We All Have Something To Contribute To the World!

Total Pageviews

Friday, December 31, 2010

UNBRIDLED CONSUMERISM




Zombies, Malls, and the Consumerism Debate:
George Romero's Dawn of the Dead

Americana: The Journal of American Popular Culture (1900-present), Fall 2002, Volume 1, Issue 2
http://www.americanpopularculture.com/journal/articles/fall_2002/harper.htm
Stephen Harper
University of Glasgow

In George Romero's satirical film about consumerism, Dawn of the Dead (1978), an American shopping mall becomes the site of battles between the zombies who have overrun the country, four human "survivors" who exterminate the zombies and appropriate the mall for themselves, and a gang of marauding bikers which, in the movie's violent climax, seeks to take over the mall. These battles serve as a useful, if melodramatic metaphor for recent theoretical disputes over the nature and value of consumerism, disputes which remain of central importance among cultural critics of differing political persuasions. 1. At the risk of crudely dichotomizing, these critics have tended to affiliate with one of two camps with respect to what might be called the "consumerism debate."
On one side of this debate, a host of unrepentantly Marxian critics have described the baleful impact of capitalist production on those whom it exploits and the depoliticizing effects of commodity fetishism on consumers. On the other side, postmodern ethnographers and sociologists have argued that consumerism empowers capitalist subjects by granting them a limited, but politically important space in which to live out utopian fantasies of autonomy. The exchanges between these camps are as frequent as they are ill-tempered: just when the "issue" of consumerism seems to be dead and buried, it rises zombie-like from the critical grave. A recent irascible polemic is James Twitchell's denunciation of the "melancholy Marxist" view of consumerism, complete with some scandalous ad hominem attacks on academics working in cultural studies. Recently, Western arguments about consumerism have even moved outside the confines of academia and into the realm of popular culture — witness the recent sparring in the British press between Germaine Greer and Nigella Lawson (see Lawson). This paper offers some observations on what might be called the "consumerism debate" based on a consideration of radical anti-consumerist elements in Romero's film.
Before discussing this film, I would like to consider briefly one influential theoretical intervention in what I am calling the "consumerism debate." In Reading the Popular, John Fiske argues that while consumer "tactics" are never radical, they may be "liberating" to a certain extent. Moreover, he argues, following de Certeau and many others, that consumers should not be despised as the "cultural dupes" of capitalist producers; consumers are instead "secondary producers," finding value in their consumption and making use of capitalist products for their own ends. Fiske rightly reminds cultural critics that people should not be patronized as idiots who compliantly consume the images and products imposed on them by the dominant ideology; and he is surely correct that consumers may be temporarily empowered by the experience of shopping, a point well established by Angela McRobbie and others. But his well-practiced indignation about "cultural dupes" requires a caveat, for this injunction risks patronizing the "ordinary" people whose shopping habits Fiske aims to redeem. Few critics would dispute that an unacceptably dismissive view of consumers as "cultural dupes" has been presented (or at least implied) by radical critics from Adorno to Eagleton. It is important, however, to remember that many "ordinary" people actually sympathize with anti-consumerist views and feel empowered, rather than patronized, by their engagement with oppositional perspectives. Anti-consumerist —as well as consumerist — attitudes and activities can be a source of both pleasure and liberation.
As Raymond Williams famously observed, there is no such thing as "the masses," only ways of imagining people as masses. Of all of these ways, Romero's is surely among the most extraordinary. Zombies function in Dawn of the Dead as a lumpenproletariat of shifting significance, walking symbols of any oppressed social group. This function is derived in part from their origins in the literature and cinema of the twentieth century, in which zombies are synonymous with oppression and slavery. 2. Romero uses zombies because, as part of a maligned cinematic underclass, they suit his satirical purpose. Both Dawn of the Dead and its successor Day of the Dead (1985) present the human survivors of the zombie plague as literally and etymologically "living over" the zombies. In Romero's trilogy, Captain Rhodes — the sadistic army commander of Day of the Dead — expresses the strongest contempt for the undead, regarding them as a disposable and despicable underclass.
In Dawn of the Dead, the social abjection of the zombies is established in the film's remarkable second scene. Here, two of the film's central characters, Roger (Scott H. Reiniger) and Peter (Ken Foree), along with other members of a police SWAT team, storm a brownstone full of Puerto Ricans who have refused to exit their properties as ordered by the authorities. Despite the poverty of these people, one policeman bluntly adumbrates the film's theme of material insecurity and envy. "Shit man," he remarks as he impatiently waits to start shooting at their "nigger asses," "this is better than I got." However, any sympathy the audience may have for such reactionary sentiments is dispelled when the SWAT team enters the zombie-infested building

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

WHAT'S YOUR CONTRIBUTION?

"Ask not what your country can do for you
but what you can do for your country."
John F. Kennedy
Article by Helmut G. Flasch, CEO Flasch Business Expansion
This as you well know is a statement made by J.F.K. This attitude applies not only to the country but also to your family, your job or business, your customers, friends etc.

People choose professions, and make business decisions based on what the field will bring back in terms of money right away. Thus in the business world too many businessmen, doctors etc. are not doing what is good and helpful to their customers BUT WHAT IS GOOD FOR THEIR INCOME. That is of course understandable and I myself definitely do take into consideration of what I can expect back when making any business decision. But there is a fine line between only wanting to get before giving and between being totally willing and even a desire to give (or risk) before receiving.

It is quite magical how people who are willing to give first are doing well in making money.

And no, I am not talking in a religious sense here at all.

I am referring to people who are willing to invest in something that might involve risk. Since nothing in life actually is 100% sure and people who will never do anything without being 100% certain in a good return usually end up being in a bad shape.

There are an awful lots of things one can do as a businessperson to woo one's customer or one's prospective customer.

First one has to care about them and that is not just caring about them in the area of your service but caring about their lives as a whole.

It could mean to somehow participate in community activities. Activities that help children are extremely beneficial for our society and are also very appreciated by the parents in the community. And they are after all your customers and prospective customers. Helping the community for a doctor or businessperson might include making sure that when people are in your office, they are well supplied with good water and good air, and as well getting some advice on general topics to them even if completely unrelated to your field.

That sounds simple enough but is rarely done. Oh yes, you have bottled water available but how much more could you do?

What about making the best possible healthy water available to them?

Sure, the one time a year they come to you will not change their health because of the good water but maybe because you showed them that good water is available and how to get it and thus they might start using the same water at home for their family. It might even take some brochures next to the water so that they do get educated.

You ask, "What is my benefit for doing that? Why should I get involved in their private live style?" "I am not going to be intrusive to their life - no not me!!"

Well, that is the attitude, which John F. Kennedy wanted to reverse!!

What is it in for me? Nothing - except a whole family drinking better water and thus thinking of you more often and thus maybe coming back more often and or mentioning your name more often to their friends.

So you see, nothing in for you at first in terms of monetary results but probably something in the end. And what if the end in terms of monetary results never comes? What about it? So you helped someone to be healthier -- if you are a doctor then that even happens to be your sworn-in duty!! So you spend a few hundred bucks or even a few thousands to achieve that. This is what we are talking about when saying "don't ask what you can do for me but what can I do for you." People who do that -- people who live by that type of principals -- are usually very much happier people and yes, usually also quite rich!

Water was one example, air is another, and enlightening people about other dietary supplements and basic exercises are yet other examples.

Also don't forget about doing things that help parents to keep children away from drugs - it would be making a difference in the community. Wouldn't it?

The above examples are by no means the only examples of the principles of doing something first before receiving or even without thinking that you might receive anything.

I bet you can come up with thousands of variations if you put your mind to it.

The state of the health in the U.S. population has never been worse due to fast food, water being substituted by soft drinks which are literally killing people, and air being bad despite the possibility of having great air at least in one's home.

Looking the other side and not caring because it is not in your line of business and because of being worried what other people might think if you do those things are an admission of not caring for the fellow man.

After all we can only have as good as a life as the neighbors, friends, and families have a good life.

