TSWB

          Fleas dream of buying themselves a dog, and nobodies dream of escaping poverty: that, one magical day, good luck will suddenly rain down on them - will rain down in buckets. But good luck doesn't rain down, yesterday, today, tomorrow or ever. Good luck doesn't even fall in a fine drizzle, no matter how hard the nobodies summon it, even if their left hand is tickling, or if they begin the new day on their right foot, or start the new year with a change of brooms.
        The nobodies: nobody's children, owners of nothing. The nobodies: the no-ones, the nobodied, running like rabbits, dying through life, screwed every which way.
        Who are not, but could be.
        Who don’t speak languages, but dialects.
        Who don’t have religions, but superstitions.
        Who don’t care art, but handicrafts.
        Who don’t have culture, but folklore.
        Who are not human beings, but human resources.
        Who do not have faces, but arms.
        Who do not have names, but numbers.
        Who do not appear in the history of the world, but in the police blotter of the local paper.
        The nobodies, who are not worth the bullet that kills them.
                                                                                    Eduardo Galeano, “The Nobodies”

          Paul Farmer在《Pathologies of Power》這本書的introduction一開始就引述了Eduardo Hughes Galeano (Uruguayan Journalist，The author himself has denied that he is a historian: "I'm a writer obsessed with remembering, with remembering the past of America above all and above all that of Latin America, intimate land condemned to amnesia.")的這一段文字。The nobodies，就像生活在liberalism底下被犧牲的一群人。這一群人，常會被形容為”The little people”，故事所述說的，就是一小群人。Paul Farmer引述了Joseph Mitchell在《McSorley’s Wonderful Saloon》當中的一小段文字來闡述自己對這一小群人的看法，「There are no little people in this book. They are as big as you are, whoever you are.」。我們在討論第三世界國家議題的時候，我們常會被導入類似的錯誤觀念，我們會認為這是一小群人，一小群追趕不上世界進步腳步的人，會把自我與他人分開得很清楚，當討論的基礎建立在一開始就不平等看待群體身分的立場，所得到的，是否也一樣是不平等的呢？

          Paul Farmer在書中一直強調「structural violence」這件事。Johan Galtung (Norwegian Professor，founded the Journal of Peace Research)把暴力定義為「任何使人無法在肉體或是思想上實現他自身潛力的限制。」這種「限制」也就是我們這裡所強調的「傷害」。 「直接暴力」，(殺戳、殘害、肉體折磨等)和與直接暴力有關的各種壓迫(監禁、管制、奴役)，是造成社會、政治恐懼的最直接原因，也是最赤裸裸的暴力形式。社會越現代化，「直接暴力」就越為「結構暴力」所代替。「結構暴力」是通過現代社會的政治、社會和經濟體制來起作用的，它並不需要直接施加於暴力物件的肉體。Galtung把「結構暴力」總結為四種表現：剝削、滲透、分裂和排斥。剝削是一種使一方受惠的「勞動分工的不平等結構」；滲透是指「統治的一方通過控制被統治者或對被統治者的思想控制，來佔據中心位置」；分裂是指「分裂和隔離被統治者，將之分而治之」；排斥則是將被統治者置於邊緣地位。尊卑等級、貧富差別、經濟和政治權力的不平等關係，這些都是結構暴力的主要形式。無論是「直接暴力」還是「結構暴力」，都必須依靠「文化暴力」來獲得合理性和道義辯護。「文化暴力」乃是指文化中那些能被用來為直接的或結構的暴力辯護、使之合理化的內容。為貧富懸殊或暴富辯護的「自由市場論」，或者「要市場、不要民主」的說辭，都是這樣的文化暴力。

          The big bankers of the world, who practise the terrorism of money, are more powerful than kings and field marshals, even more than the Pope of Rome himself. They never dirty their hands. They kill no-one: they limit themselves to applauding the show.
          Their officials, international technocrats, rule our countries: they are neither presidents nor ministers, they have not been elected, but they decide the level of salaries and public expenditure, investments and divestments, prices, taxes, interest rates, subsidies, when the sun rises and how frequently it rains.
          However, they don't concern themselves with the prisons or torture chambers or concentration camps or extermination centers, although these house the inevitable consequences of their acts.
          The technocrats claim the privilege of irresponsibility: 'We're neutral' they say.
                                                                             Eduado Hughes Galeano, “Professional Life”

          Paul Farmer在闡述structural violence的同時，引用上段Galeano的文字來敘述他的論點。他認為structural violence的產生，和全世界的technocrats脫離不了關係，他們運用terrorism of money來運作所為的自由經濟市場。很諷刺的是，他們從不認為造成「the nobodies」的問題，與他們無關，因為他們是中立自由的，不干涉任何政治議題，也不主動製造衝突與剝削。

          Paul Farmer身為醫生兼人類學家，在看自由經濟市場所導致人權問題與不平等對待的社會，透過自身的實例，來剖析「the nobodies」的癥結所在。

        The nobodies: nobody's children, owners of nothing. The nobodies: the no-ones, the nobodied, running like rabbits, dying through life, screwed every which way.
        Who are not, but could be.
        Who don’t speak languages, but dialects.
        Who don’t have religions, but superstitions.
        Who don’t care art, but handicrafts.
        Who don’t have culture, but folklore.
        Who are not human beings, but human resources.
        Who do not have faces, but arms.
        Who do not have names, but numbers.
        Who do not appear in the history of the world, but in the police blotter of the local paper.
        The nobodies, who are not worth the bullet that kills them.
                                                                                    Eduardo Galeano, “The Nobodies”