A public opinion survey released earlier this month shows that 67 per cent of Alaskans think gay couples deserve some form of legal recognition. So, in a meeting of the Alaska House Majority Caucus February 15, Mark Miller, a reporter for the Juneau Empire newspaper, asked, “would the caucus support the idea of having domestic partnerships or civil unions open to same-sex couples?”

Cue laughter.

Nothing like a gay joke to prime Republican Law-makers for President’s Day long weekend.

By law in Alaska, LGBT couples do not exist—their relationships have illegitimate, bastard status in the eyes of government. People who identify as LGBT are exempt from hate crime laws and they’re not protected against housing and workplace discrimination.

After recovering from the knee-slapper of a question, the caucus justified the reaction, saying the idea of gay couples’ rights was so funny because it wasn’t on the agenda (lol, duh!).

Lance Pruitt, the House Majority leader Rep. says, “What’s important about this caucus is that we focused on the things that really allow people to have a great life.”

Ohhhhhhh. A great life! Which has NOTHING to do with personal relationships. Gotcha.

Aside from the caucus’ totally inappropriate reaction to the idea of better gay rights, it’s yet another example of the disconnect between elected officials and the people they supposedly represent. Silly Americans.

But wait! Here in Canada, we too send mixed signals about our stance on sexual identity and orientation. We tout ourselves as the leader of human rights and acceptance, but we have found loopholes (in true Harper fashion) through which to thread homophobia.

Since 1999, the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) has been funding Crossroads Christian Communications—a Burlington, Ont.-based evangelical group with staunch views against LGBT rights, as in, they consider homosexuality and cross-dressing as “sinful” and “perverse” as bestiality and pedophilia (Crossroads recently had these opinions removed from its website). CIDA has given Crossroads more than $2 million for humanitarian work in Africa. Some of that money has gone towards HIV/AIDS education, and right now Crossroads is building a water filtration system in Uganda with $544,813 from CIDA.

Uganda, by the way, is notoriously homophobic. Since 2009, the Sub-Saharan country has been considering an Anti-Homosexuality Bill that, if passed, could mean the death penalty for homosexuals and jail time for people who don’t report anyone they know to be gay.

The international community has lambasted Uganda over the “Kill the Gays” bill. Amnesty International launched a campaign to stop the bill, and along with other Western nations, Canada dutifully denounced Uganda’s homophobia.  So why are we still supporting programs lead by homophobic organizations in a homophobic country?

Early this month, CIDA announced it will halt funding to Crossroads until it completes a review of the organization. Meanwhile, the Canadian government continues to justify funding Crossroads. Minister of International Co-operation, Julian Fantino stated, “We fund results-based projects, not organizations.”

Funding an organization’s projects, however, implies support of that organization’s values. Whether it’s building toilets that flush or exorcising the gay out of religious deviants, by giving Crossroads money, CIDA is backing the organization and what it stands for. Maybe Canada’s not laughing in the face of LGBT rights—just doing it behind their back.

Jenny Vaughan

Jenny Vaughan is no stranger to the hybrid role of journalist, leader, and advocate. She now occupies a unique position as the Accra, Ghana-based eyes and ears of Journalists for Human Rights, a media development organization with operations throughout sub-Saharan Africa. Currently, her job ranges from ensuring the professional and personal well-being of a team of journalists currently placed in Ghana and Malawi, to leading training programs with soldiers from various African countries on interaction with the press. Yet her fascination with the points where journalism, leadership, and international advocacy work coincide dates back much further. Born and raised into a family of journalists and politicians in Toronto, the 25-year-old has been navigating those worlds all her life.

Vaughan first worked in African media in the summer of 2009, as a reporter for the Daily Monitor, a national newspaper in Uganda. Sample stories from this time saw Vaughan on the back of a bodaboda motorbike in August 2009, weaving through traffic on Kampala’s red dirt roads to cover the story that businessman Benjamin Mukasa had been illegally detained by an army major in Kampala. “For two days,” says Vaughan, “he says he was starved, beaten, and refused access to a bathroom.”

Vaughan knew covering that story would be dangerous, because it involved exposing human-rights abuses committed by the army. But, as she puts it, “I didn’t hesitate when my colleague asked me to interview Mukasa. It’s because of stories like this that I became a journalist.” While at the Monitor, Vaughan also produced features on refugee rights, sexual harassment, and youth empowerment. “Human rights abuses often go unreported,” says Vaughan, “which is why I believe the work of Journalists for Human Rights is so important.”

