Some months ago, the Civic Education Working Group launched a competition for essays with the title: “What does the ideal political system look like?”.  Participants had to submit an essay over their ideal political system and then organise an activity within their local. The working group chose one winner, how had the possibility to win an Interrail ticket, but the ECWG chose also two honorable mentions: What if YOUth could shape Europe? by Antonis Triantafyllakis (AEGEE-Cluj-Napoca) and The Ideal puzzle – can we put back together our pieces? by Roberto Meneghetti (AEGEE-Torino). 

The Ideal puzzle – can we put back together our pieces?

Author: Roberto Meneghetti, AEGEE-Torino. 

Since the dawn of Mankind, the problem of establishing an ideal form of government has been debated. Nowadays, with a diffuse Crisis, both economic and ideological, of our system, the question seems more relevant than ever. However, are we sure that “ideal” means good in practice? And is there an “ideal” form of government that can be found out throughout these days? To answer these questions, or at least, give it a try, it is useful to have a pretty quick (and simplified) trip through some previous attempts that have been tried in the history of Europe in order to attain an ideal state of government.

We will see that any time has produced its own “ideal governments” depending on different values and ideas of society.

I. Monarchism (…-1700s)

One of the most ancient form of government in a large and organized society is Monarchy, where the rule is centered into the hands of one. There are many kinds of Monarchies with different kinds of relationship with the whole society. Here we are concentrating on the feudal/absolute monarchies, ruling out any democratic environment, but all of them share a legitimacy coming from dynastic and divine rights. Beside the divine justifications, we find justifications for this kind of government as the one system to solve all the problems.

Even Machiavelli (1) in the XVI century, who favours ultimately a republican model (especially during his late years), recurs to the necessity of a sovereign because it acts and adapts faster to the rapid changes of the times. Hobbes (2), one century later, says a King is necessary to ensure order and stability in an otherwise chaotic society. Machiavelli was living during the late Renaissance, in which Italy was scrambled by wars and internal conflicts and Hobbes was writing right in the aftermaths of the English Civil War.

In their societies in which instability, strict social divisions, war, slavery, colonialism were considered the norm, this kind of reasoning as well appeared more acceptable and became an ideal through which manage a troublesome situation.

II. Liberalism (1600-1700)

During these centuries, various upheavals change the shape of the European society: a larger and larger share of the population attains an higher living standard, becoming a new social class: it is the so-called “bourgeoise”. With a new society come along new values: the new ideals are of individual self-realization, personal rights and property protection, which are the issues that the rising new class is facing in the hostile Monarchic environment.

Locke (3) theorizes that the humans possesses some innate rights, such the one to life, to freedom, to health, to property, the so-called natural rights. We are in the XVII century, where England is a forerunner in granting new rights to this uprising social class as a rising constitutional monarchy.

In the XVIII century, during the Enlightenment, the liberal thought takes full form: Kant (4, 5) introduces the concepts of universal laws, respecting the natural rights: the ideal man, and therefore the State is the one respecting those terms. Montesquieu (6) formalizes the concept of division of the three powers, necessary for a democratic environment. It is a period of prosperity for Germany, under the “King Philosopher” Frederick II and France was still enjoying the fruits of the colonial dominance under Louis XIV, but after his rule the general wealth was crippled by war debts and this will lead to explosive consequences: all these values are incorporated into the French revolution which will be the ultimate demand of individual rights against the monarchy. Sadly this surge of freedom rapidly degenerates into a regime of Terror, culminating with the rise of the Napoleonic Empire.

III. Authoritarianism (1815-1950)

After the French Revolution, the shape of Europe has changed and monarchies have lost their “appeal”: Napoleon crushed the whole continent, and the traces of the revolutionary thinking have remained. These previous upheavials have made many thinkers change their mind about the role of the State, going far beyond divine legitimacy or simple utilitaristic thinking. During the Romantic age, Hegel (7) among the others theorises a new role of the State: the monarch become the actor w history and defends the national identity. This reflects a period of reactionary restauration in which exstensive national/colonial empire arise. The concept of People and will be re-elaborated by Marx (8): the people is not a Nation, but a Class, the working class. The ideals of liberalism (during this period we find this word for the first time) continue to co-exist in contrast with the previous views and in the mean time and the democratic processes become achieved by the end of the 1800s, with the Industrial Revolution bringing fundamental technological breakthrough. It is a period of hope and this is reflected in the wave of Positivism, the belief that technology can and will save mankind. The theories of Darwin, thought for the animal kingdom, start to be applied to human society: the ideal becomes a system where the strongest survive and evolve, the weakest deserve to be excluded from the path of history. Thinkers like Spencer (9) include these ideals even in the framework of Liberalism.

However the faith in technology will have a sad epilogue: the Great War: after this tragic event, technology shows all its deadly potential at the service of an, up to that point, ideal mankind. But the 1929 breaks also the ideal of liberalism: freedom of individual has brought to a major economic crisis. Liberalism doesn’t pass the test.

We are again in a moment of confusion, upheavial, but now without strong monarchies, which have been mostly dissolved after the Great War. In this period new ideas arise: totalitarisms set their foot in the political scene, bringing the promise of a completely revolutionized society which, at the eyes of the, seem the ideal response to the weak and struggling liberal regimes. Nazifascist and Soviet dictatorships bring with themselves the ideas of Positivism in a new form: their ideal societies see a totally new kind of man, accurately crafted by the State, with precise requirements and qualities. This positivism yields its most nefarious product in the form of the concentration camps, where the scientific method and the ethics of maximum efficiency are put at the service of one of the darkest pages in the European history

IV. Social-democracy & Free-Market (1930-2000)

The crisis of the 1929 even though coming from the US, has struck heavily Europe. The liberal system, as we have seen, came into crisis. In those places where dictatorship didn’t become the new ideal, we witness anyway a shift in the ideal form of Government toward a more controlled one. The need of control emerges in a new way, which tries to get a compromise between the necessity of controlling an otherwise unstable system and on the other hand the protection of human rights and liberties. Keynes’ (10) theories about Welfare State and intervention in the economy are fundamental in this shift, that will change the ideal of State. After the Second World War, Europe is looking for peace and a new time of prosperity. The ideas of Keynes will be influential throughout this period of reconstruction and regrowth. In the ideal vision the State must no more simply grant the liberty of the individual. The ideal State is the so-called Welfare State, which grants to the individuals the right to realize their individual ambitions, by granting proper education and services and a suitable environment. This is a new concept of equality called “Equality of Autonomy”, as theorized by Sen(11).

In the meantime, there are many oppositions to this kind of reasoning: Friedmann (12) is one of the most prominent economist which supports a laisser-faire economy: one where the intervention of the State is minimal and finalized to the security issues. Reaganism and Thatcherism follow this path and lead to a gradual return to a non-interventionist view of the State.

Both this right and left-wing visions share the ideal of democratic representation as we know it and live into this framework. In this period of general prosperity, Fukuyama (13) prophetizes “the end of history” as conflict, with democracy as the permanent winner.

V. Ochlocracy v. Epistemocracy (2000-…)

In the recent times, also the form of democracy we have just outlined comes into crisis: socialdemocratic systems incur into debt crisis and free-market policies put the basis for the unregulated framework which will burst into the financial crisis of 2008. Both systems lost their credibility for their harsh consequences, leading to serious concerns about the democratic system as we know it. The consequence of this failures comes into the form a feeling of underrepresentation.

