Justice for all

At my internship last summer, what I really took away was the importance of pioneering a new approach to human rights. The 20th century approach to human rights was in defining human rights standards - like the International Covenants on Civil & Political Rights, and Economic, Social, & Cultural rights. I’m sure you know how incredibly important these covenants were - they revolutionized the way of thinking about human rights, and they provide some benchmark through which to keep countries accountable. They provided NGOs with a guideline - what standards to follow, what rights to lobby for. They provide a pathway forward. The debate still continues about economic, social, and cultural rights: what obligation does this mean, exactly, for governments? Many people still argue about how exactly to implement these standards.

But this hasn’t been enough, and what we need now is a new and different approach. We need to shift away from a time of declaration and into the era of implementation.

What does this mean? It means we have many of the right laws on the books, particularly enshrined in international covenants and agreements, but we simply haven’t been able to implement these laws properly. Even though the current debate is about social & economic rights - in particular, the rights to things like health, education, credit, water, or even “development” - the older, more accepted civil and political rights are not guaranteed in most countries, either.

Organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch - the two most prominent human rights organizations of our time - are doing amazing work in terms of bringing to light the human rights abuses taking place around the globe. However, while Amnesty’s work might result in releasing individual political prisoners, this approach to human rights lobbying and petitioning does not result in systematic transformation. While Amnesty’s lobbying might get a few political prisoners out of jail, the original system that oppressed them and their rights remains. Some might be saved, but more and more will continue to be imprisoned, tortured, or threatened in other ways.

What is needed is systematic change. The systems need to change, themselves, in order for lasting change to occur. Like any other aid organization, the work done by Amnesty is simply like a band-aid on a gashing wound if the broader system and situation in the relevant country does not change. The goal is not just to save individual people, but to change the system and address the root of the problem such that in the future, more people do not undergo the same fate.

How can this be achieved? Systematic change mostly depends on democratization and good governance. It depends on instituting leaders who are accountable to their people and genuinely want to contribute to development and positive social change for people in their countries. In countries with dictators, extremely weak or collapsed governments, or perhaps worst, genocidal governments and leaders, the efforts of human rights organizations simply cannot have a lasting effect. Both an overly strong state/dictatorship and an extremely weak, failed government are both recipes for chaos and violations of civil and political rights.

And at the local level, everyday people are being tortured, denied access to lawyers, and suffer for years in jails without ever going to trial. Prison conditions in many developing countries are terrible. I’ve written about this before. How does systematic transformation work here? Building up domestic legal systems: putting in place more legal aid lawyers, trained judges, prosecutors, paralegals, and other stakeholders who are desperately needed to end legal abuse and human rights violations. Police forces have to be trained in non-coercive interrogation methods.

We need more systematic approaches to addressing civil & political rights by changing the system, and by implementing rights standards on a local level - especially in the latter area (improving legal systems). Why is there so much focus on the former, individualized approach and less focus on systematic reform? It’s a lot harder, a lot more complex, and a lot less straightforward, that’s for sure. But it’s needed if we are to progress in systematic change in the human rights arena.

The internet is awesome. I spend hours a week Googling and Twittering and Facebook stalking. The internet has brought us such gems as the “Hamster Dance” and full episodes of The Office. However, in this age of information, the internet can also make the world seem like a depressing place. It’s hard to miss the headlines on your Yahoo! Mail homepage every day: suicide bombers, poverty, global warming, war, and the like.

I know the answer for most of us is to tune out all the bad news. After being bombarded with information on a daily – if not hourly – basis, we can’t help but become desensitized. Even I admit to clicking on articles about celebrity gossip rather than reading about the latest news on the war in Afghanistan (yes, we are currently at war, remember?).

Many members of our generation (in America, at least) are rather apathetic about current affairs. Sure, we know who the President is, but we certainly don’t care what he thinks about healthcare or what is going on in the “outside” world. Or maybe we do care but we think, “Hey, I’m not Mother Teresa. I just want to be happy. I’ll let people like Al Gore worry about global warming.” There is nothing wrong with feeling that way. In fact, I derive a lot of my personal happiness through friendships and hobbies. However, we are all capable of being Mother Teresa – even if for only an hour out of our week.

You know the motto when it comes to recycling: “Every little bit helps.” It’s cliché, but it’s true: there may be mountains of rotting garbage in our dumps but if we collectively work to recycle and re-use, we can make a substantial change in our environment. Grass roots efforts do work, from recycling to Presidential elections – just look at President Obama! So why don’t more people make activism a part of their life? Whether it’s volunteering at your local pet shelter or blogging about gay rights, there are small and big things each of us can incorporate into our lives that WILL make the world a better place. And believe me, it will be less painful than those forty-minute elliptical machine sessions you’ve been forcing yourself to do three times a week.

