly gave me the feeling of being inside of a gas chamber.  It was a visceral experience.

Above these rooms was an exhibition detailing the horrors of the deportation, transportation, and internment of French Jews.  It was detailed and some of the photographs were quite graphic.  Although I have learned about the Holocaust extensively throughout my schooling, it is always a surprising realization when I read new testimonials.

The Memorial des Martyrs de la Deportation was a great representation of what the French Jews endured during the Holocaust.  It somber aesthetics and straightforward representation of the struggle will stay with me for a long time.

Blog Post 7 for April 6 Class

Earlier this week, I visited Lyon’s Centre d’Histoire de la Résistance et de la Déportation (the History Center of the Resistance and Deportation). It is housed in a building that was originally constructed as a medical school in 1889 before it became the Gestapo’s regional headquarters in the spring of 1943, led by the notorious “Butcher of Lyon,” Klaus Barbie. Barbie was known for his brutal torture of the victims arrested and imprisoned in the Lyon area; many were tortured in the basement of this very museum. Thousands passed through Lyon: it was a relatively large city, had a somewhat sizable Jewish population, and—with its location in the Vichy region—served as the center of the French Resistance.

Approximately 60% of the museum was dedicated to the French Resistance fighters (with particular attention given to the ones based out of Lyon), but the rest discussed the Jews and their fate in Vichy France. The exhibits mentioned the Vichy exclusion policy, including the law of October 1940 which prohibited Jews from holding several different jobs and the July 1941 proclamation which declared a census of the entire Jewish population, resulted in Jews losing all their property, and mandated Jewish identity cards. Based on our class discussions and readings, I tried to pay particular attention to where the exhibits placed the blame of the Jewish roundup. One paragraph admitted that the decision of the Vichy government to voluntarily deport Jews saved the Nazis a significant amount of time and money and that the Vichy regime’s enthusiasm for hunting Jews far exceeded simply “following orders.” Another plaque noted that most of the Jews were arrested by French police and that many were sold out by their neighbors. On a more positive note, however, one sentence declared that “In France, thanks particularly to the solidarity of the population, three-fourths of the Jews were saved, but 80,000 perished.” I have no idea how France addressed its role in the deportation of Jews in the past, but it seems that they are more fully taking responsibility for it now.

London Reflection (for March 29 Class)

When I visit a new city in Europe, I try not to create idealistic fantasies about what I am going to see or how the food will be or how much I will love it, namely because I hate building something up unrealistically only to be disappointed when reality can’t compare to my expectations. With London, I tried really hard to forget we were going. Because I read a lot growing up, I was terrified that if allowed to, my brain would pull up all the settings I had read about in London that consisted of Big Ben, a dreary sky, and terrible food, and I would inevitably hate our time there. But how wrong was I—I loved everything about London. From the unchanging literary architecture and the blustery winds to the familiar language and unknown history, London soared very easily to the top of my list of favorite European cities.

Perhaps the most important thing I learned was that of the separation of the city of London from the rest of London. I knew London had a rich history that went back to the Roman era, but I was completely unaware that the Romans had built a wall around a city of their own creation that was so strong and self-sufficient that later powers did not want to interfere with its management. Now it seems, the real city of London, still self-ruled, is hidden behind the more national influence of Parliament and the iconic image of Big Ben in Westminster.

The importance of the Thames in the making of London has been in the back of my mind since history classes in high school, but the effect of the river on the development of London is something I was not expecting. Emma, I believe, called the river “the blood of London” and “the most important man in London’s history.” Obviously the point of imports and exports as well as access to the city, the Thames helped make London into the economical stronghold that it is today (and hopefully will remain despite Brexit). It was home to (several) the London Bridge, which at one point was a thriving village of its own before having to be rebuilt. But, in addition to the creation of the city, the river fully supported its development. Without the quays and business on the riverfront, London would not have the history of starting small coffee shops. And it was at these coffee shops that traders and merchants shared information, leading to the creation of newspapers. London would not have the history of the “eighth wonder of the world” of the first underwater tunnel. It would not have grown so large outside of its walls. The changes made along the river—such as those at Canary Warf to support the economic industry—have only served to grow the life and power of this city.