This feeling has originated movements bringing forward a new idea of democracy, exploiting the higher communicability given by the new recent technology: the direct democracy, which unlike the representative democracy which relies on elected representatives, gives to the common citizen a direct influence and decisional power into politics. Referenda and online voting/discussions have seen a great rise in recent times’ debates. European parties like Syriza, Podemos, Five Star Movement, the Pirate Party, advocated for the introduction of an edemocracy, based entirely on an online participation. Ultimately this need of “representing the voice of the people” has given birth to various movements, labled “populists” and a period in which referenda have been advocated as the ultimate resolutive tool, leading to events such as the Brexit and the Italian Governmental crisis of 2016.

One big critique to this ideal participated system is that giving so much decisional power into the hands of inexperienced individuals may lead to disastrous consequences, or as the ancient would call it with derogatory spirit, an “ochlocracy”: the government by the crowd. In this vision we insert the opposing school of thought, which as well criticizes the participation system of democracy, but at the opposite: it is too much. Thinkers like Taleb (14) and Brennan (15) have put forward a system in which only the competent people have the right to participate into the electoral process, it’s the so-called “epistemocracy”: the government by the culture. There are flaws in this thinking, too: beside the renouncement of the basic democratic values, it’s indeed really difficult to determine which is – and how to measure it – the optimal level of knowledge necessary to make a good voting decision.

One thing is for sure: the democratic system is facing once again a big upheaval and this will probably change it radically.

VI. Conclusion

We have seen many different systems, with many different ideals, which have significantly shaped our vision today. Many systems looked like reasonable because of the values of their time: slavery, colonialism, segregation, discrimination, the very use of violence were considered normal. The fear for the future made people change their mindset and their priorities. Nowadays the challenges are new and at the same time no different: in our period of crisis we must be really attentive to what our ideals are, as violence and intolerance are sadly returning to be tolerated and apologized, a process accelerated by the recent migrational crisis.

Ideal is then not a synonymous for good. At least, not necessarily. Therefore we have to think more than twice before stating that our system in our minds is the one which will solve all our problems. Democracy as we know it has many flaws, but has also granted us one of the longest periods of peace and prosperity in our history.

Do we really need to change it? Probably yes. But, do we really want to change it in a way that will run over our individual rights?

References:

1. Machiavelli, N 1532, Il Principe, Feltrinelli Editore, Milan

2. Hobbes, T 1651, the Leviathan, BUR Edizioni, Milan

3. Locke, J 1690, Second Treatise of Government, UTET, Turin

4. Kant, I 1788, Kritik der praktischen Vernunft, Feltrinelli Editore, Milan

5. Kant, I 1795, Zum ewigen Frieden, Feltrinelli Editore, Milan

6. Montesquieu, C 1748, De l’esprit des lois, BUR Edizioni, Milan

7. Hegel, GWF 1817, Enzyclopädie der philosophischen Wissenschaften im Grundrisse, IBS, Bari

8. Marx, K 1867, Das Kapital, Newton Compton, Roma

9. Spencer, H 1862, First Principles, Bocca Edizioni, Milan

10. Keynes, JM 1936, The general theory of employment, interest and money,

11. Sen, A 2009, The Idea of Justice, Mondadori, Milano

12. Friedmann, M 1962, Capitalism and Justice, IBL Libri, Milano

13. Fukuyama, F 1992, The end of History, BUR Edizioni, Milan

14. Taleb, NN 2007, Epistemocracy, a Dream. The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable. Random House

15. Brennan, J 2006, Against Democracy, Princeton University Press

Some months ago, the Civic Education Working Group launched a competition for essays with the title: “What does the ideal political system look like?”.  Participants had to submit an essay over their ideal political system and then organise an activity within their local. The working group chose one winner, how had the possibility to win an Interrail ticket, but the ECWG chose also two honorable mentions: What if YOUth could shape Europe? by Antonis Triantafyllakis (AEGEE-Cluj-Napoca) and The Ideal puzzle – can we put back together our pieces? by Roberto Meneghetti (AEGEE-Torino). 

What if YOUth could shape Europe?

Author:  Antonis Triantafyllakis, Politics Interest Group

How would the ideal political system for Europe look like? In an attempt to discover what young people think about it, we held two events, one in Paris, France, and one in Cluj-Napoca, Romania, organised by AEGEE-Paris and AEGEE-Cluj-Napoca respectively. 24 students participated in total, in a structured discussion over coffee. We asked our participants the questions below and analysed the results. We deliberately the definition of “Europe” open to interpretation, to get more diverse outcomes. We called this the “Europe Cafe”.

Is Europe democratic?

70% of the participants consider Europe democratic, because there is rule of law, freedom of speech, freedom of mobility, legal protection of human rights, and every country in Europe uses the electoral process. However, a lot of concerns were shared about corruption, the lack of citizens’ involvement in the decision making processes, the influence of big corporations and the media, and the fear of the most powerful states dictating policies.

How can we improve democracy in Europe?

When it comes to the main ideas behind improving democracy in Europe, our participants focused a lot on transparency, civic education, informing more people on the values, pros and cons of democracy, involving young people more, stricter laws against corruption in politics, bringing the EU institutions closer to the citizens, increasing mobility and freedom of speech, increasing the social cohesion of the citizens, implementing an unconditional basic income scheme, letting more countries join Schengen, enabling everyone to have an equal say and use more interactive and online tools for participation.

Is democracy an ideal political system?

Most participants agreed that there can be no ideal political system per se, but democracy seems to be the best that we can currently have, despite its flaws. It can only work if everyone’s voice is equally heard and their rights protected. Concerns were shared about how power can corrupt those holding it and how that can severely affect the functioning of democracy.

What values should the ideal political system for Europe be based on?

After the introductory questions above, we started the structured discussion with this question. The values mostly mentioned were equality (with a special focus on wealth equality), transparency, freedom, justice, human rights, education, equity. Several participants also focused on the importance of environmental sustainability.

How can those values be respected in a political system for Europe? What core rules should be there to maintain them?

When it comes to upholding those values in practice, our participants focused a lot on individual responsibility and the importance of education, starting already from elementary level; “how can I understand if my rights are respected if I don’t know what my rights are?” one said. Several opinions were heard regarding the rule of law and the importance of equality and transparency. One suggested that changing laws shouldn’t be decided by a majority, but by having a quorum made of a representative of each country so voting cannot be influenced in a major way. In a similar mindset, a constitution written by the citizens was mentioned, suggesting also that a “real” european constitution should be voted, written and recognized by every european country and that referenda should be run before every big decision that would impact the European nations is taken. Another interesting suggestion regarding law was that laws should be developed in line with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, and countries with a lower HDI index should be supported by the rest, where they lack infrastructure/consumption credit. Scrutiny of the ECB and the suggestion of a federal Europe were also mentioned. Finally, the participants also focused on the importance of human rights, promoting empathy and the need to develop a stronger social policy in Europe, in order to maintain democracy and improve citizen participation.

What types of structures would ensure the values above are respected?

Most participants mentioned having an elected government, a court of technocrats and elected assemblies, as bodies differentiated from each other. Having local groups was also deemed very important, as they can better adapt to the local realities and it was suggested that a lot of the decision making power should be delegated to local groups. Many participants considered schools and NGOs an important part of the process, due to their role in educating and giving voice to the citizens.