What kind of activism do I participate in? If you’ve read my blog, you’ll know that I am a feminist political blogger. I blog about a wide range of topics – from hot button issues like abortion and sexist double standards to lighter fare like relationships and book reviews. As for my personal life, I recycle and work actively to be as eco-friendly as possible. I hope to start a career in a meaningful industry – be it the government or a non-profit organization. I want the work I do in my lifetime to bring about positive change – however great or small.

Recently, I applied to write for a college fashion blog that had an opening for interns. I received an interesting response – while the editor of the blog thought I was a strong writer and displayed a good sense of fashion, she told me that she was rejecting me because she felt writing about fashion would bore me and conflict with my beliefs. She said, and I quote, “[my blog] is simply a fun, positive blog that covers the trends and provides style advice . . . There are plenty of places to find negativity online, but few places to escape it, and I want my site to be one such escape.” I was seriously taken aback. Sure, she could tell from my writing samples that I am not a fan of our consumerist culture; something that I had explained would not be a problem because I could easily advocate thrifting and other eco-friendly fashion tips while discussing the latest clothing trends. However, the real shocker to me wasn’t the fact that she felt I wasn’t right for the job because of my beliefs but because I had beliefs at all! My blog, by focusing on something more “depressing” than fashion, makes me too negative for fashion writing? I was surprised to find myself placed in that sort of category. See – I’m just like most young people in our generation. I go to college, I party hard on the weekends, I obsess over guys and I am a huge fan of clothes shopping. However, I happen to moonlight as a feminist blogger. Does that make me so different from everyone else? I hope not!

After thinking about the response I got from that fashion blogger for the past few months, I realized something – she saw me as one of those “special” Mother Teresa types who found it possible to look at all that is wrong with the world and try to change it, rather than just be a “regular” girl who enjoys having a good time. My friends, I beg to differ. I think there is a little “activist” in all of us. Sure, bloggers like Akhila and I might spend more time than the average person writing and thinking about depressing world issues, but we have other passions and interests as well. In fact, that’s the great thing about blogging – it’s a learning experience and I’m getting my voice out there – but, at the end of the day, if I’m too mentally exhausted to write a post, I just…don’t. I can sit in bed and watch the Hills to my content (and hey, it inspired me to write a post just the other day!).

So, what are your passions? Do you love to write and care about global warming? Why not start a blog. Do you enjoy sports? Why not volunteer as an assistant coach at a public school that might not have a lot of sports-related funding? There are fun and “easy” ways of incorporating activism into your daily life without feeling like you are sacrificing your own well-being and interests. Hey, we can’t all be Mother Teresa, but we can be better citizens, friends and members of the international community.

In what ways are you engaging in activism in your community and/or abroad? Do you have some suggestions for other people looking to make a change in the world?

The Changemaker

Dollface is a college student at a small liberal arts college in New England. She blogs anonymously about feminism and politics so that her future plans of becoming President of the United States aren’t compromised by her stance on abortion (…just kidding!). She enjoys long walks on the beach, poking fun at Twilight fans, and generally being a sarcastic @$$hole. She blogs at Rotten Little Girls (http://therottenlittlegirls.com) and you can follow her on twitter @rottendollface. Be warned, of course, that her twitter updates are horrendously boring and of little interest to anyone.

Recently, I’ve been reading a really great book — In Spite of the Gods: The Strange Rise of Modern India, by Edward Luce. I was born in India but moved to the U.S. at a young age - and yet, I recently felt that I didn’t know enough about my birthplace’s political scene. So I decided to pick up this book, and it has provided me with valuable insights into the country’s political and economic development since the time of Gandhi’s independence movement.

Strangely though - much of what it describes are things I’ve already known intuitively after my summer visits to the country. When you go to India, you see stark disparities. It’s a country of contradictions. You see bustling technological complexes and advanced software research coupled with beggars on the street, trash on the side of the road. It seems ridiculous that squalor can co-exist with incredible intelligence and innovation - India’s top government-funded colleges, like the IITs, churn out some of the world’s most intelligent minds. These men and women go on to become true leaders in science, technology, and business. And more recently, India has been achieving remarkable economic growth. From the 1980s to 2001, the percent of Indians living below the poverty line fell from 40% to about 26% - not an insignificant drop. The government clearly has more than enough money and resources to ensure basic living standards. The question is not one of its financial capacity. So why does a country that is a technological and intellectual leader, with a legacy of peace and a burgeoning economy - fail to meet so many of its’ citizens basic needs? The conditions seem ripe - yet the change isn’t coming fast enough.

