Since his death December 5th,
the entire world has been taking time to remember the life of one of the
greatest symbols of personal strength, human rights and equality, Nelson
Mandela. Mandela spent 27 years of his life imprisoned for his political
beliefs and is recognized today as the man who ended apartheid in South Africa.
But more than that, he is recognized as a man who dedicated his life to
ensuring equality for all people in his country through peaceful action. Mandela,
however, is not only being mourned in his country of origin, but all over the
world. This phenomenon can largely be contributed to the state of our
globalized world.
The current worldwide mourning of
Mandela exemplifies the effects of globalization. One trait of globalization is
increased communication. Increases in
communication through technology played a large role in spreading Mandela’s
story over the years and also spreading the news of his death within minutes
after its announcement. Yesterday, I was sitting in the car and my phone lit
up. I had a Sports Center announcement, of all things, announcing that Nelson
Mandela had died at the age of 95. My situation was not unique. Everyone I
talked to that night knew the news. Just a few years ago this information would
have required much more time to spread, but through global technology,
important events can be communicated almost instantly. The effects of globalization
are apparent in the fact that technology can be employed to rapidly spread
information all around the world.
Aside from the communication changes
during this era, the fact that the world cares so deeply about Mandela is
evidence of globalization. People are becoming more and more knowledgeable
about foreign cultures and events. Although we are thousands of miles away here
in America, we still appreciate Mandala and the work he did for human rights.
The fact that news distributors thought it would be important to notify
everyone immediately of his death shows how intertwined cultures and nations
are. People who have never even been near South Africa recognize him as an
important symbol of peace, not just in his home country, but around the world.
In this period of globalization, one does not need to be from a particular country
to idolize or revere its leader. Important figures such as Mandela can be
adopted by people from all different cultures and backgrounds and can be molded
to fit their ideas of activists and heroes.
Another characteristic of
globalization is the rise of discourse regarding social responsibility. Mandala
is a perfect representation of the ideal model for social responsibility. The
entire world recognizes him as an example of someone who fought for human
rights in the face of what was viewed as political and social inequality. His
work and his life encourage discussion about right and wrong and how
individuals can make a difference in society. This discussion is not limited to
the country of South Africa or even the African continent. But through globalization
and the spread of culture and information, Mandala’s life is used as a model
for fighting for human rights all around the world.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteErika, this post is so relevant and it is insane how immediately information diffuses across the globe. What I was really thinking about though as I read through your post was the idea of human rights, and how it actually applies to queer theory. While the changes that human rights activists fight for seem so obvious and necessary, there was a reason that white people in South Africa truly believed that dark skin would tarnish their water fountains and their schools. Before I go on, I must note how this phenomenon is a clear exemplar of Foucault's idea about how "truth" is only a reflection of what those in power believe to be true. I believe that due to the fact that powerful rich white men thought segregation was a necessity, this idea trickled down to the families who taught their children to accept the notion. But I digress.
ReplyDeleteIn reference to segregation, the sweeping changes of mindset that paralleled Mandela's rise to fame is much like how American citizens have started to grow more accepting of gay relationships over the last few years. The Chicago news actually reports an acceptance growth of 11% in 1988 to 46% in 2010 (and I'm sure that the other 54% just forgot to vote or have grown up in a dog kennel). Queer theory critiques essentialism- the understanding of human category as universal and unchanging). Judith Butler, a leading lady in queer theory, suggests that notions of acceptance are fluid rather than permanent.
While it may seem taboo, I find the rise of acceptance of black citizens in South Africa to mirror exactly the acceptance of gay citizens in America. It seems that in both situations, the majority (or at least the powerful majority) agreed that black or homosexual people were of less value and deserved "different" rights. As people started to speak out against this, and as the fight for change began acquiring large followings, policies were rewritten to assign equality to those formerly discriminated against. While we are not quite there yet with equal rights for gay marriage (in all states), I foreshadow that future generations of straight people will look back on the laws that debilitate gay rights in exactly the same way that white South Africans reflect on their past laws of apartheid, and surely wonder, "How could our own citizens have once been so stupid?"
Love the trope of Judith Butler as leading lady! Was that tongue-in-cheek?
DeleteErika, this is such a great blog post that ties together our learning of anthropological theory with current events. Nelson Mandela's death, and the international response to it, is an excellent example that demonstrates the ripples of globalization around the world. Nelson Mandela was an incredibly brave and dedicated person, and his legacy will continue to exist as a powerful symbol of freedom and perseverance.
ReplyDeleteI would like to expand this discussion by briefly noting how Nelson Mandela's legacy as a symbol of power has been amplified in our globalized world, and how he has consequently intersected with post-structuralist anthropological theory.
If we recall from our studies of symbolic and interpretive anthropology, we remember that a symbol has several defining characteristics. It is polyvalent, meaning it is not restricted to a single value; it links many signified ideas to a single signifier (that is, the symbol itself); and it is capable of transmitting meaning to multiple groups. Nelson Mandela’s leadership in the movement against apartheid in South Africa has elevated him to the status of symbol of freedom and justice not only in South Africa, but around the world. This process has been catalyzed through the mediums of globalization. The internet has resulted in the rapid transport of events and ideas, permitting a pace of exchange that far exceeds past rates, opening up new possibilities that have not been previously been impossible. While Mandela would still certainly be a powerful symbol without globalization, his adoption by the rest of the world could have never happened this quickly a century ago. Thanks to globalization, he has become a symbol for freedom from oppression for various groups around the world as a pace never before possible.
One of the “multiple groups” Mandela transmits meaning to includes those involved with the recent Arab Spring, particularly Palestinians. After apartheid was abolished from South Africa, Mandela visited Yasser Arafat, then the leader of the Palestine Liberation Organization, a gesture that formed a bond between the liberated South African people and the still-struggling people of Palestine. It should come as no surprise that Nelson Mandela was personal friends with Edward Said, the late author of Orientalism, founding figure of post-colonialism and post-structuralism, and premier advocate for the rights of the Palestinian people. As a symbol, news articles and political groups have evoked Nelson Mandela’s image, asking “where is the Mandela of the Arabs?” In the large role that the internet played during the Arab Spring, rhetoric containing Mandela’s name as a symbol was certainly used.
The use of Mandela’s name in the Arab Spring is just one example of how he has become a symbol, true to the anthropological definition, that fits snugly with post-structuralist movements. As Foucault taught us, power structures often define how we see the world, but unfortunately this distortion can cause us to view the world in a way that is consistent with itself, like Said’s orientalism, but inconsistent with reality, promoting false assumptions of causality between what is natural and what is imposed. Specifically, I mean that the apartheid of South Africa that Mandela heroically fought against was consistent with itself, but it was not the natural order of things, despite how convincing it may have been to those privileged by it internally. Through his efforts to eliminate this power structure in a way that did not reverse the roles of the oppressors and oppressed, but instead placed them on equal ground, Mandela demonstrated that the structures in place were just that, man-made structures that could be torn down for the greater good of humanity.
-Phillip
Links
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/12/mandela-arab-spring.html#
http://arabspringnow.com/nelson-mandela-death-of-a-giant/
Great weaving together of complex theory with current events!
DeleteNice post, Erika!
ReplyDelete