Category: Uncategorized

by Hannah Schepers

Image Credit: Hannah Schepers

Under stormy blue skies and cheered on by the public, the sailors participating in the Transat Café L‘Or have left the port of Le Havre on Sunday, Oct. 26. The boats will head across the Atlantic Ocean, towards the goal of this year‘s regatta in Martinique.

The city of Le Havre has hosted this race for the 17th time this year. The regatta was created in 1993 and retraces the route of trading ships transporting coffee from South America to Le Havre, the biggest port to import coffee in France. The sailors compete in teams of two to be the first to reach their goal in South or Central America, which is newly picked for every race. 

With the race village set up right in front of campus, it has been quite hard for Sciences Po students to miss this event. During 10 days before the departure, the public was able to participate in several activities, learn about the regatta and admire the boats resting in the Bassin Paul Vatine. 

Embarking on a journey of solidarity

Among the many competitors is the team of skipper Sophie Faguet (38) and navigator Nicholas Jossier (49) who are participating in the regatta for the second and third time, respectively. This year, they are sailing in cooperation with the social organisations L‘Arche en France and Ellye.

For this article, I had the opportunity to accompany Faguet and Jossier when entering the Bassin Paul Vatine on their boat, together with a group of residents of the newly founded community of L’Arche au Havre.

With a rumbling motor the boat leaves the port of Le Havre, for the short distance the sail will stay rolled up in its cover. We are not far out at sea but we are still met with a strong wind. I can only imagine how strong it will be on the open Atlantic. 

While organising ropes on deck, Faguet tells me about her history in sailing. 

She grew up in Normandy, close to the sea, and started sailing when she was still in primary school. What she likes most about this sport is the connection to nature and the feeling of true freedom: “You can go wherever you want.” Looking out on the open water lit up by the setting sun, I think I grasp the idea. 

She participated in various sailing competitions for over ten years, becoming a full-time professional in 2019. Her next goal is to participate in the transatlantic regatta Route du Rhum in 2026. 

When asked about challenges she faced, Faguet mentions the search for financial support from sponsors. In this race she and her teammate Nicholas Jossier are sailing in cooperation with Ellye, a non-profit organisation that is engaged in educating people on cancer affecting the lymphatic system; as well as L‘Arche en France, an organisation that works with people with a mental disability, to create more visibility and solidarity for these topics. 

On the way to the Bassin Paul Vatine, she discusses the programme of the next days before the departure with the residents of L‘Arche au Havre. This cooperation started in 2024 when L‘Arche au Havre was still in development and Faguet participated in the Tour Voile, a regatta around the coasts of France, from the English Channel to the Mediterranean. In October this year L’Arche has celebrated its official inauguration, only a few weeks before the Transat Café L‘Or. The community consists of people with and without a mental disability who live together in a shared house, supporting each other in their daily lives. 

We have nearly reached our destination when we pass in front of the Sciences Po Campus and enter the basin through the open bridge. Students leaving campus now will have to make a detour.

“[The hardest part is] making the right meteorological decisions for taking the fastest route,” Faguet explains. The sailing boats in the regatta are dependent on wind and taking the wrong route can cost their team precious time. 

Especially this year, with storm Benjamin hitting France right in the week before the departure, the weather is not to be underestimated. The strong winds have overturned three trimarans in the English Channel that had already left on Saturday night, a few hours before the official departure. All of the sailors have been rescued, but they will not be able to continue the race. 

Nonetheless, both Faguet and Jossier are optimistic: “[…] I am sailing with someone I trust completely,” Jossier states in an interview with Le Figaro Nautisme. “Our strength will come from our ability to remain united and stand by our choices,” Faguet underlines in the same interview.

The boat with the number 185 comes to a halt at the very end of the basin and our small group leaves the deck. 

