An open access review in Pacific Affairs of Deborah McDowell Aoki’s book, Widows of Japan: An Anthropological Perspective, says that this “…comprehensive study of Japanese widows brings into focus the complex, ambiguous, often tragic history of the impact of spousal death on Japanese women. Her eight years of research from 1996 included 58 interviews with women from urban and rural areas. She states the themes in the introduction: ‘the fetishism of female bodies to protect and embody family honor, the historical role of state formation in creating family and kinship systems, and the integrative functions provided by women…’ ”
Category: foreign/other
Washington DC photo exhibit on Pakistan floods
“Rebuilding Hope after Pakistan’s Floods” a United Nations Development Program exposition of photos by Satomi Kato, will be on display at The National Press Club from February 4th to 15th. A former television anchor and radio broadcaster in Japan, Satomi Kato documented UNDP’s work throughout Pakistan’s hardest hit areas by flooding in 2010-2011. These images were previously exhibited in New York, Milan, and Tokyo. Kato has also traveled to remote areas of Peshawar, Pakistan, near the Afghan border, to photograph Afghan refugee children in 2005.
There will be a reception on Tuesday, February 12th, from 5:30-7:30 p.m at 529 14th Street NW on the 13th Floor Lobby with remarks by:
Ajay Chhibber, United Nations Assistant Secretary-General & Director, UNDP Regional Bureau for Asia & the Pacific
J Alexander Thier, Assistant to the Administrator for the Office of Afghanistan & Pakistan Affairs, US Agency for International Development (USAID)
Sherry Rehman, Ambassador of Pakistan in the United States (invited)
Koji Tomita, Minister Plenipotentiary & Deputy Chief of Mission, Embassy of Japan in the United States
For more information, contact sarah.jackson-han@undp.org or RSVP here.
France deports Roma
The Roma camps in France are not great places to live, but being summarily deported from them is even worse. Dozens of media sources around the world reported on the deportation. I am proud that my colleague, Michelle Kelso, assistant professor of sociology and international affairs at the George Washington University, was quoted in the reports as pointing out that: “Almost every family here is the family of a Holocaust survivor…Their grandparents were deported to camps in World War II.” Kelso translated interviews at Roma camps around Paris for The Associated Press.” See article.
Mauritius joins the premier league of global democracies
By contributor Sean Carey
Mauritius is in the premier league of the world’s democracies, according to the newly released London-based Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index. The Index, which monitors 167 nations ranks the small Indian Ocean island, with a population of 1.3 million, 24th out of 25 “full democracies,” just ahead of Spain.
Norway is in first place followed by three other Scandinavian countries—Iceland, Denmark and Sweden. Canada is eighth, Ireland is 12th, Germany is 14th, the U.K. is 18th, while the U.S. is ranked 19th.The remaining 90 countries which make it into the “democratic” category are divided into 53 “flawed democracies,” which includes France and Italy at 29th and 31st respectively. The next category consists of 37 “hybrid regimes” and includes Hong Kong (80th), Singapore (81st), Turkey (88th), Tanzania (90th) and Kenya (103rd). The remaining countries in the Index, including Bahrain, Chad, Fiji, Madagascar, Saudi Arabia, and North Korea, are described as “authoritarian.”
The Index is based on five criteria: electoral process and pluralism, civil liberties, the functioning of government, political participation, and political culture. However, it doesn’t take a genius to work out that almost all of the “full democracies” belong to a group of the world’s advanced economies, whose populations are well-practiced in placing marks on ballot papers and tossing out unpopular or incompetent governments.
Little wonder, then, that Mauritius’s inclusion has caught the eye of some commentators. “In some ways, of the 25 ‘full democracies,’ Mauritius is now the most notable,” writes Neil Reynolds, economics correspondent for the Toronto-based Globe and Mail. Reynolds cities Mauritius’s endorsement by the World Bank as the best among African economies, and its top position in the Sudanese-born telecoms billionaire Mo Ibrahim’s Index of African Governance.
Reynolds also goes on to note Mauritius’s ascent in the Index of Economic Freedom jointly produced by the Washington-based Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal. In 2010, it was in 12th place of 179 countries. In 2012 it has moved up to eighth place. The piece finishes with a rousing cry: “Economic freedom is as much a prerequisite for democracy as voting. Let’s hear it for the prosperous little democracy with a dodo on its coat of arms.”
But free-marketeers are not the only members of the economic tribe to endorse Mauritius. Last year, for example, Joseph Stiglitz, after a brief visit, wrote an article for The Guardian, heaping praise on the country for the provision of free education, transport for schoolchildren and free healthcare, including heart surgery. The former chief economist at the World Bank, and a leading light in the neo-Keynesian “third way” movement, reckoned that North America and Europe could learn lessons from Mauritius in terms of how the country managed “social cohesion, welfare and economic growth.”
Despite the brevity of his stay, the Nobel prize-winning economist was observant enough to point to some of the island’s problems, especially the colonial legacy in inequality in ownership of land and other forms of capital which differentially affects the life chances of various segments of the polyethnic population.
