Unembedded

I just came from a fascinating slide show from a few independant journalists who had been convering the war in Iraq from before the US invasion until quite recently. This was a remarkable presentation not only for the incredible quality of the photo's and the stories they told, but primarily for the depth it gave to life in Iraq. Contrary to what many would have us believe, reality is neither pro-war or anit-war. Life, the real facts and realitues, the things that actually happen and cause other things to happen are not black and white. The world we live in is not black and white. This slideshow and presentation captured wonderfully the simple realities of life on the ground, both for better and worse. No partisanship, no snide political remarks, no admonishments or name calling or foot stomping or rhetoric. Only the stories and photos that come from living there for years and watching history unfold. This event is among the first in a tour promoting the gallery display of their photo's and presentation, they will soon be in Virginia, Toronto, and I'm not sure where else yet, but seek them out at www.unembedded.net and book them at a venue near you soon.

Those that have known me for awhile may know I long held journalists in low regard, for the way I thought they mis-represented the world and reality. On the one hand, my notion that the world is not even remotly close to the way it is presented on the evening news, in the daily paper, or in the magazines has only been confirmed by my lifes experiance, both at home, then in Cuba, Sri Lanka, and most recently Haiti. But where I once held jounalists responsable for the mis-information, I had latley begun to suspect it is in fact the editors and publishers who are to blame. I began on this train of thought in Haiti, where all the journo's I met were consious, decent people with an affinity for the truth and who truly wanted to paint an accurate picture of events on the ground for the world at large. I was there, in the slums, at the polls, in the jails, in the courts, at the NGO meetings and I often saw jouralists. But the news being reported back home was not the same news that happened on the ground in front of me. How could this be, I asked myself? The answer is in an office in New York, an editor or publisher who takes a story, cuts it in half, takes out all the big words, and re-writes the caption to the photo. This suspicion was confirmed for me by the folks who spoke tonight.

I spoke with them at length after the presentation, and we disscussed this phenomenon. Thanks to the power of the internet and self publication, more information is available. This means more of the truth, but it also means more of the garbage. How to sort the wheat from the chaff is still and ongoing issue in these heady times, but I am convinced the truth, while rarely to be found in the daily newspaper, is out there, and sometimes is actually closer than going to the dusty streets and bombed out neighborhoods where realtiy is a fact of life.

Semantics and the "Third World"

For a few years now I have struggled with a question of terminology. What do you call a country with a standard of living somewhat less than that of the United States. Ah hell, even there I fall into the trap of definition, in this case “standard of living.” It would seem that in referring to things as complicated, nebulous, and fraught with political agenda and consequence, trying to assign an accurate and scientifically rigorous definition to these things only serves to leave out some of the very things it means to include. A definition may be precise, but it may be precisely wrong. Instead we turn to the model of example. Rather than define what a standard of living is or is not and what level exactly, we can use examples to indicate meaning, much as a primary language teacher would use examples to indicate the meaning of esoteric concepts like “in front of” or “more than”.

This question had been rattling around quietly in my mind for some time until it made itself clear one afternoon in Sri Lanka. I was speaking to a friend, a native and expatriate of Sri Lanka now residing in London. I mentioned in an off handed way that this was not my first third world country, and she bristled at the term. I quickly corrected myself and used “developing nation” instead. This seemed to fit for awhile until, some time and some countries later, that idea and term was also challenged.

This time the challenge came not from the outside, but from within, as I sat reading about social and economic rights in Haiti, fresh from a recent trip there myself. The author used the term “deprived world”, and suddenly that bold assertation threw the shortcomings of my previous answer into sharp relief. “Developing Nation” carries with it several assumptions that experience and reality has not born out. First, that development is actually happening, that there is progress being made of some kind toward a better standard of living. What then of those places that are stagnant in their poverty and misery (Haiti in the 70's and 80's) to say nothing of those actively backsliding (Cuba in the early 90's). To call these places “developing” is wishful thinking at best. And what about the other part of that label, the “Nation?” What about places where the nation state is none existent, under civil war, military coup, or unrecognized by other countries? (Palestine, Haiti, Rwanda, North Korea, Cuba, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, etc, etc...)

No, the term deprived world seems to fit far better, if only one stops to consider certain realities. First, deprived; that is to say their condition is not a product of fate or bad luck, but rather a consequence of action (or inaction), and generally traceable to inequalities of power. Yep, violence, abuse, poverty are all the result of rising tides of inequality. The current condition of most countries cited as examples and scores of others as well, is directly traceable to the influence or previous rule of another, more powerful country. France and Haiti, Belgium and Rwanda, England and Sri Lanka, the United States and Guatemala, and the list goes on. Deprived implies the relatively recent nature of the poverty; I can think of no place or race on earth that at one point or another did not flourish and thrive. The dirt floor poor country of Mongolia once ruled the largest empire in the world. The people in bombed out mud huts in Iraq once exported the first known human civilizations from the Mesopotamia river valley. There is a lesson in this, if we would hear it.

Finally, distinguishing between “nation” and “world” also lets us see those in our own backyard who live in these same conditions. One need not travel to Sub-Saharan Africa to witness the ravages of AIDS and multidrug resistant TB on a homeless and pennyless population, that can be found right here on the North American continent, and even within our own borders, as the inequalities of power continue to breed structural violence.

This is not to say there is no developing world, indeed I would count places such as Thailand firmly in the camp of the developing world as their people and society progress toward a higher standard of living in a more or less peaceful manner, but they, like every nation on earth, have a deprived segment of their population.


Whew, I hope you’ll forgive me for using this blog as a forum to test drive a few newish ideas and arguments, and not just a place to tell you about where and what I’m doing. If ya’ll have any comment or criticism about this piece or any other I may write, please let me know. If I’m not clear or wander off topic, slap me around and help me get better.

Thanks

Home sweet....apartment?

I am home, or at least I am home to Flagstaff, if not actually in my home. As you probably know, my home burned up a few weeks ago while I was in Haiti. Hot coals on the back porch, gust of wind, buring roof, you know, the usual.

So I got back into town from my 6 week excursion to Haiti and promptly set about dealing with insurance, contractors, cleaners, and finding somewhere to live myself. Actually, I had always wanted to live downtown, and now that the insurance company is paying for a little 1 bedroom apartment, I can. walking distance to the library, post office, bank, bars, coffeee shops...jeez, I could get used to that.

So getting back into the swing of things bit by bit. Since most of my clothes were in the house during the fire, since I got back in town I have had only the clothes I took to the carribean, and this just as the biggest winter storm of the year hits Flagstaff and dumps 3 feet of snow.

As far as things lost, most of it is no great concern and really a good opportunity to down size from the massive heaps of junk the house has collected over the past few years. what I do regret loosing is the things that cannot be replaced: the Cuban rum, the Sri Lankan Arrack and tea and spices. Stuff that you just can't go to the walmart to find again.

But it is good to be home, to be able to walk down the street and greet friends at every turn, and in english no less. Some folks, knowing my tendancy to wander, have asked me how long I'll be around for this time or where I am headed next. right now I can't say for certain, or even for maybe.