Opposition: Symbolic Psyche v Practice and Adequacy

It has been more than a while now since I left my home country and started residing in my present consign. Sometimes I look behind to see what I left, as I always believe I belong to such place and environment. At other instances I would like also to witness what I benefited from my present status as a second citizen in others realm. I could not pronounce and formulate the exact expression, however, as I see the contemplation of many contemporaries being changed in the gush of circumstances.

In the past recent years, a lot of people were trying to get involved in the political atmosphere of Eritrean politics. It might be considered as a superior motive on one hand but on the other hand there is an unsolved question which crosses our psyche. An issue which could be framed as: Is it because everyone assumes the responsibility to contribute in such arena or is it for the reason to hit upon some attention only? As a result of such initiation, conversely, people could immerse themselves in to a vicious circle as an individual or in a group for various reasons: to overcome their horrendous dissatisfaction and annoyance, to save their interest from any damage, having confidence in supremacy of law and order, or to curb those in authority from being off limits etc, etc, etc. All these, however, could pilot too many an unusual behavioural change which could in turn be disastrous, more violent and revengeful act if not put into service wisely. This can hold true as emotions are becoming a common ground and part of the Eritrean diasporas leaving aside the merits of knowledge, expertise and experience.

It is such a superb exertion when people try to commend or criticize what they perceive and listen to. Indeed it is so civil to give your observations and share your ideas optimistically. Undeniably it is good to pin your ears back to your conscience. It is also polite to not put in the picture the bogus to create impressions. These are some of the trouble-free errands in which people could make the most of in life.

In considering these, it is very crucial to remember what the rationale behind the opposition is. Nowadays, what numerous people appear to recall is that the oppositions are in favor of full democracy. In fact, leaving aside the debatable definitions and points, the issues of democracy need to be raised as a more fundamental demand not only at the present but potentially any time when considered necessary. That is, as one of the gadgets to eradicate not only dictatorship but to craft a well organized institutional chain of command, responsible persona, healthy political atmosphere, etc. It is the belief of intellectuals as well as the people at large that the establishment of democratic institutions is the only way to root out government absolutism without violence and effectively.

However, anyone who wants to avail himself from the present situation should not just tune out in the name of opposition. It is surprising several individuals believe that you have only to denounce the current ruling government in order to be named as a resistant group. Just take your pen and write whatever crosses your mind, without giving a second thought to all the evils that could crop up as a result of one’s instigation. This is a fantasy of self-interest without any philanthropic principle to facilitate the mainstream concern. May be one can get himself in to a difficulty where the point of opposing inadvertently mounting to another level of hatred.

What are some of the plain and primary leading points in opposing any other disposition in power at individual or group level?
• To make sure that you have principles compatible to almost the internal situation and in consideration of the international arena.
• To point out the ideas and rules you are in difference with and the reasons why.
• To dedicate enough time and personality in achieving the goals aimed at.
• To be tolerant and optimist not only in practicing your ideas but also in sharing others thought as well.
• To ingenuously partake in shaping the ruling leadership whenever it is indispensable.

Why most of the opposition groups at hand, who abruptly come up with different names in time, seem to sound they are only the most concerned about the situation the country is facing now? Here, take me not that I do not understand or am in opposition to those who feel sorrow and are working for the good of change in resisting and opposing the present government. It is unquestionable that there are many citizens and groups who really are alarmed and work for such purpose to overcome the calamity the country and its people are facing. This being the patent certainty, almost all of the individuals involved in these different groups have been given more than enough chances in the past; either to shape the government constitution or in opposing its rule of governance and in rectifying other major and minor slip-ups. Most of them have been going hand in hand for years like almost nothing was happening, either inside the realm of the government or upon the rest of the populace (the outsider). And some of them, differing for many years during the armed struggle, had made a reunion after the country’s independence. Here, my point is only to tip at the foundational spot of ‘trust’.

Well now, should not we (the populace) and those who are entering in to the struggle for change ask initially what happened to the friendship and trust among each of them? Is it because one man was found very distrustful which made all the wrongs and evils to become real? If yes, what was the role these people could have played in such instances? Isn’t it possible to put forward your observation upon the real findings on time, or put together remarks, convince, and make your position clear and finally resign where there is no room to accommodate all other possibilities?

One should ask whether the oppositions are capable of overcoming their internal divisions and ousting a burly and so-called charismatic president at one time and still to some emotionally driven people. My point here is about the time lost to come to a unified agenda and solution. Should they formulate a specific governing platform of their own? Will opposition supporters, many of them distrust their leaders as much as they have an aversion to each other; show up to in sufficient numbers? And, perhaps most important, who will rule the country, and how, if the present government is forced out (talking about the collective and participatory rule)? These are some issues which need to be addressed by the oppositions sequentially to win the heart of the majority and grow to be trustful among the masses.

