Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
What it is an effective approach to social change and development which benefits the society?
Most people believe that education eliminates ignorance and therefore allows transformation. Thus, people are encouraged to achieve higher education. Education is considered to be the primary tool for great social change that can be used to bring about an end to social inequality, class disparity, as well as gender and racial discrimination. However, can education eliminate these barriers if it does not fully reflect on the lives of the people? Does education have the potential to condemn oppression and address a constructive practice that is empowering? Furthermore, what it is an effective approach to social change and development which benefits the society? This work will demonstrate a theoretical framework built upon the ideas of Paulo Freire, as it relates to social change, the role of education, and Freire’s unique concepts.
Paulo Freire’s theory is unique in comparison to any other theory because his analysis of devices of oppression, whereas most theories focus on class-analysis, political or social-analysis. He ideological addresses anti-authoritarian philosophy; and his method of consciousness rising thought challenges people to analysis, discover and recreate life experiences from personal and address social situation. Freire’s theory challenges people to be conscious of their reality; and critical consciousness involves making connections and analyzing the real condition and structural problems.
His theory views human beings in two categories, one objects the other as subjects, independent beings who are able to go beyond and recreate the world. Freire (2005) examines the conditions of human beings by comparing humans to animals. In so doing, he explained why the main difference between humans and animals is that humans can function in the world through action and reflection. According to Freire (2005) humans are subjects and the creators and recreates of history. Furthermore, “the human world, which is historical, serves as a mere prop for the being in itself” (Freire, 2000, p. 98). He further illustrated that people are aware of themselves and thus of the world because human beings are conscious beings, which exist in a dialectical association between the determination of limited and their own freedom (Freire, 2005). Consciousness is formed by the socio-economic, personal situations and background in general. When human beings have control over their livelihood, they have the power to think and reflect for themselves, human beings are seen as subjects. However, this has been the case; some human beings are dominated by other human beings. Some are viewed as the objects and others as the “subjects” or some as the people who can control and tell others to be followers and oppressed. Some as the oppressors and others as oppressed. Paulo Freire offers methods that challenge both the oppressed and the oppressors to become full conscious overcome injustices.
Freire in his famous the pedagogy of the oppressed, asserts that the book focuses on the pedagogy of people engaged in the fight for their own liberation. For people who “recognize, or begin to reorganize, themselves as oppressed must be among the developers of this pedagogy” (Freire, 2005, p. 54). The oppressor’s interest is for the people to persist in a state of submersion, incapable in the face of oppressive reality. An affective change is to explain to the masses about their own actions, because one’s action is clarified and illuminated, “both regarding its relationship to the objective facts by which it was prompted, and regarding its purposes” (p. 53). The pedagogy of the oppressed, as a humanist, has two stages. First, the oppressed reveal their world of oppression and through the praxis of committing themselves to its transformation. In the second stage, the reality of oppression has already been transformed, “this pedagogy ceases to belong to the oppressed and become a pedagogy of all people in the process of permanent liberation page” (Ferire, 2005, p. 54). The pedagogy of the first step deals with the issue of the oppressed consciousness and the oppressor consciousness, the people who oppress and people who experience oppression. This stage has to take into account the people’s actions, their outlook of the world, and their morals (Ferire, 2005). The oppressed have the power to overcome oppressors, according to Ferire (2005), as the oppressors dehumanize others, in the process they themselves also become dehumanize. Ferire (2005) trust only the oppressed, by freeing themselves, can free the oppressors as well. Nonetheless, in the process of fighting for libration the oppressed must be aware not to become the dominators and perpetuate the oppression on others including their past oppressors. Freire’s ideology can be applied to addressing issues of education and social change. Paulo Freire offers a unique approach to pedagogical role of education, thus social change.
He offers to concepts of banking education which has been used to dominate and oppress people and proposes the alternative method problem-posing. Banking education attempts to conceal certain facts. Banking education resists dialogue.
