Of course, he did not actually make that suggestion.. It would take longer than a week.
Bo. works and lives here in Yaounde. But back in his hometown, his neighbors are the 500+ members of his father's side of the family. A couple of streets further lives his mother's side of the family, a community of some 700+ relatives. So apart from being my friend, I have a good reason not to get into a fight with him.
Typical of non-Western societies, distant relatives here remain very close. Truly, family comes first. Man first took care of his family and his family of him, long before modern society created a system he could rely on and thrive in. It only makes sense that family ties are especially strong in an underdeveloped country where the unemployment rate is astronomical (40-50% now, maybe) and countless people live in poverty. A social welfare system seems more like a fantasy than a realistic goal.
Cameroon's population has doubled in the past 20 years and overpopulation will continue to make life difficult for the average citizen. Personally, I find it harder now to bluntly say they only have themselves to blame. It would be implying to neighbors, colleagues and other people I have grown to like that the very existence of their many, dearly loved siblings and kids are for the greater bad, that this is a disaster in the making. Sometimes, when looking at the big picture, you think you know what's right and wrong - but once you take a closer look or things get personal, you and your rationale are easily overwhelmed. The consequences are ruinous but gradual and broad so that the individual hardly sees them until it's late. And until that tipping point is reached and the individual recognizes that choosing to have 5 to 10 kids contributes to a vast and growing problem, it will be the most wonderful thing in the world to be part of a big family and have as many little ones as he/she can raise comfortably. Maybe it's one of those things that can't be left to the individual, and requires governments or other organizations to take action. But at most, population control is enforced at country level. Will population growth ever be addressed as a global issue before it's too late? Though fundamental, it is too wide-ranging and divisive an issue for the world to reach a consensus and start a cooperative effort to limit fertility rates, isn't it? But must the human race not try to control world population growth for its own good? It touches on economic, environmental, religious, ethical and political issues. Should certain countries not be allowed to catch up a little? China and India dominate the world in numbers.. 37% is enough to win a general election in some places. Is it even a big deal, will wars and diseases not serve as a counterbalance? Will our carrying capacity increase indefinitely? Are we not refraining from effectively preventing more tragic deaths that are the result of famines and a shortage of clean water, especially in Africa? Am I being ridiculous, drifting off to asking such questions?
This is weird, but give it up for the West, where they stopped having legions of babies first.*
I don't know if the size of Bo.'s extended family is the norm or if it is unusually big. Hearing about it not only got me thinking about how very busy everyone must be, but also reflecting on how family members grow estranged more easily in a modern, globalized world. Cultural traditions, regular reunions and the tireless diplomats within families can hardly negate the effects that increased mobility and financial independence for individuals has on family ties. Friends begin to play a bigger role in everyday life, family a smaller one. In Eastern societies, this trend isn't as apparent as it is in the West yet. But even if the central role of the family is rooted in mainstreamed Chinese philosophy, it may just be a matter of time. Then again, I might be overly pessimistic on this one; bitter, from witnessing firsthand how family members drift apart.
Meanwhile, it is worth noting how popular the term "brother" really is among blacks. In Bo.'s case, it makes things much more convenient. There are so many brothers, half-brothers, and cousins around all the time that it's easier to just call everyone brother. They take it to the next level by calling all their friends and acquaintances brothers as well, along with every one of their 同乡, people from the same town or region, who are likely third or fourth or fifth cousins. It becomes entirely impossible to tell what is their relation when someone says he "has a brother who could help out". At the same time, this indicates how many connections a person typically has, which are crucial here to survival and getting anything done.
Actually introducing someone to my family wouldn't take quite as long, it only involves an awful lot of traveling. But there's fun in that, too.
_____________________
* West 1 - 2 East
It Starts With Deep Breaths
13 years ago
brother...~did you think about the femenine side? hehe~ brother is quite c'mon using in today's life...yet "sister" is not... mayb in the future get to read sth from u abt this side... :P
ReplyDelete"Sometimes, when looking at the big picture, you think you know what's right and wrong - but once you take a closer look or things get personal, you and your rationale are easily overwhelmed."
ReplyDeleteTo further cloud the issue, as a country becomes more developed and gender equality increases, the female work force grows, women wait longer to have children and have fewer children due to access to contraception, family planning, concentration on career. How to be fair?
Liang, how do you mean? Does it further cloud the issue?
ReplyDeleteA rep. from India was quoted as saying at the UN something like development is what's most effective in addressing overpopulation. It would take so long tho until it is naturally solved that way.
Overpopulation: let's kill people.
ReplyDeleteJust no one I care about or deem worthy. Or I'll cry.