INQUIRE Articulating PUBLICATION
Grassroots Advancing strategies for institutional and social change
Where Activism Takes Root
1.
3.
2.
GLOBAL
BRIEFING 4.
1) Asian Pacific Distraction 2) The Last European Dictator 3) Justice for All 4) Health Impact Fund
5.
4.
6.
5) Thread Bare 6) Land Mines
SOCIAL
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
BRIEFING 7) New Insite 8) Anorexia Nervosa 9) Starve 10) Fertile Research 11) Higher Education 12) Stereotypes
P. 2
Inquire Publication V5 I1
INQVIRE EDITORS CONT ENT
STAFF NOTE INSIDE A big thank you to both the editorial staff, contributors but also to all of the Inquire Publication executive members across three campuses. Queen’s University Co-Presidents Jessica Chen Jorge Caicedo Co- Editors in Chief Devin McDonald Craig Draeger Vice President Finance Vivian Li Vice President Marketing Victoria Piccin Matt Nesvadba Vice President Initiatives Caroline Friedrich Editor in Charge of Production Jason Campbell Editor in Charge of Responses Sean Ngo Intern Megan Scarth University of Toronto President Quila Toews
It’s hard to believe that Inquire is already five years old. In this first issue of Volume 5, you will find articles on topics as varied as the geopolitical situation in Belarus, to the state of male body in society today. We’ve broken up the articles into two broad categories—those with a global focus and those with social implications.
Thread Bare Cotton Subsidies and Progressive Inaction Jason Campbell 3
The common theme that connects all the pieces in this issue is a call for change, no matter whether that change is a new method of structuring risk in international health care, or a new paradigm in approaching anorexia nervosa as a medical issue.
Health Impact Fund Driving Innovation to Improve Acces to Medicines Bechard, Kobylianskii, Qaddora, Randhawa 4
Change ends with action, but it begins with ideas. Our mandate is to foster discussion on the battleground of ideas and give an opportunity for unconventional approaches to be heard. We’re trying something a little different with our layout this issue, returning to newsprint for the first time since Volume 3. You may have noticed that we are continually changing, tweaking, and altering our style of presentation as well as the types of content we showcase. We are a discourse-driven publication, and the tone of the articles and comments submitted to us determines the composition of our final product. So, if you think what you have to say is worth hearing, please send it to us for our next issue in January. We’re going to start work on it as soon as this one hits the newsstands, so there’s no time to waste. Thank you to everyone whose effort and commitment made this issue of Inquire possible—especially to Devin McDonald, whose vision and artistic sense has driven this publication to new heights time and again—and to everyone who keeps the conversation alive, online and in print. Here’s to many more. - Craig Draeger
Editor in Chief Amanda Ali McMaster University Co-President Flora Huang Tahrin Mahmood
inquireblog.blogspot.com
Editor in Chief MIke Davison
inquirepublication.com
Vice President Finance Harkanwal Randhawa
Images Supplied
Vice President Initiatives Armo Qaddoura Vice President Marketing Qian Feng Jennifer Pearson Director of Events Sharon Yeung Director of Finance Arnav Agarwal
Contact at: copresidents@gmail.com
Land Mines Relic of History and Pervavsive Nightmare Ronald Leung 5 The Last European Dictator Lukashenko and Belarussian Democracy Yanka 7 Justice For All The First Decade of the ICC Michael Davison 9 Asian Pacific Distraction The Diaoyu/Sankau Dispute Stephen Zhao 10 New Insite The Benefits of Safe Injections Sites Mohamed Sarraj 12 Fertile Research The Limitations of Canadian Stem Cell Research Megan Scarth 13 Anorexia Nervosa The Ethical Dilemma of Force Feeding Tetyana Pekar 14 Starve Adventures In Male Body Image Devin McDonald 15 Stereotypes People Don’t shape Stereotypes Stereo Types shape People Arnav Agarwal 17 Higher Education The Gift That Kept On Giving Sean Ngo 18
P. 3
Inquire Publication V5 I1
Thread
Bare Jason Campbell
More than ever, money has the capacity to influence political decisions. Their connections to the political elite allow the largest companies to reap undeserved profits through subsidies, tax breaks, and bailouts. Supporters of such methods have claimed that benefits to larger corporations will allow them to hire more workers, which will result in the flourishing of the economy. To the contrary, these methods have proven to be detrimental rather than beneficial to the economic recovery and do not truly represent a “free market” approach. Providing subsidies to smaller companies would allow them to be more competitive with well-established, larger corporations, which would force the market to innovate and optimize efficiency. Rather than foster competition, increased advantages are provided to the largest companies; smaller companies are unable to compete, which inevitably leads to the largest companies dominating the market. According to the Environmental Working Group, 10 percent of the US farms producing cotton have received 74 percent of the total cotton subsidies between 1995 and 2009. The United States federal government maintains the position that these cotton subsidies are used to protect the farmers—why then do 62 percent of farmers receive no subsidies at all? An analysis of the raw data shreds holes in any optimistic theories on subsidy use. Subsidies are damaging to smaller companies in any economy, but also, and more dangerously, to the global market. Companies that receive subsidies are able to sell products at lower prices— when these cheaper products are sold in the international market, countries that can’t afford to subsidize suffer due to the price differential. Subsidies are provided
to a realm of different industries; unfortunately, cotton subsidies have proven to have disastrous consequences on the markets of less developed nations. In particular, the C-4, consisting of Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad, and Mali, have issued numerous requests to have the unfair subsidy issue addressed—however, their call for change has fallen on deaf ears. Who decides what’s fair in the world market, you ask? The World Trade Organization (WTO) is responsible for monitoring trade policies and implementing WTO trade agreements. There are three categories of subsidies as defined by the WTO: amber, blue, and green. “Green box” subsidies are those that don’t distort trade, are governmentfunded, and are not involved in price support—these are good subsidies. “Amber box” subsidies distort production and trade; these are the subsidies that are damaging to the world economy because they are used to lower prices or encourage high levels of production. “Blue box” subsidies are similar to those in the amber box, with the key difference that these subsidies have conditions that limit production. There is a limit to the amount of amber box subsidies that any one country can implement due to their negative influence on world markets. Despite the clear limits established by the WTO, the United States and the EU have continued to fill up the amber box with money to “protect their farmers.” Brazil, a member state of the WTO, has raised concerns that subsidies applied to the cotton industry in the United States are damaging the economies of lesserdeveloped countries involved in cotton exports, which would render such subsidies illegal. The WTO ruled in
favour of Brazil and permitted them to levy 830 million dollars worth of tariffs against the US to compensate for their losses as a result of the subsidies. Rather than deal with international problems associated with the subsidies, Brazil now receives over 140 million dollars in subsidies from the United States, effectively solving the problem in Brazil, while countries elsewhere continue to suffer. Although successive American administrations had promised to revoke the subsidies, the farm bill currently being debated by US legislators seeks to maintain the illegal cotton subsidies which could re-ignite the conflict between Brazil and the US. Despite the growing number of legitimate complaints from cotton-producing African countries, the subsidy issue has still not been addressed at the global scale. One might assume the ruling that resolved the issue for Brazil could be applied to other nations suffering from the exact same cotton subsidies. Rather than address the issue at the global level, which would seem like common logic for an organization known as the “world” trade organization, these resolutions are dealt with similar to individual court cases bilaterally. Since Brazil brought up the case, they are the ones to reap the benefits, while other member nations are left to fend for themselves. Is it even plausible to believe that only one country can be affected? The answer is no. In the case of Brazil, the WTO ruled that Brazil could implement tariffs on trades with the United States due to the illegal subsidies, while these exact same subsidies continue to be a detriment to numerous other economies. The problem has been clearly identified, yet no international action is taken. Unlike Brazil, the C-4 nations often can’t afford the lengthy judicial process and don’t have as much economic leverage involved in obtaining a formal decision. Although the WTO has a Secretariat composed of experts in law, statistics, and economics, no case has been made for less developed nations suffering from the American cotton market. If you’ve ever watched a TV show about law, you’ll notice that if a defendant can’t afford a lawyer, one is provided for the person; in the World Trade Organization, if a member na-
tion can’t afford the legal process they’re seemingly out of luck. The difference is that rather than a single individual suffering from a lack of representation, an entire country’s population suffers from it. Reality is antagonistic to the WTO’s claim that special provisions are provided for developing nations—if this were the case, why are these illegal subsidies still able to negatively affect the economies of these less affluent member states? The American pacification of Brazil with subsidies is intended to prevent interfere with the illegality of their policies while the WTO watches. It’s as if the defendant got up after the court had ruled, handed some money to the prosecution, and said “let’s just forget about this court ruling for right now.” No clear end to the subsidy problem is in sight; the World Trade Organization has been ineffectively addressing these issues since the Uruguay talks that begin in the ‘80s. These initial talks ineffectively dealt with the trade issues at hand and established a future agenda rather than take much direct action, which led to the absence of some member nations at the Seattle conference in 1999. A follow-up conference, the Doha round of talks, began in 2001 hoping to reduce subsidies that protect industries in more developed nations. Essentially, the countries with the largest economies are refusing to compromise on key agricultural issues and each agenda promise is delayed or extended another year. Does the World Trade Organization have any influence on countries with the largest economies? Seemingly not. The trade promises that have been made over the past 20 years are still in the process of being implemented while the issues that aren’t addressed continue to decimate other nations’ industries. Where is the accountability? If the WTO took a stronger stance on implementing punishment for countries that refuse to abide by their trade agreements, we might see more results. However, it seems that they’d rather not ruffle the feathers of any of their more affluent members. Twenty years of inaction is enough. When is the world going to protest the cotton industry rather than Kony? It’s time to wake up and take action—the problem exists, it needs a solution.
