Question:

One of the first wisdoms of sociology is that everything is connected to everything else.  Anthropologists call this cultural integration. When doing a functional analysis the social scientist looks at the social phenomena in question and probes deeply into not only the obvious and manifest functions that are present -what the phenomena in question is intended to do and what impacts on the major institutions and groups of the society- but also and aggressively the many unintended (both positive and negative) latent consequences of this phenomena. On page 16 Dawes asks, “How do we weigh the unforeseen and often unforeseeable negative results of our humanitarian interventions?”  Does Dawes offer any answers to this important question?  What are your answers to this question?

Everything is connected to everything else. We as humans are mirrored neurons; a social species connected through each other and define each other. To put this simply: “I am because you are”, our actions simultaneously communicate with each other dictating the next course of action (SOC 376:2-18). This helps explain why in sociology most of what happens we are unaware of and we take our present actions and explain them in the future. All parts of society work together to complete a viable culture in something called functionalism. For this assignment, we were asked to read “That the World May Know” and complete one question in response to our learnings from the novel. Regarding this novel, the social phenomena in question would be the integration of stories and how they are interpreted. Below I attached a video to help describe a functional analysis to those who have not taken an Introduction to Sociology class prior to this course.

Through symbolic interactionism we know that meaning is created not inherent, meaning we cannot decide how one reacts to the stories we tell. This is particularly relevant in the section of the novel entitled “Genocide”, in which the Rwandan individuals interviewed claimed, “they were anxious about the kind of stories being told, about them being turned into stories” (Dawes, 27). In order to maintain their humanity, those affected by the Rwandan genocide did not want to become characters overshadowing the mass terror that they and their country experienced. We begin to question how meaning is created, but more importantly how it is sustained within people. Within symbolic interactionism we know that literature turns experiences into beautiful works of art, however, this may be misinterpreted as trying to uplift the reality of the situation. Sociologists must be careful to avoid the process of reification; turning an experience, such as the genocide, and condensing it into something tangible. This also applies to the use of language and its effect in symbolic interactionism. Within the novel language is the main topic describing that “from using language as a precise tool for the objective, agent-neutral measurement to using it as a form of emotional exhortation and moral coercion” (Dawes, 80).

Functionalism is the process of understanding the connection between all parts of society. This can be found within “That the World May Know” when Dawes describes in the “Integration” section that he “examine[s] how their different organizational goals shape their language practices and how these, in turn, either amplify or diminish their capacity for dealing with state-sponsored violence” (Dawes, 77). Under functionalism, we are able to explore the latent and manifest functions that help evaluate the social phenomena. The latent functions are those, in this circumstance, representing the unforeseeable effects. For example, a latent effect of writing about those affected by the Rwandan genocide; is the dehumanizing of that group of people.

Dawes asks the question “how do we weigh the unforeseen and often unforeseeable negative results of our humanitarian interventions?” (Dawes, 16). When participating in humanitarian aid one is unsure how their actions will affect a particular situation; going back to symbolic interactionism. With the possibility of negative effects, one begins to question why themselves or another would enter into this sector, “it is a question asked frequently of people involved in humanitarian work. It is a question they frequently ask themselves” (Dawes, 117). Perhaps Dawes is answering the larger question with a series of smaller, more personal questions. Through questioning the origin reasoning as to why one becomes a humanitarian, the possible negative results become blinded. Dawes offers another answer to the question when he states that “it may have been the consequence-blind feeling of purpose that comes from simply trying the faith we cling to because it is the basis of our will to act or the confidence that comes from immersion in an institutional culture that performs effectiveness in its very architect” (Dawes, 74).  After this quote, Dawes continues to explain how he was enlightened to the idea that perhaps the problem at hand is a lack in education in situations. In the “Storytelling” section it is exclaimed that people want to be genuine and tell the truth, however, I do not believe he offers one concrete answer to the social phenomena.

References

Davis, Daniel, director. Three Founding Sociological Theories. YouTube, YouTube, 31 May 2013, www.youtube.com/watch?v=paA61KfOcEc.

Dawes, James. That the World May Know. 2007.

SOC 376: “How to Become Global Citizens”

#1.) Review what Dawes says about General Dallaire in the chapter titled Genocide and how he describes Dallaire’s reaction both in the moment and now in the years afterward to the genocide and the part that he played.  What are your reactions in general and more specifically through the lens of the Dunant/Nightingale philosophical debate?

