European Representations of African Poverty
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
ABSTRACT
The Affluent Psyche. European Representations of African Poverty
The context of this research is the persistence of global poverty, which I consider not only as one of the most pressing political problems but also as one of the intellectually most challenging phenomena. It is a field where questions of justice, race and racism, power asymmetries and postcolonial issues are raised, but also questions of the economy, legal implications of the global institutional order and one’s own political positioning and therefore questions of identity construction come together.
The field of research which places the solution of global poverty in the hands of rich countries and their policies is dominated by economists, political scientists, sociologists and philosophers, who, according to their discipline, develop concepts e.g. for reforms of global institutions, new taxation systems, changed ethical demands, to mention a few.
However, less attention has been paid to the social-psychological dimension of this phenomenon. And this is the starting point for my research: How do we, members of the middle class living in ‘old rich’ Europe construct ourselves as ethical beings in the context of severe poverty? What is the link between people’s world view, identity construction and performed action?
I do not wish to imply that the issue of global poverty can be reduced to an issue resolvable at the level of individual psychology, but a social-psychological analysis needs to complement an analysis of social structures. Despite the institutionalised nature of the global economic order, it is people who design, support, and maintain this system and individual constructions of the world and structural inequalities reinforce one another; just as global poverty and discourses of dominance intersect historically and geopolitically, so do they intersect within the psyche of most people living in the so-called First World.
I will present a typology of six types, derived from an analysis of semi-structured interviews with 20 middle class Europeans conducted in London, Berlin, and Cape Town.
PAPER
“The trouble with Eichmann was precisely that so many were like him, and that the many were neither perverted nor sadistic, that they were, and still are, terribly and terrifyingly normal. From the viewpoint of our legal institutions and of our moral standards of judgment, this normality was much more terrifying than all the atrocities put together, for it implied […] that this new type of criminal, who is in actual fact hostis generis humani, commits his crimes under circumstances that make it well-nigh impossible for him to know or to feel that he is doing wrong.” Arendt (1961/1994)
“Meanwhile, not nearly enough work is being done on those who hold the power and pull the strings … Let the poor study themselves. They already know what is wrong with their lives and if you truly want to help them, the best you can do is give them a clearer idea of how their oppressors are working now and can be expected to work in the future.” (George 1976)
The clandestine power of the dominant world view is to create an ‘invisible normality’. And part of the contemporary European normality is a global institutional order under which at least 46% of humankind live under the poverty line defined by the World Bank. According to calculations from UNICEF (2003), it would only take an additional 7 billion dollars over the period of 10 years to give all children between 6 and 15 years a school education. To put these figures into perspective: 7 billion dollars is less than Europeans (and only Europeans of the 15 member states of the European Union before the 1st of May, 2004) spend per year on ice- cream (Ziegler, 2005, p. 84).
Regardles of whether one considers severe poverty as a phenomenon caused by rich countries and chooses the approach of justice and redistribution or whether one prefers to join the charity discourse and chooses the approach of aid and help, one question is: How do we1, people living in Europe, construct ourselves as ethical beings in the context of global/African poverty? What is the link between our world view, identity construction and (in)action with regard to severe poverty?
To explore this question, in 2005, I conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 Europeans (10 males, 10 females) in Berlin, London and Cape Town (in SA: travellers and Europeans
1 The consequent use of the terms ‘we’ and ‘I’, which might be rather unusual in an academic paper, is meant to represent that I do not want to exclude myself from the researched group and is aimed to prevent that this paper gets a ‘sour moral undertone’.
2 [email protected] working as volunteers for NGOs), with whom I met between 1 and 12 times. Every interview took between one and 2,5 hours: in total I analysed 36 hours worth of transcribed material.
Criteria for Interviewees: - white - between 25 and 40 years old - raised in ‘old rich Europe’ - a university degree - no financial commitments (e.g. no elderly parents to care for, no children)
(Interviewees were: a teacher, a lawyer, a journalist working for the Financial Times, a web designer, a social worker, an engineer, a self-employed person; professionals working for NGOs as financial managers, project managers; an active member of a political party which was in power at the time of the interview, five students who started their degree with the intention to work in the field of development;)
Analytical Tools I used NVIVO as a technical tool; and Grounded Theory and Thematic Network Analysis as theoretical tools.
The Exploration of People’s Social Representations of African Poverty and Related Issues In order to gain a comprehensive understanding of a white individual’s representation of African poverty, it is necessary to explore how this is interwoven into the general Weltanschauung (world view); for what lies at the heart of this representation and the question of one’s personal activity is basically one’s personal answer to all big questions of human existence: What do I believe is a good life? What do I think is the meaning of life and how do I want to achieve this in the context of existing contradictions in our societies? Furthermore, questions like: Do I believe that there exists something like ‘human nature’, and if so, do I believe that humans are egoists by nature or nurture? – What do we merely claim because we need it for our our self-image/the construction of an ethical self, and how do actually we live?
(see: Appendix I Typology and Appendix II Construction of the ‘African Other’)
TYPOLOGY
I______II______III______IV______V______VI Do a lot do a little do nothing Feel strongly feel little feel nothing Africans as distinct Africans as totally different Ethics of high importance in life Ethics as an obstacle for a successful life
The point is that the order of the types remains the same, regardless of whether the continuum is created along the line of a) how much do people do against their assessed reasons of severe poverty or b) what and how (passionately) do people feel about severe poverty or c) how do people construct the ‘African Other’ and talk about severely impoverished people in general or d) how important do people consider ethics in general to be in their lives?
