What is the Christmas Truce of 1914?

In 2014 the British supermarket chain ‘Sainsbury’s’ launched a Christmas advert which popularized the ordeal. The advert depicts British and German soldiers singing ‘O Holy Night’ in unison with one another. They temporarily stop fighting one another to play a friendly game of football. And this is essentially what happened in the Christmas Truce of 1914. Check the advert out below:

Although the advert condenses the whole thing into 4 minutes, it provides an accurate portrayal of a series of events which occurred across the Western front. These events took place from Christmas Eve to Boxing Day of December 1914. With these truces having taken place at the beginning of the First World War, it must also be noted that these were unofficial ceasefires between both sides of the conflict. Nevertheless, these truces manifested themselves in German and British soldiers amongst others exchanging gifts, singing Christmas carols, playing football and socialising with each other as if they were lifelong friends, and not combatants participating in a world war.

How did the Christmas Truce Come About?

All of this found its roots on December 7^th 1914, when Pope Benedict XV suggested that the war be put on a temporary hiatus in order for Christmas to be celebrated in a peaceful manner. Despite this plea for an official ceasefire, together with those made by British suffragettes at the time, these calls for a truce fell on deaf ears. Regardless of the reluctance felt by the warring governments, soldiers at the frontline had a completely different outlook towards Christmas compared to that of their superiors.

Taking different forms in different places, the Christmas Truce commonly manifested itself with German soldiers rising out of the trenches, crossing the infamous ‘no man’s land’ and calling out ‘Merry Christmas’ in the native tongues of their enemies in order for the British and other Allied soldiers to understand.

Making Peace

At first, the Allied soldiers suspected this to be some sort of trick, but after seeing that the German soldiers were unarmed, they subsequently climbed out of the trenches, shook each other’s hands and engaged in the aforementioned pleasantries. Any future attempts at similar truces proving to be nowhere near as successful due to the resistance shown by senior and commanding officers.

In addition to this, the festive and joyful description which the Christmas Truce often gets was also accompanied with more somber aspects. soldiers making use of the temporary suspension of hostilities as an opportunity to retrieve and bury the bodies of their fallen comrades, together with swapping prisoners of war.

Not soldiers, just humans.

Despite the short-lived and rare nature of the Christmas Truce, it is still considered to be a heart-warming display of humanity and peace shown by soldiers amidst one of the most violent wars in world history.  For a short period these individuals were not soldiers, but brothers. Not heroes or villains. Not enemies, but friends. They were nothing but humans.

The post The Time The War Stood Still | Christmas Truce of 1914 appeared first on The Third Eye.

Written by Jacob Callus

The evolution of history brings along with it several changes, some of which come as a surprise, others which we can consider to be quite predictable. This can definitely be said to be the case with the ever-changing state of affairs the international community currently finds itself in, as its future has never seemed more uncertain than it does right now.

It’s almost become cliché to list Donald Trump, Brexit, and the rising tide of nationalism across Europe as evidence pointing towards a radical shift in global politics since all of these events came as quite a shock to the international community when they occurred. However, that in of itself can be considered to be the main problem here, due to their root causes not being unexpected at all, and they’ve actually been sitting right in front of our eyes for years on end.

The aptest phrase which can probably best explain this is ‘that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction’. In this regard, the events which I previously listed are the end result of decades’ worth of rampant globalisation, an unfettered period of neoliberal policies being introduced, and an uninterrupted internationalist outlook on world affairs. This is not to say that most of these initiatives being undertaken are bad in of themselves, but that their repercussions have been ignored for far too long, and only their benefits have received maximum attention. Both Donald Trump and Brexit are the products of such issues being unaddressed, as this has too many voters feeling a profound sense of anger and frustration. Neglecting problems can indeed be bad, but abandoning those which they affect the most is even worse.