Founded nine years ago, JHR—of which I am International Programs Director—works with local media in a variety of sub-Saharan African countries to shore up the power of the fourth estate. It does this by foregrounding a culture of human-rights reporting in a media environment where life is cheap, and respect for human rights is frequently the last priority.

But Vaughan’s engagement with this kind of work predates her time at JHR. Uganda, for example, made international headlines in January 2011 when gay activist David Kato was murdered. Yet Vaughan was on that issue two years prior, co-producing a television documentary about Uganda’s criminalization of homosexuality for iChannel and working closely with gay rights activists who risked their safety to expose injustice.

Her time in Uganda proved to her the power the press has to educate and empower communities in developing democracies, especially when it comes to human rights—an ethos she has refined during her time with JHR. With such a heady mix of media work, leadership, and development to her credit, I’m fascinated to see what Vaughan does next.

Pierre Trudeau. Bill C-150, passed by his government on May 15, 1969, ushered in a new era of human rights in Canada.

Tomorrow, let’s take a moment to reflect on the 42nd anniversary of the passing of Bill C-150, the omnibus bill that decriminalized abortion, contraception and homosexuality. The rights that Canadians have because of this historic bill are crucial to remember as those same rights come under attack elsewhere: on Wednesday, Indiana became the first state in the U.S. to cut public funding to Planned Parenthood. The same day in Uganda, gay people came close to facing the death penalty.

On May 14, 1969, The Criminal Law Amendment Act formed the legal foundations for the Canadian gay rights movement, and for Henry Morgentaler to perform abortions against — and eventually according to — the law. But it didn’t reduce discrimination, or grant women and members of the LGBTQ community full rights under the charter. Forty-two years later, how much has changed?

Abortion and contraception then:

In the 1950s, a family of five was considered small, explained former nurse Lucie Pepin in her speech commemorating the 30th anniversary of Bill C-150. Many women in rural communities gave birth to their children at home. When complications occurred during birth, the mother was rushed to hospital. If it was too late for a cesarian, her doctor had a decision to make:

“Which to save — the baby or the mother? The Church was clear: save the baby. The Church was clear on many points — women sinned if they refused sexual relations with their husbands or any other form of contraception. The State was also clear. Contraception was illegal and so was abortion.”

Women had no choice in the matter, and neither did their doctors. But Bill C-150 at least changed the latter. The legislation decreed abortion was permissible if a committee of three doctors felt the pregnancy endangered the mental, emotional or physical well-being of the mother. Regard was not given just yet to women’s charter rights to life, liberty and security of the person.

Enter Henry Morgentaler. In 1969, armed with decisive arguments in favour of a woman’s right to an abortion within the first three months of pregnancy, the doctor began performing the procedure illegally in his Montreal clinic. An exchange in 1970 between the adamant doctor and a furious caller on CBC Radio highlighted the fundamental disagreement between the doctor and his critics about when life begins.

Now:

The debate hasn’t progressed. It has degenerated into little more than a shouting match between so-called “pro-life” and “pro-choice” advocates who still can’t agree on when life begins, or whose rights win out: those of the mother or those of the unborn fetus. And recently the Canadian debate has shifted for the worse.

In Indiana, the governor was quite happy to openly chop away at Planned Parenthood’s $2 million in public funding. Meanwhile, in Canada, subtler shifts are taking place. During the election, Tory MP Brad Trost bragged that the Conservative government had successfully cut funding to Planned Parenthood. Stephen Harper quickly denied the comments, saying he would not re-open the abortion debate as long as he is Prime Minister. However, the International Planned Parenthood Federation has been waiting for 18 months to hear whether their funding from the Canadian government will be renewed. During the election, women’s rights groups foreshadowed the Conservatives’ indecision on the matter warning Canadians that Harper would be under pressure from his caucus to re-open the debate. With a Conservative majority now in government, that pressure is sure to grow.

Homosexuality then:

149 Members of Parliament agreed with Trudeau and 55 did not after he famously said “there is no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation.” According to his omnibus bill, acts of homosexual sex committed in private between consenting adults would no longer be prosecuted. But gay sex between people younger than 21 was still illegal.

A Gallup Poll at the time that asked Canadians whether they thought homosexual sex should be legal or illegal found 42 percent in favour of decriminalization and 41 percent against. Homosexuality was openly discussed as an “illness” that ought to be cured. Progressive Conservative Justice Critic Eldon Woolliams voted in favour of Trudeau’s bill so that gays could have the equal opportunity to receive treatment. On February 2, 1969, he said casually on CBC television:

“I don’t think (homosexuality) should ever be put in the criminal code. I think it should be taken out. It should be done in a medical way so that these people could be sent to centres if we feel as citizens who oppose the feeling of this illness and this homosexuality so they could be rehabilitated.”

