Marda Loop Justice Film Festival

I'm getting this out a little late, but I figured it was worthwhile enough to get out for what little time there is left...

This weekend is the Marda Loop Justice Film Festival in Calgary.  It actually started on Wednesday, but the bulk of the films are being shown on Saturday and Sunday.  The Marda Loop Justice Film Festival is a documentary film festival with the goal of, through films and discussion, promoting understanding of justice issues and advocating for the wellbeing of local and global neighbours. From the Wednesday to the Sunday documentaries are shown, for free, on a wide range of current social issues.  On the weekend evenings there is also what the organizers term an "NGO Village", which, if it is the same from previous years, provides the opportunity for local NGOs, as well as local chapters of national and international NGO's, to advertise their work and how to become involved.  This festival has been running here in Calgary for I think 8 years or so, I have been attending for maybe 5 or 6.  I am consistently impressed by the range of topics and quality of the films presented, and this year looks to be no exception. 

The topics this year as always cover a range of issues including a variety of environmental issues (Yasuni, Chasing Ice), health (GMO OMG),  North American ethical issues such as the market in human egg cells (Eggsploitation), human rights issues such as female gendercide (It's a Girl), peoples' struggles for freedom (State of Control and The Defector), special needs (My Way to Olympia), mental health (Marta's Suitcase), homelessness (Cardboard) and others.  The films are generally informative, as a minimum, and often also attempt to approach the central issue from a different perspective than what might be common in the general populace, an approach I appreciate as it helps to get one thinking about the topic critically.  Reading the descriptions for this year I do not expect this to have changed from previous years.  Festivals such as these incredibly valuable.  Not only just for the difference in perspective that can often be gained, but also because they provide an easy touchpoint to become aware of, or more familiar with, current social justice, human rights, and global interest topics (such as the environment) both close to home and throughout the world.  There is so much going on in the world it is impossible to keep track of all of it, festivals such as these help considerably with opening one's mind and eyes to the wider world around us.  This is the first year my son has participated in the festival, so far we have seen "State of Control" and "Yasuni".  I was happy with his comments after seeing "State of Control" - he stated that he had been aware of the restrictions described in the description of the film, but until seeing the film he did not really understand.  This, I think, is exactly the purpose of films such as these, and the reason people take the time, and sometimes risks, to produce them, and I am thankful that this modality of communication exists for me to use to enhance both my, and my son's, understanding of issues which we cannot always go to experience first hand ourselves.

So for any of you in Calgary who are able to make it, do look up the festival, and choose a film or two to try.  It's free.  And different.  For those of you elsewhere, perhaps look up if there are any similar events in your area.  And for those of you who produce such films, those who work so hard to provide a forum for their presentation, and the financial sponsors, thank-you.

Thoughts to consider

I was reading more on the issue of petroleum production here in Canada, and, as is not unusual, it made me feel sad. Not because of the debate about what to do, which does also cause me some concern, but because of the understanding of the conflict this issue causes, whether acknowledged or not, within all of our citizens, and which often spreads to become conflict between citizens.  A conflict which is not isolated to here, but which is shared by people the world over.  A conflict which in many places results in physical aggression, death, and other calamities, but which thankfully here, for whatever reasons, is not presented to such extremes.

I live in Calgary, which is the center of the oil patch in Canada.  Everyone here, from the Engineer in the office, to the doctor in the clinic, the teachers in the schools, the gardeners with the city, the hairdressers in the salons, the piano teachers in their studios (that would be me!), and the kid manning the till at the local store, relies upon the oil patch for their livelihood.  All 1 million or so of us, whether we admit it openly or not.  It is because of the income generated from the oil industry that we are able to go about our lives at the level of comfort to which we have become accustomed. We have food, shelter, heat, education.  We have green spaces, bike paths, and health care.  We have services for the elderly and those with special needs.  We can go get fancy haircuts, take vacations, have a latte.  We weathered this latest recession relatively well.  And why?  Because of the oil patch.  It's probably safe for me to say that all of us who benefit from this appreciate what we have, and would be very sad to lose it.  And thus the conflict,which is....

What part of our existence do we protect?  Certainly of concern is the immediate economic uncertainty.  If we withdraw support for the oil industry we risk much....  the loss of our homes because we can no longer afford to pay the mortgage.  The whining of our children when they are no longer able to play hockey.  Our depression as we sit in our homes thinking of how we had intended to go for that nice beach vacation in Mexico.  Having to watch our children go hungry because we no longer have the means to provide them with food.  Those calamities that we see on the news which occur to "others" and which we most certainly don't want to have happen to us.