In this chapter titled, Genocide, Dawes delves into deeply personal stories and testimonies of the Rwandan genocide. The chapter covers the timeline of the Rwandan genocide and how Tutsi and the Hutu’s tribal rivalry resulted in the fasted and largest killing of the twentieth century. It follows several different accounts of this harrowing tragedy that barely made it to the surface of media during the killings. One of the unique things Dawes does in the chapter is uncovering how Westernized the reactions are after finding out about these accounts. He notes how one author wrote a love story between a Rwandan woman and French-Canadian man fall in love only to have her captured and raped during the period of the genocide and then eventually killed by her captives after being mutilated. The book was praised and the reactions to those who actually experienced and knew the atrocities that were committed during the genocide were not to be used to craft love stories. From the Dunant perspective on how to tell the story of such magnitude Dawes states, Rwanda, the Balkans, and elsewhere, have catalogued the many ways stories designed to shake us out of our self-absorption and apathy can fail” (Dawes pg. 10). There is a multitude of literature available on the genocide of Rwanda and along with this, media sources were relaying information to major news centers and governments. Despite efforts to voice the alarming amount of deaths and mutilations going on through ethnic cleanings, there were no actions taken by governments or NGO’s to assist the Rwandans in desperate need. However, on the other side of the argument if it weren’t for the attempts of those in Rwanda recording what they experienced and attempting to relay it to anyone who could make a change to their current situation. Even though the Hutu were attempting to silence the people in Rwanda through killing those involved in media and new outlets the stories that the survivors possess is unmistakably invaluable towards those affected and carrying out the story of what happened.

General Dallaire was stationed in Rwanda by the Canadian military to protect and report upon what was happening. His experiences during the time deployed under the United Nations as a peacekeeping force during January of 1994 still haunt him to this day. In an interview on his expierences, Dallaire states,” The impact of the trauma of Rwanda had physically affected my brain and had put me in a state where there was no capability left of any desire for life, any desire to even consider life. I was even debating whether I should exist as I held on my shoulders, and still today, the belief that as commander of the mission in Rwanda I had failed the Rwandans” (USHMM). General Dallaire in the midst of the over 800,000 killings committed by the Hutu’s in less than a year, his warnings and pleas for help were ignored by national governments across the globe. In his hearings with the ICTR to sentence the Hutu’s involved for war crimes and genocide, Lawyer Peter Erlinger attacks him in cross-examination simply trying to state that this was a war due to the Hutu and Tutsi’s involvement as political parties. However, the Hutu’s overthrew the government through warfare and installed themselves into power making them not an official political party with no division of votes or government for the Tutsi. However, despite Daillare’s and so many other survivors horrible experiences outlined in the chapter, Dallaire has committed himself to battle media oppression of this matter and serving as a voice to those in need and affected. Even though he still battles with the regrets of yesterday and fear of tomorrow, Daillare transformed into J.’s perspective through all 4 m’s. Upon his initial deployment from the UN, he is simply tasked with keeping communication lines open and help those in need not knowing of the dangers ahead and resembling the missionary phase. As soon as the killings begin and he is attempting to battle the Hutu’s he shifts into the mercenary phase followed by his initial departure and recovery from what he experienced shifting him into the misfit stage. For six or seven years he could not think about Rwanda and spent most of his time in therapy however through his books and interviews has transformed into a voice for Rwanda and the need there finally putting him into the mystic phase.

Works Cited:

“A Good Man in Hell: General Roméo Dallaire and the Rwanda Genocide.” United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 2002, www.ushmm.org/confront-genocide/speakers-and-events/all-speakers-and-events/a-good-man-in-hell-general-romeo-dallaire-and-the-rwanda-genocide.

Dawes, James. That the World May Know Bearing Witness to Atrocity. Harvard University Press, 2007.

Philg. “Florence Nightingale Opposed the Red Cross.” Philip Greenspun’s Weblog, 5 Nov. 2010, philip.greenspun.com/blog/2010/11/05/florence-nightingale-opposed-the-red-cross/.