Woolliams appeared to sincerely (and incorrectly) believe that gay sex was a mere tendency based on environmental factors, and that the “pressure” of these factors could be “relieved.”

Before Bill C-150 was passed, “incurable” homosexual George Klippert was convicted of “gross indecency.” He was sentenced to preventative detention. In 1967, the Supreme Court upheld the decision.

Now:

Today the Ugandaan Parliament debated a bill that aimed to punish “aggravated homosexuality” by increasing jail sentences from 14 years to life. Until yesterday, the bill also proposed the death penalty for gays. The main motivation behind the legislation was preventing the spread of HIV and AIDS.

We would like to think that Canada is 40 years ahead of Uganda, but we still impose discriminatory policies to prevent the spread of what used to be known as “the gay cancer” — HIV/AIDS.

The policy of the Canadian Blood Services is to ban any man who has had sex with another man since 1977 from giving blood for the rest of his life. The organization asserts that it is arms-length enough from the government to uphold the ban without fear of violating Charter rights. The CBS also discriminates based on action rather than sexuality — a gay man who hasn’t had sex is welcome to give blood. A third argument holds the least strength: though HIV/AIDS testing has advanced over the years, the possibility of a false negative still exists.

However, the policy is inherently discriminatory because it assumes any man who has sex with another man carries a high possibility of illness despite other factors such as relationship status, use of condoms, and differing risk factors based on oral versus anal sex. The CBS, which is regulated by Health Canada, maintains its policy based on outdated science. To their credit, the organization has offered a grant of $500,000 to any researcher(s) who can find a safe way to allow “MSM” men to safely give blood. No researchers have applied for the grant.

The lifetime ban is outdated, as is the recommended deferral period of 10 years, which the U.K. recently implemented. Australia, Sweden and Japan currently have deferral periods of one year. Researchers for the Canadian Medical Association Journal have recommended a one-year deferral policy for MSM donors in stable, monogamous relationships.

We’ve progressed, but we’re not perfect. And there’s a real risk of losing what we have. On May 14, let’s be grateful to the activists that pushed the LGBTQ and women’s rights movements forward.

A sunset in Elongatuas, Masai Mara, Kenya (2009). Photo by Siena Anstis.

[Editor’s Note: Siena Anstis, who has served as our Africa correspondent on the blog over the past few months, is moving on to new projects. She’ll continue to contribute to the blog, but wanted to pass on some of the things she’s learned during her time working and reporting in Uganda, Kenya, and elsewhere for other young Western journalists looking to work abroad.]

I will be packing my bags next week and leaving Nairobi after an 8-month fellowship with the Aga Khan Foundation (East Africa) and freelance work under the Journalism & Development Scholarship funded by the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). Of course, the idea of leaving and juggling with new choices is both exhausting and exhilarating.

On that note, I know I am privileged to have traveled this much over the past few years (with a lot more to come). I regularly think back on how important the guidance and opportunities I received have been (parents are probably the biggest asset in this department). So, if you are interested in entering international development, I figured I would share a few other tips, after the jump:

Develop a specialty: Whether I want to work in journalism or not, having the skills and training of a journalist is a big asset. Getting into international development is no walk in the park – entry level positions often ask for 5 or more years of experience. However, if you have something that makes you versatile – in my case, photography, design and writing – you might make the cut.

Studying International Development: You do NOT need to study International Development to enter the field. An undergraduate degree (Social Sciences or Humanities) in any discipline is what you make of it and is equally as relevant. Also, grades matter. You will need to do a Master’s at some point to climb the ladder and high grades are key.

Study both applied and research: Instead, combine your undergraduate. For example, do a major in a research degree and another major in an applied degree. You might not have time to do an Honors in the research section, but you will have a lot more skills when you graduate. Plus, no Honors will not stop you from getting into Canadian or UK graduate schools (I can guarantee you this). Applied degrees can be anything from journalism to graphic design and marketing. All applied skills are valuable when you start an internship or a new job in international development. The applied degree will always add that extra edge to your applications – and be your emergency money-maker down the line.

Apply your “applied skills” now: I started freelancing the moment I entered journalism school. A lot of it was unpaid work with minimal exposure, but it taught me the difficult ropes of freelancing. I also wrote regularly for the school newspaper and did a stint as a news editor. I continue to do a mix of free and paid work, using all of it as an opportunity to market myself online. This also applies to other degree. For example, if you are a graphic design and political science major (maybe a strange – but interesting – mix), try volunteering/working for some local NGOs.

