Iain McCay '22 and Nicholas Pandelakis '22
Iain and Nicholas each translated two editorial columns by Aydemir.
NPD Local Representative in Hessen: There are nice Nazis too
Der Artikel „Es gibt auch nette Nazis“, der in der taz am 8. September 2019 veröffentlicht wurde, erforscht, warum ein Nazi als Ortsvorsteher gewählt wurde. Die Autorin Fatma Aydemir kritisiert scharf die Betonung der „Nettigkeit“ und Kollegialität, die es so oft erlauben, unhöfliche Politik zu akzeptieren, solange sie mit einem Lächeln kommt. Für das amerikanische Publikum ist dieser Text relevant. Die Kritik von Donald Trump in den Medien konzentrierte sich so oft auf seine „Höflichkeit“, so dass seine aktive Feindseligkeit gegenüber Armen und PoC fast vergessen wurde. Aydemirs sondierender Witz schafft es, den Fokus auf die Gefahren der rechtsextremen Politik zu richten. Dabei macht sie sich über die Akzeptanz des Nazismus lustig. (Iain McCay)
English translation:
The article "There are also nice Nazis," published in the taz on September 8, 2019, explores why a Nazi was elected chair of the local council. Author Fatma Aydemir sharply criticizes the emphasis on "niceness" and collegiality that so often allows rude politics to be accepted as long as it comes with a smile. For the American audience, this text is relevant. Criticisms of Donald Trump in the media have so often focused on his "politeness" that his active hostility towards the poor and PoC has all but been forgotten. Aydemir's probing wit manages to focus on the dangers of far-right politics. She makes fun of the acceptance of Nazism. (Iain McCay)
English translation:
The article "There are also nice Nazis," published in the taz on September 8, 2019, explores why a Nazi was elected chair of the local council. Author Fatma Aydemir sharply criticizes the emphasis on "niceness" and collegiality that so often allows rude politics to be accepted as long as it comes with a smile. For the American audience, this text is relevant. Criticisms of Donald Trump in the media have so often focused on his "politeness" that his active hostility towards the poor and PoC has all but been forgotten. Aydemir's probing wit manages to focus on the dangers of far-right politics. She makes fun of the acceptance of Nazism. (Iain McCay)
NPD Local Representative in Hessen: There are nice Nazis too
He is said to be “quiet and collegial” and knows his way around a computer. Therefore, a Hessian local council elected an NPD member to be their chair - unanimously.
There are a few certainties that one can rely on in this country. One of them: in Germany, innovation is emphasized. Those who want to contribute to Germany, the great center of technological innovation, must master the art of pressing the “on” button of a computer, opening a browser tab, and sending an email.
And that’s surely what all the current members of the Waldsiedlung local council in the Hessian town of Altenstadt thought last week. Because there, representatives from the SPD, CDU, and FDP voted unanimously for a new chairperson: Stefan Jagsch, from the NPD. Correct, the NPD, the far right, völkisch-nationalist party that is said to be an ideological neighbor to the NSDAP. And why would one choose someone like that?
“Because we don’t have anyone else - above all, no one younger who knows their way around a computer, who can send emails,” said Norbert Szielaska from the CDU. Makes sense, right? Further, he claims, “What he does in the party or privately is not my concern, not our concern.” On the council, Jagsch behaves “absolutely calmly and collegially.”
Someone who is nice and inconspicuous can’t be a Nazi? That rings a bell somehow. For example, from the NSU trial, where witnesses repeatedly indicated that “that Beate” was so absolutely fond of animals, helpful, and oh, how she also liked children. This however didn’t hinder her to roam the country for a decade, killing at least 10 people in cold blood.
Warnings of “Volkstod”
Who had ever suggested that Nazis couldn’t be “nice” anyway? Why is it surprising that an NPD official is collegial towards white people? That the same Stefan Jagsch likes to warn of the so-called “Death of a People” during elections, which the establishment parties allegedly promote and propagate? That’s a given! That he called integration “genocide”? Mundane pish-posh. After all, Jagsch is an IT genius, whose email sending capabilities will massively profit the Waldsiedlung district in the coming years. In view of this great talent, colleagues from socially democratic to liberal are happy to turn a blind eye.
It’s just been reported by the German government that in the first half of 2019, more than 609 attacks on refugees were filed. Anyone who, against this backdrop, has no scruples about giving their vote to an NPD member is no better than the fire-raising, inflammatory, violent offender himself.
Like I said, there are a few certainties that one can rely on in this country. For example, that cohesion between the white majority-society is stronger than solidarity with minorities. And that the so-called right-wing fringe is not all that fringe. That doesn’t matter as long as he behaves in a way that is “collegial” and can use a computer.
