" there's a world that's waiting to unfold … a brand new tale, no-one has ever told … "


“The truth is rarely pure and never simple.” — Oscar Wilde
August 30, 2011, 12:21 am
Filed under: Ethiopia | Tags: , , , , , , ,

29 August, 11

The Great Libya Lie

 

“Obviously no government can be worse than the Gaddafi regime.” John Baird; Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs

 

So Libya is a terrible place and Gaddafi is a terrible, terrible bastard, right? That’s why Canadian taxpayers will spend an estimated $80 million to have Canadian planes drop Canadian bombs on Libyan people: to save the people from their terrible, oppressive, corrupt government.

 

Well … here are some fun facts about Libya’s place in the world. Remember that NATO did NOT intervene in Iran, Egypt, Tunisia or Yemen when their people revolted. In Syria, people are still being slaughtered by their government every day, while NATO does nothing but impose weak sanctions.

 

According the United Nations Human Development Index (2010), which gave Libya a score of 0.755, the people of Libya, under the long reign of Muammar Gaddafi, enjoy better health, better education and more wealth than Iran (0.702), Tunisia (0.683), Egypt (0.620), Syria (0.589) and Yemen (0.439), where NATO did not intervene for the good of ‘the people.’ Overall, Libya scored 53rd out of 169 countries, better than Mexico (56), Costa Rica (62), Russia (65), Brazil (73), Turkey (83) and China (89). Indeed, Libya scored better than 17 of the 20 most populous nations on Earth, representing 63% of the world’s population. Though there are certainly well-off people in those 17 countries, there are also 99 other nations full of people that Libya outperformed, including 44 of the bottom 50 countries by HDI, that are not included in this statistic. I think it would be reasonable to assume that 75% of the world’s population has a lower quality of life than that which was provided by the long reign of the Gaddafi regime.

 

But that’s not all. Maybe Libya’s people have health, wealth and education, but certainly the women of Libya are oppressed, right? Not so, it would seem. According to UNICEF (2010), Libya’s “Gender Inequality” rank is 52nd (out of 169 nations). This is better than Iran (98), Tunisia (56), Egypt (108), Syria (103) and Yemen (138) where NATO did not step in to create a better society. Incidentally, in terms of gender equality, Libya also ranked better than Saudi Arabia (128), Chile (53), Argentina (60), Uruguay (54), Mexico (68), Peru (74), Brazil (80), Venezuela (64), Ecuador (86), Colombia (90), Jordan (76), Turkey (77), Thailand (69), Indonesia (100), South Africa (82), India (122) and Pakistan (112), just to name a few. UNICEF seems to think that women have it pretty good in Libya. Maybe we should bomb Mexico instead.

 

But the Gadaffi regime is oppressive right, and the citizens of Libya endure terrible human rights violations? Again, the truth does not seem to be so terrible. According to Gibney, Cornett, and Woods (2010), as reported in the UNHDR (2010) Libya scored 3 out of 5 for “Human Rights Violations.” Other countries scoring 3 out of 5 include: The United States of America, Israel, Greece, Ukraine, Venezuela, Tunisia, Indonesia and Turkey. Maybe Canada should send planes into the United States to overthrow their oppressive regime and protect their human rights. Stephen Harper has called Israel of beacon of hope, but they rank the same as Libya for human rights violations. That’s strange.

 

Countries that scored 4/5 for human rights violations (that is, worse than Libya) include: Egypt, Iran, Syria and Yemen, where NATO did not step in to protect human rights. Other countries scoring 4/5 include Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Brazil China and India. Incidentally, Colombia, where Stephen Harper has just signed a new free trade agreement with the government, got the worst possible score (5/5).

 

Just for fun … Canada scored 2/5, along with such countries as Switzerland, France and Denmark. Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Germany, Japan and the Netherlands all beat Canada, scoring 1 out 5. Other countries that had better human rights records than Canada include: Kuwait, Croatia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, Cyrus, Singapore, Oman, Kyrgyzstan, Namibia and Surinam. Way to go us! But wait!

