Making the Invisible, Visible

For the past couple of weeks we have been studying about Human Rights. The first week was an intro to Human Rights, what they are, and why it's important. We shifted around some work centers. We then identified some topics and went through a process called consensus building, in the goal of coming to a conclusion of a topic we would be focusing deeply on for the next few weeks. Our class landed on the topic of HIV, and more particularly the discrimination that goes along with it. In the beginning, I knew only a few basic facts about HIV/AIDS. I really didn't understand why people with HIV would carry around a stigma, why others would discriminate them, and why it's so embarrassing to have it - after all, it's a disease, and anyone can catch diseases. During the research, I found out a lot more about HIV - how it can be passed on, how it affects people, why there's discrimination, who it affects, what's being done to improve it, and what should be done. The number of people that's been affected and that are still suffering from this disease is humongous in Malaysia and many other countries, and most of these people are uneducated about the disease that they carry around in their bodies. It's a disease that not a lot of people talk about, and therefore not a lot of people know about it. I'm a lot more lucky in terms of education, and yet I hardly know much about this - then what about the people who can't afford education? HIV/AIDS is a widely spread epidemic and is still spreading rapidly. It's growing more and more dangerous as more people are infected, and that's why it's such an important topic to focus on. Since it's a disease that is embarrassing to talk about, what people need to know about this deadly disease doesn't get to them, making the epidemic spread so rapidly, but invisibly. The disease could be living in a person's body for 10 - 15 years with no symptoms before he or she realizes that they are infected - shocking. During that time, the person could spread the disease to tens of people, without even knowing it. This makes the disease very, very dangerous, and to solve this problem and educate people about it isn't easy. People don't seem to accept the information they are given, and they don't want to believe it nor talk about it, making the job harder. But there is a way, though it might be the longer, tougher, and slower way, but it will help, and that is what we are working towards to achieve in this topic - to educate and raise awareness, if only a few people, about this deadly epidemic.

Dealing with a Dictator

Many dictators have been and are still roaming around all over the world, even til today. Those of you who are more into politics might have an idea of who they are, but for those you who don't, here are a few examples:

Adolf Hitler: Dictator of Germany during the Third Reich. His ultimate hatred for the Jews fueled him to set up concentration camps and death camps where about 2,700,000 Jews were rounded in and treated beyond slaves, tortured, and murdered either by shooting, asphyxiation, or gas poisoning in gas chambers.

Vladimir Putin: Dictator of Russia today. He rose to power in 1999 as the country's President, then Prime Minister, then back to President again now. Putin has gained control over the authorities in the country, intentionally putting his allies in power. He has made up laws that do not allow citizens to protest or be part of a demonstration, or else they pay for it - grievously.

Kim Jong Un: Present dictator of the secretive North Korea. He only came into power about a year ago, after his father's death. Disabled people are kicked out of the city, news and messages that go in and out are censored and propaganda. Kim Jong Un also focuses on the military of his country; lately, he's been building nuclear weapons and testing them.

These are three examples, but there are many more. As you can see, these people are very dangerous, cruel, and power-hungry. You shouldn't leave a dictator as he is, because he's likely going to cause more damage to the country and maybe even some other countries. But how do we deal with a dictator? Confronting wouldn't be really smart, because you'd probably be dead in a few seconds following your first word, unless you really feel confident and brave enough to be successful, in which case I wouldn't really consider the leader as a dictator, or it's just the confronter is not very smart(probably the latter). During the past month or so, we've been studying about one Shakespeare's great works: the play of Julius Caesar. So we could do what the conspirators did - assassinate the dictator. But of course in the play it didn't end up so well; the country dissolved into civil war and complete chaos. And it's pretty likely that something like that could happen now, if we did deal with a dictator that way. For example, the dictator's allies (people in power) or just simply people who actually loved the dictator would probably seek revenge. When two groups of a country are raging with fire and have completely different opinions on something, civil war is what is a lot of the time destined to be in that country. So, we might have to come up with a more efficient way of taking care of someone who's gone a bit over the line. Well, the people from inside the country could decide to take matters into their own hands and figure out something, like gathering a group of people large enough to stand a chance of succeeding. That could be a first step. They could have protests/demonstrations and riots, in an attempt to present their statement to the public, if not to actually take down the dictator, which is probably impossible to do with just a few protests and demonstrations. Or they could try to get someone in power or authority to be on their side, so physically they have an advantage. The person could be someone who can get close to the dictator often without being suspected, or it could be someone from the army, which would result in a military coup. If, by any chance, they get the entire population of the country on their side, then there's not much work to do, because the dictator, no matter how powerful and mighty he is, can't afford to kill the whole country because well then, who's left there to bow down to him?

On the other hand, there's a second group of people who could help out the poor country - other countries! Okay, they could be impatient and march an army into the country and start war, but this time it's going to be worse than civil war, so no, it's not a good idea. Here's one that might work. By boycotting the country, they could force the dictator to step down, at least a little bit. Some ways of boycotting would be to limit the country's resources by refusing to trade certain goods with them, especially the ones that allow them to build and make dangerous items, like weaponry. The shortage of resources that cannot be found in the country and needs to be imported from abroad can really suffer the country and make the dictator step down by default.

In conclusion, whichever the way chosen, a plan has to be well laid out, another reason why having a person who has physical power or who can get close to the dictator is so important, because then they know what might work and what would not. That way certain strategies could be eliminated. Besides that, there has to expert communication in the group, or else the plan's likely to fail. None of the ways are easy, but this was an issue that has been in the world as long as history dates back, and sadly, it's still an issue the world faces even today.

Assassination: Caesar and Mountbatten

Lord Louis Mountbatten (1900 - 1979)

During the past few days in humanities, we have been studying about Julius Caesar's assassination. Today, we widened our study and looked at some other people who have been assassinated in the past century. We got into groups, each group assigned a person to focus on. My group and I were given Lord Louis Mountbatten to research about. Mountbatten was a member of the Royal British Family, as well as a commander in the Navy. This made him quite powerful and skilled, and the same goes to Julius Caesar - he was the Consul for many years, and was later worshipped by the people of Rome. His skills on the battlefield also made him stand out, which contributed to how much power he had. Both were leaders - powerful, skilled, important people. And both were assassinated. You can see this pattern occur in many assassinations as well. The reason why people get assassinated is often because they pose some kind of threat to a group of people, often the killer(s), but not necessarily. Caesar was getting too powerful and was on his way to dictatorship, and then the Senate that the Romans were so proud of would not exist anymore, and that was why Caesar was assassinated. Mountbatten was a powerful and influential man, and therefore he was an important target to their cause. All assassinations are for a purpose, and almost always there's a benefit the comes with it. Some assassinations might just be a revenge on the victim, but most actually benefit the group of people that's being threatened by the person/victim. Another reason why people are assassinated is to draw attention toward the assassin. For example, the IRA decided to kill Lord Louis Mountbatten was partly also to draw attention towards there cause in wanting to become a separate country.

Whether assassinations are justified are not, it depends on its purpose. Like I said before, some assassinations are just for the sake of revenging and getting equal on the victim. However, if the assassination was for the general good of the people, then there is a way that it can be justified. If killing one person would save a large number of people, or prevent something extremely bad from happening, then the cause would be worth it and therefore most likely justified. Let's make it clear that justified means that it is done for a reasonable, worthy cause, but it doesn't mean that it's right, and definitely doesn't mean that people can kill other people as long as they have their own 'reason'. I don't think killing is ethical or righteous whatever the case, but in some it can be justified and accepted.