But....  what about all that is being said about the dangers of the oil industry?  The illnesses reported by those living near to petroleum production areas?  The spills, on land and water?  Claims that the damage caused by such is irreversable, or maybe it isn't?  The air pollution? The reduction in our water levels, at a time when we hear talk of intense debate between our country and our neighbour to the south on who, exactly, gets rights to that water which is flowing from our country, in anticipation of water shortages?  We do care about other people.  It matters to us if people are getting sick because their home location is dangerous to live in.  Many people here donate money to help establish clean water for people in places known to be lacking in such.  Others volunteer their time for the same or similar endeavours.  We also care about the preservation of our world.  Many of us, especially here in Calgary, enjoy the outdoors.  We regularly go out to the national parks situated oh so close by, we camp, we ski.  We pick up our garbage, we recycle, we compost, we refrain from washing our cars in places where the runoff will go untreated into the river.  So it's not as though we are inherently self-centered and uncaring about others or the world which supports us, or unaware.   

And this is where the individual conflict comes in.  The conflict within ourselves which, if left unacknowledged, can eventually lead to some of those more disastrous consequences mentioned earlier, like aggression and death, but which also can simply lead to no decisions being made, no consensus being reached, no real solution being found.  It is the conflict arising from the question of which security do we need, or, how much of each of the competing securities do we need.  This is a difficult question to answer, and therefore a difficult conflict to address, even if a person does have accurate, certain information.  And in this situation we don't.  We don't know the economic impact on our personal lives if we limit oil production or transportation.  We don't know, for sure, how many spills there will be, or the extent of the leaks, or what the long term impact will be.  We can not say, for certain, that those high rates of cancer are, really, a result of the higher number of wells in the area.  Most of us do not have the background to really disseminate all the information being passed on to us by all the different people involved, so the prospect of attempting to do so is, to put it bluntly, frightening.  And the consequences of a wrong decision are also frightening.  So many of us practice avoidance.  It is easy to do.  We form in groups and out groups.  Everyone who says something that may bring up that side of the conflict we are running from is part of the out group, whose knowledge and opinions are worthless anyways.  Our in group provides us with the psychological support we need to stay strong in our conviction of this, and to provide reinforcement of the aspects we are focusing upon.  This holds for both the environmentalists and the industrialists. Subconciously all those aspects of our psychological functioning which are studied so assiduously by those in marketing, commercial and other, such as the tendency to read only information which will support our position, run rampant. We distract ourselves, keeping busy with the minutae of our everyday lives.  And we reassure ourselves that "others" who "know what they are doing" will look after it all.  And in the meantime, people get frustrated.  Others who are not in the situation judge those who are, saying they are self-centered, or naive, or money-hungry.  Those who are in the situation form factions, labelling those on the other side as extremists, environmentalists, oil workers, naive, unrealistic, greedy, uneducated, all words which are used as degradations here.  And the individual conflict spreads to the outside, intensifies on the inside, and the perceived need to ignore the roots increases. 

So here we have, in Canada, a first world country, the same conflict which appears the world over.  The conflict that people must face in this larger world of ours, between our immediate existence and our broader existence.  I think, for all of us, we do not struggle with this necessarily because we do not understand a scope of existence broader than our own immediate physical condition, but because we are trying to resolve competing needs, and this is difficult, and frightening, and uncertain.  We all wish to live happily, we all wish to keep those good things we have.  I think most of us are truly concerned about other members of humanity, and the world that supports us, but, sometimes, fear of facing that conflict between our needs and desires for our immediate physical condition and those of the broader world, or even our more long-term personal existence, drives us to bury this concern, using whatever tools we have, and there are many, to do so.  It is understandable, but it causes great pain.  Because the conflict is still there, the nagging doubts still exist.  And it spreads.  If we could only join together to grab the courage we need to have confidence in ourselves and our abilities to make decisions, to live with those decisions, to find happiness in multitudes of ways.  We don't need to fight, we can work together.  We can listen, and we can hear, and we can trust in our ability to find a way.  Just some thoughts to consider when we find ourselves on the verge of discarding another's thoughts, actions, or opinions out of hand....

 

The Precarious State of Canadians' Access to Information

As I mention in my "first smudge" posting, this past Saturday I participated in a workshop on the topic of accomplishing change through the power of community.  In addition to the experience of the smudge, and the direct instruction on the focal topic, I also learned some disturbing information about difficulties people have encountered in attempting to implement their basic human right of access to information.  I felt this was important to bring out but did not want to detract from the experience of the smudge, and so am posting on this topic separately.