In the next days, Sophie Faguet and Nicholas Jossier will make their last preparations before leaving Le Havre to cross the Atlantic Ocean. 

by Le Xuan Yeo

A megacity is like a pressure-cooker — every building, every street, every piece of infrastructure has a part to play in intensifying the heat, both literally and metaphorically. Although megacities around the world are often lauded for their innovation and opportunity, beneath the glossy surface lies a far more sinister truth: a violent undercurrent that shapes the daily lives of millions of people. Therefore, what does it mean to live in a city where violence is built into the system, from its infrastructure to its economy?

This is one of many questions that Dr. Laurent Gayer’s lecture on Oct. 6, titled “The Violent Fabric of a Megacity”, sought to shed light upon. The lecture focused on his 25-year research in Karachi, and in particular, the city’s resilience amidst violence and economic turmoil. He explored how Karachi maintains a form of democratic order and economic prosperity. Beyond his findings, Dr. Gayer also shared about his research process and experiences living in Karachi. Here are some key insights from his lecture: 

The Research Process

All research must begin from somewhere, and for Dr. Gayer, this started from an enigma — something which goes against common sense, that surprises you and motivates you to delve deeper into the topic. If one is unable to solve the enigma, he suggests an attempt to strive towards an explanation of the enigma. For Dr. Gayer, the enigma he constantly returns to is how a city of 25 million people, which seems to be permanently on the brink of civil war and collapse, could nonetheless not only survive the decades of militancy, terrorism, sectarian warfare, gang warfare, but to some extent, also continue to thrive and actually found also resources for prosperity and democracy? 

He then conceived his work in the form of a trilogy. The first volume in 2014 discussed the disorder and the struggle for the city, specifically the political component that despite high levels of confrontation, a certain form of democratic order continued to reproduce itself and was never entirely at threat over these years. The second volume confronts the common assumption that capitalism requires stability and predictability to thrive, following the Weberian legal rational hypothesis. Dr. Gayer is currently working on his third volume, with his main informant being his co-author. This serves to acknowledge and put at the forefront the people he works with, as well as aiming to promote a more equalitarian kind of research when researching on the global side. 

On Scenes & Narratives

“Sometimes, what is the most striking, the most fertile is not necessarily something you see, something that you experiment, or in the way journalists work, a spectacular scene that would be interesting.”

Dr. Gayer highlights how he does not have personal anecdotes, instead, he works with ethnographic sources. Scenes in his work are not the product of one spectacular moment, but the outcome of familiarity he has developed over the years. From a conversation with his main informant over lunch that allowed Dr. Gayer to visualise so perfectly what transpired three years ago to his informant, to walking around Karachi, he has developed a much deeper knowledge of Karachi due to his extensive period working in the city. 

An important distinction Dr. Gayer makes would be between journalists and his work as a scholar. While journalists may work in the heat of the action to get their news scoop, Dr. Gayer was not there to expose himself. Beyond taking precautions in his fieldwork, he mainly worked through relations of friendship and confidence, working with people, as well as sought to revisit the stories of informants’ families as he believes in collaborative effort. 

Karachi and the Global Order

The built environment of Karachi bears the imprint of that violent city of various forms of violence. Violence intermeshes and materialises in industrial architecture, such as the textile factories that are reminiscent of prisons: they become death traps in fire accidents, the walls surveil the workers themselves, so that security architecture is as much inward as it is outwards, and thus it also shows this form of brutal accumulation through shared exploitation.  

What is most fascinating is how the guard belongs to a private security force managed by an official federal security force led by the army. We observe how capital and the violent brands of capitalism redesign the city with semi-official contracted partnerships with official security forces. This hence represents a deeply complicated, productive and repressive configuration.

Nonetheless, this circumstance is not specific to Pakistan. While Pakistan radicalises this form of gunpoint capitalism, it is only  a lens to look at the broader global phenomenon. This is also the story of global capitalism — the coercion we see today, like the US and its transnational predatory extensions right now is very emblematic. Looking into France where we are situated, the construction of the highly controversial Highway A69 is showing very similar trends to Pakistan. There is collusion between the kiafab, the largest pharmaceutical group in the region, which is the contractor behind that infamous highway project, suggesting how economic groups may control politics. 