I cannot tell you how many people (complete strangers in the beginning) whom I gave an unsolicited speech about nutrition, had then told me that their child's skin rash disappeared or that their knee pain went almost totally away, or that they hardly have any headaches any more, or that their children are now studying better etc. The list is long indeed. You might have been one of them who got my rather "enforced advice" but tried it anyhow and maybe got results.

Does the advice you give people work for everyone? It would be nice, but it will not happen, what counts is that you exclude no one from the valuable information on whatever subject you have information on.

The truth is that nobody really can help anyone. But one can show people the road and some will walk it others will not. Keep showing people the road, even to the ones who did not walk it after you have shown it once or twice - keep showing it. The ones who eventually will go on that road will reward you with more personal fulfillment than you can imagine.

And you know what? They will also make you rich.

People know they have to pay for things and they do not mind paying and seeing someone make money with a product or service, which gives them something in return.

Thus you should also make available some of those items to them. Only telling people what is wrong helps nobody - nobody - unless it also comes with an insistence in performing the steps necessary to remedy the situation.

Insisting that someone does what he should do, to get help (in whatever area that it might be) is what is called caring. Let's say you do some events with children about no drugs, no smoking, not so much sugar, or on how to study better, you must also bring a certain tenacity to those meetings and insist in the following of your advice.

Thus the term 'hard sell' only applies to people railroading others into services they don't need with heavy duress.

'Care Selling' on the other hand is exactly what it says, - care enough like you would when repeatedly talking to your mother for hours and days and weeks, and even years to act on a certain thing you knew will help her!!!

The moral of this issue? Care a bit more, care in areas which you are not necessarily designated by your profession. Care about areas of people's life no matter what those areas might
be and no matter when financial rewards may be realized.

Helmut G. Flasch
CEO Flasch Business Expansion

Monday, December 27, 2010

OUR HERITAGE

I was recently privileged to to be hosted at dinner by good family friends where one of the topics discussed that evening centered on the imminent demise of our African cultural heritage as we know it and hear from our older members of our communities. The discussion became even more interesting when we broached it to the possibility of changing our present education system of education from using English as medium of instruction to vernacular languages but with the option of giving learners an opportunity to pick second and even third languages at secondary school or university level. A young and intelligent member at our dinner table and who recently completed her university studies chipped in by saying that, whereas, it's possible to develop a new curriculum of education where we could use mother tongues as choice language of instruction, it would however, find resistance by many because of our present state of inferiority complex and perhaps, in her words, it would take much more time than it took the West to colonize us, for us to reverse the clock and fully accept our current predicament. As a gesture of goodwill to the lady of the house who had made us dinner, we left the topic by resigning to fate, hopping for the possibility of getting a benevolent political leader and thinker in the future who would be bold enough and have the gravitas to challenge the status quo. But with the current crop of political leaders preoccupied with corruption and illegal drug trade, it's likely that we gonna wait for a long time before such a redeemer is born. However, we shall remain forever challenged by such countries as Israel, Pakistan, Iceland, Malaysia, etc that have successfully used their vernacular languages in their education system and development of science and technology to the highest levels.
Closely related to the above, we are all aware of our present proclivity and even obsession to give our babies "designer" Hollywood and Western names at birth whether we are practicing Christians or not without due regard to the origin of such names, provided they are chic and current. Whereas, we were made to understand earlier on that the Christian names were associated with saints, it's now evidently clear that even the church man has fallen prey to this Western fad! What happened to the traditional African naming ceremonies that were associated with merrymaking and joy to welcome the new bundle and name in the family? I guess even in Western and Eastern cultures, names are important for continuity of lineage and heritage of families but the modern African seems to be disoriented and confused!
Before discovery that hemophilia is  a hereditary disease which invariably affects males having been passed by females, the royal families in Europe were devastated because of losing male inheritors to the disease. Eventually, laws were passed that prohibited the marriage of close blood relations that could result in inbreeding and may be hemophilia. Here in Africa, and in the Meru tribe in particular,  sex and marriage between close blood relatives and in some cases between members of far flung clans is regarded as a taboo. For instance, in Tiania, the Akiuna clan may not intermarry with Amatu and Mburi Ntune. The Antuanthanju clan may not intermarry with Irotia. All the Akithi clans may not intermarry with Ruiga of Imenti and also Mwimbi.The Athwana clan may not not intermarry with the Igoki of Imenti. The Tharaka may not intermarry with the Muthambi, etc. This in the Meru tradition is regarded as taboo ("ICIARO") and it was believed that in case anybody went against it, calamity ("MWIRO") would befall the offending families.  In a related case, there were some families that were regarded as "hot" ("NGIRANI") where suitors were required to undergo special cleansing ceremonies before taking such brides so as to get rid  of the "hot" MWIRO. In cases of rape ( "KWENJA MBENJA"), the married woman was supposed to undergo a prolonged cleansing ceremony, possibly, to prevent the spread of venereal diseases and may be to avoid birth of an "unwanted" baby. The above, may seem frivolous to the modern Christian Meru but I think it would be wise to pause and ponder the implications and consequences, if any, before dismissing those who have trepidations to such taboos!
Finally, in the Western and Eastern cultures where writing and keeping of records has been established for a long time, recording of family trees for social and medical purposes is now well espoused. On the other hand, the Merus entrusted this knowledge of family records to the "KIAMA/NJURI NCHEKE", who meticulously passed this information orally from generation to generation. However, we all know that the true Njuri Ncheke was undermined by the colonialist because of their role in the Mau Mau and it only exists in the periphery, save for the present limelight hogging "Njuri Ncheke" that is unlikely to shed much light into the Meru traditions because of lack of knowledge and vested interests. Just like the Chinese have researched and recorded  3 million members of Confucius Family, making it the largest in the world, the modern  educated African has the tools to help record his family tree before all the octogenarians in his family fall off the radar. So, get cracking and download free software from http://www.myheritage.com. Thank you.

Sunday, December 26, 2010

A LITTLE RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY

Henry Porter
Sunday May 2 2010
The Observer


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/02/muslim-veil-religion


The first thing you want to ask about Gary McFarlane [http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/apr/29/court-dismisses-christian-employment-appeal" title="], the man who lost his case against unfair dismissal from Relate because he refused to counsel gay couples, is whether a fundamentalist Christian heterosexual with strongly held views about homosexuality was necessarily the best person to give advice on gay sex. The second is why it didn't occur to McFarlane before he signed up with Relate, which advertises courses on counselling gays, lesbians and bisexuals, that his religious beliefs might prove an obstacle.

These questions drifted through my mind as I listened to the judgment on the BBC's midnight news. Greece was going down, the Gulf of Mexico is polluted for an eternity and the election rages but here were the courts engaged on an issue that seemed heroically beside the point. The BBC reporter mentioned that Lord Justice Laws, the judge in the McFarlane case, assessed religious conviction as no higher than "opinion", but before I'd had time to compute that another item came along: the Belgian parliament [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/9054508" title="] had voted to ban Muslim women from wearing the veil.

Both stories may give hope to many that at least some things are going right. Homophobia is being ruled out of order; Muslim women in Belgium ? and probably soon in France too ? will no longer wear the signs of their oppression. We can cheer two more victories in the campaign to secularise everything in Europe except its temples and churches, which are, in any case, either neglected or swamped by tourists blind to their mysteries.

Yet these two stories left me feeling oddly uncomfortable. In the McFarlane case, I regret that a man lost his right not simply to express but also to live by his religious conscience, however loopy and offensive the majority believes it to be. Lord Justice Laws's judgment said: "In a free constitution such as ours, there is an important distinction to be drawn between the law's protection of the right to hold and express a belief and the law's protection of the belief's substance." Well, yes, of course there's a difference between allowing someone to believe something and believing it to be a fact yourself, but that doesn't prove his point that religious beliefs are simply another "subjective opinion".