Banking education leads students to memorize mechanically and dispose what they are taught by their teacher. They are not challenged to be critical; they will only follow the instructions given to them by their teacher, because in the banking concept of education, the teacher is knowledgeable and the student is not. Therefore, the education that the student receives from the teacher is the only thing that is valued and the students would only dispose the same knowledge that the teacher is teaching him/her. Consequently, education becomes an act of depositing, in which the student are the depositories and the teacher is the depositor. The teacher would not communicate with his/her students, instead expects students to receive, memorize to memorize, repeat, fill and store their deposits. This prevents people from being creative, from transformation, and knowledge which can liberate them. According to the banking idea of education, knowledge is a gift present by those who consider themselves knowledgeable upon those whom they regard as knowing nothing. The teacher might not know much, but still projects a characteristic of the ideology of oppression, reverses education and knowledge as courses of inquiry. The students alienated accept the teacher’s ignorance as justifying the teacher’s existence (Freire, 2005, p.72-73). According to Freire (2005), education must begin with the clarification of the teacher-student contradiction, by integration the poles of the disagreement, so that both are concurrently teachers and students.
Freire’s analysis of the dominant banking model of education informed his democratic proposals of problem-posing education, where “men and women develop their power to perceive critically the way they exist in the world with which and in which they find themselves; they come to see the world not as a static reality but as a reality in the process of transformation” (Freire, 2005, p. 12). Banking education anesthetizes and hinders creative power, whereas, problem-posing education involves a constant unveiling of reality.
According to Freire (2005), problem-posing education involves a constant promotion of reality, whereas, banking education anesthetizes and inhibits creative power, which enables the oppressors to generate their economical or political power. In addition, Scott (1990) illustrated that dominant ideology controls the minds and livelihood of subordinate people. Banking education treats students as persons who need those with superior education to supply them with their knowledge. Consequently, banking education reduces creativity and domesticates. Conversely, problem-posing education makes them critical thinkers. Problem-posing education considers dialogue as essential to the act of cognition that unveils reality.
According to Freire (2005), education that is able to solve the contradiction between teacher and student takes place in circumstances were both address their act of by with they are decided, “the dialogical character of education as the practice of freedom does not begin when the former first asks herself or himself what she or he will dialogue with the latter” (p. 93). Therefore, dialogue starts when both the teacher and student have an open mind to the situation and let the dialogue between both addresses their ideas and let their knowledge continue. Education must raise the awareness of the students because when they are critical and conscious they become subjects, rather than objects, of the world by teaching students to think democratically and to constantly question and make sense with a critical outlook on their education (Lyons, 2001 p. 1). According to Brosio (2005) Paulo Freire , “educational ideas include humanistic, personal, and caring processes, as well as content that is characterized by breadth, depth, and the potential” (p. 197). Education which includes humanistic and democratic ideas has the power to bring about positives social change. However, social change comes from within the community, not by people who come from outside of the community and try to reinforce their ideology.
Freire’s educational ideology does not only apply to class room education, it can be applied to every day live and informal education, leadership and different circumstance in life. The information provided to people must apply to their reality and obtainable knowledge. Freire (2005) explained that programs or educators must never provide people with information or programs that have little or nothing to do with their existence, noting to with their doubt, fears and hopes. If education or programs does not apply to their livelihood, it would only increase fears of oppressed consciousness (p.96). In some communities formal education might be useful in others informal education. The essence Freire’s ideology exemplifies knowledge. People have their own knowledge and ways of existing. Their reality and knowledge is the key. Therefore, his theory of education can be applied outside of the classroom. It can be used to analyze different situations such as community, leadership, social, economical, formal and informal education within and outside of classroom.
Education that includes the people does not necessarily have to be formal education because some social groups have informal education which might work for them. However, when any person tries to educate or inform such groups, he/she might understand that his/her knowledge or formal education training might not be applicable. Both Horton and Freire (1990) admit learning from their mistakes about teaching and believing that their formal education was going to benefit the people they were teaching and helping. However, they both illustrated that their assumption was wrong. They had to start listening and learning from their students and the people they helped and worked with.
