Surely, people the world over are aware of the current emergency situation in Japan. The tsunami and subsequent earthquakes were devastating and awesome, in the true meaning of the word. No doubt, the situation is deserving of attention. The problem though with disasters such as these is the sensationalism of the event, and the ability of natural disasters to overtake all forms of media, resources, and attention. Human lives are human lives, and are intrinsically equally valuable and deserving of the compassion and help of other humans. However, we must consider that for each natural disaster that kills hundreds, or regretably, even thousands of people, there is ongoing war, poverty, disease, and strife, killing hundreds of thousands of people daily.
This is a grim realization. If there is anything that can make someone feel more helpless, insignificant, and irrelevant, it's thinking that for every aid dollar we give, someone else is in need of it. For every doctor or nurse or engineer we send abroad, another community somewhere else (perhaps even closer to home) is equally deserving. The point is not to be full of despair or hopelessness. The point is to be cognizant of what we are spending our efforts on. For instance, the earthquake in Japan is currently getting an enormous amount of media airtime and government international aid. While Canada so far hasn't promised any funds, they are ready to deploy military aid as well as technical and logistical assistance. Other countries have responded in similar manners, with the US making promises of grandiose proportions.
However, if we look back to the earthquake in Haiti, January 12, 2010, we saw an earthquake equally devastating, taking enormous numbers of lives and wreaking havoc upon an already destitute, struggling country. But one year later, despite the aid efforts at the time, the country is not even close to recovering. For instance, there are estimates that up to 800,000 people may be infected with cholera. But before the earthquake, the incidence of cholera in Haiti was close to zero. Indeed, the earthquake in Haiti pushed one of poorest countries in the world into a disaster situation that one speculates could never resolve itself. Not only is cholera spiralling out of control, Haiti's already morbid HIV/AIDS prevalence is increasing, as is the number of orphans, the amount of violent crime and rioting, and economic instability.
Natural disasters are devastating, and they exact remarkable human, enivronmental, and economic costs. But what about those disasters that are induced by humans, onto other humans or the environment. There are hundreds of oil spills we could talk about, and the human and environmental impacts they've had. But even aside from the oil spills, the nuclear disasters, or the overharvesting of fish, forests, or water, there is ongoing strife that humans inflict upon other humans. Why then, are these not responded to in the same manner as earthquakes or tsunamis? The conflict in Darfur has not ebbed, but it seemingly has lost any impact on the wider global community. Over 300,000 people have died in the conflict, and 2.7 million people have been forced out of their homes by the violence.
Of course, U2 and Rihanna have feverishly been working on songs to feature on an aid album for Japan efforts. And this is why Japan will recover: natural disasters are sexy and sensational, and the political and economic relationship of Japan with the west is a very deferent and friendly one. It's easy to wrap up a natural disaster in a fashionable way, to sell it and package it. Wars, genocide, famine, poverty, and diseases on the other hand, are reminders of our human capacity for evil, and we don't like to be reminded of that. We do not like the fact that manmade disasters such as these are preventable - and if not preventable, at least remediable - yet we haven't fixed any of the problems.
While my heart and sympathies and compassion goes to the people of Japan, and all those helping with aid efforts, my attention to Japan's crisis does not come at the expense of holding in my heart and mind the plight of the people of Haiti, Darfur, Libya, Congo, the people living in the slums of Kibera and the pavelas of Rio. I think that every new natural disaster that occurs, we need to respond in a timely and compassionate manner, but we need to ask ourselves what we do every day to help those who live in constant crisis and unending endangerment.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Tuesday, March 08, 2011
100th International Women's Day
March 8, 2011 marks the centenary of International Women's Day. All over the world, women and men are celebrating the achievements and progress women have made in social, political, and economic spheres in the past century. Additionally, people are calling for attention to be paid to the areas in which gender equality is still lacking, has stagnated, or has been outright ignored. The concept of International Women's Day however, is NOT based out of feminism, and it's important to keep this in mind. In fact, maybe capital-F Feminism is what's holding women back.
The idea of IWD was based out of a Socialist political demonstration, beginning in Germany. In 1911, Austria, Denmark, Germany, and Switzerland were the first countries to commemorate the day, which at the time was meant to draw attention to the sad state of labour and working conditions in increasingly industrialized societies, still undergoing the growing pains as seen with any societal advancement. In Russia circa 1917, protests by women demanding bread and peace sparked the October Revolution. Even up to 100 years ago, women have been standing up, making their demands heard, and affecting change when faced with a seemingly unresponsive, apathetic political and social hegemony.
