Well, I guess this about wraps up the term. Does anyone else here thinks it went terrifyingly fast?
What did I take from it? I guess mainly that human rights are not something that are set in stone. I do still believe that they exist, or that they should exist, but I now see how difficult they are to define, or how easily manipulable of a concept they are. Human rights can be taken and redefined to suit pretty much any situation, as we have seen in the case of the military Junta in Argentina. They are also incredibly hard to protect, since they too often seem to come second to the economy or the interests of the wealthy. This does not stop me from thinking, however, that there is something there worth fighting for. People are twisted, often ignorant, and ocasionally evil, but always of value. Latin America has a long and twisted history when it comes to human rights abuses, and perhaps I'm an optimist, but I do believe that things can still change.
As the course when on, my vision of human rights went through a rather dramatic shift. I used to have a rather simplistic view of what rights were - that is to say, I really did believe that they were a natural things, a given, something that could always be argued for and that I could trust others to respect. I now see how naive that idea was. Human rights are an idea, and ideas can always be changed. If your government abuses your human rights, while actively denying it (as did Argentina), then what are the recourses? The international community? If they can even bring themselves to care, what can it do, when national sovereignty is involved? Very little. When you can't trust the authorities, the only possible change is from the bottom up. I do like the idea that revolution and human rights go hand in hand, though I have to admit that, if one looks at the track record of revolutions, this has not always been the case.
I have also learnt that internation organizations, such as the UN, do not hold the answers. Far from it. If anything, they perpetuate a very Westernized conception of human rights, one that supports a colonialist attitute. We can no longer justify imposing our beliefs on others (and someone should really tell that to the US and their involvment in Latin America). Each region should really be given some leeway to figure out what human rights mean in their own context...but this would invariably lead to abuse. So what's to be done? I don't anyone has that figured out.
Basically, what I have learnt is that human rights are complicated, a little insane, and that there is no straightforward answer or explanation to anything. The only thing I do know, however, is that we need to keep on moving foreward.
Finally, I love the intergration of the Occupy movement into class dialogue. I personally have a lot of faith in Occupy, in the sense that it represents people finally realizing that there are problems that are not getting solved and speaking out about them. The movement is still in it's infancy, but I will hoping that it will gather up steam and grow. What I see in it is the simple realization that all people have worth, and should be treated well, and have access to opportunities. What I see in it is the hope of a more open and intergrated world. But I guess I'll just have to wait and see what happens.
Monday, November 28, 2011
What if they declared an emergency and no one came?
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/charlie-angus/attawapiskat-emergency_b_1104370.html?ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false#undefined
This is not happening in Latin America, but I felt that it's important that everyone know about this and hopefully try to help. This is happening in Ontario, on Attawapiskat First Nation lands. It's been three weeks since they took the extraordinary step of declaring a state of emergency due to poor living conditions...and nothing has happened. No one has stepped in to help. The government hasn't even lifted a finger. The people in this community live in conditions one would never expect to find in a developped country such as Canada. Basic needs, such as healthcare, hygiene or decent living conditions are not met. The children of this community have not had a school to go to in 12 years. It's like they've completely fallen off the map.
To make matters worst, right in the Attawapiskat back yard, on their land, the De Beers mining company is making million off diamond extraction, not one cent of which is being seen by the Attawapiskat people.
The winter is coming, and it's going to be a cold one. The federal government has to step up it's game. In the meantime, send in letters to the Ontario government, see what you can do to help. It's things like these that make me ashamed to be a Canadian at times.
This is not happening in Latin America, but I felt that it's important that everyone know about this and hopefully try to help. This is happening in Ontario, on Attawapiskat First Nation lands. It's been three weeks since they took the extraordinary step of declaring a state of emergency due to poor living conditions...and nothing has happened. No one has stepped in to help. The government hasn't even lifted a finger. The people in this community live in conditions one would never expect to find in a developped country such as Canada. Basic needs, such as healthcare, hygiene or decent living conditions are not met. The children of this community have not had a school to go to in 12 years. It's like they've completely fallen off the map.
To make matters worst, right in the Attawapiskat back yard, on their land, the De Beers mining company is making million off diamond extraction, not one cent of which is being seen by the Attawapiskat people.
The winter is coming, and it's going to be a cold one. The federal government has to step up it's game. In the meantime, send in letters to the Ontario government, see what you can do to help. It's things like these that make me ashamed to be a Canadian at times.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Gunmen Execute Indian Chief in Western Brazil
http://news.yahoo.com/gunmen-execute-indian-chief-western-brazil-212054028.html
This article illustrates the age old battle between land owners and Indigenous people in Latin America. In this case, gunmen hired by cattle ranchers were sent into an Indigenous village in the hope of brutally repressing land claims and getting the people to move. Evidently, the more tims go on, the less things change.
This article illustrates the age old battle between land owners and Indigenous people in Latin America. In this case, gunmen hired by cattle ranchers were sent into an Indigenous village in the hope of brutally repressing land claims and getting the people to move. Evidently, the more tims go on, the less things change.