Typology: I. Cosmopolitans II. Political Activists III. Religious Believers by Self-Definition IV. Believers in a Just World V. Representatives of the (Upper)-Middle Class VI. Neoliberal Aspirant High Achievers
(Let me reassure you: I know that psychologists have the reputation of creating stage models, rankings etc. in which it just happens that the researchers themselves appear on the highest stage, together with Jesus, Ghandi and Martin Luther King. I chose the criteria for cosmopolitans so strictly that I would not fulfil them.)
The study is based on three theoretical assumptions: a) People construct their identities around an abstract notion of the good (Taylor, 1989). b) Everyone constructs their identity in opposition to an ‘other’ (Joffe, 1999). c) The intuition-based model of moral reactions (Kagan, 1984, Haidt, 2001; Epley and Caruso, 2004): I. People automatically evaluate stimuli on a semantic differential as positive or negative and base their moral judgements on affective reactions to stimuli.
II. Moral reasoning is ‘only’ a post hoc explanation or justification of these emotional reactions.
To give you the result of my analysis right at the beginning: There are three components if all of them are part of one’s belief system, it seems to be inevitable that one is engaged and active.
1. If people take responsibility for the past, 2. if people feel empowered and take responsibility for the future, 3. if one constructs the ‘African Other’ as ‘an Equal’ and not as morally inferior.
Or more precisely:
1. It is ‘easy’ (in the sense of: not necessarily related to action) to take responsibility for the past, as long as one feels helpless to do something about the future. e.g.: It is my fault, I caused it, I am sorry – but you know that there is nothing I could do about it.
2. It is ‘easy’ to take responsibility for the future if one does not feel responsible for the origins. e.g.: I could do something about it, but I didn’t cause it. Why should I do anything?
3. It was my fault, I could do something about it, but the issue is so minor, why do you even want to talk about it?
Part of the ethical self-construction in the context of global poverty seems to be that it is psychologically impossible for people to believe at the same time that: 1. It was our fault, we caused it. AND 2. We have the power to do something about the future. AND 3. The ‘global poor’ are like us. AND then to say: 4. Just leave the world like it is and let them suffer.
One Method During the Interview: Dora Vignette I used a short story - without any visual inputs which could have distorted the factor of absence with regard to the ‘African Other’ - as a moral stimulus:
In the film Central Station, Dora is a retired school teacher who makes a modest living sitting at the station writing letters for illiterate people. Suddenly she has an opportunity to earn $1000. All she has to do is persuade a homeless nine-year old boy to follow her to an address she has been given. She is told that he will be adopted by wealthy couples. She delivers the boy, gets the money, and spends it on a television. Her neighbour spoils her good mood by telling her that the boy is too old to be adopted. She says that he will be killed and his organs sold for transplantation. Perhaps Dora was aware of this possibility all along, but was able to block it out of her mind.
One of the questions I raised was: What are the differences and/or similarities between her and our situation as individuals in Europe when we buy e.g. clothes which are produced in sweat- shops2?
Type 1 Cosmopolitan: They subscribe to all three components given above (see: Appendix I + II). 1. They believe that severe poverty is a phenomenon produced by ‘us’. AND 2. They believe that they personally can contribute to the required change. AND 3. They construct the ‘African Other’ as equal.
Francesco “Yes, this is a big issue, our behaviour is very similar to Dora’s because we have been knowing for a long time that so many goods are produced in developing countries by using child labour, yes, we are like Dora didn't go back to that place and take the child with her. … I can’t describe how I feel, it is so unjust.”
Type 6 Neoliberal Aspirant High Achiever: They acknowledge the first 2 components and openly disagree with the third one (see: Appendix II). 1. They believe that severe poverty is a phenomenon produced by ‘the West’. AND
2 I used the keyword ‘sweat shop’. Most interviewees answered my question if I had asked them about ‘child labour’. 6 [email protected]
2. They believe that they could contribute to the required change if they wanted to BUT 3. They say openly that they believe that the ‘African Other’ is of less value than a European life.
Elias “For sure there are parallels, [in our case] it is even stronger than in the story, we have the evidence that they have to work under horrible conditions but I guess, we are very rational, she will probably compare and weigh up her new fancy television to her feeling of guilt, so we do a bit the same.”
Laura “I think the difference is the fact that it is anonymous, in both cases you are making money out of the fact that someone else is suffering, if you buy clothes for 9 Euros you know that it is made by a little kid from Taiwan, how else could it be done, you don’t feel it if you buy it, the difference is really psychological, it doesn’t touch you.”
What Cosmopolitans and Neoliberals have in common and differentiates them from the other types is the absence of the need (and the desire) to construct their conduct as ethically immaculate in this discourse – but for different reasons. Although or because ethics is of high importance for Cosmopolitans a) they believe that it is impossible to live an ethically immaculate life under the existing global institutional order; hence, b) they believe that they personally contribute to the ‘suffering of the global poor’; therefore they experience strong emotions of existential guilt anyway; and c) they make a distinction between judging a person as good or bad and assessing their political position and the corresponding actions and consequences, so that even a good person can take politically unjustifiable actions; whereas Neoliberals, who construct the ‘African Other’ openly as morally inferior (in the sense of: less valuable), consider ethics as an obstacle for a successful life (and believe in the survival of the fittest).
More interesting than answers categorized in type 1 and 6 are the ones given by interviewees with the psychological need for an ethical self and who explicitly name global poverty when asked directly about their personal assessment of the most pressing contemporary problems; interviewees of the types 2 and 3 claim for themselves to subscribe to the first two components to some degree. Additionally, they merely claim to acknowledge the ‘poor Other’ as equal, because they need it for their self-image, but do not do so.
