It Isn't So Easy

In an earlier post I let everyone know about how to get involved with rallies across Canada protesting our role in the war in Afghanistan. This in no way indicated that I was in support of or opposed to the rallies and their message, I simply went as an observer. Here is what I saw:

To be entirely honest, I went to this rally as a supporter of ending the war in Afghanistan. However, this is very different from being a supporter of the withdrawal of Canadian forces from the country. Let me explain.

A few years ago, after I graduated from University, I was allowed to sit in on a meeting of Professors, Deans and the Minister of Education from Afghanistan (I guess I was representing one of the 'student' voices). The first thing that struck me about the Minister was how eloquent, articulate and calm he was. He addressed many pressing issues with such clarity and seriousness that I was fascinated just listening to him. But, the one part of the entire presentation that really stuck out for me, and that has stayed with me these past few years, is when he said something along these lines:

"Yes, it is true that there is still much violence in Afghanistan, but I wish you knew about the great progress we have made as well. Our education system is improving as is our infrastructure. But, we still need your help. We need the security that Canadians can provide in order for us to achieve our goals. If you leave us, everything will be lost."

And there is the point exactly. Yes, I am against the 'war' in Afghanistan when we are talking about solving a problem with bombs and guns. But, no, I am not in support of 'bringing the troops home' as that would be entirely catastrophic. Not at one point in this rally did someone calmly say that Canadian soldiers are a part of a network, including development and governmental agencies, all with the same goal of trying to rebuild a shattered nation. And yes I know the arguments that it's 'all about oil', arguments about national sovereignty and intervention and creating more terrorists than when the whole thing started. But to be so anti-military doesn't do anyone any good. The military has changed so much in the past few decades and they are, now more than ever, a part of the peacekeeping process. Don't get me wrong, I would throw every weapon in this world into a bottomless pit if I could, but the fact is: we need soldiers to provide security alongside NGOs and government agencies.

This idea is clearly outlined in the incredible memoir about the 1994 Rwandan genocide titled "Shake Hands with the Devil" by Romeo Dallaire. I strongly encourage anyone who is adamantly anti-military (as I was) to read this book. Not only will it provide a different perspective (a conservative, military man's point of view), but it recounts in great detail the atrocities that can occur when the world turns its back on a struggling nation.

When I volunteered in India last year, a fellow volunteer (an older man from New York) said something that stuck with me. He said, "Say there is a special path that you like to take every morning because you love the trees and the rocks and the stream. But then someone decides they want to build a fence through that path, well then it's no longer the path that it once was." He was a little pompous, but basically he was talking about how I tried to 'change' things in India. I organized a group of volunteers to clean up a stream that ran through the community that was full of clothes, garbage, everything. The main impetus for this was that I am a humanist. I don't believe in lines, boundaries, borders, nations. This water comes from the same Earth we all share and as a member of the global family I had a duty to do something.

People will say that that wasn't my place, but here is the question that plagues me, as I am sure it does many Canadian soldiers, every day:

Is it better to do something than to do nothing at all?

Back in Business

Hello friends,

I am SO sorry for the long absence. I was without a computer and/or internet for the past 4 months, so it has been incredibly difficult to maintain my blog. However, I am now in possession of a laptop and access to the interweb and we have many, many things to discuss.

Glad to be back,
Pam

"It Is Better To Light A Candle Than to Curse The Dark" (K'Naan)

skeptic (noun)
1. a person who questions the validity or authenticity of something purporting to be factual.
2. a person who maintains a doubting attitude, as toward values, plans, statements, or the character of others.
3. a person who doubts the truth of a religion, esp. Christianity, or of important elements of it.

cynic (noun)
1. a person who believes all people are motivated by selfishness.
2. a person whose outlook is scornfully and often habitually negative.

I look at the world with a pair of critical eyes, but I need to remember not to focus so much on the ugliness that the beauty is forgotten.

Taking a Short Break

Hello friends,

I apologize for not posting in awhile. Things are a little hectic for me right now, so I will be taking a short break from my blog. I hope to be back in full effect by June. For now, please enjoy the many videos and articles I have posted in the past 7 months.

Thanks, take care

Pam

Anti-War Demonstrations Across Canada Tomorrow

Click here to see where protests, rallies and marches against the war in Afghanistan are taking place this Saturday, April 4th 2009.