Conclusion

Is there hope even with violence? Dr. Gayer has certainly heard many stories about Karachi. Some stories may be distressing, but others showcase moments of solidarity, of trust, bonding and generosity across boundaries, in ways that are more intense and unpredictable than ordinary situations. 

In our current world where the Global North is regarded as the paradigm of stability, success and development; perhaps what we need is to look at the South, to understand the forms of deviance from the paradigm. Symbolic violence still manifests in the Global North, be it internalised racism where minority groups are symbolically represented as inferior, less capable and even “dangerous,” or historical amnesia where nations downplay and forget the darker parts of their history, to reinforce a dominant national identity that avoids confronting historical injustices. To truly reimagine urban spaces all across the world would necessitate a comparative critique of the current global systems, that prioritise profit over human welfare, and a commitment to reshaping global inequalities. 

by Anish Parcha

Image Credit: Emilie Leclerq

As a freshman at Sciences Po, during my first few weeks, I always wondered: what ties the 2As together? What makes them such a cohesive group, with every conversation among them reflecting positivity, engagement and curiosity. I looked from afar and analysed — maybe it’s the lectures, the collective struggle to get good grades or maybe the lack of space on campus, so as to keep seeing each other no matter where you are. This rudimentary analysis led me to constantly question: What defines the Sciences Po community? How is this vibrant, diverse, inclusive and deeply dynamic culture fostered and transmitted? And how can I perhaps be a part of this culture and reflect it, in my own way? 

My quest to find the answer ended when I witnessed it in its purest form, an experience of both immersion and realization. Through the course of celebrating Diwali and Halloween I understood what makes Sciences Po Le Havre a place like no other.

Starting the journey, an early spark: The night of Oct. 22 was perhaps an early initiation for me to find my answer. This time the hallways of Sciences Po echoed with sounds of awe as people described their elaborately constructed outfits; these overlapping conversations set the tone of creativity, cohesion and, most importantly, inclusion. I walked in a bit late when a few incredibly talented musicians from sciences po le havre’s classical music band LHarmony were performing ‘Danse Macabre’. I quickly found my seat and took a quick glance around the amphi to realise the sheer perfection to which everyone had crafted their outfits. To my left stood a spot-on Buzz Lightyear  from Toy Story, and to my right, a vampire with fake blood and fangs that looked alarmingly real. Strangely enough, through impersonation and fear emerged an unexpected compassion that united the entire student body.

The event was organised by numerous associations —  they curated a perfect student experience by embodying the spirit of Halloween, right from the incredibly petrifying haunted house to the blended decorations around campus. The famous sculpture “La Victoire de Samothrace” marking the entrance to Sciences Po was decked with cobwebs, symbolising the dynamism that runs through campus life — a community where birds gather not merely to rest, but to prepare for flight together through integration. Holistically, I finally found the first part of my answer! The fact that the community at Sciences Po is built through collaboration, curiosity and laughter—all of which were inculcated in the essence of Halloween.

Sustaining the community, a late surprise: Diwali, known to be one of the largest campus festivals, was celebrated in an incredibly decorated “Salles des Fêtes Franklin”. The Indian origin festival bloomed in an international setting. The atmosphere surrounding the event was brilliant, as I walked into the auditorium I felt a sense of cultural expression engulf me, every corner of the auditorium was reverberating with effort, grace and honest participation, all the students performing were frantically finalising their performance before getting onto the big stage. The Bureau des Arts set the tone for the event by defining the essence of Diwali through their perfect organisation, coordination, weeks of planning and seamless execution. The Bureau des Arts practically removed all organisational obstacles and made way for celebration contributing to a central theme of diwali being a culmination of happiness. I quickly headed upstairs to find my seat, with the words “Happy Diwali!” echoing through the auditorium. Over the course of the next hour, I witnessed sheer talent and creativity which left me in utter admiration for the cultural brilliance that I witnessed—from the rhythmic energy of the Bollywood dance to the poised grace of the Chinese dance performance, and the playful optimism of the musical theatre club. It’s rare to imagine such a harmony of styles and spirits in one evening within an auditorium in Le Havre. This is what makes Le Havre special, it’s not simply a city in northern France but within it lies a community that embraces global identity, harnesses diverse culture and celebrates life with friends who eventually become family. The progression of Diwali was a perfect representation of the bright lamps that were placed along the auditorium, representing light, happiness and vibrance. Every performance was followed by loud cheers and a strong wave of adrenaline flowing through the auditorium, so as to portray a constant wave of support the student body has for each other, when expression is complemented by belonging.

