The exiting and intense program of Humanity in Action came to its last day today, before we are to write our Action Research papers for the next week. The theme of the day was "Post conflict societies" and the discussions evolved around the question of how reconciliation is possible after horrible genocides, as those in Bosnia and Rwanda, which followed us as examples during the whole day. Furthermore, we explored the role of the youth in the process of building new democracies - a theme that to a great extend corresponds with our current focus as young HIA fellows, and therefore the whole day gave us insight with great importance for our future actions as HIA senior fellows, hopefully working for the promotion of human rights and the appraisal of minorities, in one way or another.
For our first lecture we had the chance of hearing about the Bosnian society before, under and after the war from 1991 to 1995, from two great experts in the field of the Bosnian society's challenges of today: that is our two Bosnian fellows, Inga og Igor, with inputs from Alena, who is a Bosnian refugee. Now we have track on Bosnians geography, history and political system, but even more important we got to know how the war, and the societal changes following upon it, has affected the Bosnian inhabitants, since we heard it from themselves in flesh and blood. An example of this is Inga's story on how she as a pupil in school participated in censuring schoolbooks around 1998, with a primitive black marking-pen, and Alena then added that the Bosnian refugees in Denmark, who received lessons in Bosnian, were reading the same books, only without the censuring. This experience shows which strength it is for us as HIA fellows to be together with people from different cultures and societies, with each of our unique story to tell. The Bosnian fellows' stories are without a doubt important to be told - and not the least heard!
Concentrating on reconciliation, the speakers, former HIA Fellows Elisabeth Moltke and Tine Brondum, presenting contrasting examples as to how countries who have faced human rights atrocities, such as genocide, move forward. They demonstrated through using two very different examples of reconciliation, presenting Bosnia and Rwanda more then a decade after the genocides in each had ended. Both examples had dramatic pitfalls. In Bosnia, the three governments dictated by the Dayton Peace Agreement are unable to effective come together. Each of the three government, for example, teach the history of the Bosnian War differently, but the Bosnian government, in stark contrast, pursues reconciliation in a far different manner then the Rwandan government. In Rwanda, the government has chosen to move past the genocide by eliminating a conversation about the topic. For example, the Rwandan government has made it state law and policy not distinguish ethnicity. While on the surface the efforts sound good, the people of Rwanda have no ability to properly address the anguish of the genocide. The strict authoritarian regime in Rwanda has implemented tremendous structure into the lives of the Rwandan citizens. Bosnia, on the other contrary, has attempted to maintain a free democracy to facilitate reconciliation. The two examples presented different ways in which governments try to move pass atrocities such as genocide.
With the day dedicated to reconciliation after atrocity, the next lecture featured Thomas Brudholm, PhD and researcher at the DIIS and Copenhagen University. His lecture focused on the concept of forgiveness. Dr. Brudholm argues, quite articulately, that forgiveness is over emphasized after atrocities. Arguing that the emphasis on forgiveness is, in many possible cases, detrimental to the long term emotional development of victims of mass atrocity. His argument presents the pressuring of victims by society and government to forgive as something contrary to the healthy development of victims. The victims are unable to properly go through the range of emotions necessary because of this forced forgiveness. Also, Dr. Brudholm refutes the argument that victims need to forgive their attackers in order to live a productive life. The lecture illustrated a seldom-discussed view of how governments and societies should seek to initiate reconciliation.
Associate Professor and Director of the Centre of Multi-ethnic Traumatic Stress Research at University of Copenhagen, Peter Berliner, presented the final lecture of the day. Peter has a lot of experience in working rights-based with vulnerable people in so different countries as Norway and Guatemala. Peter's main message, which frames the last day of our program in HIA very well, was how crucial it is always to listen to people and to learn from their stories - exactly as we did during the morning lecture by Inga and Igor. He puts emphasis on the important point that every situation is a new situation, and that we have to approach every new situation by listening to the people in it. As both an academic and a practitioner, he explored the balance between being the knowledge-bearer and undertaking an appreciative approach by saying that you have to put your knowledge in a bag and put the bag on your own back, so it does not get in the way of you and the person you meet. For us as HIA fellows, this is a lesson to be remembered. This very community-oriented, buttom-up approach is closely intertwined with the human rights-based approach and emphasise the importance of not only speaking human rights on the political level, but also - and just as important - on the community level with the civil society. In short, this can be highlighted in following imperative: Do not pretend to know about the other, but ask and listen!
Friday, June 26, 2009
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Day 16: Tuesday, June 23
We started the day at Kofoeds Skole in the outskirts of Copenhagen. It is a social institution that tries to help the socially excluded in Danish society. Anybody who needs help is welcome to attend the school, either to work or to gain new abilities by taking different classes. Social worker Mrs. Karin Larsen gave us a presentation of the fundamental ideas of the school as well as a tour of the school grounds. The school’s ideology is basically “help to self-help”. Not everybody fits into the Danish mainstream society; therefore you need an institution like Kofoeds Skole where there is room for everyone, said Mrs. Jensen.
The founder of the school, Hans Chr. Kofoed, came to Copenhagen as a young man in order to study theology, but when he witnessed the social inequality and feeling of despair among the homeless and socially excluded of Copenhagen, he started a social movement that could give the homeless people meaning in life. Today the school teaches 50 different subjects including a lot of creative classes. The school also provides the attendants with a social network so they will not feel alone. When people work at the school they earn ‘Kofoed dollars’ so they can buy food, soft drinks or perhaps get their clothes washed. The internal currency is made because the school does not want the attendants to spend the money on alcohol and also because people are not allowed to earn money while they are granted social benefits from the Danish state.
We took a tour of the grounds were we could see with our own eyes how people were taught different crafts and skills. A special workshop at Kofoeds Skole is the Greenlandic workshop. Here, homeless Greenlandic people are able to make traditional Greenlandic art crafts; e.g. the hunter’s kayak which is personalized to fit its owner perfectly. Kofoeds Skole also has workshops on subjects such as auto mechanics, wood shop, and glass. It seems that the ability to work or learn new skills plus the social network at Kofoeds Skole gives the attendants at the school a sense of purpose.
Kofoeds Skole is an example of a private organization that tries to take care of the people who are otherwise left alone and ‘outside’ the Danish welfare state.
After lunch, psychiatrist Preben Brandt (author of The City and Social Inequality) spoke to us about “social marginalization and its consequences in Danish society”. He illustrated for us the apparent correlation between life expectancy and income in different areas of Copenhagen, and asked us how it could be that there is such inequality and marginalization within a 10-kilometer block of a relatively wealthy, social welfare state such as Denmark. This sparked a stimulating discussion of the meaning of the terms “welfare state” and “marginalization.” Is the U.S. a welfare state? Is Denmark a welfare state in practice or just in name? Dr. Brandt posited that in the past 20-30 years, Denmark has become the latter; Denmark has strayed from the conception of a welfare state as a state for the common good and has effectively become a state geared to ensuring the welfare of the middle class. Today, NGOs have taken up the responsibility of addressing problems of social inequality—a role that Danish society had once charged to the state. Dr. Brandt’s lecture challenged us to critically examine our conceptions of—and our complicity in—the social constructions of “good” and “bad” that create marginalized populations in Danish (and American) society. The raised hands that remained after the allotted time for Dr. Brandt’s lecture had elapsed testified to the many thoughts he had stimulated with his interesting lecture.
Our next presenters introduced us to Muhabet—a drop-in center for mentally ill refugees and immigrants. Muhabet administrator Lise Poulsen explained that “muhabet” is understood among Middle Easterners as “togetherness”—a term that nicely captures the essence of this inspiring organization. Muhabet provides a haven of community for those who suffer double isolation in Danish society because they are both mentally ill and have a language and culture different from those of the hegemonic Danish society. Through a café-like setting that fosters a warm guest-host relationship between those who drop in and those who work/volunteer at Muhabet, the organization promotes intercultural dialogue on equal footing. Muhabet serves its guests a hot, home-cooked meal every afternoon and stimulates guests’ senses through music, laughter, and other nonverbal communication. In contrast to the double isolation and marginalization that society imposes upon refugees and immigrants with mental disorders, Muhabet offers a community that breaks this isolation and restores guests’ dignity through recognition by others. As one Muhabet guest has said: “Even God cannot stand loneliness—that’s why He created man.” Muhabet combats the debilitating loneliness that its guests face everyday, and through human contact, attention, and food, strives to give its guests a good day and a sense of dignity and respect.
Our day ended with a celebration of Sankt Hans Aften at Amager Strand. We grilled food on the beach and enjoyed each other’s company as the sun gradually set on the longest day of the year.
- Alex and Rune
The founder of the school, Hans Chr. Kofoed, came to Copenhagen as a young man in order to study theology, but when he witnessed the social inequality and feeling of despair among the homeless and socially excluded of Copenhagen, he started a social movement that could give the homeless people meaning in life. Today the school teaches 50 different subjects including a lot of creative classes. The school also provides the attendants with a social network so they will not feel alone. When people work at the school they earn ‘Kofoed dollars’ so they can buy food, soft drinks or perhaps get their clothes washed. The internal currency is made because the school does not want the attendants to spend the money on alcohol and also because people are not allowed to earn money while they are granted social benefits from the Danish state.
We took a tour of the grounds were we could see with our own eyes how people were taught different crafts and skills. A special workshop at Kofoeds Skole is the Greenlandic workshop. Here, homeless Greenlandic people are able to make traditional Greenlandic art crafts; e.g. the hunter’s kayak which is personalized to fit its owner perfectly. Kofoeds Skole also has workshops on subjects such as auto mechanics, wood shop, and glass. It seems that the ability to work or learn new skills plus the social network at Kofoeds Skole gives the attendants at the school a sense of purpose.