Having a dialog between the person who is trying to assist or teach and the student is fundamental, because without communicating and having an understanding of the station or idea the results would not reflect both parties, it would end up with one dominating the other. For example, sometimes people assume that their ideology will “save” people from traditional practices, poverty or illiteracy, without understanding the needs and value of the people, yet their programs or dominate ideology will only worsen the problems. For instance, the current human rights issue of Female Genital Cutting (FGC) is an example where different groups have tried to educate or tell women living developing nations such as Kenya or Senegal and fail because their approach was forceful rather than helpful to the women. According to Antonazzo (2003), when Western groups attempt to end FGC, they have to take the risk of being cultural imperialists. Furthermore, campaigning to end the practice as an isolated event is an issue and describing the practice as unnatural, uncivilized and barbaric is a major problem. Most African women do not perceive FGC as a harmful practice and have criticized Westerners for misrepresenting the cultural context of FGC. For most African women, the practice has a deeper ritual meaning, such as preparing girls to become women, following tradition, ensuring chastity and, most importantly, ensuring their daughter’s marriagebility (Antonazzo, 2003).
When people who might have good intentions go into a group of people and use the concept of banking education, where ‘the knowledgeable’ are the Western feminists, human rights activists or any outsiders, and the women who are practicing FGC become the people who need to be “saved.” The ‘bankers’ assume they don’t know and tell them to stop the act because they categorize the practice as unnatural or uncivilized. As a result, these women are alienated and dehumanized. Therefore, rejecting the idea and would increase the practice that is harming them. Case in point, in 1956 when British colonial government attempted to ban FGC in Meru, Kenya, as a nationalistic response the women refused to obey the law and went into the forest to circumcise one another with razor blades. Young girl were encouraging their peers to get circumcised. The British colonials imprisoned girls who circumcised themselves and placed them in camps to carry out forced labor. Antoanzzo (2003) further explained, three years after the ban, 2,400 girls, men and women were charged in the African court for violations and thousands had to pay fines at the local level. Additionally, young women who attended Presbyterian-run mission schools were expelled if they had undergone the ritual. This did not stop women from performing the practice. Antoanzzo (2003) stated that “David M’Naikiuru, a Kenyan government official from the 1950s, said in 1995 that the ban on FGC actually encouraged rather than deterred excision” (p.4). Therefore, criminalizing the people did not work, rather it forced them to increase the practice. Antonazzo (2003) presented another example of how the idea of criminalization of FGC is a wrong direction. In 1999 the U.S. State Department’s Annual Human Rights Report, the Senegalese Parliament voted to ban all FGC. This ban interrupted what were some of the most effective community-based FGC eradication efforts ever undertaken because people rejected the idea of being criminalized. If the law was fully applied, over a million people in Senegal would have gone to jail. Before the law was voted on, women from 31 different village’s spoke in front of the Parliament and said that criminalization would obstruct the effort that these women were working on in preventing the practice; however, the law still passed.
According to Freire (1990), to assist or to teach people, one has to respect the people. If one has to start from the level in which the people perceive themselves and their reality because this is accurately what makes their knowledge valuable. It is significant to know what they know and teach them what they don’t know. Additionally, one has to be aware his/her knowledge is necessary because according to Freire, sometime the knowledge that one is trying to teach might not be needed or necessary (Horton and Freire, 1990 p. 66). Maybe the information that the human rights organization or people wanting to prevent the practice was providing might have not been useful and necessary for the women. However, if they have used the approach of problem-posing, they could have found out from the women what information can be useful to help them.
If the human rights groups or feminists used problem-posing, using dialogue to exchange information with the women about health, they could work with the women and understand the situations and allow them to find a solution that might help prevent this harmful practice. The role of the human rights activists or women who are trying to assist in preventing the practice should be interchangeable with the group of people, they should learn from the women as well the women will learn from them. They can learn from each other by sharing ideas rather than a using an authoritarian method, telling that the traditional practice is savage and they need to stop. They can build the relationship that allows a reciprocal teaching with each other. Using problem-posing they could begin a dialogue with each other, encounter on an equal basis and discover the reality of the harmful practice, child’s rights and its health circumstance. Once they understand the circumstance, maybe they could have come up with better solutions. For example, maybe come up with a law that states the as long as a young woman are 18 she can choose to undergo FGC; however, no child should experience FGC. This would depend on the outcome of the dialogue and condition these women.