Start early. Get “involved” now: Being involved can mean anything from attending lectures and seminars you would not usually bother with to helping at the soup kitchen and assisting with the Amnesty Chapter at your university. I would suggest a mix of the obscure and the obvious. Having UN-related organizations on your CV is fantastic, but remember that you will probably get more experience working with that small local organization that really needs extra hands. Getting involved takes some determination: many organizations are too disorganized or busy to streamline volunteers. Harass them persistently.

Travel with purpose: Wherever you travel, analyze the conditions around you. From racism in Denmark to tourism in Zanzibar, there is a story in every surrounding. Recognize these stories, write a blog, use social media to disseminate your stories (namely Twitter). Show that you are engaged in your environment. If anything, this will help you discover more about yourself and the world around you.

Internships: There is a point where you get to say “no more work for free.” However, the time between now and then is getting longer and longer, particularly with the job market in disarray. Some people spend several years after university working for next to nothing or free and getting their foot in the door. So, beat them to it. Do internships abroad every summer. Use some of your student loans and savings. Don’t wait until you’ve graduated. For example, I spent the the second and third summers of university working in Uganda. I then did an exchange for 6 months to Europe and threw in some freelancing in Kosovo. I started a non-profit (and basically surrendered myself to no-income for a year). And now I’m finishing a costs-covered (but no profit) 8-month fellowship. Yes, I had to take out some extra bank loans, but it’s worth it.

Look outside the box: Instead of applying for those mainstream and hard to get internships that everyone applies to, contact an organization you would like to work for directly. Say you are moving to where they are based and want to volunteer for free for several months. Getting an internship is not hard, making the most of it is. And sometimes these internships change you whole perspective. For example, I started working for Women of Uganda Network because a friend heard the organization occasionally took foreign interns and referred me. WOUGNET introduced me to a whole other area in development, information and communication for development (ICT4D) in broad terms, which is now my thesis focus and has helped me get accepted to top schools in the UK.

Prepare for your internship: Like I said, making the most of an internship is hard. Many are office-based and involve little field-work. You’ll find yourself editing documents and writing tired Facebook messages. Unless, of course, you bring some ideas of your own. Spend the first few weeks recognizing gaps in the organization and, once people are comfortable with you, suggest a particular project you would like to work on or pitch your own idea. When I was working with the Women of Uganda Network, in Kampala, Uganda, the first few weeks were slow – until I stumbled across their citizen journalism initiative and asked to design and facilitate a workshop for local non-governmental organizations.

Award/Internships: There are a few good organization and awards you should be applying to while in university or after graduation. This applies primarily to Canadians and is based on some of my previous work experience. There are dozens more – if you know them, post in the comments section!

The Aga Khan Foundation Fellowship (8 months, costs covered): This fellowship has funded my current position. There are position all around the world, from Tajikistan to the white beaches of Zanzibar. Applications are generally due in December. They take university graduates with a preference for Masters students (however, there were plenty non-Masters in my cohort).

Insight Collaborative (1-year, costs covered): This fellowship is for people with a bit more experience (several international internships under their belt – whether summer or longer-term).  Training is primarily in conflict resolution, with the opportunity to organize internship placements anywhere in the world.

Forces Avenir: For students studying in Quebec, this competition is a fantastic way to gain more exposure for yourself or your project.

Concordia Volunteer Abroad Program (summer, unpaid): If you are at Concordia University, this is a great way to get your first field experience. It is the most basic introduction to international development you can get while being cared for.

McGill Internship Program (summer, bursaries available): If you are at McGill, you can look into this highly competitive program. A friend of mine used to work in their offices, feel free to contact me for more details.

CIDA Internships (5-6 months, costs covered): These internships are good for people on their first or second work experience abroad. They are getting increasingly competitive, I presume, as the job market stalls.

Women of Kireka (rolling, unpaid): A bit of self-promotion, but the organization I started with Project Diaspora in Kampala, Uganda, is looking for interns. You can read more about the positions here.

Queer rights are on trial left, right and centre this month.

Here in Canada, an HIV-positive gay couple from the States has won their appeal against Citizenship and Immigration Canada. Until now, the majority of HIV-positive applicants have been excluded because of the excessive burden they posed on health services. This couple was initially rejected, but appealed on the basis that they could afford to cover their own health costs. CIC might still choose to appeal themselves, but the case is still encouraging for future HIV-positive immigrants to Canada — providing they have some cash behind them. Xtra has more here.

Meanwhile at the Ontario Superior Court, an HIV-positive man named Kyle Freeman is challenging the ban on blood donation by gay men. The trial moved to closing comments last week, and a decision is expected in a few weeks. Freeman’s lawyer Patricia LeFebour said in her closing remarks, “The current rule unfairly singles out the entire gay population,” and “doesn’t take into account the reality of today’s HIV statistics of gay men.”