Scary stories from the Ladies Room
Die von Fatma Aydemir in der taz am 18. Dezember 2021 veröffentlichte Kolumne „Gruselgeschichten vom Mädchenklo“ bespricht den reaktionären Stoß gegen das Selbstbestimmungsgesetz für trans Menschen. Natürlich kommt Fortschritt immer mit einer Opposition, so kontert Aydemir die schon begonnene Kampagne der frivolen Gruselgeschichten in deutschen Boulevardmedien. Sie benutzt auch das Beispiel von Großbritannien, um den Schaden dieser Propaganda zu zeigen. Generell ist dieser Artikel sehr effektiv, da sein informeller Stil und die starke intellektuelle Erdung gut dem informellen Stil und der schwachen intellektuellen Erdung der Boulevardmedien entgegentreten. Das amerikanische Publikum kann diese Gruselgeschichten erkennen und aus ihnen lernen, trotz fehlender politischer Unterstützung für trans Menschen auch in diesem Land. (Iain McCay)
English translation:
The column "Scary stories from the girls' toilet," published by Fatma Aydemir in the taz on December 18, 2021, discusses the reactionary push against the self-determination law for trans people. Of course, progress always comes with opposition, as Aydemir counters the campaign of such frivolous scary stories that has already begun in German tabloid media. She also uses the example of Britain to show the damage of this propaganda. In general, this article is very effective as its informal style and strong intellectual grounding contrasts well with the informal style and weak intellectual grounding of the tabloid media. American audiences can recognize these scary stories and learn from them, despite the lack of political support for trans people in that country as well. (Iain McCay)
English translation:
The column "Scary stories from the girls' toilet," published by Fatma Aydemir in the taz on December 18, 2021, discusses the reactionary push against the self-determination law for trans people. Of course, progress always comes with opposition, as Aydemir counters the campaign of such frivolous scary stories that has already begun in German tabloid media. She also uses the example of Britain to show the damage of this propaganda. In general, this article is very effective as its informal style and strong intellectual grounding contrasts well with the informal style and weak intellectual grounding of the tabloid media. American audiences can recognize these scary stories and learn from them, despite the lack of political support for trans people in that country as well. (Iain McCay)
Scary stories from the Ladies Room
The traffic light coalition promises trans-inclusive changes in the law. An occasion for conservatives to speak up against a systematically threatened minority.
This was one of the good news to be taken from the coalition agreement between the SPD, Greens, and FDP from a week ago: the discriminatory “Transsexual Law” ought to finally be abolished and replaced with the “Self-Determination Law” that has been demanded for many years. Thanks to this law, trans people will no longer be subjected to lengthy interrogations from psychologists and judges, who have had, to this point, the sole power to decide whether people could change their legal gender. In the future, these changes should be easily possible at the Office of Vital Records. And that’s through a voluntary disclosure, instead of invasive assessments.
What sounds like a long overdue matter of course for the affected and their relatives, and will be life changing for many people, is, unsurprisingly, driving up a tree already in conservative circles. Even before the law is worked out concretely - the project is so far limited to a single paragraph in a 200-page coalition agreement - they are already in the starting-blocks, with their insane fantasies, foaming at the mouth.
Die Bild, for instance, warns about criminal men, who, thanks to the new law, would sneak into women’s toilets and women’s shelters in order to perform violence against women. The NZZ (Neue Zürcher Zeitung) in turn railed against the “authoritarian transgender ideology”, in which gender dysphoria amongst youth is explained to be a dangerous trend, and conversion therapy to be a legitimate remedy. The NZZ describes the educational campaigns on sexual and gender diversity in schools, which is also planned by the traffic light coalition, as indoctrination. Yeah, sure. Missing are only the demands for a stake for witches and another one for books.
Of course, nothing of this demagogy is new. So, too, have feminists, such as the Emma editor Alice Schwarzer or the Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling endeavored for years to depict trans identities as a pack of lies and sex offenders "in women's clothes.” As absurd as that sounds, there are still unfortunately many who call themselves feminists and perpetuate these fairy tales, in the belief that their own liberation depends on the oppression of others, and from an adherence to biological conceptions of the Middle Ages. And naturally, from their last “safe space”, the women’s loo.