I enjoyed seeing the evolution of London—growth from within the walls to the Great London Fire to an expanding trade market and city outside of the walls. I love how the city has held onto its history, preserving buildings and mounting plaques where great people worked on lived. Historically, England has been a nation of rebirth and power, and I saw that most clearly demonstrated with the story of the Great London Fire. To think that building codes today are still influenced by that tragic event explains the extent of damage better than any memorial. And then there are all the buildings destroyed in the war which have been rebuilt to preserve history and life. I think it is easy to forget today that such a beautiful city was bombed and destroyed in the war. The story of the blitzworkers in the cathedral who ran silently in the dark of night to prevent fire on the rooves of the church signified to me the English spirit to carry on that I felt so much in London.

That spirit, more presently, was obvious in the streets of Westminster just days after the terrorist attack. Kaitlynn and I would watch the news every morning, and we knew that people were returning to work in the area immediately the morning after. News anchors were saying how “London had faced terrorism before, and they would not be intimidated.” Still, it was shocking to me to see not four days later a large protest in the streets by Tralfagar Square. Carrying European Union flags and posters and wearing blue and yellow, London, it seemed, wanted to make it clear that they were not in support of leaving the EU.

I know we’ve talked in class about how the effects of Brexit have the possibility of being hard on the English economy as banks look outside of London for a new banking center with access to the rest of Europe. We’ve seen it already start as companies actively seek to replace British jobs with branches in nations such as Germany and Belgium. It only makes sense that such consequences would be apparent to those living in London, but I didn’t put two and two together until we stood in Canary Wharf, and then amongst those in blue in yellow, that London, this capital city of England, did not want to leave the EU.

Because it seemed so obvious while we were there that the city was against Brexit, I did a little research into the vote from that area. Unsurprisingly, the top five percentages of votes to remain in the EU came from voting regions within London. I was surprisingly shocked to find, however, that London as a whole averaged near 70% voter turnout, with just under a 60% majority for remain. For me, these numbers most clearly explain the enormity of the split within England; if a city who will obviously feel a large shock from breaking from the EU economically was only 60% majority to remain, the feeling of isolation and frustration with immigration was greater than I realized.  

Ultimately, though, London was charming, historic, and a small taste of home after three months abroad. I learned more than expected about its rich history. I hope that as these next two years pass, Brexit does not hurt such a beautiful place.

Reflection on the London Trip

London was a city I did not expect to enjoy in Europe as much as I did. After all, England is probably the most similar European country to America, and I came to Europe to learn about all the different cultures that comprise the boundaries of the continent. However, I immediately recognized that I was being closed-minded in my assumptions. Although America and England have many similarities, London showed me that this country of the United Kingdom has its own very distinct culture that has been comprised through hundreds of years of conflicts and economic growth.

            Before visiting London, the River Thames was just a landmark on a map to me. I never realized how vital of a role it played in helping London, and England, become a world power. Walking along the river, one is able to be taken back hundreds of years in London history. There are many major landmarks along the river, such as the Tower of London, which was built in 1066 by William the Conqueror and was used as a prison and royal residence. Another landmark mentioned, which isn’t still standing, was the first London Bridge. This bridge had nineteen arches which caused large currents, and often halted commerce along the river because many boats could not fit through the openings. One thing that really shocked me about this bridge was that it was so big that people even began building houses along it. Ultimately, the bridge was a visually pleasing piece of architecture, but it did not last because of the weight put on top of it and how it slowed down ships trying to cross underneath it.

            London, and the River Thames, underwent many trials and tribulations before it started becoming an efficient city used for shipping and commerce. There was a point in London’s history where there were so many ships clogging the river that ships could not cross and the citizens were becoming increasingly aggravated. Learning about the Brunel’s and their engineering feat of building an underground tunnel was one of the most interesting parts of the tour for me. Marc Brunel and his son built the first underground tunnel that connect the north and south sides of the river. It blows my mind that engineers in the mid 1850’s were able to come up with a way to build underground tunnels in a way that is still used to this day. Even being able to sit in part of the tunnel shaft really showed me how London has been comprised of years of brilliant minds, creating inventions beyond their times.

