As we enter 2024, we constantly think about voting, especially in the United States. Voting is a way to engage with our political system, making our voices heard and shaping our respective country’s history and politics.
Voting may seem to be another task on one’s to-do list and may be seen as a burden; with the need to take time off to vote or go through paperwork to request an absentee ballot, it indeed seems like a lot of work and time is invested into something that does not elicit any visual change. However, the reality is that every vote truly matters. When analyzing the impact of voting, history tells it best. For example, in U.S. history, the 2000 election showed the effect of voting; Al Gore narrowly lost the Electoral College vote to George W. Bush because the latter won Florida by a mere 0.0009%. With each individual vote having a role in influencing history, it is important to note the importance of voting on the national and local levels.
The Significance of Voting Rights
The importance of voting has not been something reserved for all individuals. Throughout history, voting history has been associated with social justice and human rights, specifically the acquisition of it. Domestically, in the United States, it has been associated with women’s suffrage and civil rights. When reflecting on Seneca Falls in 1848, we see that delegates focused on the idea that all “men and women are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” This realization helped birth the idea of voting rights for women, especially at a time when American women were hindered from genuinely exploring their political identity. Even amidst the conflict of World War I, women were able to stay true to their cause and showed their commitment to advancing our country’s interests. This influenced many individuals to allow a change in how women were represented democratically and elicited the ratification of the 19th Amendment of the Constitution.
Beyond suffrage for women, African American suffrage further highlights the importance of voting rights throughout history. After the Civil War, the 14th Amendment granted African Americans the right to citizenship; however, this did not mean that all individuals were able to effectively cast their vote due to them being systematically turned away from the bolls. This unfairness led to individuals mobilizing to share their stories and advocate against inequality, poll taxes, literary exams, etc. The push for equity was eventually successful through the passing of the 24th Amendment and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, an encompassing act that prioritized equity in voting rights.
Human Rights and Threats to Voting Rights
Voting is unequivocally a human right; expressing one’s voice without discrimination is a right, and voting is one way to do so. This action is not only a political right but also a civil right, embodying the importance of preserving and exercising one’s voice.
However, recently, significant challenges domestically and internationally have suppressed these voices. Ranging from gerrymandering to voter ID laws , different communities are targeted. This undermines the integrity of the voting process globally. In addition, with the rise of misinformation and disinformation, public trust in elections has decreased, posing a great threat to democracy.
As we continue discussions around voting, it is important to highlight historical trends and work effectively to remedy the injustices we see. This series will highlight recent injustices in elections and the infringement on democratic and fair elections worldwide, helping us work through a more equitable global democracy.
In the past couple of months, Yemen has been mentioned a lot. More specifically, the Houthis or, as some have called them, Ansarallah. You might be wondering first, “What is Yemen?” Why are they being talked about? Who are the Houthis/Ansarallah? How is Saudi Arabia involved? And where is the government? These are all questions that I heard many people around me ask. So, in this article, we will answer all these questions as well as explain Yemen’s situation and wars coming from a Yemeni American.
Before diving into the issues concerning Yemen, we have to cover some important history of Yemen to have a full understanding. Yemen’s history can stretch back 3000 years and the biggest evidence of that is the architecture of the villages and towns in it. Yemen had three successive civilizations: Minean, Sabaean, and Himyarite.
Ancient Yemen played a crucial role in overland trade between Egypt, Mesopotamia, and the Mediterranean civilizations due to its strategic location. Pre-Islamic trading kingdoms, such as Minaean and Saba’, thrived on incense trade. The decline began with the Romans favoring the Red Sea, leading to the loss of wealth for southern Arabian kingdoms.
The rise of Islam in the 7th century saw Yemen’s rapid conversion. Muslim caliphs ruled, followed by local dynasties like Zaydi imamate and Rasulids. The Ottoman Empire took control in the 16th century, bringing Yemen under their rule. Despite a flourishing coffee trade, Yemen remained culturally isolated.
The 19th century marked the division of Yemen into North and South, controlled by the Ottomans and British, respectively. North Yemen faced opposition, leading to the Ottoman evacuation in 1918. Two powerful imams ruled North Yemen until the 1962 revolution, resulting in the establishment of the Yemen Arab Republic (YAR).
The YAR faced internal conflicts and external interventions, including support from Egypt and Saudi Arabia. A coup in 1974 led to military rule under Colonel Ibrahim al-Hamdi. His assassination in 1977 and subsequent leaders set the stage for the lengthy presidency of Ali Abdullah Saleh, who ruled North Yemen until its unification with South Yemen in 1990.
Yemen’s modern history is a tumultuous journey marked by political transitions, civil wars, and external interventions. Understanding the dynamics of this complex narrative is crucial, especially for students seeking clarity amid the intricate details. Let’s embark on a journey through the early years of Yemen, focusing on key events involving President Ali Abdullah Saleh and the Houthi rebels.
In the 1990s, Yemen underwent a significant transformation with the reunification of North and South Yemen. Ali Abdullah Saleh, the president of North Yemen since 1978, transitioned to become the president of the Republic of Yemen. Concurrently, the Zaidi-Shia group Ansar Allah, commonly known as the Houthis, gradually gained power, with President Saleh’s tacit support. A brief civil war erupted in 1994 between the unintegrated armies of the north and south, resulting in the defeat of the southern army and solidifying Yemen’s reunification.
In 2000, President Saleh reached a border demarcation agreement with Saudi Arabia, seeking to disarm the Houthis, whom he had previously considered a valuable tool against Saudi interference. Tensions escalated between Saleh’s government and the Houthis, leading to a rebellion in 2004 initiated by Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi.
The conflict unfolded in several phases, with government crackdowns, rebellions, ceasefires, and amnesty grants. Saleh’s government faced sporadic clashes with the Houthis, and in 2010, Operation Scorched Earth aimed to crush the rebellion. The Houthis, however, persisted, engaging in cross-border clashes with Saudi forces.
Inspired by the Arab Spring, Yemen experienced widespread demonstrations in 2011, calling for an end to Saleh’s 33-year rule. Despite initial concessions, the protests intensified, leading Saleh to agree to a Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)-brokered deal. However, clashes persisted until November 2011, when Saleh’s deputy, Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi, assumed power.
The National Dialogue Conference in 2014 laid the groundwork for a new constitution, and a political transition plan was approved. However, anti-government protests erupted, leading to the dissolution of President Hadi’s cabinet. In 2014, the Houthis seized control of Sanaa, and by early 2015, they took over the Yemeni government, prompting President Hadi to flee.
In response to Houthi advances, a Saudi-led coalition initiated Operation Decisive Storm in 2015, launching indiscriminate airstrikes and imposing a naval blockade. Despite subsequent efforts like Operation Restoring Hope, the conflict escalated, leading to a dire humanitarian crisis. Yemen became a battleground, but not for what is being told. One of those example is Al-Mahra.
In the shadows of Yemen’s well-documented conflicts lies a lesser-known struggle for control in the easternmost governorate of Al-Mahra. While the global narrative often focuses on the Houthi rebellion and the Saudi-led coalition’s efforts, the intricate dynamics at play in Al-Mahra offer a unique perspective on regional power shifts and economic interests.
Since 2017, Al-Mahra residents have witnessed a gradual influx of Saudi troops, raising concerns and sparking anxiety among the local population. What initially seemed like a limited military presence evolved into a comprehensive campaign by Saudi Arabia to establish control over the governorate, extending its influence to the Omani border in the east.
