I know about structural racism …. Racial oppression through entrenched systems in society through various public bodies, laws, corporations, the prison system, universities...you name it. But when the idea of racial oppression through use of language was introduced to me, I was suddenly taken aback. I had never though about it before-- was there such a thing as a linguistic hierarchy?

Topping out at an HDI value of 169, the country of Burundi is far from attaining the coveted term of “developed.” Life expectancy sits at a young 44 years, adult literacy is about 60% of the country with school enrollment at just 36% of the population in either primary, secondary, or tertiary education, and Burundi’s GDP per capita wallows at $677. Burundi’s GDP is roughly $39,000 less that that of the US. ‘Why?’ you ask. Burundi has a history of ethnic conflict much like is neighbor Rwanda, it has faced overpopulation problems, and large numbers of Internally Displaced People (IDPs). Germany gained the Burundi region in the partitioning of Africa, however after the First World War the region was given to Belgium. As part of the Belgian Colonial Empire, Burundi remained apart from the clutches of colonialism. In this regard Burundi is unique because it is not a product of colonialism. The country was ruled by a monarchy with a dynasty of kings. Colonial Belgium made a pact with this dynasty in order to control the people, however this dynasty faced numerous coups and a fragile rule as the polarization of ethnic groups continued. Burundi gained independence in 1962, but did not democratically elect a President until 1993. The President was assassinated before his first 100 days in office were finished.

If it happens in Africa it must just be the primal instinct based in tribalism. The mass media has been covering the situation in Kenya as a near exclusive tribal and ethnic conflict without accounting for the history of Kenya's political turmoil and where ethnicity is put into a colonial context. The crisis in Kenya is not solely ethnic and tribal. It is a crisis based on democracy and fueled by past divisions created by British colonial rule.

According to National Geographic, "Every 14 days a language dies. By the year 2100, over half of the more than 7,000 languages spoken on Earth -- many of them never yet recorded -- will likely disappear, taking with them a wealth of knowledge about history, culture, the natural environment, and how the human brain works."

It has always been my opinion that language is free and language is fluid, but those two conditions cannot be met if a language dies. But why are languages dying? Both a difficult and nearly obvious answer exists. Earth is slowly developing into a single civilization. Traditional societies and languages are dying; disappearing and waves of rapid modernization aid in the erosion of tradition. The answer cannot be left at just that however, because there are many reasons, effects, and causes intertwined in the death of a language.

Our long time allies, in this day is added to the long list of former friends, the french have not surprisingly been turned away by the near idiotic foreign policies of the Bush Administration. However, yet again we stand to learn a lesson from the French. The newly elected leader of France, Nicolas Sarkozy, is setting a shining example of a how to build a foreign policy with meaning. Even as the leader of a former colonial power, he is showing the US how to have a policy in the African continent that is not all words. A policy that is not bent on capitalist gains and military conquest in the name of fighting terrorism.

After reading the question of the title, the first country that comes to mind is Somalia and a slew of African countries. Somalia always seems to be at the top of the list and always seems to fit the necessary criteria of a failed state no matter what happens. On returning from Ghana I was talking with my uncle about Africa and was very surprised about his views and ideas especially when came to the subject of conflict. He wondered whether it would have made a difference if there had been no colonizers? Wouldn't Africans still be fighting each other regardless of the colonial 'divide and conquer' strategy? Could it have been worse if the colonizers never 'intervened?'

The noise will make all else inaudible, not even the whisper of, "here they come," will be understood. The noise will be unbearable. TICK TOCK, time is running out to stop and realize the impending doom. CHING, money is flowing so fast and smoothly for anyone to truly care and take notice. RATTA-TATTA, RATTA-TATTA, anti-terrorism gunships will tear through the sky and open fire marking holes on the cratered dirt roads, the cargo shipments will crash and the cheap goods will burn as the bombs fall, KABOOM, refugees will run from camp to camp to avoid the madness of it all, AHHHH, disease will run rampant as systems of infrastructure are torn apart, rebel groups and religious sects will race to claim control before they are cut down in the streets, RATTA-TATTA, buildings and factories will be contructed and destroyed all in the same day, BOOM KA-BLAM, the force of trade will combat the force of military imperialism in the last great epic battle for the African continent.

I am not an African, I am not an American, I am not white, I am not black, I am not a Michigander, I am not a catholic, I am from no country, I am of no nation. I like to consider myself a global citizen, a person of the world. The constructed boundaries of countries hold no bearing in my mind, I see no lines drawn upon the earth and I believe that no falsely imposed blockade of governments can hold me back. We are all people of this world and being so we all hold the same basic hopes and dreams. Everyone wants enough food to eat, clean water to drink, a shelter to be warm or safe, education for themselves and their children, and most importantly to be loved by one another. There are no boundaries when people care.