One of the most pressing issues the global community faces today is the continued search for reliable alternative sources of energy production. For too long, humanity’s almost indiscriminate use of fossil fuels for energy has now led to two major problems. Firstly, the burning of fossil fuels is a major factor contributing to environmental degradation. Specifically, the green house gases released during the burning process are direct causes of ozone depletion and global warming. Secondly, we cannot simply rely on fossil fuels indefinitely. Our usage of this valuable source of energy is limited. Sooner or later, our growing energy needs will outweigh its sustainability. Some countries of course, consume significantly larger amounts of energy then others. To put things into perspective, the top two energy producing countries, China and the USA, together produced approximately three and a half billion tones of coal in 2006 representing more than half of the world’s total coal production. The USA particularly used 90 percent of the 1.05 billion tones of coal it produced to sustain 49 percent its energy needs.

These issues have put pressure on major energy consuming countries to seek alternative and ‘greener’ sources of energy. Technology has already enabled us to harness renewable and environmentally-friendlier sources of energy such as hydro and solar power. However, such sources of energy are not easily controlled and may not be sufficient to provide the required amount of energy to meet minimum the demands of people. Hence, this leads me to the main issue of this entry – the viability of major energy-consuming countries turning to nuclear power to replace most of their energy needs.

There has been an ongoing debate as to whether nuclear power can eventually takeover the role of fossil fuels in energy production. Let’s consider the benefits of nuclear power. The most obvious advantage nuclear power has over the burning of fossil fuels is the fact that the amount of greenhouse gases released would be tremendously reduced. Furthermore, the efficiency of energy production is much higher through nuclear power. The usage of nuclear energy is also seen as highly sustainable compared to fossil fuels which take millions of years to form beneath the Earth’s crust.

Despite its benefits, people who oppose nuclear power will immediately cite the Chernobyl disaster in as a reason to put a hold on the expansion of nuclear power. The explosion of the Russian nuclear power plant in 1986 resulted in thousands of deaths from nuclear fallout. Besides this, the threat of terrorism is often used as well. Critics of nuclear power often fear that a country might use nuclear power plants as a means of proliferating nuclear weapon technology under the guise of supplying energy. They also are wary of nuclear power plants being vulnerable to terrorist groups. Finally, the high cost of maintaining a nuclear power plant may make it unfeasible for poorer nations to adopt it on a large scale.

From my perspective, the benefits offered by nuclear power outweigh its potential dangers. It boils down to a matter of risk management. On one hand, we have the risk of a potential nuclear disaster. On the other, we have the risk of increased global warming over time. Human nature usually tends to place emphasis in short term rather than long term risks which may result in governments as well as NGOs going against nuclear energy. Yes, radioactive fallout from an unfortunate disaster in a nuclear power plant will definitely cause major damage to any society but this is an issue of responsible management of the power plant. The Chernobyl disaster happened in 1986 and after two decades, technology is bound to have increased safety standards of nuclear power plants. When it comes to the issue of terrorism, these fears are somewhat unfounded. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) closely monitors all nuclear reactors in countries that have joined the United Nations (UN). In addition, nuclear reactors are usually heavily fortified. For example, US nuclear reactors have electronically monitored double row tall fences and a sizable force of armed guards.

Ultimately, it all boils down to the choosing of the lesser of two evils. It is between averting an unlikely nuclear disaster and averting what I believe is a far greater threat of global warming that would eventually spell disaster for not just one country but the world.

References:

1) http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/figes1.html

2) http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/security-enhancements.html

The internet has certainly come a long way since its introduction to the world in the early 1990s. Over the past decade or so, the internet has evolved from simply a source of information for people to a means in which people can exchange their thoughts, ideas and opinions with others on a scale never seen before. It has transformed from a one-way source of information to a two-way information superhighway. Instead of the mere ‘library’ it once was, the internet is now a massive ‘forum’ where people send and receive knowledge and opinions on an almost unrestricted level.

The term ‘Web 2.0’ can mean different things to different people. For some, it signifies the growing role of the internet as the world’s most popular platform for exchanging ideas and opinions. To others, it embodies the ever-increasing interactivity and interconnectivity of the internet. To me, it also describes a trend I find rather disturbing – the creeping of the internet our lives that bring with it certain detrimental issues.

With ‘Web 2.0’ comes a plethora of programmes and software like YouTube, Wikipedia and Limewire. All of these are aimed at creating an environment for web users to easily exchange data at speeds unheard of before.