Finally, as the upbeat drums of ‘Uptown Funk’ played by the incredible band Mushulicious lit up the auditorium, I found my answer in its entirety with total conviction that the Sciences Po culture of building community centres on support, expression and energy, the kind that lights you up every time you see a familiar face on campus.

By Sylvain Sainte-Marie

Has society gone mad with capitalism? That’s what the degrowth movement argues, stressing the current dominant system as destructive of social welfare for the world as a whole and reckless in face of the climate crisis. 

In 1972, the Meadows report on the limits of growth demonstrated that the rate of economic growth at the time could not be sustained within the planetary boundaries. Subsequent models only confirmed this conclusion. The hypothetical decoupling of economic growth with human footprint on the environment is presented as a solution to this problem, but is widely debated and seems risky considering the survival of humankind on the Earth is at stake. Decoupling also falls short of solving the consequences of human activity on the planet other than greenhouse gas emissions. Finally, globalised capitalism has not proven beneficial for all in society, leaving in its path  increasing inequalities and financial crisis. As Pierre Samuel wrote in his book in 1973, trying to raise awareness on the climate crisis:

“In fact, we live in an extremist society: extremist of production, growth, war, competition, specialisation. Because of its critical analysis of this society, the ecological movement is fundamentally moderate. But paradoxically, this tendency of moderation is viewed by some as revolutionary!”

In this article, we will look into how the degrowth movement is currently moving its focus toward strategizing the shift toward a degrowth society. Specifically, we will discuss how the movement tries to answer two of its major criticisms. First, no matter how desirable an utopia can be on paper, it is idealistic. Second, degrowth would be idea entertained by rich people who already have everything and criticise capitalism with no concern for the poorest in their own society and around the world. As such, degrowth would merely be another disconnected ideology for the highly-educated middle-class. 

I. A brief introduction to degrowth thinking

Degrowth originates from a criticism of globalised capitalism as the endless pursuit of profit and technological innovation. In the vein of Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen’s work, The Entropy Law and the Economic Process in 1971, degrowth thinkers argue that decopelling, i.e. the complete decorrelation of economic growth and greenhouse gas emission, is either impossible or at least dangerously uncertain. Additionally, it is important to keep in mind that the footprint of the human economy is not only composed of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission, but many other components such as mineral extraction. As of 2025, humanity has crossed 7 of the 9 planetary boundaries, leading us one step closer to utterly unpredictable environmental changes. Degrowth adds a social critique to the environmental one. Namely, degrowth thinking insists on the importance of de-commodification of society which restores many aspects of human life from the trade economy. Stemming from Polanyi’s pioneering work in the 1940s, degrowth advocates for retiring “false commodities” from the trade economy to protect basic human rights. Finally, degrowth is also built on the criticism of unreflexive technological progress. Authors such as Ivan Illich analyse “growth […] as the result of a historically unique mindset that turns tools from means into ends.” 

Degrowth tries to find solutions to the dead-end of capitalism. As Noémi Cadiou is a degrowth activist and co-editor of Degrowth & Strategy: how to bring about social-ecological transformation (2022). During a talk organised by SPE’s sustainability hub in October she explained that degrowth is a transdisciplinary intellectual framework. It revolves around core principles: abundance (the Earth resources are not scarce but abundant, meaning no predatory behaviour is necessary), sufficiency (focus on the needs and not the means to live a fulfilling life), care (the social structures providing individuals’ physiological and emotional needs), democracy and self determination. Degrowth rejects as well as all form of domination, making feminism and decolonialism key components of its fight. 

