It probably goes without saying that we have all been horrified by recent events in London. That event is not alone in the world of violence against others, where the perpetrators are often made scapegoats, examples or token victims after doing the same to their victims. Young men are often, as explained in the following quote, unemployed and with no future, whether they are in London or the Highlands of New Guinea. They have no prospects, no useful work, no skills and are often the first-born generation of immigrant parents. They turn to whoever will listen, take them seriously, provide role models and mentors and give them purpose. What have we done? They make their own future predictable by violent acts against others, the society they live in and the country of which they are citizens.
http://www.countercurrents.org/burrowes250513.htm – moving towards non-violence
In writing of New Guinea Jaworski blames much of the escalating violence in all spheres on deeper social malaise, in particular the angry frustrations of young men, and for which there are no easy remedies. “Today 70 to 90 per cent of young people are unemployed. They went to school, but there is no future for them. They don’t fit back in their gardens and their villages.” They are without prospects in the new world, and without skills for the old one.
On bleaker mornings, navigating broken roads strewn with rocks from a night of fighting, or stitching up the casualties in the operating theatre, Jaworski worries that the rage of young men will one day propel the community back to the tumbuna (the time of the ancestors).
“I hope I am a wrong prophet.”
Reggie Littlejohn, president of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, stated, writing of China and the one child policy – “We condemn this egregious, state-sponsored violence against an innocent citizen, whose only ‘crime’ is having more than one child. Why was this man suddenly attacked, four years after the birth of his third child? We demand that the family planning attackers be brought to justice, that Mr. Zhang’s full medical expenses be covered, and that his family be compensated.” Littlejohn continued, “This attack also serves as a reminder that men as well as women suffer as a result of violence in the name of population control. On March 21, 2011, Family Planning Officials stabbed a young man to death while he was trying to protect his father from a beating. The Officials had entered the home to seize the man’s sister for a forced sterilization. The spirit of the Red Guard lives on in China’s population control machine. Family Planning Officials are above the law and function as domestic terrorists.”
Part of what we have done, is to increase poverty in the world by increasing wealth amongst the few. How often these days we see a CEO on a huge salary make a complete mess of a job, a company or a football club, resign or be sacked with a very generous golden handshake, rather than the disgrace that once would have accompanied his incompetence. Today planned destruction of a company for other purposes, as we are currently seeing here in Australia, with the decline of Qantas under the leadership of a well-known company-destroyer is familiar and agonising for the workers. Yesterday Ford announced it would close it’s two factories in Australia in the next three years in a planned departure, after receiving $millions of corporate charity from the Australian Government. Car manufacturing companies always receive Government hand-outs to keep providing jobs, work and products.The closure packages for the workers never deliver either, in a farce that is as transparent as a net curtain!
It’s all about what you call it! In renaming something you can relabel poverty, ignore it and make the workers responsible for their own misery. No doubt we shall soon see the garment manufacturers of the world renamed and deemed responsible for their own conditions of work and the big companies informing us of how charitable they have been in keeping them in work! –
What the ruling elite is doing is as if slave owners in the time of slavery in the United States had insisted that people call slaves “agricultural workers” in order not to stigmatize them, and insisted that there was nothing wrong with slavery, now called “agricultural work,” insisted that it should not be made illegal, and asserted that the only thing that needed to be done was to ensure that working conditions of “agricultural workers” be improved. How would the abolitionist movement have responded to THAT? The same way we should respond to the ruling elite’s “just call them ‘sex workers'” ploy.
A Ruling Class vs. Revolutionary Response To Prostitution By John Spritzler http://www.countercurrents.org/spritzler230513
Of course it is inevitable that we should look at adoption in this context. The buying and selling of children in so many guises from the blatantly traded to the more subtly marketed is still child trafficking.
It is no coincidence that there are only three countries which have not signed the UN’s Convention on the right’s of children. I wonder if you can guess which ones, if you don’t know already?
The UN General Assembly adopted the Convention and opened it for signature on 20 November 1989 (the 30th anniversary of its Declaration of the Rights of the Child). It came into force on 2 September 1990, after it was ratified by the required number of nations. Currently, 193 countries are party to it, including every member of the United Nations except Somalia, South Sudan and the United States. Somalia’s cabinet ministers had announced plans in late 2009 to ratify the treaty
Not that it appears to mean anything much in protecting children from the horrors imposed on them by adults, often their own parents and relatives, by the desperate, the poverty struck, the unscrupulous and the exploitative, who view children as a useful commodity or a very last resort in order to save their other children. Adoption is so very often a result of that desperation, exploitation and commodification. Children are very marketable where sterility lives, orphan saving is a way of life and huge profits are to be made. Unpleasant as it is to believe, the principles are the same as if a T-shirt is being marketed, the supply chains work the same way and the results are the same – happy customers and happy middlemen and women. Not so much the suppliers, the ‘manufacturers’ and producers! I dare say there are relatives of garment producers who might be feeling rather similar feelings today over the loss of their mothers, sisters, aunts, grandmothers as the mothers and fathers, the families of loss to adoption. In the harsh world of supply and demand others will step in to replace them, other countries selected for cheap production, just as in adoption we see countries lose popularity and others become prominent.