In the following I will think through the interviewees’ answers and make their underlying logics visible. Neither do I want to imply that there there are no differences between our and Dora’s situation nor do I want to normatively say that one has to construct the world in a
7 [email protected] similar way to Cosmopolitans or Neoliberals. But I claim that – in this context – a lot of logical problems are actually psychological problems3; and by getting into the intricacies of peole’s arguments, which fulfil a certain psychological function, the extent of the threat which the ethical self experiences, becomes visible.
Type 2 - Political Activist: subscribe to some degree to the components 1 and 2 and construct the ‘African Other’ as ‘other’: as superstitious, extremely religious, incompetent, selfish (see: Appendix I + II). Analysed interview transcripts of this category were chosen according to the interviewees’ job positions or ambitions. Which means professionals already working for NGOs, one member of a political party who might work as an adviser for the potential next minister of foreign affairs in Germany, one person who used to work full-time for the EU, now only as a consultant, students who started their degree with the aim to work for institutions like the World Bank, UN etc.
Political Activists are not necessarily less engaged than Cosmopolitans, but they construct themselves as ‘Warriors for the Good’ with a hegemonic view onto the world and a strong construction of the ‘African Other’ as an ‘other’.
VERONIKA “I think the directness is the difference, how aware you are of this because she did have directly an impact on this boy’s life whereas it is so natural for us to go into a shop and buy shoes, we don’t often, people don’t know what is behind this pair of shoes, … yes, it is negative because it might be child labour behind it and slavery and stuff like that, but what is the alternative, you can't just go around and say no more child labour, because then they go into prostitution, and you are even more responsible because that is even worse than working in a sweatshop, … the directness [sic] of the impact gives you an excuse because you are sort of abstracting, it is actually quite convenient because the guilt is divided up between every individual consumer and every individual person working for Nike as sort of being involved in that, so it is a collective guilt4 probably more than an individual guilt.”
The unnamed cloud which covers up Veronika’s entire statement is the kernel of similarity. She begins her comment with the statement that “the directness is the difference”, which implies that the issue might be the same at its core; followed by “the directness of the impact gives you an excuse”, “the guilt is divided up” “it is more a collective guilt”. This indicates that she perceives a lot of similarities – but this remains unsaid. In brief: by the way she constructs the differences, she affirms the similarities.
3 The philosopher Jerome Neu (200) claims that a lot of psychological problems are actually logical problems. 4 It might or might not be an open philosophical question, if something like ‘collective guilt’ actually exists. According to Hannah Arendt (1967), this is not the case. 8 [email protected]
Excluding oneself She switches from a self-including “we don’t often” to an self-excluding “people don’t know”.
Defence of her fellows Whereas the Neoliberal points out that if one wants to know about the sweatshops, it can be derived from the price; then it was not so much about being capable of knowing it or needing more background information but about wanting to know it. By claiming that people are uninformed, Veronika defends her fellows.
Weak expressions which veil She uses a weak expression (a euphemism) in judging issues like “child labour, slavery and stuff like that” as “negative.”
Thinking in extreme binaries She introduces a counter-pole by the (rhetorical) question: “What is the alternative?” A phrase which got coined after Margaret Thatcher as TINA-principle: There is no alternative.
The implied lack of alternatives entails a decisive mechanism: by constructing another extreme which seems to be even less justifiable, it puts the first option in a more acceptable light. And the pseudo alternative she constructs is – what I coded as – a fantasy. Not any fantasy, but a very specific one: children as sex workers. Hence, the actual sweat shops become less threatening.
Built-in ‘ruptures’ in one’s logic According to Veronika’s logic of “you are even more responsible because that is even worse”, responsibility works like this: the more harm you do, the more you are responsible for it. One could argue that the job as a sex worker and the extent of suffering would be worse (an approach which might also say more about our fantasies with regard to sex work than about the reality of sweatshops) – but that would not have an impact on the amount of our actual responsibility.
From the lack of alternatives to the participation in the global institutional order, she derives the lack of guilt European consumers have towards the ‘global poor’: two ideas which are
9 [email protected] mutually exclusive for her. A construction which is guided by an invisible additional element: intention5.
Whereas the Cosmopolitans construct the world in binaries of either being negatively or positively affected by the global institutional order, so that one is – without any moral implications – either a victim or a traitor. The positioning as a traitor presupposes that one can bear the idea that our acts might have unintended harmful consequences for others. In other words: the point of reference is not ‘the lack of our evil intentions’ but the consequences for ‘them’.
FELIX “If [Dora] was aware that is was quite likely that the boy was going to be killed, yes, you have to be quite selfish to do something where someone can be killed, … the important difference is, it depends on the motivation, if you do it mainly with the selfish motivation of saving money then, yes, that is an important parallel.”
What does it mean to put the focus on the consumer’s intention, so that the consequences for the victims are only judged on the bases of our mind-set? On a psychological level this means that the ‘Other’ is only used in its function and meaning for the self; without leaving one’s own (white) position; it becomes the object for our psycho-hygienic needs without a position for itself. The objects gets subscribed a shifting position depending on our subjectivity, our intentions. On a structural level, this construction of ‘the other’ can be interpreted as being part of a discourse which serves the function to stabilise the dominant system, in which no stranger and no ‘other’ exists outside of its function for the self (Tissberger 2002).
RACHEL “In our case, in order to avoid being an unethical shopper, it would probably be a full-time job, so there is a difference, I would feel more guilty in that instance just because I would be forced to face it, I know it is not right, I know you can make a direct comparison, nevertheless I choose to keep on shopping fairly indiscriminately, I try to worry about bigger things …the idea that you can change something by the way you consume, is rubbish, it is a kind of compromise.