In 2004, Harvard student Mark Zuckerberg launched Facebook. To anyone reading this blog entry, Facebook would probably need no introduction. In April 2008, the popularity of this social-networking tool overtook its main competitor, MySpace.com. Zuckerberg in turn, is now seeing riches he probably never dreamt of getting his hands on. Anyway, I am not about to embark on a ‘Facebook-bashing’ spree. That would just make me a hypocrite. After all, I am an active Facebook user. I would just like to express a little concern over certain privacy issues pertaining to Facebook.

Firstly, a certain clause in the Facebook privacy agreement already illustrates my point – “We may share your information with third parties, including responsible companies with which we have a relationship.” This begs the question of who exactly these responsible companies are. I doubt anyone would like to have his or her personal details in the hands of an unknown party. Granted, the information I am talking about here is not of the extremely sensitive kind like credit card, bank account and identity card numbers. Nevertheless, it is not uncommon for people to display their contact numbers, the names of their employers and a host of other information on their profile pages and on top of that, allow them to be viewed by absolutely anyone. This could be analogous to someone walking on the street carrying a signboard with all of his or her personal details. Do they really want that? It also does not help when people randomly ‘add’ friends. I once asked a relative why they had nearly twenty people in their ‘friends list’ who they did not know at all. The reply – “I don’t know, they just added me so I accepted.”

This brings me to my second point. “Do people care about their privacy?” Facebook has a privacy tool that filters access to one’s profile. It allows the users to restrict access of their profile pages to people on their ‘friends list’ or people whom they ‘know’. However, the fact that scores of Facebook users have people who they have never met in their ‘friends list’ clearly defeats this purpose. This would lead to them inadvertently giving their information to malicious parties. In order to safeguard themselves, people should start to exercise a little better discretion than simply accepting unknown people’s requests to ‘become friends’.

Moving on from Facebook, I would now like to comment on another phenomenon which could be far more impactful on people’s lives – Second Life, created by Philip Rosedale’s company, Lindon Lab. In a nutshell, it allows the user to create and avatar (online representation of him or herself) and live another virtual life. In this virtual life, the person can go about doing things that people normally do in real life. These include going to work, going shopping, starting up a business and even getting married. From my perspective, this has the idea of ‘the internet is going to take over my life’ written all over it. I speak from experience. I was once part of an online community similar to Second Life. Slowly and seamlessly, I felt more of my time being poured into the virtual world. My real life was being pushed aside. In a twisted way, my virtual life was becoming my real life. Fortunately, I was able to get myself out of that situation but many people still remain fixated in this virtual world. In a documentary I watched in one of my sociology classes, a Second Life user who was interviewed admitted that she spent most of her waking ours on the computer. Why such an addiction? I would view this trend as a form of escapism. In Second Life, people live lives that they wished they had in real life. They look good, own large companies and live in huge mansions. Why would they want to abandon all that for their less than perfect lives? But then, they let their virtual lives take control of them. They forego real life responsibilities by neglecting their ‘real’ work and families and this forces them into a downward spiral.

As I mentioned earlier, the new structure of the internet allows much more user-based content. In a way, much of what is on the internet is controlled by us but we have to be wary of allowing our lives in turn to be controlled by the internet. The biggest danger in this case, might not come from the internet per se, but from the way people respond to this sensation known as ‘Web 2.0’

References:

Roper, Eric. 2005. “Employers, marketers and parents accessing Facebook database“. GW Hatchet. Retrieved on October 30, 2008.

]]> http://ospr3y.wordpress.com/2008/11/10/technology/feed/ 0 ospr3y http://ospr3y.wordpress.com/2008/11/05/population-and-health/ http://ospr3y.wordpress.com/2008/11/05/population-and-health/#comments Wed, 05 Nov 2008 13:23:37 +0000 ospr3y http://ospr3y.wordpress.com/?p=54 ]]> How Old is Old?

