Photo above by Humayunn N A Peerzaada

At the core of Slumdog Millionaire is the question: Have our lives already been written before us, or do we ultimately influence our destiny? The answers to the question unfold against a vibrant and colorful, but often raw geographical and human landscape in which India is as much a character as the protagonist, Jamal.

At last week’s Golden Globes, director Danny Boyle (whose past work includes The Beach , a polarizing film amongst travelers), picked up the best drama and best director awards for his tale of Indian slum dweller Jamal Malik, who finds himself one question away from winning the TV quiz show, “Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?”

Photo above by babasteve

But before possibly walking away with the prize money, the nation’s hearts, and even the love of his life, Jamal has to endure torture at the hands of Mumbai’s brutal police, who believe he cheated at the game. The suspicious inspector asks, “How could a slumdog know the answers to those questions?”

The answer: Destiny.

“I knew I’d find you in the end. It’s our destiny.”

Under interrogation, Jamal tells the inspector his incredible life story. None of the young boy’s experiences from childhood to this moment, sitting handcuffed in a chair, are of his own doing. In fact, all Jamal ever did was simply survive as life propelled him from one life threatening or life affirming experience to the next. As we come to realise, though, there was greater meaning to it all.

Underlying the story of Jamal’s life are questions that affect us all: Are our lives really mapped out for us? Does everything happen for a reason? Surely our lives aren’t pre-determined; we shape them through our decisions. Choice, not chance…right?

These are questions with particular resonance for travelers, who know that the momentary decision to go one way or the other will change one’s journey– and even one’s life–and nothing is likely to be the same again. We can’t leave such meaningful decisions to the heavens; we’re in control. Or are we?

Photo above by Meanest Indian

A Nation of Apparent Contradictions

You’ll ponder these questions throughout Jamal’s story, but the real subtext of this film is India. Danny Boyle’s visceral film-making drops you right into the streets. Filming hand-held, guerrilla style, on location, Boyle conveys the the beauty and extremes of India–from dilapidated Mumbai shantytowns and endless garbage-strewn landfills to exhilarating train journeys and colorful mass riverside laundrettes– in an intimate way.

‘You don’t take [Mumbai] for granted, ” Boyle said in an interview promoting the film. “You know nothing about how it assaults your senses. For a dynamic film-maker like myself, it’s everything I could ever want.”

That “everything” includes characters. By setting Jamal and his narrative among the country’s lowlifes, degenerates, innocents, and angels, Boyle ensures that Jamal’s experiences shock and inspire viewers in equal measure.

“I think one of the reasons the film seems to work for people is that it is very extreme,” Boyle said. “That’s what they have there. You’ve got to portray it as an extreme experience. Everything is full-on.”

“It’s a tough place! There’s a lot of poor people living there leading very tough lives. You’ve got portray that accurately. There are beggars who have been crippled deliberately to make them better beggars. You’ve got to get your head around that.”

“You get it rougher in India at the moment,” concluded Boyle, Empire. “….[I]t allows you to tell a story like this.”

Photo above by AshuGarg

Final Answer?

Beyond raising questions of destiny and beautifully portraying Mumbai’s darker side, “Slumdog Millionaire” is also likely to help travelers reflect on their own experiences of India.

Welcoming the world / Photo KelvinHu

“I see you are travelling in China at the moment. So what about the ethics of that? ” read the cheeky comment on my previous article.

Despite my initial belief that it was raised only to diminish the article’s argument, the comment preyed on my mind.

As an online journalist I accept comment and opinion, some fair, some disapproving, and often, as it seemed here, both. I consider myself a responsible traveler so I panicked. Perhaps it was true.

Was I committing a heinous crime simply by visiting a culture that has fascinated me for years?

Not that I’m oblivious to China’s crimes against humanity and the world but I wanted to see for myself. That’s the beauty of travel; you can discover these things in situ. I wanted to read about the politics having been there, and experienced Chinese lives up close, in order to fully understand.

I decided that as a Westerner, to neglect the people of China (all billion of them) over the crimes of their country would be to commit a crime of misguided punishment and ultimately hypocrisy.

And as I travelled through China, reading about their problems and criticisms, I realised that despite China’s human rights and environmental crimes being vast and various, none of them are new or even unique to the world’s newest superpower.