Fantasy vs. open question Rachel speculates that being an ethical shopper would probably be a full-time job. This suggests that she has never double-checked it. Actually, it is surprising, how little time you actually need to gather the required information for ethical shopping once and then you keep yourself updated (comparable to the literature research for a PhD; another way of gathering this information is to buy a single book, e.g. The Ethical Consumer Handbook). This qualifies
5 I am open to suggestions that this point might be less a defence mechanism but primarily an expression of her hegemonic world view. 10 [email protected] the sentence to be categorized as a fantasy. Furthermore, according to a NGO staff member there are different ways of ethical consuming (Pogge, 2005).
The underlying approach of this argumentation is: Child labour is bad as long as it does not cause inconveniences for us.
Building up of hierarchies The line “I try to worry about bigger things” can be interpreted in a two-fold way. Either as a building up of a hierarchy of the importance of issues. Being asked about her assessment of the most pressing contemporary problems, she names global poverty. And then in this context, it becomes marginal and neglectable. Or the line can be interpreted in the way that she wants to target bigger issues, e.g. the agricultural subsidies. But how come that in this context one excludes the other? Does buying fair trade products and e.g. lobbying politicians per definitionem mutually exclude each other?
The global poor as a homogenous mass with the focus on the system/’us’ According to Rachel, buying fair trade products is “rubbish” because it would only be a compromise in comparison to the required fundamental change and will not change the world. Improving working conditions for only a few people, while millions of others live in severe poverty, is an act which comes indeed next to nothing if the aim is to reduce the figures of the ‘global poor’. But what becomes visible if one does not concentrate on the system/’us’ (and how this system produces millions of severely impoverished people) but on the individuals working in sweatshops, improved working conditions might mean the world for people affected by it (Pogge, 2002).
Type 3 – Religious Believers by Self-Definition: They subscribe to some degree to the components 1 and 2 (e.g. the same arguments are used for their personal defences and blaming of fellows for not doing enough) and construct the ‘African Other’ as helpless, uneducated, backwards (see: Appendix I + II).
JFK Do you think we are personally guilty? “You could say that we are guilty, when we are buying, running shoes, you could say that these are made by young kids, they are exploited, and you encourage those people, the boss, the companies, to continue to exploit those kids, yes, you are guilty, you are part of the action, your fault might be very minor but still, but we are educated in a way that forces us to buy those products, .., you don't feel guilty, otherwise you couldn't succeed,6.”
6 This interviewee began his degree with the ambition to work for the World Bank and to become at some day the chief economist of this institution. With degrees from McGill University, the LSE and Princeton, this might be a realistic aim. Interviewees with a student status were chosen according to their career ambitions: these might be the people who will indeed be in charge of world politics in the near future. 11 [email protected]
Are you saying ‘we don't feel guilty’ or ‘we are actually not guilty’? “We are actually not guilty as individuals, we are not promoting, we are just wearing running shoes, because we have to, don't buy anything which is produced in circumstances of exploitation, you couldn't become someone, you have to become someone that is the purpose of life, you want to be happy.”
Is it really impossible? “It is possible but you would be like an animal, just the same, you couldn't be accepted by your peers that is a need, a fundamental need, if you don't have something like a TV, some nice clothes, nobody would accept you, you have to follow some rules, for sure, if you are going of the track … .”
First, he acknowledges the aspect of ‘being guilty and not feeling guilty’, second he constructs himself as helpless “it is enforced”, third he introduces the subject/theme “purpose of life”, which results in fourth, the construction of ‘our fundamental needs’ vs. ‘the fundamental needs of the poor’: ’Their needs’ and rights become an obstacle in the fulfilment of our happiness.
Religious Believers with the strongest need for an ethically immaculate self show the most extreme forms of cognitive polyphasia, the application of different ideas stemmig from different believe systems – according to situational needs.
Conclusion I followed the interviewees’ intricacies and made the implicit logics visible, to show how the ethical self defends itself against the threat induced by a short story. What one can find in all quotes given by the interviewees of type 2 and 3 is the moment of acknowledgement of similarities between Dora and our situation - just before rationalisations and other defence mechanisms get activated: “Yes, it is negative because it might be child labour behind it and slavery” (Veronika), “I know it’s not right, I know that you can make a direct comparison” (Rachel), “yes, you are guilty, you are part of the action, your fault might be very minor but still” (JFK)
According to Chow, Lowery and Knowles (2006), the belief that the group is unfairly advantaged is threatening; the important aspect is that it is not so much about the issue of inequality in general; it is not about the idea that ‘the other’ group has less than it should but that ‘the own’ group has more than it should and must therefore be considered as being unfairly advantaged. And how much more threatening must be the idea for an ethical self that this issue of us having more than we should is embedded in a long history of European normality.
If one looks at the research on the explanations of the Righteous Gentiles who took high risks for their own lifes rescuing others during WW II, the most important point might have been the factor of ‘helping another’, which presupposes equality: “I did nothing unusual; anyone would have done the same thing in my place” (Oliner, 1988, p. 113). “It was easy to do because it was our duty” (Geras 1996, p. 29). “There was no question … you could do nothing else; it’s as simple as that.” (p. 24). “He had no shoes, nothing, and when he started to tell me his story I had to help him.” (p. 26) “It was a natural thing to do.” (p. 41). The ones who rescued did not rationalise; they couldn’t think of a reason not to act.
Literature
Arendt, H. (1967). Über die Revolution. München: Pieper Verlag.
Epley, N., & Caruso, E. M. (2004). “Egocentric Ethics.” Social Justice Research 17(2): 171-$ 187.
Chow, R., B. S., Lowery, B. S., & Knowles, E. (2006). Distancing from Dominance. The Effect of Unearned Privilege on White Racial Identity. New York: unpublished paper.
Geras, N. (1996). Solidarity in the Conversation of Humankind: The Ungroundable Liberalism of Richard Rorty. New York: Verso.