The right to information is essential in the functioning of a democracy, how can people possibly make decisions if they are not permitted access to information relevant to those decisions?  Here in Canada we have laws which are supposed to be designed to protect this right, but lately I have been noticing at the federal level a disturbing trend towards a weakening, or even outright countering, of these laws.  At the workshop yesterday some personal experiences were shared which demonstrate an infringement of the right to information at an individual everyday person level, even outside of the events at the federal level.  Together these are enough to prompt me to put out a posting on what I have seen that I find disturbing so that others, particularly my fellow Canadians who may be relaxing in our past history, can perhaps start to look around, contemplate what is important to them in the fabric of our country, and, perhaps, exercise their voice in the protection of that.

At the federal level there has been a disturbing trend towards silencing those considered experts in various fields.  Specifically the federal government has instituted policies to prevent our scientists and librarians from speaking out.  For the scientists this has come about with restrictions to speaking with media about the results of their research, for the librarians, well, I'm not really sure what they're not allowed to speak about, but the federal government apparently feels that they know something the public should not since the librarians are no longer permitted to speak without prior approval with the public in the capacity of federal librarian.  Here are some relevant news articles on these two demographics and their silencing by the federal government....  BBC News - Muzzling of Canadian Scientists ,  The David Suzuki Foundation - Silencing the Fisheries Scientist,  National Post - Muzzling of Federal Librarians .  These restrictions to transfer of information are harmful to a democracy, without information the populace can not make informed decisions, and they are easily manipulated by any personal agendas of those in charge.  This is most easily seen right now in the issue of the Enbridge pipeline currently undergoing the modified approval process.  This pipeline is slated to run from northern Alberta through northern British Columbia to a terminus in Kitimat, British Columbia, where the bitumen will be transferred to tanker ships for transport through the hazardous channels between Kitimat and the open ocean on its way to China.  The pipeline route passes through many watersheds  in northern B.C., as well as some generally inaccessible countryside.  By muzzling the scientists the government is able to fairly easily keep a lid on the potential dangers of the pipeline, the realities of the likely success of any cleanups from ruptures and leaks, and the nature of the environment which the pipeline is slated to pass through.  The area is sparsely populated, so very few people would know any of this from first hand experience.  Furthermore, as a result of the general muzzling of our federal scientists, the public is likely generally unaware of the dangers that already exist to the local, and not so local in terms of the salmon, wildlife, and the tentative footing on which their existence already stands, even without increased danger from new intrusions into their territory.  All of this is information needed by the constituents of a democracy in order for the democracy to function as a real democracy, and it is frightening that access to it is being so actively blocked, and that we are allowing this.

Another worrisome move by the federal government is the expansion of the definition of "terrorism" to include peaceful activity.  According to this article by The Guardian, "Canada's environmental activists seen as "threat to national security" ", activities such as protests, and even simple opposition, to activities of the petroleum industry are now viewed as attacks on national security, allowing them, and the people involved, to be treated as threats, which would include silencing and arrest.  It hardly seems in line with freedom of speech, a human right included in our Canadian constitution, to be able to arrest someone for stating they disagree with, say, fracking, the drilling of a sour gas well close to their property, or the construction of a pipeline.  Or to be able to label a person a threat to national security simply because they disagree with the actions of commercial organizations.  Free speech is essential for the progress of a country, I can not see how preventing such when it is not assaulting anyone else can have as its purpose anything other than an attempt to exert control over the information allowed to enter the public sphere.    

Next is the lack of transparency being increasingly evidenced in our federal processes.  The free trade agreement with China, FIPA, is an excellent example.  This is an extremely important and impactful agreement, and yet it is being pushed through our government with no debate.  Debate is important for educating the populace as well as for providing thorough evaluation of an issue, thankfully we do have watchdogs keeping an eye on things so some information has gotten out to the public, but it should not have been necessary for it to happen in this fashion. 

Those are some disturbing developments at the federal level in terms of access to information....  the silencing of several groups of people in position to convey information.... scientists, librarians, and activists, as well as the circumventing of processes designed not only to allow for full evaluation of impactful changes to our country, but also to allow for education of the populace.  On a more individual level, I heard yesterday of experiences that should not be happening in a "free" country.  These occurred in the arena of individuals trying to gather information about development by a petroleum company, in particular fracking on their land.  In their efforts to understand potential dangers with the development, these individuals were subjected to threats of job loss.  They were also denied access to what was supposed to be public information, such as exactly what was proposed to be done, and how it would be accomplished.  The medical doctor's requests for the component listing of the fracking fluid were never answered.  And three unarmed women standing holding hands across a road were arrested for trespassing, on their own land, and then later charged with intimidation, because apparently three women standing in a road is incredibly intimidating to a bunch of oilfield workers in their trucks.

These are disturbing trends.  I encourage any reading this to look into them further, and form your own opinions.  Or, at the very least, take a look around and notice what is going on.  Stand up for our rights.  We have a wonderful country, let's keep it that way.  