There is a need to understand that the issue of FGC cannot be separated from the social, cultural and economical procedures within social demographics. Beyond the ritual and cultural values that FGC holds, it also is connected to socioeconomics. If a woman is not circumcised, she loses certain privileges within the society. According to Antonazzo (2003), in some parts of Sudan, if a woman fails to undergo infibulations, she will most likely ruin her probability for marriage and her future is doubtful. These procedures cannot be removed from the context of many other problems women face in these societies. Antonazzo (2003) further explains that most African women are more concerned with poverty, starvation, lack of education and access to adequate health care. Most do not see FGC as the most pressing issue; therefore, some wonder why the foreigners are obsessed with FGC. Antonazzo (2003) stated, “Many local activists say that FGC is a symptom, rather than the cause of women’s problems; the only way to end it is by giving women the tools of health and education so they can expand their roles in society” (p.2). If feminists and human rights organization are interested in preventing FGC, they need to convince the community that their purpose is not to marginalize or generalize the issue; however, it is to prevent the young women from the physical effects of FGC.
According to Freire (2005), people should have the right to have a voice and to reflect on their thoughts and actions. That it is important for those who are oppressed to “name the world,” that the dialogue should not occur only among elites, who, at the same time, deny others the rights to speak. Moreover, those who are denied the right to speak should reclaim their right to prevent the dehumanization that takes place in their lives. It would be particularly useful to have case examples of medical tragedies as important communication devices to help women make critical decisions to change their lives by compelling a societal transformation and imagery of the ideal woman. Related to the idea that information is the crucial element of girls’ education, it must, as a matter of priority, be the objective of government to ensure high school enrollment rates for girls as well as put in measures to ensure higher girls’ retention rates.
In line with Paulo Freire’s suggestion, by facing "reality critically, simultaneously objectifying and acting” upon reality, oppressed segments in society can begin “transformation from objects to Subjects” (Williams, 2003, p. 2). The mode of reaching the goal of empowerment needs is the key underlying issue. Access to information ought to be the highest priority. Women must get access to information on female sexual health and issues relating to women’s health and sex ought to be openly discussed.
The approach to fighting social constructs of FGC not only rests on women’s resolve but also on men’s cooperation. According to Paulo Friere, “the struggle for humanization, breaking the cycles of injustice, exploitation and oppression lies in the perpetuation of oppressor versus oppressed” (Williams, 2003, p. 1). Change will not be inspired by those who are not victims of the practice. Hence, it is important for women to stay at the forefront and chart the course of freedom for the future. To forestall impressions that perceptions that frown on cultural practices that impinge of women’s health are foreign or Western in origin, efforts to combat the problem must make use of cultural and opinion leaderships within the communities seeking change. The struggle for the freedom of woman is one for the entire society.
When societies are invaded, dependent, alienated from their political, economical, and cultural decision-making power; they are located outside themselves and are forest to follow the way of the invader society (Freire, 2005). As it is illustrated by Apple and Buras (2006), to have an effective change, the issue of subaltern must be done in a way that generates an open space where subaltern voices are made public and heard (p. 271). People should have the right to have a voice and reflect on their thoughts and actions. In the current world, local development or traditional values are devalued by the “modernity,” grassroots development has become secondary camper to “modern development.” Societies that are not technologically advanced and that value farming and harvesting their own food are becoming more dependent because of globalization and capitalism. Communities are forced to compete with large industrial institutions or countries. In the process, nations or institution try to “save” the people who are considered “underdeveloped”.
History has shown that, groups of people or nations who have tried to “save” the poor or the underdeveloped, have gone to communities and nations with the mentality that they are the actor with more knowledge of development and the people that they are trying to save dependents who are impoverished and less knowledgeable. Approaches of development theory such as modernization theory in the 1950s and 1960s, which promoted that developed nations have the obligation to assist the less developed to become more industrialized and “developed” have failed, left nations dependent and striped their traditional communal spaces. According to Esteva and Prakash (1998), “Daily, the blueprints of modernization, conceived by conventional or alternative planners for their betterment, leave ‘the people’ less and less human. When people are "forced out of their centuries-old traditional communal spaces into the modern world, they suffer every imaginable indignity and dehumanization by the minorities who inhabit it” (p. 4). The ideology of “modernity” is not the solution. Accordingly, dependency theory which became popular during 1960s and 1970s has not unveiled a solution to “development” which benefits developing nations. Even though dependency theory was the outcome of criticism of modernization theory which promotes development tied to classical and free-market economics, dependency theory still was not able to fully tackle the issues. Instead according to Herath (2008), “the gap between the rich and the poor countries steadily increased, [and] the classical development theory failed to account for the failure” (p. 820). The dominant thinkers of the dependency approach acknowledged the international division of labor as a cause of underdevelopment and articulated the view that obstacle to development are external to underdeveloped economy (Herath, 2008, p. 824).