Japan is arguably the world’s fastest ageing society. At the end of World War II, Japan’s median age was 22. In 2006, statistics indicated that the median age had risen to 43. This meant that in 2006, 50 percent of the population was below the age of 43 while the other half above it. Currently, the elderly, classified as people aged 65 and older form around 20 percent of the population. This indicates that Japan is in fact moving in the direction of a hyper-aged society which is characterized by a population in which 21 percent or more are aged 65 and older. (Coulmas, 2007)

Two main factors can be attributed to Japanese society’s overwhelming ageing process. Firstly, Japan has seen a tremendous decline in birthrates over the past decades. As a result, the elderly, 65 years and over, now outnumber the children aged below 15. In 1950, the latter group accounted for 35.4 percent of the population and the former 4.9 percent. By 2003, the child population had dwindled to merely 14 percent while the aged population has risen to 19 percent. (ibid)

Why the declining birthrate? The same reasons that apply to most developed countries can be applied to Japan. People now tend to put off marriage in favour of their careers and have fewer children. Generally, this is in turn due to various reasons such as rises in the cost of living in and increasing gender equality.

Secondly, the growing life expectancy of the elderly in Japan has also led to this. In 2004, data indicated that the life expectancy of an average Japanese man was 78 and that of a woman’s was 85. (Sydney Morning Herald, 2004) This was approximately 5 years longer than people living in the United States. The number of centenarians in Japan also stood at around 20 000. (ibid) While it seems that there is no definitive answer as to why the Japanese people are able to live longer, factors such as the generally low-fat diet of the Japanese, generous state pension schemes and strong education are often cited.

Some may argue that this phenomenon is nothing unique to Japan. In his book Fewer Children – So What!, Manabu Akagawa stated that Japan’s situation merely “conformed to a pattern typical of advanced nations.” (Coulmas, 2007) While it may be true that many developed nations do experience such trends, I am inclined to side with those who view the alarming pace that it is taking place in Japan warrants concern.

What exactly are the implications of Japan experiencing hyper-ageing? The most typical viewpoint would be that the younger, more able minority will end up being burdened by having to be responsible for the welfare of the elderly population. The general idea would be that a larger portion of government spending will be directed towards providing necessary care for the elderly. The assumption here of course is that the elderly are seen as a group of people who need taking care of.

From my perspective, the crux of the issue lies in what exactly old age is. True, it can be said that Japan will have a relatively high number of people above 65 in future. In fact, according to Coulmas (2007), it is projected that 35.7 percent of Japan’s population will be above 65 by 2050. Yes, 65 right now seems to be the ripe old age for retirement. In Singapore, it marks the moment citizens can finally reap the returns of their CPF. However, 40 years down the road, what will being 65 entail for the individual? It is expected that by that time, the field of medical research would have grown significantly and with it, life expectancy of people could further be prolonged. Nowadays, it is not unusual for people to be alive well into their 90s and even past 100 not only in Japan. For all we know, the working age of adults would be extended by a few years. Taking Singapore for example, we already have certain schemes put in place that allow the elderly to seek employment. Who is to say that once one is above a certain age, he is deemed as unable to work? Compare this to ancient times, where the life expectancy of people was merely a little over 30 years at best. Then, the suitable working age of a person was much lower than it is now.

The fact of the matter is that people are living longer than they used to thanks to advances in technology and the overall quality of life. On top of that, they remain healthy and able enough to work for a longer time. The entire notion of age is something that is ever-changing. After all, age is but just a number.

References:

Coulmas, Florian. 2007. Population Decline and Ageing in Japan – The Social Consequences. Stroud, Gloucestershire. MPG Books Limited, Bodmin.

“The Granny State – Japan’s Life Expectancy Boom.” 2004. Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved October 23, 2008. (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/07/09/1089000356464.html)

The other day, I read an interesting article that sought to provide a link between urbanization and the proliferation of new sexual identities and I thought I’d share it in my blog. The article draws on examples mainly from Bangkok and places the city together with a few others in a list of cities described as ‘Gay Capitals’.

To start things off, I’d like to highlight one of the points put forward by Peter A. Jackson, the author of the article. He states that these ‘gay capitals’ are regarded as the first sites of emergence of new homosexual identities and cultures in a specific region. He goes on to name a few such as Amsterdam, Paris, San Francisco, New York and of course Southeast Asia’s Bangkok. Bangkok serves as a venue of international tourism for countries that have much stricter laws concerning homosexuality for example, Singapore or Malaysia.

Let’s take a closer look at Bangkok. Last week, during the presentation segment of my tutorial, my friend Janice presented us with a case study of sexual identity in Thailand. She pointed out that during the mid-twentieth century, Thai sexual identity mainly consisted of three categories; chai, ying and kathoey. These three groups represented masculinity, femininity and a either a man who was too effeminate or a woman who was too masculine. She went on to state that sometime during the 1980s, a greater variety of terms describing sexual identity began to emerge such as tom, dee and ‘gay’. These terms mainly serve to describe same-sex relationships. We went on to discuss during our tutorial that such a phenomenon was more prevalent in urbanized areas like Bangkok because these places were more exposed to Western ideas that stigmatized the homosexual identity.