What would be the core aim of each structure and its basic life-line?

Ensuring fairness, efficiency and the rule of law, while creating the best conditions for people to live, seemed to be the overall idea behind the role of the structures mentioned. Having short life-lines and frequent elections of these structures was deemed important to ensure adequate representation, while sortition was also suggested for assemblies. When it comes to local groups, they should comprise of citizens in contact with citizens, discussing often on relevant topics and reporting the conclusions to assemblies, also ensuring the different points of view are communicated to any national structures. The aim should be to understand local realities, and have appropriate national responses. International institutions should collaborate with the national structures and take into account the local realities, in order to form common and inclusive policies.

What tools can you use to make sure these structures function and are representing all citizens in Europe adequately and equally?

The participants recognised the critical role digital tools can play in a broader representation of the citizens’ voice, from online surveys and referenda to online voting, to citizens having safe spaces to express their opinions, develop ideas and come up with solutions and from running monthly checks-up to an annual survey on the efficiency of the services provided. Furthermore, digital tools can encourage an increased participation of youth in politics and even identifying potential leaders among them. Apart from digital tools, participatory budgeting and the Swiss-type of referenda were mentioned to be worth considering. In general, the main focus of using tools when it comes to democracy was to achieve higher participation and involvement of the citizens in the decision making processes.

What are the main obstacles for implementing such a system in the current reality?

Education, or rather the lack thereof, especially when it comes to civic education, in order for citizens to make informed political choices, understand how the political structures function and be motivated to take an active role in politics was a common barrier mentioned by the participants. Corruption, injustice, careerist politicians, lobbies and the influence of the media were also heavily mentioned. Social, political and economical barriers between the different countries of Europe were identified, causing the countries to hold different interests and aims, and have nationalistic tendencies. The need to have a sense of belonging was mentioned as present in overcoming those obstacles.

What ideas could possibly get us there?

Once again, there was a heavy focus on education, starting from a very young age. The aim of education in that respect should be to shape citizens that are aware of the laws that affect their lives, are well informed and inspired to take action, starting from individual responsibility, and are capable of being kind and just to one another. The participants were concerned about the role of populism and climate change denial in politics, as well as leniency towards corrupt politicians and suggested more decisive actions against them. Encouraging more young people to be active in politics and even run on campaigns was also mentioned, as well as suggesting the Erasmus programme and be extended.

What can youth organisations, such as AEGEE, do to get us there?

The role youth organisations such as AEGEE can play was found to be significant, mainly focusing on civic education. Youth organisations can lead the process of educating young people about Europe and its political structures, informing them about current political affairs, enabling and encouraging youth participation, and improving critical thinking. They can play a crucial role in bridging the gap between the political institutions and the citizens, be the voice of young people and advocate for their ideas to be implemented. Finally, they can inspire more young people to join the existing political structures and institutions and bring change.

What can you as an individual do to get us there?

The participants mentioned their intentions to stay informed, take action in their local communities as well as their youth organisations, to be more involved and engaged in politics, to fight injustice, to vote, speak up, and be ready to interact with each other.

Overall conclusions from the Europe Cafe

Even though the weather didn’t help to have high participation and we had to compensate with a short online survey to get more results from the members of the two AEGEE locals, there are two key points that were consistently recurring in the answers of different questions:

Education: Education is identified as a major factor towards an “ideal” political system for Europe. The participants mentioned on several parts the importance of education as key in having informed citizens that are ready, willing and motivated to take an active role in politics. Education on how the political structures work, as well as how they can take action. Furthermore, education should include civic education and the developing of critical thinking skills among the citizens, in order for their actions to have outcomes and it should be both educational institutes and youth organisations carrying out that educational process.

Participation: The increased participation of citizens in the “ideal” political system for Europe was mentioned at several different points as absolutely necessary. The participants suggested several different ways to achieve this, from the delegation of political responsibilities to local groups closer to and more easily accessible by the citizens, to the youth organisations playing an important role in bringing Europe closer to the citizens and ensuring advocacy for their ideas, to more frequent votings and referenda, to utilising digital tools for reaching more citizens in elections, surveys, online referenda and brainstorming for ideas and solutions and finally, and perhaps more importantly, to have more young people participating in politics and policy making, and even be encouraged to run for political positions. You cannot have a Europe for citizens without the citizens being part of the process.

This wasn’t meant to be a detailed and thorough analysis of how to shape an ideal functioning political system for Europe; the idea was to check what main ideas would young people gathered informally over a cup of coffee have about it, coming from various levels of related knowledge and experience. In that regard, this essay is only the beginning of a long-term process, with increasing numbers of events in different cities, resulting in more ideas, suggestions and concrete thoughts, that the Politics Interest Group of AEGEE-Europe likes to call “Europe Cafe” and intends to keep it going for as long as young people have a voice.

What’s next? It’s up to YOUth!

During EPM Zagreb, the Civic Education Working Group organised a debate competition, which prize was an Interrail Pass. Domen Brus from AEGEE-Osnabrück was the winner, and he wrote this report of his interesting journey for The AEGEEan.

I started my journey in Ljubljana where I boarded the train headed for Frankfurt, final destination of the day being Konstanz. On the platform, I ran into an old friend of mine who was taking the same train so I was in for a fun drive. However, at that point I had no idea about the “real Deutsche Bahn experience” that was about to follow.

First, we stopped somewhere just across the German border as there was some accident on the tracks. Waiting time: two and a half hours. Luckily such accidents really connect people, so I got to know many nice people and actually had a great time waiting. Fast forward to a couple of hours later, the train stops at Augsburg train station. The board next to the train reads: Delay of 170 min. As I thought things couldn’t get worse the sign changed to: The train is cancelled. So, I boarded a new train and continued my way towards Konstanz. I miraculously caught a connection on the wrong side of Lake Constance and I thought I would actually make it there. As soon as this thought went through my mind the lights flashed and went dark, the train stopped in the middle of a field with a creaking noise and the emergency lights came on. At that moment, it also started to rain. It was already midnight. I knew that if we wouldn’t start moving in exactly eight minutes, then I would miss my last connection and be stranded in a village in the middle of nowhere. Two hours later we were still there. Due to some regulation, they couldn’t let us off the train but sadly they had no actual updates regarding our trip. Finally, a new train arrived and took us to the next station, where a friend of mine awaited me and the first day of travelling thankfully finished.

I spent the next four days in Konstanz. We planned to enjoy the lake, do some kayaking etc. I somehow forgot it’s Germany that I’m talking about so naturally it was more or less raining for four days. Nevertheless, we had a great time. We explored the city and its surroundings and also made some cycling trips to Switzerland. On Monday morning I took the train to Berlin. Due to the experience of the first day I was really paranoid but the trip was actually very enjoyable. I stayed in Berlin until Friday. I was visiting a friend who also lent me her bicycle. I think I made about 150 km in those three days. I was really lucky with the weather so I was able to explore the streets and parks of Berlin thoroughly. I found awesome beach bars, rooftop parties, open air cinemas, dusty record shops, cheap awesome food, cool graffiti and intriguing small galleries. Those few days really reminded me why I fell in love with the city many years ago. I was actually really sad to leave on Friday morning but new adventures awaited me!