Guatemala II
These readings allowed me to gain a more in-depth understanding of the situation that unfolded in Guatemala. What I found really interesting is that there was a greater focus on the reality of Indigenous people on the ground, and of the violence that they were victims to. I already had knowledge about the actions of the United Fruits Company, as well as the military involvement of the US, but know I have a better understanding of what all this ultimately meant to the people on the ground. The horrors that they went through seems to defy imagination, though my readings of Rigoberta Menchu paints a gruesome picture. For me, this truly states the danger of a too powerful military forces that is unleached against it's own people instead of an external threat.
The most horrible thing in all of this to me, however, is the stance of complete lack of responsibility taken by the military as well as it's apparent ease of de-humanizing those that they were fighting against. The victims of this violence were, for the most part, innocents, though they were proclaimed to be affiliated with resistance fighters. And even if they were, who can blame them? The political system was corrupt and didn't care for it's people. There was no food, no work, no respect, people couldn't live, and Indigenous people were treated like dirt. In circumstances like these, I would be part of the insurrection too. But this outlines the danger of the creation of an "us versus them" attitude being indoctrinated. As soon as a segment of a country's population starts pointing the blame at another segment, and takes action against it, all hell breaks loose. I know that this is a long shot, but I can't help thinking of the waves of repression that have begun sweeping Occupy movements, and the brutality of the police forces in general when people try to break loose and defy the status quo. If we can't trust out armed forces to listen to us and protect us, who can we trust?
The most horrible thing in all of this to me, however, is the stance of complete lack of responsibility taken by the military as well as it's apparent ease of de-humanizing those that they were fighting against. The victims of this violence were, for the most part, innocents, though they were proclaimed to be affiliated with resistance fighters. And even if they were, who can blame them? The political system was corrupt and didn't care for it's people. There was no food, no work, no respect, people couldn't live, and Indigenous people were treated like dirt. In circumstances like these, I would be part of the insurrection too. But this outlines the danger of the creation of an "us versus them" attitude being indoctrinated. As soon as a segment of a country's population starts pointing the blame at another segment, and takes action against it, all hell breaks loose. I know that this is a long shot, but I can't help thinking of the waves of repression that have begun sweeping Occupy movements, and the brutality of the police forces in general when people try to break loose and defy the status quo. If we can't trust out armed forces to listen to us and protect us, who can we trust?
Monday, November 14, 2011
Ex-ruling party wins violence-scarred Mexican race
http://news.yahoo.com/ex-ruling-party-wins-violence-scarred-mexican-race-143302399.html
This article examines the presidential race in Mexico. It is becoming increasingly apparent that Calderon might very well loose the upcomming election. His war on drugs was simply too brutal and badly planned out, and many are now loosing faith in hime. The PRI, Mexico's former ruling party of 71 years, is gaining momentum again. What I thought interesting about this is that almost all political discourse seems to be related in some way to the drug war and cartels. It's impregnated politics so completely that the best way to attack and opposition party is to blame them of being related to a cartel. In this climate, it's become difficult to differentiate between drug lords and politicians.
Another thing that is mentionned in the article is the fact that, apparently, the Indigenous Purepecha people of Cheran have refused to let poll workers into their town, demanding an election that would respect their traditions. Apparently, they have been actively guarding Cheran from illegal loggers and drug traffickers. Not much is said about them, but this is an interesting case of Indigenous people demanding the right to have their unique traditions respected as well as protecting themselves. I'm wondering in this kind of individualistic communal organization is the way of the future.
This article examines the presidential race in Mexico. It is becoming increasingly apparent that Calderon might very well loose the upcomming election. His war on drugs was simply too brutal and badly planned out, and many are now loosing faith in hime. The PRI, Mexico's former ruling party of 71 years, is gaining momentum again. What I thought interesting about this is that almost all political discourse seems to be related in some way to the drug war and cartels. It's impregnated politics so completely that the best way to attack and opposition party is to blame them of being related to a cartel. In this climate, it's become difficult to differentiate between drug lords and politicians.
Another thing that is mentionned in the article is the fact that, apparently, the Indigenous Purepecha people of Cheran have refused to let poll workers into their town, demanding an election that would respect their traditions. Apparently, they have been actively guarding Cheran from illegal loggers and drug traffickers. Not much is said about them, but this is an interesting case of Indigenous people demanding the right to have their unique traditions respected as well as protecting themselves. I'm wondering in this kind of individualistic communal organization is the way of the future.
Case Study: Guatemala
The readings for this week outline something that I never cease to be enraged about: U.S. imperialism in Latin America. The U.S. has a long and dirty history of treating Latin America as it's back yard, not as individual countries with rights to sovereignty. The history of the United Fruit Company is a flagrant example of this reality. For years, this company held Guatemala virtually under hostage. Their skills at making friends with the local disctators allowed them to treat the resources of this foreign country as their own, and their actions were backed by the U.S. government, who had large investments in the company (apparently, bribery and politicians being bought out by corporations is nothing new). What astounds me in all of this is the arrogance of the United Fruit Company in all their dealings with Guatemala and surrounding countries, even going as far as encouraging political coups! In Bitter Fruit, this sense of proprietorship of Latin America is laid out in greater details, talking about the many pressure tactics employed by the U.S.to keep it's neighbours in line.
