By Nick Vacchio
Senior Editor

*Recently, Prospect Journal of International Affairs started collaborating with The UCSD Guardian, UCSD’s student-run newspaper. The following is a piece that one of our senior editors wrote for the Opinion Section of The UCSD Guardian which can be viewed here.

One of the most widely-discussed issues on California’s ballot box this coming Tuesday is Proposition 64. The proposal regards whether or not marijuana should be legalized for recreational use. Formally titled the Control, Regulate and Tax Adult Use of Marijuana Act, Prop 64 will allow citizens over 21 years of age to legally carry an ounce of marijuana or up to eight grams of concentrated cannabis. Additionally, the measure will allow Californians to legally cultivate as many as six marijuana plants for their personal use. 

California is the largest of five states considering the matter this November, alongside Massachusetts, Arizona, Nevada and Maine. Other states like Florida, Montana, Arkansas and North Dakota will hold a similar vote, but on whether cannabis can be used for solely medicinal purposes. A bill like this has never had enough momentum to pass and as such, there are rational arguments being made from both sides of the issue. But now is finally the time. The proposition will better define, and even solidify, a fundamental aspect of California’s cultural identity and economy. 

Rolling Down & Out

The main arguments against Prop 64 stem from the fear of the unknown, illustrating a conservative value of better protecting one’s family and the greater community. 

Regarding wellness, the “No On 64” campaign cites a report from UC San Francisco stating that the proposal “contains minimal protections for public health.” It is argued that legalizing marijuana also increases the chances that people will drive under the influence and thus be a danger on the roads. This fear against recreational marijuana use is justified to some extent, as driving accidents involving marijuana use have increased in Colorado. However, the data supporting this outcome is not exactly clear-cut. Furthermore, an early study on marijuana use and its effects on driving found that “impairment is typically manifested by subjects decreasing their driving speed.” Personally, I would much rather have people drive slower on the roads than the opposite.

Some also claim that the potential expansion of marijuana use concerns addiction. However, Michael Taffe, associate professor at the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, found that dependence on marijuana is around nine percent whereas other drugs have dependencies in the double digits.

The Case for Cannabis

Outweighing arguments that California needs more time to formulate a better plan for legalization, though, are the plentiful benefits that Prop 64 will bring. Most importantly, marijuana will be decriminalized and Californians will no longer be incarcerated for minor marijuana-related drug offenses. This is an encouraging potential development especially for communities of color, who are disproportionately targeted for drug arrests and face punishments far greater than is deserved. Michelle Alexander, a law professor and civil rights activist, points out that “mass incarceration operates as a tightly networked system of laws, policies, customs, and institutions that operate collectively to ensure the subordinate status of a group defined largely by race.” Decriminalizing marijuana will hopefully go a long way in helping to deconstruct some of these institutional barriers. Having fewer people in prison is good for individual communities, puts less burden on taxpayers and benefits the state of California as a whole. Prop 64 is supported by California’s chapter of the NAACP, the California Medical Association, former Facebook President Sean Parker, Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

Additionally, marijuana will be treated similarly to alcohol, and the drug will be heavily controlled, regulated and taxed. The state Finance Director Michael Cohen noted that this will reduce taxpayer costs by tens of millions annually. It will also raise as much as $1 billion in new taxes which will go towards teen drug prevention, law enforcement training and supporting the communities most negatively impacted by the the current legal treatment of marijuana and those convicted for its use.Criticisms against the proposition are justified. I don’t like every detail about the proposal but compromise is necessary, and, all in all, additional tax revenue and decriminalization will be immeasurably beneficial to the state of California. This alone grossly outweighs the potential harm that may be caused.