The lack of a thoughtful, trustful and charismatic leader who appeals to the masses is the oppositions’ greatest vulnerability. The most important enemy for the oppositions is not only the present government, save for abstention of the people. But one should ask why? It’s for the undemanding reason that they still need to build upon the populace the buoyancy on how to put his faith on their principles before engaging in a further blunder. Though these oppositions have some committed members, they need an excellent base in order to mobilize the large, so-called neither/nor segment of the population, who are skeptical of both sides.

It seems that the opposition coalition is more held together almost exclusively by its members’ dislike of the present President of the country and his advantage taking collaborators. A kind of following the belief “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,’ or at least “the rival of my rival is my temporary ally,” and they make alignments and split-ups time and again irrespective of whether their chosen allies are dictatorships or democracies. These groups have regularly promised to unveil their own policy platform, and regularly failed to do so. The presiding government has taken advantage of this political vacuum to supply the answer itself. The oppositions’ leadership is declared as a group of terrorist coup plotters, who obey “foreign masters” and baptized upon. Their program is accordingly said to end social programs and hand the county over to hyenas (azabè). Yet, they could not crack this barricade to benefit and succeed the majority’s heart and confidence even when the people and the country are at a desperate time and end.

Regretfully to say so but it’s sad, though not always, to see people organizing themselves for evaluation rather than giving priority to their veracity in life. It is in the name of people that loads of things are happening presently everywhere, whether it is inside the country or in other places of the world, where many Eritreans are scattered for breathing. Taking such situation, however, into ones advantage in order to satisfy your willpower is not acceptable or justified at any circumstance. This is factual in a sense, as the off-putting impact could be massive and dangerous to repair the damage done and afterwards there is almost no way to alter it to good where it reached the peak phase.

Descriptive things in due time and in an acceptable approach are also crucial to the endurance of any civilization. All this can be cuddled by the word “eloquence.” Let’s not forget, it is the dishonesty and recurrence of fabricated information which led the many regimes in Africa and other least developed nations to turmoil. Thus, distinguishing the comments given in the light of advancement to generate a feasible environment in the long run of the kick against despotism could create a viable atmosphere to a shared opinion and tolerance.

Is it that much hard to choose a leader or is it because we are told that it is difficult? Is it because we fear for a change that we want to make a bond only to what we are familiar with earlier (Kab zeytfelto melak, tifelto sheytan) or is it because there is a real possibility that power-gap can be created, akin to the information we listen to? So when is the time to get one? Or are we waiting for a messiah to be born?

I want to be hopeful – and there are some hopeful signs in many respects. I discern that governments change when they have to. The government, nonetheless, may probably weather this storm and continue to hammer back the oppositions. The haughtiness may buy off other critics for some years to come. But without wrenching change, Eritrea will not achieve the promise of genuine modernization that its liberals and reformers hope for. The young Eritreans who lamented viable atmosphere, an opening for the bright future, and role models need legroom and genuine coordination. Perhaps history will recognize us as the people and country that could have been. History is a material source.

The above specifics stated does not mean only to disapprove of what is factual and imperative at the present. It is not as well to stand and/or try to see at the progress of many constructive ideas as a piece of twaddle. I myself believe on the intact liberty of Eritrea and its political attitude and beyond the lot freewill of the people at large. The reader, yet, is left upon his verdict to evaluate whether or not the reasons were really as plain as this.

Interconnectedness of Environmental Degradation to Global Risk, Consumption, and Empowerment

By Ws Hag

ABSTRACT

At present, global environmental problems are well demonstrated in different ways. These crisis issues are interrelated to various causes and their impact could result in global environment degradation to appalling degree. As long as the superfluous consumption of natural resources continues to take place, there is a global risk in the environment. In here, the role of awareness and mobilization is important in the process of cutting such increase in global consumption and in order to protect environmental degradation. The challenge, however, is in adjusting our establishments so as the force of such environmental degradation is channeled in to ways that contribute to sustainable development. To this end, the text will deliberate the issues of global risk, consumption and empowerment in relation to environmental degradation, as the impact or safety approach of one problem has an influence on the others as well.


Introduction

Human history has always been linked to the control, extraction and use of natural resources. However, the increase in resource consumption of the world and energy efficiency has accelerated the extent of environmental degradation. The general point here is that small changes can have momentous effects. Even the tiny variations in the initial parameters of a process may lead to major differences in the outcome.