“…it’s not about changing the world; it’s about changing the square meter you’re standing on.”  This quote is an incredibly powerful one who’s central theme has come across many times in this course. We often talk about the scale of aid that different organizations have and whether it is too much or too little. Another quote that seems to relate to this one, that the Center for Leadership really pushes, is that of “think globally, act locally.” This idea is that we can think of broad scale problems but at the end of the day it is most important to enact change in areas that fit in your scope; sometimes this means staying in our own backyards. When we try to act too large then we end up stretching ourselves too thin, thus causing burnout, or we end up doing more harm than good. And, there are cases where the best thing is to stop, reassess, and then go again. That is my sentiment on the video.

For background, the video is one that has stuck in my head since we first watched it (SOC 376: 2/2019). It shows a man trying to throw starfish back into the ocean as the tide is falling but in the process he ends up killing a lot of those starfish. Another man comes up and after the first man leaves the second tries to pick up where the other left off and ends up also killing the starfish prematurely. In this situation, with the quote in mind, this is one of those cases where changing the square meter that one stands on means not doing anything. The first man never took the time to really stop and process what he was doing and thus he kept doing the same thing over and over again which meant causing more harm. His sentiments and heart were in the right place but we saw throwing as the best solution when maybe walking to and from the ocean would have been the place. He was trying to change the square meter he was standing on but only went through one step. The quote can make it sound like we only have one shot to change the world we live in but humanity is amazing in that we do have chance after chance (maybe if we slow down global warming who knows I think we are running out of chances but I digress). The man in the video used one chance, and another, and another. But, he never stopped to look at his process to find another way. This is a big problem in the sector, I feel, is that there are groups that know what they are doing is not working but instead of thinking it is them causing the problem it is like they assume that the community is just not ready to receive help and that’s why their tactics aren’t working. Further, the problems facing aid workers today extends far past just natural disaster relief; we have wars, civil wars, genocides, political corruption, the list goes on. The aid sector was not designed for that and they are currently running themselves ragged trying to help everyone without the right tools (Gahrib, 2017). It is like they are constantly throwing starfish in the ocean but they aren’t looking back to see if the starfish made it because there are so many others that need help.

As for Dawes, I think his response would be rather similar to mine. This quote is one that he uses to explain how aid worker can stay sane in the sector. They see so much widespread hurt and pain, especially in war zones, that there has to be something for them to look at to feel as if they are still making a difference. The quote reminds aid workers that even if they are working in one small village in a region of wide spread war they are still making a difference. I like the example Dawes uses when comparing the work of the aid sector to that of politicians: you go in with all the optimism of the world and then once you’re in you realize you have to narrow your focus on smaller things (Dawes, 2007). Even with the smaller things in mind you are still making a difference. The atrocities that aid workers see are emotionally and psychologically damaged so as Dawes implies that quote could be the only thing to get them through. Dawes follows this throughout that chapter explaining the impact of in indirect ways. The aid workers have to see things in perspective to truly get through their times.

Arcaro , Tom. “Humanitarian Crises Around the World.” SOC371. SOC371, Elon, NC

Dawes, James. That the World May Know Bearing Witness to Atrocity. Harvard University Press, 2007.

Gharib, Malaka. “Humanitarian Aid Is ‘Broken,’ Says Former U.N. Official.” NPR, NPR, 22 June 2017, www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/06/22/533639073/what-s-wrong-with-humanitarian-aid.

To what extent does the idea of ‘bearing witness’ apply to aid workers (both international and national) in places like Sudan, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Yemen? To what extent should aid workers tell or not tell the stories those in the affected communities to their friends and family?  On Facebook or other social media?

The question of whether or not it is our duty to share stories of affected communities ties into the idea of the humanitarian imperative. Is it our responsibility to showcase others’ suffering and vulnerability? This question has many layers. If the suffering and struggles that people go through is not brought to light, how can make people aware and attempt to help them? But then there is a question of what is appropriate to share and what is not.

I found the section in That the World May Know about storytelling to be extremely interesting and eye-opening to help understand the depths of these questions. Dawes describes the perspective of writer and journalist David Rieff as he describes that aid workers tell stories for various types of reasons. Some tell stories to draw attention to a crisis they have encountered in order to get some sort of remedy. Some to denounce bad behavior and motivate intervention, either political or military. Lastly some tell stories to publicize their own organization’s work. The story is merely a vehicle for more publicity and continuing a specific type of work (165). This ties back to the idea of to the idea of Social Exchange Theory in that humans don’t typically give without expecting something in return, (SOC376: 2/13/19). Thus, while some aid workers may tell these stories in order to help the affected communities they have seen, there is some level of ulterior motivation which could be trying to paint themselves in a certain light or draw attention to their organization.

