Showing posts with label poverty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label poverty. Show all posts

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Sending out a little hope

I wrote a while ago about receiving a letter from Kodjo, the son of my best Togolese friend while I was in the Peace Corps. We've been e-mailing Kodjo regularly, and it's been great to re-form that connection after years of quiet. It has been heartbreaking as well, so much so that I hope you will forgive me as I step onto my soapbox.

Some of you may know, but most probably do not, that Togo has had a rough year. The economy is poor here, but it is devastatingly weak there. Prices for staples like rice and flour have soared as the US has redirected corn toward ethanol instead of food for people or animals. As if that weren't enough, Togo was hit with devastating floods in July, washing out bridges on the main highway, destroying homes and villages, and killing many people. This natural disaster has compounded the economic one because it has made travel and trade between the cities and outlying areas much more difficult.

The floods have brought a lot of misery to the region, but we've played our part as well. Just in case you are not clear on why we, US citizens, share at least some of the responsibility for the dire circumstances in places like Togo, here is a brief and basic synopsis.

The US has enormous power to force "Free Trade Agreements" on developing nations like Togo (the US / World Bank forgives and/or reconfigures national debt in return for signing on the dotted line). These trade agreements push developing nations away from growing enough of their staple food crops to be self-sustaining. Instead, Free Trade has meant that farmers in developing countries are encouraged to grow cash crops like coffee, cocoa and cotton, and to do so in such a way that many of the villagers are able to move to cities where they can make shoes, clothing and many of the things that allow Walmart to maintain its famously low prices. In return, developing countries import food crops such as corn and wheat that we grow in surplus. In the lovely land of theory, the benefit to this is that the local farmers will make money from the cash crops, more than enough to purchase the food they need, our corporate agri-business will have foreign markets for the food crops they grow across the midwest. Oh, and we'll be able to drive to the local mega-mart and buy "cheap plastic crap."

And we ~ you, me, our families and neighbors ~ are culpable because we elect people and then pay little attention to what they agree to in international trade agreements or the farm bill. And too many of us never wonder whether there are consequences beyond our own bank accounts and immediate self-interest.

Now, throw corn-based ethanol into the mix, and the fields that were full of food-grade corn or wheat or barley are being used for ethanol-grade corn. Corn that was going to feed cattle is also redirected, the prices pushed up prohibitively high, and so the feed lots and ranchers purchase barley and other grains. The domino effect ensues, and the prices for these other grains skyrockets right along with corn.

However, the income for the farmers growing cotton in Togo has not risen, and they are using all their means to cultivate cotton so that they don't have enough food crops to feed their families. Look further east, and it's the same, as the rice paddies in Vietnam have been turned into coffee plantations to bring us our cheap cup of Folgers, and so the developing nations find themselves in the horrific place of having too few people on too few acres of arable land growing food crops. Food prices soar and people go hungry.

I saw this happening first-hand when I was a Peace Corps volunteer. I was sent to Togo to educate and encourage farmers ~ who had been hand-tilling small family plots of yams, corn, tomatoes, other food crops ~ to begin using oxen to till larger parcels of land. And to grow cotton. What I discovered was a situation that often resulted in the farmers becoming something like indentured servants. The Togolese government provided the loans for the cattle and accompanying training, as well as the loans for the cotton seed. Then, the government also set the price for cotton. The end result was that the absolute only way that a farmer could dig himself out of the debt incurred from purchasing oxen was to grow virtually no food, use all available land for cotton, and to dump loads of chemicals into the soil to produce the largest yields possible.

Oh, and I must point out that, while DDT and similar pesticides are banned in the US, there is still a thriving market for them in places like Togo. And, contrary to their manufacturer's evident hypothesis, the side-effects aren't lessened just because it's a developing nation.

So, back to our friends, Kodjo and Adjo, and their mother Afoua...

Kodjo is a student at Lome University, Adjo is in high school (and high school in Togo costs almost as much as the university). The rising prices have left them without funds for school, and Afoua is without enough for food. She is also chronically ill. So we are helping them.

I don't know if it makes it better or only more sad that for a little over $400 we can send Kodjo and Adjo to school for a year and provide Afoua with enough money for food and medicine. The money is not insignificant to us, but it's brutally significant to them. We will have to make adjustments, but they get education and some health care.

I am glad that our current presidential candidates are talking a lot about the economy. However, while they argue about tax cuts and job cuts and the banking and mortgage crisis for us, it is my very dear wish that they'd also think and talk a little about our influence in far-off, tiny countries like Togo.