It was then that my first class Interrail ticket came in most handy. I took the train to Osnabrück that continued to Amsterdam. When I arrived on the platform there were about 600 young people waiting for the train and for a second I thought I’d have a problem. Well, there were almost no people in the first class and you also get Haribos! I made it to Osnabrück, the best city in the world, just in time to join the local antenna for the canoeing trip. It was really great to see the familiar faces of my old antenna. The canoeing was also just as I remembered it – very rainy but still awesome! Someone mentioned that Osnabrück was the rainiest city in Germany – definitely not something that I knew when choosing my Erasmus destination! After the canoeing, we enjoyed a nice barbecue in front of the city castle and then toured the city till late hours. Next day I first went to the non-existent city of Bielefeld to meet a friend and then finished the day in Verden, a small town close to Bremen where I stayed with a fellow AEGEE friend for a couple of days. Of course, there were again delays and cancellations so yet again I spent many, many hours waiting aimlessly. I used that time mostly for relaxation and to plan my next trip. My original plan was to spend that weekend in Hamburg which turned out to be a horrible idea due to all the craziness that surrounded the G20 meeting. After a few days, I decided to go to Sweden, to Uppsala. When I checked the connection, I saw that I had to change five times and that it would take 14 hours to get there if it all went according to the plan. Since I’m not a smart man I decided to take my chances.

All went surprisingly smooth up until the very end, I was even pleasantly surprised by our whole train taking a ferry. I was asleep at the time so I was quite confused when I woke up inside a ship. I was almost in Stockholm, when there was another “incident” on the tracks so yet again we had to wait for an unknown amount of time. I somehow made to Uppsala by 1:30am, when the night was almost ending since it’s so far up north. The train drive across Sweden was absolutely breath-taking. There are hundreds of little lakes, vast forests and beautiful solitary farms on the grassy fields. The next days I spent too much on bad coffee and overpriced beer. Jokes aside, it was a really nice experience to see a small Swedish student city and the friend whom I was visiting proved to be quite a good city guide.

Only after two days I had to leave again. I travelled to Hamburg to see what the riots did to my beloved Schanzenviertel. To my surprise and amazement there were almost no more traces of the chaos that went on just a few days before. I had a great dinner and too many beers with an Italian friend that I was visiting so I took the morning train almost directly. Not a good idea, I really do not recommend this. I was supposed to be home in 12 hours but by that time I should’ve known better. After many hours of confusion and chaos I made it to München where I took the bus to Ljubljana, since there were no more trains for the day. It was 2pm. After getting home I slept for about two days to recover a bit and set my head straight.

Despite being really unlucky with the trains I really had an amazing time. I saw many people that I hadn’t seen for a really long time, explored many new places, met great new people and generally gained a lot of valuable experience. The only thing I regret is not making my trip longer and seeing even more things.

Written by Domen Brus, AEGEE-Osnabrück

Their term starts today. A team of motivated people will officially begin their work on the 1st of August, and there are big expectations about them! It could be the new Comité Directeur (CD) 55 that we are talking about, indeed, but in this case we are referring to the brand new Working Groups, led by the newly elected Working Group Coordinators, namely Viola Bianchetti for Equal Rights, Álvaro González Pérez for European Citizenship, Svenja van der Tol for Youth Development, and Joanna Pankowska for Civic Education.

As most of you already know, the new Working Groups will ensure a fresh and successful start for the new Focus Areas of our three-year-long Strategic Plan.

Even though they still have not begun their term, they have already made history: they have received the highest amount of applications ever, with 62 applications for 28 spots (without counting the coordinators), and each of the teams have eight members (the maximum according to the CIA).

Furthermore, all of the Working Groups have already met via Skype several times and discussed their upcoming plans.  The coordinators have likewise met, in order to promote the team work among the WG themselves. One of the ideas that have come up from their meeting is the establishment of a unified newsletter and of Focus Area action months to take place in 2017/2018.

Before that, Working Groups will be present all around the Network during the NWMs and the Agora, and between September and October they will hold their live meetings. The Public Relations Committee of AEGEE is also working on the WG logos, in order to make them match and have common elements and show visually the level of coordination that wants to be achieved between the Working Groups.

That’s all by now. If you want to stay up-to-date with the news regarding the WGs, subscribe to our newsletter here! Rumors say that they are unstoppable!

Written by Álvaro González Pérez, AEGEE-Heidelberg and European Citizenship Working Group Coordinator

Special thanks to Stas Mahula, AEGEE-Kyїv, for the cover picture.

The Civic Education Working Group proved to be a consistent and hard-working group of people since the reform of the WG was accepted in Spring Agora Asturias 2015. The topic proved to be high in the list of priority in our organisation and in Autumn Agora Chisinau it was selected again as one of the four focus area for 2017-2020. With a new Working Group team kicking off on the 1st of August, it is time to look back at what the team, led by Aliénor Pirlet, Working Group Coordinator, did in the past months. 

Introduce your Working Group. Who is in the team? What are their tasks?

Aliénor Pirlet:  I am a Belgian student in Philosophy, Politics and Economics (PPE) at Leiden University. I joined AEGEE in 2015, I’m crazy about the intercultural atmosphere in our beloved association and I love travelling. I also like to take up new challenges, which is why I ran in Agora Bergamo to be the new coordinator of the CEWG. Besides that, I’m responsible for our newsletter and for creating new awareness campaigns.

Julia Hanesz: I am a Hungarian student from Slovakia currently spending an Erasmus semester in Paderborn (Germany) in International Business Economics. I joined AEGEE last spring to be able to participate to the SU in Warsaw organised by the CEWG. This is where I fell completely in love with AEGEE and Civic Education and decided to join the CEWG and become a policy officer of the WG. It was definitely one of my best decisions, I learnt so much about AEGEE, Europe, people and myself. Next to the policy paper, I am PR and responsible for the Quiz: ‘How civic are you?’.

Alexia Thomas: Belgian Student in Sustainable Citizenship in Utrecht, I am the Summer Universities responsible to collaborate in the funniest ways to make this summer matter.  I fell deeply in love with AEGEE and after becoming CEWG member I am now moderator of Society and the Environment Interest Group, subcommie and… who knows what the future will bring!

Evrim Emiroğlu:  I am from Ankara and I am currently studying in Economics at Anadolu University in Eskişehir. I have been an AEGEE member since spring 2012. Since then, I have been active with different responsibilities. During all these years, I always believed civic education to be one of the most important, if not the most important, aspects of our organisation. Therefore, I decided to join the Civic Education Working Group. I am responsible for network contact in the group.

Doro Harles: I am currently a student in Sociology and Psychology in Mannheim (Germany). After taking part to the SU coordinated by the CEWG last summer I was fascinated by civic education and wanted to work more on it. At the moment, I am doing an internship dealing with analysing voter turnout in Germany. In the Working Group I am dealing with organising Debating Competition and secretary work.

Daniela-Maria Maris : I am a member of AEGEE-Cluj-Napoca and finished my studies in Communication Science last year. This year, I’ve worked as Communication Assistant for the CD and I am now doing an internship at the German parliament. For me civic education is the only way we can achieve democracy. This is why I’ve chosen to get particularly active in AEGEE around this topic. I am part of the ECI task force and in the CEWG I am the external relations responsible and helped co-organising the Conference in Budapest.