To me, the biggest problem in India always struck me as corruption. Luce cites that an estimated 85% of all development spending is pocketed by bureaucrats. And in the state of Bihar, India’s second poorest, more than 80% of the food is “stolen” due to corruption. The state loses so much money in development and infrastructure projects that at the end of day, little actually gets done - even when it is done in the name of the poor. As more money comes in, officials are pocketing more while the poor are getting the same - or even less. I saw this with my own eyes in India. Bribes are a regular way of life, and often are necessary for daily activities to occur. People have accepted that corruption is ingrained into the country’s culture and politics. In the book, Luce writes how government jobs are coveted by so many in India. Working for the government means that one has generous “benefits” - and can make vast amounts of money on the side by taking bribes. This shocked me at the time, and saddens me now.

Secretary Clinton recently visited India, focusing on relations between the two countries and India’s leadership on environmental issues, defense, and nuclear energy. Yet, I believe that there are so many more underlying factors that she could have discussed. Corruption, economic development, inequality, discrimination - these are the issues that make daily life a challenge for the billion people in India. Why does the international community always look at India in terms of 1) it’s tenuous relationship with Pakistan, and 2) nuclear power? Sure, these issues are important, but they are not going to change the lives of the millions that live in poverty. I understand that Secretrary Clinton was there to focus on foreign policy. But like President Obama did in his Ghana speech, she could have done well to bring up issues like corruption.

India is also constantly praised for being a democracy. Yes, it’s a democracy, but one component of true democracy - I believe - is lack of corruption: transparency, accountability. Unfortunately, corruption is a daily reality for Indians, but international leaders rarely allude to it, instead willing to ignore the problem while covering it all up in the name of “democracy.” True, there are many wonderful aspects of Indian democracy which have endured to this day, such as Nehru’s intelligent legacies of secularism and equality under the law for all citizens (despite so many caste- and religion-based cleavages). Yet, there remains much to be desired. If corruption is implicitly accepted by Indians and passed over in international debates - how will things ever change?

(This is just a brief snapshot of one issue that matters to me. I strongly recommend the book, which also talks about caste politics, the legal system, and many other cultural and religious factors that impact India today.)

Today, President Obama spoke to Africans in his speech to the Ghanaian Parliament. Before reading, I was kept in anticipation, exciting to hear the new vision of our President with regards to Africa. I was excited, especially, after the revelations in his Cairo speech - and I hoped that he would bring a fresh perspective to America’s foreign policy to Africa in his remarks.

Certainly, I was inspired. But, I have to agree with Texas in Africa, who states:

The speech was not surprising and not particularly interesting in that it contained nothing new beyond the reflections of an American president who has a Kenyan father. Obama’s speech presented the same line that American leaders have been delivering to African states since the end of the Cold War: be democratic, stop being corrupt, embrace market capitalism, stop fighting with one another, and we’ll help you deal with disease.

Unfortunately, this is true. Obama spoke about things we all know by now about Africa; he focused on democracy, economic growth, public health, and conflict. But here’s the thing: most people know the challenges facing Africa right now. The media tells the American people over and over again about the HIV/AIDS epidemic, about the genocide in Darfur, about the lack of economic growth and business opportunities in Africa, about poverty, and about dictatorship. He talks about Zimbabwe, pirates in Somalia, Kenya and post-election violence, and South Africa. We’ve heard of these conflicts and problems a million times. What about countries he didn’t mention? There is the conflict in northern Uganda and DRC and CAR, the intervention of the ICC in various countries, and countless other countries with their own stories to tell. But, he doesn’t mention these. Perhaps it’s too much to mention in one speech, but I still think there is more to be said.

Obama didn’t do much to go beyond these common conceptions of Africa. There was nothing new in terms of US relations with African countries, and nothing much said about the new way forward. What is America going to do, other than provide foreign aid? Obama does allude to these facts - that the West is not wholly responsible for the problems in Africa although often blamed for drawing inappropriate colonial boundaries - that Africans must step up and take charge of their continent’s future - and that we will support innovation and technology for African farmers. This is good, but I wish there was a greater redefinition of America’s attitude towards African countries. There was not enough said about what we can do to help.

One thing I did like was his focus on corruption. Corruption, certainly, is a serious problem and I feel that Obama is right in acknowledging this. Corruption is an enormous problem that often isn’t emphasized by the international community. But the reality is this: according to the World Bank - a conservative estimate of bribes paid worldwide (including developed and developing countries) - the “cost of corruption” is essentially 1 trillion US dollars. Not a measly sum by any measures.