One of my greatest difficulties when reading something like this is knowing that U.S. imperialist measures in Latin America are far from over. Though things have changed and improved somewhat, there is no doubt that perceived U.S. proprietorship of it's neighbours is healthy and well. If that wasn't the case, wouldn't things such as the profound (and, in my opinion, misplaced) involvement of the U.S. military in the "drug war" create more uproar in the international community? The truth is, all out economic rights morphed into security rights and are now threatening to morph into a strange drug war/war on terror hybrid. The real problem here is that the U.S., and, to some extent, the international community, still see Latin America as a weak, pliable place, easily meddled with.
One of my greatest difficulties when reading something like this is knowing that U.S. imperialist measures in Latin America are far from over. Though things have changed and improved somewhat, there is no doubt that perceived U.S. proprietorship of it's neighbours is healthy and well. If that wasn't the case, wouldn't things such as the profound (and, in my opinion, misplaced) involvement of the U.S. military in the "drug war" create more uproar in the international community? The truth is, all out economic rights morphed into security rights and are now threatening to morph into a strange drug war/war on terror hybrid. The real problem here is that the U.S., and, to some extent, the international community, still see Latin America as a weak, pliable place, easily meddled with.
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Mexico Apologizes for not Protecting Slain Women
http://news.yahoo.com/mexico-apologizes-not-protecting-slain-women-005157025.html
This article discusses the Mexican's government lack of action in investigating the slaying of three women in Juarez. This comes at the tail end of a wave of violence against women in Chihuahua and in Mexico generally. In the militarized state of political unrest that the country is in, women are particularly vulnerable to sexual abuse and violence in general, especially activist women. The fact that the government is not taking active strides to protect it's women is unforgivable.
This article discusses the Mexican's government lack of action in investigating the slaying of three women in Juarez. This comes at the tail end of a wave of violence against women in Chihuahua and in Mexico generally. In the militarized state of political unrest that the country is in, women are particularly vulnerable to sexual abuse and violence in general, especially activist women. The fact that the government is not taking active strides to protect it's women is unforgivable.
Monday, October 31, 2011
Honduras Becomes Western Hemisphere Cocaine Hub
http://news.yahoo.com/honduras-becomes-western-hemisphere-cocaine-hub-145553646.html
This article talks about the position of Honduras a major transit route for drugs, especially cocaine. Apparently, about half of all the cocaine reaching the United States every month is unloaded in Honduras, which comes up to 20 - 25 tons. Whole villages are now part of the drug trade, and street gangs are creating a climate of violence that can only be compared to Kabul, Afghanistan. The homicide rate is euqivalent to 82, 1 killings for evey 100, 000 people. The govenrment, of course, says that fighting the cartels is at the top of the list, but the governemnt itself is far from stable, and corruption is rampant. Often, the police is actively involved in the cartels, and it is believed that many in the government are making a lot of money off of them, leaving the country in an extremely vulnerable position.
On a more personal note, this article hits very close to home due to my personal attachment to Honduras. I lived there when I was younger, my brother is from there, as is my foster sister. I still have very strong ties with people in Tegucigalpa and Copan. When I lived there, it was already routine to bribe the police (even my parents did it, in order to get out of bogus charges), but now, from what I hear from my friends, it's anarchy. They are scared to leave their homes after dark, and my foster sister, who married an American and now lived in Washington DC, is scared to go back, especially when her husband talks of going with her. She hasn't seen her family in over two years for these reasons. I have seen the good side of Honduras, and there is so much I love about it, that this breaks my heart.
This article talks about the position of Honduras a major transit route for drugs, especially cocaine. Apparently, about half of all the cocaine reaching the United States every month is unloaded in Honduras, which comes up to 20 - 25 tons. Whole villages are now part of the drug trade, and street gangs are creating a climate of violence that can only be compared to Kabul, Afghanistan. The homicide rate is euqivalent to 82, 1 killings for evey 100, 000 people. The govenrment, of course, says that fighting the cartels is at the top of the list, but the governemnt itself is far from stable, and corruption is rampant. Often, the police is actively involved in the cartels, and it is believed that many in the government are making a lot of money off of them, leaving the country in an extremely vulnerable position.
On a more personal note, this article hits very close to home due to my personal attachment to Honduras. I lived there when I was younger, my brother is from there, as is my foster sister. I still have very strong ties with people in Tegucigalpa and Copan. When I lived there, it was already routine to bribe the police (even my parents did it, in order to get out of bogus charges), but now, from what I hear from my friends, it's anarchy. They are scared to leave their homes after dark, and my foster sister, who married an American and now lived in Washington DC, is scared to go back, especially when her husband talks of going with her. She hasn't seen her family in over two years for these reasons. I have seen the good side of Honduras, and there is so much I love about it, that this breaks my heart.