The intensified Saudi presence in Al-Mahra, marked by establishing over 20 military bases and outposts, fueled speculations regarding the kingdom’s interest in constructing an oil pipeline. With a population of no more than 300,000, Al-Mahra became a battleground for what some believed was a strategic move to secure a pipeline route for Saudi crude oil to the Arabian Sea.
Leaked diplomatic cables from 2008 revealed Saudi Arabia’s longstanding interest in building a pipeline by securing territories and gaining the loyalty of local leaders. The Saudis went beyond military installations, recruiting Mahri locals and attempting to create their irregular military force. The transfer of Mahri tribes from Saudi Arabia to Al-Mahra further deepened suspicions, leading to clashes between Mahri tribes and Saudi engineering crews.
Saudi forces secured Nishtun port, raising suspicions that it could serve as the intended site for an oil export terminal. A leaked memo from 2018, thanking the Saudi ambassador for a feasibility study on an oil port, added fuel to the speculation. While not explicitly mentioning Al-Mahra, the memo heightened concerns and contributed to the belief that Saudi Arabia was preparing to extend an oil pipeline through Yemen.
Amidst these developments, skepticism arose, suggesting that Saudi deployments and tactics aimed to counter Oman’s influence in Al-Mahra. Tensions between Saudi Arabia and Oman, exacerbated by the Yemen war, saw Oman leveraging various factors, including granting citizenship and maintaining ties with Mahri political leaders, to resist Saudi influence. Publicly, Saudi Arabia claimed its troop deployments focused on combating Houthi arms smuggling.
Critics argue that the theory of a Saudi pipeline in Al-Mahra is implausible given Yemen’s entrenched political instability. Protecting a multi-billion dollar pipeline would pose significant challenges with ongoing conflicts, external pressures, and internal threats. Even before the 2011 uprising, reports suggested Yemen’s volatility made it unsuitable for such projects. Adding another layer to the complexity of this conflict.
International outrage grew over the humanitarian crisis, and in 2018, the US Senate invoked the War Powers Resolution to end its support for the Saudi-led coalition. The Stockholm Agreement in December 2018 aimed for a ceasefire, but peace remained elusive.
In February 2021, President Biden announced a shift in the US approach, revoking the Houthi FTO designation and ending support for the Saudi-led coalition’s offensive operations. Efforts toward peace continued, with UN-mediated talks and a two-month truce declared in April 2022.
NOW
Despite the recent peace agreement between the Houthi rebel group and the Saudi-led coalition, Yemen continues to make headlines due to the dire humanitarian situation and escalating conflicts. The so-called “peace” only involved the Houthi rebels and the coalition, leaving the rebel group in power and the Yemeni people still suffering. Let’s examines the recent events that have unfolded in Yemen, shedding light on the complexities of the situation.
By mid-2023, dissatisfaction with the Houthi rebels’ control began to rise among the Yemeni population. The rebels’ oppressive regime, characterized by restrictions on rights, exorbitant “protection” fees, and crippling economic conditions, fueled public discontent. However, the rebels cleverly diverted attention by exploiting the longstanding Yemeni support for Palestine. On December 9, the rebels announced their blockade of Israeli ships in the Red Sea, citing the ongoing situation in Gaza as the reason. This move united Yemenis, temporarily halting internal uprisings and garnering increased support for the rebel group.
In response to the rebel blockade, the US and UK coalitions initiated airstrikes on multiple Yemeni cities on January 11. The airstrikes were portrayed as retaliation for the rebels’ interference with ships due to the Gaza conflict. This military response effectively quashed any attempts at democracy, sparking anger and resentment among Yemenis who felt victimized by the international intervention.
The US-led coalition’s bombing campaign intensified, with the worst attack occurring on February 3. Many described it as more severe than previous assaults, even during the Saudi-led coalition’s offensive. The bombings targeted vital infrastructure, including one of Yemen’s international airports, resulting in halted flights, disrupted electricity, and widespread fear among the population.
Yemen, already grappling with eight years of conflict, faced an alarming humanitarian crisis. The World Food Programme (WFP) highlighted the unprecedented level of hunger, with 17 million Yemenis experiencing food insecurity. Child malnutrition rates were among the highest globally, and a significant portion of families lacked essential dietary elements. The WFP’s December 5 announcement of a pause in food distribution in the North due to funding shortages further worsened the situation.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres pleaded for de-escalation, urging all sides to avoid worsening the situation. Despite initial warnings and concerns expressed by global leaders, including President Joe Biden, the airstrikes persist, deepening the crisis in Yemen.
As Yemen grapples with the aftermath of international airstrikes, the fragile peace has shattered, leaving millions of Yemenis in an increasingly dire situation. The humanitarian crisis, exacerbated by disrupted food distribution and ongoing military actions, demands urgent attention and international cooperation to alleviate the suffering of the Yemeni people.
Chinese vlogger captured a horrific, viral video of a woman chained outside to a hut in January of 2022. This woman was mentally incapacitated and had been without clean water, food, and electricity for an extended time. Xiao Huamei had been taken from her home province of Yunnan and sold to a farmer in Jiangsu for 5,000 yuan – or $790 at the time. She managed to escape him only to be sold into marriage trafficking two more times. The last time occurred in June 1998, when Dong Zhimin bought Xiao Huamei and subsequently tortured her, forced her to bear children, and subjected her to barbaric conditions. At the hands of Dong Zhimin, her husband, she was forced to have eight children in nine years, the firstborn in 1999. From when she was sold in 1998 to when she was found in 2022, Xiao Huamei had been a victim of marriage trafficking for 24 years. Claiming she had schizophrenia, Dong Zhimin subjected her to inhumane treatment, such as chaining her up outside like a dog. Dong Zhimin was sentenced to only nine years in prison. Sentences for trafficking crimes are typically capped at ten years. This spurred public outrage online because many felt the punishment did not fit the crime. Ten years is not even enough time to conceive and carry eight children. This case raised awareness about the lack of reforms for marriage and human trafficking.
What is marriage trafficking?
Marriage trafficking is an international problem that continues to grow and must be handled domestically. It is defined by the transfer or receipt of a person; the means may include deception, threats, or coercion, and the purpose may be sexual exploitation and/or servitude. Cases like Xiao Huamei’s are not isolated to domestic women because foreign women are also exploited and sold to Chinese men to be abused and breed children. Traffickers target vulnerable young women and children in their country as well as neighboring countries. Women in Myanmar, Cambodia, and Vietnam who are trying to flee political unrest and economic instability are highly exploited in this situation. Vulnerable, job-seeking women are tricked into entering the arrangement through a broker that is offering well-paying jobs across the job, thus meeting the criteria for an overt act of marriage trafficking. Traffickers smuggle these women in using coercion, violence, and threats. The process used to transport these women also constitutes human trafficking.
The prevalence of trafficking in China is exacerbated by the lack of accountability among government officials. Chinese officials have allegedly turned down the appeals of women who have been trafficked, held them for extended periods, deported them without their children, and, in certain instances, returned them to their husbands in exchange for bribes. Chinese authorities rarely, if ever, pursue prosecutions against marriage trafficking charges. It is difficult to investigate due to the underground, illicit nature of marriage trafficking. In China, marriages between foreign-born women are not usually officially registered, which leads to their children being lost in the system.
