Freewheel Burning

The Lancet recently published the results of a longitudinal study examining resistance by malaria parasite to the latest and most effective treatment for the disease, Artemisinin Combination Therapy (ACT) along the Thai-Myanmar border.

Parasite clearance rates increased from a mean half life of 2.7 hours in 2001 to 3.6 hours in 2010, indicating that resistance is growing. Resistance was originally observed on the western side of Cambodia, but has now either spread geographically to western Thailand or emerged on its own. The latter scenario is actually the more frightening possibility. If resistant strains emerge in Sub-Saharan Africa, it could be a major setback.

Though research to develop new drugs is ongoing, ACTs are presently the most effective treatment and a major part of the arsenal with which to stop transmission and prevent early childhood death. Past treatment strategies are now largely ineffective.

Vaccines are also in development (most notably the RTSS vaccine), though I have little confidence that it will be of much use for long. It is a long series of shots and difficult to deliver in areas where medical delivery is poor or non-existent and efficacy is strain and context specific. Malaria vaccines are nice in the popular press, but impractical on the ground.

That resistance is growing in this particular end of the world, is in itself significant. Both regions are notable for poor health delivery, sporadic armed conflicts and marginalized populations. Efforts to contain the spread of resistance are likely futile. Even in the best of times, adequate delivery of care and prevention strategies are near impossible. Displacement of people due to conflict always provide ample opportunities for infectious agents, poor health and death. Tens of thousands of people languish in refugee camps along the border.

The subject of resistance in this region comes up often in meetings of malaria researchers, though I am always struck at the absence of discussion of social factors and conflict and how they create conditions favorable for the spread of resistant pathogens. It is no accident that malaria occurs in the places it does, and no accident that resistant strains of Plasmodium are able to fester and evade efforts to reign it in. It is almost as if the malaria research world believes that genetic adaptation happens at random, which it does not.

Discussion of malaria eradication cannot proceed without discussion of how to eradicate worldwide conflict, entrenched poverty and proper delivery and access to basic health care and the global forces which create these conditions. Yet it does.

Medications, vaccines and preventative interventions cannot work if there is no way to delivery them, and people cannot access them unless there is a local economy with which to support such a system. Malaria research has to address this fundamental issue or we’re just talking in the wind.

While politicians and citizens both struggle to dismantle democracy in the United States, we forget that there are others out there that are fighting to create democracy.

In the news this morning, it has been reported that Burmese democracy activist, former political prisoner and political philosopher Aung San Suu Kyi has been elected to a parliamentary seat. Her National League for Democracy Party has picked up at least 40 seats. Granted, these are only a fraction of the total number of parliamentary positions (659 total seats in two houses), but even this small victory is cause for jubilation.

Daw Suu, as she is affectionately known among her supporters in Burma, has won what was a seemingly insurmountable battle. Against all odds, and under years of house arrest, she patiently waited for democracy to come to Burma, which struggled under a repressive, autocratic and at times, completely bizarre military government.

In 1996, Suu Kyi stated succinctly the nature of democracy and how it contrasts with authoritarianism, “Agreeing to disagree is a prerogative only of those who live under a democratic system. Under an authoritarian regime, disagreeing can be seen as a crime.”

I have been reading Amartya Sen’s “Development as Freedom.” Sen’s work on the nature of freedom and democracy has clearly been a major influence on Daw Suu’s own philosophy. Sen notes that freedom cannot exist unless people are able to receive care when they are sick, receive education with which to participate in the greater in discussion and the greater economy, and are free of impediments to speaking freely. The United States, a supposed bastion of democracy, has sadly seen all of these things fade to the background, in favor of the wishes of a small minority of people. Perhaps we need Daw Suu to come and speak for us as well.

I saw Daw Suu speak in 2011, when she received the Wallenberg Prize (which is always presented at the University of Michigan).

“Fear renders us dumb and passive. Fear paralyzes. If we are too frightened to speak out, we can do nothing to promote freedom of speech. If we are too frightened to challenge injustices, we will not be able to defend our right to freedom of belief. Neither will we dare to ask for the rectification of the social and economic ills that make our lives a misery.