Across the border, an interesting legal challenge has begun against the ban on same-sex marriage in California. Perry v. Schwarzenegger opened on Monday, and there is some speculation that this case may progress all the way to the US Supreme Court. Queer rights groups are divided over whether this would be good news. Some claim public opinion in the US is still deeply divided over gay marriage and for the Supreme Court to rule in its favour would trigger a major backlash. Others think a favourable ruling from the Supreme Court is unlikely, and that an unfavourable one could set the cause back a decade or more. The New Yorker has an interesting piece on the case, and you can also track the progress of the trial at this new Courage Campaign blog.

In Uganda, it is still unclear whether a bill imposing life sentences and even execution for homosexuality will pass into law. President Museveni has intervened, saying that the death penalty is a bridge too far, but the harsh prison sentences may still remain part of the bill. In the meantime though, debate over the bill is stirring up some seriously ugly anti-gay sentiment in the country.

Cate Simpson is a freelance journalist and the web and reviews editor for Shameless magazine. She lives in Toronto.

The bill hasn’t seen as much press coverage as you might expect, but it has spawned some headlines I hope never to see again. The BBC wins the prize for most alarming, with “Should homosexuals be executed?” as if the prospect was merely thought-provoking and ripe for discussion.

The headline, from a post on the BBC website, actually turns out to be part of a show broadcast on the BBC World Service called Have Your Say. The episode—which aired on Wednesday and is still available online)—makes for powerful listening. A woman calls in from Zambia to say she can’t understand how a female can look at another female in a sexual way. When the host presses her on whether she would actually support the death penalty for doing so, she says, “Being executed for being something sinful, it’s okay.” From her tone of voice as she utters those final two words you could easily imagine she was talking about a vegetable she doesn’t like, but that she’d be willing to eat if it ended up on her plate.

The debate over this bill should be a warning to every casual homophobe the world over: this is where revulsion for your fellow man leads you. This is what happens when communities let their intolerance go unchecked, when governments refuse to step in to defend the rights of minorities. And let’s be clear: this bill would government-stamp the elimination of a group of people based on a particular attribute. We have a word for that: it’s genocide.

The bill’s sponsors get around the word by claiming that homosexuality is chosen rather than innate, that it is something you do rather than something you are. But I think it’s telling that the caller above says “for being something sinful.” I think that’s more than a slip of the tongue. Homophobes often claim that homosexuality is something you can “recruit” another person into, or that it’s something you can choose to indulge or ignore, but I think a lot of that genuine revulsion towards queer people has its roots in the opposite belief.

The death penalty is something you advocate for a person whom you believe cannot be saved. The kind of hatred that inspires a person to call a radio show and say, “Gay people don’t deserve to live” does not come from the mere belief that a single act of same-sex intimacy is immoral. It comes from a belief that committing that act transforms you into something irredeemably other and unfit for society.

The ex-gay ministries whose efforts in Uganda gave rise to this bill have denounced it because they believe that gay people can be saved. But the bill is only the ministries’ basic premise taken to its logical conclusion. If you preach that being gay is grievously sinful, but you fail to convince your listeners that rehabilitation is effective, or if those “rehabilitation” attempts fail, it’s not hard to see how we end up here. Several people who call into the show to support the bill justify their position by claiming that that being gay is not a necessary attribute. The ex-gay movement needs to take their share of the responsibility for that.

I try not to get too involved in the question of whether queerness is innate, because in asking it we generally assume that being gay is abnormal. But it clearly matters in this case. A reaction as extreme as the death penalty speaks to a belief on the part of its advocates that gay people are fundamentally unlike them, that they are a species apart. That is what makes it genocide. And all we can hope for at this point is that, when the bill is debated in the Ugandan parliament tomorrow, the members recognize it as such.

Cate Simpson is a freelance journalist and the web and reviews editor for Shameless magazine. She lives in Toronto.

In 2007, Ugandan Archbishop Odama places an internet phone call to an internally-displaced people's camp 70 km away. Internet technologies are encouraging ground-up development like this across the continent. Photo courtesy Bosco-Uganda.

I first stumbled across BOSCO-Uganda in July 2008. I was nearing the end of my internship with the Women of Uganda Network and was becoming increasingly interested in what is being called information and communication technology for development or ICT4D.

BOSCO-Uganda introduced me to the idea of using basic technology developed in the Western world for community development in completely different cultural and social settings. In particular, they were using the Internet was giving young people access to a whole breadth of information never reached before: from grant-making agencies to international news.