The intent behind this industry is apparent from the illicit means used to facilitate the business. The purpose of the financial transaction of young women and children to Chinese men as brides is to uphold cultural values of marriage, family, and children. Based on sociological exchange theory, women enter the relationship expecting stability and support that is gained from marriage, while the men enter the relationship expecting a personal benefit that is gained from maintaining the cultural values of marriage. Most of the time, traffickers promise a better future to young women seeking to better their situation. This is not always the case, but it is the case of Xiao Huamei and foreign brides who are trafficked for marriage. While they migrate voluntarily, knowing that they are to be married, they are also often times deceived or trapped in their situations. Forcing these women into marriage means exerting power and control over them. The exploitation of vulnerable women and lack of individual freedoms constitute these cases as marriage trafficking.
What is responsible for this?
Given China’s longstanding one-child policy with a preference for boys, broader socioeconomic and political factors drive the marriage trafficking illicit market. Due to this, China experiences a gender imbalance, with about 35 million more males than females. The lack of eligible brides creates a demand for the marriage trafficking illicit market. An estimated 7,400 women and girls were victims of marriage trafficking in the Yunnan Province along the border, which is where Xiao Huamei was from. In rural areas, the proportion of women in society has declined. Among them, more than 5,000 females were compelled to bear children with their Chinese spouses. Bride trafficking in China constitutes human trafficking because there is an overt act, a thorough process, and an intentional purpose behind it. China, with its vast population and growing economic and regional disparities, experiences nearly every manifestation of marriage trafficking.
What is China’s response?
Under Chinese law, people face more fines for selling parakeets, a protected species, than for selling women. The government realizes there is an issue, and they have pledged to crack down on the illicit industry. Chinese police arrested more than 1,300 people suspected of assisting in marriage trafficking. However, women are still trafficked from Cambodia, Myanmar, and Vietnam. There needs to be safe passage for refugees from these countries so they do not fall victim to trafficking schemes. Despite past efforts, ongoing commitment is needed to fulfill these pledges and protect vulnerable individuals. To combat marriage trafficking, China needs to enforce stricter laws around forced marriage, childbearing, and immigration.
Victims of marriage trafficking were 6.5 times more likely to experience intimate partner violence compared to women in autonomous marriages. They are 4.7 times more likely to suffer a miscarriage or stillbirth and 4.6 times more likely to suffer the death of at least one child. There are many more women like Xiao Huamei. To protect them, there needs to be active, continued efforts to educate society about the harmful consequences of marriage trafficking. Coordinated programs with neighboring countries to address cross-border cases of marriage trafficking are essential. Providing social services at risk of being trafficked and offering safe entry into China will significantly impact the illicit economy. By addressing marriage trafficking through these comprehensive strategies, we can shape a world where everyone has the freedom to choose whom they marry and live a life free from coercion and violence.
In my introductory blog on ‘How Stigma Hurts,’ I reviewed the opium crisis and the stigmatization of opium smoking by Chinese immigrants. I highly recommend reading this to better understand how addiction was viewed differently depending on the communities using drugs, and usually viewed negatively if that person is already seen as an ‘other.’ While anti-opium sentiment was centrally anti-Chinese, the anti-marijuana sentiment that developed in the 1900s was also, in ways, spurred by racist notions. It may be hard to hear, but the history of drugs has cultural complexities. In this blog, I will continue exploring the history of Marijuana stigmatization and how it intertwines with ethnic bias. I will review current information on the effects of marijuana, explain the shift from referring to weed as ‘marihuana’ to ‘marijuana,’ and display how the criminalization of marijuana has had a heavy toll relevant to Mexican and Black communities in the justice system.
History of Marijuana Propaganda
Marijuana, or cannabis, is a type of cannabinoid drug commonly known as weed, pot, or dope. The dried flowers from the cannabis plant contain compounds or cannabinoids, which can be impairing or mind-altering. Medical marijuana is prescribed for chronic pain relief, nausea relief, managing diseases, and stimulating the appetite. Marijuana is used to manage the side effects of cancer and cancer therapies, relieving nausea and vomiting from chemotherapy and severe nerve pain. Marijuana produces a euphoric, relaxing effect and affects the brain more rapidly if smoked, and the Center for Disease Control estimates that10% of cannabis users become addicted. However, marijuana can cause disorientation and negative effects on mental health, especially when used frequently and in high doses. Smoking, in general, increases the risk of heart attack, stroke, and vascular diseases, and marijuana smoke carries many toxins similar to tobacco smoke. Today, marijuana legality is increasingly accepted but still controversial in the US, and is currently regulated by each state separately.
Before accurate information was provided about its effects, marijuana was highly questioned and feared in the US. In 1930, the Federal Bureau of Narcotics was created to address rising problems with many drugs, but with a particular focus on Marijuana. When alcohol prohibition was repealed, people in power and policymakers found marijuana as the next appropriate target to deem as detrimental to the country, as well as the communities using it. Weed was strongly stigmatized to be associated with Mexican immigrants since it was presumed to have been brought with those fleeing from the Mexican Revolution in the early 1900s. This is despite weed being farmed in North America since the 1600s and used generously in over-the-counter medicine since the 1840s.
Mass propaganda was produced by the federal government to induce fear about weed, linking marijuana with the devil, the degradation of women, and insanity. A notable example of this is the film Reefer Madness, an exploitation film showing high school students becoming addicted to marijuana and then committing various crimes such as manslaughter and attempted rape. The film misrepresents the realistic effects as the teens experience hallucinations, more relevantly representing the desire to demonize and, in that way, oppress drug users. When high, the teenagers in the film descend into unpredictable and insane behavior, perpetuating the notion that those who use marijuana, and interchangeably certain communities, were violent and criminal threats to the US.
From ‘Marihuana’ to ‘Marijuana’
The ‘Mexican Hypothesis’ of drug prohibition demonstrates how the extreme prejudice already well-developed against Mexicans was then attached to their drug of choice. In Mexico, in the 1900s, the common notion of marijuana users was dangerous and unpredictable behavior concentrated among prisoners or soldiers. However, a sort of “Mexican marihuana folklore” was instilled in Americans, and this racist sentiment only grew when immigrants’ effects on the economy made them more threatening. In the context of unemployment increasing public fear of immigrants, many acknowledge that the fear of marijuana was tied to intentional racist undertones, specifically associating Mexican communities with violence and crime. The change in spelling from marihuana to marijuana in legislation, plus references to Mexican ‘locoweed’ or ‘crazy weed’ from Spanish to English, reflects the deliberately xenophobic choice to associate the drug with Mexican immigrants and, frankly, any Mexican communities. Referring to weed or hemp as a foreign, unrecognizable word caused actual confusion, and some Americans did not realize the “new Mexican drug” was the same plant that had already been farmed and used in the US for many years.
Harry Anslinger was a leader in the Bureau of Narcotics and, unfortunately, a notable proponent of repressive anti-drug measures. Some sources reflect that before Anslinger took office, he expressed that claims of marijuana inciting violence or insanity were absurd. His immediate change in opinion when he began his leadership seems to reflect a political power’s interest in finding something and someone to strictly prohibit rather than using his own opinion to advance regulation purposes. Anslinger used his position to defund, discredit, and prevent the publication of research that contradicted his reasoning for marijuana penalties, claiming the drug was something to fear to an extreme. This is an early example of actions by the government raising assumptions that the drug wars weren’t really meant to increase public safety. Anslinger expressed throughout his campaign that marijuana users were infectious and even that they caused white women to be sexually promiscuous with men of color. Overall, Anslinger and related anti-drug propaganda associated drugs with people of color and induced panic and fear about both.