Through the years since, we've seen first, second, and third wave feminism. Feminism as a concept is nebulous and vague at best, with some deriding it, some subscribing to it, and some doing everything short of tattooing the word on their forehead in the name of the ideology. However, we've reached a juncture in time that maybe it's time to throw out ideology, rhetoric, and the lofty and often exclusivist tenets of Feminism.
Often when the word is heard, it's met with groans, smirks, the rolling of eyes, or on the other hand, a self-righteous smirk akin to football players slapping each other's buttocks after a great play. The ideas that feminism is supposed to represent - equality, choice, and freedom - have become distorted into a sort of 'us and them' battle. I know from personal experience the feeling of being 'written off' after self-identifying as a Feminist.
I think for the sake of achieving goals that are ever more pressing in the world at present, we need to critically examine the state of our society, and our global village as a whole. The problems lay not in the oppression of women by men. Rather, the problems lie in social and political structures that allow both men and women to keep the have-nots of our society from accessing their own liberation. It is these structures that we need to audaciously and actively address. Let's put aside the never-ending debates about femininity and masculinity for a moment. We've reached a point where we need to very jubilantly and proudly celebrate the achievements of women thus far. Using these achievements as our ammunition, we need to consider and pursue what worked well. Generally, the greatest gains were spearheaded by women, but women eagerly sought the support of like-minded, progressive men. And children. It seems that many a Feminist today sees Feminism itself as a sort of sacrosanct, clandestine society of women. An example of this is Edmonton's own Take Back the Night march, which disallowed men from participating in the actual march portion of the event. These exclusionary tendencies are not doing women any favours. While it's important for women to have a safe space, we need to acknowledge that it's both men AND women who make the world safe (or unsafe) in the first place.
Our first question with the dawn of feminism was 'how can you exclude an entire gender - half the population of the world - and expect progress, stability, and sustainability?' Now, we have to ask that question again. We cannot make gains by ostracizing men, or by painting all women with the same brush. We can't ignore the women in positions of power who do nothing for women's rights and who do not support women's causes. Just because a human being happens to be born a female, this does not indefinitely predetermine her to be the same as every other female counterpart, with the same goals, ambitions, and motivations. This is brutally apparent when we look at debates surrounding abortion, birth control, and sexuality in general.
Further, we can't ignore the plights of impoverished and vulnerable men and boys all over the world. When thinking about International Women's Day, it would serve us well to think also of the gay rights movement, and the struggle that millions of gay men and women fight daily. We need to remember that regardless of gender, 1.4 billion people live below $1.25 USD a day (a conservative estimate surely, coming from the World Bank). This degree of extreme poverty is abhorrent regardless of gender. Of course, we need to identify the social determinants, such as gender, that prevent upward mobility, but at the same time, we need to address the problems affecting humanity at a human rights level - not a gender rights level.
Perhaps it's time to throw away capital-F Feminism and instead focus more on a return to idealism and bright-eyed optimism. We need to address the issues of our modern world with a compassionate heart that works to promote equality and justice, for everyone. Surely our discourse will be nuanced by gender, but it should be no more or less nuanced by gender than it should by race, religion, culture, or sexual orientation. And by no means should our discourse exclude anyone based on the arrangement of a couple lousy chromosomes.
The idea of IWD was based out of a Socialist political demonstration, beginning in Germany. In 1911, Austria, Denmark, Germany, and Switzerland were the first countries to commemorate the day, which at the time was meant to draw attention to the sad state of labour and working conditions in increasingly industrialized societies, still undergoing the growing pains as seen with any societal advancement. In Russia circa 1917, protests by women demanding bread and peace sparked the October Revolution. Even up to 100 years ago, women have been standing up, making their demands heard, and affecting change when faced with a seemingly unresponsive, apathetic political and social hegemony.
Through the years since, we've seen first, second, and third wave feminism. Feminism as a concept is nebulous and vague at best, with some deriding it, some subscribing to it, and some doing everything short of tattooing the word on their forehead in the name of the ideology. However, we've reached a juncture in time that maybe it's time to throw out ideology, rhetoric, and the lofty and often exclusivist tenets of Feminism.
Often when the word is heard, it's met with groans, smirks, the rolling of eyes, or on the other hand, a self-righteous smirk akin to football players slapping each other's buttocks after a great play. The ideas that feminism is supposed to represent - equality, choice, and freedom - have become distorted into a sort of 'us and them' battle. I know from personal experience the feeling of being 'written off' after self-identifying as a Feminist.