Even an atheist like me understands that religious conviction is as vitally important to some people as sexual orientation is to most of us. McFarlane simply has no choice in the matter: the meteor showers of reason and disdain from Hitchens, Dawkins and others will have no impact on his beliefs any more than it will change the colour of his skin.

Is this really such a terrible thing, given that he would almost certainly be lousy at advising gay couples? Of course, if he was to go around whipping up hatred against gays, that would be different, but he simply said he would prefer not to do something and I cannot see that he is causing any harm by quietly making that choice. We should allow for these prejudices if they don't affect the lives of others for the good reason that court cases and the sort of legislation against speech crimes proposed by the last government will not make them go away. I wonder why Relate didn't work round his views but perhaps a rather prim correctness suggested that he was not the person to be doing counselling of any kind, which is why his case ended up with the activist judge.

For Christians who feel persecuted by the enforcement of secular values, this case was important but when the former archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/29/religion-gay-rights" title="], wrote a letter supporting McFarlane and suggesting the appointment of a special tribunal of judges sensitive to issues of religious rights he was going too far. Such a court would establish the same exceptionalism that sharia argues for, which is completely against the traditions of English law, as well as being against the interests of a cohesive society in which everyone is treated the same in the eyes of the law.

What I am arguing for are attitudes that allow for more negotiation and that accept that religious conviction should not be treated as simply opinion or the inconvenient relic of a superstitious age. We abhor homophobia and any kind of discrimination and deplore the veil and all that it signifies, but a law that fines or imprisons a person for the outward manifestation of their religious convictions seems as wrong as any blasphemy ruling. A belly laugh rose when I read this sentence in the New York Times about the Belgian decision: "Belgium's French-speaking liberals, who proposed the veil law, argued that an inability to identify people who have hidden their faces presents a security risk and that the veil was a 'walking prison' for women."

They may be Belgian, they may be French-speaking, but they are no more liberal than Monsieur Jacques Straw. The ingenious idea of banning the veil on the grounds that it addresses both equality and security is a sly hypocrisy, for the truth is that the instinct to legislate in this area and to police Christians' objections to homosexuals belong on the same spectrum of intolerance as the one that authorises the stoning of women for adultery and the execution of gay men.

Voltaire would have grimly noted the irony that people who imagine themselves to be his liberal and tolerant heirs have become the opposite because of their enforcement of, you guessed it, the very ideas of toleration and liberal secularity that he stood for.

These issues would not be so fraught if we understood that it is to be expected that two rights occasionally clash and that our job is to make sure that neither one wins completely. The rights of gay people to receive counselling and to be treated equally under the law are now thankfully assured, but they should not always trump the rights of Christians to decline and demur because of their beliefs.

The Europe-wide tendency to enforce secularism is not only misguided but also impractical and, when it comes to Muslims, inflammatory. We dislike the veil for what it does to women, as well as the direct challenge to liberal society that it consciously presents, but a general ban cannot work, because it will achieve nothing but resentment. It is wrong that nurse Shirley Chaplin and the BA worker Nadia Eweida lost their jobs because they refused to stop wearing crucifixes. The veil and the crucifix are matters of people's personal choice and we have to live with that, just as we have to tolerate Gary McFarlane acting on his religious convictions ? his right to resist the new secular orthodoxy.


If you have any questions about this email, please contact the guardian.co.uk user help desk: userhelp@guardian.co.uk.q

Friday, December 24, 2010

COLONIZATION AND CHRISTIANITY

Colonization and Christianity in Zimbabwe

Maureen Grundy, Class of 2000, English 119, Brown University, 1999


Part 2 of "Religion and the Legacy of Colonialism in Contemporary Zimbabwe"

Colonization of a land, of a people, brings with it many losses that are difficult, perhaps impossible, to rediscover when the nation finds freedom again. The colonization of certain countries, particularly African countries, has proved to be a disruption of traditional culture and an imposition of Western beliefs and values on longstanding indigenous customs and rituals. When cultures are disrupted, altered, and redefined, people lose a sense of the way life used to be. The longer an oppressive force succeeds at dislocating traditional culture from the people, the further away people feel from their history and ancestry. As more and more generations are taught the new ways brought by the colonizers rather than their traditional roots, they fail to question their education and beliefs. Western ways which become so effectively integrated into indigenous cultures eventually become social and cultural norms, surviving the freedom struggle and persevering even after the colonizing forces have left.
Colonization leaves many cultural legacies, changes in the indigenous lifestyle that perpetuate after a nation's liberation. In post-colonial Africa, the greatest, most overt legacy left by white settlers is religion. While Christian missionaries have been traveling and preaching their faith throughout the millennium, the upsurge of colonialism throughout Africa during the nineteenth century expanded Christian missionary work across the continent. With white domination of the African continent, the Christian faith took hold as the governing and superior theology. While countries have gained freedom from their oppressors, Christianity often remains as a central principle of African faith with any traditional spirituality existing peripherally.
Based on Zimbabwean literature and art, as well as on my own personal experience living in the country, I will argue that the incorporation of Christian missionary work into colonization and the widespread success of converting African people to Christianity has significant, long-term implications for post-colonial countries. The shift from traditional religion to Western religions is a way in which the colonial mentality perpetuates despite the nation's independence. The survival of Christianity in post-colonial countries signifies a loss of tradition and culture and a recognition and acceptance by native people of the superiority of Western faith. Here, I will explore the way in which religion and spirituality are depicted in post-colonial art and literature. I will assess the similarities and differences between missionary work and colonization. Lastly, I will evaluate contemporary theories on the role of Christianity in post-colonial Africa and its future function in African culture.
One of the important roles of post-colonial literature is to depict such legacies and to evaluate its essential function in post-colonial culture. In contemporary Zimbabwean literature, two novels stand out in their commentaries about the influences of Western religions on African spirituality, culture, and tradition. Yvonne Vera's Nehanda and TsiTsi Dangarembga's Nervous Conditions exemplify the way in which missionary work and Western religion factor into colonization as an integral part of establishing superiority over another people. Vera's novel, set during the first Chimurenga war in the late nineteenth century, recreates the story of Nehanda, a warrior woman whose strong connection to the ancestral spirits helps her to lead her village people in a revolt against the oppressive colonial forces. These attempts for revolution, fail, however, as the white strangers ultimately suppress the native people and capture Nehanda and Kaguvi, their links to the spiritual world. While the novel does not explicitly portray the indigenous people's adoption of Christianity, it does allude to several important consequences of missionary work and colonization.
Before, however, one can assess these consequences, it is necessary to notice the way in which Vera depicts traditional religion and spirituality in Zimbabwe. Throughout this book, the ancestral spirits and the spirit mediums possess very real and significant influence over the people. The entire novel is characterized by Nehanda's messages from the spirits, rituals performed to appease the spirits, and the power the spirits hold in the life of the individual and the village.
"The dead are not dead. They are always around us, protecting us. There is no living person who is stronger than the departed. When the whole village prays together, they pray to the ancestral mudzimu of their clan. When we pray to mhondoro for rain, we are praying to the guardian that unites the whole clan. This is one of the strongest spirits of the land" (Vera, Nehanda, p.27).
As illustrated by this passage, Vera emphasizes the strength that traditional religion once held over the Zimbabwean people. Faith, here, implies a belief that the ancestors control fate and that praying to the ancestral spirits represents a way to look for guidance, knowledge, and the answers to life's questions.
As the story unfolds, Vera depicts the struggle of the people and the spirits against a more powerful colonial force. The struggle for freedom from these strangers is not only illustrated by the scenes of war and destruction, but also by the invasion of Christian missionary work into traditional African life. In one of the final scenes of the novel, a missionary priest approaches Kaguvi with a bible and the word of a Christian God. Throughout their exchange, Kaguvi grows increasingly confused by the strange God of whom the priest speaks and the eternal word of the bible. The priest attempts to assert his superiority and convince Kaguvi of a Christian God by claiming,
"Your god is an evil godÉI am here to save you from the eternal flames."
The arrogance of the priest is shocking. He has painted some pictures of suffering and of hell, but to Kaguvi it all sounds unconvincing. The priest does not bear the aspect of a man who would lie. For Kaguvi, the evidence of a man's worth is also in his face. A man can lie with words, but his body will betray him. It is hard for him to believe that the priest is entirely foolish. There is certainly a tenderness in his smile, and real concern in his voice.
"I know that there is life after deathÉBut that life is as a spirit, to help protect those who are living." But the priest insists on an afterlife in which men will rise from their graves in their former bodies." (Vera, Nehanda , p. 106)
This passage is extremely telling of missionary work and its interaction with native Zimbabwean people. Foremost, through this exchange, Vera illustrates the incompatibility of traditional religion and the new Christian religion. An inherent difference between the two faiths lies in their beliefs about the afterlife, the role of the deceased spirit, the existence of heaven, and how many gods exist. One sees here that the two approaches to spirituality are fundamentally different. Hence this exchange becomes symbolic of the struggle between the two in Zimbabwe.
Furthermore, the exchange between Kaguvi and the priest represents very early successes in converting indigenous people to Christianity. While, on one hand, Vera points out Kaguvi's confusion of this new religion, as well as the incompatibility of both belief systems, she also illustrates the loss of traditional faith Kaguvi suffers in his dialogue with the priest. The strong conviction and concern of the priest appeals to Kaguvi and in this time of desperation, when the villages have been burned and their attempt to fight off the colonists has failed, he finds his faith shifting away from his traditional system.
The prophetic cloud in the sky has burst for Kaguvi, and there is nothing strong enough left to shelter his dreams. His ancient spirit, which he now sees as something separate from himself, weighs sorrowfully on him. It is as though they bow live in separate ages of time, himself in the present, his spirit descending further into the past. They move, in both directions of time, and they will not find each other. Before today, Kaguvi has ridden of the back of the spirit. Now, he can only see short distances to his right and to his left, backwards and forwards. (Vera, Nehanda, p.107)
In this scene, Vera very vividly portrays Kaguvi's separation from his "ancient spirit" and, while not directly asserting any sort of religious conversion of Kaguvi's part, she implies a gradual disassociation from the traditional spirituality. The fact that this separation directly follows the priest's attempts to convince Kaguvi of a Western God, as well as the various indications of Kaguvi's willingness to believe the priest, implies that the subsequent disconnection from the ancestral spirit is very interconnected with the missionary work.
What could Vera be trying to say through these passages? For a story which is so centered on ancestral spirits and traditional religion to end by depicting a widening gap between the person and the spirit insinuates that Vera is trying to make a statement about the shift from indigenous religion to a foreign, Western religion. Vera could be making two points. One possibility is that through her story, she is demonstrating the combined role that colonization and missionary work play. Although missionaries are often depicted in literature as having more concern than the colonizers for the indigenous people, their role during the colonial era nonetheless encompassed the control of a people, their education, and their ability to resist political and cultural domination.
Vera may also be alluding here to the future of traditional religion in Zimbabwe. With Kaguvi's separation from his spirit as he moves into the future and the spirit's descent further into the past, Vera foreshadows an eventual departure of the ancestral spirits from contemporary Zimbabwean religion. The fact that this book, written more than a decade after the nation's independence, comments so strongly on both traditional and Western religion implies that the book also has contemporary significance. The story of Nehanda seems to mark the beginning of a religious transition in Zimbabwe.