Haidt, J. (2001). “The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment.” Psychological Review 108(4): 814-834.
Joffe, H. (1999). Risk and ‘the Other’. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kagan, J. (1984). The Nature of the Child. New York: Basic Books.
Kurzban, R., & Houser, D. (2005). An experimental investigation of cooperative types in human groups: A complement to evolutionary theory and simulations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(5), 1803-1807.
UNICEF. (2003). The Situation of the Children of the World. New York: Report.
Oliner, S. P., & Oliner, P. M. (1988). The altruistic personality: Rescuers of the Jews in Nazi- occupied Poland. New York: Free Press.
Pogge, T. W. M. (2002). World Poverty and Human Rights. Cosmopolitan Responsibilities and Reforms. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Pogge, T. W. M. (2005). “Reply to the Critics. Severe Poverty as a Violation of Negative Duties.” Ethics and International Affairs 19(1): 55-83.
Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the Self: The Making of the Modern Identity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Tissberger, M. (2002). Über Frauen und andere Ent-fremd-ete. Berlin: unpublished paper.
White, J. A., & Plous, S. (1995). Self-Enhancement and Debiasing Techniques. Journal of Applied Psychology, 25(15), 1297-1318.
Ziegler, J. ( 2005). Das Imperium der Schande. Der Kampf gegen Armut und Unterdrückung. München: Bertelsmann.
GIO: global institutional order
Appendix I: Typology I. Cosmopolitans II. Political III. Religious IV. Believers in a V. Represen- VI. Neoliberal Aspirant Activists Believers by Self- Just World tatives of the High Achievers Definition Middle Class Assessment of the Global poverty National issues in their countries: exploitation of natural resources as most pressing an issue for future generations and environmental issues in general, contemporary economic situation in their countries (weak economy with high problem, when unemployment rates as a result), homeless people in their own asked directly countries, Legal Human Rights issues (discrimination of gays, restriction of freedom of press and speech), global security (fear of terrorist attacks in own country) Result of my Coherent Incoherent, when it Not really interview analysis comes to topics and concerned (one issues which are of interviewee stated high personal at the end of the importance (e.g. first interview that questions of loyalty he realised that he towards is not really conservative concerned about parents) severe poverty and reported that he felt ashamed of himself) Knowledge about Well informed Mixture of Opinions: facts Purely opinion Opinions (but they Well informed or no GIO knowledge and constructed around (admit freely that believe that they knowledge/opinion at all opinion an ‘ethical self’; they do not even are well informed) extremely read newspapers, incoherent watch news etc.) Assessment of the GIO as highly GIO as highly Strong case of GIO as just GIO as just GIO as unjust GIO (global unjust; Africa as unjust; cognitive
15 [email protected] institutional order: the example per se polyphasia; “GIO WTO, EU, etc.) of global injustice as unjust but ...” Oneself as being a Definition of GC Definition of GC as GC as humanity: NO NO (The mere NO member of a as ‘global civil ‘global civil “You definitely get “I think it is getting question triggers “ No, not in political terms, ‘global community’ society’: “yes, society’: “well, kind a sense of a global less, I have the aggression: “What the European Union was definitely” of yes” community being impression, the is a global only founded for that reason “ There are many “ I am not sure if I in the Catholic smaller, that people community, what to dictate trade regulations, global do think it exists, church, yeah, want to identify is it? It is nothing, … I think the general communities no, because I think because you are themselves with I think it doesn’t politics, not at all, because of actually, to make if it exists it is aware that the their culture, and exist, you have so trade embargos, agricultural the most simple mostly in a catholic church is you can try to many different subsidies, because of own example, I think theoretical sense, in a lot of different make it one groups, especially interests, because the states, amnesty because we have countries and that community but a there is a huge gap for example the EU has international is a globalisation with they have lot of people want between the economic power now they global community, capitalism and connections” to identify with Middle Eastern are living off the fact that because it has like, under those their own culture World, actually they have the trade taxes to it is everywhere, it conditions how can and history and the Muslim World shut out other communities.” is spread all over a global community they are afraid that and the Western the world, the flourish, it wouldn’t they are going to World and Asia is amnesty symbol is flourish under those loose that, the more somewhere in- recognized almost conditions, they try to make it between, not even anywhere in the everything is a kind one, the more other trying to be world, but there of wrong, it groups will push friends, they are are many global probably exists but themselves off just friends with communities, there within small because they are both because of are people, bounded groups afraid that they trade and they are depending on across the world, loose their own doing good, which global but no, I think we religion or especially because community you are have this global culture.” of that big gap I talking about. capitalism and think, there is not transnational free- a global trade, no, but at the community, it is a
same time I think Western world that it is important made up with, it is there are small nothing between bounded groups, the Western otherwise nothing World and the would change Muslim World or the Third World or whatever)
Reasons for Purely West: More abstract: Cognitive Mainly domestic Purely domestic Purely domestic factors African Poverty global institutional capitalism, free polyphasia: factors (corruption, factors; defence of (corruption, order, e.g. WB, trade; (“You are opinions about mismanagement, the GIO; mismanagement) (they IMF; WTO (strong complicit. There is arms trade etc. irresponsible deals ‘blame the ‘victims’ and emotional no way to get stand parallel to between African claim that it’s down to undertone: “We do around it.”) explanations in governments and ‘African incompetence’ but the same as when ‘ruptures’ when it purely domestic multinationals); acknowledge by the same we were becomes personally factors; “natural new information time the role of the EU and colonialists.”) important, e.g. development” about unjust GIO reflect Europe’s colonial touches questions of as shocking; past) loyalty;