Aside from the motivations of the aid workers themselves comes the effects that these stories can have on the people they are about. As Dawes includes in this novel, “Who nominates you to publicize pain and suffering that you can walk away from?” (166). Dawes discusses another incident in which a photographer described not being able to photograph a situation in which Bihari prisoners were being tortured and killed. However, the other photographers he was with continued to do so and “enticed the killers.” (168). This story stuck out to me as it gives the torturers exactly what they wanted—attention. The same goes for mass shootings when the killer often times commits the crime in order to get their name out and be in the news. If aid workers tell stories like these about atrocities they have witnessed they are thus giving credit to the perpetrator rather than the victim. By writing about these faceless victims, the author thus condemns the entire group to one single body. (197). Another effect that these stories can have on the affected community is the sheer problem of having to relive those difficult times. By publicizing and telling these stories whether it be via social media or in a book, these people are forced to relive their pain again. It is crucial in this sense to take informed consent from the individual and avoid putting one’s own language and feelings into the story. These people also may be scared, ashamed, or worried about the consequences of sharing their stories so it is important to respect their freedom of silence, (Ghaoui 2016).

To not tell of the tragedies that occur in places other than our home is not a question. These stories must be brought to light in some way, shape, or form. Shedding light on injustices sparks reform and intervention and helps the affected people and communities. However, the way that these stories are told needs to be monitored. Aid workers may believe that it is their duty and responsibility to tell every detail of what they of they encounter. This goes along with the White-Savior industrial complex which we have discussed. Cole states that “those who are being helped ought to be consulted over matters that concern them” (Cole). Thus, the people who these stories are being told about should be informed of the possible outcomes and should be able to have a clear voice. Some believe that some stories may be too gruesome and violent to share with the public and often times situations are covered up. In the book that I read called Where Soldiers Fear to Tread a UN volunteer ends up killing a woman during a protest in Somalia. The situation was put to rest and not told out of fear that it would reflect poorly on the UN. This goes back to the question of whether or not all stories should be told and whether or not it is our duty to tell them knowing possible consequences.

This is a photo of a woman named Mary from South Sudan posing for a photo to raise awareness and funds for affected people in her community.

Cole, Teju. “The White-Savior Industrial Complex.” The Atlantic, 21   Mar. 2012.

Dawes, James. That the World May Know: Bearing Witness to Atrocity. Harvard University Press, 2007.

Ghaoui, L. (2016). “How to Tell Humanitarian Disaster Stories Responsibly.” The Guardian. Aug. 2016

SOC 376: “Being/Becoming a Global Citizen” (SOC 376: 2/13/19)

#15 In the Storytelling chapter Dawes talks about this effect as it relates to journalists (both photo and print), and details the 1971 executions in Dhaka. Based on what you have learned so far in this course, did Riboud do the right thing and for the right reason?  How can we use some of the insights in this chapter to more deeply understand the responsibilities (and rights??) of those tasked with telling stories about the various humanitarian crises we have studied? What are the issues a ‘comms officer’ must address as she/he communicates to the ‘outside world’ images and stories of the affected community?

Researchers and aid workers in a country of crisis immerse themselves in the culture of an area to collect qualitative data on the people.  However, the data that observers are collecting may not accurately represent the people, as the Hawthorne effect suggests that people generally alter their behavior when they are being observed.  This is important as Dawes brings to our attention that many humanitarian workers relay their experiences as an aid worker to outsiders, becoming storytellers (Dawes 164). Almost seamlessly, the illustration of their past experiences become a story from their point of view, which may not touch on important aspects of the event, or what actually occurred.  Journalists and photographers especially become subject to storytelling as their job is to be a direct observer of a context, and capture it for others viewing. Ultimately, the job of journalists and photographers in humanitarian crises presents an ethical dilemma.