References

Bourdillon, M.F.C. Where Are the Ancestors? Changing Culture in Zimbabwe . (Harare: University of Zimbabwe Publications) 1993.
Dangarembga, TsiTsi. Nervous Conditions (Seattle: Seal Press) 1988.
Vera, Yvonne. Nehanda (Toronto: TSAR Publications) 1994.

Thursday, December 23, 2010

A SIMPLE SOLDIER

A SIMPLE SOLDIER


He was getting old and paunchy And his hair was falling fast, And he sat around the Legion, Telling stories of the past.
Of a war that he once fought in And the deeds that he had done, In his exploits with his buddies; They were heroes, every one.
And 'tho sometimes to his neighbors His tales became a joke, All his buddies listened quietly For they knew where of he spoke.
But we'll hear his tales no longer, For ol' Bob has passed away, And the world's a little poorer For a Soldier died today.
He won't be mourned by many, Just his children and his wife. For he lived an ordinary, Very quiet sort of life.
He held a job and raised a family, Going quietly on his way; And the world won't note his passing, 'Tho a Soldier died today.
When politicians leave this earth, Their bodies lie in state, While thousands note their passing, And proclaim that they were great.
Papers tell of their life stories From the time that they were young But the passing of a Soldier Goes unnoticed, and unsung.
Is the greatest contribution To the welfare of our land, Some jerk who breaks his promise And cons his fellow man?
Or the ordinary fellow Who in times of war and strife, Goes off to serve his country And offers up his life?
The politician's stipend And the style in which he lives, Are often disproportionate, To the service that he gives.
While the ordinary Soldier, Who offered up his all, Is paid off with a medal And perhaps a pension, small.
It's so easy to forget them, For it is so many times That our Bobs and Jims and Johnnys, Went to battle, but we know,
It is not the politicians With their compromise and ploys, Who won for us the freedom That our country now enjoys.
Should you find yourself in danger, With your enemies at hand, Would you really want some cop-out, With his ever waffling stand?
Or would you want a Soldier-- His home, his country, his kin, Just a common Soldier, Who would fight until the end.
He was just a common Soldier, And his ranks are growing thin, But his presence should remind us We may need his like again.
For when countries are in conflict, We find the Soldier's part Is to clean up all the troubles That the politicians start.
If we cannot do him honor While he's here to hear the praise, Then at least let's give him homage At the ending of his days.
Perhaps just a simply headline In the paper that might say: "OUR COUNTRY IS IN MOURNING, A SOLDIER DIED TODAY."

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

CHE'S FAREWELL LETTER TO FIDEL CASTRO

Ernesto Che Guevara

Farewell letter from Che to Fidel Castro


« Year of Agriculture »
Havana, April 1, 1965.
Fidel:
At this moment I remember many things: when I met you in Maria Antonia's house, when you proposed I come along, all the tensions involved in the preparations. One day they came by and asked who should be notified in case of death, and the real possibility of it struck us all. Later we knew it was true, that in a revolution one wins or dies (if it is a real one). Many comrades fell along the way to victory.
Today everything has a less dramatic tone, because we are more mature, but the event repeats itself. I feel that I have fulfilled the part of my duty that tied me to the Cuban revolution in its territory, and I say farewell to you, to the comrades, to your people, who now are mine.
I formally resign my positions in the leadership of the party, my post as minister, my rank of commander, and my Cuban citizenship. Nothing legal binds me to Cuba. The only ties are of another nature — those that cannot be broken as can appointments to posts.
Reviewing my past life, I believe I have worked with sufficient integrity and dedication to consolidate the revolutionary triumph. My only serious failing was not having had more confidence in you from the first moments in the Sierra Maestra, and not having understood quickly enough your qualities as a leader and a revolutionary.
I have lived magnificent days, and at your side I felt the pride of belonging to our people in the brilliant yet sad days of the Caribbean [Missile] crisis. Seldom has a statesman been more brilliant as you were in those days. I am also proud of having followed you without hesitation, of having identified with your way of thinking and of seeing and appraising dangers and principles.
Other nations of the world summon my modest efforts of assistance. I can do that which is denied you due to your responsibility as the head of Cuba, and the time has come for us to part.
You should know that I do so with a mixture of joy and sorrow. I leave here the purest of my hopes as a builder and the dearest of those I hold dear. And I leave a people who received me as a son. That wounds a part of my spirit. I carry to new battlefronts the faith that you taught me, the revolutionary spirit of my people, the feeling of fulfilling the most sacred of duties: to fight against imperialism wherever it may be. This is a source of strength, and more than heals the deepest of wounds.
I state once more that I free Cuba from all responsibility, except that which stems from its example. If my final hour finds me under other skies, my last thought will be of this people and especially of you. I am grateful for your teaching and your example, to which I shall try to be faithful up to the final consequences of my acts.
I have always been identified with the foreign policy of our revolution, and I continue to be. Wherever I am, I will feel the responsibility of being a Cuban revolutionary, and I shall behave as such. I am not sorry that I leave nothing material to my wife and children; I am happy it is that way. I ask nothing for them, as the state will provide them with enough to live on and receive an education.
I would have many things to say to you and to our people, but I feel they are unnecessary. Words cannot express what I would like them to, and there is no point in scribbling pages.

