Who is to blame?

I am a South African guy – I’m not sure if I’ve mentioned that before – but I have not lived there for a while. I’ve been living in a few different countries and I have not only been learning about the world around me, but also a bit more about myself. So, recently I have been watching a few videos on www.youtube.com regarding the state of the nation in South Africa (RSA), where we have been and the progress (or lack thereof) that has been made in recent years.

Saying that these videos have been ‘eye-opening’ would not be the truth because there aren’t any significantly new ideas or opinions coming out of these videos. What I do find interesting is to see this kind of ‘dialogue’ actually taking place in some forum – these issues aren’t regularly discussed in everyday life, although perhaps in some circles such as university classes. Some of the videos I’ve been watching have names such as “South Africa: What about White People” or “South Africa: The Racist Capital of the World”. Quite honestly I’m not sure what to say about any of this at the moment (there’s so much to say that I’m not sure where to start). One thing though is that I see RSA as being a microcosm of the issues at play in the world at large - know what I mean? Anyway, that’s all I’m going to say for now… One thing I do notice is that there is a bit of a blame-game going on here at least from one side of the dialogue…

PS: I’ve included the address of some videos below.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHPKhVmgtJM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GLVdgA1jJU

Kind of ironic... don't you think?

“I am not advocating cutting of relations with Russia… I am advocating for actions that will make it very clear to the Russians that there are long term consequences for violation of the norms of international behaviour” (Jon McCain on the current situation between Russia and Georgia…)

“…bullying and intimidation are not acceptable ways to conduct foreign policy in the 21st century.” (George W Bush commenting on Russia and Georgia…)

Occasionally I watched podcasts from various news agencies around the world in order to stay up to date with things happening in politics and other areas of this global village we call earth. While watching some newscasts recently I heard these words from 2 USA politicians. Considering the state of international relations at the moment, not to mention the various conflicts currently underway, I found these comments deeply ironic. Enough said (for now).

A few more thoughts on Beijing...

Earlier today I was watching the opening ceremony of the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing and quite honestly I had very mixed feelings. Ever since the 1992 Olympics (before that I was too young to be all that interested in the Olympic Games) I have watched the ceremonies, the events, read the stories and shared in the excitement that comes from seeing your nations best on the world stage. As a sportsperson who spent years in training I know the excitement of competition, yet nothing I have experienced can compare to what it must have been like standing in that stadium.

But, as I watched this years opening ceremony I couldn’t help thinking about the recent coverage given to human rights abuses taking please in that part of the world including the ongoing conflict over the status of Tibet. The Olympic movement is at times looked at as a way to bring the world together in sport rather than in conflict, and this in spite of differences. Unfortunately as I watched this year’s opening ceremony I couldn’t help feel as though there is an attempt, at least on the part of some people, to gloss over some things going on in the world today in order to have this festival of sport and global brotherhood (this thought rising to the surface especially when seeing George W Bush in attendance and smiling at the USA’s athletes).

But then again there is quite a bit of money in sport today, more so than at any point before, and that is definitely a motive to gloss over the abuses suffered by a few unknown people in some lesser known part of the world.

Perspectives can divide…

Recently I’ve been thinking about perspectives and the way that while they overlap in some places they can be so incongruent in other areas. A few months ago I was chatting to a friend and something regarding politics came up (after an earlier conversation we decided to avoid politics) and we realised that we had a very different perspective. I mentioned that I admired some aspects of what Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara stood for and fought for. My friend (from the USA) on the other hand was convinced that he had been a terrorist who didn’t care about anyone.

One reason I find this interesting is that many people in the world today Nelson Mandela is revered as a great man, a statesman, an icon. He said that Guevara was "an inspiration for every human being who loves freedom", yet to this day there are those who both revere Mandela and regard Guevara as a terrorist. I guess this supports the often-quotes and occasionally-disputed aphorism that states “one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter”.