My first smudge

I participated in a smudge!  This was very exciting for me, I have never participated in a smudge before.  In fact, until yesterday I didn't even know what a smudge was.  In case any of you are like me and are also unaware of what a smudge is, well, it is a ceremony intended to cleanse the spirit and prepare one for contemplation and decision making.  Or at least that was the impression I received.  I could be completely off base here, and my apologies to anyone whose ceremony this is if I am.  This smudge in which I participated took place at a workshop hosted by Ploughshares Calgary and Next Up Calgary intended to demonstrate how change can happen through the power of community.  Summer Stonechild, and I am embarrassed to say I have forgotten which Nation she is of, was kind enough to perform the smudge for us, and to invite us all to take part.  This is something I have experienced in all of the aboriginal communities to which I have been exposed, an openess and invitation to participate.  I like this, this inclusiveness is not a characteristic of all communities, but it does seem to be fairly consistent across western Canadian Aboriginal communities.  And I certainly appreciate it, since here as a result I was able to participate in a Smudge!

So, just briefly, the explanation we were given of the smudge is that as we go through life we experience events which we then carry around with us, like a child carries their books in a backpack.  Occasionally we need to look through that backpack and decide which items we will continue to carry, and which we will leave behind, and the smudge helps in this.  The smudge is important for preparing an individual to participate in discussion and/or decision making as it unclutters the spirit, thus allowing for improved listening, speaking, and decision making.  The smudge in which we, the workshop participants, participated, was overseen by Summer.  She started by unwrapping, carefully it seemed, a bowl shaped item and bringing out her Eagle Feather.  She shared the history of her Eagle Feather and then explained the process of the smudge.  She would be bringing around the bowl, in which there was something which was smoking.  To participate in the smudge, we could wash our hands in the smoke, then use our hands to direct the smoke over our heads, so our thoughts were clean, towards our eyes, so our vision is pure, over our ears, over our mouths, and then over our hearts and down our front.  After lighting the smudge pot and saying a brief prayer of thanks to the Creator, Summer proceeded around the room, allowing each person the opportunity to participate.  The Eagle Feather was used to help waft the smoke from the bowl.  It was a moving experience, and I thank Summer in particular and the aboriginal community in general for allowing people such as myself to participate.  And please, if anyone who knows more of this is reading here and notices I have made some inaccuracies in my relating of this event, or have misunderstood anything, please feel welcome to make a comment and correct me.        

Canada's Role in International Human Rights

     Where is Canada in the promotion and protection of human rights on the international stage?  Being Canadian, and concerned with human rights, this is an area of interest to me.  Historically Canada has had a reputation of being a peacekeeping nation, interested in maintaining peace, not waging war, and a bulwark for the protection of human rights.  We frequently lead the way in the development of charters and treaties for the protection of human rights worldwide and were known as the land of human rights.  Our efforts in these areas earned us a voice on the international stage, a voice well beyond any influence we would have had as a result of size or economic power.  We were granted this voice because not only had we consistently provided contributions of value but we had also demonstrated, through both our financial and human contributions, that we held by what we said.  Many Canadians, myself included, pride ourselves on this reputation. 

     In the last 10 to 20 years, however, Canada’s attitude appears to have changed.  There is less talk about keeping peace and more about waging war.  This has been noteworthy enough to prompt texts such as Noah Richler’s “What we talk about when we talk about war”.  Our attitude towards human rights appears to have changed as well.  To my observations we do not appear to be as concerned with other nations’ behaviours in this area as the reputation which I identify with suggests we should be as we proceed, for instance, in promoting trade agreements with countries known for their human rights offences, think Columbia and China, and refusing support for those suffering from attacks on their basic human rights, think Canada’s November 29, 2012, membership in the group of only 9 nations to not just abstain but to actually vote against Palestine’s application for non-member observer status with the United Nations (UN News Press Document).  This apparent disconnect between the reputation in which I pride myself and our current behaviour disturbs me, so when the opportunity presented itself on Friday evening to hear Alex Neve, Secretary General of Amnesty International Canada, speak on Canada’s role in international human rights I made sure to attend, interested to hear what someone more involved and with more experience had to say on the topic. 