In That the World May Know, photographer, Marc Riboud is a direct observer at the time of multiple executions at the Dhaka racetrack in Bangladesh.  Rather than photograph, Ribouds instinct was to find officers to stop the violence, which he did not succeed with. Did he make the right decision, to try to find help once the violence was already occurring? Riboud said “I couldn’t photograph such a scene behind the torturer, taking no risk” (Dawes 168).  Editor, Harold Evans believes that Riboud felt that photographing this moment was “enticing the soldiers”, in other words encouraging and rewarding the soldiers to continue the violence (Dawes 168). Riboud experienced the humanitarian imperative and took action, which I believe was the right decision. This is right, because other photographers were already photographing the moment, what does another picture do? Morally, Riboud’s decision to attempt saving the lives of endangered humans could have been more powerful and effective than photographing the executions.  Riboud could have potentially saved the lives of certain individuals, which should come first before spreading passive news of the violence.

Over the duration of this course we have discussed the humanitarian imperative, beginning with the example of passing by someone who has fallen and become visibly injured. As a class we decided that anyone of us to walk by would have the urge to ask them if they needed help, because it is a human instinct (SOC 376).  However, I have begun to expand my thought on this imperative to help others in need while reading about the two photographers who continued to stand on the racetrack capturing photos of the execution. The decision of the photographers shifts my belief that not everyone has the human instinct to help the endangered, in better words that not everyone feels the humanitarian imperative.  These individual photographers felt that it was more of their duty to record the event, than their duty to help the people before them. The humanitarian imperative is definitely a unique aspect that certain people hold.

Photographers and journalists are put in the position of telling a story, through images or words, which is difficult because they witness more than they can capture.  Their job itself is an ethical controversy. Without their work, the harsher realities would go unseen, and on the other hand with their work they may be wrongfully telling the events which occured.  Riboud made a remark that “we are all better off because of people willing to take pictures”, and another photographer said that “ to walk away with evidence is the least I can do”. Both of these views affirm the fact that without images or recollections of crises, solutions may never be made, or that solutions wouldn’t be found by the white saviors.  Maybe Riboud and other photographers feel the white savior complex, and that their purpose in assisting the endangered is to bring pictures back for the global north to evaluate. However, maybe if we didn’t have the access to pictures and stories from “temporary visitors” to the global south, then the problem would be for the people to solve themselves, and our limited influence would allow for the people in crisis to develop their future from their perspective.

Photographers and journalists are not actively helping on the ground, yet they pass along news for others to do something about it. Photojournalists have the power of a gatekeeper, but who gave them that? It’s just infused in their job, as they decide what is noteworthy to capture, which aspect appears to be the most important to show or to not show.  If their photographs are telling stories, then purposefully not taking a photo would be like not telling people a part of what is occuring, which may be just what’s missing. Photography is an skill and an art, so photographers do have the right to capture what they want, they are the ones witnessing it, and they can relay their own account of the situations. This just means that the images are in the perspective of the photographer.

Nothing is out of perspective, everything that we witness, hear, or talk about is in the perspective of somebody, either our own or someone else’s. The question was raised, “What are we obliged to reveal and what to veil?” (Dawes). I think of the reference to where journalist, Matthew’s, wrote about a Marine that was killed, and through that medium the family of the Marine learnt the details of his death.  The Marines has concealed the details of the death, something done often. Should the Marines have provided the full amount of information to the family? I think transparency is best, morally so people know what has occurred especially in the instance of a death, and also for the protection of photographers and journalists so that they do not become the scapegoats when the public is outraged from being uninformed.  In the event of a humanitarian crisis, communications officers have the job of relaying information to the “outside world”. Possible exploitation of the people is definitely an issue, but it’s also important to reach people to raise awareness of such an issue. If we think of this through the utilitarian approach, we can weigh the positives and negatives of the ethical controversy, and have the chance to “maximize the good for the greatest number of people” (Bersak).  Photos and stories may be gruesome, but it does capture the attention of people willing to fight for the human rights of others.

In this world with social media, news can spread rapidly and to a large audience. Given this, there is more false news, which infiltrates chaos and confusion in people who are distant from the issue.  It would be strategic for communications officers of relief organizations to create relationships with the outside world through speaking to them often and with only the truth, this way the false news does not belittle the truth sharer. Social media also presents the ability for people in need to reach out on a global scale to recieve help (Chernobrov).  This can be beneficial to hear from a direct channel of the people in the crisis, so that their needs can be assisted, yet it can also be detrimental if there is grey space between what they say versus the communications officers reports.  Overall, transparency should be a standard in the humanitarian aid sector, between aid workers and aid receivers, and from observers to outside worlders.