 

There’s more! According to Reporters Without Border (2009), Libya received a “Press Freedom” score of 64.5. This is pretty bad, compared with Norway’s 0.0 and Canada’s 3.7, though Libya had 0 reported journalists imprisoned in the year 2009. Libya scored better than Syria (78.0; 1 arrest) and Yemen (83.4; 2 arrests) where NATO did not intervene in the name of freedom, but worse than Egypt (51.4; 3 arrests) and Tunisia (61.5; 2 arrests). Iran, which started the upheaval last year, scored worst of the bunch (104.1; 23 arrests). NATO didn’t intervene in Iran either.

 

Ok. So maybe the Libyan people have a reasonable quality of life, and women are fairly well empowered, and many countries have worse records for human rights and press freedom, but the Gaddafi regime is a military dictatorship, and that’s bad, right? Wrong again. Libya, the great military dictatorship did not import more than $1 million in arms in 2009 (SIPRI, 2010). Compare this with arms imports by Iran ($91 million), Tunisia ($7 million), Algeria (Libya’s neighbour at $1.5 billion, with a “B”), Egypt ($214 million), Syria ($292 million) and Yemen ($45 million). Now it’s possible that they make their own weapons, or maybe there was an embargo, but still it seems a bit unfair to pick on him because he spends his money on something other than the military. Incidentally, Libya spends 1.3% of its GDP on its military, the same percentage spent by Canada (2008; reported in SIPRI, 2010). Compare this with: Iran (2.7%), Tunisia (1.3%), Egypt (2.3%) and Syria (3.4%). And just for fun, check out: the USA (4.3%), and Israel, that beacon of hope (7.0%, more than five times the Libyan proportion).  Who is a threat to their neighbours?

 

Ok, ok. But the Libyan people are dissatisfied with their government, right? Wrong again. We are told that Libyans are miserable, but in 2008, only 2,100 people fled from Libya (UNHCR, 2010). Compare this with Iran (69,000), Tunisia (2,300), Algeria (9,100), Egypt (6,800) and Syria (15,200). And speaking of dissatisfaction, according to the Gallup Poll (2010), 64% of Libyans were satisfied with their standard of living. Compare this with: Japan (64%), France (72%) Greece (57%), Portugal (47%), Bulgaria (29%), Peru (54%), Russia (36%) and Iran (55%). Only 1/3 of Libyans were dissatisfied. And yet we helped an armed faction to overthrow their government. It’s worth nothing that the Conservatives achieved about 1/3 of the popular vote in 2011. Maybe we are next on NATO’s hit-list.

 

But Gadaffi is a selfish leader, who doesn’t care about his people. This is why only 88% of adults are literate in Libya (UNESCO, 2010). Compare this with: Iran (82%), Tunisia (78%), Algeria (73%), Egypt (66%), Syria (84%), Morocco (56%) and Yemen (61%). What a terrible leader this Gaddafi seems to be.

 

Canada, along with NATO, largely ignored the plight of Iran, Yemen, Egypt and Tunisia as their citizens rallied to topple their respective governments, all of whom scored worse than Libya on virtually every measure of human rights and quality of life. Every day reports are emerging of protesters in Syria being slaughtered as we stand idly by. Instead, we sent our planes and bombs into Libya, “to protect civilians,” to promote freedom and encourage democracy.

 

All this in spite of the fact that, on average, the Gaddafi government has provided Libyans with a higher quality of life, a more equal society and better human rights than are enjoyed by the vast majority of the people in the world.

 

So is Canada a peace loving country and a champion for freedom? Or did we support an armed uprising in a sovereign nation in order to install a government that would give Western corporations freer access to Libyan oil?

 

The United Nations statistics say that our government is lying to us. An estimated 11,000 Libyan civilians have died. Many were killed in our name, with our tax dollars and to our benefit.

 

Is this your Canada: killing civilians for economic prosperity?

 

I’d like to close the way I started, with the words of John Baird, the Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs: “Obviously no government can be worse than the Gaddafi regime.”