For fear anywhere, in any language, belittles, negates, and degrades. It takes courage and commitment to achieve freedom and to uphold it. While there are no laws and institutions to protect basic human rights, individuals have to fall back on their own will to practice and promote the freedoms in which they believe. The support of those who share the commitment helps them greatly in this endeavor.”

It was announced to day that Barack Obama will appoint Dartmouth President and physician Jim Yong Kim to be the next head of the World Bank. This breaks a string of appointments of right wing demagogues including Paul Wolfowitz and Robert Zoellick, both part of the group which orchestrated the invasion of Iraq and the heavy handed response to 9/11 by the Bush admin. I saw Zoellick speak recently and felt kind of gross after it was over.

Jim Yong Kim has an impressive list of publications on global health, notably collaborating with Partners In Health founder and human advocate, Paul Farmer. In fact, Kim was also part of the group that founded PIH and is known for his work on “Social Medicine” (a broad signifier for social determinants of health with a focus on clinical delivery).

Kim is co-founder of The Global Health Delivery Project, a group at Harvard that seeks to improve the health and welfare of population in developing countries by focusing on issues of health care delivery.

Problems of delivery of health care in developing countries has been perhaps my number one interest as of late. In fact, I am even writing a paper on it. As researchers, we can develop effective and radical new clinical techniques and medicines, but they do no good if the systems aren’t in place to deliver them effectively. Issues of delivery will be the primary impediment to controlling and eventually eliminating devastating diseases such as malaria. It is encouraging that Kim has been selected to fill this position.

It is unsurprising that Columbia University development economist Jeff Sachs was not chosen (he has withdrawn his nomination), despite appealing to the world community to pressure the Obama admin to select him. However, it is a relief that the first choice, Larry Summers, has to forego stepping in to a leadership position at the WB. I can think of no WORSE choice. The entire world appeared to agree and it marked the first time that the international community has had a say in who heads the Bank, a welcome departure from past appointments.

Sachs himself even came out in support, likely aware of his role in having Kim picked: “Dr Jim Kim is a superb nominee for the World Bank presidency,” Sachs said in a statement. “I support his nomination 100 percent. I congratulate the administration for nominating a world-class development leader for this position.”

I am interested to learn more about Kim. He may certainly have some ideological skeletons in his closet, though his association with Farmer leads me to think not. Congratulations to the Obama admin for taking the high road on this one.

UPDATE: OK, so it appears that Kim will be the first WB President to ever be caught on film rapping and dancing at a Michael Jackson tribute:

Kibera is one of the biggest slums on earth. Out of 5 million people in Nairobi, up to 1 million (the number depends on who you ask) live in Kibera making it larger than even supposedly big American cities such as Detroit, MI.

Like slums everywhere, Kibera’s resident flow in from all impoverished areas seeking job opportunities and better lives for their desperate families. Like slums everywhere, Kibera plays an important role in Nairobi’s economy, serving as a source of cheap labor specifically in the manufacture and distribution of hand fabricated goods and migrant agricultural work.
Like slums everywhere, the greater economy depends on keeping the area poor. Public services are sparingly doled out, just enough to keep the residents from rioting, but not so much that the prices of goods coming out of Kibera will rise.

Public sanitation is the greatest challenge in the area. There exists no effective method of handling the large amount of human waste and trash that the area produces. Households will leave waste outside their doorways, where it eventually gets burned or washed away by the rains. One group has created public toilet facilities that composts the waste and uses the methane discharged to allow for cooking by residents. Other public pit latrines are visible in the area, but they are, as yet, too few in numbers to effectively serve the demands of the large numbers of local residents. It is important to note that toilet facilities are not free. If households do not have the money, they will not use them.

