Will Sing for Work

Posted on by

What happens when the national unemployment rate for your (my) generation reaches 60%? You grab a ukulele, hit the subway, and put your resume to music.

That’s exactly what Enzo Vizcaíno did in Barcelona:

Spain has been struggling for years now to get its financial house in order, and the 20-something crowd has been suffering extensively as a consequence. Back in 2008, when I was an exchange student in Bilbao, the crisis had just begun, but the effects were immediate. Every day on my way to and from class, I passed through a pedestrian tunnel where a couple had set up their home – a young couple, who nightly laid out their cardboard to get some fitful shuteye. Those who can are packing up and leaving, seeking work in Germany, England, France and other neighboring countries. A good friend of mine is in the same boat and he has no idea when – or if – he’ll return to Spain. He used his German skills to get a job in Berlin and though he misses home a lot, there simply isn’t work available – even for the highly educated, just like Enzo.

Enzo brings an upbeat tune and humor to his song to ease the tension (you can see how some of the passengers are squirming in discomfort, while others use it as an excuse to dance), but if you look at the lyrics closely, it’s a cry of desperation. He’s talented, highly skilled and not asking for handouts. Any job at this point will do (también me sé arrodillar). From a political standpoint, this is a very scary place for a country to be in – when its youngest, brightest minds have no incentive that would motivate them to invest in their own patria. It’s very tough to maintain a highly educated population and a high unemployment rate; people know how to complain and make the government look bad. The Spanish government may not be paying any attention to cases like Enzo’s, but they would be wise to, because people like Enzo can become rallying points for the disenchanted and disenfranchised.

Buena suerte Enzo.

The Voice of Brazil and the Pledge of Allegiance

Posted on by

Recently I had another I AM SO INDIGNANT moment because of a radio program called A Voz do Brasil (The Voice of Brazil). This government program is played on the radio Monday through Friday from roughly 7 -8pm. The thing is – it’s the only thing on the radio at that time. Yes, you read that right. The program takes over the entire radio – if you want to listen to the radio, your only option is to listen to government-sponsored news.

I told my coworkers that I found this ridiculous and wrong. In a democracy, you should never be forced to listen to government propaganda. When there are government programs on TV or coverage of an election, they are limited to certain channels. If I want to watch something else, I can. So why should it be any different with radio? They responded with things like, “Well, don’t you have any CDs you could listen to instead?” I rejoined that that wasn’t the point. The point is that the government is interfering with my right to listen to whatever station on the radio I want in my own car – I should not have to desist from listening to the radio in order to avoid A Voz do Brasil. They also said, “Well, I find the information really interesting.” Fine. It could be the most amazingly informative, original, oh-my-god-inspirational content ever. Irrelevant. The point is you are forcing me to listen to it if I want to listen to the radio. (And of course, they put it at prime time, when most Brazilians are returning home from work).

But then I caught myself – A Voz do Brasil‘s monopoly of the radio is pretty undemocratic in my mind, but in the US, we also have instances of monopoly-level government propaganda – take the Pledge of Allegiance. Every single day, students recite verses that affirm their fidelity to the nation that is the United States of America. Sends chills down your back if you really think about it.

But then I caught myself again. There IS a crucial difference – the Pledge of Allegiance is not mandatory. Students have the right to refrain; this right is derived from the first amendment (the Supreme Court case West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette is one example that challenged the previously-mandatory nature of the pledge). Thus the seemingly non-democratic tradition of the pledge is counterbalanced by a reaffirmation of one of the bedrocks of democracy – freedom to speak and not speak: “Just as the First Amendment protects our right to express our beliefs, it prohibits the government from compelling us to declare a belief that we do not hold” (Emily Garber, ACLU Oregon).

I close in thinking that A Voz do Brasil seems to parallel other efforts by the Brazilian government to compel people to engage in the political process, such as the mandatory vote. I’ve heard the argument that because Brazil became a democracy so recently, following 20 years of military dictatorship in 1965-1985, the government thought it necessary for the survival of the newly-found democracy to make such democratic processes as voting mandatory. I’m not convinced by this argument; forcing people to participate in democratic processes sounds at the very least inconsistent if not counterproductive. But I’ll keep learning and report back what I find out.