From another perspective, marijuana was specially connected to jazz music and the Harlem Renaissance, a creative movement in Black culture in the 1920s. This period embraced the reconceptualization of Black identity apart from the negative stereotypes that had impacted their relationship to their heritage and communities. Harry Anslinger also publicly complained about Black people, claiming the music of the cultural revolution was satanic and that “jazz and swing results from marijuana use.”
Understanding Criminalization
In 1937, the Marijuana Tax Act criminalized and regulated marijuana use, including an expensive stamp requirement, which made legal compliance nearly impossible for people living in poverty. Income inequality disproportionately affected communities of color due to the racial wealth gap, which was about 10 to 1 for White to Black in 1920, with Latinos unrecognized. No longer being able to afford this drug led to the emergence of illegal markets among communities of color. In the meantime, wealthier White communities could still purchase and use marijuana without violating the law. One’s race and class contribute to their risk of criminalization, and the overrepresentation of certain groups easily invites stigmatization. White communities were not subject to the bias or policy that racial and ethnic minorities faced, and still, in this century, people of color are overrepresented in marijuana arrests. Institutional factors like financial means, neighborhood of residence, and unconscious bias in policing practices are said to contribute to continued discrimination.
The government continued to strengthen cannabis regulation, with the Boggs Act in 1951 establishing 2-5 year minimum sentences for first-time drug offenses. This essentially treated weed as harshly as heroin, and representatives clarified that repressive legislation on marijuana belonged in the Narcotics Control Act of 1956, later classified as a Schedule 1 dangerous drug by the Controlled Substances Act in 1971. Prejudice against Mexican immigrants played a fundamental role in federal prohibition, as some employers and stakeholders feared Mexican people as a source of crime and drugs. Legal scholars Bonnie and Whitebread acknowledge past federal law, noting that as immigrants supposedly introduced marijuana smoking to the US, anti-marijuana statutes followed in the states along with Mexican migration patterns. Around the 1960s, marijuana became popular among the middle class and mostly white college students, a movement that I will explore in my coming blog about the counterculture movement and Peyote in Indigenous culture. Similarly to that topic, existing punishments for marijuana appeared inappropriate once people of different classes and communities advocated for its free use. What is highlighted in Isaac Campos’ reassessment of prohibition is how extremely stigmatized a drug was that was so historically used and relatively mild in effects. Discrimination was even clearer cut in news sources, with claims that Mexican peddlers would distribute marijuana samples to children and the idea that marijuana was a direct product of unrestricted immigration.
So far, in the ‘How Stigma Hurts’ series, exploring bias in responses to early drug crises has revealed similarities across the criminalization of Chinese people and opium smoking and the scare about Mexican and Black people over marijuana. Especially strong was the idea that immigrants and these drugs would harm the purity of white women. Since bias was so ingrained in society, it was simple for people to follow along with repressive legislation because it made sense to them to criminalize these minorities. Importantly, government responses to these issues demonstrate the dangerous effects of a lack of knowledge, especially the tendency to falsely attribute national issues to international people. In times when information about novel drugs was scarce, the same drugs were viewed and criminalized differently because of the groups using them.
Haitis political challenges can be traced back to its revolutionary past. Following independence, the country faced the daunting task of establishing a functional government amid the ruins of colonial rule. The unmountable debt given to the Country of Haiti from its former colonial power, France, coupled with internal power struggles, set the stage for a volatile political environment that persists.
Haiti has a long history of corrupt leaders, the most notorious of whom were Francois Duvalier, also known as Papa Doc, and his son Jean Claude-Duvalier (Baby Doc), who ruled the country from the 1950s to the 1980s. The Duvalier family was known for its extravagant spending and mishandling of Haiti’s funds. Their regime was characterized by authoritarianism and totalitarian rule, and they used techniques such as extortion, repression, and embezzlement of government funds to maintain their grip on power.
Following the reign of the Duvaliers in Haiti, the country became even more susceptible to natural disasters, especially earthquakes and hurricanes, which further increased its economic vulnerabilities. The devastating earthquake that occurred in 2010 drew attention to the precariousness of Haiti’s infrastructure, leading to widespread destruction and loss of life. The subsequent challenges in rebuilding efforts imposed additional strain on the nations already fragile economy, further impeding its capacity to provide essential services and support its citizens. The earthquake has left many citizens, even years later, without stable housing or work.
Since then, Haitis government has experienced numerous periods of political instability, marked by changes in leadership, coup d’états, and challenges to governance structures. Frequent government changes have hindered the establishment of long-term policies and sustainable development initiatives.
Present Crisis
Civil unrest was ignited in Haiti in 2018 when the government announced its intention to eliminate fuel subsidies. The situation was further exacerbated by several contributing factors, including the misuse of loans from Venezuela, social inequality, substandard living conditions, and, well into 2020, the poor management of the COVID-19 pandemic. President Jovenel Moïse faced criticism for seeking to extend his term amid allegations of police brutality, human rights abuses, and violence against protesters. Following Moïses assassination in 2021, the country’s period of crisis has only been exacerbated.
The country has been overrun with gangs and has excelled to new levels, with the gangs taking over and now moving into the country capital, Port Au Prince, a prison near the country capital, and letting out 4,000 prisoners. Many of the country cities were already not safe due to brutal violence such as sexual assault and killings happening daily. Two hundred thousand plus citizens have been displaced from their homes due to the escalating violence. Haiti is home to over 4 million citizens, but the number of police in the country is around 13,000. This massive imbalance of police to citizens has made it very hard for Haitis Political Officials to establish any order within the country.
State of Emergency
Haiti declared a State of Emergency on March 3rd, The United States evacuated its Embassy, and the Regional leaders of the Caribbean Community and Common Market (CARICOM) held an emergency summit to discuss the Haiti crisis and establish a framework for a stable political transition. Furthermore, the President of Guyana, Irfaan Ali, commented on the meeting and let it be known that at the summit, plans were agreed upon to create a 7 to 9-member transitional government comprised of Haiti’s major political parties. The council will be in place and responsible for selecting a new prime minister. Recently, According to NBC News, the council has stated that its creation is almost complete. The group hopes to restore Haiti and put it back on the path to legitimate democracy.
According to Al Jazeera, over 200 gangs are operating in Haiti, with two of the most extensive coalitions claiming Port-Au-Prince as their territory. The most infamous and the one who is making news waves is the leader Jimmy “Barbecue” Cherizer of the G9 gang, a former Haiti police officer who has been pushing for the resignation of Haiti Prime Minister Ariel Henry, whom former President Moise appointed. As of March 12, 2024, at the height of the violence and within days of the country calling for a state of emergency, Prime Minister Ariel Henry announced that he would be stepping down and “leave immediately after the inauguration of a new council.” However, Jimmy Barbecue does not like the idea and will resist the implementation unless he is given a seat at the council table. He has stated that the corruption of the “traditional politicians” has not done Haiti any good and are the ones “damaging the country.”
Since the state of emergency was announced the United Nations has estimated that 53,000 Haitians have fled the capital of Port-Au-Prince in March. Also, 1.64 million men, women, and children are facing severe acute malnutrition due to the rise of gang violence has only exacerbated the crisis. The percentage of those who rely on humanitarian aide for food has only increased. Before the crisis, Haiti’s urban and rural communities had long relied on their city and town markets, which are sustained mainly by the work of Madan Saras, the women of Haiti who buy, distribute, and sell food and other essentials in these markets, serving as the lifeline of the communities. Still, unfortunately, they have become targets for gang violence, especially in recent times. The gangs seek to assert their power over the towns, and thus, the markets have become a hotbed of criminal activity, which has contributed to the decimation of Haiti’s economy. This is just one example among many of the challenges the people of Haiti face.
