Rosa Parks (Rosa Louise McCauley Parks) was born on February 14th, 1913. She is widely regarded as 'the mother of the freedom movement'. Her most famous act was to refuse to give up her seat on a bus in Montgomery, Alabama for a white passenger. Her refusal sparked a civil disobedience movement that propelled not only her but also Martin Luther King, Jnr. to international fame. Rosa Parks died in 2005. She was the first woman and only the second non-government official to be buried at the Capitol Rotunda.
One of the interesting things about Rosa Parks was that although she became a leading figure in the Black Civil Rights Movement in America she was not an intellectual, a radical or a preacher. She was just a normal woman who worked as a seamstress. She said she acted as a private citizen that was 'tired of giving in'. Rosa Park's protest was one that was not based on an intellectual position but a deep seated visceral feeling of injustice. Nobody needed to tell her that black and white people should be treated equally. She knew because she felt it every day of her life. She probably hadn't read Gandhi's articles about civil disobedience. She just knew that she should protest, and that she should do so in a non-violent manner. For these reasons she has gone down in history. She represents the everyman (or everywoman) who has had enough and who will no longer toe the line.
The main issue with civil disobedience is that it is breaking the law. Many intellectuals, most notably Gandhi and Martin Luther King, have propounded the theory that it is people's duty to resist unfair laws. Because something is a law it does not make it just. This is hardly a contentious issue since man makes the laws and man is fallible. Even in the area of religion, laws can be changed. They are not carved in stone. Jesus famously broke the commandment about not working on the Sabbath stating that the laws were made for man, not man for the laws.
It is those brave people who take action against unjust laws and unjust situations who are the real guardians of democracy. Sometimes the only way the will of the people will be heard by a government is through protest. Most recently this has been the case in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia. For too long the people complained but their protests fell on deaf ears. Many were imprisoned and tortured for their comments. Eventually, enough was enough and mass protests ensued. This is truly the will of the people in action and represents the true meaning of the word democracy? 'demos' meaning people and 'cracy' meaning rule.
Societies and mores are evolving. The general consensus is changing about what is acceptable behavior. In the 1930s in America few whites stopped to think about the injustice of racial segregation. Now it is a given that the policy of barring black people from the amenities, facilities and educational opportunities that white people enjoy is abhorrent. The same movement can be seen in terms of the environment. Before 'nature' was morally neutral and pollution was just an inconsequential by-product of economic activity and human expansion. Now people are beginning to espouse the notion of an inherent value to natural resources such as trees. They need to be protected by the law.
Other people have articulated the idea that animals deserve to have rights to be protected against cruelty. Many regard animal liberationists as a looney fringe, but they too have made an impact on public mores. This is seen in the fact that cosmetic companies now go to great lengths to advertise the fact they do not test their products on animals.
Not all causes are just or find sympathy with a wider public. However, it is necessary that people like Rosa Parks continue to stand up and say 'enough is enough'. Civilizations are judged as much by their sensitivity to human and other rights as by their architectural and other cultural achievements.
This website is a forum for debate about issues that matter. It is the place to say 'I'm tired of giving in'. The Twenty-first Century is the age of information. It is our duty to publish information about injustice and perceived wrongs. If the cause is truly just then others will respond and act. Suffering the tyranny of injustice in silence is a crime in an age where the World Wide Web gives everyone with access to the internet a voice.
The cause of equal rights takes on many forms. There is a growing awareness of the need for civil rights and equal rights for the various minority races in the West. The same is true of women’s rights – now most Western countries have the right to equal pay for men and women enshrined in the law. These laws are not perfectly enforced but there is always redress by legal means. Those who have the courage and the resources can sue for justice in many parts of the western world.
In Asia the situation is more complicated. Strongly muslim socieities tend to regard the idea that women have equal rights with men as religiously incorrect. The Arab oil nations place strong legal distinctions between nationals and immigrant workers. The latter group treated as entirely unworthy of many the privelges nationals enjoy. Korea and Japan have tried to do more to bring equal rights to their citizens.
In Thailand the government official line is that there are equal rights for all. The situation is made complicated by the millions of illegal Laotion and Burmese workers in the country. Another group who often do not receive much public attention are the sea gypsies. They are also called the Moken. They are semi-nomadic people from Malaysia. The sea gypsies are found in the Gulf of Thailand, Krabi, Phang-Nga and Phuket. They were originally encouraged to settle in the Khao Lak area and other deserted islands to stop the British claiming land that was felt to belong to Thailand. Unfortunately, they were not given any rights to fish the seas in the area. Since the Surin Islands and the Similan Islands became popular diving spots commercial fishing has been banned in the area. This leaves the sea gypsies outside the law as they must fish in order to survive.
They find it hard to gain representation within the democracy of Thailand since they are an isolated group of people who shun modern society. They have their own language and religion and want equal rights. More than that they want to be left alone.
It is interesting to note that politicians in democratic countries are forever making speaches paying lip service to the idea of human rights. These human rights include freedom of speech, the right to assemby, the right to protest, the right to procreate, the right to worship any god, and the right to equality.