Focussing now on the economic side of degrowth, Bärnthaler synthesises the academia on the subject to define it as “an equitable downscaling of aggregate throughput, with a simultaneous securing of wellbeing.” There are three common aspects to all definitions of economic degrowth. Equitability emphasizes the deepening of democratic practices and  the focus on social justice. The reduction of GDP while increasing wellbeing translates in the shrinking of specific economic sectors related to carbon-intensive industries and destructive of actual welfare. Consequently, degrowth is about redistribution within and among countries, considering everyone’s right to decent living conditions on the planet is possible by reducing the economic wealth of the richest and most developed countries. A strong argument in favor economic degrowth, brought forward by authors such as Timothée Parrique in Ralentir ou périr, 2022, argues that planetary boundaries will eventually lead to economic downscaling regardless of human choices, but it can either be done through a painful crisis out of capitalism where the most vulnerable will suffer, or via a concerted strategy. 

II. The limits of the traditional theory of transition 

How to move from a capitalist socio-economic structure to a degrowthian one? “Transition is a black box that lies between the present and our idealized visions of the future” according to the anthropologist Silja Samerski, and strategy to reach a new paradigm is still unclear. The first to really grapple with this problem was Erik Olin Wright in Envisioning Real Utopias from 2010. Wright’s work provides a theory of action, dividing strategies into three types of actions: ruptural (breaking the status quo), interstitial (creating alternatives in the cracks of capitalism), and symbiotic (using the State’s power and institutions to advance degrowth agenda). 

Taking a closer look, we can give examples of each type of action. Ruptural type of action is closely related to revolutionary type of action. Post-materialist mass-social movements such as May 68 in France come to mind. Fuelled by anti-authoritarian and situationist ideas, May 68 was a mass movement coming from the street and using protests and blockade to impose their claim. More recently, that is also the type of action Andreas Malm, a Swedish scholar and activist, advocates for in How to blow up a pipeline, 2020.  On the other hand, interstitial type of action is closer to the anarchist tradition, trying to develop alternative organisations outside of the dominant paradigm in order to have a functioning model to put in place on a higher scale whenever the dominant paradigm, capitalism in this case, loses stability. The Hangar Zéro is a telling local example. This place was built as a response to a real-estate project in the Eure neighbourhood, constructing mostly out of reused materials that the current system is unable to process, and using horizontal decision-making procedures. In that sense, Hangar Zéro tries to develop an alternative architectural and entrepreneurial model. Finally, the symbiotic strategy is connected to the social-democratic tradition, trying to use the tools of the State to incrementally change its functioning from within. The German traffic light coalition, which governed the country from December 2020 to November 2024 is an example of that strategy. The Grünen agreed to form a coalition with the SPD (socialists) and the FDP (liberals) even though there was a profound disagreement on fiscal policy with the FDP from the start. Then, the Grünen negotiated to take the seat of the economy ministry and pushed their transition agenda, especially advocating for the abolition of the German debt break in order to scale up the green transition. This very controversial topic in German politics eventually led to the collapse of the coalition. However, the foot-in-the-door strategy worked, because once the idea was thrown into the public debate, the suppression of the debt break was implemented by the CDU’s (conservatives) following government. It is currently used to finance defence spending, but this tool could be used by a Green government in the future. 

According to Wright, the three strategies are necessary and complementary in order to achieve a degrowth transition. Nevertheless, according to him, “under foreseeable historical conditions such means would be incapable of actually creating a deeply egalitarian democratic form of social empowerment in developed capitalist societies.” He consequently puts a great emphasis on the role of interstitial and symbiotic modes of action. 