Kofoeds Skole is an example of a private organization that tries to take care of the people who are otherwise left alone and ‘outside’ the Danish welfare state.
After lunch, psychiatrist Preben Brandt (author of The City and Social Inequality) spoke to us about “social marginalization and its consequences in Danish society”. He illustrated for us the apparent correlation between life expectancy and income in different areas of Copenhagen, and asked us how it could be that there is such inequality and marginalization within a 10-kilometer block of a relatively wealthy, social welfare state such as Denmark. This sparked a stimulating discussion of the meaning of the terms “welfare state” and “marginalization.” Is the U.S. a welfare state? Is Denmark a welfare state in practice or just in name? Dr. Brandt posited that in the past 20-30 years, Denmark has become the latter; Denmark has strayed from the conception of a welfare state as a state for the common good and has effectively become a state geared to ensuring the welfare of the middle class. Today, NGOs have taken up the responsibility of addressing problems of social inequality—a role that Danish society had once charged to the state. Dr. Brandt’s lecture challenged us to critically examine our conceptions of—and our complicity in—the social constructions of “good” and “bad” that create marginalized populations in Danish (and American) society. The raised hands that remained after the allotted time for Dr. Brandt’s lecture had elapsed testified to the many thoughts he had stimulated with his interesting lecture.
Our next presenters introduced us to Muhabet—a drop-in center for mentally ill refugees and immigrants. Muhabet administrator Lise Poulsen explained that “muhabet” is understood among Middle Easterners as “togetherness”—a term that nicely captures the essence of this inspiring organization. Muhabet provides a haven of community for those who suffer double isolation in Danish society because they are both mentally ill and have a language and culture different from those of the hegemonic Danish society. Through a café-like setting that fosters a warm guest-host relationship between those who drop in and those who work/volunteer at Muhabet, the organization promotes intercultural dialogue on equal footing. Muhabet serves its guests a hot, home-cooked meal every afternoon and stimulates guests’ senses through music, laughter, and other nonverbal communication. In contrast to the double isolation and marginalization that society imposes upon refugees and immigrants with mental disorders, Muhabet offers a community that breaks this isolation and restores guests’ dignity through recognition by others. As one Muhabet guest has said: “Even God cannot stand loneliness—that’s why He created man.” Muhabet combats the debilitating loneliness that its guests face everyday, and through human contact, attention, and food, strives to give its guests a good day and a sense of dignity and respect.
Our day ended with a celebration of Sankt Hans Aften at Amager Strand. We grilled food on the beach and enjoyed each other’s company as the sun gradually set on the longest day of the year.
- Alex and Rune
Monday, June 22, 2009
Day 15: Monday, June 22
Our second weekend in Copenhagen ended with a birthday bbq for Isa and Maja, as we sang the hilariously amusing Danish birthday song and enjoyed the beautiful weather. But with the weekend over, we hit the ground running hard early this Monday morning, delving into a wide variety of issues regarding sexual minorities in Denmark.
James McDowell, a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agent, and Julia Fendrick, a political officer at the US Embassy in Denmark, introduced us to the frightening world of human trafficking that affects more than a million people each year. Stressing that trafficking is a global issue that cannot be solved by one nation alone, Ms. Fendrick spoke about the annual Trafficking in Persons Report that provides not only the American government but also anyone who reads it with the necessary baseline to better know how to provide assistance to those NGOs and governments that are working to end and prevent human trafficking. Mr. McDowell focused his message on the enforcement side of trafficking, noting the philosophical differences between the Danish and American prison system and the immigration policies of both countries. It was quite obvious that the American politicians really wanted to influence the Danish government to make more flexible immigration and asylum policies for “saved” trafficking victims and to increase the prison sentence for those guilty of trafficking. The comedic highlight of this very intense discussion came, however, when one of the fellows asked Mr. McDowell why the United States was getting so involved in the European trafficking market. His response was brief and to the point and very amusingly “American”: “Because Congress signed a law about it, so we’re doing it!”
Slightly shifting gears a bit, we headed over to the prostitution shelter, Reden. Annette Rix, known as Rex to all of the shelter’s prostitutes, was an overwhelmingly and refreshingly honest and passionate speaker about prostitution, drugs, politics, and life in general. She has an incredible perspective on the women that she works with, admiring their toughness and determination to survive the hard life on the streets while understanding that prostitution is not a choice, but rather the absent of choice. Reden is a beacon of light for all the Danish prostitutes, acting as a safe-house and refuge from the dark, cold streets. Rix stressed to us all that Reden’s mission was not to re-socialize the prostitutes, but rather their goal was to give these women all of the necessary resources to be able to take that big step in their life away from prostitution. Reden provides food, shelter, a warm shower, a normal and relaxing environment, clean injection kits, condoms, lubricant, and even art classes every Monday night; they are the place that is open when the rest of Denmark is closed. One of the most incredible things about Reden is their unquestioned and unprejudiced acceptance of these women as just that: women. Reden, under Rix’s incredible leadership, is a place where prostitutes can come in and feel how they want to feel, being genuinely true and honest to themselves and what they want. While this visit raised even more questions about policy and human rights in regards to the vicious cycle of drug abuse and prostitution, Rix’s work inspired us all with an example of a truly passionate woman doing what she can to make a difference in another’s life.
After lunch at the Institute, we turned our attention to the gay and lesbian community in Denmark, discussing the history of the movement and the upcoming Outgames festivities that will be happening in July. Journalist Sune Prahl Knudsen and Sociologist Mads Ted Drud-Jensen explained the history of gay and lesbian rights in Denmark, noting that Denmark was the first country to recognize same-sex marriages. They also explained the growing trend in mainstream Danish society and politics to connect Danish intolerance and homophobia to the immigrant and minority communities in Denmark. This oversimplification has created a newfound interest in gay and lesbian rights among the right wing political parties, as many discussions on GLBT rights include discussions on immigrants in Denmark. One thing that Knudsen and Drud-Jensen and even our last speaker of the day, Michael Steensgaard, Director of World Outgames, all expressed is the false notion that many Danes have that Denmark is still the leader on gay and lesbian rights. As Steensgaard said, Denmark might have been the first country to take up gay and lesbian rights, but now it is twenty years behind other European countries in the implementation of those rights.
As this extremely long blog would suggest, this day was filled with topics and issues that need to and will be discussed in much greater depth in the future. While we covered everything from global human trafficking to gay and lesbian rights in Denmark, today gave us a look into the world of Danish sexual minorities and minority communities. Rix left us with a particularly powerful message that can be applied to all the issues we delve into with HIA: people do not have to agree with your opinion on prostitution, or anything for that matter, but they at least need to have an opinion: indifference to an issue is the worst opinion of all.
-Sarah & Soren
James McDowell, a US Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agent, and Julia Fendrick, a political officer at the US Embassy in Denmark, introduced us to the frightening world of human trafficking that affects more than a million people each year. Stressing that trafficking is a global issue that cannot be solved by one nation alone, Ms. Fendrick spoke about the annual Trafficking in Persons Report that provides not only the American government but also anyone who reads it with the necessary baseline to better know how to provide assistance to those NGOs and governments that are working to end and prevent human trafficking. Mr. McDowell focused his message on the enforcement side of trafficking, noting the philosophical differences between the Danish and American prison system and the immigration policies of both countries. It was quite obvious that the American politicians really wanted to influence the Danish government to make more flexible immigration and asylum policies for “saved” trafficking victims and to increase the prison sentence for those guilty of trafficking. The comedic highlight of this very intense discussion came, however, when one of the fellows asked Mr. McDowell why the United States was getting so involved in the European trafficking market. His response was brief and to the point and very amusingly “American”: “Because Congress signed a law about it, so we’re doing it!”
Slightly shifting gears a bit, we headed over to the prostitution shelter, Reden. Annette Rix, known as Rex to all of the shelter’s prostitutes, was an overwhelmingly and refreshingly honest and passionate speaker about prostitution, drugs, politics, and life in general. She has an incredible perspective on the women that she works with, admiring their toughness and determination to survive the hard life on the streets while understanding that prostitution is not a choice, but rather the absent of choice. Reden is a beacon of light for all the Danish prostitutes, acting as a safe-house and refuge from the dark, cold streets. Rix stressed to us all that Reden’s mission was not to re-socialize the prostitutes, but rather their goal was to give these women all of the necessary resources to be able to take that big step in their life away from prostitution. Reden provides food, shelter, a warm shower, a normal and relaxing environment, clean injection kits, condoms, lubricant, and even art classes every Monday night; they are the place that is open when the rest of Denmark is closed. One of the most incredible things about Reden is their unquestioned and unprejudiced acceptance of these women as just that: women. Reden, under Rix’s incredible leadership, is a place where prostitutes can come in and feel how they want to feel, being genuinely true and honest to themselves and what they want. While this visit raised even more questions about policy and human rights in regards to the vicious cycle of drug abuse and prostitution, Rix’s work inspired us all with an example of a truly passionate woman doing what she can to make a difference in another’s life.