I think for the sake of achieving goals that are ever more pressing in the world at present, we need to critically examine the state of our society, and our global village as a whole. The problems lay not in the oppression of women by men. Rather, the problems lie in social and political structures that allow both men and women to keep the have-nots of our society from accessing their own liberation. It is these structures that we need to audaciously and actively address. Let's put aside the never-ending debates about femininity and masculinity for a moment. We've reached a point where we need to very jubilantly and proudly celebrate the achievements of women thus far. Using these achievements as our ammunition, we need to consider and pursue what worked well. Generally, the greatest gains were spearheaded by women, but women eagerly sought the support of like-minded, progressive men. And children. It seems that many a Feminist today sees Feminism itself as a sort of sacrosanct, clandestine society of women. An example of this is Edmonton's own Take Back the Night march, which disallowed men from participating in the actual march portion of the event. These exclusionary tendencies are not doing women any favours. While it's important for women to have a safe space, we need to acknowledge that it's both men AND women who make the world safe (or unsafe) in the first place.
Our first question with the dawn of feminism was 'how can you exclude an entire gender - half the population of the world - and expect progress, stability, and sustainability?' Now, we have to ask that question again. We cannot make gains by ostracizing men, or by painting all women with the same brush. We can't ignore the women in positions of power who do nothing for women's rights and who do not support women's causes. Just because a human being happens to be born a female, this does not indefinitely predetermine her to be the same as every other female counterpart, with the same goals, ambitions, and motivations. This is brutally apparent when we look at debates surrounding abortion, birth control, and sexuality in general.
Further, we can't ignore the plights of impoverished and vulnerable men and boys all over the world. When thinking about International Women's Day, it would serve us well to think also of the gay rights movement, and the struggle that millions of gay men and women fight daily. We need to remember that regardless of gender, 1.4 billion people live below $1.25 USD a day (a conservative estimate surely, coming from the World Bank). This degree of extreme poverty is abhorrent regardless of gender. Of course, we need to identify the social determinants, such as gender, that prevent upward mobility, but at the same time, we need to address the problems affecting humanity at a human rights level - not a gender rights level.
Perhaps it's time to throw away capital-F Feminism and instead focus more on a return to idealism and bright-eyed optimism. We need to address the issues of our modern world with a compassionate heart that works to promote equality and justice, for everyone. Surely our discourse will be nuanced by gender, but it should be no more or less nuanced by gender than it should by race, religion, culture, or sexual orientation. And by no means should our discourse exclude anyone based on the arrangement of a couple lousy chromosomes.
Saturday, December 25, 2010
Tips for A Socially and Environmentally Sound Holiday Season
Christmas is upon us yet again. The time of year where people feel called to share the Christmas spirit, of peace, hope and forgiveness. Unfortunately, the holiday season also signals the time of the year that we are at our most depravedly consumeristic and environmentally ignorant. We tend to give in to the craze of senseless buying, indulging in everything we don't need, and often, don't even want. Christmas symbolizes quite nicely the throw-away culture we live in.
Of course, there are ways around this. With a little creativity, there are always smarter, more socially and environmentally conscious alternatives to those little kitschy soaps and candles, the nth pair of black socks, or the DVD that you've already downloaded off Pirate Bay.
First, as an alternative to Christmas gifts, especially for those people who you don't know what to get, consider doing something charitable. I am not advocating giving money to just any organization in someone's honour though. A much more sustainable and direct method is to donate to an organization such as Kiva (www.kiva.org) or Grameen Foundation (grameenfoundation.org), which issues microloans all over the world. Basically, a donation of $25 or more will go to the organization, who will then use it, along with other loans, to provide economic opportunities to poor people around the world. The recipients of the loan are people who already have small businesses, or who have worthwhile and plausible business plans, without start up capital. Since they're loans, you can choose to receive the money back, or you can choose to redistribute it to the organization. And to think, you probably didn't even miss that $25, and now Pedro has grown ten times as much coffee as he had this time last year!
Another great gift idea is going vintage. There are a lot of amazing finds at antique markets and flea markets, and as the old adage goes, one person's garbage is another person's treasure. Used book stores often have an endless supply of great gift items, ranging from novels to cookbooks to sheet music and CDs. If you need something unique or quirky, you might be well positioned to find it at an auction, antique market, or thrift store. Just keep away from the ones with armpit stains or other nameless imperfections that may be awkward to explain to someone.
Making your own gifts is the best Christmas present. They're often extremely thoughtful, and they show the time and energy that you have put into the gifts you're giving. You can make things as simple as handmade cards and pastries, to scarves, clothing, paintings, or home furnishings. Check out www.instructables.com for some great step-by-step how-to guides.
Give the gift of learning. Enrol in a class with a loved one as a Christmas present, or if you have a special skill or talent, invite your friends to a workshop, put on by you. You can provide the supplies needed, and it's a fun and thoughtful way to spend a day after Christmas. You could also cook an extra special meal, and have your guests come watch, or cook along with you.