     What Mr. Neve had to say was not reassuring.  He summarized Canada’s influential history in the development of institutions for the protection of human rights and our historical participation in actions to support these institutions.  He discussed our reputation, sharing with us his experience of 20 years past where, upon learning that one of the representatives sent to help with his country was Canadian, a member of the state in crisis stood up and cried out that all would be well since a Canadian, a representative of the “land of human rights”, was there to help.  Mr. Neve then discussed how this has all changed.  How more recently the reaction of a U.S. marine to hearing that a Canadian was investigating human rights issues was to ask “what the hell are you guys doing?”.  How now Canada is viewed as being a partisan nation siding with Israel, that this influences our approach to human rights issues in this area of the world, and how this partisanship on the part of Canada is being used by some to attempt to explain Canada’s recalcitrance in condemning recent actions by Syria, as well as refusal to support Syria’s referral to the ICC.  He brought up the example of Canada’s lack of intervention with Omar Khadr, an individual taken, as a 15 year old and therefore a child, from the battlefield in Afghanistan, then held and tortured in Guantanamo Bay, as a perplexing example of a serious lack of follow through by a country which had originally been one of the strongest supporters on the charter on the rights of the child and the treatment of child soldiers.  He mentioned how Canada, originally a supporter of the charter on prevention of violence against women, has not yet instituted federal level assessment structures as is mandated by that charter.  He brought up our reaction to the recent exposure of our poor treatment of our aboriginals, and the abrogation of their human rights that this included.  How we have yet to ratify the charter on the rights of aboriginals, and when concerns about our domestic behaviour are brought up as a potential matter for concern our reaction is to deal out personal and/or unrelated insults to the individual delivering the message of concern.  How we have used jurisdictional technicalities as an excuse to afford differential rights as a basis of race stating outright that aboriginal people whose management falls under federal jurisdiction because of this do not have the same rights to education as individuals whose education falls under provincial jurisdiction.  He pointed out that a poor human rights record at home undermines the value of any attempt to contribute to human rights issues worldwide.  He mentioned our decline in participation in peacekeeping missions, and the progressive melding of our approach to human rights issues, aide, and trade, which has culminated now in the most recent federal budget with the relegation of the Canadian International Development Agency to a section within the Department of Trade.  The list of examples of Canada’s declining involvement in the promotion and protection of human rights was not limited by an end to the examples but by a lack of time, presenting a depressing picture of a country once strong in the promotion and protection of human rights now descended to one weak in moral fibre and concerned not with the well being of the human race but more with its own individual, short term, material gain.   This is not the Canada I am proud of, nor the one I wish us to continue to be. 

     So what can we do?  Is it a lost cause?  Should we pack up and run, abandoning the sinking ship?  No, I do not think so.  All is not lost, as Mr. Neve stated at the end of his presentation.  We can still change.  We can, as a country, come back and return our support to human rights.  We did it before, we can do it again, and if we do perhaps this last twenty years or so will be seen simply as a little blip.  But how do we do this?  How do we get the momentum swinging the other way, back towards protection of human rights?  Well, our country is still a democracy.  The citizens do have a voice.  If we raise it loud enough, perhaps the government will start to listen.  But to get that voice raised the population needs to know what’s going on, and they need to have some way to raise it.  So…. follow along with what’s happening, both at home and in the world.  Agencies tracking human rights issues, such as Human Rights Watch, the United Nations, and Amnesty International, often have news centres (Human Rights Watch News, UN News Centre, UN Daily News, Amnesty International News, Amnesty International Canada News) which regularly share international happenings.  The larger Canadian newspapers, such as the Globe and Mail, are a good source for Canadian events, as well as a Canadian perspective on worldwide events.  All of the above have facebook pages which makes it even easier to receive updates…. all a person has to do is “like” the facebook page and the updates are sent directly to the individual’s news feed.  And really, news from Human Rights Watch or the UN is probably a far more valuable contribution to our news feed than the current sales being offered by Future Shop!  If you see something of concern, follow up on it.  What is Canada doing about this?  If the answer is nothing, then write.  Write to your MP, the representatives of other parties (NDP, Liberal Party, Green Party), the Prime Minister's office .  Tell them what the issue is and that you think Canada should be doing something about it.  Or if our country has become involved, and you approve, tell them so, this will encourage them to continue to be involved.  If you haven’t the time to find out what Canada is doing about the issue, write and ask.  Whatever you write the letter doesn’t need to be long, the goal is to indicate a desire for Canada to be involved, not to propose a solution.  Once you have written, talk to your friends.  Share what you’ve found out, what you’ve done, and why (because Canada has been moving away from taking a stand on issues of human rights, and you want that to change).  On your facebook pages provide an easy way for your friends to follow suite – provide the background information, information on what you wrote, and the addresses that they could send letters to if they would like to do the same.  The more letters our government gets, the more likely it is to listen.  Not just on a particular issue, but on the overall approach to human rights issues.  Eventually, if they receive enough letters on enough issues, they might start to get the impression that Canadians care, and we expect our government to care too.  And slowly, perhaps, the momentum will shift, and we may, just may, move that pendulum back to the side of peace, and human rights, and respect for all of earth’s inhabitants.  