Interestingly, the author brings a twist to the traditional idea of the proliferation of the stereotyped Western homosexual identity. He surmises that instead of thinking that the ‘gay culture’ originated from the west and spread to other parts of the world through globalization, it might have emerged independently within different societies. ‘Gay culture’ here refers to the presence of enough people who identify themselves as homosexual to allow the existence of establishments like gay bars and nightclubs and generally a gay scene and a substantial ‘gay market’. He states that the process of urbanization in different countries can lead to these countries exhibiting very similar gay cultures without them being influenced by one another. In his article, he uses the example of a certain Thai gay lifestyle magazine. He highlights the fact that the magazine was published and circulated in Thailand in the 1980s; well before its publishers had come into contact with homosexual communities in other parts of the world. Thus, it seems that these magazines were targeted at a local gay market and came into existence independent from western influence.

In addition, upon interviewing the editor of this Thai gay magazine, Jackson discovered that the reason he decided to start this gay magazine was because he wished to connect with an imagined gay lifestyle. To put it simply, while he knew he was gay, he had no experience with the gay scene in Thailand. As such, he created this magazine to make himself feel that he was part of the gay society. Another reason the editor decided to start this magazine was also in order for him to obtain an independent income which would allow him to lead a gay lifestyle. This is because the gay society in Bangkok is seen as one of affluence.

In relation to this, Jackson adds that he found numerous other gay-oriented enterprises in Bangkok with young gay men seeking to achieve the means to lead a gay lifestyle. This was happening without them realizing that they were doing the same thing as many other gay men in other countries.

How then does urbanization come into the picture? Jackson notes that most of the ‘gay capitals’ mentioned earlier are sites of high urbanization and market-based economies. Market-based economies in turn lead an increase in commercial spaces. He then states that the entirety of Bangkok’s gay scene consists of such commercial spaces and an explosion of new sexual identities is created from them. He notes that by looking at the history of commercial activities in urban areas developed by and for homosexuals, we realize that they have originated semi-independently. While the process of urbanization led to the growth of gay culture in these ‘gay capitals’, they subsequently became inter-linked upon the increase in rapidity of globalization.

Though Jackson has yet to prove this hypothesis more definitively, I thought it would be some food for thought.

When one examines Singapore, one often wonders about the Singapore identity. Is there something among Singapore society that enables Singaporeans to see themselves as one united entity? Is there a specific Singaporean culture? Given that Singapore is a relatively young nation, some may argue that there has been hardly enough time for a Singapore identity to develop and that any sort of culture Singapore claims to have is a mere assimilation of cultures from other countries.

I would like to state that Singapore does in fact have a culture that can be described as uniquely Singaporean. “Singapore does indeed have a national culture…and that Singapore culture has existed for as long as Singapore itself has existed.” (Benjamin, 1976) Furthermore, a defining characteristic about Singapore culture and ultimately the Singaporean identity is that it has been carefully constructed by the government over the past decades. Basically, what I am arguing is that to a large extent, the Singapore identity, while it does exist in Singaporeans, has been carefully crafted and seamlessly introduced by the government into the lives of Singapore citizens in order to achieve a specific set of objectives. In other words, the people of Singapore have developed a certain identity and a large portion of this identity is the identity that the government sees as a desirable one. Furthermore, this process is ongoing and the government may even seek to remove aspects of Singapore culture that have developed inadvertently in order to preserve the ‘ideal’ Singapore identity.

Let’s examine, what I would consider, one component that constitutes Singaporean identity, that is the concept of living in a multicultural society. (Benjamin, 1976) In Singapore, the ambiguous question of “What are you?” seems to be heard rather often. (Puroshotam, 1995) To those puzzled by the question, it is in essence the standard way one Singaporean asks another about his or her ethnicity or ‘race’ as the government labels it. Singaporeans have a tendency to identify and relate to other people based on the other’s ethnicity. At the same time, through my personal observation over the years, there is a sense that Singaporeans have an underlying or deep-rooted notion within their sub-conscious telling them that “Although ethnic and cultural differences are glaringly obvious among Singaporeans, it is socially and politically correct to at least respect these differences.” For example, it is not a rare occasion when a non-Muslim in Singapore feels slightly apologetic while eating a pork dish on the same table as a Muslim friend in a public eating place. While the non-Muslim has every right to do so, somehow the feeling still persisted within him. The same can be said for offices that have Muslim and non-Muslim microwave ovens in their pantries. What I’m getting at is that the people have successfully been ‘cultured’ by the government to acknowledge that the ethnic composition of Singapore’s population is highly diverse and to believe that it is the ‘right’ thing to treat every ethnic group equally in order for the shared goal of economic progress. How the government did this was of course through various policies that I will avoid describing in this entry.