As for doing your part for the environment, try to limit your transportation by carpooling to your out-of-town destination, or take the bus instead of driving on your own. I think Christmas is the one time of year that it's almost completely necessary to use a vehicle, but if you're feeling really brave, I guess you could hook a wagon up to your bike, or a sled to your waist if you're snowshoeing to Christmas dinner.
As for Christmas trees, real trees are the way to go. Real Christmas trees are planted, grown, and harvested for this exact purpose, and trees are a renewable resource. After Christmas of course, they are biodegradable and generally free of harmful chemicals that could leach into the ground. Often, trees don't go to landfills, but are used for landscaping or processed for use in industry. Tree farms protect soil from degradation and offer a habitat to wildlife. On the downside, once harvested, the wildlife no longer have this ecosystem in place, and the soil may have to recover from the uprooting. It is claimed that for every tree that is harvested, 2-3 seedlings are replanted. And let's face it, the more trees in the world, despite how long they are left growing for, are a positive and effective tool for removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.
For your wrapping needs, buy paper that is recycled and recyclable. Or better yet, use all those completely useless junk mail Christmas flyers in your mailbox to wrap gifts. Another alternative is to buy or sew your own cloth bags. Then your loved ones can reuse them throughout the coming year for their groceries. Reusable Christmas gift bags are a good alternative as well. Save them for next Christmas - it's okay to regift if it's for a good cause! You can also reuse things like cereal boxes, tissue boxes, or boxes from other purchases. Just decorate it with some paint or markers, and it'll be a special unique touch.
Green, or Eco stores, are popping up everywhere, offering almost any item under the sun, made in an environmentally low-impact way. Consider buying organic cotton or bamboo clothing, or purchasing organic body washes and lotions for friends. You can even buy ecologically friendly technology, such as eco cell phone chargers, reusable batteries. goodcleantech.com has great ideas for solar-powered and eco-friendly technology.
The energy used in lighting all those Christmas lights can get extreme. If you need to put up Christmas lights, use a timer so you can control how long they stay on. Otherwise, using beeswax candles can create a very authentic and nostalgic ambience for your Christmas celebrations. Use LED lights for decorating the tree, and again, using real trees for wreaths and garland is a better alternative than synthetics.
And, of course, it's inevitable that we'll receive a gift we may be less then thrilled about. Try and keep your receipts so your loved one can return or exchange it, rather than hang on to something useless. If that's impossible, donate it to a shelter or non-profit clothing store in the area.
Of course, there are ways around this. With a little creativity, there are always smarter, more socially and environmentally conscious alternatives to those little kitschy soaps and candles, the nth pair of black socks, or the DVD that you've already downloaded off Pirate Bay.First, as an alternative to Christmas gifts, especially for those people who you don't know what to get, consider doing something charitable. I am not advocating giving money to just any organization in someone's honour though. A much more sustainable and direct method is to donate to an organization such as Kiva (www.kiva.org) or Grameen Foundation (grameenfoundation.org), which issues microloans all over the world. Basically, a donation of $25 or more will go to the organization, who will then use it, along with other loans, to provide economic opportunities to poor people around the world. The recipients of the loan are people who already have small businesses, or who have worthwhile and plausible business plans, without start up capital. Since they're loans, you can choose to receive the money back, or you can choose to redistribute it to the organization. And to think, you probably didn't even miss that $25, and now Pedro has grown ten times as much coffee as he had this time last year!
Another great gift idea is going vintage. There are a lot of amazing finds at antique markets and flea markets, and as the old adage goes, one person's garbage is another person's treasure. Used book stores often have an endless supply of great gift items, ranging from novels to cookbooks to sheet music and CDs. If you need something unique or quirky, you might be well positioned to find it at an auction, antique market, or thrift store. Just keep away from the ones with armpit stains or other nameless imperfections that may be awkward to explain to someone.
Making your own gifts is the best Christmas present. They're often extremely thoughtful, and they show the time and energy that you have put into the gifts you're giving. You can make things as simple as handmade cards and pastries, to scarves, clothing, paintings, or home furnishings. Check out www.instructables.com for some great step-by-step how-to guides.
Give the gift of learning. Enrol in a class with a loved one as a Christmas present, or if you have a special skill or talent, invite your friends to a workshop, put on by you. You can provide the supplies needed, and it's a fun and thoughtful way to spend a day after Christmas. You could also cook an extra special meal, and have your guests come watch, or cook along with you.
As for doing your part for the environment, try to limit your transportation by carpooling to your out-of-town destination, or take the bus instead of driving on your own. I think Christmas is the one time of year that it's almost completely necessary to use a vehicle, but if you're feeling really brave, I guess you could hook a wagon up to your bike, or a sled to your waist if you're snowshoeing to Christmas dinner.