Path of Uncertainty
Still, despite the council’s creation, a finalized plan has yet to be developed to assure Haiti and its citizens of a peaceful and stable environment. Kenya’s plans to assist the country and bring in military aid have been stalled, and the country’s future is uncertain. The government has been distressed for many years, and the plan to restore stability will require continued effort.
Several organizations are assisting the people of Haiti in the amid unrest. Here are a few of them:
That statement was uttered repeatedly in interviews performed by the Alabama Disabilities Advocacy Program (ADAP) with residents of Sequel Courtland, a psychiatric group home for boys in Courtland, AL. The residents of the home reported consistent patterns of abuse. One boy “reported witnessing a staff member lifting another resident up by the throat and slamming him to the floor.” Multiple boys reported being slammed into the ground and not being allowed to receive medical attention.
Sequel Courtland is a facility for boys. At the time the letter was sent in July 2020, there were “at least two transgender girls inappropriately placed at Courtland,” one of whom reported that she “is constantly touched, smacked on the butt” and that “they [other residents] try to watch me dress.”
At a Sequel facility in Owens Cross Roads that was part of the same investigation, “male staff repeatedly enter girls’ bedrooms and put them in violent containments.” At the same facility, residents were frequently ordered to sleep in common areas rather than in their bedrooms as a punishment. Staff also failed to report or make any attempt to prevent suicide attempts.
Sequel Montgomery practiced “Group Ignorance” as a punishment. Group Ignorance, or GI, involved staff and other residents completely ignoring the person being punished. The isolated person was unable to interact with peers in any way; just being within ten feet of another resident would be considered a violation. The facility’s then-current guidelines read that “They can participate with peers only during direct billable services—BLS and therapist-led group therapy.” One resident reported attempting suicide specifically because of the stress of being isolated under GI.
Sequel Tuskegee utilized a “time-out room” for up to days at a time as a means of controlling residents. There was no mattress present in the room; boys were required to move the mat from their bedroom into the confinement area. It also lacked a toilet or sink. Because of that, residents were forced to either try – and often fail – to gain staff’s attention to use the restroom or, failing that, “urinate in the corner of the room and clean it up later.”
A Sequel group home in Ohio was also investigated by that state’s protection & advocacy (P&A) agency, Disability Rights Ohio. They reported that one of the children living at that home told them he was “Put in a hold so strong that it almost broke my arm; they kept holding me tighter and tighter; my hands and arms were tingling and going numb.” Another said, “I don’t feel safe.”
Abusive group homes are not exclusive to Sequel. Group homes are often abusive, no matter what company owns them.
At a residential facility called Canyon Hills Treatment Facility in North Carolina, “at least one-third of residents lost weight after they were admitted for treatment.” Canyon Hills’ residents were children who should still have been growing. When residents asked for more food, their portions were cut even further. At another facility in North Carolina called Anderson Health Services, “Ten staffers at this facility have been charged with child abuse since 2017.”
At a group home in California, a woman with severe autism often went out on rides in the home’s van. She occasionally tried to stand up, after which “the staff member driving would slam on the brakes and, like, brake check her.” That practice caused bruises. The same woman, who had harmed herself in the past, was frequently left alone and unsupervised, during which time she banged her head into the wall, leaving large holes in the process.
Neglect in Group Homes
Many group homes are chronically understaffed. That, along with low pay and a lack of care from and proper training for staff, collectively leads to preventable injuries and death.
A woman choked to death at a New Jersey group home in 2017. She was unable to swallow large pieces of food; everything needed to be in small pieces, and she required supervision while eating. Two years prior, she had been taken to the hospital after choking on a bagel – an incident her family was never told about.
As a result of poor staffing, a resident of an Oklahoma group home named Terry Brown was strangled by his roommate. There was only one staff member on duty; when she intervened, she was attacked as well and “watched Terry’s body turn purple, go limp and fall lifeless.” At a group home owned by the same company, a resident drowned in 2011 on an outing. He was supposed to be wearing a life jacket. When he died, there was no life jacket for him to wear.
One Texas caregiver worked for almost 70 hours straight while caring for two disabled women; her only breaks were a short nap and a trip to run errands. She is the only caregiver for two women who require constant care and supervision. She was clocked in from 8:16 Tuesday morning to 10:08 Friday morning, and only four hours after clocking out she returned for another 19-hour shift. She said that, “I’m always here. The only thing I do for fun — besides sleep — is go to church, read my Bible, hang out with my family.” The only occasional help she has comes from equally understaffed and exhausted workers at other group homes. For her work – providing constant, necessary care to two people – she makes $9 per hour, which is a wage that is not uncommonly low and serves as one of many reasons group homes are so often neglectful.
At the previously mentioned Sequel group home in Courtland, Alabama, ADAP investigators found blood and feces on windows and floors. The same investigation had residents report insufficient and inadequate food and water, nonexistent education and medical treatment, and that “there’s mold in the showers, and rats and roaches in our bedrooms and the hallway.”
Physical and Chemical Restraint
Mental healthcare professionals generally agree that restraining someone who is in crisis only makes things worse. Many group homes do it anyway.
As part of the previously mentioned investigation into Sequel facilities in Alabama, numerous instances of inappropriate restraint were reported. A report compiling the results of several investigations by various state Protection & Advocacy Agencies (P&As) reads about an Alabama group home, “One boy described his head being caught on a nail in the wall during a restraint; another said he was picked up and slammed on his stomach onto the concrete. A boy who had visible gashes to his head said that facility staff had slammed him against a wall the previous night.”
A group home in Carlton Palms, Florida has yet another pattern of restraints being used. Those restraints include cuffs, residents being strapped to chairs or being tied down, and straitjackets. These restraints directly cause physical harm – broken bones, bruises, and broken teeth, to name a few.
Seroquel is an antipsychotic drug that is approved by the FDA to treat some severe mental illnesses. Seroquel does not have an immediate effect. It is not approved as a form of chemical restraint or as a treatment for insomnia or anger management, among other off-label uses, but that is what it has been marketed and used for. Disability Rights Tennessee, the P&A agency in Tennessee, reported that “In one facility, staff increased a child’s Seroquel dosage from 50 mg to 300 mg as an emergency intervention.” The same problems occurred in North Carolina; “staff had administered Seroquel numerous times to a child who did not have any diagnoses that would indicate use of antipsychotics.”
Samuel Walker proposes that America has two crime problems, one affecting most white, middle-class Americans and another affecting mostly people of color in poverty. Racial bias has been expressed in drug policy for centuries and has not ceased to marginalize certain racial and ethnic minorities. Chinese immigrants have been historically discriminated against in the United States and have not ceased to face racism in everyday life, especially after being associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Bias has not only affected drug policy over time, but drug policy has reiterated this bias.
Stigma refers to a negative attitude toward a particular group of people, which is usually unfair and leads to discrimination. Stigma can be both explicitly expressed, like thinking people with mental health conditions are dangerous, and subtly embedded in societal norms, like repeatedly showing people of certain groups in the media in negative situations. Labeling someone in a positive or negative way is an easy solution to avoid the toll of understanding the challenges they are experiencing. Stigma is hugely based on social identity and perception of other groups, in that negatively stigmatizing other groups can be a way to justify inequalities in one’s own privilege compared to others.