Next, let’s look at something that is probably in the hearts of most Singaporeans – Singlish. Most Singaporeans would like to think that Singlish is part of their national identity and is part of what makes them Singaporean. Additionally, Singlish is obviously something that has not been part of the Singapore government’s ‘ideal’ Singapore identity. So on one hand, we have the people embracing Singlish as part of the national identity and on the other, we have the government taking steps to lessen its influence upon society through policies like the “Speak good English” campaign. What this entails is that almost all attempts of creating a national identity among Singapore citizens is in one way or another influenced, modified or hampered by the government.

Singaporeans do have a national identity. The only issue is that this identity can be seen as largely politically engineered. Much of this is also due to the fact that Singapore has effectively been governed by the same political party since independence. I am, however, not going to argue if such a scenario in any country is desirable or otherwise. To sum things up, a great amount of government influence is present in developing a national identity in Singapore, much more so than other parts of the world.

When one thinks of the concept of democracy and human rights, Myanmar certainly does not spring into mind. Unlike the other members of Asean, Myanmar or Burma as some nations still regard it, has yet to adopt a system of government resembling any form of what one would describe as a democracy. Myanmar’s failure to make the transition to democracy can be largely attributed to the ever-diminishing prospects for reconciliation between the military-led junta, the State Peace and Developmental Council (SPDP) and the main opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD) (Kyaw, 2003)

The current political situation in Myanmar can be traced back to 1990, when the NLD decisively won a general election called by the military junta. However, Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of the NLD and daughter of national hero Aung San did not see power handed over to her party. Instead, the junta’s reluctance to hand over power saw Aung San Suu Kyi placed under house arrest – an event that invariably led to international outcry. Over the years, the military junta has twice released the pro-democratic leader only to have her arrested again. For example, in 2003, the government arrested several NLD members, placed Aung San Suu Kyi under ‘protective custody’ and closed NLD offices throughout the country. These actions were, according to the Myanmar government, in response to the commotion caused by unruly NLD members and their supporters which resulted in a number of casualties. (Kyaw, 2003) The international community, being largely pro-democracy was of course not exactly willing to accept the word of the junta. Most felt that the clash between the government and NLD was premeditated and served as an excuse for eliminating the NLD threat to their power.

The military junta of Myanmar has also been widely criticized by other countries for failing to provide its people with basic human rights. Apart from politically stifling its people, the Myanmese government hardly did any good to its international reputation by cracking down on protesting Buddhist monks in 2007. The protests, sparked off by the doubling of fuel prices, caused massive numbers of people to join these monks in demonstrations calling for economic, political and social reforms. The government’s response to this was one of violence and contempt. Almost a year later in 2008, the military junta further tarnished its name in the international spotlight by refusing foreign aid after being stricken by the deadly Cyclone Nargis. Furthermore, they refused to issue visas to United Nations relief teams whose jobs were to ensure the victims of the disaster were receiving the aid they desperately needed. Though it was estimated that the lives lost due to the tragedy numbered in the tens of thousands with millions more ending up homeless, the Myanmese government remained adamant about their decision.

The path to democracy for Myanmar looks tumultuous at best. Then again, it is difficult to think of any democratic nation that has risen through totally peaceful means. In the international scene however, Myanmar may be seen as lagging behind with already about 62% of all countries embracing democracy (Zakaria, 2003) The most recent attempts to reconcile Aung San Suu Kyi and her NLD with the military junta through the aid of United Nations envoy Ibrahim Gambari have been widely regarded as failures. International pressure for Myanmar to turn to democracy may be high but the notion of it being the most viable method to solve Myanmar’s problems cannot simply be taken for granted. To quote Winston Churchill, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” Presumably however, democracy brings with it the idea that the rights of the people will be protected – something which Myanmar and the rest of the world is striving for in the first place. Only time can tell if this will ever materialize and eventually eradicate the numerous issues that malign Myanmar.