 

No government, that is, except for the 67% of world governments that ranked lower than the Gaddafi regime for the quality of life they provided to their citizens. Lies, lies, lies. And 11,000 Libyan families watched their loved ones die over the past 6-months, which is to say nothing of the thousands of members of the pro-government forces, who risked and gave their lives to defend their nation against foreign invaders: us.

 

Peace and love.



“Every man dies. Not every man really lives.” — William Wallace in Braveheart
August 28, 2011, 8:12 am
Filed under: Ethiopia | Tags: , , , ,

27 August, 2011

(I couldn’t sleep last night, so opened my computer, and this came out very unexpectedly.)

We’re alive, you and I, for the moment at least.

Alive? What is life?

A moment of awareness perhaps, followed by another and another; a thought and a feeling as now becomes then, again and again, on and on, until it’s off.

Life: a moment of awareness; a now. So then how to live life well?

Certainly not worry; such a waste of the now. And anger too, and sadness: a once in a life-time moment of awareness, here now and never here again; a once in a life-time spent with back turned from the light, all energy focused on the bad and the sad and the mad. Once in a life-time: gone and wasted forever.

And what of desire, and want: a now that is not good enough; a now that could be better; a now that is wasted wishing for a different, and impossible now. And now it is gone, too. And now there is regret for the then that wasn’t and the now that isn’t and the what might be that never will. Another moment is lost and the end of moments is now one moment closer.

And of course, tomorrow won’t ever come; can’t ever come. Tomorrow will always be tomorrow, as today will always, always be today. Now is all there is. So now how to live well?

Love. To love is to succumb to the now, to accept the now, to embrace the now for all that it is. As soon as now becomes filled with all that now isn’t, love comes to an end, replaced by judgement and desire and regret. How can I be happy with what is real if I want what isn’t? How can I be happy if I’m not happy. And in a blink, now is already gone again, wasted again, wasted forever and never to return.

Victims of our thoughts, it is impossible to live now. Our thoughts run and run and run, from wishes to regrets to wants, always rejecting the now. “If only,” they say. If only then were different. If only now could be. Then … in that then … then I will be happy. Not now though. Now, there are just so many things that aren’t what I want. Just so many things that can, could and could have been better, if only…

But lo, what a gift is life! So many nows have been wasted, but here, blooming ever anew is another. And now another and another and another, as thought becomes feeling and moment becomes moment. Here again is another opportunity; an occasion to live, to laugh and to smile. Here again, is a chance to love, to give love and to feel love.

And soon, soon, so so soon … they will stop.

So then how to live, moment to moment? How to embrace this bountiful spring of life, as each moment lost leaves one less moment left to be lived?

Victimized by thoughts of desire and want? Trapped in feelings of anger and sorrow and regret? Choosing to reject the only thing that is real?

Or in happiness and love; in gratitude for this rare and precious treasure of a thought and a feeling and a breath. A single breath that will be only once and will never, ever, anytime, anywhere, ever be again.

And there it’s gone again already, but no matter, for here again already is another.

How shall I spend it? How shall I live?

I choose happiness and gratitude.

Now is for kindness and love.

Peace and love.



“Remember that all through history the way of truth and love has always won. There have been tyrants and murderers and for a time they seem invincible but in the end, they always fall.” — Gandhi
August 23, 2011, 4:48 am
Filed under: Ethiopia | Tags: , , , , , , ,

23 August, 2011

I had a pretty good day yesterday.  I attended useful and interesting meetings, ate healthy food, had a good day at the gym and had a productive day at work.  On the way home, I stopped into an internet cafe and checked my Facebook.

Jack Layton had died of prostate cancer.

I knew he had been sick.  I had followed the conversation as his opponents attacked the NDP for appointing a rookie MP to lead the party while he sought treatment.  But dead?  No.  He can’t be dead.  Not Jack.  Not dead.

Jack Layton was the leader of a political party.  He will be remembered, in part, for leading that party to unprecedented successes.  But for myself, and I’m sure for millions of other Canadians, Jack Layton was so much more.