Photo courtesy of Public Domain Pictures


Photo Caption: View of tourists riding on elephants into Jaipur’s Amber Fort

By Page Law
Contributing Writer


I began to think about international tourism and how it operates as a site of power in relation to difference as a result of my two-week tourist experience last summer in India, where I was simultaneously privileged and dismembered, gazing and gazed upon as a result of my (privileged) positionality as a Korean/American who surprised both locals and other tourists by speaking relatively good American English and consequently challenging preconceived ideas of citizenship in regards to race and ethnicity. As I processed my personal impetus for travel, I grappled with unequal power relations among the locals, myself, and other tourists, who unsettlingly sought to “document” locals and places through photography as if they were historical vestiges. This project is a response to my travel experience, ultimately a recognition that tourism is “characterized by a transfer of images, signs, symbols, power, money, goods, people, and services” and that not all tourists are equal (Bruner 191).

Much of the literature discussing tourism has addressed it as a “leisure-time activity engaged in by choice and for its own sake” (Van Den Berghe 5). Although often seen as overlapping with other forms of travel that appear to be less dedicated to pleasure, tourism is infused with gendered and racialized ideas about “adventure, pleasure, and the exotic…deemed ‘private’ and thus kept off stage in debates about international politics” (Enloe 20). I discuss international tourism in order to highlight how the “private” is political and how tourism is continuing to engage in unequal relations of power in international politics. In this essay, I explore what Urry calls the “ tourist gaze” of those from the Global North in relation to ethnic tourism – the search for the authentic other in the Global South through which “the native…becomes…the spectacle” (Van Den Berge 5).

I argue that the tourist gaze in ethnic tourism produces the tourist and the other as differently raced, classed, gendered, and sexualized subjects through representations informed by Orientalist discourses. The construction of different subjects occurs as a result of the pleasure in consuming the commodity of the other and ultimately reflects the unequal power relations between the Global North and the Global South, or according to Stuart Hall, the West and the Rest. I conclude by exploring the implications and suggesting possibilities for subverting the tourist gaze.

Impetus for the Construction and Consumption of the Other

First world affluence has produced “conditions of work and life [in] such [a way] that leisure activity is prized” (Crick 25). The establishment of high levels of disposable income, especially made possible in the post-Fordism or flexible production era, has enabled mass tourism of bodies from the Global North to places in the Global South, which have ironically actually produced much of the surpluses that established Western affluence. Leisure and class privilege are exercised and expressed through the touring of places in the Global South that have already been “discovered (or created) by entrepreneurs, packaged and then marketed” (Crick 16). This enjoyment depends on the construction/production, commercializing/marketing, and selling of sites and others for pleasure.

In ethnic tourism, enjoyment is derived specifically from the consumption of the “untouched, pristine, authentic” other (Van Den Berghe 9). The Other becomes a commodity to be consumed for enjoyment through the tourist gaze, which is constructed through the difference between the “ordinary/everyday and the extraordinary” as well as the self and the other (Urry 1). The tourist gaze operates through binary relations of two opposing elements and consequently flattens difference and diversity in order to accommodate a sense of “us” from a sense of “them.” If the gaze is a visual experience, then places are chosen to be gazed upon due to an anticipation of intense pleasures or the enjoyment in consuming the commodity of the Other (Urry 3). However, as previously mentioned, this anticipation of enjoyment or pleasure relies on the representation of places and people.

Anticipation of pleasure through tourism occurs through the pretour narrative, in which temporary travelers have some preconceptions about the destination and its inhabitants (Bruner 22). Many of these narratives are often constructed and sustained through stereotypes or the collapsing of complex differences (“West and the Rest” 215) and “through a variety of non-tourist practices, such as film, TV, literature…which construct and reinforce [the] gaze” (Urry 3). Popular culture, such as films and TV, becomes a site that reflects, produces, and maintains the hegemonic discourse of othered, exotic bodies and places worth gazing upon. However, the discourses that inform pretour narratives and are reflected in popular culture rely on unequal power relations in regards to knowledge production. These pretour narratives can only exist due to the ways in which the West has been able to produce and maintain hegemonic knowledge on the rest of the world. These discourses about sites of enjoyment and the exotic other have a long history that can be traced to Orientalism. In short, pretour narratives are only one of the sites in which the tourist gaze produces differentiated subjects in regards to the tourist and the local.