After lunch at the Institute, we turned our attention to the gay and lesbian community in Denmark, discussing the history of the movement and the upcoming Outgames festivities that will be happening in July. Journalist Sune Prahl Knudsen and Sociologist Mads Ted Drud-Jensen explained the history of gay and lesbian rights in Denmark, noting that Denmark was the first country to recognize same-sex marriages. They also explained the growing trend in mainstream Danish society and politics to connect Danish intolerance and homophobia to the immigrant and minority communities in Denmark. This oversimplification has created a newfound interest in gay and lesbian rights among the right wing political parties, as many discussions on GLBT rights include discussions on immigrants in Denmark. One thing that Knudsen and Drud-Jensen and even our last speaker of the day, Michael Steensgaard, Director of World Outgames, all expressed is the false notion that many Danes have that Denmark is still the leader on gay and lesbian rights. As Steensgaard said, Denmark might have been the first country to take up gay and lesbian rights, but now it is twenty years behind other European countries in the implementation of those rights.
As this extremely long blog would suggest, this day was filled with topics and issues that need to and will be discussed in much greater depth in the future. While we covered everything from global human trafficking to gay and lesbian rights in Denmark, today gave us a look into the world of Danish sexual minorities and minority communities. Rix left us with a particularly powerful message that can be applied to all the issues we delve into with HIA: people do not have to agree with your opinion on prostitution, or anything for that matter, but they at least need to have an opinion: indifference to an issue is the worst opinion of all.
-Sarah & Soren
Saturday, June 20, 2009
Day 14: Saturday, June 20
Rejuvenated from sleeping in until noon, we met in Christiania around one and met our tour guide Nina. Along time resident of Christiania (she moved there from Sweden in 1977), Nina vividly – if disjointedly – painted a portrait of a city within a city. Christiana, she explained, used to be a military base for the Danish government until the 1960s, when people of many marginalized backgrounds began squatting in the structures in the area – some of which date back to the 17th century. By 1971 the community had organized to become the semi-autonomous city of Christiania, named (according to Nina) after “the kings, women liberation and all that.” Further speaking to its haphazard origins, Nina explained that Christiania’s flag (see below) was selected “because we found a lot of red and yellow paint.”
Unsurprisingly, Christiania has struggled from the beginning to maintain its quasi-anarchic, free-spirited culture. The government has repeatedly threatened to impose an urban planning scheme, but this threat has not yet materialized for a variety of reasons. Christiania’s survival is due in no small part to the work of its diverse and dedicated residents, many of whom dedicate countless hours each week to strengthening their community. Nina was keen to remind us that Christiania operates on the principle of consensus, not democracy. The result, she says, is that “if you love to go to meetings then this is a paradise.”
Today Christiania has roughly 900 residents. In spite of its perseverance, Christiana has changed in many ways since its founding nearly 40 years ago. Living expenses have skyrocketed, and it has become far more difficult to carry out the same transient lifestyle of the past. On top of other social and economic concerns, Christianians today are uncertain whether or not the right-wing government will impose further limitations on Christiania’s independent status. Nevertheless, Christiania maintains its status as a haven for free-thinking, open-minded people of all backgrounds. As Nina told us, “we have many different people here, many ideas, but what we have in common is Christiania.”
After touring the quirky and beautiful Christiania we hurried to the Youth House in Nørreboro. The Youth House was the product of a squatter’s movement in the 1970s, and is today a collective of young Danes that are united by their desire to bring an end to homophobia, racism, sexism, and overpriced alcohol. Although our group wasn’t universally convinced by their explanations of what constitutes violence and why all police are psychotic, we enjoyed the experience of engaging with the individuals behind this controversial experiment in Danish inclusiveness.
-Isaac & Trine
Unsurprisingly, Christiania has struggled from the beginning to maintain its quasi-anarchic, free-spirited culture. The government has repeatedly threatened to impose an urban planning scheme, but this threat has not yet materialized for a variety of reasons. Christiania’s survival is due in no small part to the work of its diverse and dedicated residents, many of whom dedicate countless hours each week to strengthening their community. Nina was keen to remind us that Christiania operates on the principle of consensus, not democracy. The result, she says, is that “if you love to go to meetings then this is a paradise.”
Today Christiania has roughly 900 residents. In spite of its perseverance, Christiana has changed in many ways since its founding nearly 40 years ago. Living expenses have skyrocketed, and it has become far more difficult to carry out the same transient lifestyle of the past. On top of other social and economic concerns, Christianians today are uncertain whether or not the right-wing government will impose further limitations on Christiania’s independent status. Nevertheless, Christiania maintains its status as a haven for free-thinking, open-minded people of all backgrounds. As Nina told us, “we have many different people here, many ideas, but what we have in common is Christiania.”
After touring the quirky and beautiful Christiania we hurried to the Youth House in Nørreboro. The Youth House was the product of a squatter’s movement in the 1970s, and is today a collective of young Danes that are united by their desire to bring an end to homophobia, racism, sexism, and overpriced alcohol. Although our group wasn’t universally convinced by their explanations of what constitutes violence and why all police are psychotic, we enjoyed the experience of engaging with the individuals behind this controversial experiment in Danish inclusiveness.
-Isaac & Trine
Friday, June 19, 2009
Day 13: Friday, June 19
The day began appropriately. The girls donned their skirts (or formal trousers), and the guys put on their jackets and ties. We were ready for business. The theme of the day? “Corporate Social Responsibility and Human Rights in the Labour Market.” On our way to Novozymes, a Danish biotech company and world leader in the production of enzymes and microorganisms for industrial use, Alena, a Danish fellow and current Copenhagen Business School student, was talking about the company’s progressive and socially minded approach to business, an approach that, she said, appealed greatly to the younger generation.
Later, inside one of Novozyme’s conference rooms, Ms. Mette Olsen, a sustainability development consultant for the company, unknowingly agreed with Alena. According to her presentation, “Sustainability and Human Rights,” a company wants to be sustainable for four reasons: because of the company’s long-run responsibility toward shareholders; because doing so makes it appealing to young, potential employees (people like Alena); because customers will want to buy its products; and because investors will want to invest in it. Ms. Olsen’s presentation could very well by summed up in the company’s vision: “We imagine a future where our biological solutions create the necessary balance between better business, cleaner environment and better lives.”
In a later presentation, “CSR [Corporate Social Responsibility] and the Global Financial Crisis,” Mr. Sune Skadesgaard Thorsen pointed out the quantitative discrepancy between Novozyme’s seven minimum standards in the field of human rights, as stated in Ms. Olsen’s presentation, and the 30 articles comprising the U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Mr. Thorsen asked, How does one cover 30 articles in seven minimum standards?
One such standard is non-discrimination, one that, as the low number of women in top management positions in Denmark shows, is not always adhered to, Mr. Thorsen said. The word “discrimination,” he added, is not part of Danish public discourse. “It’s not at all recognized that we [in Denmark] have discrimination.”
Elaborating on Novozyme’s Department of Human Resources coach Lene Munch-Petersen’s presentation, “Corporate Social Responsibility in Denmark,” Frederik Thuesen, researcher at SFI, the Danish National Center for Social Research, offered a brief historical overview of the Danish, or Nordic, model in his presentation, “Labour Law and CSR in Denmark.” The model, he said, was established in 1899 Denmark and was based on collective agreements between trade unions and employers. Flash forward 110 years, and some of the contemporary challenges to this model, Mr. Thuesen said, are: individualization of the—as well as a multinational and multicultural—labor force and globalization, which, he added, creates less stable social relations, puts pressure on salaries, and conduces to outsourcing to other countries. Like Ms. Olsen, Mr. Thuesen also remarked the difficulty of monitoring outside suppliers’ adherence to CSR principles.
The set of presentations (six in total) concluded on a befitting note. Speaking on “Danish Companies Acting Internationally: Ethics and Responsibilities,” Ms. Birgitte Bang Nielsen, head of CSR at IFU, a Danish self-governing fund associated with the Ministry for Development Cooperation, stressed the necessity of adhering to CSR principles. “CSR has to be on the [corporate] agenda,” she said. And increasingly, she added, contradicting one of Mr. Thorsen’s earlier remarks, it is.
After Novozymes, we headed to KVINFO, Denmark’s Centre for Information on Women and Gender, near Christiansborg Palace. “KVINFO” is the merging of the Danish words for “women” and “information.” The theme there was “The Challenges of Integration and Inclusiveness in the Labour Market: Mentor Programs as the Mean.” KVINFO is a mentor program that matches ethnically Danish women (who act as mentors) with immigrant women (the mentees). The program is mainly sponsored by the Ministry of Integration and it helps mentees get jobs in Denmark. The women are matched according to their background. For instance, doctors with doctors, businesswoman with businesswoman. KVINFO Director Helene Bach quoted a mentee referring to her mentor as her “human GPS,” that is, a guide in unfamiliar terrain, someone who can advise in things such as establishing networks, taking advantage of one’s academic background, and writing applications. The mentees, who number more than 4,400 since the program began, come from 127 different countries, Ms. Bach said. Outside of Copenhagen, there are programs in Esbjerg, Odense, and Århus.
On our visit to KVINFO, we also met Rana, a mentee, and Joan, Rana’s mentor, who have met regularly for the last five years. Rana was interested in starting a business and Joan has much experience in this area. It was inspiring to hear how Joan was able to guide and support Rana without infringing upon Rana's terms and initiative; Rana decided when to meet and what to discuss during the meeting. Joan said she saw her role as mentor as an opportunity to contribute to a positive image of Danes in regards to integration efforts. The idea behind this project is strikingly simple: facilitate the sharing of experience between two women and speed the mentee’s integration into Danish society in the process. Simple but nevertheless effective, this project is certainly worth recognizing, for it is truly humanity in action!
-Luis and Sofie.
Later, inside one of Novozyme’s conference rooms, Ms. Mette Olsen, a sustainability development consultant for the company, unknowingly agreed with Alena. According to her presentation, “Sustainability and Human Rights,” a company wants to be sustainable for four reasons: because of the company’s long-run responsibility toward shareholders; because doing so makes it appealing to young, potential employees (people like Alena); because customers will want to buy its products; and because investors will want to invest in it. Ms. Olsen’s presentation could very well by summed up in the company’s vision: “We imagine a future where our biological solutions create the necessary balance between better business, cleaner environment and better lives.”