Sunday, March 2, 2008

Thing 8 - Online sharing

The presentation sharing possibilities in Thing 8 look very promising. I did an early literacy presentation last month for expectant parents, and was frustrated with the pile of left-over handouts at the end. I can see uploading my presentation (I'm assuming that PowerPoint presentations can be uploaded into Zoho or the others...) and then just offering a few printed copies to those participants without easy Internet access.

Of course, this brings me back to that first blog and my concern about the gap between the haves and have nots with respect to online access. My partner is a high school science teacher, and yesterday she received the March issue of NEAtoday. The cover story is "Mind the Gap," about the "participation gap" between those kids who have access to online technology and those who do not.

"For more affluent kids, using technology is like using a pencil... After second or third grade, they no longer think about how to hold the pencil; it's become second nature.

But at-risk kids aren't able to use technology every day and haven't had exposure to it at home and have to play catch up to learn the technology as well as the lessons. When they're concentrating so much on the tool rather than the lesson, it costs them time and presents a steep learning curve."


Later in the article a teacher suggests that kids who feel more comfortable using computer and Internet technology are more likely to want to go to college. If they don't have an understanding of the technology, then college may feel doubly intimidating to them because they know the technology is out there and that they will have to learn both it and whatever subject matter they are interested in pursuing. When kids don't have computer and/or Internet access at home, they rely on their schools and libraries for that access.

What excites me about the 23 Things program is that I am learning about this stuff so that hopefully I can help some of those kids. The problem is that I don't see them very often. Most of the kids who come in to the library to use the Internet are coming in to access myspace and facebook, and they are already familiar enough with the tools to neither want nor need my help.

What makes the technology so exhilarating is the opportunity for spontaneous exploration and creativity. But I wonder how enticing the library computer will seem to someone when they know they can only have it for up to an hour and anyone else in the room can see their frustration when things don't work out properly the first seven times they try.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Thing 2...point oh?

Okay, first off, let me announce my alliance with those who don't like the name Library 2.0. I DO, however, like some of the definitions I've read, about keeping libraries relevant, staying up on technology and giving our patrons and staff more "room" to communicate ideas. It's obvious, I think, for any library staff who see the public using our Internet computers that (especially) the younger generation is using technology to communicate, and that that in turn is opening up huge possibilities for how we can/should/could join the conversation or start one of our own.

However, I have to say that in the small town where I work (population under 1000) there are also quite a few rural/elderly/unemployed/poor folk who have not joined the online conversation and don't want to. What they want to know is why they can't apply for a job with a good, old fashioned piece of paper instead of a keyboard, why they have to create an email account just to get a brochure and why, ohwhyohwhy, that bloody mouse can't figure out if it wants to be clicked one time or two.

I can count on my work as a branch manager at a rural library to keep me enthused, entertained, and optimistic. It also keeps issues of the division between the haves and have-nots front and center. And this is not just my patrons that I'm talking about. We have one Internet station for public use. We have one computer for staff use. This is not enough on either point. My concerns do not go unheard -- I know that admin at GRRL recognized the need. But where will we find the funds? We're cutting thousands from our collection budget even as it looks like we may, in the not too distant future, have to re-purchase our video collection because the powers that be(and want to make more millions) have decided to go with Blu-Ray and let good ol' DVD become obsolete.

So yes, the possibilities are enormous. The ideas are exciting (I LOVE the idea of having a way for patrons to post their reviews of library materials on the catalog or elsewhere. How COOL would that be! And, wow, if I could find the time, how fun it would be to talk back to them). But I am worried about pursuing the new and the future so much that we become irrelevant on the other end.

Libraries can be the great equalizer, providing resources for those who have the least. At the same time, technology can make the world a bit schizophrenic when it is gets too much attention. I was a Peace Corps volunteer in Togo, West Africa from 1990 to 1993. I know there are cell phones and Internet cafe's there now (which blows my poor mind). I also know that while my life has become only more rich and blessed, many of my Togolese friends have died of malaria, malnutrition, inadequate health care or AIDS. I've looked at current PCV's blogs and You-Tube video essays and I realize that those cell phones and Internet stations haven't reduced the misery in Togo, only made it easier for the wealthy to ignore and the cynical to complain. I look at the economic situation in the US, the struggles of the working class and poor, and as much as I like new-fandango-gizmos (and yes, oh yes, I like them very much) I get itchy about how they call to us to follow them, put our hopes, energy and enthusiasm in their high-tech pockets. I get so very itchy.