            I learned many things about the history of London from our tour guide, Emma. One thing I learned that I was surprised I had never heard about was the Great Fire of London in 1666. After many months of drought, the fire began on Pudding Lane in a bakery and it ravaged the city for three days, destroying tens of thousands of homes and architectural landmarks, such as St. Paul’s Cathedral, and many government buildings.  After the fire was over, the city was left to rebuild. Originally being built mostly from wood, they rebuilt lost homes and buildings with brick, in order to ensure another fire would not spread like this one had. They also started building the houses further apart, to reduce other fire hazards. This tragedy helped get London where it is today, by improving their infrastructure and architecture. They had to experience a failure to strengthen their city.

London experienced many setbacks along their way to becoming a major powerhouse. Learning about how the city and the people overcame these tribulations speaks volumes about the culture of the city, and the country. Through hundreds and hundreds of years, Londoners did not let these setbacks stop them, instead they come together and kept the city running, and after each setback, the city, the people, and the culture only came out stronger.

            Every country and city experiences failures, but it is how they react to these misfortunes that sets them apart from the others. In the face of adversity, London has proven to be a strong and capable city ready to rebuild after whatever comes their way. I believe that Brexit could prove to be another tribulation the city must face head-on in order to stay strong. Mentioned in an article we were required to read, and also reiterated by our tour guide Emma, many Londoners did not vote for Brexit. It was the people in the more rural areas of Britain that voted to leave the European Union. Emma also mentioned that this is because London tends to be comprised of more liberal minds, only about five districts of the city voted to leave, the rest begging to stay in the EU. I feel that Brexit will go down in history as another test of the people of London’s strength.

I wrote in a previous blog post before the trip that I wanted to see the people of London’s reaction to Brexit and their thoughts on the future. Coming to the last day of the trip, I realized that the only Londoner I had really talked to about the topic was our tour guide. Getting some free time to tour the city on our own, Grant and I decided to walk around Westminster and see what we came upon. After the attacks three days before, we were expecting a mournful and melancholy atmosphere from the people. We got stuck in a swarm of people on our walk, and it was not until we saw hundreds of EU flags flying that we realized we had just walked right into the middle of a protest. This city was the opposite of mournful and melancholy. The people did not waver from the attack, instead they got back up and were ready to face their next problem, Brexit, as strongly as they could. This was their last chance to plead for the stop of triggering Article 50. There were not only British flags flying, but there were French, Belgian, and Spanish flags flying, people from all over showing their support with the “Exit Brexit” crowd.

            Experiencing this really tied the trip together. With over 10,000 people in attendance, this protest really exemplified the animosity Londoner’s have toward Brexit. Although London proved to have their own culture much different than anything I’ve seen in America, there were many signs comparing Brexit and Theresa May with Donald Trump, which made me feel that as an American, both cultures are about to experience something similar. Even though many citizens are upset about what the future holds, the protesters filled the parks with smiles and laughs after it was all over. I believe that no matter what unfolds, Londoner’s will be able keep their city strong during the whole process, something they have proved to do time after time.

Display from the protest with heads of Theresa May and Donald Trump. 

Glad I got to finally see Big Ben, and the weather was beautiful!

 Took a break in the park after the protests, where we were among many still sporting their EU attire. This group was having a picnic on an EU flag, and all of their kids were wearing the colors of the EU, whether they knew why or not.

Tower Bridge, which many think is London Bridge, along the Thames River.

Blog Post 6 - London Trip Reflection (1035 words)

Since I had spent a little over a week in London two years ago, my expectations for our trip were to see many things that I had already seen before without seeing many new sights. However, I was pleasantly surprised that that was not the case. I was shocked when I realized that during all of the time that my family and I had spent in London, we had failed to visit the actual “City of London,” which was something that I did not know was separate from Westminster and everything on that side of the Thames before this trip. Also, during our walking tour of the Thames River, I saw many parts of London that I had not seen before, and learned a lot about the history of the city that I would have never known.