Some Canadians believe that a society is measured by how it treats its weakest citizens.  It is easy to cast judgement and condescension on the poor, the dirty, the criminal and the outcast.  It is much more difficult to empathize with them, to hold their hands and to listen to their stories.  The benefits to seeing, recognizing, accepting and loving the beautiful human being behind the poverty, anger and filth are beyond the power of words to describe.  When one stops holding oneself above another person, no matter their condition, their behaviour or their past, and sees them as an equal – a brother or sister who is suffering – the beauty in their eyes quickly becomes apparent.   Seeing the beauty and recognizing the human being, love quickly conquers condemnation.  The desire to support them and help them to find happiness and hope comes to the fore.  Caring then becomes easy.

Jack Layton cared.  He dedicated his life to fighting for those people who society had rejected.  He fought for the homeless, crusading tirelessly to create a more supportive system and compassionate culture for those unable to care for themselves.  He fought for the poor, using what power he had to save them a few dollars here or there, knowing well how much a bus fare costs to a widow barely surviving on welfare.  He fought for those whose gender identity didn’t match the societal norm, creating a more inclusive system and a more tolerant society.  He fought for the criminal, choosing to empower their future potential rather than to criticize their past mistakes.  He fought for compassion.  He fought for tolerance.  He fought for hope.  He fought for love.

For those of us who believe that the greatness of Canada is measured by our goodness, rather than by our wealth, Jack Layton was our ambassador.  He gave a voice – a powerful and passionate voice – to the cause of equality and justice.  He gave us a vision to support, a human being to connect with and an idea to believe in.  To taught us to believe in ourselves, and to fight and to fight and to fight through opposition and adversity and loss, and to keep on fighting until the fight is won.  He gave us hope.  He gave me hope.

Though I’ve never voted for the NDP, yesterday I lost my leader.  Politics are an extension of human values, and in dedicating his life to the greatest of human values – compassion, generosity and love – he inspired me.  He inspired me to stand up for my values, to speak up for what I believe is right and to never, ever back down.  Though I met the man only once, and only briefly, he changed my life forever.

Thank you, Mr. Layton, for giving us a cause, a vision and a voice.  Though our nation and our lives are now darker in your absence, your legacy and light live on in the hearts and minds of every Canadian who believes that goodness conquers greed, and that love conquers all.  We will carry on.  We will not give up.  We will emerge victorious.  Thank you, Mr. Layton.  Thank you, and farewell.



“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable.” — JFK
August 22, 2011, 6:01 am
Filed under: Ethiopia | Tags: , , , , , , ,

20 August, 2011

 
I don’t know if it started in Iran, but it was during the Iranian uprising last year that a new revolution first came to my attention. Protesters turned the tables on the government (almost) with the help of a magical little creature called Twitter. Citizens with cell-phones took raw pictures and videos of their realities and instantly broadcast them to the world. One image, showing the dead body of a young woman, still lingers in my mind, as do chilling tweets describing violent oppression as the Iranian government cracked-down on those individuals with the impudence to stand against it. At the time, it was not uncommon for those tweeters to fall silent, never to be heard from again.

 

I first learned about the Twitter Revolution through the concerned postings of a handful of my Facebook friends, who were losing nights of sleep in order to sit up, ‘watching’ the events unfold on their Twitter-feeds. (As an aside, I think it’s interesting that Iran has remained largely silent throughout the Arab-Spring. Did the government successfully beat the dissenting masses into terrified submission, or did they only succeed in blocking the websites?) Youtube, Facebook and Twitter were heralded at the time as ushering in a new era of freedom for the oppressed of the world. The lone camera at Tiananmen Square had been replaced by a million people with a million cameras. No longer could governments get away with bloody murder without the world knowing. No longer would the voices of dissent be isolated islands in a sea of fear. Things were going to change.

 

And sure enough, they have. From the taseing at the Vancouver airport to the murder of Tamil civilians in Sri Lanka, cell-phone videos, uploaded and viewed by millions have tipped the scales of justice and forced the hands of power around the globe. The ongoing Arab-Spring represents the so-far culmination of this movement. The massive protests in Tahir Square and across Egypt were organized, documented and given incredible momentum by the power of tiny mobile devices. The ongoing violent repression of anti-government protests in Syria continues to be broadcast daily, in living colour, on televisions, computer monitors and smart-phones around the world. In Yemen, Tunisia, Libya and Bahrain (and anywhere else), technology has and is changing everything, making anything possible and literally rewriting history … again.