As for Christmas trees, real trees are the way to go. Real Christmas trees are planted, grown, and harvested for this exact purpose, and trees are a renewable resource. After Christmas of course, they are biodegradable and generally free of harmful chemicals that could leach into the ground. Often, trees don't go to landfills, but are used for landscaping or processed for use in industry. Tree farms protect soil from degradation and offer a habitat to wildlife. On the downside, once harvested, the wildlife no longer have this ecosystem in place, and the soil may have to recover from the uprooting. It is claimed that for every tree that is harvested, 2-3 seedlings are replanted. And let's face it, the more trees in the world, despite how long they are left growing for, are a positive and effective tool for removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere.
For your wrapping needs, buy paper that is recycled and recyclable. Or better yet, use all those completely useless junk mail Christmas flyers in your mailbox to wrap gifts. Another alternative is to buy or sew your own cloth bags. Then your loved ones can reuse them throughout the coming year for their groceries. Reusable Christmas gift bags are a good alternative as well. Save them for next Christmas - it's okay to regift if it's for a good cause! You can also reuse things like cereal boxes, tissue boxes, or boxes from other purchases. Just decorate it with some paint or markers, and it'll be a special unique touch.
Green, or Eco stores, are popping up everywhere, offering almost any item under the sun, made in an environmentally low-impact way. Consider buying organic cotton or bamboo clothing, or purchasing organic body washes and lotions for friends. You can even buy ecologically friendly technology, such as eco cell phone chargers, reusable batteries. goodcleantech.com has great ideas for solar-powered and eco-friendly technology.
The energy used in lighting all those Christmas lights can get extreme. If you need to put up Christmas lights, use a timer so you can control how long they stay on. Otherwise, using beeswax candles can create a very authentic and nostalgic ambience for your Christmas celebrations. Use LED lights for decorating the tree, and again, using real trees for wreaths and garland is a better alternative than synthetics.
And, of course, it's inevitable that we'll receive a gift we may be less then thrilled about. Try and keep your receipts so your loved one can return or exchange it, rather than hang on to something useless. If that's impossible, donate it to a shelter or non-profit clothing store in the area.
Wednesday, December 01, 2010
Happy World AIDS Day!
December 1st is International World AIDS Day. Being in Melbourne right now, I hitched a train downtown to see if any events were happening in honour of the occasion. Unfortunately, nothing was happening, but I did manage to get a red ribbon to pin to my dress.
HIV/AIDS, according to the World Health Organization, infects approximately 33.5 million people worldwide. 2 million people die from HIV/AIDS a year. Though the number of new infections has decreased since 1990, the total number of infections worldwide is climbing, despite international efforts to slow and eventually stop the spread of HIV/AIDS.
Antiretroviral therapy (ART) has been a beacon of hope, however, it is an extremely costly drug regime. And since the highest number of infections tend to be in the lowest income countries, ART is often nothing more than a pipe dream and a pharmaceutical's monopoly dream come true. The current best solution to solving the AIDS crisis lies not in treatment, but prevention. The only problem is that, despite HIV/AIDS being the leading infectious killer, it is still the most stigmatized major health issue in the world.
If we look at Africa specifically, HIV prevalance varies across the continent. However, in some places, the prevalence rates are something out of an apocalyptic horror movie. In Swaziland, 25% of adults are living with HIV/AIDS. Given the relatively small population of the country, it is not inconceivable that an entire country could potentially be wiped out by a single disease. Apart from HIV/AIDS being a physical killer, it is crucial to think of the cost to society to have so many adults living with the disease. An entire generation of young Africans are no longer able to work, to provide for their family, or to raise their children. In turn, this results in the children, especially the girls, having to quit school to tend to the family needs. This could include being hired maids, working the land, or in the most horrific of cases, working the streets.
Once a parent has died from AIDS, chances are the other parent is infected as well, and will also die. This creates the phenomenon of child-headed households, wherein children become parents and guardians to their even younger siblings. Again, this results in a dreary forecast for society. Not only are these children not in school, they are not given the proper nurturing and life skills needed to successfully function in society. This is a broad generalization, and surely, some orphans are able to eventually go to school and live 'normal' lives. But the truth remains that AIDS orphans often end up on the streets, urban peasants and beggars, or coping with an HIV infection as their parents' only legacy to them.
Morbid as all this may be, there is still hope. Many tribes across Africa who used to refuse condoms are now aware of the reality and devastating risks of HIV/AIDS. In a Maasai village I visited in 2008, the community was quite vocal about their need for condoms, whereas a year prior, they denied the existence of HIV/AIDS in their village. Another positive change has been the empowering of women all over the world, and specifically in Africa. Women are becoming more able to say 'no' to a partner if he isn't practising safe sex. While there is still so much rape, sexual abuse, and domineering rampant around the world, it is a slow progression, but it is nonetheless apparent.