Clean water is in plentiful supply, but carefully managed through a system of gouging the public system. The city has run a haphazard series of municipal water pipes through Kibera. Residents either legally or illegally tap into the pipes and then sell the water to other residents. If the tap is legal, the resident must pay a fee to the city. All taps, legal or no, charge for their services. Locals imply that this is merely the market capitalizing on a surrounding demand, but the reality is that the poorest of households cannot afford the water fees. They either illegally procure water from unmanned taps or fetch water from the river which is polluted with human filth. The result of this commercialization of water resources is that poor households have no access to clean drinking water.

Health services are mostly unavailable to resident outside that which is provided by proactive NGOs and private clinics. Though health services are available at low costs from government run clinics, the nearest facility is too far away. I spoke with Elizabeth Akinyi of the “Power Women Group,” a community based organization which supports HIV positive women by selling handmade goods to tourists. She said that anti retrovirals (ARVs) are available from the public clinics, but that the clinics are so far away that even the sickest will not attempt to make the journey. Thus, HIV positive residents depend on the good graces of donor agencies and NGOs to provide medications. Medications, however, are not free so the revenues from the groups store are essential to keeping these women alive and, as they put it, “living positively”.

It should be obvious that the greatest challenge to poor Kenyans is being able to bear the costs of services. As one person told me, “in Kenya, the only thing free is the air.” In addition to water, the city provides power to some parts of Kibera, which also must be paid for. Homemade television antennas can be seen over just about every household. Every once in a while, one can see a satellite dish. Public schools exists, but slots are too few to accommodate all of the children in Kibera, so many go without. Local groups have stepped up to attempt to provide basic education to children but without formal education, the children of Kibera have little future.

All of this, however, should not distract from the incredible resolve of Kiberans to make a better life for themselves. Everyone in Kibera has some kind of business. Street sellers, small fabricators and small businesses are to be seen everywhere. Some follow western models of individual entrepreneurship such as that of the owner of “Apokolipto Cinema” a small DVD theater that runs showing of bootleg horror and action DVDs from morning to night. Many of the larger operations, however, do not. Employee owned fabrication groups produce products for sale in Nairobi, but split profits amongst themselves and provide for school fees of employees’ children such as that of Kibera Jewelry, who make necklaces and other goods from recycled bone products. Kibera tours, the group that allowed me to visit the area, is a mixture. Though owned by one entrepreneur, the success of his tour depends on cooperation with local groups. Profits from his tour group are split between himself and the groups who participate.

It could be said that unemployment is rampant throughout Kibera, but then it could be said that not a day goes by where Kiberans are not doing something to make some money for themselves. A lack of access to capital and dependable city services, however, prevent the area from reaching its true potential.

My US passport sits on my desk, along with two other ratted and expired versions of it. I often think of citizenship. Mostly, I think of how absolutely meaningless it is and about the ridiculous restrictions imposed by it.

For example, my passport is blue and has the seal of the United States of America on it. With this document, I can enter most countries around the world visa-free and return to the US at will for as long as I hold this document. Malawians, though, cannot travel to most countries without securing travel visas ahead of time, often at great expense. Passports not only restrict entry, they also restrict exit. Even Americans without passports are denied the right to exit the country legally. Malawians, even if they can afford the expense of having a passport, have to apply for special permission to leave.

It is my opinion that, by marriage, I should be entitled to a red passport for Japan as well. I am, to some extent, as personally invested in that country as the United States, equally concerned with the welfare of the population of the archipelago, speak the language and could see myself easily living there again at some point.

Yet, Japan and the US live in antiquated worlds where holding both passports is (on paper) an impossibility. Both countries maintain draconian monopolies on the state allegiance of their passport holders, forcing naturalized immigrants to forfeit citizenship to the country of their birth. Worse yet, the United States forces us to pay taxes to to her, even when we don’t live here and, ostensibly, receive no state benefits.

The Economist recently wrote on the issue of citizenship, stating succinctly:

Citizenship mattered in the days when defence relied on conscription. But modern warfare does not require armies of ill-trained conscripts. Few countries now rely on mandatory military service and those that do are mostly winding down the draft. Citizenship is no guarantee of loyalty: history’s worst traitors have been true-born citizens. Many of those ready to fight most enthusiastically for a flag will have gone through hell to get to their country.