SOC 376: “Being/Becoming a Global Citizen”

DAWES, JAMES. That the World May Know: Bearing Witness to Atrocity. Harvard University Press, 2007. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt13x0m08.

Chernobrov, Dmitry. “Digital Volunteer Networks and Humanitarian Crisis Reporting”. May 2018. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21670811.2018.1462666

Bersak, Daniel. Ethics in Photojournalism: Past, Present, and Future. 2003 .http://web.mit.edu/drb/Public/Bersak_CMS_Thesis_FINAL.pdf

The book that I read for our class book reviews is Letters Left Unsent by J. It was fairly recently published in 2014 and is a shorter non-fiction book that looks into what it is truly like to be a humanitarian aid worker. In this novel, it contains many different published blog posts that are brought together from J.’s time as an aid worker. It is very interesting reading his stream of thoughts over the years, and to be able to read stories of what he has seen being an aid worker, but also his perspective on the sector in general, and its flaws and successes. He makes the reader question the humanitarian aid sector and really thinks about people’s motivations and the good vs the bad. As J. states in the beginning, it is not a happy book, but he has gotten confirmation from many other aid workers who agree with what he is writing, and have said it is what they are thinking as well. There are many important lessons about being in the aid sector throughout the book that are emphasized by his personal stories.

This book relates to a lot of what we have talked about in class, as his blog posts reflect heavily on how best to be an aid worker. He highlights the humanitarian imperative, which has been a topic of discussion for our class and states, “We must not just sit and watch while the problems of our fellow humans go unattended. There is something called the humanitarian imperative. When we witness that suffering, it is important that we do something and do it with confidence” (J. 4). Although it is important to get involved, as we have discussed in class, J. questions exactly how people should be involved (SOC: 376). He continues to mention that one should not “just do something” in order to feel good. J. reflects on when he first started as an aid worker, and the adrenaline rush that he got from it, and the reasons many people first join the sector. He makes an interesting point and says that if you don’t know what you are doing, they very best thing might just be to do nothing. J. “strips away the romance of the job, expositing it as just that: a job” (Carr).

“The disappointment and frustration at discovering the wide gulf between what we at first believe humanitarian aid is capable of and the reality of what it in fact delivers is indescribably deep” (J. 136). Towards the end of the book, the blog posts reflect on the wide gap between what humanitarian aid should do and what it is doing. I gained more insight into what is actually involved in the humanitarian aid sector, and many more points that I had not thought about prior to this class. Although it is frustrating to think about the many problems in this sector and how it seems nearly impossible to fix them all, J. does end the book on a positive note. He questions why he still is involved in humanitarian aid, answering that he still enjoys it and he still believes. According to him, humanitarian aid is not “irreparably broken” there are some successes as well as failures, but there is still a very long way to go in order to make it better (J 147).

Discussion Questions:

• What do you believe is our greatest problem with the humanitarian aid sector today?
• Do you think that the sector can be fixed?
• Do you think that there are more successes or failures with humanitarian aid, is it doing more harm or good?

This is a photo of aid efforts after the earthquake in Haiti, one place that J. went.

References:

SOC 376: “Being/Becoming a Global Citizen”

Letters Left Unsent. Evil Genius Publishing, 2014.

Carr, Edward. Open The Echo Chamber, 27 Nov. 2014.

Human was the first science fiction book written about humanitarian aid, which put an interesting twist on the typical books we have read in class about aid workers real life experiences.  From the knowledge I have gained on the aid sector I was able to understand the underlying story behind the futuristic terminology.  The twist was that the humanitarian response was called for on planet Earth, a planet exploding in chaos after a detonation ten years earlier, experiencing violence from a group trying to come to power, called the Rtulan.  

The Rtulan are a “large reptilian, vaguely hominoid species… impervious to the conventional weapons available to the Native Earth Humans…continued to steadily deplete earth of its basic substance and no one appeared to stop them” (J, pg 27).  In this scenario the Rtulan are similar to an extremist group which we have learned of rising to power while the state is in terror, and end up taking advantage of the inhabitants and resources given by aid organizations.