Esther Hillmer: I am studying NGO-Management in Osnabrück (Germany) and just finished a three-month internship in Georgia. I became a member of AEGEE-Osnabrück in 2011 and joined the ECI task force last year. This work made me even more curious about civic education topics, so I was really happy to be part of the CEWG this year, for which I am the internal communication responsible.

María Ballesteros Melero: I am a translator and interpreter currently studying Political Science. I became a member of AEGEE-Madrid in 2014 and joined the Civic Education Working Group last May, as I believe civic education is the only way to achieve a real, long-lasting social change. I am responsible for the collaboration between the CEWG and the Europe on Track 4 project.

Bálint Toronyai: I am studying Economic Policy in Budapest. I became a member of AEGEE in 2014. I am particularly interested in civic education and media literacy as I believe it has an essential role in the formation of robust democratic societies. Within the CEWG, I am responsible for developing our workshop material and organising the debate competition.

What is the aim of the CEWG? Can you shortly summarise your activity plan?  

Aliénor: In short, the CEWG is there to help our network to achieve its aim regarding the Focus Area on civic education. At the beginning of each term, the new team members of the working group write a new Activity Plan listing the projects and activities they will be doing throughout the year in order to help to fulfill the yearly objectives on civic education.

Since our focus area has two aims, our Activity Plan contains activities to do within AEGEE on the one hand, and projects to do outside of AEGEE on the other hand. Within AEGEE, we chose to collaborate again this year with some antennae for helping with the creation of the content of their Summer Universities. Last year’s collaborations were a true success and we are confident they will be as fruitful this year! Next to this, we also organised the conference ‘Education for the Present, Democracy for the Future’ in collaboration with AEGEE-Budapest and the Europe on Track 4 project from the 21st to 23rd of April. More generally, we attend many events of AEGEE throughout the year where we deliver workshop, foster discussion and raise awareness about different topics related to civic education. Of course, we also develop many new material that AEGEEans can use whenever they want to have activities on civic education. Recently, we have created new guidelines for locals and have updated last year’s debating toolkit. We encourage locals to organise debates because it is a great way of using critical thinking, forging your own opinion and learning many relevant information on a (controversial) topic. This is why we organised a debate competition earlier this year. You can read all about it in the article of the AEGEEAN.

Regarding our projects also for young people outside of AEGEE, we are working on the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI) More than education with the ECI task force and the Europe on Track 4 project to call for more civic education in Europe and foster discussions on the matter. We also launched a test on Facebook ‘How civic are you?’ for people to check out their civic knowledge. Currently, we are still working on an open letter for non-EU citizens who would also like to call on their government for more civic education in their countries. And last but not least, our awesome Policy Officer Julia is working hard on the policy paper dealing with the use of the ECI as a direct democratic tool.

Last year 12 Summer Universities chose to organise an event related to the Civic Education. Do you expect such a great participation also this year?

Evrim: We are having eight formal cooperations this year. This is less than last year but it is most probably linked to the fact that this summer, SUCT defined that formal cooperation means that one trainer is coming to deliver the workshops in cooperation with the local in order to ensure the quality of the cooperation. Currently,  every member of CEWG is working with one SU in order to create a quality thematic content for SUs.

Organising a Summer University is difficult, but organising a contentful SU is harder. The advantages of cooperating with us are that we are helping locals to choose the best topic for their SU. If they already chose, we decide which workshops need to be created and start working on it with the appointed person in charge of creating the content. As a method we try to be as fun and non-formal as possible to actively engage the participants.  

What is your policy paper about?

Julia: This year we are working on a policy paper about the European Citizens’ Initiative as a tool of direct democracy. In general there were already researches and discussions on this topic, about whether it is a relevant and successful tool of the European Union. Our aim is to examine it from a youth organisation’s perspective based on the experience with the ECI ‘More than Education’. You can also help with the research by filling the following survey.

The CEWG is very active. What is your secret?

Doro: There is no secret! Our “activeness” is coming from our super engaged and motivated members. Also, we did not start from nothing since we got a lot of support and inspiration from the CEWG of last year. We are helping and pushing each other in creating workshops, promotion material, developing new ideas, etc. There is always someone who can give you feedback and tips if you are stuck with something. This is also supported by our very good group dynamic: we trust and are honest with each other. In the beginning of each meeting we have a “weather forecast” in which everybody tells what are good and bad news lately and how are their feelings about it. We also like to laugh and have fun together which is helping in hard time. And that is also why we decided to meet each other for a fun meeting in Budapest before going together to the EPM in Zagreb.

What did you do at your live and fun meeting in Budapest?

Julia: We evaluated the work of the past few months, planned the next projects and had a lot of fun together. We had a chance to discover the Buda castle, the Great Historical Market, the Parliament, the Heroes square on the Pest side, visit the Central European University, and rest a bit at the Margaret island. Of course our Hungarian experience would have not been complete without tasting the goulash soup, the mákos guba or the kürtőskalács. We also cooked together a traditional food, the ‘lapcsánka’ or ‘tócsni’. Thanks to AEGEE-Budapest we had a chance to visit a few “Ruin Bars” in the heart of Budapest during the wonderful pub crawl organised for us. Next to all of that we also organised a signature collection for the More than Education ECI, during which we had many interesting discussion with locals, who happily supported us with their signature. It was a very productive and fun meeting! 

Do you want to add something?

Aliénor: If you enjoy reading about our activities and know all about the latest update of our workshop materials, please subscribe to our newsletter. You can also read the ones already published. And do not hesitate to contact us at info@civiceducation.eu!

Written by Erika Bettin, AEGEE-Verona

From the 21st to the 23rd of April, AEGEE-Budapest hosted the conference “Education for the present, Democracy for the future”, which was the winner of the Franck Biancheri Award 2017. The event was organised together with Europe on Track and the Civic Education Working Group, with the support of the Association des Amis de Franck Biancheri. We talked to Álvaro González Pérez, one of the participants, to get to know more about it. 

The AEGEEan: Why did AEGEE-Budapest decide to organise the conference? Which where the highlights of the event?

Álvaro: AEGEE-Budapest had been dreaming of organising another big thematic event since their popular Agora in 2012, so the opportunity to help bringing to life such an important conference as  “Education for the Present, Democracy for the Future” was something they did not want to miss. Furthermore, and as the participants of the conference had the opportunity to learn in detail, civic education and democracy are two topics very much discussed currently in Hungary.

Regarding the highlights, there are way too many for me to mention all of them, but on a personal level I would underline on one hand the fact that the conference fired the starting gun for the arch-popular Europe on Track 4 (since both teams departed from Budapest), and on the other one the lecture given by a Hungarian university professor and activist, Marie Heller, on the current political and educational situation in Hungary, which gave us the foreign visitors a greatly enriching and enlightening local perspective.

Did they collaborate or had a partnership with other organisations?

The content of the conference has been organised by the Europe on Track Project and the Civic Education Working Group, which did an amazing job. I cannot avoid mentioning the incredible job that María Ballesteros Melero did, who was close to being omnipresent.

Regarding the collaborations, the “Association des Amis de Franck Biancheri” (AAFB) supported the conference with its experienced speakers and trainers during the whole duration of the event, and the Central European University (CEU) provided us with the necessary space and material.