Citizenship is a human rights issue. The implications of citizenship are directly addressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, in Articles 2 and 13. In the United States, though, citizenship is used as a tool to marginalize an entire labor force, deny public services, insure less than optimal wages and allow employers to skirt basic workplace safety and compensation rules. It is interesting that the most fervent proponents of this antiquated system of resident registration, are the loudest advocates against “big government” and for “free markets.” Note Presidential candidate Ron Paul’s narrow and restrictive views of citizenship, which include denying citizenship to people whose only crime was to be born on US soil to parents who fought tooth and nail to get here. It is as if the market can only be free if its participants are determined and protected by the heavily funded and armed hand of the state.

Even worse, the United States is the greatest exporter of advanced degrees in world. We don’t allow Chinese graduate students, for example, to stay in the US upon graduation, despite the fact that the number of domestic PhD’s in the sciences is embarrassingly low. We bring them in, then kick them out as quickly as possible unless they are able to quickly find a private sponsor. God forbid that they might want to start their own operation in the US or work for some small business. So much for promoting entrepreneurship among the educated.

Obviously, some are able to skate this requirement of unipolar citizenship. Canadians and Israelis often hold passports from both countries. People from developing countries, and those who likely have sacrificed the most to attain US citizenship are barred from holding passports in their countries of birth. It is an incredible double standard. Ironically, Israel, which demands the right of dual citizenship with the United States, deny even full Israeli citizenship to the Palestinians.

In an increasingly intertwined and mobile global economy, the concept of the state and of citizenship/allegiance are quickly becoming an antiquated and outdated concept. More than 200 million people around the world live outside the countries of their birth. For me, travelling to another country is the same as travelling to, say, California, taking at least as much time and effort. I am equally employable or unemployable in Japan as I am in the United States. My services are valued as much in Europe and they would be in Africa or South East Asia, so when, I ask, are states going to finally recognize this reality and catch up? Even Reale in 1931, referred to the passport as “an anachronism in the modern world” and predicted that one day, it would become irrelevant.

My recommendations:

1. Abolish passports – Publicly, states will imply that passports are meant to protect and secure borders to prevent incursion by those who pose a threat to the state. Clearly, this did not work on 9/11, nor does it work well anywhere else. The greatest threats to the security of any state probably already possess citizenship. Passports are useless guarantees of the stability of the state and merely serve to exclude economic undesirables. Best to rid ourselves of them entirely.

2. In the absence of abolishment, allow free and open passage worldwide - Proponents of citizenship posit that the “flood gates” will open, and developed states will face an unprecedented flow of immigrants from developed countries. The truth is, that those who wish to come to places like the United States, already do. In addition, most people would rather remain in their communities than travel to places where they know no one. The United States (and Europe) has a system of open borders, but people still choose to live in impoverished hell holes like Mississippi. Many other forces, besides passports, keep people at home.

Clearly, though, the first option is the most radical and the most difficult to implement. The abolishment of passports would mean the abolishment of that which defines the state. Simply, states, as we know them would cease to exist and would become, rather, provincial areas with open borders, but local laws and local systems of taxation. That is exactly what the United States is, though a passport-less world would lack the greater power of a centralized government, such as that of the US Federal Government.

The second option is the most reasonable and should be the goal of states in the 21st century. Without the free and unrestricted passage of all global citizens, the world will stagnate in a restricted and deprived global marketplace, much akin to the restrictive feudal states of pre-Enlightenment Europe. The second option is the best option for the development of global human rights, the free exchange of ideas and economic development. The rising BRIC economies will mean greater economic equality for all world citizens. The United States and Europe need not fear a mass influx of poor people seeking opportunities. They have more than a few options now.

Thanksgiving is my favorite of all the holidays, mostly because it just requires the eating of food. I do recognize, however, that Thanksgiving is easily the most condemnable of all the holidays.

I was just reading a web page on Oyate, a Native American advocacy site devoted to promoting books which sincerely promote or reflect the words of Native peoples or which accurately depict Native history.