Understanding stigma toward other social identities is especially important in the context of historical and present drug policy. In this series of blogs, I will explore some important historical examples of how stigma against minority groups has been embedded in American drug sentiment. Throughout this series, I will review the opium trade and Chinese repression, the criminalization of marijuana and Mexican immigrants, the unequal playing field of the hippie counterculture movement and the Indigenous Peyote movement, and the controversy over racial disparities in crack and cocaine sentencing. I hope to offer new perspectives on how targeting and incarcerating drug users has resulted in challenges specifically for minority groups, and how stigma hurts in the criminal justice system.
Outlining the Opium Wars in China
An early point to recognize in the development of drug prohibition was the Opium Wars in China and their effects on the criminalization of Chinese immigrants, especially in the US. This example importantly impacted policies on opiates, the term for the chemicals found naturally and refined into heroin, morphine, and codeine. These variations are derived and created from opium, a depressant drug from the sap of the opium poppy plant. Opioids can refer to both naturally derived opium and its variations syntheticallymade in the laboratory, like oxycodone and hydrocodone (partly synthetic) or tramadol and fentanyl (fully synthetic). As a medication, opium is meant to be used for pain control, but smoking opium causes euphoric effects almost immediately since the chemicals are instantly absorbed through the lungs and to the brain. The coming of opium smoking to the US created very toxic discrimination by those in privilege against Chinese immigrants, leading to blatant policies against Chinese people in poverty, even when the opium frenzy that followed was far from their goal.
In the 1700s, opium poppy fields in India were conquered by the British Empire and smuggled into China for profit. Even though China banned the opium trade in 1729, the illegal sale of the drug by outside nations caused an addiction epidemic and devastating economic consequences. In the Opium Wars, the Qing Dynasty attempted to fight against opium importation, but the British consistently gained more power over trafficking and forced China to make the opium trade legal by 1860. China had imported tea through the East India Company to Britain for many years, but it no longer appealed to Britain’s trade options, and this was detrimental to trade. As Britain ran out of silver to maintain the tea trade, the East India Company found that opium could be sourced in bulk from China, which led to a growing and promising market. The East India Company did not initially create the demand for opium but found a way to maximize the economic disruption and addiction in China for the benefit of trade.
Opium was then trafficked increasingly and was effectively destructive to the Chinese. For example, for the British to get their fix of caffeine, the Chinese got their fix of opium. The drug was sold and medicalized to merchants around the world, notably America, which played a significant role in finding new sources of supply from China and expanding the opium market until 1840. In Chinese culture, smoking opium was initially a ritual luxury that was used to display privilege, but as it became more accessible, the government was less concerned with controlling its pharmacological effects and more with controlling the social deviance associated with it. The Opium Wars ended in an unequal trading arrangement in Europe’s favor, continuing importation and causing the market to become socially segmented. Depending on their wealth, people bought different varieties of opium. However, addiction did not discriminate by wealth.
Judging Drugs by Culture
When many Chinese immigrants came to the US in the mid-1800s, primarily to escape the social and economic devastation brought upon them by the Opium Wars, they were an easy scapegoat for US politicians to blame for the internationally emerging opium crisis. Opium smoking, as well as poverty, was popular among them, so many started businesses of their own, including Opium Dens. These were hidden places to smoke without social consequences, popular in San Francisco, and were typically run by Chinese immigrants, though people of all backgrounds could be found there. These dens were compared to sin and hell, which only increased the already pervasive anti-Chinese sentiment. There was popularity in claims that vulnerable white women who entered the dens were manipulated and their honor surrendered by Chinese men. Males made up 95% of Chinese immigrants in the late 19th century, working for the few available jobs amid the great depression, leading to strong discriminatory sentiment among Americans affected by unemployment, such as referring to cheap laborers as ‘opium fiends.’
Chinese people were at first welcomed by some Americans as “the most industrious, quiet, patient people among us,” by a California newspaper in 1852. Still, tensions rose at the same time that immigrants started impacting opium use and the workforce. Policies on opium reflect xenophobia and racism, perpetuating fear of the ‘yellow peril,’ a racist color metaphor in American campaigns disguised as ‘anti-drug.’To further conceptualize racism in politics during this time, the California Supreme Court case People v. Hall in 1854 categorized several racial and ethnic minorities as lacking the progress or development to testify against White people. Even if states did not blatantly pass these laws, Chinese people would be dismissed as liars before even speaking for themselves. This pervasiveness made it impossible for Chinese immigrants to seek justice against the severe discrimination and bias of the drug wars or practically any repressive measures they were subjected to. With the completion of the railroad in 1869, thousands of Chinese people were out of work, denied access to jobs, and targeted as competition as soon as they began to succeed.
By the 1870s, it became apparent that many individuals, including white people, were picking up on opiate addiction. Opium use had increased alarmingly by the 1880s across the American medical field as well, and this led to criticism of Chinese immigrants by people who saw their fellow Americans as plagued by a disgusting habit. When more others were associated with Chinese people in this way, the criminalization of Chinese people represented a shift in focus toward protecting the perceived integrity of white people. For example, the San Francisco Opium Den Ordinance in 1875 made it illegal to maintain or visit places where opium was smoked, so many Chinese people and their neighborhoods were criminalized. Essentially, the US passed the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882, which was the first major federal legislation to explicitly restrict immigration for a specific nationality. This meant pushing Chinese people away from the US even when they were producing the backbone of American railroad labor and only making up 0.002% of the population at that time.
Parallels of Criminalization and Overprescription
The Smoking Opium Exclusion Act in 1909 continued to ban the possession, use, and importation of opium for smoking, being the first federal law to ban the non-medical use of a substance. Even though opioids were rampantly prescribed and available in America by this time, the criminalization only applied to smoking opium, primarily done by Chinese immigrants in Chinatowns. Contrary to assumptions, it is not illegal drug cartels but pharmaceutical companies that fueled the opioid epidemic. For example, many Union soldiers in the Civil War returned home addicted to opium pills or needing treatment only possible by hypodermic syringes, which had become widely overused by both doctors and addicts due to their powerful relieving abilities. Male doctors prescribed morphine for women’s menstrual cramps, and it was even infused into syrup to soothe teething babies who became addicted. This was known as the ‘Poor Child’s Nurse,’ since the drug often led to infant death by starvation when sold as a medicine to calm hungry babies. In a broad sense, depending on or relating to one’s racial or ethnic community, opioids were regulated differently.
When narcotic sales were banned in 1923, this forced many addicts subjected to this overprescription to buy illegally from the thriving black markets, especially in Chinatowns, again criminalizing Chinese people. Countless doctors warned and panicked over the rising commonality of addictiveness in opiates as early as 1833, and opium was rapidly synthesized by scientists all over the world into more dangerous variations. When problems with addiction to medicalized opioid variations spun out of control, the US blamed Chinese immigrants rather than consulting with the professional field to avoid harm in the irresponsible dispersion of highly addictive drugs. Instead of dispersing research on the new and dangerous variations, opium smoking was specifically centralized, with opium being generalized into street names like ‘Chinese molasses’ or ‘Chinese tobacco.’
The narrative of opioid addicts was changed when opioid abuse rose among white people, and by this, I mean both the attitudes toward addiction and the actions taken to solve it. Framing addiction as a disease rather than a disgusting crime came when it was no longer just people of color getting in trouble. The idea of pharmaceutical treatments for drug abuse came when it was white people suffering and dying from the opioid epidemic. Meanwhile, opium ordinances had a heavy burden on the incarceration and continued detainment and deportation of Chinese people in the United States especially before accurate research was done. Repression was tied to opium but also purposely deprived Chinese immigrants of opportunities to succeed and created criminalized reputations among their communities. Despite its age, the history of the Opium Wars and its impact on societal discrimination in America is not a point to be missed when considering drug stigmatization.