Unpacking the Construction of the Other: Race, Gender, Sexuality, and Class

The tourist gaze has been able to produce the tourist and the local as different subjects in regards to gender, race, and class in part because access to leisure and tourism has largely been “conditioned by gender, race, [class, and]…location” (Shaw 19). For example, ideas of gender in regards to the home had largely privileged (certain kinds of) men to leave the home in order to engage in adventures and tourism while preventing (certain kinds of) women from leaving the home. However, the tourist gaze has produced a relation of imagined difference that can be traced to the discourse of Orientalism, which according to Edward Said:

Is never far from…the idea of Europe, a collective notion identifying ‘us’
Europeans as against all ‘those’ non-Europeans, and indeed it can be argued
that the major component in European culture is precisely what made that
culture hegemonic both in and outside Europe: the idea of European identity
as a superior one in comparison with all the non-European peoples and
cultures (7).

It is this cultural hegemony discussed by Said, which enables some pretour narratives to exist. It is also Orientalism that produces the tourist and the local as differently raced, classed, gendered, sexualized subjects: the tourist becomes coded as a masculine explorer who subjugates the feminine primitive savage. Certainly discourses surrounding ethnic tourism have parallels with the colonial discourse of “exploration, conquest and domination…strongly marked by gender distinctions and [drawing] much of its subconscious force from sexual imagery” (Hall 210 Modernity). Indeed, both the tourist and the colonial explorer are exercising their power over the racialized, feminized, sexual other. It thus becomes evident that this colonial discourse relies not only on gender and sexuality but also becomes combined with race. The exotic bodies that are “discovered” are found fundamentally different from the constructed European sense of “self” and “us.”

As Orientalism has produced new knowledge about “new” bodies and informed pretour narratives, tourists from the Global North seek in the Global South “a figment of their imagination – the exotic, the erotic, the happy savage…the trope of the vanishing primitive, the pastoral allegory, the quest for origins” (Bruner 191). Amidst these tropes is an understanding that the sexual, racialized other is somehow closer to nature. Sexuality, according to Stuart Hall, “was a powerful element in the fantasy which the West constructed, and the ideas of sexual innocence and experience, sexual domination and submissiveness, play out a complex dance in the discourse of the “West and the Rest” (The West and the Rest 210). Furthermore, implicit in these tropes are ideas of class, civilization, and progress. The exotic, primitive other is constructed as poor and backwards. Although Claire Jean Kim writes in an American context, she reveals that: “the term ‘underclass’ is conspicuously nonracial or colorblind on the surface, [but] it is the quintessential example of racial code, conjuring up images of Blacks” (Kim 121). Ideas of class and related terms like “poor” and “unclean” are already racialized and suggest binaries like uncivilized/civilized, poor/wealthy, and black/white.

Representing the Other

In ethnic tourism, the construction of the other informed by Orientalism can only be maintained through the politics of representation, which “fixes” the other through relations of difference. Representation relies on the “link between visibility and power…[as certain] human subjects [become] great spectacles (“Spectacle of the Other”195). Photography and narrative mastery are two of the mechanisms through which the tourist gaze can fix differences between the tourists and the spectacle of the other as well as reinforce violent stereotypes regarding race and poverty in less developed countries.

Photography produces knowledge about subjects and consequently engages in a relation of power as “to have knowledge of an object is in part to have power, even if only momentarily over it” (Urry 139). Photography’s power is derived from the perception that it “seems to be a means of transcribing [or reflecting] reality” (Urry 139) when in reality it constructs meaning of what is being photographed. Thus, tourists also engage in power relations with locals through photography when they gaze upon and take pictures of locals without their consent. The very act of taking pictures without invitation is a means of exerting power as well as representing the other.