As a result, one of my favorite parts of the speech was when he emphasized good governance and rule of law - and the need to end corruption - from state heads and CEOs to the everyday police officer:

This is about more than just holding elections. It’s also about what happens between elections. Repression can take many forms, and too many nations, even those that have elections, are plagued by problems that condemn their people to poverty. No country is going to create wealth if its leaders exploit the economy to enrich themselves or if police — if police can be bought off by drug traffickers. No business wants to invest in a place where the government skims 20 percent off the top or the head of the Port Authority is corrupt. No person wants to live in a society where the rule of law gives way to the rule of brutality and bribery. That is not democracy, that is tyranny, even if occasionally you sprinkle an election in there. And now is the time for that style of governance to end.

This, I have to say, was truly inspring. Perhaps it’s especially because this summer, I’m working for an organization working to end torture and corruption by prison officials and police through appropriate training. It’s inspiring to me to see one component of our work - which I believe to be so important - to be pointed out by Obama. Along with just mentioning the cost of corruption, I hope Obama implements policies and supports initiatives working to stop this.

At the very least, I hope his speech touched thousands of Ghanaians and inspired people around the world. I hope it educated those who know less about the problems facing Africa. Though I’m not one to criticize, I do at the same time hope that our President will take more prompt action to change things and implement more concrete initatives to benefit the continent. What are your thoughts?

For those of you who actually read my blog, you might notice that I haven’t written in a while. Quite a long while, considering I used to write at least twice a week, if not more. But the reason is - I’ve finished my exams at LSE and spent a week traveling around the UK and moving into my room in Geneva, Switzerland! My mother came to visit me, and I showed her around London, while inside I was saying goodbye to a city I had grown to deeply love throughout the past year. I felt not yet ready to be uprooted yet again, to embark on yet another whirlwind adventure, to build a temporary life again in yet another new city. But life doesn’t stop according to our wishes, and so I moved on to another new experience.

When I arrived in Switzerland, I had the opportunity to take a long, winding train ride through the picturesque countryside, replete with verdant farmland and the Alps, chilly and ominous in the distant horizon. We reached Zermatt, a town nestled at the foot of some of the most majestic snow-capped mountains of the country. From there, we took a rickety cable car ride to a frighteningly high point of 13,000 feet - Europe’s highest mountain lift. As we stepped out onto a platform and into the fresh, chilly air, I found myself blinded by the dazzling white mountain peaks we were surrounded by, the most magnificent being the Matterhorn peak. This was true grandeur, and the moment remains fresh in my mind.

So why do I tell you this story? Because on the way back home, as I watched the mountains recede into the distance and basked in the sun on the peaceful train ride, I couldn’t stop thinking about how freaking lucky I was. How many people have the chance to travel the world and to see some of the most amazing sights in the world by the age of 20? This year, I took in the regal air of London, the lovely coastlines of Greece, the cheeriness of Dublin, the literary atmosphere of Scotland, and the international legal experience of the Hague. How many students have such amazing opportunities?

Stepping out into the dazzling view of the Alps - like every other exciting opportunity I’ve had recently - has made me more aware of my status in the world. I’ve enjoyed every moment, but I’ve never stopped appreciating how incredibly lucky I am to have these experiences. I’m well aware that I’m insanely privileged, and that the majority of the world doesn’t have these opportunities - or even anything close. And, I feel that it’s completely unfair for me to be this lucky, while so many others suffer from human rights violations, poverty, or conflict.

What’s ironic is that having the world’s beauty and grandeur thrust in my face gives me a great desire to work towards ensuring that others have these opportunities too. But seeing extreme poverty, somehow, hasn’t given me this drive in the past. I was born in India and have visited several times. I’ve unquestionably seen poverty and underdevelopment - in the rickshaw drivers, the domestic servants and their poor families, the sad state of government education, the utter lack of sanitation and the mounds of trash at every street corner, the pervasive corruption. I’ve seen it, but to be completely honest - seeing poverty and social problems firsthand scared me. It didn’t motivate me to act, but rather made me want to escape. It didn’t inspire me, but made me feel dejected, and powerless. Strangely, having some of the best opportunities to travel, to enjoy, and to experience life - have motivated me more, making me even more aware of my privilege, and the unfairness of it all.

Perhaps it’s because I didn’t work directly with or alongside the underprivileged in India, or perhaps it’s because I was younger and hadn’t reflected on what I saw around me. Perhaps being so close to poverty is just so frightening that I retreated rather than became inspired. Either way, it’s ironic; students and Peace Corps volunteers often cite fieldwork experience in developing countries as the most formative experiences of their life which truly caused them to become dedicated to this work. Maybe for me it’ll be the opposite - and maybe I’ll cite my experiences with the world’s grandeur and beauty as my inspiration to contribute to the incredible change happening around us, so necessary and yet so exciting.