What follows is certainly not an exhaustive list of China’s crimes; I have merely skimmed the surface. And although it may appear that I am singling out the US for much criticism, this is not the case; much like China I have simply found them an easy target.

Questionable Human Rights

China’s human rights records are reportedly improving thanks to greater transparency in the country but there major issues remain.

Soldiers in formation / Photo Steve Webel

There are still reports of untried prisoners from the Tiananmen Square massacre in detention.

Also a “Re-education Through Labour” policy has seen the detention of possibly hundreds of thousands of people, each one at a high risk of torture or ill-treatment. But China is not alone.

The US is currently fielding similar criticisms resulting from the suspected torture and ill-treatment of long-term detainees without trial or charge in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

And of course there is the Bush administration’s current rendition policy of illegal apprehension and transfer for unlawful detention and torture, which many of their western allies in European states are suspected of supporting.

China is also believed to be the world leader in the use of the death penalty with an unknown number of executions each year, although they have committed to a goal of complete abolition. Meanwhile the US currently has 3,264 prisoners on death row.

The New Super-Polluter

Hangzhou pollution blankets the city / Photo sinosplice

China is ushering in a new wave of modernity thanks to huge investments from western businesses keen to take advantage of cheap labour and tax cuts. This has resulted in environmental issues and questions of western morality.

China now produces huge amounts of pollution. And the residents, now financially better off, seek luxuries like cars and cheap airfares in huge quantities. This behaviour has angered the Western world. But is this not a case of the pot and the kettle?

We have exported to China our most polluting industries, financially exploiting them, and then complain when they pollute as we have guilt free for the past century.

Further, Western businesses are bending over backwards to accommodate the Chinese government’s requests in order to trade, effectively helping them achieve the government’s controversial means.

“Some, like Google, have argued that despite having to limit access to the internet, they are contributing to an overall increase of freedom in China,” Naomi Klein commented in a recent article.

“This isn’t an unfortunate cost of doing business in China: It’s the goal of doing business in China. ‘Come help us spy!’ the Chinese government has said to the world. And the world’s leading technology companies are eagerly answering the call.”

And it isn’t just Google; consider also Cisco, Microsoft and Yahoo, who have all assisted in creating the “Great Firewall of China”.

So while many are boycotting the country, effectively abandoning the country’s people and denying them contact with the outside world, they continue to support the home-grown businesses that really are playing a hand in oppressing the Chinese, further denying them contact with the outside world.

The Tibet Issue

China’s treatment of Tibet has seen condemnation throughout the world.

Most recently the Chinese authorities used extreme force to squash protesting Tibetan monks resulting in an unknown death toll, although many suspect it reached 250.

But also this year, exiled spiritual leader the Dalai Lama extended the olive branch, insisting his people did not want to break away entirely from China. He also said China was changing through “wider contact with outside world.”

Wider contact that can be encouraged and supported through travel.

Extend the Olive Branch

I’m not exonerating China of their crimes and I’m certainly not trying to belittle worthy causes and battles against tyranny.

I have simply tried to illustrate that the actions of governments, politicians and companies are not necessarily crimes of the people, and they should not be punished as such.

It would be unfair to deny the country’s people, the real sufferers, the opportunities afforded from the positive Western investment of travelers feeding into and taking away from the country stories and experiences.

The Chinese people, much like us, are simply enjoying the opportunities afforded to them in the 21st century. So just as we continue to travel to Europe and the US, and use Microsoft and Google, why should we not travel to China?

Dispense with our self-righteous standpoint and witness for ourselves this evolving and fascinating land.

What are your thoughts of traveling to China? Share in the comments!

Lieutenant-General Thein Sein.

Last week BBC Worldwide, the commercial arm of the BBC, entered Burma Campaign UK’s “Dirty List” of 154 companies they claim directly or indirectly finance Burma’s brutal military dictatorship.

The reason for the inclusion?

Thanks to their majority stake in Lonely Planet, BBC Worldwide are now responsible for the Lonely Planet guide to Burma, undermining the democracy movement’s calls for a tourist boycott.