Construction of Respectful According to the type, the ‘African Other’ is constructed in a specific way as ‘Other’ African Other (see Constructions of extra table) Africans as distinct but not different When and how do “ You feel like a “ You can't just go “It [colonisation] is “In Europe, we are “ This is why the “ If [Taiwan] keeps people refer to baby, like a child, around and say no like having a child a lot of steps ahead schemes like developing and the children children/animals? you can't really more child labour, and looking after of Africa, and you adopt a donkey there are going to school and communicate because then they them and telling can help them a work, it is this they are not going to sew any anything go into prostitution, them what to do, little bit, I mean, specific thing, I shirts for H&M anymore, sophisticated, you and you are even maybe not looking like a small child, did that, adopt a then [Minority World’s know, in your own more responsible after them well, but you cannot leave it child, so I am companies] are probably just
country, you are because that is even organising them alone and it will responsible for going to Angola, there are pretty well read, worse than working and telling them not grow up this bit of good, probably children but then you go to in a sweatshop.” what to do and then without help.” and it is everywhere to do this.” another country, [after the process consistent.” and you just can't, I of decolonisation] “Maybe I am felt really stupid leaving them, inhibited because [working in saying right, sort it is not politically Tanzania].” yourself out, now.” correct because it would be stupid to say people in Africa are all like monkeys, they do everything slower, but it is also culture.” Acknowledgement “ It is caused by Link between “It wasn’t me, I am “It wasn’t me.” “It wasn’t me and “ Who cares [about poverty of own colonial us.” past/present: GIO not even from a there must be a caused by us], kick them history colonial country.” threshold.” [people from the former (turn from British colonies] out of the to Australian Netherlands.” identity) Awareness of own “My privileges are “ Rich countries got “ Rich people “ People die every “ The GIO is good for us – privileges based on their rich by consuming studied hard and day in the UK as so, leave it like it is.” “I exploitation.” the Third World’s deserve their well, we are didn’t ask for what you call resources.” wealth.” mortal, get real.” privileges – why not enjoy them?”
Solvability of the Severe poverty Severe poverty Yes Maybe Maybe Yes problem could easily get could get eradicated eradicated if the if the political will political will existed.
existed.
Responsibility: Yes Yes Only African does the issue have governments are to be solved in responsible; strong general? thinking in national boundaries, all knowledge about the GIO becomes irrelevant
Responsibility on definitely restricted duty of assistance only if you harm only if you choose No an individual level directly, to feel responsible personally, intentionally
Reported emotions Moral outrage, Only one Sadness, pity ‘ makes them feel ‘ makes them feel Does not arouse any anger, personal interviewee reports “bad” but shocked “bad”; being emotions guilt, anger; in general: when confronted confronted with anger as an unuseful with severe poverty severe poverty emotion does not arouse emotions (does not even appear in their narrative if not asked explicitly
How do they deal Try to convince; “I don’t have to talk “ I would still talk to my with politically avoid people, all the time about friend even if she would disinterested cancel contact; what makes me work for an NGO and start to friends? strong inner tick.” – They just ride a bike.” conflicts talk about other subjects.
Do they blame their blame strongly no (blame as a very Yes (might use the No – but blame the No – but blame No fellows for their their fellows and unuseful emotion) same arguments to Pope Bill Gates inactivity? reflect the blame their fellows irrationality of this and also to defend act their own inactivity)
Personal History of Reported discrimination at an early age, which makes them feel ‘different’ from Discrimination as a teenager Discrimination other people: (“too rich”) Experience is transferred to political Experience is Interpretation stays setting transferred to on personal level broader setting with a humanitarian approach
Political awakening Reflected about Process of A rather Interested in issues, No No reasons for their politisation started humanitarian which are way of thinking, when they were approach to constructed as which they young adults as a ‘problems of the ‘humanitarian’ but consider as an ‘political world’. not ‘political’ones important issue for awakening’; they (“Why do people themselves; stress the deserve to live in conclusion: was importance of severe poverty?”) ‘breast-fed’ to ‘political role them through models’ like parents and their lecturers, friends parents’ history whom they consider (literally from the to be authorities; minute they were born)
Motivation for Attempt to make Change the world Fulfilment of Action ‘peace’ with the how oneself would Catholic world, hence: fight like to see it requirements for justice Developed a positivel marginality: feel different from a lot of their fellows/ deviant, odd, able to take the perspective of the ‘Other’ Non-White, non- Yes No (no non-White friends who were raised in non-European countries) European self- chosen friends
Action Become Give up to 20% of Go to protests, They donate Work as a Not concerned about professionals, their salary to sometimes buy money if they have professional in a political problems at all, do work unpaid in groups working on fair-trade products; a certain surplus poverty relief not do or have intentions of their profession; structural change; donate sometimes (e.g. are not saving organisation doing anything: it might speak out in any become a member for a world trip); (accidentally), happen by chance that they every-day-life of a party, organise they are willing to donate money buy clothes which are situation, try to public discussion; get persuaded by (interviewee produced under fair raise awareness go to protests friends to go to framed the act as conditions – but consider it wherever, protests; “adopt a to be an unimportant issue; whenever donkey”), got another interviewee works as reluctantly got a voluntary teacher in involved in southern Africa because of fundraising the ‘scenery’ (to gain activities for experiences none of his Tsunami victims friends have) but not because in East Asia of the ‘charity’ aspect because of social pressure from friends
Analytical level: No need for ethical Oneself as the Strong need for an Oneself as a good Oneself just does No need for ethical self in self self, although warrior for the good ethically person, in case of what others do; in this context; life as survival ethics of high immaculate self doubt: onself as case of doubt: of the fittest, ethics as an importance helpless and uninformed and obstacle on the way to “dumb” helpless success