Commentary: In the world of "aiding the less unfortunate achieve a better life", it is entirely unfair to offer subsidies to well-established, larger companies, and completely push down the possibility of profits for the smaller companies. The saying goes, "Don't give a man fish. Instead, teach him how to fish." In this situation, the economy is neither giving the unfortunate "fish", nor are they allowing them to successfully "fish". It is high time that the individuals who are at a disadvantage due to this unfair bias, all got together and protested. "A bundle of sticks is always stronger than one stick". I wasn't aware of this subsidies issue before reading this article. I'm sure there are many people who are in the same boat as me. Therefore, if we (the indi-
viduals who are aware of the situation) and the unfortunate people who are disadvantaged got together and protested and increased awareness, I'm sure that a solution would be achieved. - Anamika S, Bachelor of Commerce, Queen’s University, Class of 2013 This article reminds me strongly of the situation in my homeland of India— the fabled “largest democracy in the world”—where the government continues to take actions that benefit the few at the expense of the many. Make no mistake, I’m not saying that this is the natural direction of any democratic state, but it is an issue of culture. The deeply-engrained caste system in south-east Asian countries make this
form of kleptocracy a natural fit. Increasingly, it appears that the culture and attitude of the World Trade Organization is similarly stratified. What other possible explanation exists for the privileging of the established powers (and the United States in particular) in allowing their exploitative and protectionist economic policies? -Sungdeep Gupta M.Eng 2014 (Mech), Queen’s University
Health
Driving Innovation To Improve
Access to Medicines
P. 4
Fund
Impact
Inquire Publication V5 I1
Mohamed Sarraj
One-third of the world’s population lacks access to essential medicines. In Asia and Africa, this figure rises to one-half of the population. Even more astounding, over 14 million people are killed by infectious diseases each year, 90 percent of whom reside in developing countries. The majority of these diseases can be treated and perhaps even cured with existing medicines. However, many of these drugs are too expensive for individuals to purchase and some drugs are completely unavailable in certain countries. This lack of access arises because some medically necessary drugs are simply unprofitable for drug companies to produce. Estimates for the cost of developing a new drug range from $800 million to more than $1 billion. Although these estimates are often criticized for being inflated, it is clear that drug innovation requires enormous investments by pharmaceutical companies. Typically, these investments are protected by patents that afford the innovator exclusive rights to produce and sell the drug for a set period of time. To profit—while recouping its research and development costs—pharmaceutical companies charge high prices for this drug while they have a monopoly over the market. Naturally, these prices cause the cost of medicines to be prohibitively high, limiting access to the medicine. Although public pressures on the pharmaceutical industry and increased competition from generic drugs have been of great help, the issue with access remains and many people worldwide still cannot fulfill their medicinal needs. Any solution that aims to increase ac-
cess to medicine by decreasing their market price must also account for the fact that in order to drive innovation, there must be a financial incentive for pharmaceutical companies to invest in research and development. The Health Impact Fund (HIF) is a proposed financing scheme for pharmaceuticals that would incentivize innovation based on the measured performance (health impact) of a drug. It is a pay-forperformance scheme that simultaneously addresses both the innovation and access to care problems. This is in contrast to the patent system, which is effective
The HIF would be financed by countries that contribute to a fixed pool of funds, which would be paid out annually to eligible innovators. Pharmaceutical companies would have the opportunity to register their drugs with the HIF, and the assessed health impact of the drug during the previous year would determine the proportion of the fund that would be awarded for that drug. It is estimated that with a pool of $6 billion, the HIF would support a total of 20 drugs, each of which would be eligible for HIF funding for 10 years. This model could easily be expanded to more than 20 drugs if government and other
“14 million people are killed by infectious diseases each year” in encouraging innovation but primarily favours the development of highly profitable drugs rather than those that have the largest impact in society. By allowing innovators to be compensated based on the assessed health impact of their drug and having the drugs sold at cost, the HIF would provide financial incentive for innovation and increase access to lifesaving medications.
donors increased their contributions. Essentially, this model provides a longterm and stable source of income that would encourage ongoing innovation.
available to them. To inform this assessment, the HIF would utilize data from many sources, including clinical trials, practical trials, sales data, sampling of product use, and data on the global burden of disease. Although the HIF system recognizes the significant difficulty incumbent to assessing health impact, it is a more informed reward mechanism than the one currently in place. As of today, the HIF is planning its pilot projects. Since the HIF is currently a proposal, these pilots are necessary in order to test its effectiveness. The aim of the pilot is to reward a pharmaceutical manufacturer on the basis of measured health impact in a region. This pilot will allow the pay-for-performance approach to be field-tested and refined before it is implemented on a wider scale. Ultimately, the HIF is an exciting and novel proposal that could fundamentally change the pharmaceutical industry and lower the cost of medicines, not only in lower-income countries, but in countries around the world. By harnessing the primary driving force behind corporations—financial gain—and tying it to health impact, the HIF is a practical solution to the critical access-to-medicine problem. If the Health Impact Fund is to become a reality, it requires the support and commitment of politicians, academics, and corporations around the world.
When assessing health impact, the HIF would take into account a variety of factors to estimate the difference between the health status of people who used the product in question and their estimated health status had that product not been
Commentary: The HIF is certainly an interesting proposal to solve the issues of global medicine accessibility. The proposition recognizes the fact that generic drugs and at-cost distribution of drugs not only decrease the industry’s innovation, but also contribute to a long-term decrease in the overall global health. This is a very important and often ignored consequence of generic drugs and the “theft” of pharmaceutical profits. Fortunately, the HIF hopes to avoid this. The issue however, lies in the nature of the competition that will be created. By being paid on “performance”, a truly impossible metric when measuring it by “the positive effect on a region,” this opens the system up to further gaming by politicians and increased involvement by ineffective international organizations. While something definitely
needs to be done to stop the unethical distribution of generic drugs, the HIF is merely a step in the right direction. A free market system with patent protection is still the best the world can do at the present time. - Anonymous, Queen’s University, Class of 2013 Irrespective of the Health Impact Fund, the only sustainable path to increasing healthcare access is incentivizing companies and organizations to provide care for those without the resources to pay. Government provision of this care will be ultimately ineffective and create free-rider problems in itself. Instead, governments and other bodies who claim to “protect” individuals from corporations should free pharmaceutical companies to derive profits from car-
ing for individuals, which in turn will give them reason to continue providing this care. We are already seeing these positive effects in certain African countries where governments are unable or unwilling to prevent companies from “testing” new medications on their citizens for no-cost to them. This benefits both the company (who gets to conduct unregulated human trials for free) and the individuals involved (who get access to groundbreaking new drugs), and this model should be expanded globally. -Dietrick Claus
LAND Inquire Publication V5 I1
MINES Relic of History and Pervasive Nightmare
The horrors of war burn death and destruction deep into bodies and minds of soldiers and civilians alike. When it finally ends, widows and orphans are left to mourn. The lucky few who survive breathe a sigh of relief while tears are shed, monuments are erected, and funerals are conducted. Life moves on— leaving behind prisoners, eternally trapped in the shadows of war. Landmines—what better than an artificial, expendable security guard that can keep enemies at bay with the hovering threat of dismemberment and death? Yet when the treaties are signed and the battle lines retreat, it’s not only the bodies that are left behind—no one bothers to reclaim the mines. Today, when recovery operations are in progress, 80 mines a day are still recovered in Belgium—ones that were armed in World War I. Canada was a leader in promoting landmine removal. In 1997, the federal
government worked tirelessly to create what is now known as the Ottawa Treaty. Each state party that signs the treaty must—according to the official document—agree to never use anti-personnel mines. The treaty also requires state parties to never develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile, retain or transfer to anyone, directly or indirectly, anti-personnel mines. Further, states parties must not assist, encourage or induce in any way anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a state party under the convention. The International campaign to ban landmines (ICBL), which facilitated the treaty, received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1997 and has advocated endlessly with the aims of the treaty boiled down to three basic goals: disarmament, mine clearance, and victim assistance. Around 125 states entered in the initial signing, and today that list has increased to 160. Celebrities such as Diana, Princess of Wales, have personally traveled to landmine-infected areas such as Angola, Pakistan, and Bos-
“Life moves on leaving behind prisoners, eternally trapped in the shadows of war”
nia to support landmine removal. That was all in the past, however. Fifteen years after that glorious moment of peace-keeping, Canada is slowly waning from the fight. The current federal government has repeatedly cut down on the funds granted to support agencies. What was once a steady stream of money has slowed to a trickle. From a landmark high of $49.2 million funding in 2007, over $30 million has now been cut with only $16.9 million earmarked this year for landmine recovery and removal. This pales in comparison to the 16 other countries that are investing more than $43 billion (USD) into companies making cluster bombs, most of whom still refuse to sign the Ottawa treaty. Three of the banks and financial intuitions that invest in producers of cluster bombs are Canadian. Canada’s inaction does extend beyond funding cuts, however; compared to countries such as Italy, Belgium, and Ireland, who have national legislation in place that
P. 5
Ronald Leung forbids domestic investing in companies that produce landmines. Canada is heading in the wrong direction. Critics such as Dan Livermore, once the Canadian special ambassador on mine action, charges that “Canada has dropped the ball and walked away, leaving the job unfinished.” Land laced with landmines is not only dangerous, but also wasteful, especially in less fortunate countries where resources are scarce. “No one can build a school in a field of landmines. Farmers won’t till the land. Do you think Walmart will come and open stores? Canada is the pillar of this movement. Nothing is more Canadian than this. We should be doing it” adds Rahul Singh, the founder of Global Medic, a non-profit organization based in Toronto. The Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade disagrees, however. Canada has continued to hold a “leading role internationally in addressing
P. 6
Inquire Publication V5 I1
“The rod is slowly and careful extended into the ground at a 30-degree angle to see if it clicks against a landmine”
the humanitarian impact and explosive remnants of war,” with “more than $200 million contributed” since 2006 “through 250 projects to this global effort,” spokesperson Jean-Bruno Villeneueve responds. “Canada remains deeply committed to this cause.” What’s ironic is that the United States has funded over $420 million to mine recovery and action between fiscal years 1999 and 2003 alone, the largest total for any government, yet they are still one of the 36 states who refuse to ratify the Ottawa Treaty. The last self-acknowledged use of mines by the U.S. was in the 1991 Kuwait and Iraq conflict in which over 117,634 landmines were scattered from airplanes. Over 90,000 antipersonnel mines were stored in regains close to the Iraq conflict since the launch of the invasion in March 2003. The United States also have a robust stockpile of landmines: 10.4 million, the third most in the world behind China and Russia, who store an outrageous 110 million and 60 million respectively, two countries that also refuse to ratify the treaty. How can Canadians even begin to picture the devastating effect of landmines? No modern war has been fought
on Canadian soil and with the rugged mountains and abundance of green space all over the country, it can be hard to picture the hellish confinement and destruction of post-war landmines. Yet the village of Ustipraca, Bosnia suffers from an epidemic of mines, despite sharing a similarly beautiful landscape: blue lakes, rolling green hills, and orchards stuffed with ripe fruit, a scene that wouldn’t be out of place in the rich Ontario countryside. The landmines were primarily used in the Balkan wars which ended almost 20 years ago. Bosnia remains as one of Europe’s poorest nations and the 1,340 square km of mine-covered land certainly does not contribute to their economic fate. In only three years of the Balkan wars, an estimated two million mines were primed. These mines still persist today. In 2011, there was a forest fire near the village, but firefighters couldn’t reach the fire because of the continued threat of landmines. Frequent explosions echoing around the hills set off by the heat of the flames confirmed this deadly suspicion. The local wildlife also suffer similar fates. Once in a while, a single landmine will detonate after being stepped on by a deer. Despite the rich
soil and abundance of timber and fruit dotting the hills around Ustipraca, almost all of it is untouchable. Even the roads leading into the village are fraught with danger. Just two years ago, a local man discovered a landmine near the main street leading into Ustipraca. Three workers then began to section off the area for isolation and clearing when one of them stepped on another landmine. None survived. The removal of landmines is exhausting work. Metal detectors, despite being displayed in popular media as sure methods to search for underground metals, are unworkable because of the abundance of natural minerals in the soil. This leaves the physical search of mines involving a metal poker. The rod is slowly and careful extended into the ground at a 30-degree angle to see if it clicks against a landmine. Workers repeat the process, for a maximum of only five hours a day because it is just extremely psychologically tense and mentally draining. If a landmine is found, detonation occurs in a safe and controlled manner with workers at least 30 meters away.
are not enough to prevent needless death. Resources have become so desperate that people take the danger signs before an area is clear and sell it for scrap metal. This leads to devastating results, such as the death and injury of six railway workers last year, in addition to other innocent bystanders. In central Bosnia, Tarik Bijelic passed away after triggering a landmine while gathering firewood near his rural home. He was only six years old. It’s easy for Canadians to forget about the troubles of these villagers in rural Bosnia. How many of us have even thought about the possibility of landmines in Canada? Already, this idea sounds ridiculous, and for good reason—yet others do not have the same fortune. Why should an idea so passionately advocated by Canada sputter and die in silence? Waging war and leaving landmines to continue the cycle of death decades later is unacceptable— but so is leaving a task half-finished.