Then there is the vexatious issue of the US base on Diego Garcia. The island, along with 54 other atolls that make up the Chagos Archipelago, was detached in breach of international law before Mauritius’s independence from the UK in 1968 to form the British Indian Ocean Territory. “The US should now do right by this peaceful and democratic country: recognise Mauritius’s rightful ownership of Diego Garcia, renegotiate the lease and redeem past sins by paying a fair amount for land that it has illegally occupied for decades,” argued Stiglitz. He should have added that those 1500 or so islanders, who were forcibly removed from the Chagos Archipelago in the late 60s and early 70s by the British authorities to make way for the military base and dumped in Mauritius and the Seychelles, should be allowed to return to their homeland if they so wish.
Mauritius takes a step towards gender equality in politics
By contributor Sean Carey
Mauritius continues to change. The Indian Ocean island, famous for its white coral beaches and azure seas, has come a long way since independence from the U.K., in 1968. The transformation of the economy from a reliance on sugar exports to Europe to one that is forecast to grow by 4.1 percent in 2012 through tourism, financial services, business outsourcing and high-end fashion products continues despite the economic turbulence affecting most of the advanced economies.
Some local commentators argue about how Mauritius should best position itself in the global economy as power shifts from West to East and elsewhere – for example, should it stay with its traditional trading partners in Europe, should it seek to forge new alliances among the growth economies of Asia, or should it try and do both? The last seems to be the favourite option at the moment. Nevertheless, the ethnically diverse country of 1.3 million people maintains an excellent reputation with outside agencies, including Moody’s which recently reaffirmed its “investment-grade credit status.”
But change in economic activities is not the only game in town. Because of cross-cutting ties of social class, kinship and ethnicity, the country, which boasts a free press and independently-owned radio stations (though no independently-owned, local television stations), is one of the liveliest democracies in the world.
Now gender has become part of the formal political mix. As of January 1, a new gender law specifies that at least one-third of candidates in local elections must be women. Elections, which are held every five years, are due in April.
Whereas in larger countries like the U.S. and U.K., local representatives are often remote and have an abstract relationship with electors, this is not the case in Mauritius, which measures 787 square miles. Customary expectations ensure that routine face-to-face encounters and public meetings in the capital, Port Louis, and other towns and villages are an important part of the way politics is conducted — including how support for parties and political leaders is measured.
In his New Year address, the Mauritian Prime Minister, Dr. Navinchandra Ramgoolam, welcomed the change to the electoral system: “We must ensure that the number of women candidates rises considerably,” he said. Currently, around 6.5 percentof local councillors are women, so an increase in their number in the near future is almost inevitable.
However, the Dublin and London-educated Prime Minister has been more circumspect as to whether changes at the local level should be rolled out for general elections. At the moment, 13 out of 70 deputies in the Mauritian parliament are women, but only two of them have made it to the 25-strong Cabinet.
Continue reading “Mauritius takes a step towards gender equality in politics”
India’s consumer society might have to wait
By contributor Sean Carey
Last week it looked like U.S. and European supermarket chains like Wal-Mart, Tesco and Carrefour would soon be allowed to enter the $396 billion retail market in India. The fast-growing country, Asia’s third-largest economy after China and Japan, has a population of 1.2 billion, which makes it the world’s second most populous nation.
The Indian retail market is expanding at an unprecedented rate and is expected to more than double in size to $796 billion (£514 billion) by 2015 as Western-style consumerism gains momentum.
The current market is largely controlled by a small family-owned stores, street vendors and hawkers. But under ever-increasing political pressure as economic growth slows, the Indian Government led by Cambridge-educated economist Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, hoped that opening up the retail market to competition would reduce food price inflation as well as indicate that the country welcomed more foreign direct investment.
The Indian Government’s decision, which did not require parliamentary approval, signalled that it would not be a free ride for foreign companies. In return for a 51 percent stake in “multi-brand retailers” and 100 percent ownership of “single-brand stores” like Nike they would be expected to contribute to the country’s infrastructure, and source at least 30 percent of supplies from small and medium-sized Indian companies. Another condition highlighted in the proposal was that foreign companies would only be able to open stores in cities of more than 1 million people that have an “organised retail sector.”
U.K. retail giant Tesco said the announcement was good news but that it was awaiting “further details on any conditions” before making any move.
Concerns about the impact of the initiative on the traditional retail system were quick to appear, however. An editorial in the Financial Times said: “A consolidated retail sector would require consolidated agriculture to supply it. Such changes could cost millions of Indians their livelihoods. With no functioning welfare system that is a serious worry.”
On Monday, two coalition allies of the Congress Party, which governs with a slender parliamentary majority, announced that they could not back the proposed change in policy towards the retail sector. One ally, M. Karunanidhi, leader of the Dravida Munnettra Kazhagam party in the southern state of Tamil Nadu said: “It is dangerous to allow foreign direct investment in retail trade as it will affect hundreds of thousands of small traders as well as the poor and middle-class consumers. It will also be a cause for economic decline for our country.”