India

March 21, 2013, and I have been back home for almost a week, after spending two weeks in India.  For those of you who have been reading my posts from the outset, yes, this is somewhat earlier than planned.  To my Thai friends who are likely laughing at me, no, it was not the heat that chased me away.  Nor was it the lack of ice for my drinks, which would likely have all of you heading back to Thailand within a week.  My son became ill, so it was wise of us to leave, but I was not sad to have to make this decision.  And my lack of regret about this stemmed not from discomfort from heat or lack of cold drinks, but from a source far more subtle, and more meaningful.  It stemmed, I think, from finding myself in an environment where I did not feel safe, in an arena where an aura of hopelessness prevailed, and in a society where one of the most basic assumptions of my society, that of a general concern of the citizens, and government, for the care and well-being of the other members of that society, was not necessarily valid.

We started our visit to India in Mumbai and one of the first things that struck me about this city as we drove towards our hotel was the decrepit nature of the areas through which we were driving.  Buildings looked as if they had been bombed, even though this was not a war zone.  Hollow-shelled multi-story buildings with missing sides were rampant and there were piles of collapsed building materials lining the streets. One and two storey structures looked as though they were about to collapse and were pocketed with holes, even though there were plenty of materials readily available for their repair.  An aura of destitution prevailed, an impression of a certain lack of concern, and lack of pride, with the living environment.  Although I was not in the most well to do areas of Mumbai and the other cities I visited I was not in the slums either, this lack of care was not necessary.  I have been to many other places where poverty is part of the status quo and have witnessed that this does not equate the lack of pride of possession demonstrated here.  That being said, there often is at least some degree of a lack of pride of possession demonstrated somewhere in most larger cities, however, typically this is isolated to specific, relatively small, areas which can be avoided.  In India it was the opposite, with the areas of neglect being the status quo, and areas reflecting pride of ownership or possession being the minority.    

The impression of a lack of care for, well, anything, extended beyond buildings.  People seemed to care little for each other also.  Any interactions involving an individual wanting something, and something else possibly being in the way, involved competition.  People would literally push other people out of the way to get in front of them in “line”.  Non-human obstructions, such as inanimate objects and animals, were routinely kicked out of the way, perhaps because they are typically shorter and more in foot range than hand range.  With regards to interacting with each other, in general people would not offer assistance to others unless there was something in it for them, and there was a strong expectation of payment for any assistance that was rendered, no matter how minor, and regardless of whether or not said assistance was solicited.  The most basic example of this of course is the expectation of payment to the women who hang around the washrooms informing patrons where items such as the water for washing are located.  My son made the mistake of not fulfilling this expectation one time, resulting in a very irate woman waving her broom at him as he hurriedly walked away towards me, in quite a state of confusion.  My impression of the “only for myself” orientation does not result solely from irritation at constantly being expected to pay for minor little niceties of human interaction though, it is well acknowledged by the locals that one of the more counter-productive approaches to interacting with an individual from whom one requires something is to try to plead your case on the basis of need as this will result in an “it’s not my problem” response and is fairly guaranteed to, at best, lengthen, and at worst, completely obstruct, whatever it is you are trying to accomplish.  This I did also witness, between Indian residents, as I was myself waiting very patiently, and unpleadingly, for my request to be evaluated….   

The lack of care for possessions extended beyond the decrepit nature of the more public buildings to the possessions and businesses of the individuals.  As I mentioned, I have travelled to other places populated by people who do not have much; this does not prevent them from exhibiting care for what they have.  The products in their roadside stalls are nicely laid out, and handled with care.  Their shacks are clean, their footwear nicely lined up.  This was not the case in India.  The market products were more often than not displayed in a large jumble.  The products themselves were not transported or moved with care, I saw several times products, including food products, being unceremoniously dumped out of one container onto the ground, and then tossed into the next location, a process which undoubtedly was part of the cause of the poor state of the product.  In Cambodia, Thailand, and Vietnam, other places I have visited where people make do with more primitive accommodations, those accommodations still somehow exhibited a sense of pride of ownership…. they were whole, one could tell the leaves or other material on the roof were replaced as needed, there were no collapsed building materials next to buildings which could use those materials to shore up the collapsing walls or roof under which the inhabitants were living.  This was not the case in India.  I did not enter any of these dwellings while I was in India, so perhaps the care or pride of possession which is so important for human progress is demonstrated there instead of on the outside, but when one sees countless and repeated instances of living accommodations which are falling apart, which are not whole, when there are materials lying about which could accomplish this right there, there is an impression received of a certain lack of ownership on the part of the inhabitants. 