 

Much of the world is celebrating, and indeed, why shouldn’t they be? The power of mobile devices, wirelessly connected to the internet is realizing its promise to usher in a new era of global freedom, as one despotic regime after another is forced to contend with the power of the informed and organized masses. Those governments that attempt to restrict internet freedoms, from Libya to Cuba to China, are chastised and berated by civilians, businesses and heads of state alike. Internet freedom, they say, and the open-communication it facilitates, is the right of all people, and no one should stand in its way.

 

At least that was the story until a few weeks ago. A few weeks ago, riots broke out across London. The rioters, we are told, made exceptional use of BlackBerry Messaging (BBM) in coordinating their attacks and in evading the police. Research in Motion, the makers of BlackBerry, agreed to cooperate with police in providing records of BBM messages sent during the riots. Prime Minister David Cameron suggested that restrictions be applied to websites that could be used to coordinate unrest. All civilian disturbances are equal on Animal Farm, but some civilian disturbances are more equal than others. The exercise of freedom is great when it’s on the other side of the world. The exercise of freedom in the West is far less desirable.

 

A few months ago, for the second time in three years, police officers on the San Francisco Subway murdered a poor man. The first incident, which was caught on cell-phone video, involved a man being held face-down and executed at point-blank range. The officer received 7-months in prison for his crime. A July protest in response to the most recent incident shut down part of the San Francisco Subway (called the Bay Area Rapid Transit, or BART) for a short time. A second protest was planned for August 11. That protest never really happened, because for the first time in American history, officials turned off the cell-network to prevent the protesters from organizing. Mubarak did the same when the Tahir Square protests were accelerating, opting to silence dissent by stifling the capacity of protesters to communicate. (The San Francisco issue has since been dubbed “muBARTak.”)

 

Of course, in San Francisco, as in London, such restrictions on open-communication and internet freedom are justified from on high. They say that they are protecting public safety. They say that they are acting in the best interests of the population. Though I haven’t heard it said, I don’t imagine the rhetoric slung by Gadafhi or Mubarak or Assad sounds much different. Surely they condemn the isolated actions of a small number of trouble-making dissidents and thugs. Surely they suggest that, in acting to silence and stifle this dissent by cutting off communications, that they too are only acting to maintain the peace and to protect the public’s best-interest. Of course, that was them and this is us. They are despotic dictators. We are peace-loving people, who wouldn’t harm a fly if it tried to sell oil to the Russians.

 

In Egypt, as well as in Tunisia, Libya and Syria, a group of guerrilla techies (Telecomix) banded together and set up ‘pirate’ cell-networks so that the protests could be seen and heard across their countries and around the world. Many regard them as heroes of the revolution. In San Francisco, a group of guerrilla techies (Anonymous) banded together to ‘hacktivist’ the BART website. They are now under investigation from the FBI.
I don’t suppose any of this should be surprising. The double-standard (‘demonization vs. rose-coloured-glasses’) is the usual modus operandi for the powers that be in Western culture. For generations, the double-standard has allowed our industrialists to gleefully rape and pillage the world and her people, drawing apathetic consent from our populace by painting themselves (read: ourselves) as valiant and virtuous heroes, working always in defence of good and freedom and kittens stuck in trees. I am worried though, that a dangerous precedent is being set. At Seattle, Davos, Toronto, etc., they proved that peaceful protest is no protection from the violent iron fist of global capitalism. If that protest becomes inconveniently large/loud, they can and will silence it, with impunity, by any means necessary. Now they have decided that it’s ok to deny us the freedom to communicate should we be so audacious as to stand together in opposition to their policies and actions or in defence of our freedoms. They can murder us, as they did on the BART, and if we don’t like it, we can just shut up. The Arab-Spring has demonstrated to the world just how powerful the freedom to communicate can be. It would seem that it is far too powerful for our leaders to risk affording such freedom to us. We should trust them though. They are only acting in our best interests. War is peace. Ignorance is strength. Freedom is slavery.
Peace and love.