The question should be did development theory include the people in the process of trying to bring about development, and social change which directly benefit the people? The people should not only be included in the process, they also should decide the model or approach because they know their lives better. According to Freire (2005), “The means the used are not important; to alienate human beings from their own decision-making is to change them into objects” (p. 85). If the people are not included in the process, development programs or education might not convey social change because if educational approaches do not reflect on the experiences and authenticity of the community’s existence, it will not benefit the people. However, if education addresses the issues and reflects on the lives of the community, it has the potential to empower, bring about positive social change and assist in enhancing grassroots development.
According to Esteva and Prakash (1998), illustrated that local economies are overrun by global economy, and that global thinking destroys local values and development. Therefore, people who support local development and people grassroots can make a different by thinking small and say no to institutions that offer global forces. People can start to think about what they eat to what they wear, go from global thinking to local thinking. People at the community level have a lot to offer; nevertheless, this ideology of research, representation, development and written history has not done justice to people who are indigenous and have their own traditional values. Instead of including and respecting people for who they are, what level of “development” or what type of traditional values they might have, if they are different from what is considered developed or normal, they have been misrepresented. In research, the attitude and ideology of representation needs to change. Educators or researches have a responsibility to support, respect and represent local people or indigenous people the way they want to be represented.
Local people or indigenous people who are represented by this ideology are labeled as rural, illiterate and are blamed for being oppressed. Researchers and educators need to view their way of life is as good as any other. There should be empowerment from within the community, the perspective that puts traditional role and not be able to fit into the “western educated” as better than must change as well!
Smith’s (2002) illustration of indigenous people discusses some the exact issues that Horton, Freire, Esteva and Prakash address in their book. Though, Smith (2002) is illustrating about the idea of research and indigenous people. Her idea covers the ideology of allow people to “name” themselves, to name their fear or hope and be respected by researchers who go into their community. The main suggestion here is to change the perceptions and ideologies that have distorted people’s rights. Smith (2002) in her remarkable book, Decolonizing Methodologies, provides considerable information about how researchers, books and written documents have neglected and negatively represented indigenous people. She suggested that decolonizing methodologies that have represented subaltern people must be decolonized. According to Smith (2002), her work identifies research as an important position of struggle between the interest of the West and the resistance of “Other” (p.2). She stated that the “Other has been constituted with a name, a face, a particular identity, namely indigenous people (Smith 2002, p.2). Freire (2000) emphasized the significance of the oppressed having the power of their reality, knowledge and existence, to examine and reexamine their reality and name their world, instead of the oppressor naming their world for them. In other words, indigenous people have been named and have been given a particular identity by others. Indigenous people should have the choice to name themselves, constitute and form their own image.
Smith (2002) presents the word “research” as a term linked with colonialism and imperialism. In fact, the term research in indigenous vocabulary is a negative word. According to the author when the term is mentioned in indigenous context, it stirs up the injustice memories and enhances distrust. The term research is so cynical that some indigenous peoples have written poetry about the term (Smith, 2002). The author critically inspected the philosophical and historical base of Western research and explored the intersections of imperialism knowledge and research. According to Smith, the West desires, extracts and claims ownership of indigenous knowledge, their image and creations and then takes attaches those ideas and values to developed knowledge. Yet, in the process they deny indigenous peoples the opportunity to take credit or be acknowledged as the inventors of their own culture. Furthermore, Esteva and Prakash (1998) illustrated the importance of local communities having the power to the control of their local economy. Nevertheless, the global economy has dominated and is destroying local development; and however, the authors also illustrate the movement of local community and people who are fighting this domination. The authors explained that there are many people already making a difference by “thinking small” such buying the food daily eat from local businesses. Relating this to Smith (2000), historians, feminists, development programs and researchers in general, can make a difference and support local communities by writing about the local reality and writing about the interests and efforts of local communities. Smith (2000) calls for researcher to be aware of the mistakes and damaging indigenous values.