           In addition to the rather depressing pervasive air of a lack of concern with their environment and with each other, and perhaps resulting at least in part from this attitude, I felt distinct concern about my safety.  It is rather ironic that in the week I have been home there have been several articles in the Times of India relating to just this aspect of Indian society…… India shocked by another gang rape, this time a Swiss tourist, UK tourist jumps from hotel to escape sexual assault, however, my concerns weren’t necessarily related solely to a danger of being raped, or resulting from a concern that I would be singled out because I was a foreigner.  I simply, in general, felt that it was not safe for a female to be out and about on their own.  Period.  I have been to many places in Canada and the United States, to Rome, Cambodia, Vietnam, Thailand, Mexico, Costa Rica, Jamaica, and in all of these places I have felt that generally it is not irresponsible of me to think that I can go out and take a look around on my own without running a substantial risk to my safety.  This was not the case in India.  In some places, such as the tourist area of Udaipur when it was daytime and crowded, or along the main, extremely busy, street by our hotel in Mumbai, again when it was daytime and very busy, I felt as though I could wander around with relatively low levels of sensitivity for safety, not because others would look out for me but because everyone is so distracted they don't have the time or attention to devote to mounting an actual attack.  But wandering one street down?  No.  So in general, in India, I felt that I was not safe, whereas in other places I have had the impression that I generally am safe, provided I stay out of “bad” areas.  Furthermore, in other places I have been, I have felt that for the most part I can ask somebody for help and provided I don’t choose to ask someone who appears as though they are on the edges of society it is most likely that they will try to help me.  In India I distinctly felt that I was putting myself in more danger asking for help than I would be in if I were to remain in an anonymous state of needing help.  What is it that made me feel this way?  It is hard to say, but I know of a couple of factors that likely contributed….

          First is the low status of women.  An observant or sensitive person can feel this, it is quite pervasive.  I was somewhat uncomfortable being on my own in an environment where my concerns and state of being were not considered to be of value.  And I was on my own.  I saw virtually no women in the public areas during my time in India, so the usual advice for women travelling to countries with male/female interaction restrictions, of  solicit help and information from the females, was not applicable.  With regards to soliciting aid from a male, well, since males are the primary source of the danger to females in India, the wisdom of this approach was questionable.  Not to mention the societal taboos against a female initiating contact with an unknown male, and the messages doing so would therefore send. 

          Next, and perhaps because of this low status, women appear to be routinely attacked in this society, and this does not appear to generate much concern in the overall populace.  Why do I say this? First off because the attacks are so commonplace, and secondly because when such things are written up in the news the focus is on the oddity of the victim or victim’s family reporting or objecting to the event, not on the event itself, implying that it is the objecting, not the attack, that is newsworthy.  So here you have an environment where women, even the local women, are not considered of value, are routinely victimised, and where there is little concern exhibited over this victimisation.  Not good, especially when one has no local resources.

          One solution of course would have been for me to follow the lead of the local women and disappear from the public environment.  However, this is not how I wanted to spend the next three months of my time, hiding in a house, restricted in my ability to live.  I commend all of those who are in India, both Indians and foreigners, working ever so hard for the freedom of this society, but this was not how I wanted to have my son and I spend the next few months of our lives, regardless of the value of the work we would have been doing.  So I made the decision to leave, and come back to my home where everyone is considered to be of value, and everyone experiences at least relatively equal levels of security.

          Once I had made this decision I discovered yet another bothersome aspect of Indian society, that of restriction to my freedom of movement.  I had entered India on a volunteer Visa which had stamped onto it that I was required to register with the appropriate government agency in the region where I was going to be volunteering within 14 days of arrival in India.  By the time I arrived in my volunteering region, approximately one and a half weeks after arrival in India, I had decided I was going to leave.  It was then that I discovered that before I would be permitted to leave I needed to register and then de-register with the government office in my region of volunteering so that I would have the appropriate permission to leave form.  Without this form I would not be allowed to leave the country.  What a frightening thought, if I had decided to leave at the point where my son started becoming ill, without making the trek up to the volunteering location so that I could at least meet the people I had been in correspondence with, I would have been turned back at passport control.  I would have been stuck in this country, helpless and without recourse.  I am very happy to have avoided that experience.  The experience I did have was to have to make the trek down to the passport office to fill out multitudes of forms, leave and do repeated photocopying, return, wait, fill out more forms, etc. etc.  I was quite fortunate, it was all done in an afternoon, but apparently this is rather unusual and the process can take several days.  Somebody was looking after me I think.      