Tourists searching for the authentic other can also achieve representation through their narrative mastery in which they “fix meaning, encapsulate and control the other, to stop motion and time, to exert power” (Bruner 195). Partially because the authentic other is voiceless and powerless in relation to how they are represented and remembered in the West or the Global North, tourists are able to “bring back a disembodied, decontextualized, sanitized, hypothetical Other, one they can possess and control through the stories they tell about how the souvenirs were purchased and the photographs taken” (Bruner 194). Indeed, for tourists in search of the authentic other, the tour is never over so long as they continue to engage in narratives of their temporary travels and discussions of exotic others.

Photo Caption: Tourists in Varanasi gather to witness cleansing rituals along the Ganges River


Global accumulation of capital has enabled the Western elite to “travel to the margins in the Third World, to the borderzone between civilized selves and the Exotic Other” (Burner 193). However, capital’s search for and construction of even cheaper and more productive labor have facilitated the movement of these othered bodies to the core and peripheries of the West. Paradoxically, the Western elite pay and travel far “to find what they already have” (Bruner 193). And ultimately, it is the anticipation of pleasure from gazing upon, consuming, and representing the commodity and spectacle of the other that continues to incentivize ethnic tourism.

Thus the tourist gaze of temporary travelers from the Global North in the margins of the Global South importantly mirrors structures of socioeconomic power and dominance. The unequal looking and power relations between the Global North and the Global South have ultimately enabled the West to produce and maintain hegemonic knowledge on the rest of the world. This knowledge in regards to ethnic tourism is maintained through coercion and consent: “what for the tourists is a zone of leisure and exotification, for the natives is a site of work and cash income” so long as the locals perform what the tourists expect to see (Bruner 192). Just as tourism makes certain representations seem “commonsense,” there is room for subversion and resistance. Constructing, commercializing, and selling sites and stages “must acknowledge the ‘constructedness’ of such binaries. This is why travel-tourism makes such binaries vulnerable while propping them up” (Minga and Oakes 13).

After disagreeing with a few white European tourists about their sense of entitlement to “document” locals, I could not afford to be unconscious of my tourist gaze in order to not commit some kind of epistemic violence throughout my two-week trip in India. I took a picture with a “snake charmer” outside the Amber Fort in Jaipur in order to highlight how the figure of the snake charmer caters to Western expectations of India. After processing my relationship to and investment in specific pretour narratives, I started to wonder whether tourism is inherently violent and what subverting and resisting commonsense representations look like. I have called attention to the politics of representation evident in ethnic tourism and shared my personal experience as a tourist in India as part of my intervention against ethnic tourism. With so much at stake in how the way bodies are represented affects the way they are treated, how do you imagine your intervention against the construction of the spectacle of the other?

Images Courtesy of the Author

Works Cited

Bruner, Edward M. Culture on Tour. Chicago: University of Chicago, 2005. Print.

Crick, Malcolm. “Representations of International Tourism.” The Sociology of Tourism. Ed. Yiorgos Apostolopoulos, Stella Leivadi, and Andrew Yiannakis. London: Routledge, 1996. 15-50. Print.

Enloe, Cynthia. Bananas, Beaches, and Bases. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000. Print.

Hall, Stuart. “The Spectacle of the ‘Other.’” Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. Ed. Stuart Hall. London: Sage Publications. 1997. 223-290. Print.

Hall, Stuart. “The West and the Rest: Discourse and Power.” Modernity. Ed. Stuart Hall.

Held, David, Don Hubert, and Kenneth Thompson. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers, 1996. 185-225. Print.

Kim, Claire J. “The Racial Triangulation of Asian Americans.” Politics & Society 27.1 (March 1999): 105-138.

Minga, Claudia, Tim Oakes. Travels in Paradox. Oxford: Roman and Littlefield Publishers, 2006. Print.