Wright framework has proved very influential in the degrowth world and is the backbone of Degrowth & Strategy: how to bring about social-ecological transformation (2022), presented as a synthesis of degrowthian academics. However, in a recent article published in degrowth.info, Charles Stevenson advocates for a parting with Wright’s transition framework. According to him, “[Wright’s] modes of transformation offer an academic typology of anti-capitalist struggles after the fact, but they do not provide context-specific answers to the question of what is to be done.” Strategy is about building an actual plan on how to make a degrowthian coalition win hegemony. Wright falls short of expliciting how much of symbiotic and interstitial method is to be adopted in a specific context, “[his] model of eroding capitalism runs the risk of lulling us into believing that any and all strategies can be equally effective for transforming society.” Society is under the yoke of capitalism, a force that represses challenges to its control, and small scale nowtopias (experimental organisations thought as alternative to capitalism) are merely a drop in the ocean of the challenges ahead. In order to move forward, degrowth needs a strategy giving it the means to become hegemonic. 

III. Ways ahead

As Stevenson concludes along with others, making degrowth dominant is a cultural battle. In order to understand what is still needed, Bärnthaler (2024) analyzed Degrowth & Strategy using Buch-Hansen (2018) prerequisites for a degrowth paradigm shift to occur. There are four: “(i) a deep crisis, (ii) an alternative political project, (iii) a comprehensive coalition of social forces, and (iv) broad-based consent.” The two latter prerequisites are the one currently missing. 

In order to build a comprehensive coalition of social forces, degrowth movements need to move beyond the restricted definition of democracy as consensus making and accept compromise, to reach a broader audience. Regarding democracy, degrowth movements insist on abolishing all forms of domination and fostering empowerment. This leads to democratic decision making only based on consensus. However, “it impedes strategic agency to build cross-class and cross-milieu alliances [and] tends to build eco-social communities, not an eco-social society.” Degrowth movements need to reach compromises and accept to give up on certain claims in order to broaden their social base. Because “critical problem-solving necessarily takes place in political contexts that are structurally unjust and communicatively distorted”, compromising involves “identify[ing] the next best transition steps with the greatest transformative potential in the relevant context.” Moving forward, degrowthian strategy needs to develop a critically efficient grid of analysis of the acceptable compromise, for the sake of coalition building. 

Second is obtaining broad-based consent. The degrowth movement is mostly composed of highly-educated middle-classes, who tend to overestimate the importance given to the environmental crisis in the broader public. If the environment is a widely shared priority, it falls behind others such as jobs, affordable housing or health care. Moving beyond the limited dichotomy of action within and without the state, grassroots can “construct a counter-hegemony that reorders common-senses”, which “fate depends on its ability to occupy the political sphere and use the collective force of the state to spread the new common senses.” Hence the question is which common-sense is shared by a critical mass of people, so that it can effectively occupy the political sphere. In order to acquire broad-based consent, a degrowthian agenda should start with what is already common sense to bring its ideas, and not the other way around. Starting from material needs, a degrowth agenda can build on universal access to basic services. Bärnthaler insists that “structures are always strategically selective, privileging some forces, strategies, actors, and interests over others, a hegemonic project here and now will also need to resonate with some capital fractions to be selected and retained”. Accepting some of this overlap will be necessary to bring truly revolutionary changes to the system. This agenda remains to be built. 

Looking ahead, degrowth movements need not consider all action as equally efficient to take down capitalism. Nowtopias are the incubators of structural changes, but compromise making and appeal to more consensual topics, such as material needs, are necessary to build a strong enough coalition. Degrowth strategy needs focussing on finding the right balance between a deeply revolutionary agenda and the need of making actual change as soon as possible. Eventually, if degrowth truly sees itself as a realistic paradigm, it needs to be willing to rule and coerce. The movement has long shied away from embracing this idea, but no society can exist without some form of domination, therefore degrowth needs to claim its rules to be the best in order to escape its political marginalisation. 

Bibliography

Azihari*, Par Ferghane. “Les contresens de Kohei Saito, philosophe marxiste décroissant.” Le Point.fr 202411, no. 202411 (2024). https://nouveau.europresse.com/Link/politique2T_1/news%C2%B720241120%C2%B7POR%C2%B727044697lpw.

Bärnthaler, Richard. “Problematising Degrowth Strategising: On the Role of Compromise, Material Interests, and Coercion.” Ecological Economics 223 (September 2024): 108255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108255.