The large amount of warning signs scattered all over the Bosnian landscape
Commentary: It is a shame Canada has quietly backed out of a commitment it initiated. However, cuts in funding for peacekeeping and global humanitarian efforts like this have been characteristic of the attitude Canada towards foreign affairs since the late 1990s. The Somalia crisis cast a shadow of doubt over Canada’s capacity as a peacekeeping nation from which it has never fully recovered. The position taken by the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade speaks to this. Why draw attention to the fact humanitarian funding is steadily decreasing when there is an opportunity to propagate the image of Canada as
agency created a network established ‘nation of peacekeepers’? - Andrew Dupuis, Political Studies, in over 90 countries as of 2012 with the Queen’s University, Class of 2013 overarching purpose to realize a world free of antipersonnel landmines and The discussion of landmines, their imcluster munitions. Together, ICBL knows pact on social and cultural development, civil society and governments can realize change. Together, we can help make people and communities, highlights the continued need for the Canadian govtheir mission a reality. and we have a law student! ernment and others to join forces to ensure both the abolishment of these - Matthew Ponsford, J.D. Candidate, antipersonnel devices and the removal University of Ottawa, Class of 2015 of those landmines dispersed across lands. I will draw your reader’s attention to the International Campaign to Ban Against Landmines (ICBL)—a Nobel Peace Prize winning organization. The
Inquire Publication V5 I1
P. 7
The Last
European Dictator Yanka When people ask me where I am from, I am used to the confused expression on their face when I say “Belarus.” Until a few years ago, Belarus was not even a blip on the international radar. It was simply one of the many small countries that was cast from the former Soviet bloc. However, a number of recent events have made news headlines across the globe, and raised some level of international awareness on the startling realization that Belarus is the last dictatorship in Europe. Belarus is located along the borders of Russia, Ukraine, Lithuania and Latvia. A population of approximately 9.5m divided among 6 regions, is still very dependent on agriculture and other rural endeavors for its economic security. Most people in the region speak Russian, however Belarussian is still taught in schools and spoken in the smaller rural villages by the older population. The country has a strong cultural identity and even in political turmoil, the population shows respect for their country through widespread participation in numerous national holidays, especially ‘Victory Day’, celebrated on May 9 of each year in commemoration of victory in the Second World War. All such celebrations are marked by the involvement of veterans, as well as traditional style dance and song, including Belarussian language, poetry, and other public engagements. The President of the Republic of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko, came to power in 1996. A farmer in his youth, his rise to leadership was a result of his combination of fear tactics, ambition,
and outspokenness. He single-handedly abolished any semblance of parliamentary democracy, establishing one which he hand-picked. Simultaneous to this, he stregthened connections with the notorious Russian leader Vladimir Putin. His power continued unchecked for years until the 2010 election, at which point Lukashenko had been at the helm for an unbelievable 14 years. The elections which took place in December 2010 were brought to global attention due to the imprisonment and brutal treatment of the opposition leaders, all of whom—like Alexander Sannikov and the poet Vladimir Niklyaev—were well respected members of society. Their long-term incarceration, in conjunction with the mass arrests and beatings of the civilian population protesting Lukashenko’s so-called December 2010 win, finally brought to light the level of ongoing repression in Belarus. In addition to the elections, there were numerous other situations which revealed his astonishing level of brutality. In April 2011, the bombing of Oktiaborskaia Metro Station in Minsk made international news, including coverage by the CBC and BBC. First seen as an act of terrorism against the President’s residence across the street, the attack occurred during the evening rush hour, injuring over 200 people and leaving 15 dead. Soon after the event, doubts began to surface as to who was responsible for the attack. It was later revealed that the two men who were tried and convicted for the bombing were tortured for their confessions. The actions of Lukashenko’s regime have disillusioned the
people of Belarus and the international audience. Moreover, they demonstrate his willingness to use extreme tactics to preserve his authoritarian power. More recently demonstrations dubbed the Silent Protests occurred in the main cities throughout Belarus in June 2011. Advertised through social media, the protests were carried out without any visible manifestation of dissent. The objective of the protests was to unite the youth of Belarus against the leadership of Lukashenko and figuratively represent their plight through silence. Though they may have believed that the nature of the protests would protect them from persecution, by the fourth protest in late June, the President responded by ordering mass arrests. The arrests entrapped not only participants in the protests but also innocent bystanders. The police did not stop to differentiate bystanders, using excessive force to detain the so-called culprits. For what reason, the government was not obligated to say. It saddens me that in the 21st century, a European country can experience such drastic repression with so little international action. Fortunately, the events of the past few years have inspired the Western world to respond; Lukashenko is now barred from traveling both to North America and the UK. The increased attention on Belarus within international publications is another sign of progress. Growing international awareness about the repression present within Belarus may embolden Belarussians to voice their dissent.
There is still a long way to go in order to triumph over Lukashenko’s grip on power. While one may be inclined to blame the Belarussian people for not being more persistent in their protests against the regime, the reader must consider that the older population of Belarus, survivors of the atrocities of WWII, just want to live the rest of their lives in peace. Meanwhile, the lack of a cohesive opposition and the fear tactics of the regime including the blacklisting of artistic and cultural groups make it difficult for the youth to challenge the legitimacy of their country’s leadership. Although there is no doubt that some level of repression will continue in Belarus for the near future, I am hoping that this article and others like it will inspire people to action. No one deserves to live in a country without the right of free speech, the right of assembly, and the numerous other freedoms that Canadians take for granted. Since the 2010 elections, the youth of Belarus are afraid that the “light of hope” has gone out in Belarus. With the upcoming election, I can only hope that with the increased international attention and the rising friction between the youth and the government, Lukashenko will no longer be able to emerge as President. I urge members Belarusian diaspora not to vote, as our ballots can be altered in order to fit with the needs of the current regime. I urge anyone interested in further information on Belarus, its politics and its history, to look at the BBC archives online, as they have the most comprehensive information available to the English speaking population.
“It saddens me that in the 21st century, a European country can experience such drastic repression with so little international action”
P. 8
Inquire Publication V5 I1
Commentary: I guess Yanka have left Belarus at the young age and following the events via major publishing houses. I would like to point out to the fact that “older population of Belarus, survivors of the atrocities of WWII” is not a majority any more. According to CIA World Fact book less than 14% of population is 65 and older, which give us the prevalence of voting populace who haven’t seen the war, but to be fare to the author still went through the stagnant Soviet era and have the passive mentality. Also I’d like to credit the author for underlining the fact of “lack of a cohesive opposition” which leaves Belarusians without real leadership from the opposition perspective. And at last it would be good to source the photos attached, I guess the first one is Mr. Berluscony (just sentenced for 4 years in Italy) hosted by Lukashenko who has many friends with similar backgroung (Gaddafi, Assad, Ahmadinejad, etc.) - A Fellow Belarussian And what about mr. Putin? Is he a democrat? Or was his election fair and democratic? Or are they going to say that Russia is not a European country any longer? Or, rather, they don’t want to upset their dear leaders who love to fly to Moscow to strike lucrative deals whereas bashing Lukashenko means no consequences? - Vityok (Reddit Sourced)
The term “last European dictatorship” is a term often used in relation to Belarus. It would seem that The Vatican can often slip the mind of journalists. In fact, The Vatican is one of only a handful of States worldwide that actually self-describes as a dictatorship - Reilly616 (Reddit Sourced) According to the democracy indexes of 2006 and 2011 (both at the end of his individual terms as prime minister), Italy wasn’t considered a dictatorship or authoritarian at all. In 2011 it was considered a “flawed democracy”, like France, India, South Africa. Still in the top countries for democracy. - Martelfirst (Reddit Sourced) All EU countries get a score above 9 in “Electoral process and pluralism” and above 8.5 “Civil liberties”, so that’s not the issue. Score is given from 1 to 10, 10 being the highest. If the overall score is below 8, the country is considered a Flawed Democracy. Above 8 is a “Full democracy”. Below 6 is a Hybrid regime (think Hong Kong or Singapore) and below 4 is an authoritarian regime (China, DPRK). Ranked from least flawed to most flawed : Portugal, overall score 7.81. Low score in “Political participation” (6.11) France, 7.77. Low score in “Political participation” (6.11) Slovenia, 7.76. but 6.25 in “Political culture”
Italy, 7.74. 6.43 in “Functioning of government” Greece, 7.65. 5.71 in “Functioning of government” Estonia, 7.61. Low score in “Political participation” (5.00) Slovakia, 7.35. 5.00 in political culture, 5.56 in political participation Cyprus, 7.29 - 6.11 in political culture, 5.63 in political culture. Lithuania, 7.24 low in functioning of govt (5.71) and political participation (5.56) Poland, 7.12 low in political participation (5.00) and political culture (6.25) Latvia, 7.05, low in functioning of govt (5.36), political participation (5.56) and political culture (5.63) Hungary, 7.04, very low in political participation (4.44) Bulgaria, 6.78 very low in political culture (4.38). Romania, 6.54 very low in political culture (4.38) and political participation (4.44)
Basically, EU citizens all live in countries with good civil liberties and free and fair elections. The issues are in political participation (in a lot of countries, people don’t care about the elections), functioning of government (corruption, inefficiencies), and political culture (which is mainly in former eastern block countries where it is understandable). - Yannickemahe (Reddit Sourced)
Inquire Publication V5 I1
P. 9
All Justice for
Michael Davison
From the concentration camps of Nazioccupied Europe, to the killing fields of Cambodia, and the villages of Rwanda, the twentieth century was regarded as a turning point in the scale of conflict and its associated atrocities. Despite 19th century agreements on the laws of war, leaders committed crimes against humanity that went unchecked throughout the following century. When heads of state are accused of crimes against their own people, who will bring them to justice? Following the Holocaust, countries recognized the need for an international tribunal to convict such “untouchable” criminals. The ageless question posed by the Roman poet Juvenal was asked once again: “Who watches the watchmen?” Following the 1945-46 Nuremberg Trials, the United Nations (UN) recognized the need “to study the desirability and possibility of establishing an international judicial organ for the trial of persons charged with genocide.” When genocides occurred in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda in the 1990s, the UN created courts for the trying of these criminals on an ad hoc basis. But there was still demand for a permanent “court of last resort.” In response, UN member states met in 2002 to draft the Rome Statute, which established the International Criminal Court (ICC) to be located in the
Hague, Netherlands. The ICC is the first permanent international court. It is a last resort, meaning it only acts when national institutions are unwilling or unable to do so themselves. Its purpose is to try persons accused of the most serious crimes of international concern: genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. These goals may seem ambitious for a court consisting of only one Chief Prosecutor and 18 judges. Indeed, the ICC has now existed for a decade and has successfully convicted only one man, Thomas Lubanga, to 14 years in jail for the recruitment of child soldiers in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It has issued warrants for 18 individuals following investigations in seven countries on the African continent. This limited success comes as a surprise, considering the 121 states that signed the statute. Surely there are more war criminals going untried by national courts, not just in Africa but across the globe? The urgent need for justice for all humans, in all countries must be obvious? The fact is that amidst criticism of the Court, it has been challenged by opponents and even hindered by those who claim to support it. The ICC has faced political opposition from many countries since its creation. The US has not ratified the Rome Stat-
ute, due to the refusal of the Rome Conference to give control of the Court to the UN Security Council (UNSC). The Bush Administration weakened the Court by making impunity agreements with other nations, threatening that these countries should not surrender accused US nationals to the ICC. These actions limit international recognition of the Court, and undermine its ability to act across all borders. The US government has recently taken a somewhat lighter stance toward the ICC. However, the Court’s scope will be limited until the US and 41 other UN member nations that have not signed the Rome Statute do so. Many warrants issued by the ICC are outstanding because of the Court’s inability to enforce itself. Instead it relies on the actions of willing countries, which have been limited. A good example is the charges brought against the current President of Sudan, Omar al-Bashir. The Sudanese President is accused of genocide and war crimes in the Darfur conflict. Although Sudan is not a signatory of the Rome Statute, the UNSC passed Resolution 1593 requesting Sudan’s compliance with ICC-issued arrests. Not only has the Sudanese government ignored these warrants, but signees to the Rome Statute including Malawi, Kenya, and Chad have refused to arrest Bashir during his visitations. Although it might be expected that Sudan would not comply, for the Court’s own financial and legal supporters to not uphold its rulings is a blow to its authority. A different example involves the 2011 Libyan Civil War, in which Muammar Gaddafi, his son Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, and the head of military intelligence Abdullah Senussi were each indicted by the ICC for crimes against humanity. Recently, Saif and Abdullah were both captured by the new Libyan government in Tripoli. The ICC has requested that Libya hand them over for trial at The Hague, amidst fears from Amnesty International that the new Libyan government is unable to hold fair trials. Libya has refused to give up both criminals and insists that it will try them fairly in Tripoli, where they will face execution if found guilty. Following civil war, new governments often execute old leaders with haste. The
ICC is meant to set an example for such inexperienced governments on the proper use of the rule of law. But the NATO member nations that support the Court and who intervened in Libya, including Canada and the UK, have not stepped forward to pressure the new Libyan government to extradite these criminals to The Hague. As a result, revenge rather than justice may be served in Tripoli. There have been many critics of the ICC. They note that the Court has cost $1.3 billion over the past decade, so far resulting in the conviction of only one man. Furthermore, it has only investigated conflicts in Africa. Western politicians such as the former British Prime Minister Tony Blair have been recommended for ICC investigation without success. In Blair’s case, individuals have accused him of exaggerating the danger posed by the Hussein regime, and therefore his declaration of war against Iraq constitutes a crime of aggression. However, the ICC has only recently defined the crime of aggression in 2010, and signees will decide in 2017 whether to activate ICC jurisdiction over this crime. Despite all this, few can deny the necessity of the investigations the ICC has opened, several of which began at the request of the concerned countries themselves. If these criticisms are addressed, it will provide the Court with an opportunity to increase its international credibility. The ICC’s first ten years must not be seen as a failure, but as a limited success. The very existence of the Court and its recognition by 121 UN member states is a giant step toward the recognition of human rights globally. Moving forward, the ICC must broaden its scope by encouraging more states to ratify its statute, as well as by addressing criticism that it focuses too heavily on the African continent. Until support for the Court broadens, it will continue to face challenges in investigating crimes and enforcing its arrest warrants. Importantly, signees to the Rome Statute should be willing to enforce the decisions of the ICC within their national boundaries. Until this is done, the Court’s ambitious mandate to enforce the universality of human rights will never be fully realized.