How many organisers were involved in the organisation of the conference? 

There was a content team led by María Ballesteros, and formed by Maria Maris, Nicola Guida, Sofia Lobakina, and Balint Toronyai. The sessions were given by several members of the AAFB, the Comité Directeur and the CEWG, as well as by several guests that are a part of the Hungarian civil society, such as the a forementioned professor or a high school student involved in early activism. The organisational side was handled by AEGEE-Budapest and Petra Buruzs as main organiser, who made an amazing job and could not have made our stay in Budapest more comfortable and enjoyable.

Can you tell us something about the programme?

As shown by the name of the conference, the core of the conference was civic education in Europe, and the whole programme was based on this topic, whereas the first day the sessions were more based on the legacy of Franck Biancheri, regarding his life and his more than relevant role in AEGEE. In this sense, both of these elements were combined in a way that we dealt with the past, present and future of AEGEE and Europe, with interesting workshops dealing with diverse topics such as the current state of civic education in Europe, the role of civil society in the shaping of active and responsible citizens or the possibility of the democratisation of the Eurozone. The dynamism of the conference made it impossible to get bored: we had several parallel sessions that we could choose depending on what we felt like would fit us the most, as well as a World Café.

Is there something that we did not ask that you would like to share?

Especially remarkable is the fact that the place where the conference was held, the CEU, is currently in danger of being closed by the Hungarian government, because of several reasons dealing directly with the topic of civic education. For this reason, not only this university was suitable for us from a practical point of view, but also from a symbolic one.

Finally, I want to underline once again how enriching the lecture by Marie Heller on education and politics in Hungary was, not only for me, but for numerous participants. Even though the results of the evaluation are not out yet, I am convinced it will be close to the top of the best evaluated sessions, and it will come with no surprise:  getting to know the culture, society and politics of a certain place in that very place and by locals with expertise on the topic gives an unmatchable and an extremely educational insight.

Written by Paola Letizia Murru, AEGEE-Cagliari

One year as Projects and Communication Director at the AEGEE House in Brussels, and Joanna Pankowska from AEGEE-Warszawa has no intention to pause. During busy preparations for Spring Agora Enschede we talked to a very energetic and inspiring candidate for Civic Education Working Group Coordinator.

The AEGEEan: Joanna, after being in the Comité Directeur, members often take some time for themselves, but this is not your case. What keeps you motivated to lead a working group?

Joanna: Being a member of the Comité Directeur is a very different experience than working in European Bodies for one simple reason – next to the tasks that you are passioned about there is also plenty of tasks that are not necessarily the things you came to AEGEE for. Don’t get me wrong: I am thankful for the experience and I definitely learnt a lot while being in Brussels, but my true passion was and still is civic education, and that is why it feels natural to continue the work I started while being member of the Working Group in 2015/16 and continued as CD appointed responsible towards the education portfolio.

Why do you think civic education has a fundamental impact on society?

Quoting the words of Barack Obama: “The most important office in a democracy is the office of citizen“. Every office requires preparation and civic education is supposed to prepare us for the role of citizens. Currently, we are witnessing insufficient and incoherent teaching throughout Europe of essential civic competences, i.e. the knowledge, skills and attitudes that are needed to act as a responsible, active and democratic citizen. I believe that we need to address this issue first before we can move forward with any other social issue.

CEWG has two big aims: non-formal and formal civic education. What projects have you been working on in these fields?

My interest in the topic precedes my membership in AEGEE. As a scout and a volunteer in numerous Polish NGOs, I have always focused on the topic of inclusiveness and civic education. I took part in a Youth in Action study session, learning about the Swedish education system, and I coordinated a working group under The Polish Student Parliament on the proposals of changing the Polish educational system and many other similar initiatives. When joining AEGEE, I focused similarly on civic education, firstly by joining the Working Group on Civic Education in 2015/16 and being a driving force behind the European Citizens’ Initiative “More than Education”. Being part of the Comité Directeur, I continue contributing to our internal and external affairs on the topic of civic education, and education more generally. Throughout the whole year I have been working closely with the Lifelong Learning Platform, which is one of the most important education oriented organisations in Brussels. Lately, I have also been selected as a member of the expert group on education within the European Youth Forum.

What are the usual task of the CEWG? Describe a typical busy day of CEWG or a live meeting.

It depends on the new team and how we divide the roles. Two years ago, we have been a relatively small team, so the collaboration was smooth, but also the workload was quite extensive. This year, I observe that the whole team of the CEWG (9 people) worked very hard and they also managed to create a very flat and cooperative structure for the team that allows people to work in smaller subteams, which means that for every member the work looks a bit different. Live meetings are there to set up long terms plans and responsibilities. Depending on the capacity of the team, the minimum plan is to fulfill the objectives of the Action Agenda and if the team wants to do more – the sky is the limit. If Agora approves the current objectives proposals, it seems we will be focusing on differences between political systems, visits to high schools, critical thinking and ECI follow-up.

You were among the promoters of the European Citizens’ Initiative “More than Education”. What do you think is its biggest strenght and its biggest weakness?

The weakness is quite obvious – we did not do a classic campaign for it because we never found proper human and financial resources to run a campaign. None of the people in the team was interested in doing so and also several open calls and Erasmus+ openings did not attract people to run it. I myself few times regret that due to my Comité Directeur responsibilities, I could not take a more active role in it. This reflects in the numbers of signatures. Nevertheless, I believe the ECI does bring a lot of value to AEGEE. It is the theme of Europe on Track, which is proving to be a very successful edition, it has been reflected in the Budapest conference, the hitchhiking competition “Thumbs Up for Civic Education” preparation is going very well. It was the main topic of our activities at YO!Fest, University on Youth and Development in Mollina and European Ideas Lab – Greens. We established many contacts that are valuable not only for the ECI itself but also for future collaborations on the topic of civic education (Animafac, European Civic Forum, European Humanist Federation, Association for Teacher Education in Europe, Network European Citizenship Education, Vote&Vous, Bosch Foundation and many more). María Ballesteros Melero (AEGEE-Madrid) was a speaker on behalf of the ECI at the “1st European Conference on Education and Democracy” organised by Fundación Cives in Spain. Thanks to the ECI we have established very close relations with the European Economic and Social Committee. I was invited to speak at the ECI ad hoc group meeting as well as at the ECI day. We are also collaborating with EESC on the upcoming roundtable event: ‘Mind the gap – how to strengthen civic education for all throughout Europe’. Are we reaching one million signatures? No. Do we put civic education on political agenda? I think so.

Can you tell us something more about your cooperation with the Lifelong Learning Platform?

I have been a link between the Platform and AEGEE. I have attended numerous meetings and events but also I have been in touch directly with the Director of LLLP, discussing the possibility of the creation of a new working group within the LLLP on the topic of civic education, which will be led by AEGEE. This conversation has not been finalised yet, but right after Agora I will be attending the General Assembly of LLLP, where it should happen. We are also discussing the possibility of co-organising an event at the European Parliament together with Lifelong Learning Platform and other partners in autumn. LLLP is one of the important partners for AEGEE, not only because it is the most relevant stakeholder in European civil society when it comes to education, but also because AEGEE has been one of its founding organisations and it is important to maintain our active role within the platform. Contribution to the processes and consultations within the Platform allows us to be part of bigger European discussion at the tables that we might not be invited on our own. Taking into consideration all the knowledge and experience I have gained this year, I hope I can continue to be the link between AEGEE and LLLP as a Working Group Coordinator.