Global climate change and other environmental issues demonstrate well that single states are unable, on their own, to regulate the conditions for human and habitat survival. This explains that in a steadily more interconnected world, the distance between cause and effect in environment is often enormous. In fact, it is this interconnectedness that is building a network for people across continents with both opportunities and constraints. In this regard, there is a need of global cooperation and strategy in order to overcome the serious threats and consequences the planet is facing.

Furthermore, many institutions recognize the importance of sustainable development. And their role in crafting awareness and assisting to define strategies could be vital in reducing such escalation of environmental degradation.

Global Risk

The vast majority of experts are now convinced that the earth’s climate is changing. The main causes can be described as the massive emission of green house gases from industry, private appliances and traffic. As a result, the global temperature is increasingly rising, icebergs and glaciers shrinking, and desertification mounting. On a global scale such aspect of environmental degradation may lead or result to an enormous consequences (e.g. El Nino like events are described as human-induced global warming effects).

The issue of cooperation among nations is a point that needs consideration. The reluctance of states to various proposals to agreement is one of the most unjustified causes for environmental degradation. Success in confronting climate change depends very heavily on how we make strategies and agree to implement them. The world today owes much to the nations that are still refusing to ratify international agreement (e.g. the United States to Kyoto Protocol). This unwillingness or little concern of some nations to become part in the global agreements to reduce global warming is assisting the problem at hand. Instead of aiming at a global level, some nations are giving more priority to their economic or other interests. Hence, the most polluters are becoming more hesitant to tackle the global problem. This is factual as such nations are benefiting from not making the deal and at the same time damaging the planet’s environment unequivocally. The benefits of applying similar standards on a global scale are obvious, and the risk of not doing could be so extreme.

Another point worth mentioning is the impact of huge corporations that have grown worldwide and are benefiting from globalization. Although these business sectors are the economic machines, they have crated havoc upon the global environment. Their input to greenhouse-gas emissions is growing and in a way becoming one of the major causes to global warming. And often such companies get access to participate in the destruction as a result of government policies (e.g. Brazilian government subsidies to logging companies). It is true that these business sectors are playing in a great role in maximizing the development of the economic division. However, it needs not to be at the cost of environmental degradation which in turn has an immense impact on the global natural ecosystems.

Although the extent of a given risk is difficult to estimate, many environmental risks and vulnerabilities are produced locally and thereby heighten in to global forms. Urbanization, though a prerequisite for development, can be described as one of the great increases in vulnerability to the poor parts of the world. It is becoming increasingly clear that the fastest, cheapest way to reduce emissions is to build more energy-efficient cities. It is highly recommended that with the taking place of new urbanization, a long-term consideration must be given to the causes that could contribute to environmental degradation. High population densities of cities make it easy in occupying unsafe land, construct risky habitations, and thus causing damage to the environment.

The unbalanced aspect of the environmental degradation is another point for global concern. This is to mean that the distribution of impact can be uneven and to that extent less developed areas are generally at greatest risk. Among the risks are reductions in food security, increased water stress and desertification; as a result there will be an exposure to disease and other health related perils. It is also true that there is also variable risk among the developed nations, especially the human settlements in Polar Regions.

In general, looking at the magnitude, timing, persistence, and other social as well as scientific factors, it can be reflected that there is a change in climate. Whether its effect is greater or smaller than welfare gains or losses needs a thorough study and assessment. However, smooth and gradual climate change may lead to damages that are considered harmful beyond a certain point (e.g. increase in sea-level).

Global Consumption

Today, global trade affects a broad range of social outcomes. As a result both individuals and governments are involved in multiple opportunities and constraints. It is factual that while trade affects global markets, it also determines what natural resources will be used and at what environmental costs. Furthermore, understanding the interaction between human and environmental systems is essential. Such consideration helps in developing appropriate strategies and innovations for achieving sustainability, equitable distribution of resources and wealth.

Governmental policies and consumption often promote one industry or sector at the expense of the others. The most visible effect occurs in one of the others, that is environment. However, such gains are one sided and consequential because of the impact occurring on the environmental distributions. Moreover, such situation creates a conflict among those of economic interests against other values of global environment and sustainable development agendas.

Currently, global inequalities in consumption are severe. The major cause of such global environmental deterioration is an unsustainable pattern of consumption and production. In particular, the industrialized countries are aggravating poverty and imbalances. The beginning of international conferences (Stockholm 1972) is a good indication on how such deterioration has an impact globally. This and other subsequent events are formed to look beyond scientific issues to broader political, social, and economic issues. This means that it becomes an international political agenda and thereby paved a way for intensified multilateral co-operations focusing on tackling unsustainable patterns of consumption.