“Climate Leninism and Revolutionary Transition.” Spectre Journal, n.d. Accessed November 5, 2025. https://spectrejournal.com/climate-leninism-and-revolutionary-transition/.

Degrowth. “Let’s Move on from Erik Olin Wright’s Modes of Transformation.” Accessed November 3, 2025. https://degrowth.info/en/blog/let-s-move-on-from-erik-olin-wright-s-modes-of-transformation.

False Commodities: Karl Polanyi in the 21st Century – Michigan Journal of Economics. January 17, 2024. https://sites.lsa.umich.edu/mje/2024/01/17/false-commodities-karl-polanyi-in-the-21st-century/.

“Planetary Boundaries.” Text. September 19, 2012. https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/planetary-boundaries.html.

Samerski, Silja. “Tools for Degrowth? Ivan Illich’s Critique of Technology Revisited.” Journal of Cleaner Production 197 (October 2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.039.

Samuel Pierre. Écologie: détente ou cycle infernal. 10-18. Union générale d’éditions, 1973.

By Nil Topcular 

Maria Corina Machado is the laureate of the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize, awarded to her for her fight for democracy in her native Venezuela. The ceremony will take place on Dec. 10 in Oslo, but Machado is currently in hiding and has only made two public appearances since July 2024, making it uncertain whether she will be able to receive her prize in person.

Machado is the leader of the Unitary Platform, an alliance formed by multiple Venezuelan political parties that oppose the rule of Venezuela’s current president Nicolas Maduro. She has been living in hiding due to the threats that she has received by the government. The threats started after her accusation that the 2024 presidential elections were fraudulent. Following this election, the government-controlled National Electoral Council declared Maduro’s third term, despite evidence provided by national and international organizations that the elections were undemocratic.

According to an ELLE article, Machado was exposed to the socioeconomic inequalities during her studies at Andrés Bello Catholic University. when she also volunteered in the low income neighbourhood of La Paredas, in Venezuela’s capital Caracas. She decided to pursue politics after college, seeing her country becoming unstable under the previous president Hugo Chavez’s rule. She ran for congress in 2010, and became one of the 65 opposition members in the National Assembly. 

Machado won the Peace Prize for her work promoting democracy in Venezuela. Following her win, she dedicated her award to the U.S. President Donald Trump, a figure who for many represents discrimination and repression. Trump has made many racist and misogynist remarks, has multiple sexual assault allegations, and his term is currently marked by strict anti-immigration policies. In an interview with Bloomberg, she voiced support for U.S. military intervention in Venezuela, and has expressed that it is necessary for a democratic transition in Venezuela. As the committee’s announcement salutes her fight for a peaceful transition to democracy, Machado has called upon military intervention. Here lies another contradiction: She fights against the oppressive regime in her country, but calls for the help of another regime which for many is oppressive. 

Machado has expressed her support for Israel in the ongoing conflict. She called Netanyahu to congratulate “the decisions he took during the war”. More than 67 000 Palestinians were killed in Gaza by Israeli forces.  “Today, all of the U.S. who defend Western values ​​stand with the State of Israel, a genuine ally of freedom,” as she tweeted in 2021. 

Machado is not the only controversial Peace Prize awardee. Previous laureates of the prize have also been criticised for their actions that are not always reflective of the award’s’ values. Barack Obama, for example, was heavily criticized because of his involvement in the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.S. was at war throughout all eight years of Obama’s presidency. Machado’s win, like Obama’s, led to individuals and the media questioning the legitimacy and the meaning of such a “peace prize” – if working for, or even supporting peace is not a prerequisite, what does the prize mean?

Despite her controversies, Machado’s win was not entirely contested – many also celebrated her compensation. Particularly, as a recognition of women in the political sphere, and of opposition to authoritarianism. As of 2025, only 6% of current Nobel holders are women. Machado’s win was therefore congratulated by many women’s organizations, and media outlets targeted towards women. Machado is also the sixth Latin American and the first Venezuelan to be awarded the peace prize.