In a later presentation, “CSR [Corporate Social Responsibility] and the Global Financial Crisis,” Mr. Sune Skadesgaard Thorsen pointed out the quantitative discrepancy between Novozyme’s seven minimum standards in the field of human rights, as stated in Ms. Olsen’s presentation, and the 30 articles comprising the U.N.’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Mr. Thorsen asked, How does one cover 30 articles in seven minimum standards?
One such standard is non-discrimination, one that, as the low number of women in top management positions in Denmark shows, is not always adhered to, Mr. Thorsen said. The word “discrimination,” he added, is not part of Danish public discourse. “It’s not at all recognized that we [in Denmark] have discrimination.”
Elaborating on Novozyme’s Department of Human Resources coach Lene Munch-Petersen’s presentation, “Corporate Social Responsibility in Denmark,” Frederik Thuesen, researcher at SFI, the Danish National Center for Social Research, offered a brief historical overview of the Danish, or Nordic, model in his presentation, “Labour Law and CSR in Denmark.” The model, he said, was established in 1899 Denmark and was based on collective agreements between trade unions and employers. Flash forward 110 years, and some of the contemporary challenges to this model, Mr. Thuesen said, are: individualization of the—as well as a multinational and multicultural—labor force and globalization, which, he added, creates less stable social relations, puts pressure on salaries, and conduces to outsourcing to other countries. Like Ms. Olsen, Mr. Thuesen also remarked the difficulty of monitoring outside suppliers’ adherence to CSR principles.
The set of presentations (six in total) concluded on a befitting note. Speaking on “Danish Companies Acting Internationally: Ethics and Responsibilities,” Ms. Birgitte Bang Nielsen, head of CSR at IFU, a Danish self-governing fund associated with the Ministry for Development Cooperation, stressed the necessity of adhering to CSR principles. “CSR has to be on the [corporate] agenda,” she said. And increasingly, she added, contradicting one of Mr. Thorsen’s earlier remarks, it is.
After Novozymes, we headed to KVINFO, Denmark’s Centre for Information on Women and Gender, near Christiansborg Palace. “KVINFO” is the merging of the Danish words for “women” and “information.” The theme there was “The Challenges of Integration and Inclusiveness in the Labour Market: Mentor Programs as the Mean.” KVINFO is a mentor program that matches ethnically Danish women (who act as mentors) with immigrant women (the mentees). The program is mainly sponsored by the Ministry of Integration and it helps mentees get jobs in Denmark. The women are matched according to their background. For instance, doctors with doctors, businesswoman with businesswoman. KVINFO Director Helene Bach quoted a mentee referring to her mentor as her “human GPS,” that is, a guide in unfamiliar terrain, someone who can advise in things such as establishing networks, taking advantage of one’s academic background, and writing applications. The mentees, who number more than 4,400 since the program began, come from 127 different countries, Ms. Bach said. Outside of Copenhagen, there are programs in Esbjerg, Odense, and Århus.
On our visit to KVINFO, we also met Rana, a mentee, and Joan, Rana’s mentor, who have met regularly for the last five years. Rana was interested in starting a business and Joan has much experience in this area. It was inspiring to hear how Joan was able to guide and support Rana without infringing upon Rana's terms and initiative; Rana decided when to meet and what to discuss during the meeting. Joan said she saw her role as mentor as an opportunity to contribute to a positive image of Danes in regards to integration efforts. The idea behind this project is strikingly simple: facilitate the sharing of experience between two women and speed the mentee’s integration into Danish society in the process. Simple but nevertheless effective, this project is certainly worth recognizing, for it is truly humanity in action!
-Luis and Sofie.
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Day 12: Thursday, June 18th
The fight against crime and terror in a state of law
We greeted morning with a tour of Vridsløselille, Denmark’s oldest prison and one of the countries’ three closed prisons. Built in 1859, Vridsløselille’s design adheres to the principles of the panopticon, invented by Jeremy Bentham about 100 years prior.
The aim of the panopticon model was to allow guards and others to observe the prisoners without knowing themselves that they’re being watched. The intention of this, as Peter Scharff told us in a lecture later in the day, was not only to punish the prisoners, but, in line with enlightenment thinking contemporary to the time, to reform the prisoners as well. As Scharff, a senior researcher at the Danish Institute for Human Rights, told us, the rehabilitation of these prisoners was to come about through the self-regulation that was to be provoked by the constant surveillance. Additionally, it was believed, isolation the prisoners from one another would remove negative moral influence.
Eventually it became clear that this rationale was faulty. Today, the observation tower in Vridsløselille is closed, and the prison adheres to a human right’s based approach which, according to Scharff, is founded on the idea that the prisoner should retain his civil rights to the degree possible within the system. Since 1973 Denmark pledged to adhere to a normalization principle as the foundation for managing imprisonment. We witnessed this engagement during our tour of the prison. An inmate allowed us the pleasure of viewing his ‘cell’ which felt more like a small yet cosy living room, equipped with television, curtains, paintings and other niceties. While standing in the fully-stocked kitchen of spices, pots, pans and knives, where the prisoners cook their own meals, a fellow inquired as whether or not morning meals ever erupt into violence. With no time to pause, the guard – who by law carries no weapon – quickly remarked that this has never been an issue. It became clear to the fellows that the prison system was built mainly on mutual trust...and also the realization that acting up could result in solitary confinement and the restriction of other freedoms granted to the prisoners.
After Scharff put forth the practicalities of what we witnessed at Vridsløselille earlier in the day, and to cap off the series of lectures, Mr. Jonas Christoffersen looked at a specific Danish court case as a lens for comprehending the state of law in modern-day Denmark. In Christoffersen’s dense analysis of the ‘Tunesian Case,’ the intricacies of balancing counter-terrorism legislation with democracy and legitimate statehood were debated. It was clear that Human Rights are integral to this debate. In the Tunesian Case, the supposed attempt to murder the infamous Danish cartoonist Kurt Vestergaard was construed as an attack on freedom of speech; at the same time, the observance of the principle that no one should be expelled to a country where they risk torture is upheld.
It is hard to believe that twelve days of Humanity in Action have gone by. Time and time again, we are confronted with complex situations that make us question and rethink preconceived notions. Today we were blessed with many eye-opening experiences, but the real treat of the day happened mid-morning. As we made our way to the church of Vridsløselille, the courtyard was filled with hums and hymns and tender sounds. What was it? We walked into the church and were greeted by the seven members of the Fangekor, or prison choir.
It was a blessing that we interrupted their practice, for the Fangekor was willing to serenade us with song. These prisoners – many of which looked brute in appearance – seemed vulnerable and sincere when absorbed in their singing, challenging our stereotype of what it means to be a criminal.
It is hard to succinctly describe the emotions present in the church during those few songs, as we witnessed in awe the prisoners choice to overcome adversity through song. In the words of one of the choir members explaining why he joined the Fangekor ‘it’s hard to be down and in a bad mood when you sing.’
P.S. Keep your eyes peeled to see the Fangekor play at a venue near you. They’re booked until 2012!
Marissa and Isa
We greeted morning with a tour of Vridsløselille, Denmark’s oldest prison and one of the countries’ three closed prisons. Built in 1859, Vridsløselille’s design adheres to the principles of the panopticon, invented by Jeremy Bentham about 100 years prior.
The aim of the panopticon model was to allow guards and others to observe the prisoners without knowing themselves that they’re being watched. The intention of this, as Peter Scharff told us in a lecture later in the day, was not only to punish the prisoners, but, in line with enlightenment thinking contemporary to the time, to reform the prisoners as well. As Scharff, a senior researcher at the Danish Institute for Human Rights, told us, the rehabilitation of these prisoners was to come about through the self-regulation that was to be provoked by the constant surveillance. Additionally, it was believed, isolation the prisoners from one another would remove negative moral influence.
Eventually it became clear that this rationale was faulty. Today, the observation tower in Vridsløselille is closed, and the prison adheres to a human right’s based approach which, according to Scharff, is founded on the idea that the prisoner should retain his civil rights to the degree possible within the system. Since 1973 Denmark pledged to adhere to a normalization principle as the foundation for managing imprisonment. We witnessed this engagement during our tour of the prison. An inmate allowed us the pleasure of viewing his ‘cell’ which felt more like a small yet cosy living room, equipped with television, curtains, paintings and other niceties. While standing in the fully-stocked kitchen of spices, pots, pans and knives, where the prisoners cook their own meals, a fellow inquired as whether or not morning meals ever erupt into violence. With no time to pause, the guard – who by law carries no weapon – quickly remarked that this has never been an issue. It became clear to the fellows that the prison system was built mainly on mutual trust...and also the realization that acting up could result in solitary confinement and the restriction of other freedoms granted to the prisoners.
After Scharff put forth the practicalities of what we witnessed at Vridsløselille earlier in the day, and to cap off the series of lectures, Mr. Jonas Christoffersen looked at a specific Danish court case as a lens for comprehending the state of law in modern-day Denmark. In Christoffersen’s dense analysis of the ‘Tunesian Case,’ the intricacies of balancing counter-terrorism legislation with democracy and legitimate statehood were debated. It was clear that Human Rights are integral to this debate. In the Tunesian Case, the supposed attempt to murder the infamous Danish cartoonist Kurt Vestergaard was construed as an attack on freedom of speech; at the same time, the observance of the principle that no one should be expelled to a country where they risk torture is upheld.