Recently I came across something that M. Scott Peck (he was a psychiatrist and author) once said. He suggested that we should “share our similarities, celebrate our differences” yet unfortunately I see all too often these days that we are encouraged to focus on our similarities and ignore hope that differences don’t get in the way – or something like that. Anyway… that’s all for now…

Just a Thought from a (not so) Different Perspective...

Hi again… I guess I’ve been really silent on this side, but then again my life has been a bit of a crazy and confusing rollercoaster at times over recent months.

So what have I been thinking about lately? Well, for some reason I found myself thinking about colonialism (no surprise there) and slavery. During my time in London there were “celebrations” marking 200-years since the end of the slave trade. This was somewhat ironic considering the number of people still being traded as slaves in the world today. I guess the modern global society as a whole sees the practice of slavery as unethical and criminal but there was a time it didn’t. it was seen as a essential to trade and it was a given. I guess this got me thinking about things that we take for granted as things that are normal and simply part of trade etc.

I’m talking about the way in which trade today makes the rich richer and the poor even poorer. This happens in spite of the increase in the popularity and spread of humanitarian agencies over recent decades. I’m just wondering how future generations will view the things this generation has argued away in the name of financial gains and global development. You could even say that we haven’t learnt from history so we are repeating it…

"Little George" and Climate Issues...

I’ve been watching a TV show recently that is an animated parody of the actions of the current White House administration (although realistically it doesn’t take much creativity, the material is there for the taking). The name of the show is “Lil George” and I think it’s a great show – also look out for “That’s my Bush”… Anyway, back to the matter at hand…

Recently I was watching a podcast from Reuters on some things that George said recently on what needs to be done on the climate change issue and reducing “carbon emissions” etc. What I found so ridiculous is that he was making those claims. To date the USA has avoided any accountability under the “Kyoto Protocol”, something that has been signed by numerous nations around the world, but now wants to make claims and instructions about what needs to be done. Where does this presumptive authority and moral leadership come from? It’s especially puzzling that this “leadership” (something that the Secretary of State also said that the USA needs to “reclaim”) is without any significant and genuine accountability. I have to wonder if this kind of political posturing from a (as author Phillip Pullman says) “moral criminal” actually convinces anyone of any substance behind the claims. To me it appears that this is nothing more than posturing aimed at trying to place US policies in a positive light despite the unwillingness to be held accountable.

I know some would say that I tend to pick on George and his accomplices, but the fact is that the position they claim on the world stage makes them prime targets for criticism. I read a while back that there are “too many politicians in politics” today. What I understood by this is that there are too may people posturing and pretending while in public office, as opposed to people who actually want to do something with that office.

Beijing Olympics = sacrosanct?

As I mentioned in my previous entry I have been thinking about the current situation in Tibet as well as the associated issue of the upcoming Olympic Games in Beijing. I have specifically been thinking about the politically-orientated discussion that has gone on surrounding the Olympics not to mention the protests taking place in places like Paris and San Francisco. There has been quite a bit of talk about whether politics should even be an issue when discussing the Olympics. The French president Nicolas Sarcozsy is talking about the possibility of not attending the opening ceremony and others are thinking of other ways use the fact that the Olympics are taking place in Beijing to pressure that government to change their reaction to the protests in Tibet.

I have been thinking about the reasons for this separation of politics from the Olympics and no matter which way I look at it I cannot find any argument that seems to hold water. Actor Richard Gere has said that the idea of the Olympic flame travelling throughout the world implies unity and harmony, but that there can be no harmony without hope or without truth. And, I believe it was Mark Spitz, the winner of 11 Olympic Games medals, who recently said that he doubts that athletes would risk financial endorsements etc to make political statements. I guess it’s more agreeable for some to have the Olympic Games go forward so that we can live with the illusion that everything is okay. With regards to what Spitz said I wonder if it is only the competitors who have their bank balances on their minds. One perspective on the economic issue I heard recently comes from someone I met here in Cusco recently (someone from the USA). He said that it’s no surprise that the USA government has not made any major moves, because after all there is no oil in Tibet (in that case I wonder if there’s any in Sudan). In any case this kind of action is not a new concept – numerous Olympic Games (i.e. 1956, 1980 and 1984) have been impacted by occurrences in the political arena. And some of those actions such as the USA boycott of 1980 Olympics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980_Summer_Olympics) seems significantly ironic when looking at it from the perspective of present day US actions.