This in turn has impacted the international community with several countries being more inclined to look after their own interests, rather than cooperating with their partners in order to fulfil common goals. The resurgence of nationalism which I mentioned earlier signifies this phenomenon, as internationalism superseding nationalism caused nationalist sentiments to be suppressed in such a way where they eventually resurfaced in an immensely strong way, as many felt a deep sense of belonging to their country guiding them.  The resurgence of nationalism has not only occurred as a reaction to the spread of globalisation and international organisations, but can be seen in how COVID-19 saw the concept of the nation-state taking centre stage, and how there was initially little to no incentive for international cooperation to dominate the conversation on how to tackle the ongoing pandemic.

Amidst all this chaos and confusion, the international community standing at a crossroads, it must decide collectively what’s the best course of action take in order to preserve the spirit of international cooperation. With tensions growing between China and the United States to see who will be the world’s sole superpower, the importance of this cannot be understated, as only through a process of soul-searching and reform, can the balance of power be preserved, and common goals be achieved by means of commonly derived solutions.

The post Where do we go from here? | the situation with the international community appeared first on The Third Eye.

Written by Jacob Callus

At the turn of a new decade, it would be expected that it’s the start of a new beginning. Bound to usher in a series of changes that won’t just leave an impact on the country in which you live, but on the whole of the world.

With everything that happened in the 2000s and 2010s, people looked at the 2020s with optimism, as perhaps the start of something different. Little did we know of course, that three months into the new year, it would feel like more than just a few months have gone by.

To begin with, the events which have characterised 2020 so far are certainly far from similar to the period in time it has been so commonly associated with, this being the 1920s. Historically described as ‘The Roaring Twenties’, this decade is remembered as being dominated by vast cultural and societal changes relating to the performing arts and the cinematic industry, unprecedented economic prosperity in the United States and Europe, and widespread political reforms, the most pivotal considered to be women being granted the right to vote in several countries across the world. At the decade’s start, US President Warren G. Harding declared that he wanted to oversee ‘a return to normalcy’ during his presidential election campaign in 1920, in light of the immediate aftermath of the First World War.

Now, that certainly feels like quite a lot to take in doesn’t it? The amount of tumultuous events which were spread over 10 years sound so trivial in comparison to what’s already happened throughout this year so far. Up until now, the events which made the headlines undoubtedly were the bushfires raging across Australia, concerns over World War 3 starting as a result of growing tensions between the US and Iran, Brexit finally taking place after almost a four-year wait and Malta getting a new prime minister.

And the greatest impact of them all…

What has definitely had the most profound impact is what’s on everyone’s mind so far: the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic. The consequences of the virus are being felt socially in terms of self-quarantine taking place on a global level, in political terms when it comes to seeing how world leaders have chosen to respond to the outbreak of the virus, and economically in relation to the fallout which is expected to occur as a result of the coronavirus leading to businesses having to close and whole countries coming to a halt. The geopolitical repercussions which this pandemic is bound to have with regards to the already strained relations between the United States and China warrant an article of its own judging by its magnitude.

These are at the very least, what seems like the most likely outcomes of this crisis, since the broader effects may be too difficult to predict. Despite all the hardship being associated with the coronavirus, some people seem to have found a silver lining amidst all the mayhem. So, to conclude on a positive note, some may be getting their hopes up after the news that this year’s Eurovision Song Contest was canceled, the same can’t be said however for the US presidential election this November.

The post Another roaring twenties? Far from it | MIRSA appeared first on The Third Eye.

Written by Jacob Callus

One only needs to login to social media or watch the news right now in order to see to what extent the outbreak of the coronavirus has both captivated people’s attention and altered their lives. Amongst the several impacts the virus is leaving, the most unpredictable of all will perhaps be how it affects the outcome of the presidential election in the United States this November.

Bernie Sanders’ announcement

Following Bernie Sanders’ decision to suspend his campaign for the primaries to decide over who will be the Democratic Party nominee, the original number of 29 contenders have now dwindled down to just one: former US senator and vice president Joe Biden. Despite there initially being a crowded field of politicians vying to be Donald Trump’s opponent, it was evident from the onset that Bernie Sanders had an uphill battle ahead against Biden’s support from the moderate wing of the Democratic Party and the centre-ground of American politics.  