Written: April 1, 1965
Transcription/Markup: Brian Baggins
Online Version: Ernesto Che Guevara Internet Archive (marxists.org) 2002

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

CHRISTMAS TOKENISM

Once again, this is the time of the year when parties and celebrations are held across the globe by both Christians and non-Christians alike as people compete to gorge themselves in food, drinks and whatever else in frenzied orgies in the name of celebrating the Christmas season. You could, however, ask whether there is anything in the matter, particularly, when people have planned well and saved their hard earned cash so that they can enjoy themselves in this holiday season. My only beef with this, is only in instances where some corporations and individuals use the opportunity to drag poor souls into their orgies, in form of giving out trifles and crumbs for the sake of cheap publicity in the name of Christmas period. I find this tokenism of giving out, particularly, a rich meal on  a single day, say to a children's home or poor community, callous and insensitive, because you provoke their taste buds knowing very well that you will not be available to satisfy their hunger pangs 24 hours thereafter.
Let's for instance,  look at corporations presently running media appeals requesting for donations from the public so that they can support some worthy causes, such as the homeless Kenyans living in those squalid camps erected after the post election violence. Seriously speaking, some of these corporations make billions of money in profits extracted from the poorest of Kenyans living in the remotest of villages and if they were magnanimous enough, they can afford to dine and wine all the Kenyans in any chosen camp throughout the year without substantially hurting their bottom line. Likewise, smaller organizations and wealthy individual Kenyans who seem, to develop a soft spot for giving to the needy only in this festive season, could pick out one of the children's homes to cloth and feed throughout the year, without as much as thinking of how to cook their books, so as to cheat the KRA. This week, we expect company executives and other wealthy people to take flights to South Africa, Mauritius or wherever, where they will end up spending millions of shillings, which if they so wished, could be saved by cutting down on their days away or rich meals and donate that to the needy which could stretch for many days in form of meals. But selling this to greedy and egocentric individuals is a tall order.
Some while ago, on these pages, I cautioned that due to the La Nina effect as predicted by the Met department and other experts, Tiania was likely to experience erratic rainfall with the possibility of famine in the subsequent months. The rains have failed in Rwanda area and people are facing imminent famine unless help is mobilized, possibly, even during this festive season some could starve to death. It would be very insensitive and insincere for our leaders and able individuals from Tiania to engage in the revelry of the season without thinking about the suffering families in Rwanda area. However, as is the practice in this very unequal society of ours, where the poor are left at the mercy of the gods, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that some of the leaders from Tiania will be at the forefront writing out cheques, ostensibly, to help out in legal fees for some of the people in the Ocampo six, who have no need for such help at all. Talk of draining more water into the Indian Ocean to help it not to dry - as we say in my language!
Anyway, why in Gods name,  should we so deliriously and absentmindedly spend so much, that has taken us so long to save, in such a short period of time in the name of Christmas revelry? Aren't we becoming slaves of the the capitalist juggernaut machine that has been designed to drain the very last drop from our systems today such that we line up the following day for transfusion in order to continue with the ritual of serving the master? Interestingly, the capitalist system is designed in such a manner that you become mean and vain so that you don't spread goodwill to the needy masses. This way, you selfishly accumulate as much as possible by draining the masses which you pass to the grandmaster for safe keeping. We may think that we are smart through our tidy accumulations here and there but the recent world financial crisis should be enough wake up call that somebody else higher in the food chain controls our wallets and keeps the key to our till. In that case, wouldn't be better to share a little more than mere trifles with the needy instead of leaving it all in the banks or in form of securities? I think that if Christmas has any bit of spiritualism other than symbolism, it would be more blessed to give to those in real need at this time of the year other than passing it all to those who already have amassed a lot in form of hotels and the like. Happy Christmas!

Sunday, December 19, 2010

THERE IS ENOUGH LAND FOR ALL KENYANS

Mahatma Gandhi famously said, "there is sufficiency in the world for man's need but not for man's greed". This is the reason why I aver that this country has enough land for all of us if only the corrupt and greedy few among us can be stopped by way of law and compelled to surrender what is considered as excessive back to the state so that it can be redistributed to the needy. The current state where individuals and corporations have title deeds for thousands of acres, when at the same time we have large numbers of squatters at the Coast and lots of displaced victims of political and ethnic animosities without any land to till, if only to grow food is ridiculous and untenable. Although there has been so much corruption and greed in the public sector particularly in land acquisition and appropriation, it's however, gratifying to note that there have been a few exceptions to the rule. A friend of mine once told me of a former Permanent Secretary, who against conventional wisdom turned down offers to be allocated public land by both Kenyatta and Moi governments and he continued with his clean slate of life not succumbing to bribery even when he became a head of a government corporation thereafter. Similarly, I have been told reliably that Francis Muthaura, the head of of public service has refused to bow to bribery in his long career as a public servant. Now that he is in the Ocampo list of six, it's up to Kenyans to view him differently or otherwise.
Anyway, we all know that land is a national and natural resource that when employed together with other factors of production like labor and capital could be used to make a nation wealthy, and in our case, develop from a needy third world backwater country to a status where we can comfortably feed ourselves without the need of walking the world with a begging bowl in hand. Unfortunately, our land laws in the last 47 years of independence have been at variance with this line of thinking and land has been used corruptly and greedily by the political elite and public servants to enrich themselves without so much caring for the needs of the nation. This has resulted in millions of people living as squatters particularly at the Coast Province and others who have been displaced through political unrest in several parts of the country who have been denied land for growing food crops. Unlike the few elite who use land for speculative purposes at the expense of the majority and national good, many people in this country who live in the rural areas view land as basic resource from where they can get food for their families. It's important therefore that the laws are streamlined in accordance with the new constitution so as to take care of this majority. We have expansive and largely uninhabited large swathes of land in this country that can be prepared to resettle the landless for productive utilization. It therefore beats logic why we still have squatters at the coast and the many landless families living in squalor in makeshift camps.
In the past few years, the government has been accused of buying land at exorbitant prices in Molo, Nyeri, Laikipia and Nakuru from powerful and politically connected individuals to resettle the displaced people without so much caring about their need for amenities such as water, electricity, roads, schools, etc. The purchase of the drier part of Solio Ranch is a case in point here. One wonders why the government can't borrow a leaf from the Israelis and establish settlement areas akin of the Kibbutz where a medley of people from different ethnic backgrounds can be provided with facilities to make a livelihood and produce extra for the rest of the country? I think this could be a great opportunity for integrating communities through creation of such "little Kenyas" in those expansive ranches and national parks.
It was recently reported in the press of a horrible killing of Moses Ole Mpoe at Njoro by people suspected to angered by his opposition to resettlement of post election violence victims (PEV), who are mainly Kikuyu, at Muthera Farm in Mau Narok near Tipis Center, a land that the Masai consider as originally theirs. Muthera farm belongs to the Mbiyu Koinange family but it had been recently invaded by Masai squatters who claim ownership. Why should the government insist on settling the PEV on this land which is at the dispute between the Masai and Kikuyu communities? Why not settle the PEV elsewhere to avoid stoking up fires of ethnic animosity? The government is expected to be an arbiter and not a provocative force against communities!
Whereas we have looked at land here as mainly a resource for food production, I think the government has the onerous duty of ensuring that the current land laws are streamlined, so that land is made easily available for housing, so that housing development companies and municipalities have the incentive to develop dwelling units to accommodate the poorest of the citizens who live in squalid conditions in the ubiquitous slums that dot our  urban centers. There are also those enterprising Kenyans who may wish to set up industries and factories in both the rural and urban centers but over the years, it's as if the government only caters for the politically well connected as exemplified by all those who have set up Export Processing Zone facilities. Enterprise has never been and will never be the preserve of only those with good political connections or deep pockets and therefore there is need for the government to accommodate all entrepreneurs by offering land as an incentive for enterprise and wealth creation.