We have much work to do in the area of HIV/AIDS prevention, and the battle is a very long and arduous one. But the key is awareness and the mainstreaming of HIV/AIDS dialogue. If we can normalize the discussion of the disease in everyday life, we can eliminate the stigma surrounding it. If we can encourage people to talk about it, we can relay the sobering facts of the disease. It's up to every one of us to be an activist, to use our voices and our privilege to create awareness, to bring the discussion to the dinnertable, and to create lasting impact and positive change.
HIV/AIDS, according to the World Health Organization, infects approximately 33.5 million people worldwide. 2 million people die from HIV/AIDS a year. Though the number of new infections has decreased since 1990, the total number of infections worldwide is climbing, despite international efforts to slow and eventually stop the spread of HIV/AIDS.
Antiretroviral therapy (ART) has been a beacon of hope, however, it is an extremely costly drug regime. And since the highest number of infections tend to be in the lowest income countries, ART is often nothing more than a pipe dream and a pharmaceutical's monopoly dream come true. The current best solution to solving the AIDS crisis lies not in treatment, but prevention. The only problem is that, despite HIV/AIDS being the leading infectious killer, it is still the most stigmatized major health issue in the world.
If we look at Africa specifically, HIV prevalance varies across the continent. However, in some places, the prevalence rates are something out of an apocalyptic horror movie. In Swaziland, 25% of adults are living with HIV/AIDS. Given the relatively small population of the country, it is not inconceivable that an entire country could potentially be wiped out by a single disease. Apart from HIV/AIDS being a physical killer, it is crucial to think of the cost to society to have so many adults living with the disease. An entire generation of young Africans are no longer able to work, to provide for their family, or to raise their children. In turn, this results in the children, especially the girls, having to quit school to tend to the family needs. This could include being hired maids, working the land, or in the most horrific of cases, working the streets.
Once a parent has died from AIDS, chances are the other parent is infected as well, and will also die. This creates the phenomenon of child-headed households, wherein children become parents and guardians to their even younger siblings. Again, this results in a dreary forecast for society. Not only are these children not in school, they are not given the proper nurturing and life skills needed to successfully function in society. This is a broad generalization, and surely, some orphans are able to eventually go to school and live 'normal' lives. But the truth remains that AIDS orphans often end up on the streets, urban peasants and beggars, or coping with an HIV infection as their parents' only legacy to them.
Morbid as all this may be, there is still hope. Many tribes across Africa who used to refuse condoms are now aware of the reality and devastating risks of HIV/AIDS. In a Maasai village I visited in 2008, the community was quite vocal about their need for condoms, whereas a year prior, they denied the existence of HIV/AIDS in their village. Another positive change has been the empowering of women all over the world, and specifically in Africa. Women are becoming more able to say 'no' to a partner if he isn't practising safe sex. While there is still so much rape, sexual abuse, and domineering rampant around the world, it is a slow progression, but it is nonetheless apparent.We have much work to do in the area of HIV/AIDS prevention, and the battle is a very long and arduous one. But the key is awareness and the mainstreaming of HIV/AIDS dialogue. If we can normalize the discussion of the disease in everyday life, we can eliminate the stigma surrounding it. If we can encourage people to talk about it, we can relay the sobering facts of the disease. It's up to every one of us to be an activist, to use our voices and our privilege to create awareness, to bring the discussion to the dinnertable, and to create lasting impact and positive change.
Thursday, November 25, 2010
The Price of Personal Consumer Leadership
Last week I had the pleasure of attending a lecture given by Jared Diamond, Pulitzer Prize-winning author of Guns, Germs and Steel and Collapse: Why Societies Fail. Professor Diamond discussed the role of big businesses in environmental conservation and ethics. He posited a set of four factors affecting a business’s decision to choose and implement environmentally sound practices: economic considerations, attitude of corporate culture, public expectations, and personal leadership.
Professor Diamond pursued the idea that as consumers, we as individuals have the power to affect corporate actions and influence reactions. The pressure that consumers place on businesses to engage in environmentally and socially sustainable practices can have an insurmountable effect on the day-to-day operation of a business. Through actions spanning the spectrum of activism such as boycotting, lobbying, letter-writing, and word of mouth, Professor Diamond painted a wonderfully idyllic world of accountable corporations.
I am left questioning the efficacy and even legitimacy of this optimistic view of a global consumerist communion. I agree that with enough pressure, businesses will cave to popular demand in order to avoid a besmirched name and a sagging profit line. But the problem with consumption activism is that it is far too often an inaccessible ideology for many people. Selective purchasing is a luxury reserved for those who can simply put, afford it. If we look at the demographics of who low-cost big businesses serve, we see that they are mainly lower-income, working class or working poor families. Stripping down even further, many of these consumers genuinely do not even have an alternative shopping solution. The big businesses that are able to sell items at such low cost are the only option for those who are struggling to merely be meeting basic needs for themselves and their families.
