Of Self Expression & Self Preservation

I have been following Survival International for quite sometime now and I love their work. Their vision is one I can identify with. I am happy that there is someone, a group of people, whose lives are dedicated to this cause. The cause being to protect the rights and livelihoods of indigenous tribes and people. To avoid the further exploitation of their resources and cultural activities. In short - stealing from them.

Often times, I find myself debating with people I come across and those in my life about integration, self expression & self preservation and it's role in our daily lives and our quality of life as people.

For instance, recently I went on a road trip with some friends from France. One evening while driving from one town to the next, I believe we were headed to Port Shepstone, we began talking about one of the laws that France has. The conversation was steered in this direction by a comment that one of my travel companions made; that in France, Muslim women are prohibited to wear burqas. I was taken aback by this statement. He proceeded to say that he felt that it was a good law, which "protected"Muslim women.

Sensing my shock and being somewhat surprised at my disapproval he began to explain that the law (which was still in the pipelines in this article I found) was not only limited to Muslim people and their burqas, but enveloped all religions too. Rosaries, necklaces with crosses/crucifixes attached to them, religious dress of any kind - all disallowed (in public).

I would like to explain my distaste.

Throughout history we have seen painful examples of "what not to do" and I am of the opinion that making decisions for other peoples' well being is one of those mistakes. How could you possibly make an informed decision about that which you are not a part of and that which you do not understand?

The current situation in Australia is a perfect example of this phenom.

A typical example is that of the Aboriginal people. Their culture, resources (both natural and human-based), lifestyle and quality of life had been almost completely destroyed.

Now that the Australian government realises the extent of the damage they have embarked on a journey to try and mend the tears, the multi-layered tears. To avoid going into detail. I will sum up the method chosen to be the above-mentioned one, which is that they (which are not Aboriginal people) think they know what is best for that which they are not a part of.

It has been taken and destroyed, alcohol has long been introduced to them and is now a crutch, their customs have long been lost and are depleting rapidly due to death of those who knew how best to approach certain rituals and such.

Again, an example of others choosing what they think is best for others.
Arrogance.

Don't get me wrong, I do believe that the Australian government as well as the majority of it's people are genuinely apologetic and regretful of what has transpired regarding the indigenous people of Australia. It is extremely clear in this official apology and speech (**here is a downloadable version) to the Aboriginal people made by the then prime minister Kevin Rudd in February of 2008.

In fact I strongly believe that South Africa (and many other nations) can learn a lot from this apology and even more from the thorough explanations contained in the speech.

I hate to pick on Australia, I have a lot of great friends from there whom I respect tremendously and who have shaped me and added much value to my life and my journey. But it is not an attack of any kind, it is merely an inconvenient fact of historical happenings that finds me here.

I would like to revert my attention back to the French, one of their main reasoning for passing the law I mentioned earlier is that in the past they have had many conflicts based on religious beliefs. Actually, an entire war between the Catholics & the Protestants which lasted over 3 decades. And so it made sense that due to the sensitive situation back then, this law had relevance.

I still feel uneasy. Is this the best approach? That within French boarders you show no religious ties? Does this law then not propel and support the idea of atheism? I am conflicted.

Are the French merely preserving their way of life?

That being said, I would like to share this video that I found on Survival International's website, the page which deals with what they call uncontacted tribes. It lead me to the question of self-preservation and which approach is best.

Does exclusion lead to a better preserved self, nation, clan, tribe, family, friendship circle, society, business?



**I urge you to please read the apology/speech. It is moving, true and exemplary.