Friday, December 17, 2010

WE REFUSE COLLECTIVE AMNESIA!

When President Kenyatta took the reins of power in 1963 from the colonial government, he uttered the famous words, "lets forgive but not forget the past", which however, have haunted this country for the last 47 years because of our failure to address the underlying psychological distress suffered by the large number of Kenyans during the Mau Mau war of  liberation under the hands of the British colonial officers and the African loyalists (Home guards) who worked under them. During the British colonial rule and particularly during the Mau Mau war of liberation in the 1950s, Kenyans were brutalized and savagely tortured to death in the presence of many witnesses who had the misfortune of living with those gory memories without anybody offering any assistance even in the form of counseling. People were uprooted from their homes, property and land was confiscated, women were raped, men were tortured, children were left to fend for themselves or die of hunger as families were put in enclosures akin of the concentration camps of the Nazi Germany. The British colonial officers recruited African loyalists whom they used to do the dirty ground work of hunting down the Mau Mau  and their sympathizers (Home guards) from the villages for delivery to the torture chambers, if lucky to be alive. The departing British handed over the former Home guards to the Kenyatta regime as the new administrators in the independent government.
The departing British settlers were compensated for their farmland that was bought by the government for settlement of the Mau Mau freedom fighters and those who had earlier lost land through displacement. However, a proportionately large portion of this land found its way in the hands of the former home guards who were now politicians and senior civil servants instead of those who were needy. The Mau Mau families and those of their sympathizers were denied the only resource not only to get food but also to educate their children and this led to further disillusionment and destitution. The least the independent government could have done to these families was, to resettle them on the newly bought land and through affirmative action to avail education and employment to their children, if only to assuage them and help heal the gory memories of the atrocities that they had suffered under the hands of the sadistic British officers and the savage home guards. The Kenyatta regime erred here and the problem was inherited by the subsequent governments of Moi and Kibaki and this is perhaps the genesis of the post election violence (PEV) that visited the country in 2007/8. Now, we can't continue to bury our heads in the sand like the proverbial ostrich forever and we need to fully confront the problem and address it for the sake of our country and future generations.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) by taking up our case and the recent naming of the six key suspects for the PEV by the Chief Prosecutor , Luis Moreno-Ocampo, in my opinion, is the perfect catharsis that our country has been waiting for and it's now high time we took cue by revamping our judicial process so as to nab all the other villains and punish them accordingly so as to give justice to the victims. The revelation of the Ocampo six and possible prosecution was like opening up the Pandora's box for us so as to confront our dark past of corruption, injustice, bribery, skulduggery, innuendo, nepotism, violence, etc. which we ignored with the hope that it will just go away. What we have done for the last 47 years in this country was like covering a cancerous wound with gauze and skin grafts and hoping that it will heal without killing the underlying cancerous cells. This has to stop and now that the ICC has taken the lead, we should reciprocate by revitalizing our judicial process so as to accord the low and the mighty justice in equal measure.
The Justice Waki Commission report and that of the Kenya  National Human Rights Commission was the basis of the ICC investigation and Justice Philip Waki will go down in the annals of history of this country as one resolute and courageous person who against all odds authored the secrete envelope that has the name of the ten most culpable suspects who need further investigation to determine their role.  Those like the National Christian Council of Churches (NCCK) who are calling for the public release of the Waki secrete envelope are not sincere at all because that in itself will not end impunity. What they should do so as not to distract Kenyans from the quest for justice that they have waited for in the last 47 years is to help us press for a renewed judicial system that will ensure even the high and the mighty don't obstruct the process of justice like hitherto so as to put a stop to impunity. The ICC has for now vindicated itself by the actions it has taken so far and to ask for more without any corresponding action on our part is like looking the gift horse in the mouth, as it were. Let's reciprocate by revitalising our judicial process so that justice is delivered promptly and efficiently to all regardless of their station in life.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Che Guevara Quotes

Live your life not celebrating victories, but overcoming defeats.
Che Guevara   

posted: u235
   saved: 
59 
The revolution lives on not in words to live for it, but in one's heart to die for it.
Che Guevara   

posted: u235
   saved: 
40 
Words that do not match deeds are unimportant.
Che Guevara   

posted: u235
   saved: 
33 
At the risk of seeming ridiculous, let me say that the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love. It is impossible to think of a genuine revolutionary lacking this quality... We must strive every day so that this love of living humanity will be transformed into actual deeds, into acts that serve as examples, as a moving force.
Che Guevara   

posted: u235
   saved: 
33 
Knowledge makes us accountable.
Che Guevara   

posted: u235
   saved: 
27 
The revolution is not an apple that falls when it is ripe. You have to make it fall.
Che Guevara   

posted: u235
   saved: 
25 

The laws of capitalism, blind and invisible to the majority, act upon the individual without his thinking about it. He sees only the vastness of a seemingly infinite horizon before him. That is how it is painted by capitalist propagandists, who purport to draw a lesson from the example of Rockefeller — whether or not it is true — about the possibilities of success. The amount of poverty and suffering required for the emergence of a Rockefeller, and the amount of depravity that the accumulation of a fortune of such magnitude entails, are left out of the picture, and it is not always possible to make the people in general see this.
 Che Guevara   

posted: u235
   saved: 
21 
In the field of ideas not involving productive activities it is easier to distinguish the division between material and spiritual necessity. For a long time man has been trying to free himself from alienation through culture and art. While he dies every day during the eight or more hours that he sells his labour, he comes to life afterwards in his spiritual activities. But this remedy bears the germs of the same sickness; it is as a solitary individual that he seeks communion with his environment.
 Che Guevara   

posted: u235
   saved: 
19 
Capitalism uses force but it also educates the people to its system. Direct propaganda is carried out by those entrusted with explaining the inevitability of class society, either through some theory of divine origin or through a mechanical theory of natural selection. This lulls the masses since they see themselves as being oppressed by an evil against which it is impossible to struggle. Immediately following comes the hope of improvement — and in this, capitalism differed from the preceding caste systems, which offered no possibilities for advancement.
Che Guevara   

posted: u235
   saved: 
18 
The road is long and full of difficulties. At times we wander from the path and must turn back; at other times we go too fast and separate ourselves from the masses; on occasions we go too slow and feel the hot breath of those treading on our heels. In our zeal as revolutionists we try to move ahead as fast as possible, clearing the way, but knowing we must draw our sustenance from the mass and that it can advance more rapidly only if we inspire it by our example.
Che Guevara   

posted: u235

15 
The state sometimes makes mistakes. When one of these mistakes occurs, a decline in collective enthusiasm is reflected by a resulting quantitative decrease of the contribution of each individual, each of the elements forming the whole of the masses. Work is so paralysed that insignificant quantities are produced. It is time to make a correction
Che Guevara   

posted: u2
 
10 

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

CHE GUEVARA - AS A REVOLUTIONARY AND DOCTOR

Ernesto Che Guevara

On Revolutionary Medicine


Spoken: August 19, 1960 to the Cuban Militia
Source: Obra Revolucionaria, Ano 1960, No. 24 (Official English translation)
Translated: Beth Kurti
Online Version: Che Guevara Internet Archive (marxists.org), 1999
Transcription/Markup: Brian Baggins