Commentary: The need for a successful version of the ICC is important today. As Remembrance Day approaches, Canadians look back at World War II in part to mourn those who suffered and were loss during the horrors of the Holocaust. Today, many people are unaware that genocides are not a thing of the past. The author of this article points out many examples of individuals who commit genocide and are consequently charged with crimes against humanity from the ICC. Yet, these warrants are meaningless until the ICC attains the power and support needed to follow through with their goals.
I believe that the UN has a critical role to play in supporting the ICC, but this is greatly weakened by the lack of support for the ICC from the US. America is a nation willing to use power and might to influence foreign affairs, yet they actively refrain from using this power to support the ICC. Unfortunately many Americans are not aware of the ICC or its purpose. As a Canadian, I believe that awareness and support is essential for an organization that protects human rights and penalizes war criminals who would otherwise go unpunished. Therefore, the ICC needs to continue their efforts to grow
with or without the US, and Canada should be among its main supporters as we stand for human rights and equality. This article does an excellent job of highlighting some of the ICC’s flaws and opportunities; and as a global citizen I hope to someday see the ICC become an influential presence in our world. -Danielle Boucher
Inquire Publication V5 I1
P. 10
Asian-Pacific
Distraction The Diaoyu/ Sankaku Islands Dispute
Even at the best of times relations between China and Japan have been delicate. With memories of Imperialist Japan and the Second World War strongly engrained in Chinese public consciousness, diplomatic incidents with Japan tend to create an overreaction with the Chinese public. Recently, animosity between the two states has escalated to new levels with the dispute over ownership of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands. The root of the disputes date back to 1968, when a UN report suggested that the islands may hold oil underneath them. In the 1970s, both Mainland China and Taiwan instated territorial claims towards these islands as a result of the new findings. These claims were of minor significance until 1996, when the Japanese Youth Federation repaired a lighthouse on one of the Senkaku Islands. As a result of these actions, anti-Japanese protests flared up across China. The streets were filled with pro-
testers chanting anti-Japanese slogans and large portions of the public boycotted Japanese products. Although these protests eventually subsided, Japan and China never reached a concrete agreement regarding the ownership of the islands. The official diplomatic stance on the Islands was to agree to disagree. These islands now have returned to the forefront of Sino-Japanese relations following the Tokyo Municipality’s decision to purchase the islands from their private owner, rendering them as official Japanese state property. Both state and private media in China reported this action as an unacceptable violation of China’s sovereign rights. The inflammatory statements from every conceivable media outlet in China spurred a volatile reaction from the populace. Large swaths of angry Chinese rampaged through the streets, smashing anything Japanese – from stores to cars to consulates. As a result of the outrage, the Japanese suffered sizeable economic
“Even at the best of times relations between China and Japan have been delicate”
setbacks in the form of frozen inventories, heavy reductions in tourism, and waning market confidence in an already stagnant economy. In China, violence by protestors result in death while vandalism caused immense property damage. Across the nation, businesses and factories closed to protect themselves from unrest. One must wonder with all this madness: who is right and who is wrong? The answer is no one and everyone. The timing of this diplomatic crisis could not be more perfect for these two countries. China is in the midst of a crucial power transition from the current Hu Jintao regime to its successors. If the public is preoccupied with Japan, they cannot disrupt the government transition with displays of disapproval or other seditious activities. Similarly, Japan is nearing an election. As economic indicators in Japan are rather lacklustre, the incumbent regime seeks to shore up support by showcasing strength in foreign policy. Escalating
the Island dispute benefits both governments by directing the attention of their public spheres away from domestic affairs. However, this does not mean that this incident is a part of some insidious government scheme. While it may benefit the respective governments of China and Japan to take hardline stances on the issue, they only do so to appeal to the public sphere. Once the Chinese government brings attention to the island dispute through state media, applications for protests and demonstrations will flood in on their own accord. With September 18th being the 71st anniversary of the 1941 Japanese annexation of North East China, Japanese claims for the islands will undoubtedly provoke Chinese outcry as anti-Japanese sentiment run high in China. The outrage runs to such heights that the government in China must use its powers to restrain protesters from becoming too militant. Large segments of Japanese society view the nation’s foreign policy as weak and unfit for a nation as large and economi-
Inquire Publication V5 I1
P. 11
“This dispute is only one of the myriad of problems associated with the Japanese government’s use of revisionist history”
cally influential as Japan. They see little reason for Japan’s rather passive stance in international politics and some even question the point of Japanese pacifism. These people, although nowhere near being the majority of the Japanese population, are still significant enough to warrant political pandering. The development of the Senkaku Islands dispute is indicative of significant issues facing both Chinese and Japanese society. Both the claims of China and Japan are dodgy at best and reasonably, no party should be that outraged. The Chinese must look back at least four centuries until they see a point in time when they actually controlled the islands, and even then, the islands were nearly uninhabit-
ed and part of a Chinese vassal instead of China proper. The Japanese have only ever obtained the islands as a part of their colonial expansion in the late 19th century – their best claim is still morally unsound. Japan keeps reviving the issue of the islands despite the nigh-impossibility of Chinese acquiescence to elicit support by appealing to a public opinion that reflects a disregard for history. Outside post-secondary education, Japanese history lessons generally omit the nation’s dark past of mass slaughter and human rights abuse. Naturally without this context, many would believe that land acquired during Japan’s colonial era is rightfully theirs. This dispute is only one of the myriad of problems associated
with the Japanese government’s use of revisionist history. Chinese society has similar problems: Instead of omitting historical details, Chinese education strongly emphasizes its oppressed past. The Chinese Communist Party shifted the basis of their legitimacy from communism to economic progress and nationalism which requires them to frame Chinese history in a manner that perpetuated anti-foreign sentiment. Despite how powerful China is in compared to Japan these nations, much of the Chinese public see all foreign disagreements with China as both bullying and oppressive. This opinion compels the public to demand a hardline stance from the government on issues of territorial sovereignty, though these demands usually remain unmet.
The islands dispute and others like it will remain unresolved in the foreseeable future. The relevance of these issues stem from revisionist accounts of history which have inflamed nationalism. These diplomatic incidents will remain useful tools for the government to use as distractions. However, it is doubtful that military conflict will arise from the land claims, as China and Japan are too economically interdependent. A conflict with China would cripple Japan economically while Japan’s alliance with the United States makes instigating military action a dangerous move for China. Even if the dispute does not result in force of arms, it will continue to plague Sino-Japanese relations and act as a destabilizing factor for the AsiaPacific region.
Commentary: As clearly stated within the article, the strenuous history between Japan and China originated from the decade before World War II, when Japanese troops invaded Chinese territory and wrecked havoc on the civilian population. People study history for various reasons and one of the most important is to learn from the past in order to prevent the same mistakes in the future. One conclusion I think many people should, but have yet to make, from history is to take it for what it is – history. Last year, I went back to visit China with my parents and for one of our trips, we visited my cousin who lives in Zheng Zhou. I happened to stumble across his Grade 4 history book and was totally appalled by its content and language used to describe Japanese people. Not only that, but it encouraged school children to despise the Japanese due to the two country’s historical conflicts. In
the end, hatred only breeds more hatred and an eye for an eye eventually leaves the entire world blind. Sometimes, it might be best to put down your pride and approach a problem logically and without bias. Only then will they find a viable solution to their problem. - Anonymous I agree that the Senkaku/Diaoyu Island dispute is an exercise in distraction, meant to attract attention away from domestic issues facing the administrations of each country. However, at least in the case of China, I think that the issues being obscured are more diverse than simply its impending leadership transition. Despite all the obscurity surrounding the internal workings of the Chinese Communist Party, it is clear that Xi Jinping has long been favoured as Hu Jintao’s successor as General Secretary. For an authoritarian regime,
this leadership transition is about as bureaucratic, orderly, and transparent as they come. Arguably of greater concern for Chinese elite is the wavering growth of its economy, and legitimacy that will occur if the unspoken contract –authoritarian governance in return for economic prosperity – with its people is broken. Coupled with the knowledge of America’s ‘pivot’ towards Asia in terms of its defense and security priorities, and the fact that China is still tremendously weaker militarily than its super power incumbent, the CCP is likely feeling the heat both internally and internationally. The use of nationalistic fervor is not an uncommon tactic used to graft responsibility for a state’s problems onto a scapegoat – a role that it appears Japan has conveniently filled in this case. - Anonymous
Inquire Publication V5 I1
New
Insite
Imagine you are a child walking home from school in a cluttered downtown core. You trip in a heap of garbage and turn to realize there’s more to it. A woman who looks to be around 30 years old is buried beneath the trash. She is riddled with needle tracks; her body has just expunged all waste to try to flush out the toxins that have left an expression of terror frozen on her face. She’d died alone, stripped of her humanity, left to rot in the sun by the trash. But she isn’t trash. She is somebody’s daughter, somebody’s sister, somebody’s mother. She does not deserve that. In many areas, the sight of such extremely disadvantaged people is as common as it is wrong. The problem exists, but what can be done about it?
