| Seeing Through a Stigma |
 |
 |
 |
| Written by Editor |
| Friday, 07 May 2010 15:11 |
|
The theme of Colombia’s safety (or perhaps lack thereof) dominates most travel discussion boards. Its history as a mysterious narco-playground sets Colombia back while the emerging destinations propel the nation in new directions. Why is Colombia regarded as unsafe, is there truth to its improvements, and is there really potential for travel and investment stardom?
“I have problem with my ayays,” this guy said. He was the utility man at the Bantu Hotel in old town Cartagena and clearly enjoyed practicing his English on guests. But this word, ayays, at least that’s how it was pronounced, took me several moments to identify. Ayays. Ayays. Ayays. Do you mean eyes? “Yes, eyes. I have problem with my eyes. I think…” he paused, looking up at the ceiling as if the remainder of his sentence was etched into the crossbeam or stucco work. “I think I have stigma.” As a second-language learner, I know the feeling when someone corrects you for saying something stupid, so I try my best to smile and nod as if everything made complete sense. However there are some errors so grave that it would be a disservice to the Colombian to let pass. “You mean an astigmatism,” I told him. “Astigmatism, is an irregular shaped cornea. What you have. A stigma is…” I then dwelled on the best way to explain. “A stigma is what your country has.” The way I put it was a bit straightforward and cruel, but in reality, Colombia’s stigma is perhaps its greatest obstacle. Stigma: a mark of disgrace or infamy; a stain or reproach, as on one's reputation. A stigma can be based on true facts or false stereotypes, but in the case of Colombia, it’s a combination of both. Tell a person you’re going to Colombia and you get a choir-like unanimous response. “Isn’t it dangerous?” Historically, the number of people who die violently per year hovers around 30,000, which rightfully landed Colombia on the map of the world’s most dangerous countries. Kidnapping, drug dealing, FARC rebels, and some seriously uncharted terrain are all significant contributors to this stigma. Things have changed a lot over the past five years, but that’s how recent Colombia’s stigma is reaching back. And while Colombia, a huge country, has shown surprisingly high statistics in the past, much of its crime is highly localized to low-income barrios in big cities, no-mans jungle, and certain less-savory lifestyles (mainly, the drug scene). In this sense, Colombia’s dangerous stigma is factually based, yet somehow misinterpreted. Does one not visit New York City because Flatbush is known for stabbings? Do we avoid L.A. because of Harbor Gateway? So how are things changing? The list goes on and on: Alvaro Urribe has done wonders for Colombia’s security, the nation has never really had a coup (always known as a democratic stronghold) cross-country transportation (plane and bus) has a great reputation, tourism is increasing, security in urban areas has improved tremendously, and most importantly, Colombians have had enough – that is to say, there’s a real drive and desire for better days (evident as the nation is already experiencing), visible not only in the governmental initiatives but in the friendly and welcoming faces of its people. Part of Colombia’s allure to the adventuresome travelers who have already made it here, is that this stigma has kept so many people away. Virgin rainforests, perfect beaches, astounding architecture: all noticeably lacking the notorious fanny pack crowd. The sigma of Colombia, perhaps its greatest appeal to off-the-beaten-path travelers, is also its greatest enemy to mainstream acceptance: a trend that is facilitated only with time. |