Be it the controversial reception which his policies receive, or the obvious ideological divide present within the Democratic Party, this election left Sanders being the underdog in the contest for the Democrats to take back the White House. With all the twists and turns which this election campaign ended up having, the expectations which commentators and political pundits had were challenged when the candidates started to withdraw from the race, and the rest of them followed suit. Now that it has ultimately come down to just Biden being the only candidate left standing, the stage has been set in the eyes of many for the presumptive Democratic nominee and a Republican president to go head to head in what’s promising to be an entertaining political contest.

Medicare for All

What was even more unexpected however was the direction this election has wound up taking as a result of the coronavirus outbreak, with the focus shifting to issues such as healthcare, universal basic income and what ought to be a government response to crises such as these. In light of the fact that ‘Medicare for All’ (a form of universal healthcare) was Sanders’ trademark pledge, the nature of America’s healthcare system has proven to be a key issue not only for the upcoming presidential election but for how the consequences the coronavirus pandemic will be addressed in the United States. An even more crucial factor is Biden’s increasing momentum inevitably compromising what would have Trump’s planned strategy against Sanders, due to Trump being a fervent critic of Sander’s socialist policies, together with Biden, and both of them opposing ‘Medicare for All’.

Whilst the development of this crisis will undoubtedly determine how the remainder of this election campaign will unravel, Trump’s response to not only the coronavirus, but also to the expected economic fallout resulting from this pandemic is what may very well determine whether he will still be running America by next year or not. Together with this, whatever policies Biden produces to help combat the spread of the Coronavirus will settle whether he can outvote Trump.

The post When a virus determines an election appeared first on The Third Eye.

Written by Jacob Callus

We are tomorrow’s leaders…

A recurrent phrase about youths that we hear too often. It is due to this that one assumes young people possess greater importance for the future, but not necessarily for the present. Due to this mentality, it leads to one of the BIGGEST ironies out there: youths deserve to have their voices heard whilst they are still young. Only to get their words to turn into actions when they are older.

The hypocrisy of this mentality lies in the fact that the same enthusiasm for giving 16-year-olds the right to vote and contest elections, is met with the pessimistic outlook as youths being the epitome of laziness, apathy, and entitlement.

Inconsistency is at its peak when we live in a progressive society. We are willing to put 16-year-olds at the forefront of a country’s decision making but is also ready to bend towards ageist attitudes where young people are looked down upon. Youths are expected to be at a certain level of experience that adults deem to have.

Okay boomer

Rather than letting youths take the reins of the country, those at the helm still seem to be reluctant to do so. They would just rather preserve their status quo. Having said that, a recent internet sensation challenged this concept. Chloe Swarbrick, New Zealand MP, gave a speech on the crisis related to climate change and told a heckler off by saying, “Ok boomer”.

This exchange resulted in a reinvigorated commentary on the relationship between youths and adults. Even in generational prejudices that are still present within society, especially in a power setting like this. If a condescending attitude towards apathetic youth isn’t enough, a similar attitude towards youths who are actually being active is even worse.

This is when the issue is no longer of ageism but becomes one of downright pessimism. That being said, the events of the past few months have shown that young people are prepared to take the lead on a wide range of issues and have politicians as the following suit.

Moving forward

Whether its raising awareness of the damaging effects of climate change, or the ongoing political crisis in Malta, students and young people of all ages have shown that they all can make a difference.

Youths can be the change that the public is yearning for; making a difference nationally and subsequently pushing their agendas worldwide. This can only be possible by changing our attitudes and behaviours. Not by bridging the current divide between the young and the old, but by turning words into actions collectively

cover image: source

The post Does our freedom of speech mean anything to those in power? appeared first on The Third Eye.