Many researchers benefit from a particular research project that they believe is done for the greater good of “mankind,” those researchers might have good intentions but they are the products of the academic training that does not benefit indigenous people. The academic theories and ideologies do not include the views and values of indigenous peoples. Therefore, Smith (2002) believes more indigenous peoples’ movements are needed, which apply their own research methods such as Kaupapa Maori. Such methods are viewed as being “culturally safe.”
Smith (2002) is aware of the damage that researches have caused to indigenous people and believes that researchers need to change their approach. Such researchers would make money by writing stories about the indigenous people; however, they do not share the outcome of the research, knowledge, or money with the indigenous people. They need include indigenous people in the processes, and share with them the outcomes and respect them as human beings and not as “specimens” that only exist for basis of research.
One of most significant points that Smith makes is, if the non-indigenous are interested in conducting research, they should not only include the indigenous people in the process, but ones they are done with the research they should consult and present the work to the indigenous people. According to Smith (2002), this will allow for reciprocity and feedbacks, which can improve the researchers’ representation and incorporate indigenous people.
Smith (2002) asks researchers to be aware and urges researchers to set an agenda, to plan and incorporate indigenous research. According to Smith (2002), scientific research has occupied imperialism; therefore, Smith calls for decolonizing research methods (p.2). The author gives examples of indigenous research methods. Such methods might not be the same as what is considered standardized “research methods” in the eyes of the West; however, it will represent the people and allow them to tell their stories.
Smith’s (2002) illustration of indigenous people discusses the exact issues that Imam, Mama and Sow, (1997) cover in their book, Engendering African Social Sciences regarding African women. The authors addressed the issue of colonial hegemony, misrepresentation and broad domination of African women. Parallel with the ideas discussed by Imam, Mama and Sow, (1997) Smith (2002) suggests that social science and development, history and research are fundamental parts of the political structures; and this is why governments fund educational institutions to engage in research and development programs with strategies that benefit their communities. Additionally, those people who usually are conducting research are socialized and educated within the system. Therefore, they are the products of the social and political system that only focuses on their own agenda and neglect indigenous people’s rights and stories, instead of trying to simply dominate them.
Using Freire’s (2005) theory of education problem-posing, it is possible to make an effective social, economic, political, educational model and to create knowledge which benefits people. His ideology encourages a communal change and awareness of reality. He does not only focus on the issues of power, colonialism and imperialism but provides humanism, knowledge, self-determination, strategies and approaches that encourages people who are oppressed and the oppressors to overcome and challenge dehumanization. Freire (2005) encourages the oppressed to change the minds of the oppressor, and also to be aware not to repeat the mistake of the oppressor and become the oppressors. Instead, he tells us that the oppressed have the power to liberate themselves and liberate their oppressors as well. Freire’s ideology provides all people to have the control and power of in the lives and act in the act of love. Freire (2005) stated that, “Because love is an act of courage, not of fear, love is commitment to others. No matter where the oppressed are found, the act of love is commitment to their cause-the cause of liberation. And this commitment, because it is loving, is dialogical (p. 89). Freire’s ideology does not only offer strategies which allow people to dialog and solve their real issues, create, re-create and learn that it is possible to make a difference in their lives and other, but to also offers hope and courage. Many author such Horton, Freire, Esteva, Prakash and Smith have supported the idea of empowerment, local development, an effective social change and all their ideas support that the knowledge’s within the community and the people is an effective way to social change, representation and development. It is the people, who have the power and those who want to teach and assist in anything must join in dialog with the people and work together to learn, relearn and gain knowledge which can lead to constructive social change.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Southern Sudan
From Struggle to freedom, from freedom to facing crucial challenges: Questions that might navigate dialogue amongst the youth of North, Horn of African and persons who are interested. The year 2011 has been a time of social movements; thus far it has been a remarkable year, 1st Southern Sudan referendum, then social movements in Tunisia, Egypt and currently Libya and Bahrain. It’s powerful and moving to watch individuals putting their lives in line for freedom and democracy. Who and what’s next? This particular section is about Sudan and the questions I have for my friends and those who are currently thinking about or are assisting to rebuild Southern Sudan.