On it, Judy Dow and Beverly Slapin briefly attempt to deconstruct the myths of Thanksgiving, in order to right the wrong of revisionism and the white washing of America’s awful history of bloody colonization:

What is it about the story of “The First Thanksgiving” that makes it essential to be taught in virtually every grade from preschool through high school? What is it about the story that is so seductive? Why has it become an annual elementary school tradition to hold Thanksgiving pageants, with young children dressing up in paper-bag costumes and feather-duster headdresses and marching around the schoolyard? Why is it seen as necessary for fake “pilgrims” and fake “Indians” (portrayed by real children, many of whom are Indian) to sit down every year to a fake feast, acting out fake scenarios and reciting fake dialogue about friendship? And why do teachers all over the country continue (for the most part, unknowingly) to perpetuate this myth year after year after year?

Is it because as Americans we have a deep need to believe that the soil we live on and the country on which it is based was founded on integrity and cooperation? This belief would help contradict any feelings of guilt that could haunt us when we look at our role in more recent history in dealing with other indigenous peoples in other countries. If we dare to give up the “myth” we may have to take responsibility for our actions both concerning indigenous peoples of this land as well as those brought to this land in violation of everything that makes us human. The realization of these truths untold might crumble the foundation of what many believe is a true democracy. As good people, can we be strong enough to learn the truths of our collective past? Can we learn from our mistakes? This would be our hope.

We offer these myths and facts to assist students, parents and teachers in thinking critically about this holiday, and deconstructing what we have been taught about the history of this continent and the world.

While we are taught in school that the Pilgrims and the Native peoples (on whose land the Pilgrims invaded) sat down and had a happy meal together, the truth should be obvious. The only place one can obviously see Native folks in new England is at a casino in Connecticut.

A mere generation later, the balance of power had shifted so enormously and the theft of land by the European settlers had become so egregious that the Wampanoag were forced into battle. In 1637, English soldiers massacred some 700 Pequot men, women and children at Mystic Fort, burning many of them alive in their homes and shooting those who fled. The colony of Connecticut and Massachusetts Bay Colony observed a day of thanksgiving commemorating the massacre. By 1675, there were some 50,000 colonists in the place they had named “New England.” That year, Metacom, a son of Massasoit, one of the first whose generosity had saved the lives of the starving settlers, led a rebellion against them. By the end of the conflict known as “King Philip’s War,” most of the Indian peoples of the Northeast region had been either completely wiped out, sold into slavery, or had fled for safety into Canada. Shortly after Metacom’s death, Plimoth Colony declared a day of thanksgiving for the English victory over the Indians. (13)

I call to make Thanksgiving not a day of forgetting, but a day of remembering. I call to change the name of the holiday to “Indigenous People’s Day” and celebrate indigenous cultures all over the world.

The United States under little fanfare has named November 2011 National Native American Heritage Month to complement the opening of the fantastic Museum of the American Indian in Washington, D.C. If you ever have the opportunity to visit, please do. It is a museum about Native peoples, constructed by Native peoples and, ironically, is the closet structure to the Capitol building besides the Canadian Embassy. I have included a few pictures here of my last trip there.

For all my colleagues that work in developing countries, here’s a scathing report on the situation of G4S Security staff who sit up all night outside your places of residence. Most work 84 hours a week for less than $20 a month and lack bargaining rights. There are even reports of physical abuse and guards going without food. Granted, this report is from 2007, but I’ve not seen evidence that working conditions have changed much since then, at least not in Malawi.

When I first went to Malawi, I didn’t know better. Honestly, the guards’ constant requests for money annoyed me. Taking a step back and considering the reprehensible conditions under which these men must work, and questioning whether these conditions would in any way be tolerated in the US, I can only come out against exploitative, first world companies like G4S. Apologistic arguments that all Malawians are treated this badly and thus nothing should be done are weak and unforgivable for those working in any humanitarian capacity.