Argentina: State Violence
State repression and brutality are one of the most unforgivable things that leaders can do to their people. It's a complete disruption of social bonds, with the powerful lashing out against the people that they are supposed to protect. The case of Argentina is particularly horrific, though, unfortunately, just one in the long history of militarized oppression in Latin America. The use of paramilitary forces as an excuse to "maintain security" usually means keeping the elite wealthy and in power and keeping everybody else down. In the case of Argentina, this translated in the use of extreme brutality against countless people. I can't even imagine being in such a situation, living in a constant fear of being taken away, or having someone I love disappear. The complete impunity of the military meant that nobody was safe, and that everybody could be subject to torture and murder, creating a climate of constant fear. In a situation like this, it's not surprising that people would choose to flee rather than remain in such an environment. I understand, however, that this in itself would have also been far from easy, with people grieving not only those they left behind, but also the metaphorical death of a country.
In reading this, two things really stood out for me. One of these was the involvment of the US in the strenghtening of the regime. Of course, I know about that involvment of the United States in Latin America, which was more often than not treated as the US' back yard. However, the blatant support given to disctators still shocks me, especially when the reason behind this was mainly to protect US assets. Countless people suffered, and the US turned a blind eye in order to maintain it's own wealthy elite. The second thing that stood out for me is the courage of the people that still stood up and resisted, risking their lives in the process. Personally, I don't know if I would have had that courage to do that. Through the use of contraversial art, dissent was expressed and circulated. Most impressive, however, were probably the "grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo," the only visible opposition to the regime, who demanded justice for their disappeared loved ones. They displayed true courage, and their commitement to their cause was a strong agent of change.
When reading these horror stories, one is usually left with a "never again" feeling. However, I see these more as a cautionary, a reminder of how easy it is for things to slip into that institutional darkness. It's a reminder of the importance of vigilance and active involvment in politics. Such regimes are not a thing of the past, and they could easily manifest again if we are not careful.
In reading this, two things really stood out for me. One of these was the involvment of the US in the strenghtening of the regime. Of course, I know about that involvment of the United States in Latin America, which was more often than not treated as the US' back yard. However, the blatant support given to disctators still shocks me, especially when the reason behind this was mainly to protect US assets. Countless people suffered, and the US turned a blind eye in order to maintain it's own wealthy elite. The second thing that stood out for me is the courage of the people that still stood up and resisted, risking their lives in the process. Personally, I don't know if I would have had that courage to do that. Through the use of contraversial art, dissent was expressed and circulated. Most impressive, however, were probably the "grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo," the only visible opposition to the regime, who demanded justice for their disappeared loved ones. They displayed true courage, and their commitement to their cause was a strong agent of change.
When reading these horror stories, one is usually left with a "never again" feeling. However, I see these more as a cautionary, a reminder of how easy it is for things to slip into that institutional darkness. It's a reminder of the importance of vigilance and active involvment in politics. Such regimes are not a thing of the past, and they could easily manifest again if we are not careful.
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Brazil Defends Boycot of Dam Meeting
http://news.yahoo.com/brazil-defends-boycott-dam-meeting-221409783.html
This articles briefly discusses the government of Brazil's continuing refusal to accept discent in the building of it's dam in the Amazon. This project, if completed, would severely damage the environment and displace thousands of Indigenous people.
This articles briefly discusses the government of Brazil's continuing refusal to accept discent in the building of it's dam in the Amazon. This project, if completed, would severely damage the environment and displace thousands of Indigenous people.
Amnesty: Dominican Police Torture, Kill People
http://news.yahoo.com/amnesty-dominican-police-torture-kill-people-174803084.html
This articles talks about the widespread human rights abuses performed by the police forces of the Dominican Republic. Apparently, 260 people were killed and hundreds more injured by the police last year, a number that is on the increase. It is claimed by authorities that victimes were killed mostly during gunfire exchanges, but Amnesty reports show that many were tortured beforehand, or executed. Over 30, 000 officers are under investigation or openly charged with human right violations. This article illustrates the immense problem of police corruption and use of militarized excessive force.
This articles talks about the widespread human rights abuses performed by the police forces of the Dominican Republic. Apparently, 260 people were killed and hundreds more injured by the police last year, a number that is on the increase. It is claimed by authorities that victimes were killed mostly during gunfire exchanges, but Amnesty reports show that many were tortured beforehand, or executed. Over 30, 000 officers are under investigation or openly charged with human right violations. This article illustrates the immense problem of police corruption and use of militarized excessive force.
Rights in Latin America
For the section of Rights in Latin America, I chose two readings, namely the "Augostura Address", the writings of Simon Bolivar, and "The State and the Individual in Latin America: An Historical Overview" by Margaret E. Crahan. I chose these two because I found that they present two differing perspectives of the political past in Latin America as well as it's strides towards the respect of human rights. In a way, I think that it's the comparison of an optimistic versis a grimmer, perhaps more realistic perspective of the state of human rights in Latin America.