Beginning in the late 20th century, opioid prescription rates skyrocketed in shocking numbers, and in just over ten years, opioid sales quadrupled. With the introduction of OxyContin into everyday life and medication sales, an opioid that was falsely advertised as non-addictive, as well as pill mills across the United States, millions of people fell into a deadly addiction. As people lost access to prescription opioids, they often turned to more illicit drugs, such as heroin. This was worsened by the prices of heroin going down, making it much easier for people to afford large quantities of the drug. The use of heroin is often looked at as the second wave of the drug crisis, and heroin deaths surpassed prescription drug deaths in 2015. The third wave of the opioid crisis is where we currently reside, and it is characterized by overdose deaths related to synthetic opioids, such as fentanyl.
Connection to Native Americans and Alaskan Natives
The opioid epidemic has been heavily discussed in the past few years; however, it has been occurring for even longer. Opioid usage affects most groups; however, its large-scale detriment to minority race and ethnicity groups is frequently ignored. Native Americans and Alaskan Natives (here referred to as NA/AN) are disproportionately affected by the opioid crisis, and this discrepancy is ignored by many critical groups.
American Indians have the highest drug overdose death rates, and these rates are not stagnant. The CDC reports that overdose deaths have increased by 33% within the last several years. This pattern of drug abuse and overdose is not isolated to adults, as NA/AN youth also struggle with the use of unauthorized prescription painkillers, with some reports showing as many as 11% of high school students using painkillers without explicit orders from their doctors.
There are many factors that cause NA/AN groups to be affected more heavily than other groups, and these include historical trauma, lower educational attainment, lack of easy access to healthcare, housing problems, poverty, unemployment, violence, and mental health issues. In this post, I will choose to focus on two main reasons: lack of easy access to healthcare and mental health issues caused by lost connection to culture.
Health Disparities in NA/AN Communities
NA/AN groups have serious healthcare inconsistencies that must be addressed for these communities to gain adequate support during the opioid crisis. The Indian Health Service (IHS) is a group that provides care to over 2.2 million people, but it is severely underfunded by Congress. As this is one of the main organizations providing healthcare access to NA/AN groups, this underfunding affects millions of lives. To put these funding issues in perspective, funding would have to almost double to match the degree of care provided to federal prisoners, and it would have to increase by even more to equate to Medicaid benefits.
Poor healthcare consistently results in the treatment of symptoms instead of causes, and, unfortunately, this means the prescription of opioids. Whether injuries occur from manual labor, physical activity, or driving accidents, NA/AN individuals are more likely to be treated with opioids as opposed to more effective means of treatment, such as physical therapy. Poor healthcare aligns directly with low-quality insurance or no insurance at all, and opioids are more likely to be prescribed in areas with uninsured people.
Mental Health and Cultural Disconnect
The traumatic history of Native American groups has a massive impact on these overdose rates, as forceful deprivation from culture leads not only to issues such as inadequate healthcare and poverty, but also mental health issues, one cause of opioid treatment, these being direct pathways to opioid addictions.
Mental health issues are incredibly prevalent within NA/AN communities, with suicide rates for them being more than double those for the entire U.S. population. NA/AN individuals are also more likely to be diagnosed with anxiety disorders and PTSD. These mental health conditions, when left untreated or inadequately treated, can often lead to drug abuse. The IHS does provide care for mental health and substance abuse issues; however, the already underfunded organization only uses about 10% of these funds to support substance abuse treatment
These mental health issues can be attributed to many things; however, a major force playing into this is the history of trauma amongst Native Americans. This topic could be one if not several, entire blog posts, but here I will attempt to briefly sum it up. It is important to note that there are around 600 federally recognized tribes, so the experiences of NA/AN individuals can vary greatly. One thing most groups share is a prevalent history of displacement and loss of culture. In the late 19th century, the majority of Native American individuals were forced to relocate to reservations or into urban areas. This resulted in a decline in socioeconomic status, which resulted in poor living and working conditions, as well as heightened health issues, both mental and physical.
It is vital to remember that NA/AN groups are underrepresented in major clinical research studies. This results in the general public being unaware of the true extent of issues within these communities. This underrepresentation in research exacerbates the disparities and can easily result in the continuance of the opioid crisis for Native Americans with little to no acknowledgement from major government parties. Another impact of inadequate research is misconstrued statistics, and it is likely that the opioid crisis is worse for NA/AN groups than scholars anticipate, as overdose cases may be underestimated by as much as 35% due to race miscalculations.
Creating Change
The first thing that needs to be done in order to improve the worsening opioid crisis in NA/AN areas is to improve funding for the Indian Health Service. The United States Congress must take action and increase funding—the funding in 2022 is less than half of what patients need. With adequate health care, individuals with mental health and substance abuse issues will be able to get the help that they need, and, on the more preventative side, with better care, individuals will be less likely to be prescribed opioids as a substitute for proper treatment.
The second action that needs to be taken is better awareness. There needs to be more research devoted to NA/AN groups, so that we are able to pin down what leads to these heightened addiction statistics. Overall, it is vital for individuals to take personal responsibility and increase their own awareness of the issues. Native Americans have been ignored and mistreated for decades, and this must be remedied in the present.
Have you ever had a glass of wine and wondered how it’s made? Or, pondered what it comes from and how long the wine-making process takes? Who is responsible for making it? Surely, the wine industry has been modernized, where mechanical inventions can do most of the handiwork when creating a delicious bottle of wine used for birthdays, weddings, anniversaries, and other milestone celebrations.
Unfortunately, this isn’t the case. The wine industry has had a history of exploiting its workers by forcing them to work in extremely poor conditions and grueling hours. Wine-making follows an intricate process, starting with the harvesting of grapes in vineyards. Mechanical harvesting does exist and is generally quicker than doing so by hand, as the average human can harvest 1-2 tons a day, while a machine can harvest 80-200 tons. However, human harvesting is still favored because it offers a more precise selection and lessens the severity of oxidation getting to the grapes due to damaged skins.
The amount of grapes needed to produce a standard-size bottle of wine varies depending on the style of wine. However, a general number given by experts is an average of 1.25 to 1.50 kilograms, or 2.75 to 3.3 pounds. With the amount of wine that is produced worldwide within just a year, this adds up to a huge demand for grape pickers to supply the lucrative wine business. In the world, there are two primary countries responsible for the largest number of wine production: Italy and France. Both countries have come under fire for unethical practices in their wine production and human rights violations that include human trafficking, exploitation, and extremely poor working/living conditions for workers.
What is Human Trafficking and Exploitation?
Human trafficking is a huge issue across the world. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) defines human trafficking as the “recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring or receipt of people through force, fraud or deception, with the aim of exploiting them for profit.” Human trafficking can come in many different forms, like sex trafficking, forced labor, and child sex trafficking. Victims of human trafficking can come from any kind of age group, gender, and background.
However, specific groups may be more vulnerable than others. These groups include people separated from their families or other support systems, refugees or migrant workers, sexual and gender minorities, people with disabilities, and members of lower socio-economic groups. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), human traffickers will use manipulation tactics and exploit the vulnerabilities of their victims, which is why these specific groups are at heightened risk.