Safe injection sites give intravenous drug users a supervised and legal environment to inject. Safe needles are provided, medical attention is at hand, and detoxification and rehab facilities are usually in the same building. Vancouver’s safe injection site, Insite, is an answer to the East Side’s drug pandemic. Needles were strewn over the streets, alleyways were a sure place to find a dead body, and public injection was rife. Proponents of safe injection sites in Vancouver and elsewhere have argued that they directly save lives, reduce addiction, and improve public order. It is important to note that safe injection sites cater to the disadvantaged who would otherwise be injecting on the streets. Infectious diseases arising from needle sharing—such as HIV or hepatitis—are a fatal pronouncement for these people who would often rather die than approach the medical system. But the prevention of infectious disease in safe injection sites also saves the wider public from these diseases, which will inevitably spread. In fact, a study in the Canadian
Medical Association journal showed that Insite could save the healthcare system $20 million and significantly increase life span in the next ten years by stemming the spread of infectious disease. Infectious disease is not the only concern. Drug overdose kills, and kills frequently. It begins with slow respiratory failure that renders the user unable to respond and soon unable to effectively move. Nobody has ever died of drug overdose at Insite because medical staff is on hand to help. In fact, Insite has cut overall overdose deaths in the area by 35 percent according to a study in the Lancet Medical Journal. Beside dumpsters in dark alleyways, let’s just say medical staff is rare, at best. Almost counter-intuitively, safe injection sites can help people overcome their addictions. Drug addiction is a terrifying reality that many of society’s disadvantaged live with. It’s a waking and sleeping horror. But what do addicts get on top of it? They’re labelled as criminals, scum, and trash. They’re shunned and confined to shooting up in terrible conditions. To give them this baseline respect puts them a step closer to even the most basic healthcare we guarantee for all citizens. In a clean and secure environment, addicts can develop a closer trust with staff that is essential for the physician-patient relationship. Many addicts stay away from rehabilitation or treatment facilities because of alienation, fear, and distrust. Bringing them into the heart of healthcare is a crucial step to treatment and care. In 2010, Insite made 5,000 referrals to other services including onsite rehabilitation, with record completion rates. The model has been successful.
P. 12
Mohamed Sarraj legitimize and encourage drug use. But I would argue that being treated as someone who is sick, surrounded by medical staff, and constantly monitored does not attract those who do not use drugs. They are seen as a blessing by those who are currently addicted, but first-time drug users never plan on being addicted and would hardly think about safe injection sites when considering drugs to start with. Yet some may say that it is the very negative conditions surrounding drug use that discourage it, and safe injection sites only alleviate the deterrents of drug use. These deterrents include death, alienation, and legal troubles. But again, initial drug use is hardly rational, and even so, a life with drugs in Vancouver, or anywhere, is still obviously worse than one without. Even assuming that safe injection sites may encourage some drug use, the effect is minimal, and it is still for the greatest good to expand the sites. The issue of perception also plays a big part in safe injection sites. In Vancouver, Insite reduced the amount of discarded needles and public injections. Many argue that seeing this particular public disorder encourages and creates an environment in which crime thrives. However, others argued before that Insite would have led to a migration of drug trafficking into Vancouver. The data show little to no negative impact on crime. Strict illegality should never take precedence over a policy that can help save citizens, improve general health, and reduce addiction. Insite has worked in Vancouver and it can work in other parts of the country. People deserve better, and stigma should not push us into shying away from real problems.
Others say, however, that to expand these facilities is to
Commentary: This article has touched upon concerns of stigma, perception and addiction. Despite negative connotations with the safe injection sites, I do agree that they should be allowed as the benefits outweigh the negative consequences. However, I feel the author has seemingly skimmed over a few main points to support their argument. First of all, these safe injection sites are a step towards helping addicts and a part of a wider cause. The list of how these injection sites help is premature in my opinion. Having these areas does help, but more needs to be done. You cannot expect that these sites will reduce all the ills listed in this article from dead bodies and needles in the streets on their own. Secondly, the author suggests the labeling of addicts. Relating to my first point, there needs to be some kind of sociocultural discussion concerning why these sites are being rejected by the
public. There is no “why” or “how” within this article - just some illusions of bodies in the street and some observations that I could read within a Wikipedia article. In my opinion, the author comes across with an air of innocent ignorance. The entire article does not touch on any key points, and looks at the issue from a very one dimensional, typical perspective. -Lindsay This was a great piece that has provided perspective on the use of safe injection sites in Vancouver. A key point is the concept that simply because safe injection sites exist, does not mean that they are encouraging drug use and actually do the opposite. The rejection of this fact is a struggle that advocates of safe injection sites face in encouraging the creation of such sites. Advocacy efforts that use evidence and research to
inform lawmakers and the public about such correlations are critical in encouraging the continuation of Insite and other similar efforts. The role of stigma is often looked over but as this article pointed out, it is crucial in the treatment of those with drug addiction as it is intersected with many of the issues that are faced. Insite is one step in the right direction towards reducing stigma. Insite is a model for many other cities and regions that experience problems with intravenous drug use and I hope that it is continued throughout Canada. - Sara
Inquire Publication V5 I1
P. 13
Fertile Research
Megan Scarth Few topics in modern science have attracted as much attention in recent years as stem cells. Stem cells have an enormous potential to treat a large number of debilitating diseases and injuries that affect millions of people worldwide, and this capacity arises from their ability to adapt into any cell in the body. Someone who suffers from heart disease, for example, may have healthy cardiac cells transplanted into them to aid their failing heart. Stem cells may even be used to grow a new limb for someone who has been in an accident. The limb’s basis in the patient’s own cells would reduce the risk of the body rejecting an otherwise foreign appendage. With so many possible uses in modern medicine, it is easy to understand why these cells are the subject of so much current research. This research, however, bound to the limitations of Canadian regulation, slowing down the rate of potentially life-saving breakthroughs that could be made. While the potential benefits of stem cells are undeniable, they have been subject to a large amount of controversy since their discovery; originally, stem cells were derived from the tissues of human embryos, which many pro-life activists deemed to be unethical (Naik 2012). Fortunately, since the advent of induced pluripotent stem cells in 2007, adult cells taken from almost anywhere in the body were, for the first time, able to be “induced” into acting like these
embryonic stem cells, eliminating the need for human embryos (Naik 2012). Though governments are often slow to shift policy in response to scientific changes, progress is being made: last August the United States made headlines when its Court of Appeals ruled in favor of continuing its stem cell research after a difficult three-year battle with pro-life groups (Kaiser 2012). Though stem cell research is legal here in Canada, it is often difficult for
to perform them, and experts estimate that these laws will delay research in the field by approximately 10 years (Blackwell 2012). For the Canadians currently suffering from crippling injuries or lifethreatening illnesses, a decade is simply too long to wait. Left with no other option, many of them have been forced to travel to countries such as China to seek unregulated and often dangerous treatment (Blackwell 2012). Now that stem cell research has been able to sidestep the moral issues surrounding the use of
“With so many possible uses in modern medicine, it is easy to understand why these cells are the subject of so much current research Canadian labs to secure the necessary funding for their work (Canadian Institutes of Health 2010). Unlike in Europe or the United States, Canadian law dictates that stem cell research must first be conducted on non-human subjects before any experiments, no matter how carefully-controlled, may be conducted on humans (Blackwell 2012). Not only does this raise the ethical concern of animal testing, but these experiments are usually extremely costly and time-consuming (Blackwell 2012). Many researchers lack the funds
embryos, why is Canada still so hesitant to explore this promising new field? That’s what Canadian researcher Dr. Armin Curt wants to know. After four years at the University of British Columbia, Curt moved to Switzerland where laws governing stem cell research are far less restrictive (Blackwell 2012). It was there that he made worldwide headlines when he became the first person to provide evidence that stem cells can be used to effectively treat patients suffering from spinal cord injuries
(Adams 2012). Yet due to governmentimposed regulations, this discovery was credited to Swiss scientists instead of Canadians (Blackwell 2012). Despite its many drawbacks, there are, of course, benefits to conducting preliminary experiments on primates. These studies would allow scientists to refine their techniques and develop more effective and less dangerous methods of treatment before dealing with humans. This is important because while the positive effects of stem cell research on lab animals such as rats has been well-documented, very little research thus far has actually been conducted on people, mostly because the field is so new (Blackwell 2012). But is lowering these risks worth the wait, especially for the fatally-ill who would rather seek experimental treatment than none at all? It’s a difficult question to which there is no clear answer. In my opinion, however, the urgency with which this medical breakthrough is needed overshadows the gains to be had by delaying its progress. Fortunately, progress is still being made in this field, even if it is not necessarily happening in Canada. Scientists are hopeful that cures for many oncethought “untreatable” diseases will be found, though the speed at which they are researched is contingent on the ongoing debate.