Countless wars have taken place throughout the centuries. These wars are not necessarily restricted to armed conflict between two or more nation-states. Civil wars between opposing factions of people with differing ideologies within a nation itself have occurred frequently resulting in major political changes in the nation concerned; the American and Russian civil wars are but two well-known examples of such instances. The mid-twentieth century was characterized with the long-drawn Cold War between the United States of America and the USSR which culminated in the latter’s dissolution. More recently, we have wars between nation-states and organizations which they deem as threats to their security; the ongoing war on terror being waged by the United States to cite a specific case.

Wars, especially those involving staggering numbers of casualties, are often described as conflicts between ‘good’ and ‘evil’ by the global community. More often than not, it is the victorious side in the war that is seen as the ‘good side’ or the side that brought about beneficial change. The losing side on the other hand would be viewed largely as ruthless oppressors. An explanation to this is that it is usually the victorious that obtain the power to write history as they see fit. As an illustration, World War II is widely recognized by the global community as a triumph of the ‘good’ allied forces over the ‘evil’ axis powers. In addition, the victory of the Union over the Confederates in the American civil war is largely regarded as an example of how the ‘good’ side championing freedom and human rights overcame their enemies who promoted exploitation in the form of slavery – something seen to be wrong or unethical.

Let’s examine this from an unbiased sociological perspective taking once again the example of World War II, focusing on the European front. It is common knowledge that Adolf Hitler, the German dictator and his Nazi Party embarked on a campaign to eliminate the Jewish community from Europe. From a moral standpoint, most of us would never condone such an act. How is it then that Hitler managed to rally such a fearsome army to his cause? I believe ethnocentrism plays a key role in explaining this.

Ethnocentrism is the idea of believing that one’s culture or race is central to the universe. A negative effect that stems from this is that it leads one into believing that his culture is the ‘correct’ culture and that any deviance from it must be wrong. Hitler had developed a strong hatred towards the Jewish community. In fact, Hitler assumed power to save Germany from the Jews. Hatred of the Jews had been the core of his Weltanshauung or world view from the very beginnings of his political career. (Jackel, 1969; Waite, 1977) As such, this gifted orator, managed to incorporate his anti-semitic feelings into the ideological trajectory he had in mind for German society and over time, these sentiments were internalized. It could be argued that anti-semitism had become German culture during that period. From that point on, almost all of Germany truly believed that it was ‘right’ to ‘save’ their country from the Jews. This of course marked the start of the holocaust.

In conclusion, it could be said that it is not exactly fair to look at wars as simply battles between the good and the bad. Wars occur because different groups of people have such intense conviction for their ideas, values or beliefs that they are willing to die for them. Undoubtedly, the price of war is always heavy. Lives are lost, homes are destroyed and economies go to ruin. To quote the philosopher Bertrand Russell, “War does not determine who is right – only who is left.”

Almost everyday, street children in Colombia are either brutally attacked or murdered. Street children, locally known as gamins, are concentrated in the country’s capital Bogotá. Between February 1 and May 14 of 1991, Colombian police found bodies of 187 youths in Bogotá; most of whom had been killed by vigilantes. (Villareal, 1993) Of the 6 000 000 inhabitants of Bogotá, the number of gamins ranges from 1200 to 12 000, although many researchers consider the actual figure to be larger. (Aptekar, 1988 & Dimenstein, 1991) A typical gamin would usually be a boy aged between six and seventeen with virtually no family and permanent home. Gamins would be able to earn enough to support themselves by performing tasks such as washing cars, begging, or even petty theft in times of desperation. Over time, a stigma against them manifested due to the nature of their activities and the people they associated with. As a result, these gamins live in perpetual danger of being abused or even killed by vigilantes and sometimes the police. To those that seek to harm them, gamins are considered undesirable to society.