Memo Claim to be not Claim to be not materialistic and it materialistic but seems to be live in the most coherent: work luxurious unpaid in district/student hall profession they are of the city; 2 out of trained in, not even 3 interviewees quit enough money for their favourite a flat by subject for another themselves/ couch one which might surfing at a family pay better (one quit members’ place anthropology for and consider law; antoher one themselves as maths for being privileged; economics)
Appendix II: Constructions of the ‘African Other’ One- They Afric Afri- Africans Africans Afr-icans Africa Afri Afri-cans Afri- Afri-cans Afri- Afri Differences Afri African self are ans as cans as as macho as super- as ns as cans as unedu- cans as primi- cans as cans as between ca lives as as like clever com- stitious, ignorant hap- as cated as tive, lazy, selfish/ hap-pier Europe and as a less the us Petent extremely or incom- py help back- dumb, slow greedy than Africa as diff valuable other religious petent peo- -less wards for Euro- being to big eren ple money peans to overcome t them wor ld Marc X X X X X Franc X X X Vero X X X X X Rach X X X X Felix X X X X X X X SA X X X Owen X Alan X JFK X X X Sara X X X Rob X X X X Tracy X X X X X Rosal X X X X Dutch X X X X X X X Dylan X X X X X Maria X X X X X X X X X Elias X X X Swiss X X X X X Will X X X X X X X X Laura X X X X X X X X 1 3 4 5 1 2 7 9 14 11 8 6 5 5 5 2
Cosmopolitans: Marc, Franc Political Activists: Veronica, Rachel, Felix, SA, Owen, Alan Religious Believers by self-definition: JFK, Sarah, Rob Believers in a Just World: Tracy, Rosalba, Dutch Classic Representatives of the Ordinary Middle Class: Dylan, Marian, Elias Neoliberal high aspirant achievers: Swiss, Will, Laura
Names written in bold: interviews conducted in Africa Sara and JFK: the only ones who have never been to the Minority World Felix: has been to the Minority World several times but stayed always exclusively in rich, white areas
Example quotes for codes to explain the Typology
1. Oneself as the other “Yeah, you feel like a baby, like a child, you can't really communicate anything sophisticated, you know, in your own country, you are pretty well read, but then you go to another country, and you just can't, I felt really stupid.”
In the description of how he felt living in a Tanzanian community as an English native speaker with only weak other language skills, this interviewee refers to children and babies to describe the extent of his feeling of helplessness. This implies the acknowledgement that in this community the dominant discourse is different from the one in which he feels competent: being the ‘deviant’, he constructs himself as the other.
2. They are like us “They are quite reserved the Massai like the British and they sort of reminded me of the Scottish, they wear sort of tartan and stuff, you learn they have fashion the same as we do, but it is different, like for example, they have lots of beans and jewellery, there are certain colours which are in fashion and certain ones aren’t, I was given the gift of a crucifix and all the students laughed at me because, what are you, my granddad, you look like our ancestors because that is so outdated, they have the same, they have similar values, money is still important to them, status is important, so there are certain unifying sort of attitudes they have just like the English.”
This quote shows that the interviewee constructs the African other as ‘distinct but not different: He acknowledges differences but constructs them as ‘like us’. It is remarkable that he feels reminded of the Scottish, taking into account that one half of his father’s family is from Scottland.
3. Africans as clever “I really get the feeling that there is a resistance that Africans have to do things the Western way, because they are not stupid, they are clever but they are resisting it, that is what I feel anyway.”
In this quote Africans are constructed as clever, which expresses respect and recognition for the other. The construction of others as equals affirms mutual respect, which presupposes that they are neither perceived as needy nor as weak (Sennett, 2003).
4. Africans as competent “I read that we would be, it was becoming a government funded school, so I wouldn’t be taking jobs from Tanzanians, it was run by an indigenous person which was, all those things were important for me.”
The constructions of Africans as possible competitors for the job as a teacher implies that this interviewee constructs them as competent and qualified as he constructs himself.
Africans as macho “Massai culture is really macho, … the men in Massai culture, they don’t do anything, it is the women they do all the work, they go to the fields, they lay the seeds, they harvest, they are carrying all the wood and everything, the guys just walk around with their sticks looking cool, they sit around a lot and the women do all the work, that pissed me off.”
Massai culture is described in a critical distancing way as being patriarchal.
4. Africans as superstitious “They have ways of looking at the world that existed before the Christians came there, that are often called animist, sort of views that seem more sort of super-natural forces in nature.”
Africans are described as holding a certain outlook onto the world which is more than 2000 years old – old-fashioned and outdated. The description of ‘super-natural forces in nature’ might be interpreted as a cautious accusation of others being superstitious and irrational, in opposition to a rational way of thinking which enables science and technological progess. This is ascribed in a non-differentiated way to ‘them’ as a group, who live on a continent bigger than Europe and also outweigh Europeans in numbers.
5. Africans as extremely religious “They are extremely religious, that is something which struck me as very very odd, o.k., I am from a big city and there are religious people in Germany as you know, but the number of people who invited me to church and then were completely flabbergasted when I said I don’t believe in God, it was incredible, they couldn’t believe it, they believe in Adam and Eve, they believe in a virgin Mary, they believe in God and the eternal kingdom and when I said, look, Mary couldn’t have been a virgin, that was really blasphemous for them.”
From a secularized non-Christian point of view, believing in the virgin birth comes close to being superstitious. This statement implies that being religious is considered to be a mystified and misguided way of thinking, which was supposedly overcome by Europeans already during the times of Enlightenment.
6. Africans as ignorant “There are differences in world views, European world views are very much influenced by enlightenment, by secularization, … I guess there is some sense in which Western type of natural science is sometimes viewed as coming from the West, and not endorsed as much as it is here, … it can be very dangerous if scientific knowledge is rejected, it seems plausible to me that it might be indicative of a world view that hasn’t been influenced by science as much as the one in Europe has been.”