Commentary: The media often places emphasis on the efficacy and ‘breakthroughs’ of clinical trials, taking their findings out of context. Stem cells in particular, through innovation and controversy, have become a buzz-word in the media for the promises of the medicine of the future. However, new drugs, vaccines and therapies are constantly being discovered in medical research, and not all of them hold up to the expectations originally placed upon them. Importantly, there is a fundamental lack of understanding of the differences between induced and embryonic pluripotent stem cells. This calls for basic scientific research into why, for example, induced stem cells have reduced efficiency and higher cell death rates than embryonic stem cells. The regulatory ‘hurdles’ that research-
ers face for clinical trials are based not only on protecting trial subjects, but on ensuring that sufficient evidence exists to ensure that a trial is warranted. These same hurdles exist for other therapies, just as they do for stem cells. Although regulatory bodies should not back away from stem cell research, it must undergo those same standards of ethical research as other therapies. This will protect patients and prevent clinical trials that are not warranted by sufficient evidence, resulting in wasted research funds. This is why the basic science research into stem cells, such as that occurring here at McMaster’s Stem Cell and Cancer Research Institute, will continue to be a vital precursor to clinical trials. - Mike Davison, Msc Mcmaster Stem cell research has continually been
a contentious subject in recent years with debate mainly centered around the harvesting methods. However, with medical innovation like those stated in the article, I think that the question of whether it is immoral or proper should be a non-issue and that research should be encouraged. I’m sure it is easy for these pro-life advocates to stand and continue to call foul on something that can revolutionize treatments for a broad variety of ailments. It would be a complete disgrace for us as a society to deny people their one hope of being treated by stem cells. - Raymond C, Bachelor of Arts, Simon Fraser University Class of 2013 (Abridged Comment)
Inquire Publication V5 I1
Anorexia Nervosa
P. 14
The Ethical Dilemma of Force Feeding Tetyana Pekar Anorexia nervosa (AN) affects 0.1-1 percent of the population and has the highest mortality rate of any psychiatric illness1. Anorexia doesn’t discriminate against age, sexual orientation, gender, or race. Nor is it limited to Western countries or middle-class white girls. Occasionally, severe cases of anorexia nervosa gather media attention and a lot of controversy. At the heart of the matter is an ethical dilemma: whether and under what circumstances should patients be force-fed or allowed to starve themselves to death? Several such cases have recently been publicized. The first case is a 32-yearold former medical student from Wales2, known only as “E.” E hasn’t had solid food for more than a year and has a body mass index (BMI) of 1112—a normal BMI is 20-25. Although she does not want to die per se, E, above all, does not want to be fed. Her chances of recovery are between 10-20 percent, according to a consulting psychiatrist and eating disorder specialist. Those who know her well—including her parents—oppose further treatment and believe she deserves the right to die with dignity. The second case3 is of an anorexic known as “L.” L is 29-years-old, and in the last 15 years, she has spent 90 percent of her time as an in-patient. She weighs just 45 lbs. Like E, L did not express a desire to die, but stated that “her severe anorexia ‘did not allow her to eat.’ ” Typically, such ethical dilemmas are approached by attempting to grant the competent patient’s wishes, helping the patient, and considering the interests of all involved. The situation in anorexia nervosa, however, is much more complex. Anorexia nervosa patients are typically not psychotic and often do not pose an imminent risk to themselves—they are generally not suicidal, and don’t express an overt desire to die, although their actions certainly lead to a slow death. They are usually competent, and quite rational, they are “just unable” to eat enough to maintain a normal weight. Interestingly, the High Court judges ruled differently in these two cases. In the case of E, the judge ruled that she
should be force-fed, alluding to the fact that E may not, at this time, fully appreciate that we only get one chance at life. In the case of L, however, the judge concluded that although nutrition and hydration should be offered to L, staff were not permitted to use “force” to administer food, water, or medicine. Charlotte Green4, a 35-year-old anorexia nervosa patient who spoke to the UK newspaper The Telegraph in response to these cases, stated that the duration and severity of the illness are important factors that must be considered whenever the decision to force-feed is made. For Green, who has been severely sick for over a decade and spent most of that time in treatment, the prospects of recovery are grim. “I have been ill for 15 years and it only gets harder… I want to be allowed responsibility for what happens next,” Green said. Starvation alters the way our brains function. It is conceivable that once re-fed, these patients will be thankful for the decisions made on their behalf; certainly, there are patients with anorexia nervosa who were force-fed at one point and are now recovered. But, the opposite scenario could just as easily be true: forced feeding could cause more suffering for the patient and the family, as caregiving for a patient that refuses treatment is incredibly difficult. What if it is too late? We cannot force patients to recover—force feeding for life is unsustainable. Green—who has been sick for 15 years—doesn’t want any more money wasted on treatment, wasted because she doesn’t “engage” in it. “They [the psychiatrists] can make me pretend as much as they want to—but in the end I’m only pretending,” she adds. Shouldn’t patients in these situations be allowed to die with dignity? What are doctors to do when patients don’t want to die, but cannot eat? Refuse to eat. How do you treat someone for whom death is a better alternative than eating? This is the illness talking. Winning. But, if treatment for decades has failed, does it ever come to a point where clinicians and parents can say, what’s been done has been done, we can’t do any more?
An astute commentator on a Facebook page for FEAST (Families Empowered and Supporting Treatment for Eating Disorders) wrote that “the biggest ethical issue here is in the failure to treat adequately while this woman (referring to the case of L) still had hope,” adding that “there may come a point of no return in some people’s AN.” Some, like Laura Collins, author of Eating with Your Anorexic, believe that allowing these patients to die is akin to murder. On the same Facebook thread, Collins wrote “To hospitalize without restoring normal health, to depend on the mentally ill patient’s assessment, and to believe that the real person in there ‘wants’ to die [is murder]. We would do better for someone in a coma. This is a basic misunderstanding of the nature of anorexia nervosa. If they ‘allow’ her illness to kill her they are making themselves more comfortable, not her— she only gets one life and it is not her fault or choice that they’ve failed her so thoroughly (emphasis mine).” Although caregivers are not required to sacrifice themselves to save someone, especially if their prospects of recovery are grim, we cannot ignore or deny the important role that strong emotional reactions may have on the physicians’ and caregivers’ decisions with regard to treatment. To what extent are the decisions made by the judges based on making themselves, and the treatment team, feel comfortable? Historically, patients with anorexia nervosa have achieved a reputation of being notoriously difficult to treat. Resistant, deceitful, manipulative, greedy, selfish, and narcissistic are just some of the words that physicians have used to describe AN patients5. Caring for a patient with AN6 can be emotionally and financially draining, and this has grave implications for how patients are treated; particularly in cases where the decision to force-feed becomes unavoidable. The concern is that treatment might be withheld because patients are perceived as being difficult. Hebert and Weingarten, in their analysis of the ethics of forced feeding in anorexia nervosa7, worry “that an analysis of futility that uses only abstractions such as benefits
and burden may simply be a post-facto rationalization of the strong negative feelings such patients evoke in others.” If the patient with anorexia nervosa is deemed incompetent, then is it up to the parents and physicians—who are likely mentally exhausted from years of treatment—to decide? If, on the other hand, the patient is deemed competent, but not suicidal—with no intention to die, but no ability to do what’s necessary to survive—do we grant the patient ability to refuse food when food refusal is at the very heart of this disorder? Appelbaum and Rumpf, in their paper titled Civil Commitment to the Anorexic Patient8 write that “denial is such an integral part of the disorder, even many anorexics who can recite lists of adverse outcomes associated with their disorders are, at the same time, quite sure that none of these events will ever happen to them. Although these patients are not globally incompetent, they may well be incompetent to make decisions about providing themselves with basic sustenance or obtaining medical care.” Is this letting anorexia win or is it acknowledging that this deadly illness is often intractable? For many of these cases perhaps it is too late. But one thing is clear: in all of these cases, those in charge of treatment (or financing treatment) have failed; even just by letting their patient’s disorder get this far. To deny someone treatment—as many insurance companies do—is to fail patients; to discharge patients when they are not ready because treating them is too hard, is to fail patients. To belittle, dismiss and minimize the grave nature of this illness is to fail these patients. Inability to eat enough to maintain a healthy weight is at the center of this disorder and allowing patients to refuse food under the guise of autonomy is admitting the illness won. We can do better. We have to. We need to provide better treatment—and provide it early on, before eating disorder behaviours become engrained. We need to educate health care professionals, medical students, families and partners about this disorder, because recovery is possible and death is preventable.
COMMENTS ON THE FO
P. 15
Inquire Publication V5 I1
Starve Adventures in Male Body Image Devin McDonald I sit here with hunger in my stomach. I contemplate whether or not to eat something. I could continue to starve myself until 6pm or I could eat something more befitting of my caloric requirements. That’s to say, not just coffee, almonds and Preventia; the current composition of my diet. Though I would like to say that this behavior is some sort of act of self discipline, aestheticism, or religious fasting, it is more accurately a feature of my neurotic—if not wholly irrational—approach to weight loss. After returning from Japan earlier this year, I discovered that my weight had risen by about 10 lbs (apparently, ramen is much fattier than it looks). Upon discovering my body’s adoption of ten butter sticks, I shifted my mental fortitude towards the practice of weight loss. My form of dieting consists largely of not eating, as opposed to more strategic formulations of planned meals or low calorie foods or whatever the diet de jour happens to be. I have been informed, perhaps ad nauseum, of the ill conceived nature of my plan. Yet I persist daily pondering whether to indulge in another packet of Preventia. I am revealing all of this to you not because I think my dieting habits are especially interesting or something you ought to follow. In fact, I find writing this quite uncomfortable. It is not easy for me, as a heterosexual male, who for all intents and purposes is quite normal, to admit that I have body image issues. Nonetheless, I am writing about this because I think I am anything but an exception. I think I am part of a silent majority of men who struggle to find satisfaction with their body image. There is a notable public discourse on the body image pressures women face. It is even a feature of pop culture for women to dread over the vicissitudes of their weight or to dote over their public image. Yet this is rarely the case for men, only the vainest characters might obsess over their outfit or their physical condition (barring physical condition for sports). This is not to say that women do not face immense pressure about their body image, but rather that men face similar if not equal pressure to conform to an unattainable ideal—Adonis is just as coveted as Venus. The difference is that men have not had the same emotional release valves available to them.
The most dominant social construction of male body image is one of contradiction. Ostensibly we are taught to not care about what we look like. Real men are too busy logging forests or lifting rocks to bare any attention to their outward appearance. Clothing is a matter of utility. Skin is a matter of irritation. Selling body care products to men must be done either by appealing to the magnetic affect the product has in drawing women, or through the convenience of its use. Yet despite the assumption of apathy towards appearance there is still pressure to look like you are the captain of the rowing team; until we have become walking inverted triangles we have failed to acquire any sense of manhood. Notably, just as the vast majority of women’s bodies do not adhere to the super model body image, the vast majority of men do not adhere to any equivalent platonic ideal. What is perhaps most troubling about the paradoxical nature of male body image is the lack of avenues it avails to men to talk about their insecurities. It’s not exactly poker table conversation to talk about your concern for your the extra weight around your hips, or your under-defined arms, all this between burps and gulps of beer. You’re caught forfeiting your manhood lest you attempting to air any insecurities. Body images issues for women are increasingly within the scope of the public eye. Dove’s famous campaign focused on accepting the diversity of the female form and the implication that there is no perfect body type is a good example. One need not look further than the use of steroids as a demonstration of male body images issues. So compelling is the need for the ideal body, some men pursue the use of both illegal and dangerous substances to assist in their endless chase of perfection. The US-based National Institute for Drug Use reports that the use of anabolic steroids can lead to “kidney impairment or failure; damage to the liver; and cardiovascular problems including enlargement of the heart, high blood pressure, and changes in blood cholesterol leading to an increased risk of stroke and heart attack.” The drug can also have long-term psychiatric complications including the notorious “roid rage,” in addition to other states of mental instability.