How would you pursue cooperation with other Working Groups? Do you already have ideas in mind?

I have numerous ideas but those have to be of course agreed with all of the Working Groups. The general though is to coordinate actions when it comes to AEGEE calendar, so to have months dedicated to each of the focus areas (the idea was born during the drafting part of EPM and does not belong to me). Another idea would be to collaborate on communication towards the Network – for example sending open calls for members of WGs in a coordinated matter or putting together all of the publications and materials from WG that locals can use and have common promotion of them. Last but not least – active communication between groups, sharing best practices, co-creating events and much more – depending on the capacity of all of the groups. I imagine all of the working group coordinators to meet before the summer to discuss a collaboration strategy for the whole year.

You can read her full candidature here.

Written by Aliona Sytnyk, AEGEE-Berlin

After several successful events, including a Network Meeting (NWM) two years ago and three Agoras (in 2012, 1995 and 1991), AEGEE-Budapest is organising with a very experienced core team and the collaboration of the Civic Education Working Group, the Franck Biancheri Award, which will also serve as the opening event of the Europe on Track project. In this article the Board of AEGEE-Budapest gives us some information about this event which will be held at the end of April 2017.

The AEGEEan: Please, present your local!

AEGEE-Budapest: Our history started in the Nineties, when AEGEE-Budapest was founded like a pioneer as the first local of AEGEE-Europe on the Eastern side of the Iron Curtain. Since its formation, it hosted prestigious events, like the Agora in 1991, which was a conference with 600 participants. This was repeated four years later, and for the third time in 2012, when AEGEE-Budapest organised one of the biggest Agoras since the foundation of AEGEE.

AEGEE-Budapest is one of the most popular students’ associations in the capital. It provides exchanges, thematic trainings, conferences, summer universities and countless different types of events for its members. Nowadays, we have around 200 members, 50 of them actively contributing to the work of the local. They come from different fields of study like economics, engineering, computer science, sociology and some of them are even already graduated students.

To highlight some events our local hosted, in 2014 AEGEE-Budapest organised a Network Meeting with 42 participants where the main topic was Spreading Europtimism. One year later, in 2015, we hosted the IFISO (Informal Forum for International Student Organisations), where students’ organisations from all over Europe were represented. In 2016, AEGEE-Budapest launched a new project called Get Involved! which aimed at discussing some of the current happenings in Europe. For now all the conferences organised within this project explored the topic of migration towards Europe, including the Hungarian perspective and the role of Turkey in Europe after the military coup and the governmental answer to it.

To activate its members, AEGEE-Budapest has now three working groups, namely: Human Resources (HR), Public Relations (PR) and Fundraising (FR). These WGs help a lot to improve the quality of the events we organise.

Why did you decide to apply for the Franck Biancheri Award?

Since Autumn Agora Budapest 2012, we had the dream to organise a prestigious and professional event where the content was aimed at addressing the current situation in Europe, cooperating with several AEGEE Bodies to highlight its values. We were thinking about applying last year, but we had some doubts whether we could apply for the award with an outstanding application or not. In fact, our motto would be a quote from Star Wars: “Do or do not, there is no try”.

When Europe on Track (EoT) and Civic Education Working Group (CEWG) approached us in 2016 with the basic idea of a conference which would be reflecting on the past, debating on the present, envisioning a different future, we understood that we could be able to win the award with this application.

Who is in the core team?

In the core team there are those members who already contributed to fill in the application. After the positive result from the Association des Amis de Franck Biancheri, we involved more people with different backgrounds and experiences to achieve the highest possible level of cooperation among us. The core team members from AEGEE-Budaperst are: Petra Buruzs, Bernadett Mészáros, Ákos Glaub and Bálint Caesar. As for the cooperation with the AEGEE Bodies, we have Nicola Guida and María Ballesteros Melero from Europe on Track, Bálint Toronyai from Civic Education Working Group and Maria-Daniela Maris from More than Education.

Can you give us a sneak peek of what you are preparing?

A three-day conference will be held in Budapest at the end of April. During the conference we will discuss the role of Civic Education, analyse the real meaning of democracy and how we can face the raising of populism in Europe. All these topics are highly associated with the ideas of  Franck’s legacy and his work. This is also reflected by the title of the conference, which is ‘Education for the present, Democracy for the future’. The event will be also the opening of the fourth edition of the Europe on Track project, and their ambassadors will commence their journey from Budapest this time.

Furthermore, AEGEE-Budapest has an own middle-term, local project called Get Involved!. The project was launched in 2016, and aims at focusing on the current happenings and issues in Europe. We are organising more forums and discussions in the near future covering three main relevant topics. Among others, we will examine the relevance of a common currency (a.k.a. Euro), analise the threat of the populism in Europe and finally how did Hungary benefit on different levels from the EU membership.

What were you doing when the CD delivered the news and how did you feel about it?

After submitting the application, we were really excited. All of us were waiting for the final result with fingers crossed – we really felt pain keeping our fingers crossed for so long. We were checking and refreshing our e-mails quite often, until finally we received the highly anticipated e-mail from the Association des Amis de Franck Biancheri announcing that we won the award. All of us were really happy and ‘celebrating’ it in the Facebook chat group with a lot of champagne stickers and smileys.

A few days later, we had a skype meetig with the core team, when we discussed the most important steps ahead of us. Some weeks later, we also had a skype meeting with the members of AAFB and Comité Directeur. They are really supporting us with everything!

Did you already collaborate with Civic Education Working Group and Europe on Track project?

Last year, Budapest was one of the stops of the third edition of Europe on Track. We organised an event where we screened a Hungarian movie and the ambassadors of EoT also held a workshop for the members of AEGEE-Budapest. One of our members, Bálint Toronyai, is also part of the Civic Education Working Group and this definitely proved to be a huge help during the application process. While preparing the application, we had weekly skype meetings, hangouts, rapid commenting at the shared documents, where we discussed our ideas and made it real together.

How can we reach Budapest? What has Budapest to offer?

Well, it is easy to reach Budapest. Our capital is located in the middle of Europe and it has several connections with other European cities. Liszt Ferenc International Airport is one of the biggest in the region with more than 10 million passengers per year, it has connections with almost 100 destinations and 120 flights per day. International trains connect Budapest with several German cities and with every neighbouring countries. Express trains operate every two hours from Wien, Munich, Bratislava, Prague, etc. International bus companies operate several cheap lines from different cities all over Europe. When the application period will be open, we will publish a document explaining how members can get to Budapest from all over Europe.

And why is it worth visiting Budapest? The capital of Hungary is divided into the hilly Buda on the western bank of the Danube, with its narrow streets and greener environment, and the more residential and flat Pest on the opposite side.

Budapest is famous for its historical sites, like the almost 800 years-old Buda Castle District, where you can visit Buda Castle, Matthias Church and the Fisherman’s Bastion. An astonishing view from the hilly Buda is guaranteed! On the opposite side you can see the Hungarian parliament, which is the third biggest parliamentary building in the world, St. Stephen’s Basilica, which is the largest church in Budapest, and the Main Synagogue, the second largest synagogue in the world. At the end of the Andrássy Avenue, Heroes Square closes the Unesco World Heritage area.