The crucial point about this quote is the point that science is ‘not endorsed as much as it is here’: Whereas Europeans world view has been influenced by science and scientific progress, in Africa it is not even realised what greater good comes out of scientific progress, which is not critically referred to, which might indicate that it is implicitly constructed in a purely positive way.
7. Africans as incompetent “I couldn’t adjust here, that would really be impossible for me, …, I just want everything to work – how the hell do all these people cope? That is terrible, I couldn’t imagine to live in Mozambique, impossible, they didn't have electricity for three months, three months, I mean get it fixed, or they are building new roads next to a place where there is going to be built a new factory, so it is going to be, really heavy trucks driving down the road the first year that the road is there and it is only thin, so it won’t survive, but they are building it before the factory is finished, and they already did that ten years ago, the same thing, the same mistake, why, just don’t.”
Africans are openly constructed as incompetent: nothing works, people do not become active and repair things, they have no idea how to work properly and structure work processes, they do not learn out of former mistakes.
7. Africans as happy “I am not sure, if we, in the Western World, are happier at the end of the day than he is in his hut in the bush, I got the impression that people in in Europe are not always as happy as here, we in Europe, we worry more … here there is a totally different approach to life, a much more joyful one."
The ‘primitive African Other’ is constructed as still living in the uncivilised bush in literal contact with nature, who has no worries, is happier than the European.
Africans as helpless “But in those countries people have no defence at all to protect themselves against those kind of illegal transactions, deals. They need better institutions as we have in Western countries.”
People in Africa are constructed as helpless and subaltern without agency and control, incapable to build up what Europeans did.
8. uneducated “I don’t think I could have a Zulu girl-friend, I think things are too different to work comfortably, too different in terms of expectations, educational background, … partly it is because the locals there are not particularly highly educated, comparatively speaking, I think I am highly educated in comparison to them.”
Women in Africa are constructed as so different that a relationship cannot be considered: speaking little English and not having gone through a Western school system, they can be considered as uneducated from a hegemonic perspective.
9. Africans as backwards “ There is a lot of corruption in certain African countries and the political system, but so there was in the UK when it first, when it was becoming democratized in the 19th century, it took 200 years for things to become, you know, true democracy.”
If the political development of a society is viewed as natural progress, then Africans are indeed backwards in comparison to Europeans, because we already climbed further up the ladder.
9. Africans as greedy for money “Now I know that they want only one thing of you, money, they don’t want small talk or a nice conversation, they just want your money, so I don’t look at them anymore, I know that people are going to try and get my attention but I am better in ignoring them.”
People in Africa are not friendly but want to get in contact with her only for their personal advantage.
10. Africans as primitive “It is not really fair what I am going to say but they are just living really primitive lives, like you are doing your laundry in a pool next to the roads, a rain pool, I think the Netherlands is further because of that.”
Introducing the sentence with a kind of disclaimer, African lives are openly constructed as being primitive.
11. Africans as lazy “You mean a lot of people think people in Africa are all lazy, they dance all the time etc.?” [Do you think they are different?]7 “It is really easy to think so, I must honestly admit, when you see them, I do have a friend from Senegal, and he is, they have an attitude of, they crawl along, I can't imagine him sitting in an office, he wouldn’t work like a German in investment banking, I don't know, I don't think it is because of genes.”
Whereas Europeans are constructed as being capable and having certain characteristics like working in a disciplined and diligent way in banks, Africans are constructed as being lazy.
11. Africans as dumb “In Mozambique it is really striking that 75% of the people can't even read, so it sounds really un-nice what I am going to say but people there are really dumb.”
Africans are dumb. The word dumb has a certain connotation which implies that it is people’s own fault, in opposition to being caused by the circumstances. A construction which goes beyond the point that a lot of people did not get a school education.
11. Africans as slow In Europe people have more of a work appetite, efficient and in time, but it is considered as good to work and people want to work and they work and I think here in Africa, I see lots of people who are just hanging around in their jobs and doing everything slow, I couldn’t work here, it would really irritate the shit out of me if people work like that all the time, can you imagine something so annoying
11. Africans as selfish
7 The aim of the question regarding differences between Europeans and Africans was meant to provoke a reaction, in terms of rejection.
“I think they are probably more selfish, I heard this story of someone, a director of a school selling off the tiles of the roof or the covering of the school which has just been installed, exposing the school to the weather conditions and making it unusable basically, which I thought was just outrageous and obviously this sort of thing, it clearly doesn’t happen very often in Europe or we would know about it.” [Is it an African phenomenon?] “Well, yes.”
From the example of one person, who sold part of a building and without any reference to the circumstances or motivation, it is concluded that people in Africa are more selfish than people in Europe. Africans are constructed as selfish thieves, out for their personal advantages.
12. Differences as being too big “I think it is difficult, because the differences are too big sometimes, in terms of way of living, doing things, African countries, which are pretty similar in their way of working, can work together, European countries can work together because they are all very similar.”
The statement that ‘differences are too big’ does not exclude the idea that there might be similarities but that the differences between Africa and Europe are too big to overcome them.
13. Africa as a different world “I think it is not comparable, their life here is not comparable to the life in the Netherlands, I mean, they don’t even have roads there, so, yeah, you cannot compare the worlds, for me it is just really interesting to see that there is such a different world, but I don’t see it as a world that could become like Europe.”
In this construction Africa is in the most extreme form constructed as different: a different world; not comparable, without similarities but fundamentally different.
14. African lives as less valuable “I think one life here is not really as valuable as in the Netherlands.”
African lives are openly constructed as morally inferior.
Copyright Eri Park 2007
30