It is hard to believe that twelve days of Humanity in Action have gone by. Time and time again, we are confronted with complex situations that make us question and rethink preconceived notions. Today we were blessed with many eye-opening experiences, but the real treat of the day happened mid-morning. As we made our way to the church of Vridsløselille, the courtyard was filled with hums and hymns and tender sounds. What was it? We walked into the church and were greeted by the seven members of the Fangekor, or prison choir.
It was a blessing that we interrupted their practice, for the Fangekor was willing to serenade us with song. These prisoners – many of which looked brute in appearance – seemed vulnerable and sincere when absorbed in their singing, challenging our stereotype of what it means to be a criminal.
It is hard to succinctly describe the emotions present in the church during those few songs, as we witnessed in awe the prisoners choice to overcome adversity through song. In the words of one of the choir members explaining why he joined the Fangekor ‘it’s hard to be down and in a bad mood when you sing.’
P.S. Keep your eyes peeled to see the Fangekor play at a venue near you. They’re booked until 2012!
Marissa and Isa
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Day 11 - Wednesday, June 17th
Refugees in Denmark – The Human Consequences
While discussing human rights in a theoretical context can lead to heartfelt convictions and unwavering opinions about right and wrong, things become more complicated when one is confronted with real life situations in which an array of human rights issues come into play. Today we visited the Sandholm Center, one of Denmark’s largest facilities for housing and processing of people seeking asylum in this country. We arrived at the facility and were greeted by two friendly Red Cross workers who immediately informed us that the large metal gate through which we had just walked was in fact there to keep unwanted visitors out, rather than to keep the asylum seekers in. We then began a tour of the premises, visiting the dining hall, the pre-school, and one of the apartments reserved for families. All of the facilities seemed clean and orderly, but as we absorbed some of the statistics our guides offered us the harsh reality began to sink in. Sandholm, which is a former army base, houses around 600 asylum seekers at a time, of the 2,300 currently in Denmark. Of those, less than 40% will actually be granted asylum, leading to a terrifying state of limbo for many of the people whose pleas are rejected. While an asylum case normally takes about 9-10 months to process, after being granted a rejection many people wind up spending up to 10-12 years living at Sandholm because they do not feel that they can return to their home countries, usually due to fear of death or other personal harm. While at Sandholm they cannot legally work or officially learn Danish, cannot receive visitors without officially registering them with Sandholm in advance, and must receive all health care through the facility. It is here that the moral lines begin to fade and strong questions of human rights violations come to the forefront. As agency and dignity are stripped away from the people idling their lives away at Sandholm, are they truly being granted all of their rights as citizens of the human race?
This question, as well as many others, was addressed by our next speaker, Dr. Bente Rich, a psychiatrist who works with and for asylum speakers in Denmark and other countries. Dr. Rich discussed the prevalence of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) among refugees, stressing the fact that many of them develop the disorder not directly after fleeing their country but instead after years of wanton waiting in facilities such as Sandholm. She also brought up the intensely negative effects on children, citing that laws were changed in 2006 allowing children of asylum seekers to attend regular Danish schools. However, 83% of such children were too low functioning to do so, often due to psychological issues, and thus had to remain segregated. If PTSD remains untreated, as it
does among many refugees, other disorders can develop such as depression, personality disorders, or even psychotic disorders. Such a lack of treatment offers a rather direct example of a violation concerning the right to the best obtainable health. It was suggested both by Dr. Bente and by fellows that such poor treatment seems to be being used to create an example for others who might want to immigrate to Denmark, stalling a potentially large influx of asylum seekers from such war-torn countries as Iraq and Afghanistan. This conclusion was one that was saddening and appalling to all of us, bringing forth questions of when and how it is ever appropriate for pragmatic policy to override basic human rights.
In the afternoon we did a workshop on refugee life in Denmark, facilitated by Lotte Rask from the Centre for archaeological research and communication. The workshop took its starting point in an exercise where we had to pretend to be supervisors giving the Danish government advice about the refugees coming to Denmark after the outbreak of the conflict in Bosnia in 1991. During the workshop we were asked to discuss and take a stance in very concrete matters, i.e. -
Should the group of refugees be granted a permanent residence permit?
Should they be allowed to study in Denmark for free?
Which family member should they be able to be reunified with, if any?
These questions spurred many debates especially as ideological considerations, personal experiences and pragmatism were taken into account.
We ended the day at a somehow happier event, namely at the GAM3 street basketball tournament and event in Avedøre, outside of Copenhagen. GAM3 is a non-profit organization that is set out to revive the streets and support a worldwide urban culture community. At the event, organized by Mikkel, an HIA senior fellow, we played basketball with local kids, listened to music and watched street art being done. Some of us even tried to learn breakdance - unfortunately the local kids were much more talented! Still, a very good way to end a day on refugee life and cultural diversity in Denmark.
By Jamila and Ursula
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Day 10: Tuesday, June 16
Is Denmark conceived of as a multi-cultural nation? Today we addressed this burning issue over the course of a very tight schedule. Exhaustion aside, we jumped right into a discussion of racism, and internalization with Filmmaker Hassan Preisler and PhD Fellow Dorthe Hovids Possing. Preisler asked children of color in Copenhagen to choose which of two dolls, one white and one brown, was “nicer” in his film, The Danish Doll Test. His results confirmed prior experiments: 36 out of 41 children preferred the white doll despite having identified with the brown doll.
Possing felt that the doll test tells us more about the nation-state in Denmark, and how it plays out, than race and racism: diversity threatens a sense of sovereignty. She also noted that the doll test demonstrated the tendency to internalize imposed categories. A clearer connection between the doll test and Possing’s arguments would have been worthwhile, but her distinction between structural racism and daily discrimination provided helpful nonetheless.
Zubair Butt Hussein of The Muslim Council complemented the morning presentation well. He eloquently argued that Muslims must redefine themselves as a positive action, within Danish society, as opposed to a reaction to global events. Hussein also raised a recurring theme: what is integration?
City Council Member Jan Andreasen defined integration in terms of employment, education, and other socioeconomic indicators. Lise Bayer and Marie Kappel of the Office for Integration Policy similarly defined integration as different from assimilation, and instead a respectful “meeting of majority and minority.” However, the integration policy that they distributed stated, “immigrants must take part in culture and leisure activities.” It seems there is more work to done.
Our marathon day concluded with Mandana Zarrehparvar of the Danish Institute of Human Rights, who discussed their report on discrimination since 2006 in the City of Copenhagen. Using a right-based approach, they recommended that the City review existing services with an eye towards structural discrimination. They also emphasized that practitioners need to look outside the office and to civil society for direction.
Before ending our tale about this interesting day we have to take a moment to pay a tribute to the cakes at City Hall. The City Hall certainly knows how to treat their guests.
-Catherine and Lise
Possing felt that the doll test tells us more about the nation-state in Denmark, and how it plays out, than race and racism: diversity threatens a sense of sovereignty. She also noted that the doll test demonstrated the tendency to internalize imposed categories. A clearer connection between the doll test and Possing’s arguments would have been worthwhile, but her distinction between structural racism and daily discrimination provided helpful nonetheless.
Zubair Butt Hussein of The Muslim Council complemented the morning presentation well. He eloquently argued that Muslims must redefine themselves as a positive action, within Danish society, as opposed to a reaction to global events. Hussein also raised a recurring theme: what is integration?
City Council Member Jan Andreasen defined integration in terms of employment, education, and other socioeconomic indicators. Lise Bayer and Marie Kappel of the Office for Integration Policy similarly defined integration as different from assimilation, and instead a respectful “meeting of majority and minority.” However, the integration policy that they distributed stated, “immigrants must take part in culture and leisure activities.” It seems there is more work to done.
Our marathon day concluded with Mandana Zarrehparvar of the Danish Institute of Human Rights, who discussed their report on discrimination since 2006 in the City of Copenhagen. Using a right-based approach, they recommended that the City review existing services with an eye towards structural discrimination. They also emphasized that practitioners need to look outside the office and to civil society for direction.
Before ending our tale about this interesting day we have to take a moment to pay a tribute to the cakes at City Hall. The City Hall certainly knows how to treat their guests.
-Catherine and Lise
Monday, June 15, 2009
Day 9: Monday, June 15
After a great weekend of social events, where we got to know each other even better, we started this week off at the Ministry of Integration, where - to our surprise - there was breakfast waiting for us. A presentation was made by Mr Henrik Kyvsgaard, Head of Section for Integration, and three of his colleagues in which they explained all the initiatives that have been taken in the last decade to integrate immigrants in the Danish society. The time just flew by and our program coordinator once again had to cut us off from raising all the questions we had, which just underlines the enthusiasm and engagement this program calls forth. We just seem to want to know more all the time, whether it´s about immigrants, the Danish political system or the EU.
The presentation ended and we headed back to our “base”, Wilders Plads to have typical Danish lunch, which our coordinators Rasmus and Shayne have been preparing for us since we started on the program. The great thing about this part of the day is that we always, with great curiosity, can discuss and have a laugh about how people combine their “smørrebrød” depending on whether they are from the U.S., Bosnia or DK, men or female.