Just over a year later, I decided to check in with Kevin Bailey, Organizational and Communications Envoy with BOSCO-Uganda, to see how the organization was growing. For some background material, check out my previous article here.

Since 2008, BOSCO-Uganda has grown exponentially. The organization now covers a total of 20 different sites, providing wireless Internet access and free satellite phone connections. With support to a local HIV/AIDS community based organization, a local Catholic Radio Station and a local government office, among others, BOSCO-Uganda has also started riding the Web 2.0 wave.

“We have really gained traction in our Web 2.0 Train the Trainer model at the community sites. We developed and produced a curriculum manual that is specifically for these rural based Web 2.0 trainings in rural northern Uganda,” Kevin Bailey, Organizational and Communications Envoy for BOSCO-Uganda explains, “The whole concept is based on getting the user to jump right onto the Internet and begin collaborating first, rather than following the typical Ugandan school curriculum of learning to use a computer in a very methodical way that begins with word processing, spreadsheets, etc., and never really get to practical use of the Internet for collaboration purposes.”

“We think that if users begin using Web 2.0 collaboration tools as a starting point, they will learn how to use the basic skills like word processing in the process (imagine a user learning to word processing skills by sending emails and making blog/wikispace posts),” he continues. Trainees have already started using their new knowledge and posting at www.bosco-uganda.wikispaces.net.

BOSCO also hopes to use their technology to teach adult literacy and numeracy. When I first spoke with BOSCO last year, they mentioned that teaching people computer literacy was difficult as they did not have the staff capacity nor scope. However, with new funding from UNICEF, it looks like their mandate is expanding.

“The idea would be to digitize the curriculum, put it on our high speed server, provide a set of low power netbooks and allow a literacy teacher to hold community literacy classes while the students learn using the computer as the tool to gain those literacy skills,” says Bailey, who also believes the use of computers will encourage people previously too shy to come forward due to stigma around illiteracy.

Bailey says the BOSCO’s uniqueness lies in simply “provid[ing] the medium to connect and offer[ing] a bit of guidance; the usage and direction will be driven by the community members who taken an active role in using our services.”

Morever, as Bailey express, BOSCO’s services “do not to be necessarily focused in one area like other development programs. We don’t have to just focus on education or health. We can be broad in our approach because ICT and connectivity affects every area of development and we’d like to work with others who see value in connectivity and collaboration in all development areas.”

Participants in the "Africa Gathering" conference in London, October 27, 2009. CC-licensed photo via Flickr by chiefmoamba.

In the interest of full disclosure, I currently work with Project Diaspora and am getting hitched to one of the founders next year in Uganda (you might be invited). However, that said, I think myself (mostly) capable of distinguishing between these personal associations and PD’s mandate.

When I first joined PD in 2008, I was vaguely interested in their work. I thought the core idea of the project was different from the mainstream, and therefore merited some attention.

However, when TMS Ruge spoke at Africa Gathering a few weeks ago in London, the reason for initiatives like PD truly became tangible.

While working with the Aga Khan Foundation has been interesting, I often feel that my work is superfluous and could be done much better by someone with a cultural familiarity and connection to East Africa.

I also feel that we foreigners continue the colonialist vibe first exported by the British to Kenya. And, as my father, a former diplomat, points out, the days of colonialism have neatly blended into the proxy Cold Wars fought in African countries like the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Now, international development and aid have become, in large part, a cover for forcing poor and unstable countries into adapting the norms and ideals of other nations so that the West can export their products and ensure their own long-term financial health.

Despite these very real moral obstacles, international development — in the sense of cross-cultural integration, stemming poverty and establishing global economic stability (but not necessarily growth) — remains an important component of African advancement. In a sense, the funds and quality of work necessary to jump-start countries is often still found in the West. Therefore, despite all the subversion that aid delivers, it is necessary to build a connection between these two regions, the minority and majority worlds.

But, how about a different connection? PD seems to offer a unique solution to these two difficulties: development should be home grown with the necessary cultural, linguistic and religious nuances to be successful. At the same time, Western resources are often necessary to start-up projects (even PD, strictly averse to aid, understands this).

PD envisions harnessing the knowledge and financial resources (including $40 billion annually in remittances) of the African Diaspora, mostly living in the West, in the interest of social and economic development in Africa.

This means encouraging members of the African Diaspora to contribute to the advancement of their countries; either by coming back and directly contributing their skills; or by acting as advisors to government, non-governmental organizations and the private sector. PD hopes, in a sense, to reverse the “brain-drain” that has been overwhelmingly crippling the African continent.