Congratulations to Southern Sudanese (The Republic of Southern Sudan) around the world and most importantly to those whom I have met and have been inspired by. I have been thinking about friends, especially those who I met during my studies and friends I grew up with in Portland, Maine. Living in Portland Maine one meets so many youth from all over the world, Sudan, Somali, Bosnia, Vietnam, Korea, Cambodia and many more. Growing up in Portland Maine amongst so many immigrant youth from all over the world was a privilege. Many stories to tell, so much to overcome and a profound passion to help those left behind. I had the privilege to hear countless stories. Some of the most touching stories were the stories of Southern Sudan. As high school students they shared their stories about war, survival and leaving their loved ones behind. This was only a few years ago, I wonder if they knew the day of referendum would come during their life time. I remember when one of my friends shared his story with me, as a nine years old child soldier he endured so much. He watched his father being taken away by soldiers and watched his childhood friend die in front of him, so much sorrow. His story is the story of so many Southern Sudanese children whom I had the privilege to meet. According to Peterson (2000) about forty percent of the Sudanese soldiers are Nubians, black Sudanese from the South, who have to fight for the Sudan government who was fighting against the South which is their home. The war has killed over 1.5 million, more dead bodies than in Somalia as well as Bosnia combined, and is almost the double of the 1994 Rwandan genocide (Peterson, 2000). As I sit here thinking about how Sudan can learn from the mistakes of African nations, one of the questions I have is, what will happen to the Nubians soldiers? What about individuals from both South and Northern Sudan who might have established their lives in both areas? The issues surrounding the Sudan and Southern Sudan is complex, there are so many dimensions that need attention. I hope the unresolved issues within Southern Sudan between the Dinka and Nuer will be dealt with from the beginning, because if people pretend that there is no problem between the two Ethnic groups, the future of Southern Sudan will be in crisis. One of the major issues is the historical land ownership (dispute) between the Ngok Dinka and Messiri of Sudan, the district of Abyei. This issue reminds me of the border conflict between Ethiopia and Eritrea, the main difference is there is oil in Abyei. I can only imagine how many more people would have died from both Ethiopia and Eritrea if Badme had oil. Issues of land, access to resources and citizenship have led to tragic events in Rwanda, Somalia, Ethiopia and Eritrea and more deaths in Africa, what can Sudan learn from these nations? How can Sudan and Southern Sudan create peaceful co-existence?
· Land ownership and resource (oil)
The unresolved issue of Abyei
· Conflict resolution/anger management: healing and reconciliation
Historical conflict within South Sudan between Dinka and Nuer ethnic group
· Citizenship rights
South/North
Can Sudan learn from neighboring nations that deportation only leads to crisis and poverty?
I hope the above question will navigate dialogue and lead those interested to come up with suggestions that might be useful to readers and leader:=)
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
Remembering our brother Goiteom:=)
He was the kind of person who brought life to a party, who was responsible and who wanted the best for others. He was only 24 years old, so his life was taken away too soon, but for those 24 years he was on this earth, he lived as the one who brought a light to a room of full of people. I remember our high school graduation; people sitting around listening to music and then he came into the living room, all of the sudden people are dancing to traditional music and jumping of joy and going around in a circle. I loved those moments and still remember his joyful personality.
December 28, 2000, he went into the light and changed everyone’s life, those who were most close to him especially one particular family member he was close to, changed forever. You know how within a family there is always one sister or brother that you are most close to, so for him, it was one of our sisters, his younger sister. Her life was changed forever, until this day she dreams about him and remembers him every day. Today it’s been 10 years and many people are remembering him and celebrating his life. At home in Ethiopia, family members are getting together and paying tribute to him traditionally. Other family members are lighting candles to remember and honor his life. To the one most close to him, I want to say, he is watching over us especially over you who was truly there for him. He always knew your love for him is endless and he would want you to let go of the sadness you have been feeling for the past 10 years. I know he always wanted you to live life full of pleasure. Make him a promise that you will!