After lunch the time came for the presentation of the Mr. Thomas Gammeltoft, PhD, Danish Institute of International Studies (DIIS). Gammeltoft's presentation on Danish immigration policy and politics was perhaps the most enlightening of the day, and complimented the account of Denmark's immigration situation given by the Ministry of Integration earlier in the morning. Dr. Gammeltoft spoke about the tightening, so to speak, of Danish immigration laws, including stricter regulations regarding citizenship, marriages, and family re-unification. He also discussed an aspect of Danish policy that hadn't been addressed beforehand--the complex relationships between Denmark and the EU. His opinion was that Denmark was at a disadvantage within the EU because, due to its opt-out clauses on several pieces of EU legislation, it did not have influence over many issues directly concerning its national interests. Dr. Gammeltoft stressed that in many ways, Denmark's reticence towards participating fully in certain EU policy spheres was amounted to a lose-lose situation.
The presentation given by representatives of the Council on Ethnic Minorities and their Ministry of Integration liason offered a more grass-roots perspective of immigrant issues. The idea that some minority council members were picked by the same municipal governments they lobbied was a bit surprising. It is also surprising that the same country could have what are essentially local minority lobbying firms, and at the same time enforce such strict citizenship requirements. The testimony of Lynette Munk, from the CEM, that she had never really felt personally unwelcome by Danish society was also telling.
We also had an evaluation meeting today, where we all agreed that we would like to stay longer at the end of the day in order to discuss the days subject/s, as so many impressions and opinions are being made through the different presentations that it could be nice to have the opportunity to exchange thoughts and ideas within our group. During this meeting we also agreed that we would wait with the dinner till after the visit to the Islamic Faith Community at, what Copenhageners call, Nørrebronx, where we got to experience a multicultural side of København.
We heard a presentation about Islam as well as Muslims in general in the Danish society. I think that everybody felt that it was extremely interesting to hear the opinion of this minority group that is so widely debated in the media nowadays. So once again we had to be cut off with all the questions we had and we finished the evening – where else – then at a shawarma place! In conclusion, it has been a long, but very informative day.
-Sesi and Alena
The presentation ended and we headed back to our “base”, Wilders Plads to have typical Danish lunch, which our coordinators Rasmus and Shayne have been preparing for us since we started on the program. The great thing about this part of the day is that we always, with great curiosity, can discuss and have a laugh about how people combine their “smørrebrød” depending on whether they are from the U.S., Bosnia or DK, men or female.
After lunch the time came for the presentation of the Mr. Thomas Gammeltoft, PhD, Danish Institute of International Studies (DIIS). Gammeltoft's presentation on Danish immigration policy and politics was perhaps the most enlightening of the day, and complimented the account of Denmark's immigration situation given by the Ministry of Integration earlier in the morning. Dr. Gammeltoft spoke about the tightening, so to speak, of Danish immigration laws, including stricter regulations regarding citizenship, marriages, and family re-unification. He also discussed an aspect of Danish policy that hadn't been addressed beforehand--the complex relationships between Denmark and the EU. His opinion was that Denmark was at a disadvantage within the EU because, due to its opt-out clauses on several pieces of EU legislation, it did not have influence over many issues directly concerning its national interests. Dr. Gammeltoft stressed that in many ways, Denmark's reticence towards participating fully in certain EU policy spheres was amounted to a lose-lose situation.
The presentation given by representatives of the Council on Ethnic Minorities and their Ministry of Integration liason offered a more grass-roots perspective of immigrant issues. The idea that some minority council members were picked by the same municipal governments they lobbied was a bit surprising. It is also surprising that the same country could have what are essentially local minority lobbying firms, and at the same time enforce such strict citizenship requirements. The testimony of Lynette Munk, from the CEM, that she had never really felt personally unwelcome by Danish society was also telling.
We also had an evaluation meeting today, where we all agreed that we would like to stay longer at the end of the day in order to discuss the days subject/s, as so many impressions and opinions are being made through the different presentations that it could be nice to have the opportunity to exchange thoughts and ideas within our group. During this meeting we also agreed that we would wait with the dinner till after the visit to the Islamic Faith Community at, what Copenhageners call, Nørrebronx, where we got to experience a multicultural side of København.
We heard a presentation about Islam as well as Muslims in general in the Danish society. I think that everybody felt that it was extremely interesting to hear the opinion of this minority group that is so widely debated in the media nowadays. So once again we had to be cut off with all the questions we had and we finished the evening – where else – then at a shawarma place! In conclusion, it has been a long, but very informative day.
-Sesi and Alena
Friday, June 12, 2009
Day 8: Friday, June 12
It’s Friday morning and I had packed my bag and dressed myself for the lectures. On my way to the HIA office I was thinking about this whole week. It was a really busy week, but we have met so many interesting people who gave us inspiring lectures.
Today’s topic is Perspective on Human Rights. Our first speaker is Astrid Kjeldgaard Petersen, young lady, who is doing her PhD at the University of Aarhus and she is also HIA Senior Fellow. Firstly, she gave us a short introduction to history and development of International Human Rights Low. After that we did workshop, case study, where we put ourselves in position of Court and had to decide the Al-Jedda case. On this case we have found out more about law connections between Charter of United Nations, European Convention on Human Rights and Security Council Resolutions. At the same time, Judith Goldstein, HIA founder from the US arrived to the Danish program, as a part of her visiting tour to all the European programs. It was interesting to hear about the other programs - and to show that the Danish program definitely beats them all!
For the first time in our life as HIA fellows, we had all done readings for today. These consisted of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which, together with Astrid's thorough both historical and contemporary analytical lecture, gave us a well-informed outset in order to study the group-specific cases that we were given as well. After a Danish lunch with traditional ryebread, mackerel in tomato and potato salad, we split into groups, where we discussed the different topics in the given papers. It was very interesting and educational for all fellows to experience how differently one can approach the same topic, and how our diverse backgrounds is a challenge in way of structuring a group presentation, as well as an incredible enrichment in throwing light on a topic from several perspectives. Hence, the exercise brought us even closer together and gave rise to reflections as well as debates about the first week of occupying ourselves solely with human rights and the question of how a democracy threats its own minorities. There is no doubt that all of us - whether a Dane, American or Bosnian - are recognizing the huge challenges of multiculturalism, integration and economic inequality facing Denmark, and how ambiguous the picture of a well-developed democracy is. This is why our attendance in HIA's educational program becomes so crucial: It opens our eyes and forces us to go around a modern democracy in order to take all of its 360 degrees into perspective. This nuanced presentation of a topic was also clear in the groups' presentation, where the subject was the rights based approach to development planning, with outset in children's rights. One group told about the development from needs to rights, emphasising that an outset in the human rights mean that each human being in the world, regardless of age, gender, religion, colour or economic situation is recognized as an equal individual with the capacity to make a change. The individual thereby becomes an active agent of change, it regards to own life as well as the society. This reminded us all of the overall purpose of engaging ourselves in HIA: We can make a change by empowering ourselves in order to empower others. To know all human beings' rights is the key to demand and realize a worthy human life in dignity!
The educational program of the program's 5th day was ended by the enthusiastic speaker, Jakob Mchamgama, who is the Head of Legal Affairs in the conservative/libertarian think tank CEPOS. He carries a law degree from the University of Copenhagen, and is occupied with international human rights law. Unlike many of our speakers in the first week of the program, Jakob undertook a critical perception of not only the international human rights institution, but also about the attempt to intertwine the civil and political rights and then the social, cultural and economic rights. Jakob thinks that development planning to a much greater extend should confront the issue of private property rights, as a way of extending especially poor people's capacity, instead of focusing so much on the softer dimensions. With his innovative and critical approach, Jakob gave us all a lot to reflect upon and debate, in our further occupation with human rights issues.
In the evening we took a bus 66 towards Operaen and we got off at Gallionsvej station. Curiously, we were looking for Philip de Langes Alle 9 street, where our Welcome dinner should take place. After little random walk we saw Ulla standing in front of building and calling us to come. Inside in the kitchen Senior Fellows were preparing dinner for us (Fellows) and our host families. Around 20:00h dinner was served and almost all families were there. It was really nice to meet other families and talk with them. Danish meals and wine goes perfectly together. After a pleasant and interesting dinner Fellows lead by Danish Fellows had a chance to taste of Copenhagen’s nightlife. It was an enjoyable night and it will stay in our memory for a long time
-Igor and Maja
Today’s topic is Perspective on Human Rights. Our first speaker is Astrid Kjeldgaard Petersen, young lady, who is doing her PhD at the University of Aarhus and she is also HIA Senior Fellow. Firstly, she gave us a short introduction to history and development of International Human Rights Low. After that we did workshop, case study, where we put ourselves in position of Court and had to decide the Al-Jedda case. On this case we have found out more about law connections between Charter of United Nations, European Convention on Human Rights and Security Council Resolutions. At the same time, Judith Goldstein, HIA founder from the US arrived to the Danish program, as a part of her visiting tour to all the European programs. It was interesting to hear about the other programs - and to show that the Danish program definitely beats them all!
For the first time in our life as HIA fellows, we had all done readings for today. These consisted of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which, together with Astrid's thorough both historical and contemporary analytical lecture, gave us a well-informed outset in order to study the group-specific cases that we were given as well. After a Danish lunch with traditional ryebread, mackerel in tomato and potato salad, we split into groups, where we discussed the different topics in the given papers. It was very interesting and educational for all fellows to experience how differently one can approach the same topic, and how our diverse backgrounds is a challenge in way of structuring a group presentation, as well as an incredible enrichment in throwing light on a topic from several perspectives. Hence, the exercise brought us even closer together and gave rise to reflections as well as debates about the first week of occupying ourselves solely with human rights and the question of how a democracy threats its own minorities. There is no doubt that all of us - whether a Dane, American or Bosnian - are recognizing the huge challenges of multiculturalism, integration and economic inequality facing Denmark, and how ambiguous the picture of a well-developed democracy is. This is why our attendance in HIA's educational program becomes so crucial: It opens our eyes and forces us to go around a modern democracy in order to take all of its 360 degrees into perspective. This nuanced presentation of a topic was also clear in the groups' presentation, where the subject was the rights based approach to development planning, with outset in children's rights. One group told about the development from needs to rights, emphasising that an outset in the human rights mean that each human being in the world, regardless of age, gender, religion, colour or economic situation is recognized as an equal individual with the capacity to make a change. The individual thereby becomes an active agent of change, it regards to own life as well as the society. This reminded us all of the overall purpose of engaging ourselves in HIA: We can make a change by empowering ourselves in order to empower others. To know all human beings' rights is the key to demand and realize a worthy human life in dignity!