Certain aspects of Colombian governance and social attitudes have inadvertently led to the encouragement of gamin persecution. A brief history of Colombia would indicate that a period of political violence in the late 1970s to early 1980s promoted the growth of paramilitary groups and hired killers. (Kelly & Maghan, 2006) Furthermore, the government’s inadequacy in dealing with crime, especially drug trafficking, saw people starting to take the law into their own hands. Gamins were singled out by vigilantes as the cause of increasing crime rates. More often than not, gamins also found themselves implicated as they usually were in the presence of other undesirable groups like prostitutes and drug dealers although they might not have necessarily been involved in direct dealings with them. While the government of Colombia does not condone the acts of these vigilantes, it sees no urgency in clamping down on it. Rather, the government allocates most of its resources in combating what it deems to be more pressing issues i.e. drug-related and political crimes albeit with limited success. Also, members of the police force are frequently behind some of these attacks on gamins to begin with making a proper investigation on the crime almost impossible. The judicial system exacerbates the situation as well. The killing of a teenager or child is viewed as a much lesser crime compared to the killing of an adult. (Mendoza, 1994)

In addition, among the people of Bogotá, a persistent attitude of apathy towards gamins only serves to promote this form of social cleansing. Colombians are prejudiced against the poor, including street children, and they often attribute their poverty to laziness. (Wilson, 1989) While not participating in the killings directly, the upper and middle classes of Bogotá silently resent gamins and rather see them disappear.

From my standpoint, the minority of gamins who turn to crime like snatch theft or drug trafficking have created a stereotype for the rest of their kind. While most of them are in fact merely beggars or odd job workers, society wants to see them removed from the streets as to them, a gamin is nothing more than a wayward youth with a high propensity for crime. With an incapable law enforcement system, the public then takes it upon itself to eliminate gamins. In a climate of lawlessness, the easiest method would simply be to kill them clandestinely. After all, prevailing apathy among Bogotá’s citizens seems to allow for this. No one would be concerned if a gamin suddenly went missing.

What it all boils down to is the need for a change in perception of the issue. On a political level, the Colombian government might see reduced numbers of vigilantes if proper law reforms were put in place. For instance, perpetrators of hate crimes should be publicly prosecuted to increase confidence in the judicial system. (Dimenstein, 1991) Though much more difficult to achieve, social mindsets against gamins must be changed. Gamins could be viewed as needy members of society who require proper attention from the more privileged rather than lost causes. Unless more substantial action is taken by Colombian society, gamins will continue to endure sleepless nights, constantly fearing a sudden attack by those bent on their extermination.

With increasing unemployment rates and few options to choose from, many women of third world countries find themselves involved in the sex trade; a line of work which is viewed by majority of the world in a negative light. Taking the Philippines for example, an estimated 600 000 women were involved in the sex trade in 2002. (Alcuitas, 2002) The idea of women selling their bodies to ‘clients’ has been the subject of much debate between groups dedicated to promoting awareness against the trafficking of women as sex workers (GABRIELA and CATWAP, for example) and pro-sex work feminists. Groups taking a stand against the trafficking of women argue that such a structural flaw in society is degrading to the status of women. They label the sex trade of women as ‘prostitution’ and go on to say that what these women are providing their clients with is not labour but in fact their personhood. Proponents on the other hand, describe the sex trade as necessary income for impoverished women in poor, indebted third world countries. They add that those who view the sale of sex as harmful and exploitative confuse “the sale of one’s sexual energy…with a particular morality about sexual relations,” and by doing so “imposing essentialist cultural interpretations upon the subject.” (Kempadoo, 1998)

From my perspective, while I do not outrightly condone the sex-trade of women, it appears that such a social phenomenon is bound to occur anywhere where women face poverty, hardship and ultimately desperation. Such a trade, be it morally right or wrong (it all depends on a society’s culture) is necessary in enabling these women to fork out a even a meager income. More often than not, people tend to classify women involved in the sex trade as oppressed and exploited. While it may be true in some cases, many women do so willingly as it allows them to at least live a slightly more comfortable life. Moreover, the sex trade serves as a lucrative industry for poorer nations. Looking at the Philippines once again, as one of the poorest countries in Southeast Asia, the tourism trade (which mainly comprised American, Australian and Japanese men coming to the country for sex tours) managed to bring in US$300,000,000 in the late 1970s. This was US$262,000,000 more than in 1972. (Eviota, 1992) The reason behind this was that the Philippines embarked on a strategy to improve its development by enhancing its tourism sector in 1972. In 1973, ‘fourteen first-class hotels’ were built in the centre of Manila. (Schirmer and Shalom, 1987) Whether by accident or otherwise, these hotels ended up being hotbeds for the sex trade bringing with it much needed revenue for the nation.