For example, learning about the Brunels and their creative way of solving the issue of the congestion of cargo ships on the Thames River fascinated me. My favorite part about studying abroad in Europe is being able to learn something in a class and then go outside to directly see it myself, so the fact that we learned about this while sitting in the very site used to construct the tunnel was incredible. This tunnel, which the museum worker described as the eighth wonder of the world, was the first development that was built under a navigable river. Ironically, this major architecture development never served its original purpose of being a passageway for horse-drawn carriages containing cargo. By the time it was completed, it was only opened for pedestrians because the constructers ran out of money and did not have the funds to build ramps for the entrance of cargo. Years later, the East London Railway company purchased the tunnel, but currently, the tunnel is part of the London Overground.

During the walking tour of the Thames, I realized how vital the river was to the development of the London as a major city. The river allowed London to develop into the largest city and commercial center of the UK because it was the site that all of the ships arrived to in order to deliver goods to the island. This is a great example of how geography plays a large role in the development of cities. Were it not for the Thames, London would probably not be the capital of England and the huge economic stronghold that it is today.

Relating to Brexit, I feel like I was able to directly see many of the topics that we have been talking about in class during this trip. Flying in, I could see how England is physically isolated from mainland Europe by the sea. However, through my visit to the country, I could see how England is also culturally isolated from the rest of Europe. To me, it seemed like London had more similarities to the United States than to Europe – partially because in London I saw many restaurants that I did not expect to see outside of America, such as Bubba Gump Shrimp Company and Five Guys Burgers and Fries, but also because of other cultural similarities. In both England and America, the primary language is English and judging off when the restaurants were crowded, the meal times seem to be similar too. This was a huge difference for me compared to Spain, where the meal times are much later and the culture seems more relaxed and less reserved than in England.

On Saturday when we were walking around the Trafalgar Square area, we saw an enormous protest against Brexit. In class, we have discussed and read that the majority of London’s voters wanted to stay in the EU, and that fact was apparent from the huge turnout at the protest. Personally, I did not understand the point of this protest since the referendum has already occurred, but nevertheless it still shows the sentiments that many people in London feel.

Another thing that surprised me when walking around London was that we saw some buildings that still had EU flags hanging outside. I interpreted that as resistance against the UK’s decision to leave the EU. However, the political situation has changed since we left London; on March 29, Prime Minister May invoked Article 50 – officially beginning the process of Brexit. For that reason, I wonder if those flags will be taken down in the near future. Now that the process has officially started, the UK and the EU have two years to negotiate a withdrawal agreement. As we read in the UCL Constitution Briefing Paper, one issue that the EU faces in relation to the withdrawal process is how difficult the organization should make it. On one hand, the post-Brexit UK is predicted to be the EU’s largest export market, so for the purpose of fostering good trade relations, allowing a fast and generous exit would be the best route. However, if the process is too generous, the EU runs the risk of other “Eurosceptic” countries deciding to exit. I am interested to see how the negotiations will play out because no matter what happens, there will be direct consequences.   

From the articles that we have read about Brexit, it seems like the event will not only negatively impact the UK, but could also have unfortunate consequences on the EU. The UK, being a country with the fifth largest economy in the world and the second largest in the EU, is one of the most important members of the organization. Furthermore, since the UK has the third largest population in all the countries of the EU, they have a large role in the Council of the European Union and in the European Parliament. The UK leaving will shift the distribution of power within the EU, which could potentially shift the direction of the organization. Stephen Wall, a former UK Permanent Representative to the EU, believes that the UK has had a significant impact on making the EU more economically liberal, supporting the enlargement of the EU, and strengthening the global role of Europe overall. Without the UK, the strength of the protectionist states will increase, which could result in the EU adopting policies that restrict free trade.