What a day!

I need to write this while it’s all fresh. What a day! This morning I woke up and turned on the TV, to see John McCain giving his speech conceding defeat on the US presidentlal election. I must say, what a gracious speech it was. If nothing else, McCain is a good loser.

Then about 20 minutes later, I watched Barack Obama’s victory speech. By that stage I was in an airport departure lounge, and there were quite a few of us gathered around the TV. I don’t think of myself as particularly sentimental, but I couldn’t stop a few tears from rolling down my cheeks. His speech was so fitting, the occasion so momentous, I couldn’t help but be moved.

The faces of the people in the crowd in Chicago reflected not just happiness but idealism, and hope. Goodness knows we need some ideals in today’s world, we need some heroes. Obama is now the focus of that need. Even as I savoured the moment, a part of my mind was already sceptical. Obama now carries the ideals and hopes not only of Americans but of many around the world. Will he live up to the heavy expectations that have been placed on him?

Please, please let us not be disappointed, as we so often are by our leaders. I recall, for instance, the scenes of jubilation in Kenya when Mwai Kibaki was elected president. Four years later, that jubilation had turned to bitter cynicism. In South Africa the hopes placed on the ANC have in many cases also faded all too soon. Let’s not have that again.

In a sense it doesn’t really matter. This moment, this day, will have a lasting positive impact, no matter what follows. As an American friend of mine has put it — African American men today see themselves re-imagined. The proliferation of negative images of black men in America, as prisoners, as drug dealers and so on, now have an extremely powerful counter-image. In a sense, the image of Africa, too, is changed. What impact is this having on youngsters, who now can imagine a world of possibilities they never before thought possible? Obama has broken the glass  ceiling for black Americans in the most powerful way.

Today, the USA, too, is being powerfully re-imagined by the rest of the world. Suddenly, the nation associated with George Bush, with war, with aggression and mindless conservatism, has transformed itself in this one act. Will our jubilation be justified, or will the strictures of office, the demands of the military-industrial complex force Obama into the mould of so many predecessors. Let us hope and pray not.

But again, I am hopeful, because this is not about one man. Obama’s campaign succeeded because it transformed the nature of electoral politics in America. It relied on an extensive network of grassroots-based organisations and individuals. It build on a model of citizen involvement and activism. The youth have been energised and re-engaged in politics by this election.

As Obama’s speech indicated, this is just the beginning. There are huge crises to tackle — a faltering global economy, two wars that the US is involved in, new forms of international instability. It will not be easy by any means. Obama can’t do it on his own. Individuals naturally have weaknesses and failings, but one of the huge strengths of the president-elect is his strength as an organiser, his realisation that he needs a strong team. In this case there is  a network, a movement that’s been established. In this sense, change has already happened.

The financial bubble bursts — what about Africa?

As I write this, US lawmakers are still haggling about whether or not to approve the $700-million bail-out package, to rescue Wall Street.

Exactly how all of this international financial stuff works is rather beyond me (and from reading newspapers and magazines such as Time, it seems not even seasoned financial reporters understand all of it, let alone the regulators). But basically it seems that top international banks made a whole lot of very risky loans, which were backed up by complicated inter-bank guarantees — and now that many people can’t pay back their loans, the whole system is coming crashing down.

Anyhow, there are a few points that can be made, and questions to be asked, about how all of this is affecting, or going to affect, Africa.

The first point is one that BBC World made, when the US bailout package was first proposed. At the time, the UN was also meeting to discuss measures to reduce global poverty. After lengthy deliberations, the delegates agreed to commit something like $16-billion to fight global poverty and try to meet the millennium development goal of halving the number of people living on just 1-2 US dollars a day. The UN secretary-general hailed that as a great achievement. Well, it does sound like a lot, but in comparison to the proposed $700-million to rescue Wall Street, it’s a pittance.

Another notable feature of the current crash, is that we are seeing a reversal of market liberalisation, as the US government rescues banks, and even effectively nationalises huge private financial institutions (which is what happened when the government took over the home loan organisations Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac). There are huge contrasts here with what might happen should the economy of a developing nation be in the same situation. Firstly, the IMF and World Bank would be there, insisting institutions be allowed to collapse rather than be bailed out, and insisting on market liberalisation rather than the opposite (which is what happened in south-east Asia about a decade ago). Secondly, imagine an African or South American government suddenly deciding to nationalise major privately-owned financial institutions. The US would be decrying it, and imposing blockades and sanctions.