In his Augostura Address, Simon Bolivar outlined the future of the state of Venezuela. He began by saying the he was purposfully stepping down because he did not believe in one individual holding a position of power for too long (this, in itself, must be viewed with some irony, considering how long Bolivar himself stayed in power, long enough to arguably be defined as a dictator). He went on to declare his belief in Decomocracy, basing himself on contemporary (at the time) examples. However, he also reconized the failings of the democracy, in the sense that it did not automatically equate with greatness or fairness. He did, however, believe in the right of popular autonomy, and saw democracy as the only clear route to achieve this goal. Something that struck me in this reading is the way that he spoke of the homogenous intergration of all segments of society into an equal whole. I believe that he is much to be applauded for this ideal, though I can't help but think it somewhat naive. He did not believe that there should be any distinction between, for example, Indigenous people and rich land owners of European descent, and I can't help but agree: there shouldn't. However, historically, his country had not necessarily respected different ethnic groups as equal, and that equality has not yet been reached to this day. Bolivar's writings are difficult to read because I have trouble equating his ideals with his actions, and what has transpired of them. He declares that Venezuela is a great country that will do great things, only to say that it should strive to resemble England. He speaks of popular equality and then says that there should be a House of Lords consisting of people with inherited priviledges. Was banishing such inherited rights one of the tenants of his popular movement? Overall, I find that I have trouble defining Bolivar, or seeing weither I agree with him or not. There is too much of a gap between words and actions, between original beliefs and articulated ideals.
In Crahan's text, a historical overview of the political foundations of Latin America is offered. Unlike Bolivar, Crahan offers an emphasis on enduring class and racial inequality, and the roles that these have played on the construction of Latin America. She argues that enduring structures of inequality find their roots in colonial models that have replicated themselves over time. According to her, structures of inequality are so pervasive, and have been so ingrained (on the Iberian model), that Latin America is, in a certain way, doomed to replicate it. What is also shown is that this structure of society believes social disparity to be natural, even self evident. This structure of class differences is also replicated, which, in my opinion, severely impinges in the development or continuation of human rights. I believe that for real change to be achieved, there must be a break from this overly rigid model of society in order to allow for more inclusiveness.
In his Augostura Address, Simon Bolivar outlined the future of the state of Venezuela. He began by saying the he was purposfully stepping down because he did not believe in one individual holding a position of power for too long (this, in itself, must be viewed with some irony, considering how long Bolivar himself stayed in power, long enough to arguably be defined as a dictator). He went on to declare his belief in Decomocracy, basing himself on contemporary (at the time) examples. However, he also reconized the failings of the democracy, in the sense that it did not automatically equate with greatness or fairness. He did, however, believe in the right of popular autonomy, and saw democracy as the only clear route to achieve this goal. Something that struck me in this reading is the way that he spoke of the homogenous intergration of all segments of society into an equal whole. I believe that he is much to be applauded for this ideal, though I can't help but think it somewhat naive. He did not believe that there should be any distinction between, for example, Indigenous people and rich land owners of European descent, and I can't help but agree: there shouldn't. However, historically, his country had not necessarily respected different ethnic groups as equal, and that equality has not yet been reached to this day. Bolivar's writings are difficult to read because I have trouble equating his ideals with his actions, and what has transpired of them. He declares that Venezuela is a great country that will do great things, only to say that it should strive to resemble England. He speaks of popular equality and then says that there should be a House of Lords consisting of people with inherited priviledges. Was banishing such inherited rights one of the tenants of his popular movement? Overall, I find that I have trouble defining Bolivar, or seeing weither I agree with him or not. There is too much of a gap between words and actions, between original beliefs and articulated ideals.
In Crahan's text, a historical overview of the political foundations of Latin America is offered. Unlike Bolivar, Crahan offers an emphasis on enduring class and racial inequality, and the roles that these have played on the construction of Latin America. She argues that enduring structures of inequality find their roots in colonial models that have replicated themselves over time. According to her, structures of inequality are so pervasive, and have been so ingrained (on the Iberian model), that Latin America is, in a certain way, doomed to replicate it. What is also shown is that this structure of society believes social disparity to be natural, even self evident. This structure of class differences is also replicated, which, in my opinion, severely impinges in the development or continuation of human rights. I believe that for real change to be achieved, there must be a break from this overly rigid model of society in order to allow for more inclusiveness.
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
Wrongs in Latin America
In these readings, we have finally broached the subject of historical wrongs that have afflicted the people of Latin America, the repercussions of which are still felt today. In these two texts, the subject is approached differently, more lyrically in Memory of Fire and "historically" (with a strong level of personal interpretation) in Bartolomé de Las Casas' text.
I very much liked the lyrical descriptive approach taken in the writing of Memory of Fire. It developed and portrayed a complex and long history in a way that was both easy to read and that projected us into the mindset of the people that lived through these events, especially the Indigenous people. Everything seemed to be interwoven to create a visually engaging description. Personally, I enjoyed reading it very much. The way it was written allowed me to mentally string together a history that was complex and scattered across a continent and see it as a coherent, cohesive chain of events. More importantly, it allowed me to see the importance of certain events that I would not necessarily have considered, and understand how the related to a whole.