“Washing one’s hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.” — Paulo Freire
August 16, 2011, 2:50 am
Filed under: Ethiopia | Tags: , , , , , ,

14 August, 2011

One of the rare treats of living in a city like Addis Ababa is listening to the city fall asleep.  It’s 8:02pm now, and it’s Ramadan, the Muslim Holy month.  Soon the neighbourhood Mosques will start singing at full volume again.  The Mosquely chorus will continue until about 10:15, when a long string of “Allah Ahkbars” will forecast the coming of silence.  I don’t mind the singing, especially when you can hear the “congregation” singing-along in the background, but it can get a little tiring after a few hours (and after a few weeks).  Also, every so often the singer breaks into a mad coughing fit.  As the closest Mosque is less than 100m from my window, it really does sound like he is coughing into my ear, which kind of spoils the groovy Muhammadian mood.  After the echoes of the last “Allah Ahkbar” have faded and the loud-speaker crackles into silence, there is sometimes  a reprieve of an hour or so before the dogs have their turn at singing.  I’m grateful that the dogs haven’t yet accumulated enough money to buy a loudspeaker of their own, though who is to say when that day will arrive.

My neighbourhood is populated by a rotating assortment of 25 to 50 dogs of all shapes, sizes  and colours.  By day, they roam about, alone or in packs, sniffing for food, fighting with each other and trying to play leap-frog.  They are not very good at leap-frog, as I have yet to see a single dog successfully climb over top of the dog in front of him.  They practice diligently, though, so I am sure they will master it before too long.

I’m not sure where these dogs go at night, as I am too busy lying in bed with a pillow over my head, trying to block out the incessant barking.  (It’s 8:08 and the Mosque just started.)  Who knew that dogs liked to bark so much?  Near and far, quiet, loud and very loud, dozens of doggy voices ring out in the night the way dozens of birdy voices ring out in the morning.  The barking and growling persist until somewhere between midnight and 2am, at which time I must assume they get tired and agree to disagree until the following night.

I love watching dogs, and watching a pack of wild urban dogs is a unique treat.  I often stop as I pass by on my way to and from work to see how their leap-frog practice is coming along.  This particular pack of dogs seems to be ‘Alpha’d’ by a big-ish blonde dog, who walks with a limp and has a distinct ‘white-trashy’ look about his face.  He growls a lot, and frequently sends other dogs whimpering away with their tails between their legs.  He is the most ardent leap-frog practiser of the bunch, and often attacks other dogs when he sees them practicing leap-frog without him.  He is also the only neighbourhood dog who I have seen actually growl at a person.  Of course, a group of men immediately rewarded his growls by pummelling him with stones.  Ethiopians, it turns out, have very little tolerance for insubordinate animals.  Just last week, I watched a shepherd literally punch his goat in the jaw for wandering too far afield.  The blonde dog quickly retreated amid a hail of falling rocks, cursing our opposable thumbs under his doggy-breath.

One day, not too long ago, he was challenged by a brown dog of about the same make and model.  The brown dog had been happily working on his leap-frog skills with a sexy little bitch when Blondie came along and told Brownie that he had no business practicing leap-frog without him.  Most dogs seem to immediately back down from Blondie, but I guess Brownie really wanted to improve his leap-frogging skills.  After a little casual ass-sniffing, Brownie stood up to Blondie.  I’ve seen lots of dogs play-fighting in my life, but when a dog really decides to put on his “don’t f*ck with me” smile, it’s quite terrifying to behold.  The bared teeth and growls lasted perhaps 30 seconds before Blondie made his move.  It was like the classic ‘ball-of-dust-with-limbs-flailing’ seen so often in cartoons.  I could see immediately why Blondie was the Alpha.  The fight lasted only 10 seconds or so before Brownie was sent scampering and whimpering away, bleeding from at least three places.  Blondie, jaws dripping crimson, wasted no time in claiming his spoils.  He immediately commenced with his leap-frog practice, but still didn’t manage to get all the way over the little dog.  Maybe he was tired from the fight.  I’ve never seen that brown dog again.  Violence and blood-shed, it would seem, are very effective means of projecting doggy-power.

