I am the (global) 1% (and you probably are too).

Wow. I'm bad at this. I meant to do a post every week but things just get away from me. In my defense, school does take up a lot of of my time. Also, it's easier for me to write when I have things that I feel strongly about or am angry about, and these past few weeks I've had...less of that. Which is good. But also confusing. It's just that a lot of the things we've been covering class are super interesting and important, but also really complicated and I don't always know where I stand - or why I stand where I stand....or even if I kind of know where I might stand, I'm wary of writing down a concrete positions and sending it out into the internet where barely anyone will read it until I'm like, I don't know, up for Prime Minister or something and all of a sudden people are calling me super radical, or a bad feminist or whatever (because, in the future, not being enough or the right kind of feminist is going to be THE campaign issue in Canadian politics. prepare yourself).

Ok. But, one tiny little thought I have recently had formulate inside my brain is concerning this whole Occupy Wall Street thing. I am not an expert on this, I will say that from the start. And I do support a lot of what I think the movement is about. The current distribution of wealth is ridiculous, especially in the States and am all for greater equality. I think certain jobs/position/peoples make far too much money and have far too much power combined with far too much incentive to perpetuate this inequality. If you're not convinced about the moral argument for equality, never fear, here are some instrumentalist reasons, developed, studied and presented by someone smarter than me: http://www.ted.com/talks/richard_wilkinson.html

Anyway, I think that no just inequality, but the whole economic system is very problematic and very unfair and I do think national government should play a role in ensuring not necessarily complete financial equality,  but more that people's work is valued appropriately and that they're salaries/living standards reflect that. I do think that working hard (or even just averagely) should ensure you have enough (all needs, some wants) and in many places, this is not the case. I also think that the state should ensure that if you are less well off, or unemployed, for whatever reason, that people are not thus unable to have their basic needs/human rights met - because that's what human rights are - things you deserve no matter what. I am a little confused regarding exactly what the occupy movement are hoping will happen, but like I said, I'm not expert. I know what I know from procrastinating on the internet and in doing so I've seen a lot of  "I am the 99%"  - meaning the bottom 99% of the population (economically). Usually these signs/posts/assertions also describe how hard the person has worked/does work, how much they've lost and what they cannot afford. It emphasizes the current situation in America, where the vast majority of wealth is concentrated in the richest 1% of the population. It dispels myths about why poor people or poor (or tries to I guess), and also about what proportion of the population is in fact struggling financially  - that its not a minority issues. Anyway, overall, I like this slogan and I do think that the 99% deserves a lot more. But there is something about it that bothers me.

  In America, yes, maybe you are the 99%. But I can't help think that on a global scale, I am absolutely sure that the vast majority of the people stating they are the 99% are in fact in the 1%. (or at least the 5%)  And just as these "99%" lose because big ceos and bankers or whoever win, the global 99% lose because WE win ( I have no clue where I technically stand within Canada, but I'm pretty sure globally I am the 1%). So. Certain amount of irony there. And while I still support a lot of the goals of the occupy wall street movement, I can't help but think about it on a larger scale.  I still don't know what the solution is (obviously, or I'd be a hero) but I do think its important to remember that our ideas of poverty are very, very relative. It's not to say that people in America should shut up and stop complaining, or that they don't deserve decent lives, or that  most of the richest people in America don't deserve/need all that friggin wealth. It's just to say, maybe let's keep in mind that its not just our national economies which are completely messed up.