In Las Casas' text, the approach that is taken is very different. I guess that he must be applauded for being one of the first to speak out against the injustices being wrought on the people of the New World, but I found it very hard to remain sympathetic towards him after reading his description of said Indigenous people. He sees them as children, helpless, innocent, delicate, unable to speak for themselves. In this sense, I think he mis-represents them just as much as the butchering Spaniards that he speaks out against did. All this serves to corrupt the European's image of Indigenous people in the Americas. However, I believe that much can be said for him being one of the few willing to speak out against these atrocities, and to propose that these people be treated with fairness and considered human beings.
I very much liked the lyrical descriptive approach taken in the writing of Memory of Fire. It developed and portrayed a complex and long history in a way that was both easy to read and that projected us into the mindset of the people that lived through these events, especially the Indigenous people. Everything seemed to be interwoven to create a visually engaging description. Personally, I enjoyed reading it very much. The way it was written allowed me to mentally string together a history that was complex and scattered across a continent and see it as a coherent, cohesive chain of events. More importantly, it allowed me to see the importance of certain events that I would not necessarily have considered, and understand how the related to a whole.
In Las Casas' text, the approach that is taken is very different. I guess that he must be applauded for being one of the first to speak out against the injustices being wrought on the people of the New World, but I found it very hard to remain sympathetic towards him after reading his description of said Indigenous people. He sees them as children, helpless, innocent, delicate, unable to speak for themselves. In this sense, I think he mis-represents them just as much as the butchering Spaniards that he speaks out against did. All this serves to corrupt the European's image of Indigenous people in the Americas. However, I believe that much can be said for him being one of the few willing to speak out against these atrocities, and to propose that these people be treated with fairness and considered human beings.
Monday, October 3, 2011
UN human rights office concerned about killing of journalists in Mexico
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=39896&Cr=drug+trafficking&Cr1=
This article discusses the wave of murders in Mexico, specifying the vunerability of news reporters as targets. Apparently, "80 journalists have been killed in Mexico since 2000". Other targets include internet users, or anybody who would dare try and intervene in the drug wars.
What is particularly worrying about all this is the assumption that some elements of the police forces probably have a hand in this. Far from protecting their citizens, they have shown that corruption really runs deep in Mexico. How can human rights be protected if their primary enforcers are the ones torturing and murdering innocents? Not only that, but freedom of speech, a basic tenant of human rights, becomes something that is too dangerous to engage it. If people are too scared to speak out, how will this ever end?
This article discusses the wave of murders in Mexico, specifying the vunerability of news reporters as targets. Apparently, "80 journalists have been killed in Mexico since 2000". Other targets include internet users, or anybody who would dare try and intervene in the drug wars.
What is particularly worrying about all this is the assumption that some elements of the police forces probably have a hand in this. Far from protecting their citizens, they have shown that corruption really runs deep in Mexico. How can human rights be protected if their primary enforcers are the ones torturing and murdering innocents? Not only that, but freedom of speech, a basic tenant of human rights, becomes something that is too dangerous to engage it. If people are too scared to speak out, how will this ever end?
Sunday, October 2, 2011
The End of Human Rights: Readings for October 3
The readings for this week are, in my opinion, the most interesting ones we have had so far. They are all about the limit of human rights, and what it means to understand and respect them. We are finally moving away from the idealized intellectual frameworks of human rights to the reality of them. In these articles, people seem almost to be arguing against human rights, in the sense that they are saying that the way they are viewed is flawed and that there have been many failures.
I was really drawn to the idea of nationhood as the defining factor of being a human being. There was this idea that if you loose that attachement to your nation, if you become a refugee, then your human rights also disappear. Cut off from your cultural setting, your place of origin, you are no longer viewed as a complete human. This explains the systematic rights abuses so often commited to refugees. It is easy to say that you are open to "the other" until the other is all around you. It also begs the question: what does it mean to be human? Are we our culture, or is there something more, some underlying tread uniting us in our common humanity and making us all worthy of the same rights?
I would also like to address the idea of human rights being a Western concept. In many ways, I very much agree with this. Western countries have been at the forefront of the articulation of human rights as we know them; therefore, Western values and ideals are heavily present in them. Does this make them wrong? I do believe that the Western world have too often used human rights as an excuse to march into a country guns blazing and try to impose peace and democracy, as if that ever works. Human rights as a pure and untainted concept, however, looses a lot of it's meaning for me if I start thinking of it simply as a construct of the West. The solution, then, would probably be a more inclusive discourse, one that includes minority groups and refugees and countries other than the West. But would any agreement ever be reached? And if so, would it be respected?
I'm starting to feel terribly disillusioned.
I was really drawn to the idea of nationhood as the defining factor of being a human being. There was this idea that if you loose that attachement to your nation, if you become a refugee, then your human rights also disappear. Cut off from your cultural setting, your place of origin, you are no longer viewed as a complete human. This explains the systematic rights abuses so often commited to refugees. It is easy to say that you are open to "the other" until the other is all around you. It also begs the question: what does it mean to be human? Are we our culture, or is there something more, some underlying tread uniting us in our common humanity and making us all worthy of the same rights?