A key question for all of us must be, how will the current crisis impact on Africa. So far it seems that African banks are not in much danger — I think the fairly conservative banking and finance laws in most African countries have protected us to an extent. But there will obviously be other impacts. One I have wondered about is how the economic slump in the US and Europe will affect remittances sent back to Africa by Africans living in these countries. Remittances have been shown to be a major form of income, not only for individuals and families, but for national economies. But if Africans abroad start losing their jobs, or feeling the pinch, these contributions are bound to suffer.

In the long term, the picture may not be so bleak. Writing in South Africa’s Business Day earlier this week, finance expert Michael Power argues that savers in the rest of the world have up to now been financing the US’s over-consumption and credit-fuelled lifestyle, and have not been profiting from it. He says this huge bubble is about to burst, and the US is going to lose its place at the top of the global capitalist market system. He foresees “the end of the world as we know it”, and that the new global financial system that will emerge, will be much friendlier to countries that are rich in natural resources (such as in Africa). But, there is one important condition — these countries will only benefit if they and their economies are well managed.

Let’s hope our politicians and financial leaders are prepared.

Do Olympic protests show double standards?

I’m not much of a sports fan, but the Olympics are something else. There is something larger than life about it all, from the opening ceremony to the agony, triumph and glory that can be witnessed several times each day, until the end.

The Olympics are also very interesting because of the political context. With the games set in Beijing, a lot has been said and written about China, it’s human rights and environmental record, and its rise as a superpower.

The opening of the Games was spectacular. I’ve never seen such masterly use of performers, rhythm, light and colour to create patterns and moving shapes on such a scale. There were 2008 individual performers on the field, dancing and drumming and moving in unison.

It was compelling, jaw-dropping stuff, but it also made me feel a little uncomfortable. At times I had the unsettling feeling that each of those 2008 individuals was nothing more than a cog in a gigantic machine. Certainly the scale of things made the individual human seem tiny and insignificant.

But I wonder too, whether that uneasy feeling I had was evoked solely by the images on TV, and to what extent it was influenced by the views about China that have been expressed in the media recently. Views that paint China as a fearful, unfeeling machine-like force, about to become dominant in the world.

Much of my reflection over the past day or two has been sparked by a very interesting article by Brendan O’Neill, in the online magazine, Spiked (see www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/earticle/5562/).

O’Neill argues that a lot of the rhetoric about China, painting the country as a threatening, unfeeling, alien giant, is simply a reflection of double standards, prejudice, and insecurity on the part of the Western media. For example, O’Neill says that the Chinese have been criticised for going all-out to win as many gold medals as possible — as if this is somehow morally wrong, and not what every country is striving for.

He argues out that in coverage of the Games (and the run-up to them) in the Western media, the Chinese athletes are shown as a team, without much insight into their individual stories and personal dramas, while athletes from Britain and the US are presented in much greater depth. O’Neill argues that all of this reflects a form of racism: “Here, contemporary China-bashing has echoes of yesterday’s ‘Yellow Peril’ fears about the Chinese. The idea of the Chinese as peculiarly driven, unemotional and unforgiving is an old prejudice that is being rehabilitated on the back of the Olympic Games.”

I have noticed this kind of prejudice in South Africa. While disparaging comments about blacks or whites are not permitted, it’s still somehow seen as fine to depict Chinese or Japanese or Korean people as having slanty eyes, buck teeth and talking with a funny accent. You also hear comments on the radio such as, “I can’t really tell the difference between the Chinese, Japanese and Koreans” (Which is just as racist or xenophobic as saying “I can/can’t tell a Zambian or Malawian just by looking at them.”)

And several weeks ago, when a small community of Chinese South Africans went to court and won legal recognition that they had been discriminated against during Apartheid, all sorts of racist nonsense was spouted against them — including a very embarassing tirade by the Minister of Labour.

O’Neill’s article has caused me to do a lot of reflection. Certainly, I think one can criticise the actions and policies of the Chinese government. Its human rights record is dismal, it severely limits freedom of speech, and its policies in Africa are at times very worrying.

But criticism must be consistent. During the build-up to the Games, there were often quite violent protests as the Olympic flame made its way around the world by people outraged at China’s regular violation of human rights.  One could ask, though, whether the USA is presently that much better. Think of ongoing events in Iraq, and the prisoners detained in Guantanamo Bay. And just last week I was reading in the New York Times about how the military has prevented journalists from publishing photographs of dead soldiers in Afganistan and Iraq. And yet I wonder, would the expressions of outrage have been as many and as loud, would the protests have been as vociferous, had the 2008 Olympics been held in the USA?

Somehow, I doubt it.

(This post first appeared on the Citizen Journalism in Africa site on 11th August: www.citizenjournalismafrica.org)