The Native Human Earth, Caine and Connor, have been trying to fight the Rtulan off, however with no success the System human’s from plant Xaxoni are introduced to provide aid to Native Earth Human.  By giving aid to those who are living in the midst of extreme situations, almost mirroring the distraught crises that we have discussed occurring in the global south, they are also breaking their neutrality since this builds up the army that Caine has been trying to grow.  This causes more of an eruption of violence from the Rtulan, as they now want to show their power to the System Humans as well as the Earth Humans.

From the beginning there is a sense of ethnocentrism coming from the System Humans, portraying Earth as a “desolate, dying, planet inhabited by uncivilized, warlike peoples…who were suspicious of anything or anyone that threatened to move them out of the previous millennium” (J, pg 24). Generally we have seen this ethnocentric view coming from the group with the upper hand, who is doing the delivery of aid. Additionally, the white savior complex has a large presence in the book, displayed from the System Humans. Some of Earth Humans have made remarks toward the aid workers saying;  “Your ways are not always ours..” Bo (J. pg 59), or “You’re not from here. How can you possibly know what we want?!” (J, Pg 34). Clearly, the earth humans are in need of help, and so are people in countries of crisis today, however it is important that groups going into assist have adequate knowledge on the culture of the country and background of the crisis, or inhabitants will be upset with the “invasion” of their land.

Nassandra the protagonist, a system human, experiences Earth differently than her co workers.  She begins to see that the line between System Human and and Native Earth Human is much thinner, that they are more alike than different.  Nassandra connects with the Native Earth Humans, which makes them feel more comfortable with her presence, by drawing attention to the number of fingers they both have, “five fingers”. 

In this book I also am able to see the harsh realities that do occur in times of crisis in which we have learned about.  For example, Caine’s last resort at fighting the Rtulan is by employing children to train them to be soldiers, which we would view as unethical.  The imagery of Connors son, Zeke, struggling to fire an M-94, and then being held at gunpoint by the Rtulan, and minute later finding his grandfather wounded, reinstates the fact that children are not equipped for a job involving such physical and emotional toll. 

We later learn that the System Human’s have an alternative motive in providing aid to the Earth Humans, to keep them alive, so they can find what gene they missed in the production of System Humans.  System Humans are soon to be extinct as they are missing a crucial component in their makeup, so they are trying to keep Earth Humans alive to find this.  Nassandra’s journey on earth has allowed her to realize that she is so similar to the Native Earth Humans, and enjoy being there despite the terror.  She finally realized that System Human’s have an interdependent relationship with Earth Human, and they are all crucial for their existence. 

SOC 376: “Being/Becoming a Global Citizen”

J. Human. 2016

The book that I chose to read for our class book review is Where Soldiers Fear to Tread by John Burnett. It was published back in June of 2005 by Bantam Dell Publishing. This book reminded me a lot of the accounts we read in Emergency Sex. In this narrative, we follow the moral career of the author, John Burnett, in his experience in Somalia. John initially joins the cause for the money not thinking about the potential dangers and horrors he would face while in the field. It is evident that coming into this position he doesn’t grasp the full extent of humanitarian aid. He states, “when we joined this relief mission, we were told it should be safe, that we would be among friendly people who welcomed our help,” (Burnett 2). Throughout the book, however, he experiences the realities of this line of work. Almost immediately after arriving in Kismayo, he is almost shot by a lone gunman. What phased John the most was when he offered a young boy a fig bar, not thinking of what could happen, and the boy was later attacked by fellow children and later died. John can’t help but think that this is his fault and his eyes become opened to the fact that his small act of kindness is easily overshadowed by the violence in this country. Aside from the atrocities he witnesses, throughout the book John starts to realize the dishonesty of the UN. He was told that he would be pulled out of the mission if violence came involved and also received false information by the WFP about he mission. He also realizes that much of what happens on the field is covered up, as a UN worker shot a woman in a riot and it was not publicized. Realizing the dishonesty he has experienced, he says “I am beginning to feel this is getting out of hand, that I am mere fodder, a pawn in some larger context with no game plan. Expendable.” (Burnett 2).