Environmental degradation, as Martinez-Alier put it, is also caused by people “too poor to be green.” Poverty and pressure of population on resources can be mentioned as the main problems related to environment change. The problems are the result of economic activities causing pollution, the using up of scarce resources, disturbance of ecosystems, and destruction of habitats. These problems must be considered as important factors affecting in particular the potential for long term development, and in general to the global environment.

Consumption of resources is appropriated by world industrial centers with no much reflection to many environmental damages. The advanced industrialized countries produce around three quarters of total world carbon emissions. From this perspective, not only do they play a great role in environmental degradation but also in victimizing the less developed nations as a result of the inequalities and responsibility to take action. While improving their local environmental standards, and maintaining a high level of production and consumption, the burdens are shifting to the third world countries. Thus, it is an unsound and detrimental to global environment and sustainable development as it causes uneven growth and imbalance between nations of the world.

Global Empowerment

The contemporary world is a multi-centered place in which states, intergovernmental organizations, NGOs, individuals and other international and local organizations partake as actors. These various institutions can be related to each other when it comes to the function they act upon in relation to environmental issues. Empowerment, thus, can be explained as the process of enhancing the capacity of individuals or groups to make choices and to transform those choices into desired actions and outcomes.

The initial trend is the growing role of information as a driving force in the global environment protection. Powered by the ability to reproduce and distribute it ever more quickly and cheaply by new technologies, the internationalization of such aspect can be achieved. Thus, empowering the information centers (such as media, TV, etc) with the ability to disseminate the consequences of climate change is playing an essential role. It creates awareness, not only at an individual level but also in a way to recognize such calamity with common knowledge everywhere. The awareness constructed by the global information has a massive influence in the maturity of the people and societies as a whole. Accordingly, the part of social responsibility to tackle various issues related to development will rise concurrently.

Social movements are an opening to mobilize people in a context of networking and cooperation to resist the crisis of environmental degradation. These movements may come up with different strategies, demands, groups, technologies, etc. It is true that several movements are combating such global concern by building a unity among them. This profound organizational link can be a form of authority to make their devotion a possible reality. Today, the international movement of environmentalist’s is becoming stronger with time where it is no longer possible to stop their demands. The individual nations are more under pressure to merely turn down the demands of such institutions in international arena. This is due to the growing global awareness and mobilization of individual people, organizations, and institutions

Furthermore, the establishment of different conferences, agreements, conventions, etc is open with the purpose advancing the concept of sustainable development in combination with economic policies (Rio, Kyoto, etc). I can state that recognition to the loss of environmental degradation is one of the motivations for the organization of such conferences and agreements. To this effect, many developing countries understand the need to integrate environment in to their development policies. This will help in cutting their wasteful consumption models, though it could be difficult to implement such policies in short period of time.

The position of NGOs, specially agricultural and humanitarian organizations can be explained as a means in appealing to such environment degradation. For instance many NGOs are concerned with that of attracting foreign direct investment, as the developing countries would appeal to eliminate or ignore environmental standards. The fear is that a host country may not have strict pollution standards, which in turn could have an impact on the ecosystems and development choices.

Conclusion

It can be stated as a concluding remark that environmental degradation is undeniably an increasing problem now days. This crisis is interconnected to the three overarching global issues, namely global risk, global consumption and global empowerment. Likewise, these global issues are interrelated to each other as the impact or safety strategy of one problem has an influence on the others as well.

As long as the unwarranted consumption of natural resources is taking place, there is a global risk in the environment. Equally, the risk is not confined only to the nature but also has a significant effect on human health, even to the extent of conflict over critical resources, as there is lack of safety measures. Thus the power assumed to influence the polluters primarily lies on the society and other varied and keen institutions. Empowering them could create awareness and mobilization in the process of cutting the increase in global consumption. It is true that governments could play a great role in here; however their reluctance or unwillingness needs to be taken in to account.

The big question here is can we overcome the global environmental degradation our planet is facing? And is it possible that the various groups, which are contributing to such global degradation, work in harmony with the pro-environmental individuals and institutions? The response to these issues could be, why not? As described in the deliberation of the text, it is an issue of taking responsibility in finding viable protection strategies, through awareness, mobilization, and alternative mechanisms, in order to share the benefits of sustainable development.

Therefore, the challenge is to adapt our institutions so as the force of such environmental degradation is channeled in to ways that contribute to sustainable development. Whether this situation advances or undermines sustainable development depends on how policies are crafted and linked case-by-case to get a win-win solution.