This simple celebration, another among the hundreds of public functions with which the Cuban people daily celebrate their liberty, the progress of all their revolutionary laws, and their advances along the road to complete independence, is of special interest to me.
Almost everyone knows that years ago I began my career as a doctor. And when I began as a doctor, when I began to study medicine, the majority of the concepts I have today, as a revolutionary, were absent from my store of ideals.
Like everyone, I wanted to succeed. I dreamed of becoming a famous medical research scientist; I dreamed of working indefatigably to discover something which would be used to help humanity, but which signified a personal triumph for me. I was, as we all are, a child of my environment.
After graduation, due to special circumstances and perhaps also to my character, I began to travel throughout America, and I became acquainted with all of it. Except for Haiti and Santo Domingo, I have visited, to some extent, all the other Latin American countries. Because of the circumstances in which I traveled, first as a student and later as a doctor, I came into close contact with poverty, hunger and disease; with the inability to treat a child because of lack of money; with the stupefaction provoked by the continual hunger and punishment, to the point that a father can accept the loss of a son as an unimportant accident, as occurs often in the downtrodden classes of our American homeland. And I began to realize at that time that there were things that were almost as important to me as becoming a famous or making a significant contribution to medical science: I wanted to help those people.
But I continued to be, as we all continue to be always, a child of my environment, and I wanted to help those people with my own personal efforts. I had already traveled a great deal - I was in Guatemala at the time, the Guatemala of Arbenz- and I had begun to make some notes to guide the conduct of the revolutionary doctor. I began to investigate what was needed to be a revolutionary doctor.
However, aggression broke out, the aggression unleaded by the United Fruit Company, the Department of State, Foster Dulles- in reality the same thing- and their puppet, called Castillo Armas. The aggression was successful, since the people had not achieved the level of maturity of the other Cuban people of today. One fine day, a day like any other, I took the road of exile, or at least, I took the road of flight from Guatemala, since that was not my country.
Then I realized a fundamental thing: For one to be a revolutionary doctor or to be a revolutionary at all, there must first be a revolution. Isolated individual endeavour, for all its purity of ideals, is of no use, and the desire to sacrifice an entire lifetime to the noblest of ideals serves no purpose if one works alone, solitarily, in some corner of America, fighting against adverse governments and social conditions which prevent progress. To create a revolution, one must have what there is in Cuba - the mobilization of a whole people, who learn by the use of arms and the exercise of militant unity to understand the value of arms and the value of unity.
And now we have come to the nucleus of the problem we have before us at this time. Today one finally has the right and even the duty to be, above all things, a revolutionary doctor, that is to say a man who utilizes the technical knowledge of his profession in the service of the revolution and the people. But now old questions reappear: How does one actually carry out a work of social welfare? How does one unite individual endeavour with the needs of society?
We must review again each of our lives, what we did and thought as doctors, or in any function of public health before the revolution. We must do this with profound critical zeal and arrive finally at the conclusion that almost everything we thought and felt in that past period ought to be deposited in an archive, and a new type of human being created. If each one of us expends his maximum effort towards the perfection of that new human type, it will be much easier for the people to create him and let him be the example of the new Cuba.
It is good that I emphasize for you, the inhabitants of Havana who are present here, this idea; in Cuba a new type of man is being created, whom we cannot fully appreciate here in the capital, but who is found in every corner of the country. Those of you who went to the Sierra Maestra on the twenty-sixth of July must have seen two completely unknown things. First, an army with hoes and pickaxes, an army whose greatest pride is to parade in the patriotic festivals of Oreinte with hoes and axes raised, while their military comrades march with rifles. But you must have seen something even more important. You must have seen children whose physical constitutions appeared to be those of eight or nine-year-olds, yet almost all of whom are thirteen or fourteen. They are the most authentic children of the Sierra Maestra, the most authentic offspring of hunger and misery. They are the creatures of malnutrition.
In this tiny Cuba, with its four or five television channels and hundred of radio stations, with all the advances of modern science, when those children arrived at school for the first time at night and saw the electric light bulbs, they exclaimed that the stars were very low that night. And those children, some of whom you must have seen, are learning in collective schools skills ranging from reading to trades, and even the very difficult science of becoming revolutionaries.
Those are the new humans being born in Cuba. They are being born in isolated areas, in different parts of the Sierra Maestra, and also in the cooperatives and work centres. All this has a lot to do with the theme of our talk today, the integration of the physician or any other medical worker, into the revolutionary movement. The task of educating and feeding youngsters, the task of educating the army, the task of distributing the lands of the former absentee landlords to those who laboured every day upon that same land without receiving its benefits, are accomplishments of social medicine which have been performed in Cuba.
The principle upon which the fight against disease should be based is the creation of a robust body; but not the creation of a robust body by the artistic work of a doctor upon a weak organism; rather, the creation of a robust body with the work of the whole collectivity, upon the entire social collectivity.
Some day, therefore, medicine will have to convert itself into a science that serves to prevent disease and orients the public toward carrying out its medical duties. Medicine should only intervene in cases of extreme urgency, to perform surgery or something else which lies outside the skills of the people of the new society we are creating.
The work that today is entrusted to the Ministry of Health and similar organizations is to provide public health services for the greatest possible number of persons, institute a program of preventive medicine, and orient the public to the performance of hygienic practices.
But for this task of organization, as for all the revolutionary tasks, fundamentally it is the individual who is needed. The revolution does not, as some claim, standardize the collective will and the collective initiative. On the contrary, it liberates man's individual talent. What the revolution does is orient that talent. And our task now is to orient the creative abilities of all medical professionals toward the tasks of social medicine.
We are at the end of an era, and not only here in Cuba. No matter what is hoped or said to the contrary, the form of capitalism we have known, in which we were raised, and under which we have suffered, is being defeated all over the world. The monopolies are being overthrown; collective science is coring new and important triumphs daily. In the Americas we have had the proud and devoted duty to be the vanguard of a movement of liberation which began a long time ago on the other subjugated continents, Africa and Asia. Such a profound social change demands equally profound changes in the mental structure of the people.
Individualism, in the form of the individual action of a person alone in a social milieu, must disappear in Cuba. In the future individualism ought to be the efficient utilization of the whole individual for the absolute benefit of a collectivity. It is not enough that this idea is understood today, that you all comprehend the things I am saying and are ready to think a little about the present and the past and what the future ought to be. In order to change a way of thinking, it is necessary to undergo profound internal changes and to witness profound external changes, especially in the performance of our duties and obligations to society.
Those external changes are happening in Cuba every day. One way of getting to know the Revolution and becoming aware of the energies held in reserve, so long asleep within the people, is to visit all Cuba and see the cooperatives and the work centres which are now being created. And one way of getting to the heart of the medical question is not only to visit and become acquainted with the people who make up these cooperatives and work centres, but to find out what diseases they have, what their sufferings are, what have been their chronic miseries for years, and what has been the inheritance of centuries of repression and total submission. The doctor, the medical worker, must go to the core of his new work, which is the man within the mass, the man within the collectivity.
Always, no matter what happens in the world, the doctor is extremely close to his patient and knows the innermost depths of his psyche. Because he is the one who attacks pain and mitigates it, he performs and invaluable labour of much responsibility in society.
A few months ago, here in Havana, it happened that a group of newly graduated doctors did not want to go into the country's rural areas, and demanded remuneration before they would agree to go. From the point of view of the past it is the most logical thing in the world for this to occur; at least, so it seems to me, for I can understand it perfectly. The situation brings back to me the memory of what I was and what I thought a few years ago. [My case is the] story all over again of the gladiator who rebels, the solitary fighter who wants to assure a better future, better conditions, and to make valid the need people have of him.
But what would have happened if instead of these boys, whose families generally were able to pay for their years of study, others of less fortunate means had just finished their schooling and were beginning the exercise of their profession? What would have occurred if two or three hundred peasants had emerged, let us say by magic, from the university halls?
What would have happened, simply, is that the peasants would have run, immediately and with unreserved enthusiasm, to help their brothers. They would have requested the most difficult and responsible jobs in order to demonstrate that the years of study they had received had not been given in vain. What would have happened is what will happen in six or seven years, when the new students, children of workers and peasants, receive professional degrees of all kinds.
