That her dark hair would weave a snare that I would one day rue.
A job. I has it. It’s a shit job, but it’s at my favourite clothes shop (very dangerous territory). I never managed to convince human resources staff in office-type interviews that I’m not going to run away when uni starts. Duh.
The other night I was on the train from Waterloo to Richmond. I was on the last chapter of Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins (interesting book) and then:
Kiwi man: Do you believe him?
Me: Sorry?
Kiwi man: Do you believe what he’s saying?
Me: Well, the facts fit in with what a lot of other people say.
Kiwi man: I don’t believe it…
And thus the conversation continued. The Kiwi man had just quit his job in some engineering company because he hated the company’s work ethics, despite loving the job itself. It became apparent that he believed the basic concept of the story, but was angered by the arrogance of Perkins’s perspective. But then I guess to be an ‘economic hitman’ you’d have to be quite the egocentric asshole.
This man was intent on talking to me for the duration of the train journey (a lot of people do this to me on trains – I don’t know why). The conversation eventually turned to charity work, I produced a SUFA business card (*swiiiiiish*), and we debated the problem of corruption in Africa. At least the guy had the balls to admit he was talking from the perspective of the ‘white man stereotype’ when he emphasised the prevalence of corrupt political leaders in Africa. I think SUFA really sets a good precedent for other flourishing African charities because instead of raising money to go into African countries and set up its own organisations and projects, it seeks out and assesses existing projects run by members of local communities and offers to raise money for them instead. It finds organisations with existing commitments to the local community and allocates money on a project-by-project basis to reduce the likelihood of corruption. I also loathe the idea that corruption is just a fact of life in Africa or that it’s inherent to African culture. That is such a bullshit cop-out and I told Kiwi man as such, and pointed him in the direction of a writer from whom he could learn a lot about corruption. He looked a little taken aback, and so he should have.
We were debating at SUFA the other day whether or not it’s ethical to accept large donations from multinational corporations which essentially perpetuate debt crises in developing countries. I’m not exactly sure how I feel about it. I mean, aware as I am of the role of the massive oil/extraction/engineering/construction companies in damning developing countries to debt which they will never be able to repay, the idea of lobbying these companies to donate to charities does tick the box of ‘it’s the least they can do’.
However, the dilemma arises also of whether we are in fact further entrenching the dominance of these organisations within developing economies by allowing them to ally themselves with non-profits and charities and to thereby appear generous, caring and committed to sustainable development. What I struggle with is the choice between a) resigning myself to never being able to change this dangerously subtle and insidious form of imperialism or b) committing myself to the struggle against it.
It’s partly a matter of confidence. Confidence in my own ability and commitment to aiding the uplift of people other than myself once I am in a position to really contemplate doing so. Also confidence in other people to have the same perseverance. Confidence in poor people to not want quick and easy modernisation which leaves them forever indebted. Indeed why should they not want to see the poignant symbols of ‘modernisation’ within their own borders? There is evidence that considerable portions of these societies support either side of the argument. Some are for these modernisation programmes because they see it as the solution to their problems of poverty and some are against the programmes because the very implementation of them destroys whole villages, threatens local cultures and takes lives by not taking precautions to prevent contamination of water and lands. South American countries are an astounding example. In fact, speaking of Perkins’s book, Perkins notes the contrast in Ecuador before Shell’s arrival and a few decades after Shell’s arrival.
Ecuador is especially interesting as it’s seen by many as America’s most important potential oil resource after the Middle East. Many think that because trouble’s brewing in the Middle East, the US oil companies will look to Ecuador to secure supplies. And now that both Republicans and Democrats are talking about bringing down petrol prices in the lead up to the November election, I have to wonder how they plan to do this, and worry for Ecuador. Considering the invasion of Panama in 1989, which was essentially undertaken to secure control over the Panama Canal Zone (despite the pretence that it was because drugs are baaaahhhdd and the US has a duty to protect the people, yuh huh), and the invasion of Iraq (known to many as the key to control over the oil trade in the Middle East), I don’t know what to expect. I know to expect something sinister, yet I don’t know what form it will take after the disaster case that is the Iraq occupation.
In general, the nature of international relations is growing more disturbing. National interests are often represented by private businesses who are neither as accountable nor as open to scrutiny as governments in ‘developed’ and ‘democratic’ countries. So how does this help me to make my choice? Well, it doesn’t. It only makes me hope that the nature of international relations is cyclic and that the societies pushed to the limit by the current system will push hard enough back to strike some sort of balance…and also that one day Japan and China decide to cash in their IOUs from the US…and not pursue a similar agenda to the existing one. Too much hoping. Not enough action. I guess that’s answered my question. Either that or I’m listening to too much Rage Against The Machine.