But do the BBC, and the 30 other tourism groups listed, deserve to be thrown in alongside nefarious oil and gas companies?

London-based pressure group Burma Campaign UK, believes so, “Our reviews represent the views of the Burmese democracy movement,” says, Campaign Officer Johnny Chatterton. “By going to Burma on holiday tourists are paying for the military machine that keeps the regime in power.”

Brutal Regime’s Tourism Links

Since 1962 Burma has been controlled by a military dominated government. Current leader Senior General Than Shwe identified tourism as a vital income source and, having used forced labour to build tourist facilities, now profits from many hotels and airports.

Half this money is spent maintaining military strength, not educating or caring for Burma’s people.

In response, the leader of the democratically elected National League for Democracy Aung San Suu Kyi, now under house arrest without trial for over 12 years, requested tourists avoid visiting the country.

“Burma will be here for many years,” Suu Kyi said. “So tell your friends to visit us later. Visiting now is tantamount to condoning the regime.”

Currently, thanks to this unsettled political landscape, only 750,000 tourists visit Burma annually, compared to the millions who flock to neighbouring Thailand.

Rough Guide respects Suu Kyi’s request and refuses to publish a Burma guide. But BBC Worldwide, Burma Campaign UK argues, undermines Suu Kyi, effectively defending tourism to Burma.

A Brutal Regime

BBC Worldwide have stressed that their decision to publish a guide to Burma does not represent support for the current regime. It, they say, provides information and lets readers decide for themselves.

Lonely Planet guides pride themselves in being independently written, offering impartial advice without any political affiliations. In the Burma guide they choose not to specifically state which hotels are regime owned, (no comprehensive list is currently available), but they do advise that such establishments are easily identified

“The first chapter of the guide presents all the issues and includes the views of Aung San Suu Kyi and the Burma Campaign UK,” says BBC Worldwide Director of Corporate Affairs Jennie Allen.

“For travelers who decide to visit Burma, it provides information which, if followed, will help maximise support for the local population and minimise the prospect of money going to the military regime.”

There is no arguing the regime is indeed brutal and shouldn’t be supported.

In September 2007 Buddhist monks protesting against government were fired upon by security forces resulting in many deaths. More recently, obstruction of aid relief following Cyclone Nargis undoubtedly resulted in additional suffering to the country’s people.

But is discouraging independent travel the correct course of action?

The Moral Question

Voices for Burma, an independent international NGO believe that responsible, small scale tourism benefiting local communities and raising awareness has a place in Burma.

Isolation, they claim, will only make the military government stronger and the people poorer.

Hannah James, editor of Real Travel magazine, agrees, “Independent travelers return with tales of locals desperate for visitors to come and an understanding of a country that the dictatorship just won’t allow to escape otherwise.

“If we stop going, are we turning our back on the military dictatorship or on the Burmese people themselves?”

Johnny Chatterton disagrees, “I would say that the people of Burma – represented by their politicians and trade unions – are the best qualified to judge whether tourists can play a positive role in their country.”

Some argue that the Burmese regime is no more brutal than those of other tourist destinations. But the reality is that Burma is different. Human right breaches can be directly connected to the tourism industry and the resulting revenue is helping the regime continue.

Letting The Reader Decide

BBC Worldwide’s guide, which they say will continue to be published, simply presents the information, leaving the decision its readers.

Even Rough Guide, in supporting the request for a tourist boycott, stresses it is a personal choice for individual travelers to make.

“We’re here to inspire and encourage travel, but we try to do so in as responsible a way as possible,” says Hannah James.

“The independent traveler will go to Burma if they want to, and it’s our job to best equip them to deal with the experience in a suitable manner rather than ignore them, and therefore the Burmese people, entirely.”

Readers of Lonely Planet are generally knowledgeable of political situations and fully aware of ethical travel. Their journeys tends to benefit local communities and small businesses first and foremost.

Ultimately, in publishing the Lonely Planet guide to Burma it is difficult to argue that the BBC Worldwide is supporting the Than Shwe’s regime.

Travelers will decide on their own merit the ethical issues of traveling to this controversial but no doubt beautiful country. And hopefully they will help by either spreading knowledge or financial support.

What is your stance on the controversy? Share your thoughts in the comments!