This is a really good piece. I am shocked but not surprised that after all these years, this is still how outlets like the Guardian (even the Guardian!) cover issues that are simply dripping with political economic implications. The essence is something like: oh no, the white saviours are pulling back, how will they survive without them?
Thanks. And yes, that was exactly my reaction too. Like all the rest of them, the Guardian piece had the line that Rohingya are “completely dependent on aid.” It’s a familiar humanitarian shorthand, but it’s also a political signifier. It implies that the aid system is the only thing keeping people alive, and in doing so, it erases both the state policies that enforce immobility and the everyday labour through which Rohingya actually survive.
This is a really good piece. I am shocked but not surprised that after all these years, this is still how outlets like the Guardian (even the Guardian!) cover issues that are simply dripping with political economic implications. The essence is something like: oh no, the white saviours are pulling back, how will they survive without them?
Thanks. And yes, that was exactly my reaction too. Like all the rest of them, the Guardian piece had the line that Rohingya are “completely dependent on aid.” It’s a familiar humanitarian shorthand, but it’s also a political signifier. It implies that the aid system is the only thing keeping people alive, and in doing so, it erases both the state policies that enforce immobility and the everyday labour through which Rohingya actually survive.