On the same day, hundreds protested at the prospect of international retail giants arriving in their country outside a Carrefour wholesale outlet in the northern city of Jaipur.
On Tuesday, after Parliament was adjourned for the third day as the BJP opposition and its allies demanded that the initiative should be abandoned, the Prime Minister used the platform of the Youth Congress party convention in New Delhi to defend his plans. “We have not taken this decision in haste, but after a lot of consideration,” he said. “It is our firm conviction that the decision will benefit the country.”
The Hindu reported that the Prime Minister has offered an olive branch to state governments. “State governments that are not convinced of its usefulness have the means to prevent foreign participation in retail businesses in their States,” he declared.
Commentators think that the most likely option is that the Prime Minister will refer the initiative to a ministerial committee, “a traditional way of Congress kicking problems into the grass.”
The Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry has announced a nationwide strike on Thursday to protest against the proposed changes in the retail sector.
The lesson? It is surely that in the world’s largest democracy it is not a good idea to force through measures which have not been debated and do not command popular support. This is a pity since some reform of the retail market in India is urgently needed as it is estimated that around 40 percent of food and vegetable rots before coming to market.
Open CCAFS call for proposals
CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) has launched an Open call for Proposals for the “Farms of the Future” research project, aiming at the:
Development of a method to study farmer’s social, cultural and gender specific barriers for enabling behavioral change and improve adaptive capacity, based on farmers’ exchanges between climatic analogues locations
The project will particularly improve understanding of social and cultural perceptions of future climates, local practices and available tools for enabling change. The adopted approach will allow the participatory diagnosis of capacities and needs, thus aiding in the design of community-appropriate adaptation strategies.
Royal wedding etiquette buzz
This just in from Sean Carey, cultural anthropologist at Roehampton University:
Big and growing excitement in the UK about the Royal Wedding next month.
This article on what the Palace is telling guests about etiquette and protocol includes advice about trying not to kiss the Queen!
And this from the BBC about how to address members of the Royal family – remember ma’am rhymes with ham.
Dishonorable killings
So-called honor killings take the wind out of a form of cultural relativism that I refer to as absolute cultural relativism. According to absolute cultural relativism, anything that goes on in a particular culture, and is justified within that culture, cannot be questioned or changed by insiders or outsiders. For insiders, such questioning is cultural heresy; for outsiders it is ethnocentrism.
An antidote to absolute cultural relativism is critical cultural relativism, which promotes the posing of questions about practices and beliefs by insiders and outsiders in terms of who accepts them and why, and who they might be harming or helping. In other words: Who benefits, who loses? [Note: I present these terms in my cultural anthropology texts as a way to get students to think more analytically about the very important concept of cultural relativism.]
Image: Flickr creative commons licensed content. If only India, and indeed the whole world, was a domestic violence free zone.
When death, torture and structural violence are involved, it’s time to relegate absolute cultural relativism to the sidelines and bring to the fore critical analysis and discussion among insiders and outsiders. As far as I know, murder is not legal in any country in the world, including murder of one’s own kin for purposes of protecting family honor.
An article in The New York Times describes an alleged honor killing of a young unmarried Hindu woman in her family home in Jharkhand state, eastern India.
The article links the possible murder to Hindu caste values, which forbid marriage of woman to a man of a lower caste category — in this instance, the woman was of a Brahmin family and was engaged to a man of the Kayastha category, which is lower. Not only that, she had apparently engaged in premarital sex, another serious problem from the point of view of family honor.
What the article doesn’t say is that honor killings of daughters and wives by family members occur among people of other religions as well, including Christianity, that are not driven by caste purity. More deeply than particular religious values is the widespread existence of lethal patriarchy: male dominance in all domains of life — economic, political, social, sexual — that it justifies, even actively supports, murder of women and girls.
There can be no way, in this world, that anyone can get away with murder by saying that “it’s part of our culture” to kill a daughter or wife who breaks cultural rules. As if it’s their right and duty to kill.
Unfortunately, local police and the judicial system are often on the side of the killers.
Amnesty International now keeps track of so-called honor killings, but it’s likely that cases are severely under-counted. Nevertheless, any and all efforts to keep shining a very bright light on the problem of honor killings and related forms of patriarchy are essential.
See also this post on the blog Women Against Shariah.
To thee I sing: sweet land of oil spill
European colonists came to North America seeking religious freedom and economic opportunity. They destroyed the very same for those who had lived here for centuries.
One person’s liberty often means someone else’s shackles. One group’s success often means another group is in ruins.
The boom and crackle of Independence Day fireworks in the United States are echoed in the gunfire in the war zones of Iraq and Afghanistan as outside forces vie for control of these strategic lands. Let freedom ring.
Allow me one more bit of gut gashing irony. In the 18th century, the American patriots fought hard to gain independence from the British. They succeeded.
What would those freedom fighters say about British Petroleum’s oil spill in the Gulf?
Image: “An American Flag on top of a fake oil derrick in Sapulpa, Oklahoma.” The derrick may be fake, but the questions the image raises are surely very real. Creative commons licensed Flickr content.
anthropologyworks 