This book highlights many of the important topics we have discussed in this class by providing a first hand account of the humanitarian aid sector. The book discussed several times the real reasons that people get involved in this line of work. John states that it is unlikely that someone sitting at home on their couch would see an atrocity on TV and go out to save the world without expecting anything in return. This reminded me of the Social Exchange Theory in that humans don’t typically give without expecting something in return, (SOC376: 2/13/19). John himself even admits that money was a big factor in why he wanted to go to Somalia. In addition, John’s account sheds light on the bureaucratic biases of the UN. He states that he feels the UN doesn’t even know he is there and that he feels expendable. The United States Institute of Peace says that “Somalia has become a symbol for the unacceptable costs of humanitarian intervention.”

What I gained from reading this book is another account of the atrocities that relief workers experience on the field. It is one thing to read about the horrors that have occurred in Somalia but it’s another to actually read about them from someone who was there and can provide a detailed description of what he experienced. I think many aid workers go into a mission not grasping the full extent of what they’re getting themselves into and I think John was no different. In this case, I don’t think he was warned or prepared by the WFP before going into the field about what he would experience.

Questions for the class:

How can the UN and other relief organizations better prepare relief workers for going out into potential dangers in the field?

Who do you think the target audience was for this book and other accounts similar to this?

Do you think the UN has the obligation to disclose everything that happens in the field?

Works Cited:

Burnett, John. Where Soldiers Fear to Tread. Bantam Dell, 2005.

United States Institute of Peace. “Restoring Hope: The Real Lessons of Somalia for the Future of Intervention.” USIP, www.usip.org/sites/default/files/sr950000.pdf.

SOC 376: “Being/Becoming a Global Citizen” (SOC 376: 2/13/19)

In the fictional novel, Honor Among Thieves, it highlights several of the key topics learned throughout the course. The book follows the World Aid Corporation in Cambodia as they are recently given a very generous grant of five hundred thousand dollars. The terms to the grant were fairly open and allowed the main characters who were located in Cambodia to assess the issues around them and develop a plan of action. As the novel progresses it shows the structure and operations day-to-day of an NGO as Patty and Mary-Anne (aid workers in Cambodia) have to deal with outside factors such as their hard-headed boss Todd and CEO Julianna. The grant which the World Aid Corporation has received has a massive potential to make a real difference in Cambodia and assist those who are desperately in need. After surveying the local communities for those most in need both Patty and Mary-Anne decided upon Baray Santuck, a small farming community outside Phnom Phen stricken by poor rainy seasons and increasing debt, as their most viable location. The group decides that cash-transfers, health education, and food were the most effective way to solve the communities issues. However, Maxima Enterprises (the company providing the grant) had been behind closed doors attempting to expand into a local factory, which also produced clothing products called Naga Apparel, but in order to do so needed to have tangible evidence of benefitting Cambodia. Naga Apparel was a glorified sweatshop that had been caught years prior in human trafficking and was attempting to join forces with Maxima in order to gain a better brand image.

From this novel, it is very apparent how flawed the humanitarian aid sector truly is. The divide between organization and people on the ground integrates the humanitarian aid imperative as well as flag planting. There were countless NGO’s both large and small in Cambodia and all providing some sort of “difference” for their communities but how much really was it doing? One of the passages which highlighted the humanitarian imperative the most in the novel was, ” The problem is in the NGO world brand loyalty very quickly overshadows actual, like, performance in the real world” (J. 116-117). Rather than actually make a difference or cause change within the humanitarian aid sector, businesses corporations and people were to solely focused on personal gain and image. Another passage which also exemplified the issues within the aid sector that I felt J. crafted very well was, “The thing to understand,” Patty was speaking again, “and that I figured out far too late, is that for all of their originally laudable, altruistic intentions, NGOs become primarily about ensuring their own survival, pretty much within minutes of forming” (J. 116).

Discussion Questions:

How do you think the Aid Sector can solve the divide between corporate and boots on the ground?

Will the aid sector ever be a conglomerate of several different NGO’s merging to solve various issues in each country?

Works Cited:

J.. Honor Among Thieves (p. 120). Evil Genius Publishing, LLC. Kindle Edition.

https://www.phnompenhpost.com/fiction-novel-takes-cynical-look-cambodias-aid-industry