          So that was my experience in India.  It was a valuable experience, if not exactly what I was expecting. I learned about some of the basic assumptions of my society which are central to my being, such as the assumption of a general concern of the citizens for each other, a pride of self of the majority of the citizens, and respect for the freedoms and dignity of each and every member of the society.  I have experienced to a small degree what life is like without these assumptions, and have a far better understanding of others’ situations than I did before, or would be able to attain without this or a similar experience.  I am thankful that I was able to obtain this experience without significant consequences.  I am also thankful that there are people in India who think differently than the general impressions I received, people who, for instance, will help a mother and son standing alone at a train station find their loading area, and remain close by until said mother and son's train arrives and the two of them are safely aboard, individuals such as those at Sambhali Trust who are dedicating the whole of their lives to improving the situation, and others who I did not encounter but who surely exist.  I am thankful there are people from other countries with better home situations who are willing to travel to India and sacrifice their time and freedoms to demonstrate another way.  There is hope, even if not everyone recognizes it.  But for me,  I am now quite happy to relax into a society where I am considered to be a person and have the general rights associated with this.  It was nice the other day going to the grocery store  knowing I was not risking my sanctity by doing so and that if I were to suddenly require assistance for some reason chances were that the person next to me, male or female, would offer it to me...

 

Chinese New Year's Parade

     Last Friday our hosts Nett and Anders took my son and I to the Chinese New Year's parade in Thai Meaung. This was a most interesting, and enjoyable!, experience. The action started at the Chinese Temple, which is, from what I understand, the place of action for many festivities in town. In the morning people had set out tables of confectionary turtles: big ones, little ones, big ones with little ones, all through the square
around the temple. They were all red, and had various decorations on them, from iced dragons to peacock feathers. My understanding is that these were offerings to the Gods of the temple. These turtles were on display all morning, until just before the parade preparations began.







     Just after noon the more active preparations, from a spectator's perspective, began.  People appeared, milling about in the square with even more in the temple.  Incense was set alight, drumming began, the occasional firecracker was set off, and children with flags and dragon costumes appeared.

   
     Things became quite noisy, crowded, and hot.  Small palanquins appeared, ranging in size from 5 to 8 ft, approximately.  These were of two types, one which consisted of a chair, presumably for a person to sit on, and another which resembled small temples.

These, I was told, were for the statues of the Gods which would soon be removed from the temples, embued with their God's presence.

     Inside the temple, other preparations were proceeding. I could not see much other than a lot of smoke and people moving about, but, since the idea was for those participating to become possessed by the various Gods represented in the temple I am assuming that this is what was happening and the increasing noise and activity level indicated progress in this.

     The noise and activity level inside the temple continued to increase until, somewhere around 1:30, a path was cleared in front of the temple doors and the God statues began to appear. These were quickly and discreetly placed in their houses, and the curtains closed.  Following upon the heels of the statues were the possessed individuals.  Their appearance was rather more showy, with the individuals gyrating around to the music of the drums, and the spectators being careful to avoid looking them in the eye.  The possessed individuals made their way over to what I will call the piercing table, upon which was a selection of metal rods ranging from perhaps 3 to 5 ft in length, and about 1/2" in diameter.  Each

possessed individual chose a rod, or two, which was then slowly slid into their cheek on one side of their face, and then out the cheek on the other side.










     And now it was time for the parade itself.   Palanquins, God statues, carriers, possessed individuals, drummers, spectators, we all set off towards the main street in town.  Being careful, of course, to avoid the rods sticking out of the sides of the possessed individuals heads...

     Once we reached the main street, the crowd dispersed somewhat, with the main participants(these being the palanquins, the carriers, and the possessed individuals) taking center stage and the spectators (including myself and my hosts) falling back.  We retreated to the shop front of my host's parents, where they, like so many other shopowners, had set out a table of offerings for the Gods.

   
     Many shop owners had also set out firecrackers, which would be taken by the participants, lit, and then tossed under the feet of the palanquin carriers.  













    We waited and waited, and then, there they were!  The parade was coming our way!

    First to arrive were the enclosed statues and their carriers, accompanied by a man who would stop and bless the shop owners.  

This was relatively quiet. Following this, however, was more excitement, as this was where the possessed individuals again made an appearance, this time to the accompaniement of the noise and smoke of firecrackers. Those firecrackers that shopowners had put out were now being put to use... they were collected, lit, and then tossed among the feet of those people following along with the possessed individuals.  This created a lot of noise, smoke, and, well, burn marks on the carriers' legs and clothing. 


     And then, finally, after lots of smoke, banging, and drumming, the parade was done, at least for us.  It continued down the road, of course, and then eventually made its way back to the temple.  After about two hours of excitement and heat, however, my son and I were done, happy to have experienced something completely new in this land of smiles.