Said, Edward. Orientalism. New York: Vintage Books, 1979. Print.

Shaw, Gareth and Allan M. Williams. Critical Issues in Tourism. Oxforrd: Blackwell Publishers 2002. Print.

Urry, John. The Tourist Gaze. London: Sage Publications, 1990. Print.

Van Den Berghe, Pierre L. “Introduction: Why Study Ethnic Tourism?” Quest for the Other. Seattle: University of Washington, 1994. 5-20. Print.


Turkey Should Not Have a Path to EU Membership

By Ari Kattan
Staff Writer

Turkey’s recent behavior in reaction to a French law outlawing the denial of the Armenian genocide should give pause to even the staunchest supporters of Turkish EU membership. In addition to the country’s failure to come to terms with its past and accept responsibility for its actions, as Germany has done, Turkey’s Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and his Islamist Justice and Development Party (AKP) have gone on a diplomatic rampage, making outlandish statements and suspending military, economic and political ties with France. This is not the behavior of a responsible, Western-leaning political leadership; it is the behavior of a leadership interested in flaming nationalist sentiment and moving its country away from Europe and its values and interests. This trend can be seen in a number of areas, the spat with France only being the most recent. Not only are there structural problems with Turkey joining the EU, but the direction the country seems to be going effectively puts the last nail in the coffin of the case for Turkish EU membership.

Putting aside Turkey’s behavior under the AKP, there is a laundry list of issues that, to put it mildly, seriously complicate Turkish EU membership. First and foremost, Turkey borders Syria, Iraq and Iran. Would it be wise for the European Union to border these countries? Second, Turkey has a large population of almost 80 million and the seventeenth largest economy in the world. If it gained membership to the EU, it would be the most populous country in the Union by 2020, meaning it would also have the most members in the European Parliament. Thus, the EU’s only Muslim-majority state would be among its most influential, which is bound to cause problems with the rest of the secular and Christian Europe. Contrary to how many see this argument, refusing Turkey on the basis of its being Muslim isn’t Islamophobic, just as disagreeing with Mexico becoming a U.S. state wouldn’t be anti-Mexican. It simply points out that there are cultural and social differences that would complicate Turkey’s successful assimilation into the EU. Thirdly, Turkey has ongoing conflicts in Cyprus and with its Kurdish minority, of which the latter has claimed more than 40,000 lives since 1984. If Turkey were to join the EU, the EU would inherit these problems. Lastly, Turkey does not have a human rights record on par with what is expected of a EU member. It places severe restrictions on its Kurdish minority, including banning the Kurdish language from being taught in schools. Turkey currently has more journalists in prison than China does.

Many argue that with the exception of Turkey’s geography, these problems can, in theory, be resolved. But that is not the direction the country is headed. The most telling signal, apart from the increased human rights abuses by the AKP, is Erdogan’s foreign policy. Erdogan has been shifting Turkey away from a more Western-oriented foreign policy and towards a foreign policy aligned with some of the West’s most dangerous enemies. He has consistently undermined U.S. and European attempts to stop Iran’s nuclear program and, until recently, was personal friends with Syria’s Bashar al-Assad. He has also sabotaged relations with Israel, and has been vilifying Israel in an attempt to court extremist voters within Turkey and to increase his regional popularity in the Arab world. Erdogan even recently hosted the leader of Hamas in Gaza, Ismael Haniyeh, where he was received with a standing ovation in the Turkish parliament.

Turkey’s problems are too serious and too many to make it a viable contender for EU membership. And even if they weren’t, the country’s current leadership does not inspire confidence that Turkey is moving in a direction compatible with the norms of the European Union.