While the sex-trade is essentially socially unaccepted amongst the global community, it is unavoidable especially in third world countries. What can poor, low-educated women do to fend for themselves? Or worse, what if they are single mothers as well? In countries lacking good infrastructure and firm governance, the sex-trade somehow usually seems to be the most viable option of making an income. Opportunities to even work in low-wage industrial jobs might be few and far between or dominated my the male workforce.

Once again, by no means is the sex-trade a desirable long term solution to solving the plight of women in poverty. The protraction of this phenomenon might only serve to degrade the reputation of women, exacerbate the problem of gender inequality and fail to solve the issue of poverty amongst the women of third world nations. Organizations like GABRIELA show that “there are still feminist theorists and activists committed to revolutionary praxis and struggle. It also gives hope that we can begin to break away from the apolitical, conservative brand of theorizing that refuses to imagine an alternative social order.” (Aguilar and Lacsamana, 2004) In essence, the phenomenon of the sex trade might only decline if people are willing to examine the problem from its root rather than thinking of mere methods to control and regulate it.

The USA is one of the world’s most socially diverse nations. This can be largely attributed to the influx of immigrants from poorer countries seeking brighter prospects as what many term “The American Dream”. These immigrants usually come from less developed regions like South America and East Asia.

This week, I’ll put the microscope on Chinese immigrants to the US during mid-twentieth century . This group of people, like many others, came to the US in search of reprieve from the harsh conditions of their native country. What lay in store for them when they finally reached their so-called promised land was almost always a different story. Many of them fell victim to false promises of easy fortunes and other cruel realities. The end result was that many of them became virtual slaves toiling endlessly in sweatshops, their lives held in limbo.

During the 1950s and 1960s, China was undergoing major social and economic changes under the leadership of Chairman Mao. The Great Leap Forward, deemed now as an economic disaster thrust many peasants into poverty and forced them into seeking greener pastures in the US. Following the repeal of the national origins quota system in 1965 , the US recorded a large increase in the number of Chinese immigrants, averaging 18000 per year from 1965 to 1980. (King, Locke 1980) The actual number may be greater as many of them entered the US illicitly. Many of these immigrants, out of poverty and desperation, forged contracts with ruthless money lenders agreeing to pay them back once they found work in the US thus becoming indebted to them. Furthermore, many of these immigrants were literally “shipped” to the US illegally. Up till today, there are cases in which Chinese nationals are found in shipping containers destined for the US. In extreme cases, a number of them end up dead during the hellish journey which may last several days.

Upon arrival in the US, these immigrants realized that life in the US was far from a bed of roses. They had to adapt to a totally new lifestyle and culture and learn to deal with social stereotypes placed upon them. Having relatively no educational background, a great many found themselves becoming part of an exploited workforce usually concentrated in Chinatowns. There, they were subject to poor living conditions and only served as pawns to benefit those higher up the societal chain. Often, by choice or otherwise, they became involved in carrying out tasks for the Chinese underworld in the US. By far, the greatest problem these immigrants faced was that the minimal wages they earned were used to repay their debtors and as a result nothing went back to their families; the sole reason they put themselves in a foreign land for. Ultimately, they ended up virtually slaving away for years on end. Sadly, word of their plight hardly ever reached people who could make a difference. For one, power had been taken away from them by those they were contracted to. Also, a large number of illegal immigrants could not risk dealing with proper authorities in fear of deportation.

In the grand scheme of things, such a phenomenon is one of many examples of how people from poor, rural backgrounds are being exploited into performing low wage, labour intensive tasks. As a result, labour is being siphoned from developing nations to fuel the growth and infrastructure of richer nations. One may argue that the wages earned by immigrants to richer nations outweigh those of any job they could find back home. However, on a macro level, this is a small price to pay for the richer nations as they would reap benefits from the improved infrastructure they obtain through cheaper labour costs. Taking Singapore, a developed country for example, we find that much of the menial labour, especially in the construction sector is done by foreign labour. Although Singapore pays higher wages compared to what their native country would pay them for the same task, Singapore benefits more as the improvements to its infrastructure would draw MNCs and foreign investment. The same concept of improving infrastructure to enhance the economy would not be felt as strongly in less developed nations mainly because the idea of global reputation would come into play. Investors would feel more secure if their money were in the hands of countries that have better economies.

To sum things up, a vicious cycle is created where poorer nations continue to be exploited by their richer counterparts causing a widening of the global income gap.

]]> http://ospr3y.wordpress.com/2008/08/28/work-and-trade/feed/ 0 ospr3y