Moral of the story: Tip your guards at least a months wage for every month you’re there. If one of them asks you for money, he might well need it because his meager wages aren’t sufficient to pay his kids’ school fees or, worse yet, buy food.

The nature of African inequality will not change overnight, but small actions can make a huge difference. Remember, one of those guys may take a blade for you one day.

Major Findings

The fact-finding team found serious and ongoing violations of labour laws concerning overtime and time off as well as behaviour that have consigned workers to a hand-to-mouth existence.

Allowing racist behaviour to go unchecked

• “Kaffirs” and “Monkeys” Workers allege that G4S supervisors refer to guards
at the Johannesburg airport as “kaffirs” and “monkeys.” SATAWU, the union
representing guards at the airport, had to petition for their removal. The company took no corrective action of its own.

• “Whites Only” Toilets According to SATAWU, a G4S manager in Pretoria provides white guards with keys to the company toilet. Black guards are forced to use the toilet in a nearby mall.

Maintaining policies that keep guards in poverty

• In Blantyre, Malawi, guards’ salaries are so low they are forced to live in some
of the area’s poorest housing—homes with no running water and no electricity. Guards said their families frequently don’t have enough to eat and their children’s school fees go unpaid. Tea, in a country where tea plantations dot the land, was considered by the wife of one G4S guard to be an unobtainable luxury item. Guards in Malawi could earn more because they work enormous
amounts of overtime. Instead of increasing their hourly pay for the four hours of overtime they typically work each day, Group 4 Securicor reduces their wages by half.

• In both Malawi and Mozambique, guards report they are not allowed to take paid leave. One guard from Blantyre, Malawi, reported that he had worked an entire year with only a single paid day off. He was allowed the day off to attend a funeral.

This week, an Israeli solider held captive in the Hamas controlled Gaza Strip was released in exchange for more then 1000 Palestinian prisoners. The event is meaningful, not only in terms of Israeli/Palestinian reconciliation, an improbable result of this exchange, but also as a measure of the vast divide of human worth between the wealthy and the poor.

Gilad Shalit is a nobody. He is a (now) 25 year old French/Israeli national who served as a low ranking soldier in the Israeli Defense Forces. Symbolically, he was a giant. That Hamas kept him alive for five years in Israel’s backyard despite numerous attacks on Gaza by the IDF and an ever complicated political battle over Palestinian statehood should serve as proof to his significance.

Most interesting to me, however, is the vast divide of the value of humans between the richest of the world and the poorest. One Gilad Shalit is exchanged for 1,027 faceless Palestinian prisoners. If we are to quantify the relative value of humans from Israel and Palestine, we could say that a Palestinian is worth less than one one-thousandth of an Israeli. The GDP per capita of the West Bank and Gaza was $1,123 in 2005. The GDP per capita of Israel is $26,256. The monetary worth of a Palestinian is one twentieth that of an Israeli.

The 9/11 attacks by Al Qaeda on New York City and Washington, DC claimed 2,996 lives. The retaliatory conflicts that were soon begun by the United States on Afghanistan and later, Iraq, have killed an estimated 200,000 people. The exact number is unknown, mostly due to Afghanistan’s lack of reporting and recording infrastructure. Iraq’s contribution, however, totals more than 150,000 as of 2011. If figure that this means that an Iraqi and a person from Afghanistan are worth approximately 1.4 hundredths of an American (1.4%).

The GDP per capita of Iraq and Afghanistan are $2,090 and $483, respectively, where as the GDP per capita of the United States is $45,989. The monetary value of an and Iraqi and and Afghanistani compared to an American are 1% and 4.5%, respectively.

The attack on Pearl Harbor by Japan claimed 2,403 lives. Over the course of the war, more than 3,000,000 Japanese lost their lives. Now, certainly, the war with Japan was inevitable. Thus, I calculate the relative value of a Japanese civilian to an American in 1940 to be less than .0001 or one ten-thousandth of an American.