I would also like to address the idea of human rights being a Western concept. In many ways, I very much agree with this. Western countries have been at the forefront of the articulation of human rights as we know them; therefore, Western values and ideals are heavily present in them. Does this make them wrong? I do believe that the Western world have too often used human rights as an excuse to march into a country guns blazing and try to impose peace and democracy, as if that ever works. Human rights as a pure and untainted concept, however, looses a lot of it's meaning for me if I start thinking of it simply as a construct of the West. The solution, then, would probably be a more inclusive discourse, one that includes minority groups and refugees and countries other than the West. But would any agreement ever be reached? And if so, would it be respected?
I'm starting to feel terribly disillusioned.
Sunday, September 25, 2011
UN Warns of Threats to Indigenous
http://www.lapress.org/articles.asp?art=6463
I wish I could be shocked by the information contained in this article. I really wished that I could be surprised and appalled by it. But I simply can't.
It is always so easy for governments to pretend that they respect their Indigenous populations...until they suddenly dare to have a voice. Until they begin claiming what should be theirs. It is then that we see what little value human lives have when compared to resources and money. It is all well and good for the Peruvian government to have passed a law saying that Indigenous groups should be consulted before projects such as mining go ahead, but their opinion is not "binding under the legislation." I have two problems with this. First, if the government can simply ignore what the Indigenous people are saying and go ahead with the project anyway, what is the point? Second, shouldn't it be self evident that they be consulted? I mean, before drilling and extracting minerals from someone's backyard, you would probably ask for permission first, right? These are their lands, why should it be any different?
A law is a good starting point. A law in which Indigenous people actually weild power and have a strong voice would be even better.
I wish I could be shocked by the information contained in this article. I really wished that I could be surprised and appalled by it. But I simply can't.
It is always so easy for governments to pretend that they respect their Indigenous populations...until they suddenly dare to have a voice. Until they begin claiming what should be theirs. It is then that we see what little value human lives have when compared to resources and money. It is all well and good for the Peruvian government to have passed a law saying that Indigenous groups should be consulted before projects such as mining go ahead, but their opinion is not "binding under the legislation." I have two problems with this. First, if the government can simply ignore what the Indigenous people are saying and go ahead with the project anyway, what is the point? Second, shouldn't it be self evident that they be consulted? I mean, before drilling and extracting minerals from someone's backyard, you would probably ask for permission first, right? These are their lands, why should it be any different?
A law is a good starting point. A law in which Indigenous people actually weild power and have a strong voice would be even better.
Readings for September 26: On the Origins of Rights
After quickly looking through the other blog updates, I have found that, like myself, many others were particularly struck by De Gouges' Declaration of the Rights of Women. After reading it, I find that I can only respect and admire this woman for her courage. She is one of those feminists that brings it all back to the source: equality. It is no secret that, in recent years, feminism has been given a black name. Some people wrongly construct it as a desire for women to be superior to men. This is just a perversion of the original desire for simple respect and equality. As De Gouge says, women simply want to be treated like men. If a woman has done something wrong, then she should receive equal punishment. Consequently, a woman who has done right should be rewarded, as a man would be, or at least reconized.
Another interesting fact about this declaration is that, despite it's age, it is still very actual. De Gouge speaks of things like equal representation of women in positions of power; though some strides have been made in that respect, it is still nonetheless true that women are grossly under represented at the governamental level. It is evident that there is still much work to be done.
About the other readings, I was struck by the idea of limitations or rights. I have heard of this concept before, but still find it very interesting. The basic idea is that we should all be able to do what we want...as long as we don't limit someone elses liberty, or harm others. This implies a certain amount of empathy, or basic respect of others. As this is by no means a given amongst human, I do understand the necessity of laws being put in place to limit the actions of people. However, I also believe that nothing is static, and that laws shoud be revisited to accomodate the changing dynamics of human life.
Another interesting fact about this declaration is that, despite it's age, it is still very actual. De Gouge speaks of things like equal representation of women in positions of power; though some strides have been made in that respect, it is still nonetheless true that women are grossly under represented at the governamental level. It is evident that there is still much work to be done.
About the other readings, I was struck by the idea of limitations or rights. I have heard of this concept before, but still find it very interesting. The basic idea is that we should all be able to do what we want...as long as we don't limit someone elses liberty, or harm others. This implies a certain amount of empathy, or basic respect of others. As this is by no means a given amongst human, I do understand the necessity of laws being put in place to limit the actions of people. However, I also believe that nothing is static, and that laws shoud be revisited to accomodate the changing dynamics of human life.
Monday, September 19, 2011
Women Human Righst Defenders Risk Death, Dsicrimination by Laura Carlsen
http://alainet.org/active/45177&lang=en
It is no secret that Mexico is fighting an intense drug war, and that casualties as a result of this war are high. Certain regions are all out no-go zones, with people dying daily while others go into exile in hope of saving themselves. In this climate of violence, peaceful protest is shoved to the side, and rights movements are filed under "deal with later". It should be no surprise that activists are dropping like flies, especially women's rights activists. In the mind of the government, this probably lacks in importance when compared to the drug war. However, that does not mean that the issue should be avoided and forgotten, as it is now.