“It’s not exactly poker table conversation to talk about your concern for your the extra weight around your hips” Even worse perhaps, is the silence which surrounds the issue of male anorexia and bulimia. 20 percent of those with either of the two diseases is male but given the public image of body images condition one would think the condition only afflicts the female half of the population. The focus of treatment on women is strong enough to make it significantly harder for men to recover. Men afflicted with anorexia take, on average, one-third longer to recover. This is likely due to the immense difficulty one would have in admitting they have a problem and seeking help; I have difficulty imagining something harder than admitting to have a condition which is branded by the public as residing wholly in the sphere of the female. A recent GQ article chronicled the dire state of support for male anorexics and bulimics. They found that a majority of treatment centres did not admit male patients due to the gender focused nature of their treatment. If a male becomes an anorexic they face the dually troubling feat of both admitting their affliction and seeking out nearly non-existent treatment options. Making progress on body image issues for both men and women require that we move forward in our understanding of the state of mind that drives someone to starve themselves into ill health. Common features of anorexics are obsessive, perfectionist, and neurotic behaviors. We need to recognize that the juncture of these mental attributes and a society which drives its member to physical obsession are the cause of anorexia and bulimia. Bulimia arises not from the some innate female qualities but rather from the pressures mentioned above. The intent of the essay is not to under-
OLLOWING PAGE (Pg. 16)
mine the value of all the work that goes into supporting the pressures women face with regards to their body. They face just as steep a hill as men, if not steeper, as evidenced by the 80 percent of anorexics that are female. Rather the intent is bring to light and contribute to the growing dialogue about the issues men face with their bodies. Silence does not betoken apathy but often an inner struggle confronting the paradox of the ideal male. It is easy to appear not to have body images issues when you are a TV character who embodies everything that is the ideal. Yet, in reality not everyone can have a six-pack or shoulders like an ox. What we should recognize as a society is that not having those features is just fine. Just as the women in the Dove commercial are shown accepting their body, why can’t men? Fortunately, I am not anorexic nor bulimic but I cannot say with confidence this is due to a complete invulnerability. Rather, I feel this is in part due to the support I have available to me. I have a strong group of friend and a supportive family. I often feel that in other circumstances the obsessive, neurotic, and compulsive natures which often drive my ability could spur on a much more harrowing affliction than my occasional dieting. Yet there remains innumerable men who do not have the support systems I do, who may fall into a similar trap but find themselves in a hall of silence.
P. 16
Inquire Publication V5 I1
Commentary: Is it worth noting that the male ideal is based on a strong and healthy body (Counting the Bodybuilder physique as an outlier in this case) while the ideal feminine form is one of fetishized waifishness and improbable genetic fat distribution? - Anonymous
the stigma that afflicts those males who helpless and don’t know any better for suffer in silence. themselves. In many respects, they’re -Anonymous like our children. Helpless and sometimes aren’t aware of what might be I wonder how much of body image is best for them. Think of a baby; babies affected by anti-fat jargon. I hear it from are helpless. They’re God’s gift to mansubtle comments about “I/he/she USE kind. Why do we look after our babies to be fat.” how much do these converand force feed them even when they sations affect the way we believe our don’t want to eat? Why do we ignore In response to the first comment, I’m bodies need to appear? Our bodies our children’s comments sometimes on uncertain where to go with that... On are no longer ours to live in but rather purpose and do things that are against the one hand, it is true that women’s objects for other people to see. Also, their wishes when we know in our hearts body images are often an unhealthy where is this sort of talk more prevathat what we’re doing is best for them? and unattainable goal which makes lent? and how can we prevent it from Might it be that we actually love them, them dangerous to pursue. However, happening there? care for them, and want them to happy it seems to me that some of the meth-Anonymous and healthy? Why shouldn’t we perceive ods men are using to attain a “strong sick individuals the same way? and healthy body” are not healthy at Dear Tetyana Pekar, thank-you for comall. Moreover, if we really do believe posing such a thought provoking article. As the late Steve Jobs said, “don’t be that the male ideal type is just a healthy However, it does hurt me that the writer trapped by dogma which is living with male, then we seem to be missing the of this article is completely biased. Tety- the results of other people’s thinking.” point of the article. This article is not ana is definitely leaning more towards We as a society have created these about whether or not men should purone side rather than looking at anorexia great legal and medical institutions. sue an ideal body type. What’s at issue nervosa from an objective point of view. However, over time we have become here is that men are silently expected I would like to share a few thoughts with complacent and have been trapped by to achieve this body type, regardless of you and hopefully others can provide these deadly social creations. Evolution their individual situations and life plans. their input as well. is slow, and corrupt individuals resist By calling it healthy, I think we risk being change because they want to maintain blind to the struggle Devin is describing When it comes to human or animal life, their power and prestige. We should here. Perhaps we need to rethink what a people must rise up and do whatever take a universal perspective. It is im“healthy” body looks like... it takes to help our brothers and sister perative that we try our best to help -Anonymous during that troublesome time. Giving up those with Anorexia Nervosa. We need on someone because you cannot see to change our laws & constituents with This comment is in no was intended to visible pain shows that we as a species respect to health care reforms and alter take away from the suffering describes, are becoming weaker and lack courage other national laws. We need to set-up and the fact that the issue of anorexia in to help others. Agreeing to do what a a system of values where helping others males is paid so little attention is dissick person wants elegantly showcases is a MUST and not left in the hands of gusting in its own right, but I do think one’s unique level of stupidity. When a judge, a doctor, or even parents. We that it is worth mentioning that in some we start to feel that others are being a must do everything we can to help othsense this issue is even more problemburden on society and we would rather ers survive. atic when one considers that women’s let them die than pay for their expensive insecurities often stem from men’s perhealth care treatment, is the moment I would like to apologize if I may have ceived lack thereof. This may not be the that we as a species have failed. offended anyone. However, when it case for every woman, but the ease with comes to human life, we should always which the men around me ‘appeared’ to The only reason healthcare treatments hope for the best and act in a way that maintain their weight was definitely a are so expensive is because we have gives others another chance to survive, factor in my own anorexia growing up. accepted defeat by saying “well, there’s to live, and to thrive. Ultimately, life and I have clear memories of being outright nothing we can do about the high cost death is not in our hands and thinking envious of males’ wardrobe choices of the treatments.” Hell no! United we otherwise is only a delusion and foolishwhich as far as I was aware consisted can do anything! We’re the ones who ness. of comfortable t-shirts and loose jeans put politicians in the office in the first - Anonymous Queen’s 2013 while I felt pressured to essentially wear place. tight-everything. I imagined the boys in In my opinion, in extreme cases the my year simply rolling out of bed and The pharmaceutical industry is a giant decision to force feed an individual with donning whatever was closest to them trap of greed to which many people anorexia should not have to be debated. while my morning routine involved a have fallen victim. If the great patriotic Anorexia nervosa is a mental disorder lengthy process of finding an outfit citizens and taxpayers of the land deand is often accompanied by cogniwhich performed the dual task of accen- cide that certain health care treatments tive distortions, anxiety, and denial. For tuating my barely-there breasts while should not be copyrighted or patented, example, a common cognitive distortion also showing off my slim waistline – the but rather should be made available to is equating a low body weight with selfone that I was literally starving myself all at a reduced cost in order to sustain worth and success. Thus, the statement to achieve. What I am describing here life, then who’s stopping them? Get rid that people with anorexia are not suiis a vicious cycle of sorts. Body-builders of those greedy politicians. Promote a cidal or psychotic is a weak argument; aside, the stigma associated with anculture constructed on the principles of these individuals’ thoughts are clearly orexia in males has made it uncommon humanity. The people of North America misguided. As a result, in severe cases, for men to speak out about this issue, and Europe find it acceptable to pay they should be force fed and given and this has in turn made it easier for disgustingly high medical costs. We therapy. However, treating the physical women to believe that men are reladeny treatment to the poor. Is there aspects of this condition will not lead to tively blithe when it comes to all things nothing that we can do as a society? improvement unless the mental compoweight-related. I would argue, based on To look after our own? Is money everynents (i.e., the core of this disorder) are my own experience, that this perceived thing? Monopolists would disagree with addressed as well. lack of male concern with body-image my statements but who is asking them -Anonymous Queen’s Psychology 2013 breeds (or at the very least feeds into) anyways. anorexia in females – the prevalence of which has cast a shadow over men’s an- Think of those suffering from Anorexia orexia and is thus largely responsible for Nervosa as patients. Patients that are
Inquire Publication V5 I1
P. 17
STEREOTYPES People Don’t Shape Stereotypes, Stereotypes Shape People Arnav Agarwal-
Friday, June 29th, 5:20pm. Public transit, back-seat. Rosa Parks might disagree, but sitting at the back of the bus carries its own sense of adventure. A young student belonging to an ethnic minority group walks onto the bus, dropping his coins into the machine at the front and picking up a transfer from the bus-driver. He walks to the back of the bus, a small grin on his face and skateboard in hand. As he finds a seat at the back, he peers out the window, and receives a smile from his friend on the exterior of the bus. Pulling open the window with a slight tug, he stretches his arm and quickly throws something out the window. A breeze propels his small paper ball floats under the bus. Outside, the boy’s friend—also an ethnic minority—bends underneath the bus to retrieve the seemingly discarded paper. He picks himself up, dusting off his pants before casually walking to the front of the bus, opens the ball, and shows a transfer ticket to the bus-driver before making his way to his friend. One transfer allowed three young people to board the bus, as they repeated the act twice more times within a span of three minutes. I was just as intrigued by the cleverness of this plan as I was shocked by how far people can go to save $3.25. As I shared this experience with one
of my friends, he shook his head in disapproval. “Why are you even surprised?” he asked. “That’s their way. What do you expect?” While I couldn’t disagree more with his prejudice, he raised an important question: what do we expect? In a multicultural hub, marked by its dynamic diversity, we have engineered a society that has a mindset of its own. Some may see this as a good thing—conforming to a unified social perspective. They couldn’t be further from the truth. When we examine “at-risk” groups in educational institutions, minority ethnicities are often the highest on the list. Similar trends can be found in crime rates across the globe. A prime example of this is an article in the UK’s Daily Mail, which stated that authorities hold the black population responsible for both the majority of crimes committed and for being twice as likely to be victims of crime, despite only 12 percent of London’s 7.5 million people being black in ethnicity. The article, published in 2010 and titled “black men ‘to blame for most violent crime’… but they’re also the victims”, mentioned 67% of those caught for gun crimes in 2009-2010 in London were black, and the police held black men responsible for two-thirds of shootings and more than half the robberies and street crimes in London, according to figures released
by Scotland Yard. A critical eye was placed on black women as well, with 52% of robberies, 45% of knife crimes, and 58% of gun crimes that police had an involvement with being placed on them.
behaviour produce stereotypes? What is truly paradoxical, however, is how oblivious we are to the environment we create through stereotyping, which gives rise to these behavioural trends.
Is there something different about these ethnicities? Or are we looking for an answer that isn’t even out there? We often attribute qualities to certain groups, whether ethnic in nature or otherwise. There are numerous theories as to what gives rise to these stereotypes. These ethnic minority groups are no different. Several have come to take on a stereotype of violence, substance abuse, low academic performance, and uncivil activity.
A well-known case in psychology involved parents who deceived their child into believing they were female for over fourteen years of their life, until the child finally identified as being male in gender at the age of fourteen. How is society any different? By making a baseless perspective so commonplace in the social framework, we have almost laid out an expectation of “danger.” If an ethnic group is raised in an environment where it is marginalized by the views of the very society that nurtures it, what more are we to expect? It’s ironic that psychology is rooted in an ongoing debate regarding nature versus nurture. While it is clear that human behaviour isn’t shaped solely by the nature of an individual, we nurture our people in a hostile environment of negative expectations.
There are several theories—among which are the subculture of violence theory, the social control theory, and the macro-structural opportunity theory—which strive to find a definitive explanation for this behaviour. These ethnic groups have essentially come to take on an intricate identity in the public eye, which can be captured by one word: danger. This is not about the trends themselves, but rather what gives rise to them. The answer to that is clear: the answer lies in the question itself. Stereotypes give rise to stereotypical behaviour. It may seem paradoxical; after all, doesn’t consistent human
Does this excuse the high rates of violence, the low rates of academic performance, or the offender’s crime on the public transit? Of course not. But it’s hard to expect a seed to flourish into a flower when the soil itself is arid and lacking.