On that note..... a few weeks ago, for my Globalization, Gender and Development class we had an optional viewing of a film called China Blue. First off, it was really good, and I really recommend it. It's a documentary which focuses on a small group of teenage girls, and one in particular, manufacturing jeans in China and basically how absolutely unfair the terms of their employment are. And not just because of one evil ceo or factory owner, but because of the way the global garment economy is structured. Anyway, it was informative, and moving, but also left me with the same sense of despair I sometimes felt in Ghana. I know the exploitation is there, and I know I should be doing something to stop it, or at the very least to not participate in it but I don't know how and I don't know that I will (or that other people who watch the movie and shake their heads will). Our class discussion afterwards was actually really  frustrating; for many reasons - i was being totally devils advocate at every turn, spreading hopelessness and despair and pointing out the flaws in any kind of solution - which I'm sure was not entirely helpful. Mostly though, I was pissed off by the argument that, while, it is possible to buy "fair trade" garments, and jeans, it's too expensive. "we can't afford it". I feel that way all the time. But realistically, how much does  fair trade pair of jeans cost? More than my regular jeans, yes. But how much did all my jeans put together cost? I only have 4 pairs here in England, but I have plenty more sitting in a box in Canada - clearly its' not important that I have that many since I won't be wearing them for a year. So, really, is it that I can't afford the fair trade jeans, or that I can't afford to buy 10 pairs of them? I really, really credit One World and my experience in Ghana with emphasizing to me that "need" and "want" are not the same, and that we can afford a lot more than we're willing to acknowledge; often because "cheaper" usually just means "more". I feel like a huge hypocrite because of course I only own old navy jeans ( I had  a staff discount and first dibs when they went on sale).  But maybe it's one more thing I can add to my list of "things I will no longer justify buying unless they are fair trade". Which brings that list up to  - jeans and coffee. Ready for my sainthood. But....when pretty much everything we buy is tied up in unfair supply/production chains sometimes its a little less overwhelming to start small.....

The film also brought up the issue that, even though the employment is super, super shitty, if the factory loses an order it's the workers at the lowest level that pay; either through even worse conditions (to save the factory money) or through less money. Which is the problem with boycotts/the entire global economic system. I am going to stress that the answer is not to buy infinite number of jeans because we're SUPPORTING the workers and providing jobs! Because buying more will mostly just add profit to the retail company, or at the most, the factory owner. That's the problem. The balance between those who reap the rewards and those who pay the price is completely and utterly effed.

So, yeah. Like I said. Feelings of despair.

Well.....that might be all for today I think. Less gendery than last time...not that the gender issues aren't totally in there - in both the importance of jeans to middle class first worlders like myself and in their importance to the teenage girls who make them. But perhaps that will be for another day.

Other recommendations; I'm reading Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell and I'm only a third of the way throught but it is blowing my mind. It's distracting me from all my other school work (though, I am reading it for school, so I feel kind of justified). Inheritance of  Loss by Kiran Desai is also fantastic; I'm writing my postcolonial representations essay on that one. I also have a presentation on "Dirty Pretty Things" this week, which is a kind of problematic, but good film and brings up a lot of issues around how immigrants are treated; while still being entertaining. Lagaan was also really entertaining - my first "Bollywood" film. I enjoyed it, but it also really pissed me off. It was the heart-warming story of an (fictional) Indian cricket team formed around 1900 (I think...) during British Imperial rule. Basically an evil British dude decides if the Indian team doesn't beat the British team they have to pay triple taxes (VERY realistic portrayal of colonial relaitonships). Anyway, despite initial tensions the whole village does basically come together to learn this game, claim it as their own etc while simultaneously breaking down religious/caste barriers. Everyone gets to participate! Oh, except the women. When the one main Indian female characters is decides, "I want to play" its' like this huge joke. As opposed to when the man from the untouchable caste wants to play; then its all inspirational speeches about equality and brothership and everyone's unique contribution (the woman's unique contribution I guess being to bring the snacks, cheer and sing romantic duets with the protagonist). Anyway, I won't give away the ending, but there's the little rant of the day.

By the way, all of those recommendations are from my postcolonial representations class, which continues, like all my classes, to be totally awesome.

Bye.

p.s. another Ted talk on  unfair supply chains...dunno if I'm convinced but it's more than I've got: http://www.ted.com/talks/auret_van_heerden_making_global_labor_fair.html