I do not mean this calculation as a criticism of the decision to go to war. I won’t go there, though I will say that the war in Iraq was unjustified, and the decision to use the Atom Bomb on Nagasaki/Hiroshima was reprehensible from every measure of human rights and human decency. (I guess I went there, anyway. Oh well..)

Rather, I intend this as a criticism of the destructive and cyclical process of war itself. It is important to recognize that nearly no American civilians died in World War II, very few died on 9/11 and relatively very few Israelis have died in he conflict with Palestine. Most of the dead on the other side have been, in fact, women, children and the aged, the historical case in nearly all conflicts. These numbers, do, however, unveil the vast disparities in human worth between those at the top, and those at the bottom and personally, I find this disparity to be incredibly depressing.

Sugar costs money. In fact, everything that’s bad for you in the American diet is heavily subsidized by the United States Government. A few large scale producers of sugars, oils, grains and other commodity crops receive huge payouts from the federal government to produce what they do.

Proponents of subsidies point to issues of food security, the protection of rural economies, and broader benefits of the low cost of food in the United States as justification for spending nearly half of one percent of the entire federal budget on direct payouts to American farmers. The truth is that the United States is one of the most food secure areas of the planet, that urban economies receive the largest benefit from food subsidies and that subsidies really work to keep producers of BAD food like Frito-Lay and McDonalds financially well fed.

While the proponents of subsidies, who often have deep interests in large agri-business, point to the poor, struggling American farmer as justification for continued subsidies, the truth is that the economy of agriculture couldn’t be healthier. The mean income of a farming operation was close to $90,000 last year, far beyond the national average/ Overall revenues from farming at an historical high. The farming sector is expected to pull in more than $100 billion in revenue this year, $31 billion more than 2010. A 24% increase!

Most family owned small farms are struggling and actually lose money on their farming operations. However, the bulk of farming is now done by large agricultural conglomerates, beholden not to Grandma and Grandpa but to urban elites and global stock-holders. These groups have a vested interest in continuing subsidy payments because it increases the health of it’s stock holdings. However, they don’t like to spread the subsidies around to people like my local struggling organic vegetable farm.

These subsidies have global implications. While right-wing blowhards in the US tout neo-classical ideas of “free-markets,” “small government” and “open competition,” the US government’s massive subsidies of agricultural commodities actually do what said blowhards say is a bad idea. The subsidies artificially depresses world commodity prices, giving the United States a competitive advantage on the world market.

The small country of Benin depends on cotton for 80% of its exports, which amount to a little over a billion dollars. A modest one percent decrease in the world price of cotton barely registers on the American economy. A one percent decrease in world cotton price has disastrous implications for a country like Benin, whose tiny GDP is only $6.4 billion or $1500 per capita. It has been estimated that US farm subsidies cost small cotton producing West African countries more than $250 million every year, $250 million dollars that could have been invested in schools, health care, power and communication infrastructure, and domestic industries. In essense, developing countries pay, in both lost revenues and human health, to beef up the stock portfolios of investors in big-Ag.

This isn’t even the worst of it. The sugar industry of Florida notoriously imports labor from Jamaica to assist in the grueling annual sugar cane harvest. For the privelege of cutting sugar cane all day, workers are rewarded a little as $2 per hour and must suffer under prison like conditions. These were most famously document in the fantastic 1990 documentary work of Stephanie Black, “H2 Worker.” Conditions may or may not have improved, to my knowledge they may have not. How could a business model used for the past 500 years change overnight? Slavery and the sugar industry built the United States; we won’t let go of it so easily.

The health of this criminal industry depends on massive subsidies from the US Government, who will happily turn a blind eye to the reprehensible conditions that workers slave under. Worse yet, as in interview with the late progressive Jamaican Prime Minister Michael Manley reveals, these subsidies prevent Jamaica (or even Haiti) from successfully developing its own sugar industry, thereby robbing a struggling country of a chance to lift itself out of poverty.