Hungary, and also Budapest, is famous for its spas, like Széchenyi, Gellért or Turkish. Nowadays Budapest is also leading the nightlife in Europe. Several tourist, in fact, come to Budapest to discover the pubs, bars, clubs, festivals and concerts scattered all around the city.

If you want to stay updated about the event, visit the website.

Written by Matteo Lai, AEGEE-Cagliari

Summer seems distant but AEGEEans, as busy bees, are already in the process to organise Summer Universities. The Summer University Coordination Team gave the future SU organisers the possibility to collaborate with AEGEE bodies and give their Summer Universities a content twist. We asked the bodies involved to give us some more information about how they envision the collaboration. In this first article we will understand more about Civic Education Working Group, Your Vision for Europe, The Academy, Human Resource Committee and Youth Employment working group.  

Even if summer is the season for relaxation, vacations and parties, a content Summer University is still possible. The Civic Education Working Group launched the motto “a SU that matters” last year, and a lot of locals followed them organising a Civic Education-themed Summer University. This year, the Working Group proposes to organise an event related to Civic Education, intercultural communication, environmental sustainability, human rights or active citizenship like LGBT, Democracy, Refugees/immigrants, Green SU, Climate change, Intercultural communication through music, Volunteering, European Citizenship, Debating SU, Sexual Education and much more.

Last year, 17 Summer Universities were organised in collaboration with Civic Education or on a topic related to it. We asked some of those locals to explain why you should think about it. If you think that a SU with content might be boring, you may be thinking it twice if you consider that last year AEGEE-Udine placed its SU in the first place with their The Dark Side of the Boot SU.

AEGEE-Udine Summer University The Dark Side of the Boot

Stefano Dal Farra, main organiser, says that they chose “this topic for our SU last year because we thought that, in order to create an amazing SU, participants had to know the real Italy, the real conditions in which we are living. We did not want them to see and experience Italy perceived from an idyllic point of view, as if they were seeing it from a postcard. They had to experience the reality of our country, and that meant making them realise and see Italy for what it is right now, with all its problems”. One of the problems in Italy is the refugee crisis and a lot of activities were done with refugees, in the places where they are being hosted. “Participants met them, played volleyball with them, had a human library and an open table with them,  learnt Italian with them, volunteered for them. All these activities helped the participants to clear their ideas about the refugee crisis in Europe, to really understand the causes that are behind it and to meet them, to talk with them, and to understand that they are normal and common people like us, who had to leave their countries because of the war or because of the difficult living conditions”, concludes Stefano.

AEGEE-Leuven and AEGEE-Tilburg Summer University Burgundian Bicycles Vol III: Biking through SUmmer

AEGEE-Leuven, together with AEGEE-Tilburg, organised the Summer University Burgundian Bicycles Vol III: Biking through SUmmer. Elinne Mertens from AEGEE-Leuven told us that they collaborated with the Civic Education Working Group “because all people should (learn how to) act as a responsible citizen, which is exactly what civic education is about. Besides, our European Citizen Initiative is about Civic education and a SU on it can help us reaching the goal of one million signatures and will make people aware of what Civic Education is, also raising the understanding about it”.

CrEATe the Peace with your heART was the Summer University organised by AEGEE-Eskişehir last year. Tuğçe Demir, Treasurer and External Relations Manager of the Turkish local, said that “Civic education is a theme that appeals to everyone and it is very common nowadays”. Positive with the previous experience and the active participation of their participants, AEGEE-Eskişehir decided to choose the same path for their Summer University 2017 as well: “This year we will work on the subject of volunteering under the name of green water and Civic Education. One of the biggest reasons is that the NGOs in our country and the world are working on this issue, but can we give a sense of volunteerism at a sufficient level? We have chosen this theme in order to be able to give and to allow participants to look at it from different perspectives”.

You can contact them at su@civiceducation.eu. 

Your Vision For Europe Project team members

Your Vision for Europe is a project which aims at spreading Europtimism in- and outside the AEGEE-Network, but not only. According to Elinne Mertens, member of the project’s team, they give “tools to encourage young Europeans to think about important European topics, to discuss them with others and in that way, to formulate and express their vision for Europe – an informed and critical view on certain European topics”. During the Summer University, with the help of the project’s team who will act as trainers, participants will develop critical thinking stimulating opinion-formation. They proposed a variety of broad topics as explained by Elinne: “We have proposed some broad topics – more specifically bridging Europe, envisioning Europe, peace building and conflict resolution, refugees and policy and advocacy processes – that can be specified more in different sessions according to the wishes of the SU organisers. Other topics can be proposed too, we are very flexible. Just tell us on which topic you want to stimulate ‘visions for Europe’!”

You can contact them at yourvisionforeurope@aegee.org. 

The Youth Employment Working Group works in the frame of our focus area and it aims at providing participants with the necessary skills and trainings to have a smooth transition from the educational system to the job market. To do so, the working group proposes several workshops on entrepreneurship, but also some visits to companies and activities on self-presentations. At the end, participants should acquire the skills to use and present their “AEGEE skills” on a professional level; the process of becoming an entrepreneur; resumé writing, Motivational Letters, Interviews and so on.

You can contact them at yewg@aegee.org.

The Human Resources Committee and their members want to stress the importance of volunteering and  the possibility it gives to people to develop themselves as human beings. Summer Universities represent a perfect opportunity to develop our members’ skills in a friendly and rather unconventional environment. The workshops they propose are studied to push participants out of their comfort zone, to think about their gained skills and experiences and to reflect about the value of volunteering and the importance of its recognition.

You can contact them at hrc@aegee.org.

The Academy is a partner association that “works” as our pool of trainers: for this summer they proposed to the Summer University organisers the HRESSU (Human Resources European School Summer University). The Secretary Eugenia Casariego has no doubt about why a local should choose them: “Training and Non-formal Education are the best choice for this awesome summer: fun, learning, skills development, and workshops delivered by experienced Trainers, so they will not be the typical workshops you have been through in many other events”. The topic, Human Resources, is very important for locals and bodies that rely massively onto that. “Thus, -she continues- developing skills to support, empower, train, motivate and retain members are key in the functioning of a successful local or body”.

You can contact them at board@aegee-academy.org.

Here the other bodies you can collaborate with.

Written by Erika Bettin, AEGEE-Verona

More Intercultural! Your Participants can Learn Even More!

Jorge Miguel Vielva, Civic Education Working Group, is the moderator of this workshop which will be on the 21st of May, starting from 15.45 in the “S.Giacomo” room. 

One of AEGEE’s main ideas is intercultural exchange. The organisation creates a space for members of different backgrounds to meet and learn about cultural differences, in order to foster mutual understanding, to break stereotypes and strengthen tolerance, show respect and solidarity. This is possible to achieve with the help of Summer Universities and other AEGEE events. The topic might seem easy, but given today’s reality it is very complex and crucial. During the workshop the participants will dive into the intercultural communication theories and reflection exercises. This will help to embrace differences, diversity on a deeper level and truly understand other’s and your own culture. You might learn not only how to say “Hello” in any language, but also how to co-live peacefully in this dynamic and fast changing world with people from all around the globe.

For more information you can download the Agora Agenda and the Workshops and Progress Meetings booklet.

Written by Dariia Kogut, AEGEE-Kyiv