Let Go Of Your Post-Colonial Guilt

I went to a lecture by Maryam Namazie at the Centre for Inquiry in Toronto this past Monday and felt I should highlight the key points here. Maryam is the spokesperson for One Law For All, a British organization opposed to Sharia law. Sharia is the Islamic law that dictates every aspect of a Muslim's life, offering rules and guidelines for their sexuality, their business, politics, etc. Sharia courts have been set up in the UK, as well as here in Canada, which bypass civil and criminal courts in order to 'deal with' issues within the Muslim community in whatever way they see fit, much to the detriment of Muslim women and children. I will now go through the main points that Maryam made during her talk:

• Freedom of Expression is not a Western value, or a privilege, it is a universal right and it is most important when criticizing religion.
• Freedom of Expression is necessary for the progress of human civilization.
• We hear people in mainstream media criticizing and opposing supposed 'cults', but what is the difference between a 'religion' and a 'cult'?
• Islam is not just a religion that is a part of one's life, it encompasses every aspect of life, it is in the political process and the education system. It is in the public sphere, and that is why we must vehemently criticize it.
• Critics of political Islam are accused of not looking at the full 'reality' of Islam, however the 'reality' of Islam is far more violent than what is even discussed.
• Ideas such as 'feminist Islam' and 'moderate Islam' are oxymorons.
• The real problem here is the dangerous mix of religion and political power. Religion needs to be pushed out of the political sphere. This has happened almost entirely with Christianity, but Islam is still very much a part of the public sphere and that is why it is getting more criticism than the other religions. This is not 'Islamaphobia'. This is a strong opposition to religion and politics being so closely intertwined. Too many lives are at stake to compromise on this.
• Everyone is entitled to believe in whatever they want, but religion is a private matter. It should not be a part of the education system, nor any other part of public life. One should compare freedom of religion to the freedom to smoke. People are allowed to smoke, but there are restrictions on where and how, as well as taxes and warnings that say "Smoking kills". Now, where is the warning that says "Religion kills"?
• Criticizing religion is not the same as condemning an individual. We must see the difference between a person and a person's beliefs. The human being is sacred and human rights are for people, not for religion. Many human rights organizations often get this point wrong.
• Change happens through progressive social movements, we need to mobilise.

At this point, the floor was opened up for questions and a woman went up to the microphone and said "Change within the Muslim community, and particularly Iran and other places where political Islam is a very real thing, has to come from within the community itself. What are we supposed to do here in Canada? We went through many changes to get to where we are today and we can't tell other people how to live and how to change. They need to change their own mindset and push for change on their own."

To which Maryam said "This idea that Iranians and other people who have these rules and restrictions imposed on them every day actually want this is almost offensive. Iran went through a middle-class workers' revolution years ago and great social progress was made, this political Islamic regime has been forced on them and there is great resentment and opposition to it within Iran, as well as other Islamic states. Westerners need to get over their post-colonial guilt and help push for universal rights for everybody, no matter their nationality or geographic location."

Now, this last statement really hit me hard. For years I have been struggling with two opposite worldviews that pull me in different directions. One is that I should help push for social change and progress in the world regardless of where the problems are. This is the humanist perspective where I see all human beings as having value and I want to fight for universal human rights without any regard for lines drawn on a map. Now, the other side is always reminding me that I don't, nor will I ever, fully understand a culture or a people different from my own. That people who live in a certain country have a history, traditions and values that I would need to be a part of in order to push for social change. And what am I even pushing to change? Should things change? Would I just make things worse?

With this one sentence "You must let go of your post-colonial guilt", I was set free. I realized that I have been scared and hesitant to say something or ask something because I know how badly 'westerners' have fucked things up in the world, and particularly Africa. But, what I am fighting for, I realize, are universal rights. People have the same rights, and the same value, no matter what part of the world they are born. I do recognize that particular countries will have political, economic and social situations that I must try to understand as best I can, but sitting back and saying "I'm not going to interfere, that's not my place, who am I to tell someone else how to live their life?" is not an option for me anymore. I am pushing for positive social change, I am fighting for human rights, I am championing the human being.

All The Things I Want To Say

My good friend Neil posted this video on his Facebook page and I felt I needed to re-post it here. It shows Severn Suzuki, David Suzuki's daughter, addressing the United Nations back in 1992 and saying the things that I have always wanted to say to world leaders. It has been 17 years since these words were spoken and we still face the same challenges that she outlines. I have asked this in a previous post and will ask it again now, how far have we come? Are we still in the same place?

If you could address the 'decision-makers' of the world, what would you say?