The educational program of the program's 5th day was ended by the enthusiastic speaker, Jakob Mchamgama, who is the Head of Legal Affairs in the conservative/libertarian think tank CEPOS. He carries a law degree from the University of Copenhagen, and is occupied with international human rights law. Unlike many of our speakers in the first week of the program, Jakob undertook a critical perception of not only the international human rights institution, but also about the attempt to intertwine the civil and political rights and then the social, cultural and economic rights. Jakob thinks that development planning to a much greater extend should confront the issue of private property rights, as a way of extending especially poor people's capacity, instead of focusing so much on the softer dimensions. With his innovative and critical approach, Jakob gave us all a lot to reflect upon and debate, in our further occupation with human rights issues.
In the evening we took a bus 66 towards Operaen and we got off at Gallionsvej station. Curiously, we were looking for Philip de Langes Alle 9 street, where our Welcome dinner should take place. After little random walk we saw Ulla standing in front of building and calling us to come. Inside in the kitchen Senior Fellows were preparing dinner for us (Fellows) and our host families. Around 20:00h dinner was served and almost all families were there. It was really nice to meet other families and talk with them. Danish meals and wine goes perfectly together. After a pleasant and interesting dinner Fellows lead by Danish Fellows had a chance to taste of Copenhagen’s nightlife. It was an enjoyable night and it will stay in our memory for a long time
-Igor and Maja
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Day 7: Thursday, June 11
We had an honor to start our day in the astonishingly decorated Folketing (Parliament). There, we were introduced with a lecture about the Danish Parliamentary traditions by Jette Nedergaard and Maiken Bork Clausen. Although sitting at the “opposition table”, we felt that there is nothing to oppose to after such a clear, exhaustive and interesting hour of conversation.
Afterwards, we had the opportunity to meet Line Barfod, who has been a Member of Parliament for almost 8 years now for the party ‘Enhedslisten’. She made some really good points backed up with perfectly valid examples. Among them, she singled out how important it is for democracy, and not the market, to be the decision-maker. The experience has proven that the chase for instant profit, at which market aims, brings more problems than benefits in the long run.
After the morning spent in The Danish Parliament, we were headed towards Danish Institute for Human Rights. We actually started to feel almost at home, since we have spent the last three days there enjoying our lectures, as well as lunch and coffee breaks. During the breaks, we have the chance to chat and get to know each other. Experiencing such a diversity of cultural backgrounds in just one room leaves one amazed and breathless.
It was in that atmosphere that we awaited for the lecture “Free speech in a globalized world – beyond the Muhammed Cartoon Crisis” given by Flemming Rose and Michael Rothstein. During those two hours we contemplated and discussed about the interference of the right of the freedom of speech and the right not to be offended. How and where one draws the line? Michael Rothstein made one definitely “awakening” remark, which can be used as a guideline – what is the goal of one´s speech, where is it heading to? He also pointed out that, although the globalized reality gives us a great spectrum of information and understanding (gathered through media, internet), we must preserve and value the importance of a two-way operation. No matter how broad our globalized view is, in an unknown territory we have no choice but to depend on the locals who have the knowledge of the “system” which dominates in that specific spot. By having this in mind, it would be easier to establish equality among people, and thus guarantee the rights of all humankind, which HIA programs persistently try to implant into the attitudes of their fellows.
The speakers also laud education as precondition to an open and tolerant society. It is, indeed, crucial to be well informed in order to decrease the level of misunderstandings and offences between people of different religions, cultures, races etc. It doesn´t have to be the “to know is to love” situation, but “to know is to respect” would do just fine.
AND, not to forget – we finished off our day in Christiania, the (self-proclaimed) autonomous neighborhood covering 34 hectares in the borough of Christianshavn. There, Rasmus was kind to give us one unscheduled but extremely useful lecture (as seen in the photo).
Also, it must be emphasized - Rasmus, as well as Shayne, must be given credit, since they have been remarkably organized, cautious, kind and caring towards the fellows.
So, from Parliament to Christiania in one day – hence, HIA Copenhagen Program 2009 leaves you anticipating the extraordinary for the next day.
-Inga and Jacob
Afterwards, we had the opportunity to meet Line Barfod, who has been a Member of Parliament for almost 8 years now for the party ‘Enhedslisten’. She made some really good points backed up with perfectly valid examples. Among them, she singled out how important it is for democracy, and not the market, to be the decision-maker. The experience has proven that the chase for instant profit, at which market aims, brings more problems than benefits in the long run.
After the morning spent in The Danish Parliament, we were headed towards Danish Institute for Human Rights. We actually started to feel almost at home, since we have spent the last three days there enjoying our lectures, as well as lunch and coffee breaks. During the breaks, we have the chance to chat and get to know each other. Experiencing such a diversity of cultural backgrounds in just one room leaves one amazed and breathless.
It was in that atmosphere that we awaited for the lecture “Free speech in a globalized world – beyond the Muhammed Cartoon Crisis” given by Flemming Rose and Michael Rothstein. During those two hours we contemplated and discussed about the interference of the right of the freedom of speech and the right not to be offended. How and where one draws the line? Michael Rothstein made one definitely “awakening” remark, which can be used as a guideline – what is the goal of one´s speech, where is it heading to? He also pointed out that, although the globalized reality gives us a great spectrum of information and understanding (gathered through media, internet), we must preserve and value the importance of a two-way operation. No matter how broad our globalized view is, in an unknown territory we have no choice but to depend on the locals who have the knowledge of the “system” which dominates in that specific spot. By having this in mind, it would be easier to establish equality among people, and thus guarantee the rights of all humankind, which HIA programs persistently try to implant into the attitudes of their fellows.
The speakers also laud education as precondition to an open and tolerant society. It is, indeed, crucial to be well informed in order to decrease the level of misunderstandings and offences between people of different religions, cultures, races etc. It doesn´t have to be the “to know is to love” situation, but “to know is to respect” would do just fine.
AND, not to forget – we finished off our day in Christiania, the (self-proclaimed) autonomous neighborhood covering 34 hectares in the borough of Christianshavn. There, Rasmus was kind to give us one unscheduled but extremely useful lecture (as seen in the photo).
Also, it must be emphasized - Rasmus, as well as Shayne, must be given credit, since they have been remarkably organized, cautious, kind and caring towards the fellows.
So, from Parliament to Christiania in one day – hence, HIA Copenhagen Program 2009 leaves you anticipating the extraordinary for the next day.
-Inga and Jacob
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Day 6: Wednesday, June 10
In listening to Professor Hedetoft, of the Saxo Institute, we gained a brief overview of Danish history highlighted multiple rationales as to why Denmark has become such a homogeneous society. Professor Hedetoft provided us with an excellent basis to begin examining the political and social structure within Denmark. The lecture pushed us to question whether the political and social structure of Danish society is capable of flexing under the pressure of future cultural diversity within Danish society. In cultivating a uniquely Danish identity, Denmark has placed itself in a precarious position entering into the age of globalization. It is, as of now, unclear whether Denmark has the capacity to shed some of its Danish identity to better integrate numerous cultures into Danish society. The homogeneity of Denmark has not been expressed in terms of overt racism or prejudice; instead, the Danish government has implemented an array of policies that are aimed at sublimating the cultural differences of potential immigrants. It is unclear whether Denmark will have to sacrifice, or reform, its cultural identity in order to maintain its prosperity and position in a world of globalization.
In the afternoon, two new speakers arrived to provide us with more aspects of the overall topic of “Danishness and the characteristics of Danish society”. The first speaker was Tim Knudsen - professor in public administration – whose main theme was the Danish population’s political engagement, which today is very low compared to what it used to be. To give an example only around 4 % of the population in contemporary Denmark are members of political parties, whereas this number was as high as 24% in the 1940’s. Knudsen provided us with three main reasons for this unfortunate development. First of all, the fact that fewer people read the newspaper - due to the rise in mass communication tools such as TV and the Internet - has a negative influence in people’s engagement in politics. Secondly, the political parties in Denmark are no longer directly linked to different social classes in society, which cause less loyalty towards one particular party and more people frequently shift party. Lastly, globalization has caused the population to perceive national politics as being less important. Besides the fall in political engagement, Knudsen points to a new tendency of a more divided civil society between an educated elite informed about politics and a group of less educated people who are not engaged in society at the same level. Knudsen’s suggestion for cultivating more public engagement in politics is the creation of more and smaller local governments so that the political agendas move closer to the population, which is part of the historical Danish political tradition.
After Tim Knudsen, Johan Malki Jepsen followed, who is a research associate at the Department of political science at the University of Paris VIII. His topic of debate evolved around the general view of Denmark from the European Union and visa versa. Summing up his speech, an evolution has happened with regards to the outside image of Danish society since the 1990’s, which can be characterized as a notion of nationalism and euro-skepticism. This image was established for the first time as a result of the referendum on the Maastricht Treaty in 1992, where Denmark chose to opt-out on four central issues of the treaty. Since then, the Danish society has been an object for fascination but also criticism from the rest of Europe.