It’s clear that usually the lowered cost of items at stores like Wal-Mart comes at the expense of social and environmental responsibility. By taking short cuts in labour rights or environmentally sound practices, usually companies are able to increase profit margins. Is there an option then, a compromise of a responsible corporation who also uses cost-effective solutions to the problem of environmental degradation and socially just working conditions?
Businesses that are applauded for their altruistic, or at least, morally neutral practices are generally also known for their increased cost of goods, as well as catering to the ‘yuppy’ demographic of young working professionals. Lululemon, Mountain Equipment Co-op, Planet Organic, and smaller independent or local boutiques are innovators in ethical business modelling, but the accessibility of their products must be questioned. Is activism actually an elitist activity that can only be engaged in if you are able to afford it? If you are making minimum wage, all the while trying to put yourself, or your children or family through school, it is hard to find the capacity to consistently boycott those stores that while reprehensible, are the only ones at which you can afford to buy your daily bread.
In addition to the increasing cost of activism, there is the cost of time. Again, looking at the demographic of the working poor, there is often a lack of disposable income as well as disposable free time. For the single mother of three working two jobs, the ability to search out facts on company policies regarding labour or the environment is hindered. The question now isn’t whether or not we should hold accountable these companies for their indiscretions. It is clear that those of us who are able to make socially sound purchasing decisions should, but the question becomes, how can we make the act of “smart consumption” accessible to more than a bourgeois minority? There is a distinct amount of solidarity that is needed to make a true global shift to a more socially responsible corporate playing field. The language of corporate responsibility needs to become a common one, that is understandable and entrenched in the mind of the average consumer. “Smart consumption” shouldn't be accessible for just one income bracket.
Monday, November 15, 2010
"Voluntourism" and the Consumer Activist
An interesting expository article came across my path discussing very bluntly and concisely the damaging effects of 'voluntourism'. In the article from the UK's Guardian, it refers to this relatively new phenomenon as well-intentioned yet misguided citizens of the 'first-world' attempt to make a difference via hands-on involvement in the social affairs of underdeveloped nations.
While voluntourism definitely warrants its own discussion and discourse, I instead want to address a related phenomenon: the consumer activist. This is very nicely illustrated in the phenomenon of Product(RED). Brainchild of Bono, Product(RED)'s main mandate is to provide people with Africa with increased opportunities, as well as to help eliminate HIV/AIDS across the dark continent.
Product(RED) has capitalized on consumer activism, with marketing products that include Starbucks lattes, Hallmark greeting cards, and Gap t-shirts. It is speculated that almost $100 million was spent on the launching and promotion of (RED) with meagre returns. Though admirable, it raises alarm bells to think that the average consumer is being tricked into thinking there is a correlation between consumption and the eradication of the world's fastest spreading non-curable disease.
With the human rights activist now becoming a devout consumerist, the fight for social justice has moved from the periphery into the center of government and corporate activity. Instead of the activist putting pressure on the government from the outside to respond to demands, to remain accountable, and to work for the people, the activist has become employed by government or business interests. This means that the pressure from the 'activist' community is muted, as businesses are now focused on catering to the socially-savvy consumer rather than the victim of human rights abuses.
With the human rights activist now becoming a devout consumerist, the fight for social justice has moved from the periphery into the center of government and corporate activity. Instead of the activist putting pressure on the government from the outside to respond to demands, to remain accountable, and to work for the people, the activist has become employed by government or business interests. This means that the pressure from the 'activist' community is muted, as businesses are now focused on catering to the socially-savvy consumer rather than the victim of human rights abuses.
The meaning of activism has shifted. Instead of the focus on the recipient, we are now focused on the donor. This new enterprise of 'Human Rights Inc.' represents the watering down of any political heat or pressure that historically has been the foundation of activism. We are no longer yelling demands; we are using our voice to change our latte order or buy a different shirt.
This brings about an even scarier paradigm shift: the absence of critical thought, investigation, and exposé. As consumers see that, albeit superficially, corporations are at least doing something to be socially responsible, the tendency to look further into the actions of these corporations decreases. We are placated as we jump to the too-convenient conclusion that these corporations are truly do-gooders.
The depoliticization of human rights and activism spells out certain doom for the traditional activist. True, we may have learned our lesson that riots and demonstrations are not the sole way to create change. In some instances, we do have to work within the system to change the system. However, we still need to radicalize politics, we need to, in a word, frighten policy makers into listening to our demands. We need the demonstrations, the rallies, and the pressure in addition to working with powerful government and corporate entities. Complacency is not an option, and consumerism is far from the answer.