Furthermore, Machado has support in Venezuela. The New York Times conducted three polls that showed she is the most popular politician in the country, with more people accepting her leadership than not. According to Amnesty International, Venezuela has been in a deep political crisis for 10 years. Opposition is repressed, as seen in Machado’s case. There are also 853 political prisoners in Venezuela as of July 2025. Human Rights Watch states that there are arbitrary arrests, torture and even murder of political dissidents. In such a political climate, she is the main figure of resistance.

Nevertheless, her being awarded the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize has led to a debate: Should Machado be compensated for her efforts, even though she voices views that are contradictory to the name of the prize itself? She is a figure of resistance and freedom in her country, but supports regimes that are similarly oppressive to the one she is against. 

In the art world, there is also a long-standing debate about separating the art from the artist. Can we appreciate the work of an artist, even if we do not agree with their views or acts? Similarly, the question surrounding Machado comes down to whether we can separate her stance in Venezuela from her international views.

Bibliography

CNN. (2025, October 15). Venezuela: Machado, Trump, Maduro. CNN International. https://edition.cnn.com/2025/10/15/americas/venezuela-machado-trump-maduro-latam-intl

MR Mondialisation. (n.d.). Maria Machado : Prix Nobel de la Paix = Honte ? MR Mondialisation. https://mrmondialisation.org/maria-machado-prix-nobel-paix-honte/

Elle. (n.d.). Entretien : María Corina Machado — “…” ELLE. https://www.elle.com/culture/career-politics/a66047848/maria-corina-machado-venezuela-opposition-democracy-interview-2025/

BBC Afrique. (n.d.). 3 événements marquants qui définissent la carrière de María Corina Machado, la « dame de fer » de l’opposition vénézuélienne et prix Nobel de la paix. BBC Afrique. https://www.bbc.com/afrique/articles/czdj9md6150o

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). (2025, October). UN experts condemn coercive intervention in Venezuela — United States. United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/10/un-experts-condemn-coercive-intervention-venezuela-united-states

Amnesty International France. (n.d.). Comprendre ce qu’il se passe au Venezuela. Amnesty International France. https://www.amnesty.fr/liberte-d-expression/actualites/comprendre-ce-qu-il-se-passe-au-venezuela

ABC News. (n.d.). Nobel Peace Prize awarded to María Corina Machado. ABC News. https://abcnews.go.com/International/nobel-peace-prize-awarded-maria-corina-machado/story?id=126355178

Deccan Herald. (n.d.). Nobel Peace Prize winner María Corina Machado facing criticism as pro-Israel posts on X resurface. Deccan Herald. https://www.deccanherald.com/world/nobel-peace-prize-winner-maria-corina-machado-facing-criticism-as-pro-israel-posts-on-x-resurface-3761643

Sociedad Periodística El Ciudadano Ltda. (2025, October 30). Venezuelan human rights activist critiques Nobel Peace Prize award to Machado for advocating military intervention. El Ciudadano. https://www.elciudadano.com/en/venezuelan-human-rights-activist-critiques-nobel-peace-prize-award-to-machado-for-advocating-military-intervention/10/30/

Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada. (2025, 6 mars). Venezuela: The Democratic Unitary Platform (Plataforma Unitaria Democrática, PUD) [Unitary Platform (Plataforma Unitaria, PU)] political alliance, including the parties making up the alliance, its political agenda, structure, and leadership; whether documents are issued to its members; treatment of its members by authorities . ecoi.net. https://www.ecoi.net/en/document/2124530.html

European Parliament. (7 February 2024). Joint motion for a resolution on further repression against the democratic forces in Venezuela: attacks on presidential candidate María Corina Machado (RC-B9-0097/2024). Retrieved from https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/RC-9-2024-0097_EN.html

The Carter Center. (2024, 30 juillet). Carter Center Statement on Venezuela Election. The Carter Center. https://www.cartercenter.org/news/pr/2024/venezuela-073024.html