But we must not view the future with fatalism and separate all men into either children of the working and peasant classes or counter-revolutionaries, because it is simplistic, because it is not true, and because there is nothing which educates an honorable man more than living in a revolution. None of us, none of the first group which arrived in the Granma, who settled in the Sierra Maestra, and learned to respect the peasant and the worker living with him, had a peasant or working-class background. Naturally, there were those who had had to work, who had known certain privations in childhood; but hunger, what is called real hunger, was something none of us had experienced. But we began to know it in the two long years in the Sierra Maestra. And then many things became very clear.
We, who at first punished severely anyone who touched the property of even a rich peasant or a landowner, brought ten thousand head of cattle to the Sierra one day and said to the peasants, simply, 'Eat'. And the peasants, for the first time in years and years, some for the first time in their lives, ate beef.
The respect which we had had for the sacrosanct property right to those ten thousand head of cattle was lost in the course of armed battle, and we understood perfectly that the life of a single human being is worth a million time more than all the property of the richest man on earth. And we learned it; we, who were not of the working class nor of the peasant class. And are we going to tell the four winds, we who were the privileged ones, that the rest of the people in Cuba cannot learn it also? Yes, they can learn it, and besides, the Revolution today demands that they learn it, demands that it be well understood that far more important than a good remuneration is the pride of serving one's neighbor; that much more definitive and much more lasting than all the gold that one can accumulate is the gratitude of a people. And each doctor, within the circle of his activities, can and must accumulate that valuable treasure, the gratitude of his people.
We must, then, begin to erase our old concepts and begin to draw closer and closer to the people and to be increasingly aware. We must approach them not as before. You are all going to say, 'No. I like the people. I love talking to workers and peasants, and I go here or there on Sundays to see such and such.' Everybody has done it. But we have done it practising charity, and what we have to practice today is solidarity. We should not go to the people and say, 'Here we are. We come to give you the charity of our presence, to teach you our science, to show you your errors, your lack of culture, your ignorance of elementary things.' We should go instead with an inquiring mind and a humble spirit to learn at that great source of wisdom that is the people.
Later we will realize many times how mistaken we were in concepts that were so familiar they became part of us and were an automatic part of our thinking. Often we need to change our concepts, not only the general concepts, the social or philosophical ones, but also sometimes, our medical concepts.
We shall see that diseases need not always be treated as they are in big-city hospitals. We shall see that the doctor has to be a farmer also and plant new foods and sow, by example, the desire to consume new foods, to diversify the Cuban nutritional structure, which is so limited, so poor, in one of the richest countries in the world, agriculturally and potentially. We shall see, then, how we shall have to be, in these circumstances, a bit pedagogical- at times very pedagogical. It will be necessary to be politicians, too, and the first thing we will have to do is not to go to the people to offer them our wisdom. We must go, rather, to demonstrate that we are going to learn with the people, that together we are going to carry out that great and beautiful common experiment: the construction of a new Cuba.
Many steps have already been taken. There is a distance that cannot be measured by conventional means between that first day of January in 1959 and today. The majority of the people understood a long time ago that not only a dictator had fallen here, but also a system. Now comes the part the people must learn, that upon the ruins of a decayed system we must build the new system which will bring about the absolute happiness of the people.
I remember that some time in the early months of last year comrade Guillên arrived from Argentina. He was the same great poet he is today, although perhaps his books had been translated into a language or two less, for he is gaining new readers every day in all languages of the world. But he was the same man he is today. However, it was difficult for Guillên to read his poems here, which were popular poetry, poetry of the people, because that was during the first epoch, the epoch of prejudices. And nobody ever stopped to think that for years and years, with unswerving dedication, the poet Guillên had placed all his extraordinary poetic gift at the service of the people and at the service of the cause in which he believed. People saw him, not as the glory of Cuba, but as the representative of a political party which was taboo.
Now all that has been forgotten. We have learned that there can be no divisions due to the different points of view of certain internal structures of our country if we have a common enemy and a common goal. What we have to agree upon is whether or not we have a common enemy and whether or not we are attempting to reach a common goal.
By now we have become convinced that there definitely is a common enemy. No one looks over his shoulder to see if there is anyone who might overhear- perhaps some agent from the embassy who would transmit the information- before giving an opinion against monopolies, before saying clearly, 'Our enemy, and the enemy of all America, is the monopolistic government of the United States of America.' If now everyone knows that is the enemy, and it is coming to be known also that anyone who fights against that enemy has something in common with us, then we come to the second part. Where and now, for Cuba, what are our goals? What do went want? Do we or do we not want the happiness of the people? Are we, or are we not fighting for the total economic liberation of Cuba?
Are we or are we not struggling to be a free nation among free nations, without belonging to any military bloc, without having to consult the embassy of any great power on earth about any internal or external measure that is going to be taken here? If we plan to redistribute wealth of those who have too much in order to give it to those who have nothing; if we intend to make creative work a daily, dynamic source of all our happiness, then we have goals toward which to work. And anyone who has the same goals is our friend. If he has other concepts besides, if he belongs to some organization or other, those are minor matters.
In moments of great danger, in moments of great tensions and great creations, what count are great enemies and great goals. If we are already agreed, if we all know now where we are going - and let him grieve to whom it will cause grief- then we have to begin our work.
I was telling you that to be a revolutionary you have first to have a revolution. We already have it. Next, you have to know the people with whom you are going to work. I think that we are not yet well acquainted, that we still have to travel a while on that road. You ask me what are the vehicles for getting to know the people beside the vehicle of living in the cooperatives and working in them. Not everyone can do this, and there are many places where the presence of a medical worker is very important. I would say that the revolutionary militias are one of the great manifestations of the solidarity of the Cuban people. Militias now give a new function to the doctor and prepare him for what was, until a short time ago, a sad and almost fatal reality for Cuba, namely, that we are going to be the victim of an armed attack of great breadth.
I ought to warn you that the doctor, in the function of soldier and revolutionary, should always be a doctor. You should not commit the same error which we committed in the Sierra. Or maybe it was not an error, but all the medical comrades of that period know about it. It seemed dishonorable to us to remain at the side of a wounded man or a sick one, and we looked for any way possible of grabbing a rifle and going to prove on the battlefront what we could do.
Now the conditions are different, and the new armies which are being formed to defend the country must be armies with different tactics. The doctor will have an enormous importance within the plan of the new army. He must continue being a doctor, which is one of the most beautiful tasks there is and one of the most important in a war. And not only the doctor, but also the nurses, laboratory technicians, all those who dedicate themselves to this very human profession, are of he utmost importance.
Although we know of latent danger and are preparing ourselves to repel the aggression which still exists in the atmosphere, we must stop thinking about it. If we make war preparations the centre of our concern, we will not be able to devote ourselves to creative work. All the work and all the capital invested in preparing for a military action is wasted work and wasted money. Unfortunately, we have to do it, because there are others who are preparing themselves. But it is- and I say this in all honesty, on my honour as a soldier- the truth is that the outgoing money which most saddens me as I watch it leave the vault of the National Bank is the money that is going to pay for some weapon.
Nevertheless, the militias have a function in peacetime; the militias should be, in populous centres, the tool which unifies the people. An extreme solidarity should be practiced, as I have been told it is practised in the militias of the doctors. In time of danger they should go immediately to solve the problems of the poor people of Cuba. But the militias offer also an opportunity to live together, joined and made equal by a uniform, with men of all social classes of Cuba.
If we medical workers- and permit me to use once again a title which I had forgotten some time ago- are successful, if we use this new weapon of solidarity, if we know the goals, know the enemy, and know the direction we have to take, then all that is left for us to know is the part of the way to be covered each day. And that part no one can show us; that part is the private journey of each individual. It is what he will do every day, what he will gather from his individual experience, and what he will give of himself in the exercise of his profession, dedicated to the well-being of the people.
Now that we have all the elements for our march toward the future, let us remember the advice of Martí. Although at this moment I am ignoring it, one should follow it constantly, "The best way of telling is doing." Let us march, then, toward Cuba's future.