Italy
In September 2021, a humanitarian organization by the name of Oxfam released a Human Rights Impact Assessment (HRIA) on the Italian wine supply chain to assess their impact on human rights. The HRIA is titled “The Workers Behind Sweden’s Italian Wine” and focuses on the primary Italian wine supply chain in Sweden, Systembolaget. The HRIA’s objectives were to perform a context analysis on Systembolaget in order to “build an understanding of the nature of the Systembolaget supply chains” and then to “identify the actual and potential human rights impacts in Systembolaget supply chains in practice.”
Oxfam’s HRIA does a great job at going more in-depth with the current human rights violations occurring in the Italian wine industry, along with the potential human rights violations that are at high risk of coming to fruition. To summarize, Oxfam found several serious violations: forced labor, low wages, excessive working hours, health and safety risks in vineyards and wineries, lack of access to remedy, restrictions to freedom of association, sexual harassment and gender discrimination, and unsanitary housing. To read more about Oxfam’s findings, follow this link.
France
France’s primary region for wine production is called the Champagne region, located roughly to the east of Paris. In late 2023, a large portion of the region was shut down by French authorities and put under investigation for human rights violations. Wine-makers in the Champagne region are migrants primarily from West African countries. It was discovered that the lodgings that provided housing to the migrant workers were of poor quality, with makeshift beds surrounded by electrical cables and extremely unsanitary bathroom facilities.
The investigation also found that the contractors responsible for hiring the migrant workers exploited their vulnerabilities, as they were willing to work, even without proper contracts and for extremely low wages. At the end of the 2023 harvest season, another trafficking investigation was opened by authorities, which involved 160 laborers from Ukraine living in poor conditions in another area of the Champagne region.
South Africa
Although South Africa isn’t at the very top of the list of wine-producing countries, it has been accused of violating several human rights for years. In 2011, Human Rights Watch released a report titled “Ripe with Abuse: Human Rights Conditions in South Africa’s Fruit and Wine Industries,” detailing the problems surrounding the country’s industries. For over a decade, numerous attempts have been made to improve them, as well as conditions on farms. For instance, the Wine Industry Ethical Trade Association was created in 2002. Unfortunately, significant improvements have yet to be made to rectify the issues at hand.
South African farmworkers who supply the grapes needed for wine are vulnerable to some of the following human rights violations: exposure to pesticides and harmful chemicals, working long hours, and being forced to work in extreme weather conditions. Many farmworkers don’t even have access to safe drinking water, toilets, or livable housing. They face difficulty in forming a union to bring attention to the injustices they face. Like Italy and France, South African farmworkers receive low wages and little to no protection from the government.
The Future of the Wine Industry
There are many possible routes that can be taken to improve the working conditions for wine-makers. One of the most productive ways includes wineries turning to certifications that can help lay a groundwork for better standards, like environmental sustainability and safe working conditions. These certifications can help ensure that wineries are being held to their promises. Several wineries across the world have turned to certification efforts, like Chile’s Emiliana Organic Vineyards, which is certified under B Corp. B Corp was established in 2006, with the initiative of encouraging accountability, transparency, and environmental performance in business. Similarly, Italy has founded the Equalitas standard in 2015, which is specifically aimed at the wine industry.
In recent years, Kenya has witnessed a horrifying increase in cases of femicide. The alarming statistics paint an ugly picture of the state of women’s safety in the country. This issue goes beyond simple statistics as it represents a deep-rooted problem that demands urgent attention. Femicide in Kenya is not just a crime against women but also a violation of basic human rights and an assault on the fabric of society.
Understanding Femicide
Femicide is not a new phenomenon, but the magnitude of the problem in Kenya is shocking. The term encompasses various forms of violence against women, including domestic violence, rape, honor killings, and dowry-related deaths. These acts are driven by deep-seated beliefs and cultural norms that perpetuate gender inequality and elevate toxic masculinity.
According to a 2020 report by the World Health Organization, Kenya experiences one of the highest rates of femicide in Africa, with an estimated 47 women killed each week. Shockingly, this represents a 50% increase in femicide cases over the past decade. Furthermore, the majority of these cases go unreported or unnoticed due to social and cultural factors, making the situation even more alarming.
The Cultural Factors Behind Femicide
To tackle femicide in Kenya, it is crucial to dig into the cultural factors that contribute to this crisis. Some of these factors include gender roles, traditions, economic disparities, and the normalization of violence.
Gender roles deeply rooted in Kenyan society perpetuate a patriarchal system that devalues women. Women are expected to be submissive, nurturing, and bound by societal norms. Patriarchy creates a culture of power imbalance, where men feel entitled to control and dominate women, both within and outside the household.
Traditional practices, such as female genital mutilation (FGM), child marriages, and wife inheritance, further perpetuate the vulnerability and defeat of women. These practices condone violence against women in the name of cultural preservation and perpetuate harmful gender norms.
Economic disparities play a significant role in intensifying femicide in Kenya. Poverty and lack of access to education, healthcare, and employment opportunities disproportionately affect women. When women are economically dependent on their partners or families, they are often trapped in abusive relationships with no means of escape.
Society’s normalization and acceptance of violence against women contribute to the perpetuation of femicide. Many cases of domestic violence go unreported due to fear, stigma, or lack of trust in the justice system. In some cases, many people, instead of helping, tend to record videos of women being wronged and post them on social media.
Addressing Femicide in Kenya
To address femicide in Kenya, a comprehensive approach is necessary. It requires collaboration between the government, civil society, community leaders, and individuals alike. Here are some key steps that can be taken.
Legal Reforms and Enforcement
Restoring the legal framework surrounding violence against women is paramount. Stricter laws targeting offenders, along with their effective implementation, are crucial. Adequate training for law enforcement officials and judicial personnel is also essential to ensure cases are dealt with sensitively and expeditiously.
Education and Awareness
Comprehensive educational programs should be implemented from an early age to challenge harmful gender norms, promote gender equality, and raise awareness about women’s rights. This includes teaching both boys and girls, as well as women and men, about healthy masculinity and respect for women.
Empowerment and Economic Independence
Efforts must be made to empower women economically. This can be achieved through vocational training, access to micro-financing, and opportunities for entrepreneurship. Women who are financially independent are better equipped to escape abusive relationships and have control over their lives.
Support Services and Safe Spaces
Accessible support services, including helplines, shelters, and counseling centers, are crucial for survivors of femicide and domestic violence. These safe spaces provide survivors with the support they need to rebuild their lives and break free from the cycle of abuse.
Community Mobilization
Community leaders, religious institutions, and local organizations play a vital role in challenging harmful cultural practices, promoting gender equality, and raising awareness about femicide. Mobilizing communities to change attitudes and behaviors towards women is essential to create a safer environment for all.
Conclusion
Femicide in Kenya is an urgent crisis that requires immediate attention. It is a reflection of deep-seated gender inequalities and cultural norms that perpetuate violence against women. Addressing this issue demands a comprehensive approach encompassing legal reforms, education, empowerment, and community mobilization. Only through collective efforts can we hope to build a society where women can live without fear, violence, and the threat of femicide. Together, we must strive to create a country that embraces gender equality, respect, and the protection of basic human rights for all.
UAB is an Equal Employment/Equal Educational Opportunity Institution dedicated to providing equal opportunities and equal access to all individuals regardless of race, color, religion, ethnic or national origin, sex (including pregnancy), genetic information, age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, and veteran’s status. As required by Title IX, UAB prohibits sex discrimination in any education program or activity that it operates. Individuals may report concerns or questions to UAB’s Assistant Vice President and Senior Title IX Coordinator. The Title IX notice of nondiscrimination is located at uab.edu/titleix.