I’ve been thinking a lot about power lately.

Over the past couple weeks, the international news has been dominated by a handful of stories: the riots in London, the uprising in Syria, the civil-war in Libya, the trial of Mubarak in Egypt, the famine in Somalia and the debt-crisis in the United States.  In response to the London riots, the media and government in the UK immediately began denigrating the rioters as “mindless thugs” and “nihilistic and feral teenagers.”  Parliament was called back for an emergency session, the focus of which was to determine appropriate punishment for the so-called wrong-doers.

A well-spoken minority of pundits and bloggers asked if maybe the discussion shouldn’t be focused instead on the underlying causes of the violence.  Of course, such pragmatism has no place in modern Western culture, so these voices were largely ignored in favour of the establishment’s line of discipline and moral decay.  Still, many important questions have been posed about the incendiary role of rising unemployment among the ‘lower-class,’ the increasing lack of opportunities for lower-class youth, austerity cuts to social services and racially prejudicial police behaviour.  It’s been suggested that at the roots of the riots lay an increasing feeling of economic alienation and a perception of powerlessness in those disenfranchised youth who gleefully looted and burned.

Feeling powerless isn’t a very positive feeling: facing your family with guilt because you can’t find a decent job; looking with envy at the wealth-objects that are perpetually out of your reach; being shaken down by aggressive police officers because of the colour of your skin.  I’m sure most of us have felt victimized at one time or another, with little recourse but to grit our teeth and carry on.  I remember having a spear thrust towards my chest in South Sudan, and feeling completely vulnerable.  I remember it as one of the worst days of my life.  I walked home with my head down, curled up in a ball in on my bed and didn’t leave our compound for a week.  Feeling weak sucks.  There can be little doubt, however, as to the strength one feels when sending armoured police officers fleeing as a member of an anonymous mob or that feeling of power that accompanies basking in the flames of a burning police station.  There are many kinds of power, but few, if any, are as potent as violence.  I wonder how many cases of violence – from genocide to school-yard bullying – are the product of a desire to mitigate a feeling of powerlessness.

In this sense, the London riots aren’t much different than the civil war in Libya, where generational abuses of power have caused the historically marginalized to take up arms against their oppressors.  NATO joined the fight not to protect human rights, but to gain control of oil: the fuel that powers commerce and industry.  Syria too, and indeed the entire “Arab-Spring,” is a story of the wielding of violence (or the threat of violence through peaceful masses) to transfer entrenched power from the powerful few to the powerless many.  Education protests in Chile and the Gaza flotillas share the common theme, as do the ongoing drug-battles spilling out from Colombia and Mexico through much of Latin-America.  To die of hunger is perhaps the quintessence of powerlessness, and Somalia’s famine itself has been greatly exacerbated by the fundamentalist tyranny of al-Shabaab as they fight for regional and religious domination.  Even the debt-crisis in the United States – a standoff between powerful factions of government – has a struggle for power at its roots.

Once upon a time, some psychologists put a dog in a cage and then electrocuted it.  Don’t worry.  The dog could jump out of the electrified cage and into another, inert cage.  When you inflict pain on a living thing, it tends to learn pretty fast how to get away from that pain.  The dogs learned fast, and jumped immediately to safety.  Then the psychologists, those sadists, electrified both sides of the cage.  After trying unsuccessfully to get away from the pain, the dogs eventually just laid down, suffered and presumably waited to die.  Even if the electricity was subsequently turned off in the other cage, the dogs still just laid there whimpering, with sad looks on their little puppy-dog faces.  Having attempted to escape and failed, they resigned themselves to their fate, and didn’t bother to try again.  The researchers defined this as “learned helplessness.”  Many connections have since been made to human behaviour.