In climates of violence, women are always more particularly at risk of loosing their basic rights. In fact, the article speaks about the increasing amount of violence, both physical and psychological, that women in Mexico have to deal with. The ennemies in this case are not only the cartels, but also the troops sent by the government who view the women brave enough to speak out against thing as trouble makers, more than they can deal with. This discouraged women to speak out. The fact that women human rights activists are turning up dead by the score is not helping. But since when does one issue block another? Are the women not suffering as much as the men? Do they not have as much right as they to be protected? I think that in cases like these, the International Community has an obligation to reach out and offer their support, though I reconize that, with a lack of information and transparency, this is far from being easy.
Women such as these, defending human rights at the risk of their own, and defying patriarchal rules in doing so, are to be applauded and supported. Despite the risks, they continue to attempt to be heard. It would be naive to thing that things will get easier for them; at every turn, the climate of violence seems to be deepening, and human right activists will continue to be targeted until such time that things stabilize. What is important is that they never give up, and that help eventually comes to them.
It is no secret that Mexico is fighting an intense drug war, and that casualties as a result of this war are high. Certain regions are all out no-go zones, with people dying daily while others go into exile in hope of saving themselves. In this climate of violence, peaceful protest is shoved to the side, and rights movements are filed under "deal with later". It should be no surprise that activists are dropping like flies, especially women's rights activists. In the mind of the government, this probably lacks in importance when compared to the drug war. However, that does not mean that the issue should be avoided and forgotten, as it is now.
In climates of violence, women are always more particularly at risk of loosing their basic rights. In fact, the article speaks about the increasing amount of violence, both physical and psychological, that women in Mexico have to deal with. The ennemies in this case are not only the cartels, but also the troops sent by the government who view the women brave enough to speak out against thing as trouble makers, more than they can deal with. This discouraged women to speak out. The fact that women human rights activists are turning up dead by the score is not helping. But since when does one issue block another? Are the women not suffering as much as the men? Do they not have as much right as they to be protected? I think that in cases like these, the International Community has an obligation to reach out and offer their support, though I reconize that, with a lack of information and transparency, this is far from being easy.
Women such as these, defending human rights at the risk of their own, and defying patriarchal rules in doing so, are to be applauded and supported. Despite the risks, they continue to attempt to be heard. It would be naive to thing that things will get easier for them; at every turn, the climate of violence seems to be deepening, and human right activists will continue to be targeted until such time that things stabilize. What is important is that they never give up, and that help eventually comes to them.
Human rights-readings for September 19
After reading the different declarations pertaining to human rights, the first thing that came to mind was a certain sense of evolution. At the beginning, the concept of protecting individual rights was rather broad and generalized. In fact, it could be argued that they were more guidelines than something that could be strictly enforced. As time went by, these texts became more specific, with targeted audiences in mind. Originally restrictive (limiting the absolute powers of feudal lords, kings, colonizing powers, etc.), they began reaching out to englobe the protection of individual rights. In this, the UN charter is extremely comprehensive, zoning in on different groups, and rights, that need protecting. Further texts go into further details on specific groups, such as racial minorities or indigenous groups.
In all, the texts were clearly comprehensive and showed a clear evolution through time. What was interesting to me was to see how certain things, that I often take for granted, came into being, and how these rights are protected by law. However, despite all the good intentions, there are certain obvious and well know loop holes, especially pertaining to the United Nations; how does one prevent, or punish, a violation of rights? You can't exactly grab a country and drag it to jail, and change is almost never possible without internal political will. This is why genocides are still being committed today, why Indigenous rights are far from being universally respected. On a smaller scale, such as within a country, charters and texts go further in protecting human rights because they are more easily enforcable. When the scale widens to the International level, things become vastly different, and implementation becomes a problem. At that scale, one must also deal with differing cultures and world views that cannot always come into line with each other. I do still believe, however, that great strides have been taken to protect universal human rights. Equally true is the fact that despondency at this point is not an option, and there is still much work to be done.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Hi folks
Hi. My name is Isabelle Maurice-Hammond and I'm a last minute drop in in this class. As such, I have a lot of catching up to do.
I'm an third year Anthropology major, and as of three days ago, a Latin American Studies minor. Three days ago was when I discovered that I could actually pursue this as a minor, at which point I dropped English Lit. like a hot potatoe. I am in this class because I have a very deep interest in Latin America, especially when it pertains to Indigenous or women's rights. Having lived in Honduras, and having an adopted brother from there, has also contributed in kindling my interest in this part of the world as well as the various cultures found there.
Ultimately, however, I want to go into Mesoamerican archaeology and teach while conducting my own research. I simply want my knowledge of Latin America to be multi faceted, and not completely rooted in the past.
I'm an third year Anthropology major, and as of three days ago, a Latin American Studies minor. Three days ago was when I discovered that I could actually pursue this as a minor, at which point I dropped English Lit. like a hot potatoe. I am in this class because I have a very deep interest in Latin America, especially when it pertains to Indigenous or women's rights. Having lived in Honduras, and having an adopted brother from there, has also contributed in kindling my interest in this part of the world as well as the various cultures found there.
Ultimately, however, I want to go into Mesoamerican archaeology and teach while conducting my own research. I simply want my knowledge of Latin America to be multi faceted, and not completely rooted in the past.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)