The article was a perfect culmination of the course. What we read in this
article is exactly what we have seen time and time again throughout the
semester. In speaking about India, the author admits “somehow we manage
progress and regress simultaneously." To go as far as to say that progress
has been schizophrenic is actually quite accurate to say. What is even worse is
that most people seem okay with it or at least are too apathetic to do anything
about it. I think members of our class have something very much in common with
how the writer sees her position. “The trouble is that once you see it, you
can’t unsee it.” So as highly aware individuals, are we now compelled to do something about the problems we talked
about. As ignorance is erased, whose job does it become to deal with issues
that no one else seems to be dealing with?
India, as are many other developing countries, is facing severe consequences
from what we confuse for clean cut progress. India faces severe unemployment
and failed development projects. In what seems like some sort of new form
of imperialism, “creating a good investment climate is the new euphemism for
third repression…this time around, the colonizer doesn’t even need a white
presence” as “implementation [of projects] now rests with the local
administrations. It seems that a clash is occurring that is pushing true progress to a standstill. In
attempts to stop corruption and such,
many villagers can’t find jobs in the cities they fled to for work and
entrepreneurs who were encouraged to flourish in a free-market are left to deal
with corruption.
The author declares “there is a lot of money in poverty.” This is quiet a
fascinating statement which suggests that perhaps less is being done to truly
make positive change happen because so many academic scholars who study poverty
and despair are making some easy money by researching the issue. I think that
many scholars are probably just as frustrated with the problems around the
world and see their role in positive change being their jobs as researchers; to
get the information to those who have the power as well as media. Nonetheless,
it seems many of their claims are met with resistance and failing political
leaders.
So what is the author’s role as “writer” activist,” a title she doesn’t seem to
embrace? I would follow that up with what is
our role as educated students? We have explored and written about so many
themes over this course, I feel that in many ways we are aware of what is
really going on and what the experts seem to ignore. We’ve asked the tough
questions, as the authors did as well, and we have sought after possible
solutions.
This course has opened my awareness to an array of global issues, expanding my
narrow understanding of what exactly globalization is. Beforehand, I visualized
globalization as a sort of sweeping movement that sort of set everyone on an
equal playing field. By simply spreading one culture’s ideas, technologies, and
values onto another has proven in many cases harmful and simply unfair. I don’t
think globalization in itself is bad. It is still a very exciting idea to me
because it paves the way for exciting new advances and changes that may produce
some really great progress. In thinking back to our first readings about the
“Clash of Civilizations” and” The Clash of Ignorance,” it is obvious that what
is going on in terms of globalization is often oversimplified. Our histories
are all interconnected; they have been for centuries. Unfortunately, the West
has repeatedly attempted, both intentionally (and unintentionally perhaps),
force itself onto other cultures. It seems that as tensions rise and more are
educated about these issues like us, something will change.
No comments:
Post a Comment