Today, December 28, 2010, we are remembering Goiteom, his joyful nature and celebrating his life. He is loved and will never be forgotten!
Friday, October 29, 2010
Why do African Students join the brain drain club?
Ever since I realized I can use my education and experience to make a difference, I have continued to reach high. Being an example for children/women in the U.S., and women like myself who come from developing countries. Break the cycle, the stereotypes that Ethiopian women are subjected by FGC, early marriage and famine. To be involved, inspire and be inspired by people’s spiritual and humble lives. Recently, I have been speculating about issues of migration and brain drain regarding African nations.
At the end of my undergraduate degree, I called the UN office asking how and where I can apply to work for them. A nice lady on the phone said, “My dear you at least have to have your MA degree to work for the UN” so I told myself if I want to join the UN one day, I must continue and get a higher degree. Consequently, I joined the African Studies department at Ohio University. Little did I know that my world was going to change, the African Studies department was made of students from all over African nations. Each student brought his/her own social, political, economic and cultural view and values. There I learned that “WE AFRICANS” were so difference from each other, however, most of us had something in common. We were extremely passionate about going back to our home country to make a difference. In fact, when most of us apply for the degree, our statement of proposal includes the reasons why we have chosen to study African Studies. Correct me if I am wrong, but I think most us write that our goal is to make a difference in our community or the country we have chosen to study. Nonetheless, most of us stay in the U.S., and join the brain drain club. WHY? Maybe your views can help answer the questions I have been wondering about?
As I am preparing myself for the real world, I find myself questioning about how and where I will like to be in the next five years and how I will get the job I have the passion for. A few month back I attended a Priority Africa Network meeting in the Bay Area, where many African immigrants came together to discuss their concerns. One of the major issues was: Africans in the bay area need strong network and support, because over the years educated Africans have just been settling for any job they can find. One of the participants explained it well, “there are many Africans with higher degrees in this area, but instead of working for a job that fits their qualification, they are working at any job, some are taxi drivers and others might be cleaning. Some of those who come as students end up becoming illegal immigrants.” It is not to dishonor or undermine the work of many individuals who are working in such industries, however, I bring this issue to understand, why are many educated Africans from peaceful nations choosing to stay and prefer to be illegal immigrant, work under-table rather than using their educational qualification to work within African nations?
In recent decades Africa has lost one third of its skilled professionals. Since 1990, Africa has been losing 20,000 professionals annually. Each year about 23,000 qualified academic professionals migrate to foreign countries (BBC News, 2001). There are more African-born scientists and engineers working in the United States than there are in Africa; for example there are more than 2,000 Nigerian doctors working in United States, an estimated 600 Ghanaian doctors working in the United States and more than 1,000 professionals left Zimbabwe for other countries in 1997 alone (Shinn, 2002). According to the International Organization for Migration, over 300,000 professionals reside outside Africa; and, in the case of Ethiopia, between 1980 and 1991 the country lost 75% of its skilled workforce Yau & Assefa (2007). The issue of brain drain in many African nations has greatly impeded economic and educational development.
In regards to African Students, why are most of them choosing to stay and work in the U.S.? What happens to the passion of making a difference? Is it because they feel they do not have a chance in the job market? Do they think they will not make as much money as they would if they were working at any job in the U.S.? What about those job in the area of for profit, non-for-profit, for governmental organization jobs within or for African nations? Who is getting the jobs with million dollar budgets? There are so many organizations! Do African students feel overwhelmed or do they think they would not have an opportunity to have access to such jobs? Is it because they think those jobs are by network, for network, family and friends? Do they feel that those jobs that pay well are dominated by foreigners? Do most of them chose to stay or is it because they feel restricted? Or they just merely don’t want to go back?
There is also a gender aspect of this issue, but that question is for another day:-). Each of you might have different experience or perspective, what your viewpoint? I hope to hear from you all:-).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)