The European Union should offer Turkey a viable long-term path to membership on the basis of economic benefits, domestic reforms, resolution of territorial disputes and international security

By Megha Ram
Staff Writer

Although Turkey is poorer than the average European country, many economic factors indicate that Turkey is advancing in the economic sphere and will be able to economically integrate into the EU in the future. Turkey established ties with the EU in 1995 with the signing of the Customs Union agreement, which led to significant investment by European companies in the Turkish economy and subsequently brought the two economies closer together (Yesilada). Furthermore, Turkey has the seventeenth largest economy in the world, a strong private sector and strong levels of growth (World Factbook). Thus, Turkey should be offered a viable path to membership because of its geostrategic position, which enables it to act as a bridge between European markets and Central Asia, and because of its strengthening economic position.

Naysayers decry the rise of a mildly Islamist party in Turkish government as inherently negative to EU aspirations, however this argument ignores the fundamental Europeanizing reforms that have been initiated under the Justice and Development Party (AKP). The AKP continues to strengthen its ties with the West and liberalize Turkey’s democracy; it has relaxed restrictions on freedom of expression, reduced the role of military in Turkey’s government and increased the independence of the judiciary (Phillips). Furthermore, Turkey has taken steps to increase minority rights, specifically for the Kurdish population, including the facilitation of Kurdish-language education and the rights of the Kurdish media (Phillips). Although these are steps in the correct direction, human rights and minority rights in Turkey must still be dramatically improved, and a path to EU membership is a way to ensure that they will. This is because liberalizing reforms have destabilizing consequences for Turkish society, and will only continue if Turkey is offered a viable path to membership in the EU — which would effectively counter the destabilizing effects of the reforms.

Another benefit of legitimate accession negotiations is that they promote the peaceful resolution of longstanding territorial disputes in the Mediterranean region (Robins). In 1999 Turkey became a EU candidate country, and these positive relations influenced Turkey’s decision to adapt to the EU Acquis and work with Greece to resolve disputes (Yesilada). Furthermore, in 2002 Turkey advocated for Cyprus’s reunification, even though it had to distance itself from the Turkish Cypriot government in the process (Phillips). Therefore, history demonstrates that EU membership has been an effective incentive for the resolution of territorial disputes in the region.

According to the EU, major international security concerns include unstable societies and terrorism, as opposed to traditional state threats (EU Website). Turkey’s geopolitical position would enable it to extend EU influence to countries in the Middle East and play a central role in stabilizing the region and mitigating terrorist threats. In the past, Turkey has been a staunch ally of the West, and EU membership would further emphasize the compatibility of a predominantly Muslim nation with secular and democratic values. On the other hand, a spurned Turkey will look eastward towards the Middle East and may slowly lose its secular and democratic nature, contributing to the region’s instability rather than countering it.

Turkey’s membership will enable the EU to fight terrorism, mitigate territorial disputes in the Mediterranean and be a stabilizing force in the Middle East. Conversely, rejection would hamper domestic reforms in Turkey and deprive the EU of an increasingly strong economic and military partner. Thus, in the interest of a safer and more prosperous world, Turkey must be offered a viable path to EU membership.

Works Cited

“Foreign and Security Policy.” EUROPA – EU Website. European Union, 27 Jan. 2012. Web. 31 Jan. 2012. http://europa.eu/pol/cfsp/index_en.htm

Phillips, David L. “Turkey’s Dreams of Accession.” Foreign Affairs 83.5 (2004): 86-97. JSTOR. Web. 31 Jan. 2012. http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/20034069.pdf

Robins, Philip. “Confusion at Home, Confusion Abroad: Turkey between Copenhagen and Iraq.” International Affairs 79.3 (2003): 547-66. JSTOR. Web. 30 Jan. 2012. http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/3569362.pdf?acceptTC=true

The World Factbook 2009. Washington, DC: Central Intelligence Agency, 2009.

Yesilada, Birol A. “Turkey’s Candidacy for EU Membership.” The Middle East Journal 56.1 (2002): 94-111. JSTOR. Web. 30 Jan. 2012. http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/4329722.pdf

Image by Flickr User unaoc, used under a Creative Commons License.