What awaits us in the coming time, on the way to the passage of the self-determination law, can be previewed nicely from the example of Great Britain. The debate there about trans-inclusive changes in the law have been accompanied for years by a wide-spread disinformation campaign in the tabloid press. Individual celebrities, like J.K. Rowling, fuel the campaign, in that they crank out horror stories. Trans people in these stories are always made to be perpetrators, although the statistically observed reality looks the opposite: According to one study, the probability that one would be a victim of a criminal act - which also accounts for sex crimes – is at least twice as high for a trans person as for a cis person.
However, these paranoid narratives don’t have all that much to do with reality anyways. They serve only for cheap propaganda against a minority, which has always had to fight systematic persecution, violence, and poverty. And so, one would wish that the TERFs and conservative hate rags will forever stay where they belong. On their beloved toilets.
Op-Ed Column Minority Report: Every Marriage is a sham:
Die taz veröffentlichte am 28. Januar, 2020 Fatma Aydemirs Artikel „Kolumne Minority Report: Jede Ehe ist eine Scheinehe“. Aydemir schreibt über die ersichtliche Doppelmoral zwischen einer Scheinehe für „kriminelle Flüchtlinge“ und anderen Ehen, die selbst viele Vorteile haben. Sie macht die interessante Bemerkung, dass fast alle Ehen Scheinehen sind. Obwohl die USA nicht die gleichen Gesetze wie Deutschland hat, gibt es auch dasselbe Gefühl über, zum Beispiel, „Green Card Marriages“. Der Artikel ist auch eine wichtige Erinnerung, dass es immer noch in einem westlichen demokratischen, modernen Land andere Regeln für Migrant*innen als für „Einheimische“ gibt. (Nicholas Pandelakis)
English translation:
On January 28, 2020, the taz published Fatma Aydemir's article "Column Minority Report: Every marriage is a marriage of convenience." Aydemir writes about the apparent double standard between a marriage of convenience for “criminal fugitives” and other marriages that have many advantages of their own. She makes the interesting point that almost all marriages are marriages of convenience. Although the U.S. doesn't have the same laws as Germany, there is also the same sentiment about, for example, "Green Card Marriages." The article is also an important reminder that there are still different rules for migrants than for “natives” in a Western democratic modern country. (Nicholas Pandelakis)
English translation:
On January 28, 2020, the taz published Fatma Aydemir's article "Column Minority Report: Every marriage is a marriage of convenience." Aydemir writes about the apparent double standard between a marriage of convenience for “criminal fugitives” and other marriages that have many advantages of their own. She makes the interesting point that almost all marriages are marriages of convenience. Although the U.S. doesn't have the same laws as Germany, there is also the same sentiment about, for example, "Green Card Marriages." The article is also an important reminder that there are still different rules for migrants than for “natives” in a Western democratic modern country. (Nicholas Pandelakis)
Op-Ed Column Minority Report: Every Marriage is a sham:
An NGO is accused of calling for marriages of convenience. Perhaps love is nothing more than a strategic sharing of one’s privileges.
Recently, I started wearing some jewelry on my left ring-finger and one particular sentence I have heard quite a lot since then is: “I would not have thought that about you of all people.” That should probably express some kind of disappointment. Not for the reason that this person wanted to propose to me, but rather because they saw me as an ally - and felt betrayed because of the ring.
Marriage is uncool, outdated, antifeminist, false, etc. The list goes on forever, after all, are we living in a modern, western democracy where progressive, self-determined, left-wing people should reject marriage on principle. Those who marry encourage oppression and the preservation of the patriarchy. It’s that simple. Or is it?
In a similar vein, a tweet by the Mission Lifeline from last week expressed legitimate criticism: “You are still not married? Perhaps you will fall in love with someone who still lacks the right of residence here. It could happen, no? Remain open to everything!” The reactions to the already controversial private sea distress relief organization were fierce and went in all directions. Above all, it said the NGO found matches for “criminal refugees” and called for a marriage of convenience, which is a massively prosecuted criminal offense in Germany.
Now what does it actually mean to have a marriage of convenience? Legally, it means the marriage was just done formally so that both sides get a legal benefit from the marriage. That is interesting, because that is the case for almost every marriage I know. Some marry to save on taxes, others to be financially secure with the help of the “maintenance obligation.” Many marry because they need someone who cares for them and fucks them and hugs them, without wanting to pay extra every time, but rather a flat rate, so to say.
Unequal Distribution of Power:
Okay, some people also marry on account of religious beliefs or because they’ve seen too many Hollywood movies, but even that I think is a sham - because whereas others take a relationship break or separate, spouses do not immediately file for divorce, but rather think first whether it is financially worth it at all. Therefore, I think one can say that every marriage is a sham.