The way I see it is that when social injustice and the depreciation of human rights becomes the norm or where lives are at risk then why should the Olympic movement be sacrosanct especially when that will continue to give tacit approval of injustices.

Peru & Tibet...

The current situation in Tibet, the upcoming Olympic Games in Beijing and everything being said about it have been on my mind quite a bit lately. Then again with all the news coverage it has been receiving it’s probably no surprise, but it was something that happened over the weekend that really got my attention.

I was walking home after grabbing a bite to eat at a local restaurant when I noticed a number of people sitting on the steps in front of the cathedral facing the Cusco’s main plaza. At least subconsciously I assumed that it was probably a protest relating to some workers union or the ongoing protests against privatisation of the tourism sector, but then one banner caught my eye. The banner (in Spanish) basically said: “Tibet = Peru 500 years later”.

I think what caught my attention about it is that (and this relates to my thoughts on globalisation as colonialism) those holding the vigil recognised something in what is happening in Tibet with what their ancestors experienced at the hands of the Spanish around half a millennium ago. I just stood there for a while watching them without really having a specific thought, but just feeling as though we were seeing the continuation of an unending cycle. On the one hand it was a disheartening feeling because the problem seemed so huge, yet at the same time it felt as though that simple hand-made banner was a symbol of global solidarity.

Thoughts on Poverty ... postscript

Although I took a different look on the idea of poverty in my last entry, something that was by no means an original idea, there is a fiscal reality worth looking at again. In an entry called “The World at (not so) Large...” I mentioned the changing ratio between the world’s richest and it’s poorest. The reason I mention this again is that recent history shows that while the “lords of this (global) manor” may appear well-intentioned at times, even the fiscal facts vehemently contradict their promises and apparent intentions.

Thoughts on Poverty...

Following my recently blog entries I have been thinking about the issue of poverty – the alleviation of which is often cited as a reason for economic development in developing countries. This is the kind of thing I hear at times here in Cusco and I also heard it while I was living in London – sometimes these things are said in an implied way, although there is at times the unspoken idea that those saying that want to be able to make their own profits in the process too.

The problem is that I believe ‘poverty’ is at best misunderstood and at worst that misunderstanding is (mis)used for financial gain. What do I mean by this? I look at Cusco – the developing tourism sector, the resultant foreign investment, not to mention the scale of urban-ward movement. It’s all justified at times on the basis that it’s developing the economy, although the foreigner-led profit hunt is never denied. While I haven’t seen any figures I think it’s a safe bet to guess that there is considerably more money flowing through this region now that say 20 years ago, but I doubt that everyone is better off.

Back to poverty… In a world where decisions (both personal and perhaps political) are often made primarily based on the fiscal impact it’s interesting to note that poverty is mostly defined in terms of fiscal factors – even the United Nations has universal poverty line determined in monetary terms. The problem I have with this is that I don’t believe that it’s a true and holistic picture (some people I have spoken to agree with this but don’t see any way out). While it’s possible to look at issues such as the so-called “culture of poverty” or the “cycle of poverty” among other things I want to focus on one idea.

Not too long ago a hypothetical “Paolo” may have been living below the UN-determined poverty line but in his community where forms of bartering were still central cash was not a central issue. He was living not too far from Cusco and as the changes took place in the town and surrounding areas he move into the city to find the “better life” everyone was talking about. Jump forward a few years… He’s a grandfather and his kids have more cash-in-hand that he did (even relatively speaking), but he and many like him are now second-class citizens in their home country/region. Why second-class? Because, fiscal responsibility says that the tourist-dollar is priority; that is what matters. He and others like him have money and perhaps a job of some sort, but are they better off or are they perhaps (in some non-fiscal way) actually poorer?