-Najhee and Trine
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Day 5: Tuesday, June 9
Our plane touched down in Copenhagen Airport at 11:30 pm Monday. Everybody was tired but happy and looking forward to the start of the core program Tuesday morning. After retrieving their luggage, the Danish fellows went home to sleep. However, for the American and Bosnian fellows, the night was not completely over for they were not going to meet their host families or see their dormitory until Tuesday afternoon. For the night they stayed at Danhostel in the center of Copenhagen.
Tuesday morning we all met at DSCISM which is an umbrella organization for the Danish Institute of International Studies and the Center for Human Rights. This is going to be our base for the next month, this is were we are going to spend most of our time. The chairman Jørgen Bøjer welcomed us with a speech about the role of the organization in the Danish society. He also introduced us to many of the issues regarding human rights in the Danish society we are going to look into during the next month.
Having heard a little about the dilemmas and questions that can be posed when dealing with human rights in Denmark from Jørgen Bøjer, everybody felt quite excited to begin the core program. The amount of questions and the fact that we did not have time for all of them shows how eager we all are to learn more.
The next speaker, Tøger Seidenfaden, chief editor of the Danish newspaper Politiken, rose an intense debate about Denmark in a global context regarding immigrants, the media and the notorious cartoon crisis.
Speaking of integration, the American and Bosnian fellows are already fully integrated in the Danish society, even though they have only been here for one day. When lunch came, everyone wanted to eat the notorious Danish 'rugbrød'. Rasmus and Shayne, who had been shopping for the lunch, were certain the American fellows would definitely want to eat white bread and not rough black 'rugbrød'. They stand corrected.
The American, Bosnian and Danish fellows are starting to get to know each other a little better. It is a privilege to be around so many culturally different individuals at the same time. Although our backgrounds may vary, our interest in human rights seems to remind us that we might not be so different after all.
-Maribel and Rune
Tuesday morning we all met at DSCISM which is an umbrella organization for the Danish Institute of International Studies and the Center for Human Rights. This is going to be our base for the next month, this is were we are going to spend most of our time. The chairman Jørgen Bøjer welcomed us with a speech about the role of the organization in the Danish society. He also introduced us to many of the issues regarding human rights in the Danish society we are going to look into during the next month.
Having heard a little about the dilemmas and questions that can be posed when dealing with human rights in Denmark from Jørgen Bøjer, everybody felt quite excited to begin the core program. The amount of questions and the fact that we did not have time for all of them shows how eager we all are to learn more.
The next speaker, Tøger Seidenfaden, chief editor of the Danish newspaper Politiken, rose an intense debate about Denmark in a global context regarding immigrants, the media and the notorious cartoon crisis.
Speaking of integration, the American and Bosnian fellows are already fully integrated in the Danish society, even though they have only been here for one day. When lunch came, everyone wanted to eat the notorious Danish 'rugbrød'. Rasmus and Shayne, who had been shopping for the lunch, were certain the American fellows would definitely want to eat white bread and not rough black 'rugbrød'. They stand corrected.
The American, Bosnian and Danish fellows are starting to get to know each other a little better. It is a privilege to be around so many culturally different individuals at the same time. Although our backgrounds may vary, our interest in human rights seems to remind us that we might not be so different after all.
-Maribel and Rune
Monday, June 8, 2009
Day 4: Monday, June 8
Today, our last day in Paris, we all met in the morning at the Mémorial de la Shoah—what Americans might call the Holocaust Museum. Senior Fellow Juliana Shnur, an intern at the Mémorial, welcomed us in front of the museum. She introduced the museum as the product of efforts in 1943 to gather documentation of war atrocities for later prosecution—efforts that, however somber, indicated a sense of optimism for a post-WWII world. With the context set by Juliana, we fellows then set out to explore the museum on our own. We stood in silent contemplation before the “The Crypt”—a tomb for the Jewish victims of concentration camps and ghettoes. We stood in the midst of countless police files of Jews who were victimized from 1940-1944, reading about the important role of Jewish resistance organizations and the collective amnesia that grasped France until 1995—the year that Jacques Chirac acknowledged the role of the Vichy government in the deportation of Jews. In the permanent exhibition, we read about the development of Jewish rescue networks in France, and learned about how the heterogeneity of the Jewish population in France posed a problem of collective action that complicated a united Jewish network.
After a couple hours of independent engagement with the museum exhibitions, we reconvened for a lecture by Georges Bensoussan, the editor-in-chief of Revue d’Histoire de la Shoah. Georges spoke about “The use and misuse of the Memory of the Holocaust,” and posited the idea that memory can be the enemy of history. He explained how collective memory has evolved over the years and has become a sort of “machine of forgetfulness.” As “all memory is utilitarian” in the sense that it reflects what is important to us today, it is also inevitably a selective memory that engenders collective amnesia in society. History is thus never objective, but rather constructed—a product, like memory, of contemporary context and societal expectations.
From these general ruminations about the nature of memory, Georges went on to warn that it is wrong to coopt Holocaust terms to easily explain other things—to project past events onto current ones. This appropriation of Holocaust terms to proclaim that “never again” shall such an event occur is a misuse of the memory of the Holocaust. Instead, Georges suggested that we remember the Holocaust as a watershed of human history; Shoah irreversibly destroyed the dignity of human beings and shattered the conception of human sanctity. This irretrievable destruction of humanity means that we cannot simply remember the Holocaust and assume such memory is sufficient to declare “Never Again”; we must understand that because the Holocaust marked an irreversible change in human history, it can indeed happen again.
In closing, Georges succinctly connected his lecture to the overarching ideals of Humanity In Action. Georges noted that former U.S. President Clinton inaugurated the Holocaust Memorial in Washington, D.C. shortly before the Rwandan genocide, and left us with a question and a call to action: what is the good of memorials and rhetoric if no action is taken?
Patrick Weil then ended our Paris opening program with closing remarks about “The Salience of Memory Issues in Contemporary France.” He explained that French law criminalized Holocaust denial, which brings up questions of freedom of speech and expression that we will discuss in more detail in Copenhagen in our discussion of the Muhammad Cartoon Crisis. Patrick contrasted the collective memory and social consensuses about the Holocaust and the slave trade with the collective memory and continued debate on colonization. Patrick’s remarks identified tensions in discourse and understanding that we shall take with us and explore as we now set out to our respective core programs for the next four weeks.
-Alexandra and Søren
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Day 3: Sunday, June 7th
As part of the Humanity in Action Paris program our hosts decided to let us see some of Paris’ different neighbourhoods to better understand the history of cultural diversity in the city. We had a choice of 5 areas: The Jewish Marais, Historic Arab Paris & the Institut du Monde Arabe, Belleville Artisans and Immigrants, La Goutte d’Or and finally the Chinese district in Paris. Below are our accounts of two of the city’s unique neighbourhoods.
Sofie: I went to La Goutte d’Or which translates into ‘the golden drop’. Our excellent local guide told us that the name originates from back when this was a rural area outside of Paris where the finest white wine was produced, unfortunately not anymore! Given its location close to, yet outside, Paris this neighbourhood became a popular site for immigrants to move to since prices were lower. This is reflected in the area today since about 35 different nationalities are represented here and shops selling African fish, far-fetched spices, and things for cooking I have no idea what to do with. Our guide described this as one of the most vibrant and cosmopolitan areas of Paris, displaying the great number of minority groups which make up the French capital.
Isaac: I went to the historic Arab Paris, a dynamic area of the city that contains evidence of the longstanding relationship between France and the “Arab World.” Our guide took us on a tour of the old and beautiful Arab churches of Saint-Ephrem and Saint Julien le Pauvre. This segment of the tour served to dispel the false conflation between Arabs and Muslims, as well as introduce us to the longstanding presence of Arabs in Paris since the beginning of the 19th century. In addition we explored the exquisite Grande Mosquée de Paris, an intricately designed and constructed mosque built by the French government in honor of the Arab Muslims that lost their lives fighting for France during the First World War. The mosque’s first Imam is also well known today for his work to rescue Jews from Nazi persecution during the Second World War. It is unfortunate that the cooperative spirit embodied by the mosque’s creation is not reflected in the inter-ethnic and inter religious relations in France today.
The afternoon session started with a talk by Sophie Wahnich from Centre National de Recherche Scientifique who spoke on constructing history in museums. She spoke about the importance of speaking to the visitor’s senses and feelings rather than using only narratives. In a more broad context the consequences of what is and is not represented was discussed, thus the question of whether statues of people such as Christopher Columbus and Saddam Hussein, which for some stand as representations of evil and others as liberators, should be torn down or be left standing. While there seems to be no final answer to this, Sophie reminded us of the importance of introducing a critical discourse around such monuments, urging us to think and reflect upon the past to use it constructively in the present.
Sophie Wahnich’s presentation was followed by a panel discussion on the development of one of the exhibits at the Cité Nationale de l'Histoire de l'Immigration. Historian Maureen Murphy and curator Rémi Dumas-Primbault eloquently outlined the difficulties they faced in designing such an exhibit, capturing our attention with pictures and tales of the harrowing dilemmas they faced in selecting the color scheme and spacial layout of the exhibit’s components. In the end we all gained an appreciation for the remarkable degree of intelligence and labor required to arrange pictures and captions into a coherent and meaningful display. In discussing how historical exhibitions influence visitors the panel emphasised the importance of raising questions rather than giving answers.
The day ended with a reception which gave us the opportunity of meeting and talking to some of the central people of HIA, as well as more time to talk to the other fellows participating in the program, in a relaxed atmosphere.
-Sofie and Isaac
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)