I’ve been thinking a lot about the topic of diversity
lately, in particular because of our presumptive GOP candidate, Sir Donald
Trumps-a-lot. In the current climate of anti-migration rhetoric, and in my
current situation of living in a large college town in suburban Texas, I’ve
never felt more uncertain about the conversations I have with people. This is
partly because now, more than ever, people are quick to assume that I’m of the “other”
side. They lump me in with the secretly bigoted, force me to partake in indirect
and unclear conversation guised in silent but knowing head nods and winks. The young anthropologist in me doesn’t want to
break the trust, feeling that if only I could get a glance at “the other” I
could make a breakthrough for all of humanity on the anthropology of bigotry
and xenophobia. Knowing that people with these dark/not-so-dark secrets exist
everywhere and they’re a sign of societal times, I’m inevitably most upset by
the fact that my white skin and blue eyes gains me access to a world I’d prefer
disappear forever in our growing globalized homogenization.
Contrary to Trump’s rhetoric, one of the greatest strengths
of America is our immigrant population. Immigrants bring with them new ideas
and different perspectives. Their experiences in times of adversity have
allowed them to not only survive, but to grow to new capacities, to see the
world from new angles, and to push the accepted norms. I like to think that the
Peace Corps provides Americans with similar adversity and growth, but two years
of this experience can’t replace an entire worldview. When different worldviews
come together, ideas are exchanged, compromises made, and humanity flourishes
from pushing the boundaries of the possibilities of civilization just a tiny
bit further. The ugly lie of Donald Trump is that limiting American immigration
will hinder our nation’s growth potential: businesses will falter, ideas will
die, the same parts of our brain that benefit from learning new skills and
languages will wither away. We’ll become obsolete in a world where innovation
and creativity depend directly upon the meeting of minds. Limiting migration
and encouraging deportation will not, in fact, make America great again.
What I loved most about Cameroon was meeting all kinds of
Africans. In a small village in rural, forested East Cameroon, a family from
Niger settled. They were surrounded by Christian Bantus, most of whom were born
and raised deep in the forest. They were all talented bushmeat hunters who
generally died of starvation with money in their pockets. The family from Niger
saw a commerce opportunity, and they invested in a bakery and cafeteria, raised
goats and chickens, and traded goods on their small lot. The community welcomed
the family with open arms (and probably some jealousy and maybe even a little
sorcery), and the family single-handedly cooked for and fed the government
employees sent to live in the bush to teach the village children, treat the
village sick, and monitor the forest. Following this family’s development and
success, other businesses opened and led to a (relatively) thriving market
economy in a village that was often cut off from town supplies by a bad road. Totally
ignoring the tribal diversity of Cameroon, in Yaoundé, Senegalese and Nigerians
drive commerce, and Cameroonians often model their success in attempts to make
it as well. Commerce is, truly, the lifeblood of Cameroon and I think this has
much to do with their large population and their open immigration policy with
other West and Central African nations. In the development world, exchange
visits are often organized to provide a meeting of the minds, an opportunity
for rural people to see what activities are carried out in other parts of the
country, or even in different countries. The ability to see problems firsthand,
and to see how other people have thought through solutions is an incredibly
useful tool for development.
This post has been inspired by some of Ecoexist’s
activities, in particular an exchange visit that Ecoexist had in Ghana to learn
more about conservation agriculture in practice in a very different climate,
culture, and environment. In the face of growing population, climate change,
etc., there is more demand than ever to feed the population of Botswana (2.1
million), which is currently a net importer of food. While more land is
currently in production than ever, productivity has actually declined, perhaps
in response to heavily subsidized agricultural inputs. One of the challenges to
wildlife conservation relates to the question of “land sparing or land
sharing”: is it more useful to make agriculture more intensive on smaller
parcels of land (ie. clearly distinct land use), or is it more useful to make
agriculture a less-intensive, though integrated part of the landscape (ie.
slash-and-burn agriculture). Conservation agriculture is one important approach
that can help in the development of an agricultural sector, and in particular
one that must develop alongside a sustained wildlife economy. Elephants, like
people, require a lot of space, and in order to best establish and protect
fields, a concerted and communal effort is a necessary approach. These are practices
that Botswana farmers can benefit from learning. If immigrants aren’t bringing
new and innovative practices into the community, then exchange visits are the
next best thing.
Biodiverse ecosystems have been proven time and again to be
the most resilient to perturbations. All niches are full, and disease
inevitably kills some, but not all. With time, all niches become functionally full
again. Likewise, diverse communities present their own challenges, but the
ability to pull from the many resources that are inevitably associated with
diversity is an advantage in the long run for the sustained development of a
community. A town full of doctors will die of starvation. A town full of Donald
Trumps will self-implode in the most beautiful of fireworks display, a shower
of shining hair extensions.