As long as there are rights in this country that only come with marriage, the aversion to marriage is often just a sign of privilege. It is not necessary for oneself, and one despises everyone who does it - whether for financial reasons or because of the residency permit, which is actually easiest to secure through marriage. Whether marriage is the smartest form of activism remains to be seen - the unequal distribution of power really often ends up in blackmail.
But as long as the institution of marriage is not completely abolished - and that would be logical anyway - the advice of Mission Lifeline is not so wrong: perhaps true love is nothing other than the strategic sharing of one’s own privileges.
Op-Ed Column Minority Report: Every Marriage is a sham:
An NGO is accused of calling for marriages of convenience. Perhaps love is nothing more than a strategic sharing of one’s privileges.
Recently, I started wearing some jewelry on my left ring-finger and one particular sentence I have heard quite a lot since then is: “I would not have thought that about you of all people.” That should probably express some kind of disappointment. Not for the reason that this person wanted to propose to me, but rather because they saw me as an ally - and felt betrayed because of the ring.
Marriage is uncool, outdated, antifeminist, false, etc. The list goes on forever, after all, are we living in a modern, western democracy where progressive, self-determined, left-wing people should reject marriage on principle. Those who marry encourage oppression and the preservation of the patriarchy. It’s that simple. Or is it?
In a similar vein, a tweet by the Mission Lifeline from last week expressed legitimate criticism: “You are still not married? Perhaps you will fall in love with someone who still lacks the right of residence here. It could happen, no? Remain open to everything!” The reactions to the already controversial private sea distress relief organization were fierce and went in all directions. Above all, it said the NGO found matches for “criminal refugees” and called for a marriage of convenience, which is a massively prosecuted criminal offense in Germany.
Now what does it actually mean to have a marriage of convenience? Legally, it means the marriage was just done formally so that both sides get a legal benefit from the marriage. That is interesting, because that is the case for almost every marriage I know. Some marry to save on taxes, others to be financially secure with the help of the “maintenance obligation.” Many marry because they need someone who cares for them and fucks them and hugs them, without wanting to pay extra every time, but rather a flat rate, so to say.
Unequal Distribution of Power:
Okay, some people also marry on account of religious beliefs or because they’ve seen too many Hollywood movies, but even that I think is a sham - because whereas others take a relationship break or separate, spouses do not immediately file for divorce, but rather think first whether it is financially worth it at all. Therefore, I think one can say that every marriage is a sham.
As long as there are rights in this country that only come with marriage, the aversion to marriage is often just a sign of privilege. It is not necessary for oneself, and one despises everyone who does it - whether for financial reasons or because of the residency permit, which is actually easiest to secure through marriage. Whether marriage is the smartest form of activism remains to be seen - the unequal distribution of power really often ends up in blackmail.
But as long as the institution of marriage is not completely abolished - and that would be logical anyway - the advice of Mission Lifeline is not so wrong: perhaps true love is nothing other than the strategic sharing of one’s own privileges.
Covid-19 Crisis and Housework: Not Valued
Die taz veröffentlicht am 6. April, 2020 Fatma Aydemirs Artikel „Coronakrise und Hausarbeit“. In diesem Artikel schreibt die Autorin über die ungerechten Ansichten, die Leute über Hausarbeit haben. Diese sind keine besonders deutschen Ansichten, sondern auch sehr relevant für amerikanische Menschen. Hausarbeit ist oft die Arbeit der Frauen und der Migrant*innen und wird deswegen nicht wertgeschätzt. Dieser Artikel war ziemlich leicht zu übersetzen, aber es gab ein oder zwei Wörter (z.B. Putztunnel), die schwer waren. (Nicholas Pandelakis)
English translation:
On April 6, 2020, the taz published Fatma Aydemir's article "Corona Crisis and Housework." In this article, the author writes about the unfair views people have about housework. These are not particularly German views, and are relevant to American people. Housework is often the work of women and migrants and is therefore not valued. This article was fairly easy to translate, but there were a word or two (e.g. plaster tunnel) that were difficult. (Nicholas Pandelakis)
English translation:
On April 6, 2020, the taz published Fatma Aydemir's article "Corona Crisis and Housework." In this article, the author writes about the unfair views people have about housework. These are not particularly German views, and are relevant to American people. Housework is often the work of women and migrants and is therefore not valued. This article was fairly easy to translate, but there were a word or two (e.g. plaster tunnel) that were difficult. (Nicholas Pandelakis)
Covid-19 Crisis and Housework: Not Valued
Some people are bored in isolation. Our author cleans. And she sees an opportunity in the Covid-19 crisis to reevaluate housework.