Nobody wants to feel powerless and weak.  Perhaps even more than this, nobody wants to identify themselves as powerless and weak.  The implications for the human ego of such a self-appraisal run in the direction of depression and suicide.  But if an individual who feels powerless is provided with an opportunity to exert control over some aspect of their situation, they can use that opportunity to redefine their self-image.  They can bolster their ego, and see themselves more as they would like to be – as powerful, capable and strong.  All the better if, in so doing, they can redefine their former oppressor, whether a person, an institution or a system, as somehow weaker than they are.  Faced with a oppressive situation, and no constructive opportunities to influence a change, who can really blame a person for joining a gang, or carpe-diem-ing when ‘no-consequence violence’ becomes easily-available.  The alternative is that they spend the rest of their lives thinking of themselves and meaningless and pathetic.  It seems unlikely that anybody taking part in those rioting mobs felt vulnerable, weak, meaningless or pathetic.  What would you choose?

Once upon a time, some psychologists went into a nursing home and set up a couple of electrified cages.  They put the old people into one side of the cage and I’m kidding.  They randomly picked half the residents and gave them plants.  Have you ever been in a nursing home?  They can be pretty depressing places.  Formerly strong and capable human beings sit in chairs and stare at the walls all day as saliva drips from the corners of their mouths.  They have generally lost the ability to care for themselves, and so rely on others to do most everything for them.  Even their schedule is largely fixed.  They eat when they are told.  They sleep when they are told.  They rely on adult-diapers, and are bathed at a scheduled time.  It is difficult to imagine a situation more rife with powerlessness.  So psychologists came in and gave half the patients plants.  It doesn’t take much to care for a plant.  Even people who can’t bathe or dress themselves can probably muster the energy to pour a cup of water into a pot every once in awhile.  Do you know what happened?  Those residents who received the plants lived significantly longer, on average, than those residents who didn’t.  Cool, eh?

Which isn’t to say that we should go find all the unemployed and unengaged youth in our cities and give them plants to care for (though that doesn’t sound like an altogether terrible idea).  But there seems to be value in providing people with a concrete reason for feeling important, and like they are capable of exerting influence on their situation.  This value extends beyond dogs, geriatrics and would-be rioters.  How many school-yard bullies are victims of violence at home, who then victimize others in response?  How many wife-abusers were themselves subjugated by violence in their homes?  The so-called ‘cycle-of-violence’ is well known.  The Rwandan Hutus were the powerless majority, and a recent study in South Africa found that as many as one in four South African men in the townships anonymously confessed to raping a woman.  Importantly, these were not upper or middle class men.  They were also not the poorest of the poor.  As in Rwanda, the majority of the perpetrators were those living on the threshold of poverty – they could see and understand the life they desired, but had no means to attain it.  An important question thus might be: how can we provide productive power to those who perceive themselves as frustrated and powerless?

Our modern world is defined by an increasing disparity between rich and poor.  Especially over the past 30 years, the richest 1% have become phenomenally wealthy, while the poorest 60% live on less than $10/day, and the poorest 20% cling to life on the brink of starvation.  This trend has only accelerated since the global recession of 2008, with banks and money lenders consistently getting paid in full (with interest, of course), while the lower and middle classes are forced to endure successive rounds of austerity cuts that carve away at their social services and safety nets.  In countries around the world, violent riots and peaceful protests have brought citizens to the streets in response.  Generally, these protests are to no avail, as the bankers get paid while the people get shit on.  Rather than providing a feeling a power to the powerless, this trend is accomplishing the opposite and worse.  Not only are the powerless rapidly losing what little power they had, the number of those counted among the marginalized is increasing every day.  Movements to large-scale violence can be potent and deadly, however, and have proven to be an effective means by which the powerless masses can re-assert their positive self-images as individuals and in-groups.  With the leaders in the UK, Greece and other countries continuing to ignore the negative blow-back from spiralling inequality, there is little cause for optimism about a peaceful future.  Truly, there may be great cause for fear.

As a privileged white male from a G-8 nation, I really hope that I am wrong.  For the time-being, Blondie continues to have his way with the ladies.  Inevitably, however, the day will arise when a younger and stronger dog will feel that he deserves to be Alpha.  All things go, as they say, and all’s fair in love, war and leap-frog.

Peace and love.




Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.