"Just"

When I visited Swaziland, I met at length with the king in private, and attempted to persuade him, with a combination of subtlety and argument, that the world was increasingly impatient, his people were decimated, and his behaviour was unacceptable. Then we held a press conference together and I held my tongue. 

I have felt guilty about that to this day. Whom did it serve by the bloated ego of the monarch? So I’ve rationalized my actions: I’ve persuaded myself that it’s not for me to do, that it should be done by UN officials with far greater authority. I’m merely a part-time envoy.

But I know my excuses for remaining silent in the face of such behaviour don’t wash.  -p. 184-185, Race Against Time

Stephen Lewis - possibly the best known and longest-standing advocate for HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment - said "I'm merely a part-time envoy." It was an excuse, a rationalization. A way to make the pain of complicity, of doing 'nothing' (and I don't use that word lightly) when words could have been spoken go away. Make the questions of "what if?" and the statements of "if only.." stop coming. Yet the choice not to speak out and stand up left him feeling guilty - guilt he still feels. 

What it comes down to is that we are all "merely" someone. I'm 'just' a twenty year old, I'm 'just' a student, I'm 'just' a mother, I'm 'just' an employee, I'm 'just' an employer, I'm 'just' an executive, I'm 'just' a politician, I'm 'just' a teacher, I'm 'just' one person

To dismiss the power that we have as 'just' one person - no matter who that person is - is to rationalize the impossible. I cannot rationalize my choice to do nothing on so many fronts because I'm 'just' a student, to be complicit in all the ills of the world because I'm 'just' a student.  

To wait until I'm something 'more' than 'just' a student reinforces messages our society is insistent on sending: that powerful and influential people are more than 'just' a person; that they are somehow better than the rest of us, that they have done something to deserve the power they hold. But we need to ask why they hold that power - and the answer lies (partially) in the fact that we are willing to give it to them, to accept their ideas and their judgements about what and who is important and will get funding and be noticed. Waiting also fundamentally undermines the value of the person I am in the present (student, mother, politician) - while that person is worth no more than anyone else, neither is it worse any less.  It concentrates power in the hands of those who society has collectively agreed (implicitly or explicitly) has power because I am one less voice challenging and questioning if I wait. 

We are all "just" one person. We are all oppressed in one way or another, we all have things working against us taking ourselves and our ideas seriously. It is easy to buy into those belittling messages that rob us of self-confidence and self-esteem because they are pervasive, and because to some degree, they make it easier to sleep.  As "just" one person, I'm not complicit in anything. 

But, if we can take ourselves seriously and question and challenge and critically think about what is going on and refuse to be too busy to tell others what we think the face of the world will change. We have to stop writing ourselves off as "just" someone and we have to realize that collectively, and as individuals, we have more power than we realize, our ideas are more valid than we realize, and our concerns - whether they be about food, poverty, health, the environment, human rights, women, education, children, sex workers, soldiers domestically or internationally - our concerns are the ones that should be on the agenda. We have to stop waiting.

"It’s not possible...to grab the heads of state by the scruff of the neck and shake them into equality. But it should be the role of the UN family to shame, blame and propose solutions, all the while yelling from the rooftops that inequality is obscene.  Only then will change have a chance.” –p.143-144, Race Against Time

Considerations

These two things came up today in various places, and I did my best to tell them people who said them they were wrong. Now I'm going to write them here to make myself feel better.

Statement: "Africa does not have human rights."

1. First off all, 'Africa' isn't homogeneous.
2. Many cultures in Africa are based on principles of equality and have a greater community  focus than we do in North America, which would suggest regardless of Charters, basic ideas of equal distribution of resources are put in to practice much more there than here.
3. Many of the human rights violations that have occurred Africa, stem, either directly or indirectly, from colonialism and slavery. For example, Rwanda and South Africa.

Statement: "Female genital mutilation is a culturally acceptable practice because it has been around for a long time."

1. Just because it has happened for a long time doesn't make it right. Examples include: women haven't always voted, homosexuality used to be a crime, we used to think the world was flat.
2. Women have been oppressed in many cultures on many levels and oppression is always bad.

         

Louise Arbour: Job Well Done

Tonight on CBC, an interview Louise Arbour, the current UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, a former Supreme Court judge and a highly esteemed Canadian aired.  She was being interviewed as her term comes to an end in July, after a few years at the UN.

She has done exceptional work, and her work has included developed countries, such as the US, rather than solely developing countries.  She worked tirelessly and refused to say she had accomplished enough, especially in the context of Darfur. Her comment on Tibet is as follows: “The bottom line is China is ready to open its door to 30,00 foreign journalist in August, why can’t it open its doors to 1 or 2 foreign journalists in Tibet now when the world is equally interested as to what is happening in Tibet as it will be on what will be happening during the Olympics. I mean that I think is the main question” and I agree wholeheartedly. 

Despite this, Harper instructed the government not to comment on her work as UN High Commissioner, despite the fact that she's pushed the boundaries and pushed the UN and other countries to actually protect the human rights to which they have committed. Nearly every other country has congratulated her for her contributions. Except ours - and hers. What ever happened to Canada as upholders of human rights and democracy and peace keeping? 

Conservatives, that's what.