Commentary: You are raising an important point here. Negative social stereotypes do lead to delinquency. It is not just in the form of self-fulfilling prophecies of individuals acting according to what is expected of them but also through education systems favouring certain ethnic groups over others, by valuing their cultural capital more. Students from wealthier homes where parents have received more education have an edge over the less well off. So they end up doing better. The cycle of economic marginality continues. The job market is also affected by negative social strereotypes. I think all of us can play our own little part by addressing the stereotypes we hold, and perpetuate. - Shiza Malik, Political Studies/Global Development, Queen’s University, Class of 2013 The author argues that stereotypical behavior is a consequence of a socially produced framework that is internalized by the individual. Ethnic minorities
do not have the privilege of agency: the actions of an ethnic minority are not motivated by personal inclination; behaviour is the consequence of a societal construction. This construct lays out an “expectation” for minorities, which becomes internalized and perpetuated by individual victims. The individual internalizes stereotypes and comes to fulfill them in an unconscious autonomic process. Thus, stereotypes aren’t shaped by people; stereotypes shape people. This argument does not discuss the possibility that victims of stereotyping have the capacity for social reflexivity that a victim is capable of becoming aware of their position in the social configurations of power. Socially reflexive individuals cannot be said to internalize stereotypical behavior unknowingly or automatically for they are aware that their “expected” identity is an arbitrary, socially constructed illusion. The socially reflexive individual is imbued with agency, with the ability to challenge stereo-
types directly or ironically. Stereotypical behavior is not an inevitable consequence of stereotypes. The individual determines how to respond to these stereotypes: by conforming to them in an effort to pass, by defying them in effort to challenge and by exaggerating them in such a way that would expose their arbitrariness. Thus, stereotypes do not automatically shape people. Victims have the liberty to determine their own relation to the social world. Individuals are ontologically free to determine their own identity in spite of power relations imposing particular dispositions on the individual. The seed can grow in spite of the soil – if it chooses to. - Matt Bradley, Political Studies, Queen’s University, Class of 2013
Inquire Publication V5 I1
Sean Ngo It is easy to see the beginning of things and harder to see the end. I remember the moment of accepting an offer of admission vividly as if sensations were always so easily recalled; the truth, as we know, is quite the opposite. When I applied to university, there was a certain sense of predestination and inevitability involved. Even now, walking the paved paths of Queen’s University on a cold and windy autumn morning, there is no doubt or guilt in being here. And yet, it is precisely this lack of anxiety, which sets upon me a certain type of “despair.” I know now, that this feeling of inevitability was the best and worst illusion of my life thus far. When I was young, eight or nine (perhaps before then), my parents had told me with unwavering earnest that one could truly “succeed in life” and “get ahead” if the person “worked hard in life” and/or “played to their strengths.” As with all children who are repeatedly told banal platitudes, one has no choice but to accept it as truth and carry on living. Indeed, it was around this time that my mother and father enrolled me in Kumon, for Math and English, foregoing any classes in Chinese. Their commitment to my education was unfaltering and dedicated; paying additional tuition (by taking extra shifts), in the hopes that I might be the first from our family to acquire a Canadian university degree. Undoubtedly for them, they pictured my graduation from Queen’s as a familial obligation and a fulfillment of a greater Canadian promise of meritocracy. Unlike European societies historically dominated by hereditary aristocracy, Canada and America began largely as a group of immigrant colonies of the United Kingdom. Deeply rooted in the conception of both countries was the notion that an individual was “free” to achieve their desires in the “New World” on a basis of merit. The casting off of one’s old country is symbolic of the notion that one was neither privileged or disadvantaged by the circumstances into which he or she is born. It seemed to be a time of unlimited possibility in a new foreign land. How could one not accept the American declara-
Higher Education tion that “all men were created equal?” Perhaps, it is revisionary to say now that Adam Smith had only just published his influential Wealth of Nations or that America was largely built through the free labour of African slavery. But the hopeful idea of it all, remained largely not a sentimental pretense but a means of redemption—or so they believed. The conquest of the earth is not such a pretty thing when you look into it too much. Today, survey data overwhelmingly shows that Americans and Canadians alike believe that widespread opportunity continues to exist. For them, a higher education acts as the “great equalizer” that necessarily diminishes inequalities of circumstances and provides opportunities to get ahead. Such a claim, situates the institution of education as the functional and realized end of meritocracy. If one is truly intelligent or dedicated to school—they will inevitably receive the spoils of life with their degrees. In this sense, education acts as the “engine” for meritocracy by effectively demarcating and measuring “merit” in order for occupations to draw a clear list of credential eligibility. Rarely, if ever is education considered a “bad” investment because it hypothetically entails a job at the end of college or university experience. It seems a fair price then for most students to graduate with $24,000 in outstanding loans; consequently this has made student loans America’s single largest source of debt (close to $1 trillion). Of course, it is also reasonable that students are no longer able to file bankruptcy to escape education fees because they are a “necessary” and “natural part of growing up” and that one must “take responsibility for one’s actions” even if the debt follows you to the grave. There is no limit to the potential price of college and university tuition as long as access to occupations are controlled by the bachelor’s degree. As a result, we are now the most indebted generation in history. The irony of it all is that graduating seniors in 2010 had an unemployment rate of 9.1 percent and the prospects continue to look grim.
“The freedom of choice between education and vocation is largely an illusory one”
P.18
The Gift that Kept Giving
“They pictured my graduation from Queen’s as a familial obligation” Antonio Gramsci, a Marxist thinker of the 20th century, argued that the ruling class has control over a society’s belief system through the means of ideological hegemony. While it is possible to maintain control with force and authority, hegemony operates on a cultural sphere by dictating the transmission of ideas in a way that creates a commonsensical or natural way to see the world. The majority of society comes to see particular institutions and values as inevitable and even desirable when it is fundamentally counterintuitive to our best interests. Education for Western society has become deeply engrained through this manner. While many would argue that there are individuals who work straight from highschool or enter vocational jobs—the freedom of choice between education and vocation is largely an illusory one. Within a free market of ideas, education and labor have been continually placed against one another, but not all ideas are presented equally or fairly. Indeed, media has consistently favoured management over labour and our own need for degrees is symptomatic of the way in which we have internalized the college/university success story. Quite the opposite, a college degree is no longer seen as a “privilege” (while it paradoxically remains one) but a prerequisite in a knowledgeable capitalist economy. With the realization that a postsecondary education is a minimum requirement to receive a reasonable job, the continual enrollment creates an inflation of degrees which lowers the individual value of any particular one. Whereas it was once acceptable to have a high school degree to perform certain jobs, most of these are now filled by university graduates; while previous B.A. positions are now being held by those with an M.A.. Credentialism is a direct result of the economy failing to produce “college/university level” jobs in proportion to the new graduates. It is unsurprising then that between 1970 and 1999, graduate and professional school enrollments increased by 75 percent in America. Of course, most of the degrees do not actually translate perfectly to all jobs and many have questionable utility at best. Does one truly require an M.A. in order to apply? “Paper credentials” are precisely what they claim to be, a simple means to refer shorthand to the type of
values that might be desired in an organization. If one finishes an M.A. they are considered more “hard working” than someone with a mere B.A. But the truth is, I have never felt more inadequate in comparison to my father who has shown me what “hard work” truly means. Is it not the solitary worker who does more than a CEO and his army? Paradoxically, education functions by awarding individual achievement while also perpetuating existing inequalities. Indeed, if a degree signifies a shorthand for an individual, then the education as “great equalizer” is precisely the opposite—an engine of conservative preservation. The origins of a degree start to matter and education becomes another status symbol, which differentiates those who have from those who do not. It is apparent that as tuition fees continue to rise, postsecondary education for lower-income students generally decline because they are unable to continue learning even if they had the time to. The reciprocal relationship is apparent: inequality of income creates inequality of education and vice versa. According to Adam Smith, there will always be winners and losers in the race of life but everyone is allowed the equal opportunity to run. He nevertheless failed to mention the extra hurdles and laps that many might have to endure. I know now why my parents put so much emphasis on my education and it seems to me ambivalent at best. They were passing on the torch in hopes that my future might be a brighter one and that things would genuinely get better. Inheritance always comes before merit. But at least I am given the chance to run? Perhaps, in the end, I am the sole cause of my own failure and meritocracy really does keep those who do not belong out. Yet, it seems peculiar to me that the race is linear at all, if one can rise and fall based on merit that I have not passed anyone who has come before or seen more rich men fall. Here in the goldenland where everyday is born anew; the past is not believed to have any bearing upon time present or future. I wish I could tell my mother and father all that I have learned in these four years of higher education but I lack the sufficient Chinese to do so. I hope this will do.
Inquire Publication V5– I1
P. 19
Commentary: “Is it not the solitary worker who does more than a CEO and his army?” This sentiment is essentially one of the backbones to the new hit show “Undercover Boss,” where CEO’s and people in various high positions go undercover to see a day in the life of someone who works in their factory, fast-food restaurant, floral shop, etc. They quickly come to see how difficult the jobs of their “underlings” are and just as it seems that they are beginning to understand the immense effort it takes at all levels to ensure their fat bonuses at the end of the year, they take 10 steps back. The undercover agent ends up offering one of the workers featured either something of monetary value or a “better” position. Who does this help in the long run? At the end of the show we would all rather be the CEO. After all, isn’t that what we go to university to become? - Anonymous My name is April Colosimo. I’m an environmental studies student at York University. While I carry a huge student loan for my education, I can only think of the privilege of not only my education, but of my debt as well. Many stu-
dents are denied OSAP and financial aid for school. This is another inequality we experience. I believe education should be free. Like health care, it should not matter how much money you have; every person should have this opportunity. This will be the determining factor when it comes to true equality. - April Colosimo, Environmental Studies, York University, Class of 2013 Meritocracy is a beautiful idea and a centerpiece of the American Dream. It’s promises have inspired millions of immigrants, some even illegally, to cross borders and oceans for a chance to live in a land governed by this noble principle. In a meritocratic society, the belief is that hard work and risk-taking enable anyone with any background to become successful. If someone makes the right decisions and is willing to dedicate themselves to their pursuit, they will achieve it. In other words, those who deserve to be successful are successful. However, many of us fail to consider the other side of this belief, and it’s that people who deserve to fail do fail – I don’t believe this is always the case.
My idea is that a purely meritocratic society is utterly impossible. There are too many variables, and many of them are out of our own control. It’s not a coincidence that the majority of my school mates (UBC engineering) come from middle or high income families whose parents are likely to have an advanced degree. Off the top of my head, one classmate’s father has a PhD in physics and his mom is an elementary school teacher. Another classmate’s father and mother both have PhD’s from a Canadian university. A third classmate’s parents are both civil engineers working in Hong Kong. This pattern is pervasive throughout the faculty, and for students who deviate from this trend and have blue-collar parents, they often struggle and are among the bottom of the class. In summary, meritocracy is a beautiful idea but perhaps its implementation isn’t identical to the theory and we shouldn’t be quick to judge. - Ben Nie, Electrical Engineering, University of British Columbia, Class of 2015
Want to Get
Published? Watch the inquire website and inquire blog for new articles. Comments made online are published in print in the next issue of Inquire.
inquireblog.blogspot.com inquirepublication.com
INQUIRE
PUBLICATION
DAM IBEavertails L VE X
INQUIRE
PUBLICATION
Where Activism Takes Root
January 10th 9:30AM-4:30PM