Instead of imported World Bank employees at $100,000+ tax free per year, such international organizations can focus and draw upon an influential African Diaspora working in the West and start re-building these broken links.

In the long-run, this could bolster the faltering middle class of countries like Uganda and allow a stronger political voice among the people. By ensuring a cultural continuity in development, one also has the opportunity to lift people out of “victimhood” and bring the role-models home.

However, this is only a first step. The idea of re-branding Africa must be included. In practice, this concept would allow for the awakening of a new market built on the talent of Africans, Diaspora and non-Diaspora. As explained in TMS’ speech, customer service is key to the development of countries like Uganda. I don’t mean in the traditional sense — even though Teddy refers to it — as exporting computer troubleshooting labor from the US to Uganda.

Instead, I think he (and many other Ugandans/Africans) mean that businesses in places like Uganda need to step up to the plate and produce the products and service currently delivered both in the West and new economic superpowers like China and India. Simultaneously, we need to use the individuals behind these businesses as proof that African countries are not defined simply by corruption, instability, poverty and war. This involves both bringing these individuals to international light and helping the West understand that there is an investment to be made, while ensuring that African countries deliver on the work that is desired.

Lastly, while globalization has its merits, I think Africa can do it differently — and better. With all the “big” lessons being learned by countries like China (pollution) and the US (dependency on oil), African countries have the opportunity to posit a ‘healthier’ form of economic and social development.

Women in the Dadaab, Kenya refugee camp receiving training to work with Samasource, a web company that outsources computer jobs to women, youth, refugees, and internally displaced people living in poverty. Photo courtesy Samasource.

This coming week I will be covering the 6th UNESCO Youth Forum in Paris. In preparation for the event, youth delegates have been participating in an online forum and discussing a variety of issues which affect youth during this global economic (and social) crisis.

Naturally, one of my preferred topics is along the lines of information and communication technology (ICT) and social media. As I discussed last week, ICT and social media, slowly, but surely, are allowing people to reverse the dominance of Western information. As tools are developed to allow active translation of English websites into even the most obscure dialects, those with basic education are tapping a source of previous privileged wealth.

Social and economic investment via ICT (such as the internet and mobile phones) is another key purpose. However, while the Internet is bringing us together, there remains the contentious “digital divide.” As Sylvia Namukasa, a UNESCO youth delegate from Uganda comments, “In Uganda, ICT only favors the urban youth who can access computers, unlike their rural counterparts, many of whom have never had a chance to look at a computer.”

We need to actively work against this disparity. Instead of pouring our hard-earned savings into charities, which continue to laud free goods on people who have no need or want for them, Canadian youth, in particular, should consider investing in their technologically able and inventive counterparts.

Across the ocean, people in the “developing world” are turning technology into an economic revolution with life-altering effects for the poor. Technology allows “us”—Westerners saturated by the stereotypical images of starving Africa—to circumvent the popular aid mantra and go for the real deal: delivering solid work into the arms of people who need it, or assisting those in acquiring the necessary knowledge to build the structures of a functional economy.

One excellent example of just how ingenious we can be with our money is exemplified in Samasource. The organization, founded by an Indian woman living in California, delivers small bits of computer-based work to women, youth and refugees living in poverty. TMS Ruge, the Ugandan co-founder of Project Diaspora, inspired by the need to invest back in his home country, has jumped on board. He currently has a team of web developers assisting with US-based contracts. While simplifying his own work, he delivers added income to individuals without the opportunity to join the formal work sector. I can guarantee this has a deeper impact than free malaria nets or second-hand clothing, both which eventually sneak out of the household and find their way into the informal economy anyway.

Txteagle is another example of how outsourcing via ICT can be revolutionary to people in poorer countries. From translation to conducting surveys, households confined to rural areas of Kenya have the opportunity to increase their livelihoods with tasks that integrate well into their daily lives—like taking care of livestock and doing domestic work.

For those of us who are not at the point of having work to outsource, there exist organizations that develop ICT in areas generally considered unreachable. For example, in Northern Uganda, I stumbled across a humble organization called Battery Operated Systems for Community Outreach, or BOSCO. By connecting up internally displaced persons to the internet, BOSCO has initiated a new means for refugees to acquire funding for locally-initiated development projects. For example, getting the necessary resources for solar-power in a town that had only, until then, functioned by costly paraffin lamps.

Or take AppAfrica. East African tech entrepreneurs and innovators develop software that allows huge changes to those isolated in rural Uganda with only cell phone access (and yes, almost everyone has a cell phone). One example, Question Box, is a means to democratize information, which further fosters economic development. People call in with all types of questions, such as “How can we control soil erosion in our village?” or “Can a mother pass HIV on to her child?”

