I hate tourism. I really hate it. I think there are few things I hate more. First of all, we should not even call it tourism, I mean that really is a misleading, or at least not accurate enough word. I prefer to use “gawking” but I understand that since I am the only one who uses that, I will have to type tourism throughout this post so as not to confuse people. Anyway, there are many levels on which you can criticize tourism, perhaps the easiest and most “scientific” would be one a economic basis. I will go into that, but I should point out at the beginning that the main reservation I have about tourism is the extent it is connected to racism.
Economically tourism acts as another form of neo-imperialist exploitation, and also of capitalist exploitation. It leaves countries which depend on tourism for a large part of it’s national income, more or less at the mercy of the western countries where most tourists come from. Also, very much like foreign investment, tourism favors countries which are “stable,” friendly with the west, capitalist, and essentially this means a brutal dictatorship which is subservient to the west, like the fucking regime of mubarak. You can also see the impact this has on the population of countries which are heavily frequented by tourists, and who rely on them for a significant portion of their national income. People are often kicked out of their homes, or their land is appropriated, or barriers are built up around their neighbourhoods so as not to “spoil” or “contaminate” the atmosphere for the foreign, mostly western, tourists who frequent said country.
These kind of things are mentioned in the media, surely not as much as they should, but the other aspect of tourism, which is perhaps worse, is rarely written about. I am of course referring to the extreme racism and paternalism of tourists when they visit another country, especially if we are talking about western tourists visiting countries in the global south (or the so-called “third” world). Why is this? The answer is simple: race. I mean think about it, “tourism” really just means a bunch of bourgeois foreigners gawking at the “native.” And this is even strengthened and worsened depending on race. I mean to say that western tourists in egypt will of course be much more condescending than say arab, african, latin american, or asian tourists would be. This stays true even for very slight differences. Take for instance Sicily (since sicilians look more like north africans than north italians), where I was a few months ago. The northern italians who come to sicily also gawk, etc, just like the western tourists who come to egypt. Thus even inside one country, the north italian racism is acted out in Sicily through the perverse oggling of the sicilians by the north italians. There is also much evidence of the colonial and imperialistic nature of tourism, just think of how the western colonists and imperial officials of the past acted in the countries they were colonizing: did they know the language? NO. did they know the country? NO. did they know anything true about the culture? NO. did they have any respect for the “natives” of the country? NO. did they act as visitors, guests, in a country they were not tied to by anything but the desire to exploit? NO, of course not! Now for the real question: is this exactly how most western tourists still behave to this day? YES!
Now for something no one seems to ever agree with me about: objects. Can anyone deny that the focus of tourism is mainly put on inanimate objects? In regards to people, fuck them, no, we just want to oggle at objects, and if we see any people it will only be to oggle them like they are animals, like they are objects. In egypt for example foreigners come to look at a variety of objects, the pyramids, the stuff in the egyptian museum, various ruins, etc… In italy it is the Colosseum, the Vatican, all the various museums of art, etc…in france it is the Eiffel tower, the Louvre, the Champs Elysée, etc…So in other words tourism is first and foremost about looking at, walking in, etc, inanimate objects and places with no commendable aim in sight. And I must say that from my observations of these tourists, in many different countries, they really like that stuff , and there is no doubt at all that they care more about the safety of these things than they do about the well-being of the people who inhabit said country.
Now I personally view such things as old roman ruins, pharonic ruins, etc, as useless rocks which I can’t understand why anyone in their right mind would spend so much time on unless they were archaeologists, historians, etc, who actually know what they are looking at and who intend to do something with the knowledge they gain. In regard to other objects, I feel it would be appropriate to relate an example from my own life: when I was younger I remember going to see a lot of the famous art work in Italy, like the Pietà , the statue David, the creation of Adam in the sistine chapel, etc…, and I was repeatedly told that I was very lucky to be seeing these things. I never understood it though, and I still don’t, I mean anyone can look at a picture of these famous art works online, very detailed pictures even, which are really all you need to see and study these art works if that it what you want to do. I mean if the emphasis which is placed upon seeing these artistic works in person was really just to be able to see and study them, there would be no need to travel since you can see them just as well on the internet in your home! The real reason I feel is more this: its basically a primitive bourgeois status symbol to be able to say “I was in Italy and I saw the Pieta in person, [now insert a long, meaningless dialogue where the speaker makes many points about this work which may or may not be figments of their imagination intended to impress].”
Now I understand that my view of artistic pieces and historical “artifacts” and really old pieces of rock, is somewhat of an extreme position, but you have to agree that tourism is much too focused on these material objects, which it makes little rational sense to spend money to see in the first place. Finally, this is the point I want to make: why can’t travel to another country not be about oggling the “natives,” or acting paternalistically like you own a certain foreign country although you have nothing to do with it, or placing higher value on inanimate objects than on the human beings who are the descendent of the people who produced those objects? Why can’t people travelling to other countries respect the people of these countries and express the genuine, non-condescending, non-racist, and non-paternalist, desire to learn about the people and the country which they are visiting? Why can’t travel to another country broaden peoples minds instead of them keeping inside them the same old racist ideas they always had, but now “justified” by being able to say that they travelled to another country? WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY????!!!!!!
As socialists and decent human beings, we should be categorically against this type of racist, paternalist, bourgeois, materialistic type of travel known as tourism. We should stand in solidarity, sisterhood, and brotherhood with all the peoples of the world, and never ever place material objects over human beings. For a world without borders racism, or oppression!!!!!