The depoliticization of human rights and activism spells out certain doom for the traditional activist. True, we may have learned our lesson that riots and demonstrations are not the sole way to create change. In some instances, we do have to work within the system to change the system. However, we still need to radicalize politics, we need to, in a word, frighten policy makers into listening to our demands. We need the demonstrations, the rallies, and the pressure in addition to working with powerful government and corporate entities. Complacency is not an option, and consumerism is far from the answer.
While it is true that it is better to do something than nothing, we need to seriously and consciously evaluate the effects of our actions. We can no longer throw money at problems and believe that change will occur. We can no longer even believe that the money we throw is even going anywhere. Sustainable solutions must be eagerly sought, and this can only occur with critical thought and the engagement of an activist periphery. We need to get angry, we need to get outraged. We can't do that while holding an iPod and a macchiato.
Monday, November 08, 2010
White Privilege?
Recently, the Edmonton Sun published an article about a campaign in Edmonton that is targeting racism. The campaign, a project of non-profit organization Racism-Free Edmonton, is aimed at getting white people to acknowledge their ‘white privilege’, and how it plays out in social and professional dynamics of power and interaction.
The term they chose surely is a controversial one. Now, it falls upon us to question what the intent of using the term ‘white privilege’ seemed to be for the organization. Perhaps it is an attempt to merely ask Caucasians to acknowledge the fact that white privilege exists. Perhaps it has an even stronger aim, to eliminate the presence of white privilege. However, it must be known that white privilege is something that exists after being manufactured, stolen, remodelled, and engrained through centuries of dirty history.
Despite what the intent of Racism-Free Edmonton was with the campaign, the use of the term ‘white privilege’ was quite a risk on the part of the organization. No matter what your knowledge is of the history of colonialism, imperialism, slavery, or minority rights movements, the term evokes strong links to overt acts of racism. It calls to mind prominent images of Ku Klux Klan, plantation owners beating slaves. In less violent and grotesque impressions, it calls up middle-upper class white suburbia, white tourists naively enclosed in white sand beach resorts being served by quaint and subservient ‘locals’.
The problem is that here, in Edmonton, Alberta, the average citizen does not conjure up those images in his or her head. Instead, it is taken as offensive, as a direct attack on the morality and ethicality of one’s own value system and way of life. Indeed, reading the comments section of the article in the Edmonton Sun it became quite clear that the campaign did not work to instil awareness in the broader population. Rather, the article saw a viewership becoming more and more irate, more offended, and sadly, more racist. It’s the quintessential human defense system, in an environment of attack, our hackles raise and the claws come out. Some of the comments I read evoked personal emotion for me, as a minority female, and I almost felt unsafe.
The majority of the racism that we see today is not the kind of overt racism that we associate with the KKK or slave owners. Rather, it is a very subtle, very nuanced form of racism that manifests itself not only as power dynamics, but as awkward social situations, xenophobia, and wildly misplaced assumptions about identity. As a minority myself, I can count on two fingers the number of times I have been the target of outright racist remarks. However, the number of times I have felt different, ostracized, or disadvantaged because I am not white are innumerable. I am from a middle-upper class family, have a university education, and speak only English. I am by no means ‘underprivileged’. But the point of the campaign by Racism-Free Edmonton is to call on people to recognize just this fact: that racism is inherent in our social structures, simply because there exist colours of skin. Unfortunately, the campaign went about detailing this in the wrong way.
Most people I meet are not racist. They may be uninformed or just unaware. They are not ignorant people. But, they are human. If you call them racists, they will respond. The pointing of fingers is the absolute wrong way to win people over to a cause, to encourage self-reflection, or even to get someone’s attention. Racism-Free Edmonton marred an excellent campaign by playing the blame game, and as a result, it seems as though the counter-response of the population has become one of increased xenophobia and discrimination.
I admire the audacity of the organization to use the term ‘white privilege’. But in our climate, in our political environment here in Edmonton, Alberta, was this the smartest move? We need to tread carefully when we deal with any social justice issue. We have no hope but that of raising awareness. Surely, education is the strongest weapon in our artillery. To put forth a campaign without a solid base of support is suicide. The only people who will subscribe to the idea that white privilege exists are those who probably already know all about race dynamics. The campaign thus far has only served to alienate the broader population, and it is at the expense of minorities. The potential backlash is frightening. The City of Edmonton is aware of this, and has pulled support for the initiative. In the meantime, Racism-Free Edmonton must engage in some serious damage control. How they will do this, I’m not sure. But I hope that their next attempt is one that seeks to be far more inclusive, educational, and enlightening.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)