All of the large agricultural conglomerates that have headquarters in the United States such as Cargill, Bunge, Monsanto and Archer Daniels, and the beneficiaries of continued agricultural subsidy programs are internationally owned conglomerates that operate throughout the globe. Thus, in addition to the massive negative worldwide implications of commodity subsidies I just mentioned, the question of political sovereignty must also be addressed. Lost in neo-liberal right wing discussions is the role of international bodies in determining United States domestic policy. To me, the very idea of sovereign states in the 21st century is but an illusion and passports really just serve as protectionist labor schemes. Worse yet, democracy itself is called into question, when the money of the worldwide elite are able to shape US policy to serve its own narrow goals.

Along with two other Iron Ladies. Liberian President and Harvard trained economist Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, along with Liberian peace activist Leyma Gbowee and Yemeni dissident Tawakkul Karman have deservedly split the 2011 Nobel Prize. This is a powerful statement not only for peace, but also for the necessary political role that women must play in creating it. As long as the world is run by crusty, rich white guys and their non-white analogues, politics will continue to ignore the necessity of peace at the expense of profit, the crime of poverty, and the importance of insuring the long term health of women and children.

Most salient in this particular prize is the role of documentary film in its making. We should not short change the powerful actions of the recipients themselves but, in my view, the publicity generated by a few dedicated and brave filmmakers helped hand this prize to these three very deserving recipients.

For those who missed it, a few months ago, I wrote a review of an excellent documentary on Ellen Jonhson, the “Iron Ladies of Liberia“, from the fantastic Women Makes Movies film collective and directors Daniel Junge and Siatta Scott Johnson.

Liberia suffered under a series of conflicts between warring factions for more than 20 years, culminating in Charles Taylor’s brutal dictatorship. The war was eventually brought to aclose by that Women of Liberia Mass Action for Peace movement, which consisted of nothing more than groups of women praying in front of government and military buildings. Eventually, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf became the first African female head of state, and was able to bring stability to what was once one of the most ineffective governments on the planet. Siatta Scott Johnson and Daniel Junge follow Sirleaf through her daily dealings with shaky politics, rioting former military members demanding pensions, and the eventual burning of the Presidential Palace. Amazingly and without hesitation, Sirleaf confronts armed men with histories of guiltless killing and violence with nothing more than words and a firm, but open ear. It’s amazing to watch.

Leyma Gbowee was featured in “Pray the Devil Back to Hell,” a documentary from Gini Reticker. on the brave actions of a few Liberian peace activists to end the brutal civil conflict.

Pray the Devil Back to Hell chronicles the remarkable story of the courageous Liberian women who came together to end a bloody civil war and bring peace to their shattered country.

Thousands of women — ordinary mothers, grandmothers, aunts and daughters, both Christian and Muslim — came together to pray for peace and then staged a silent protest outside of the Presidential Palace. Armed only with white T-shirts and the courage of their convictions, they demanded a resolution to the country’s civil war. Their actions were a critical element in bringing about a agreement during the stalled peace talks.

A story of sacrifice, unity and transcendence, Pray the Devil Back to Hell honors the strength and perseverance of the women of Liberia. Inspiring, uplifting, and most of all motivating, it is a compelling testimony of how grassroots activism can alter the history of nations.

Finally, though no one has yet to make a documentary on Yemeni journalist and democracy activist Tawakkul Karman, she, in essence, produces her own. As the head of “Women Journalists Without Chains” she promotes a free press for Yemen:

WJWC is a non-governmental organization in Yemen that seeks to advocate for rights and freedoms, especially freedom of expression. It also aims at improving media efficiency and providing skills for journalists, and particularly women and youth.

Founded in 2005 the NGO brought out the first of many annual reports on Freedom of the Press in Yemen in which it documented more than 50 cases of attacks and unfair court sentences against newspapers and writers.

Despite threats of violence from the sitting Yemeni government and rightist groups, advocates for a female voice for political change in Yemen. She staged peaceful sit-ins in front of the Yemeni cabinet building to protest the government’s refusal to allow her groups a free newspaper and radio station. For her act of bravery, she endured threats, abductions and beatings.

Hats off to this years recipients. Let the new era of free media continue to allow them to flourish.