The last right is a wide ranging one. Equality before the law means everyone gets treated equally. And yet those with money can employ the lawyers to improve their chances of escaping punishment. Equality in terms of employment; and yet women and part time workers are paid less around the world. The issue of pay is of vital importance to the vast majority of employees who are not given salaries comparable with bankers.
The difficulty with equality in wages is that increases wages can often have detrimental effects on the economy. In the UK at the moment the minimum wage has gone over 6 pounds an hour. It sounds great but the phenomenal increase in house prices at the same time as the minimum wage was intropduced in 1999 has left those who wish to buy property no better off.
In America the issue of the minimum wage is often siude stepped by employing illegal Mexican workers. Although the right wing moan about the porous boarder with Mexico the country that first put man on the moon says it can do nothing to stop the flood of immigrants over the border. It is obvious that secretly they don’t want to.
In Thailand the country is experiencing a boom time. This has meant that the government has had to increase the minimum wage. Hotels in Thong Nai Pan, Chaweng, Karon, Sairee and all the other tourist destinations in Thailand get round the problem of higher costs by employing illegal Burmese workers. Since these workers are illegal they don’t have to pay for any social benefits. As with Mexicans in America they are often regarded as second class citizens despite being essential to the economy.
Much of equality depends on legality and justice in the economic system of a country.
In Chicago during the 1960s, there was a well-established African American population – over three quarters of a million – who had successfully established themselves relatively well off financially compared to African American communities in other large cities.
While still only making half of what local whites would make, their per capita income was higher than Blacks in every other American city apart from Detroit. Of course, success is always relative. Racist institutions and habits both played their part in keeping the community from gaining true equality with their white neighbors.
In fact, ’white neighbors’ itself is a bit of a misnomer. Due to the racist practice of redlining the white and black populations of Chicago were largely segregated. If an African American family wanted to purchase a home, they found it almost impossible to obtain a traditional mortgage at reasonable interest rates.
The alternative they had to pursue was to buy a home on installment payments; similar to the way people would purchase a television or a refrigerator reviews of the terms of these arrangements indicate that they were very harsh.
Missing a payment would result in eviction – just as if they were mere tenants. Plus, the costs were onerous. Research paid that in Chicago black families paid 70 plus percent more for their housing than white families did, despite their much lower household income! With this type of financial disparity, clearly the prospect of purchasing luxuries such as refrigerators and televisions was dim.
In late 1968, many buyers in this situation banded together to form the Contract Buyers League. On December 1st of that year they organized a payment strike, where several hundred of these contract buyers stopped making their payments at the same time. As a result of this, many of the real estate agents involved renegotiated the terms of many of the contracts with fairer terms.
The civil rights movement in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries in Europe and America did a lot to protect the rights of vulnerable minority groups. These groups include foreigners. In many parts of Asia foreigners are still commonly perceived with distrust, and are denied the same rights as citizens. The civil rights movement in Asia has not developed along the same lines as it did in the West. A good example of this is Thailand.
Thailand is seen by many as a paradise country. The weather is great nearly year round. The cost of living is cheap. The people are friendly. The infrastructure and medical services are on a par with many Western countries and the crime rate is low. While welcoming foreign tourists, many Thais have a hypocritical attitude to foreigners living in Thailand. Foreigners are called ’farang’. They are viewed as a source of income. Those farang that try and integrate into Thai society are faced with a number of difficulties.
One of the most common phrases in Thai is: ’the farang knows too much’. Those foreigners who become too aware of the scams, the scandals and the extra legal way that many communities operate are often shunned. While learning Thai opens the door to communicating with locals, it also arouses suspicion and puts many Thais on their guard.
The law does not help. A good example of this is the visa system in Thailand. Even if married to a Thai person a foreigner will still have to leave the country every 2 months to make a visa run. This is the height of bureaucratic racism. There is no point to exiting a country and then immediately re-entering. Nothing is achieved except a regular income for those involved in the ’visa run’ business. It is a system designed to remind foreigners that they are only begrudgingly allowed to stay in the country.
Another injustice for foreigners in Thailand involves owning property and land. The law is a mess in this area. Foreigners have to buy through their spouse’s name. This leaves too much room for cheating. Foreigners not married to Thai nationals can only buy 30 year leases on land, but have permanent rights to anything they build. This is illogical. At the same time the Thai government allows Thai businesses that have minority foreign ownership to buy freehold property.
On the Thai island of Koh Tao the confusion of property law is exploited very cynically. Estate agents sell land and property to foreigners and then at whim they take the property away under the legal loophole that Koh Tao has no land titles because it was once a prison island. It is possible to get recourse in the courts, but a foreigner is always taking the risk of physical threats if they pursue their rights.
If Thailand wants to really attract foreign investment and increase tourist revenues it has to do more to protect the rights of foreigners. At the same time the police force has to be fairly paid so they spend more time upholding the law and not collecting ’fines’.