The name “Fatma” is translated into German as “cleaning lady.” I learned that when I was eight years old from my neighbor Jonas. I remember how I ran howling to my house and confronted my mother, to which she soberly replied, “but what’s wrong with being a cleaning lady?”
Since I am currently stuck in isolation, I believe I have discovered the answer, since I am not one of the people who is bored or learns to play the guitar. Instead, corners of my apartment that I haven’t cleaned for years are constantly standing out to me. I polish the doors, beat rugs, and clean windows. And the problem is: it never ends.
Constantly, a folder shows up that needs to be re-sorted, a plant that needs to be repotted, or a closet that needs to be cleaned out. And because between all that you still need to sleep, eat, work, and take care of yourself and others, more new stains, new dishes, and new mountains of laundry emerge. There is no end in sight. Housework is a full time, backbreaking job.
It is precisely for this reason that it is so astonishing how little recognition those to whom this work has traditionally been delegated receive: cleaners, housekeepers, who are often migrants and almost always women. The cleaning lady, which even little Jonas had internalized, is not devalued because allegedly anyone can clean (except Jonas’s old-60s radical parents, by the way. I’m just saying: toilet from hell). It is also that the work is always compensated unfairly and oftentimes not at all.
Supposedly Unproductive:
A job that doesn’t produce a product, and for this reason received zero appreciation from Karl Marx himself. But isn’t the capitalism he criticized actually based on unpaid cleaning and fucking?
Feminist theorists such as Silvia Federici have been addressing this contradiction for many years. I have not really had the time to crack open these writings, however, because the moment in which I step up to the bookshelf, I begin to dust it off; and have to think about the study which the University of Brussels published a few years ago, which said that people who clean regularly, die earlier.
So, all this work to keep the environment clean and sterile literally risks their lives? Yet, this won’t impact the pension.
Is the Covid-19 crisis perhaps the right moment to reevaluate reproductive work? A universal basic income could help. The nice thing about it: it’s not even tied to a heteronormative concept of family (child-raising benefit). You could sit slump down on the sofa after running the cleaning gauntlet and, despite excruciating pain and shrunken hands, read a book. Instead, the “real” work begins. That, which is paid. That, which even Jonas and Karl call work.
Covid-19 Crisis and Housework: Not Valued
Some people are bored in isolation. Our author cleans. And she sees an opportunity in the Covid-19 crisis to reevaluate housework.
The name “Fatma” is translated into German as “cleaning lady.” I learned that when I was eight years old from my neighbor Jonas. I remember how I ran howling to my house and confronted my mother, to which she soberly replied, “but what’s wrong with being a cleaning lady?”
Since I am currently stuck in isolation, I believe I have discovered the answer, since I am not one of the people who is bored or learns to play the guitar. Instead, corners of my apartment that I haven’t cleaned for years are constantly standing out to me. I polish the doors, beat rugs, and clean windows. And the problem is: it never ends.
Constantly, a folder shows up that needs to be re-sorted, a plant that needs to be repotted, or a closet that needs to be cleaned out. And because between all that you still need to sleep, eat, work, and take care of yourself and others, more new stains, new dishes, and new mountains of laundry emerge. There is no end in sight. Housework is a full time, backbreaking job.
It is precisely for this reason that it is so astonishing how little recognition those to whom this work has traditionally been delegated receive: cleaners, housekeepers, who are often migrants and almost always women. The cleaning lady, which even little Jonas had internalized, is not devalued because allegedly anyone can clean (except Jonas’s old-60s radical parents, by the way. I’m just saying: toilet from hell). It is also that the work is always compensated unfairly and oftentimes not at all.
Supposedly Unproductive:
A job that doesn’t produce a product, and for this reason received zero appreciation from Karl Marx himself. But isn’t the capitalism he criticized actually based on unpaid cleaning and fucking?
Feminist theorists such as Silvia Federici have been addressing this contradiction for many years. I have not really had the time to crack open these writings, however, because the moment in which I step up to the bookshelf, I begin to dust it off; and have to think about the study which the University of Brussels published a few years ago, which said that people who clean regularly, die earlier.
So, all this work to keep the environment clean and sterile literally risks their lives? Yet, this won’t impact the pension.
Is the Covid-19 crisis perhaps the right moment to reevaluate reproductive work? A universal basic income could help. The nice thing about it: it’s not even tied to a heteronormative concept of family (child-raising benefit). You could sit slump down on the sofa after running the cleaning gauntlet and, despite excruciating pain and shrunken hands, read a book. Instead, the “real” work begins. That, which is paid. That, which even Jonas and Karl call work.