As I gear up for this UNESCO Youth Forum, I want to encourage young people to consider the “snowball” effect of investing in work opportunities via ICT or technology itself. One woman making a dollar or two extra a day via Txteagle can now afford to buy malaria nets (stimulating the local economy) and send her children to secondary school. Her children, in turn, will grow up in the atmosphere that we have all come to understand and which secures, in part, democracy and government accountability: hard work pays off; we are accountable to the decisions we make.

A friend recently sent me an email commenting on the Twitter craze provoked by the recent riots in Kampala, Uganda. Within the first few minutes of the first sign of rioting, Twitter was chock-full of witness reports on the events.

Just like Tehran earlier this year, Twitter delivered an instant “news” source. While Twitter provides largely unverified information, I was able to track events via a series of people whom I trust because we have either met or because they have honed a flawless track record of articles, blogs and informal citizen news production eventually verified by mainstream news agencies.

While I was impressed by the f requency and detail of the updates, one of my acquaintances seemed less so. He asked why rural Ugandans — such as our mutual connection “Norman” who runs an orphanage in Mbale, Western Uganda — would be interested in minute-by-minute updates on rioting in Kampala. He writes: “I don’t think their lives [Norman and other rural Ugandans] would be demonstrably altered by knowing facts two or three hours earlier.”

However, as a Ugandan friend who is social-entrepreneur insists, this argument misses the point. It does not matter whether anyone wants or needs to hear information on a minute-by-minute basis. The importance of Twitter lies not only in providing a security mechanism when news is lacking,  but also in offering everyone a “personal microphone.” This personal microphone extends far beyond news updates by offering a new knowledge-production mechanism which expands beyond limited village-based traditional information-sharing networks to a virtual global network. Writ large, Twitter and other social media are tools to counter the hegemony of Western knowledge-production, both in news and in international development.

While Norman might not be as interested in the instant updates on riots in Kampala (which, I would argue, he would be, considering family and friends living in the capital city), he has a stake in terms of funding his own orphanage project through instant updates. Sure enough, Norman is a prime example of just how effective this type of social media marketing (Facebook, Twitter and so on) can be. On any given day, I receive at lease one or two updates from Norman on his orphanage in Mbale. And, while an overflow of information has often turned me off from reading every update and contributing to the project more than just once in a while, it does inspire a sense of trust and confidence to see that the project is constantly evolving (for better or worse). It also enables Norman  to foster a wider network of people contributing to his project, honing more funding and opportunities.

A key point in the development of social media tools like Twitter is that they are being used to circumvent all types of “traditional” structures that are rigid in control and content. Twitter enables news to circumvent the tightly controlled radio stations and newspapers in Uganda and ensures that citizens are given an idea of how their friends and families are doing; social media in general is circumventing time worn international aid structures that have consistently hampered the development of home-grown ideas and projects through foreign-controlled and imposed development ideas and ideals.  Individuals who have built a Twitter “reputation” for accurate information  can provide live, in-the-field updates; others can provide an up-to-date source of information showing the traceable and digestible development of their projects. The latter, moreover, offer a personal connection to the project, which secures further donations.

Based on the huge growth of social media, it is safe to presume that over the next few years, we are going to see social media emerging as a tool for the marginalized: those whose voices have been silenced by bigger “machines” such as the ever present bureaucracy of large aid organizations like the United Nations and powerful Western news agencies such as CNN.

While the Internet does give everyone a chance to “re-invent” themselves as they wish, a unique trust system based on complex virtual and face-to-face relations is becoming a stop-gap for the potential fabrications that come with unregulated information. As I mentioned before, I have developed a network of friends whom I have met, or been referred to by trusted friends, or who have proven themselves to be accurate in their reporting and observations. Besides this, active Twitter users are engaged in a parallel activity, “tweetups”, which brings users together on a more human basis, providing far more trust than the forever elusive structures of big development systems like USAID and the “parachute journalism” of chronically underfunded newspapers.

So, contrary to the myth  that social media, particular Twitter, are irrelevant to human development, I believe individuals like Norman show the great potential in investing in this type of information sharing and networking. Moreover, it is high-time for a tool to challenge the mainstream knowledge structures that are forever dominated by the West. with its bottomless finances to manipulate information, and thus to ensure  a more even distribution of knowledge production. As Foucault said, “Knowledge is Power” and social media — increasingly accessible to the masses — is helping reverse the unfair distribution of information which has tainted the reputation of regions like the Middle East (remember Edward Said?) and Africa keeping them forever marginalized.