Living together staying apart

Submitted by silvia lozeva (Australia), Nov 18, 2009 at 03:04

A segregation of this measure is almost unimaginable for people who live in Western Cities. Yet even in traditionally migrant countries such as Canada, Australia and New Zeland it does exist. A striking example of economic and social segregation is the recently popular case among mining companies called Fly in-Fly out. In this concept mine workers are accomodated in camps away from the centre of near by town if such even exist, surounded by large fences and fully independent from the outside environment, community and resources. They are fully sufficient in sense that all provisions, materials, food, protective clothings, transport are brough from the outside with negative contribution to the development of the local communites. In fact the segregation is so vast, that the mine workers even take out and bring their own toothpase with them, fill from different petrol station and if a community evet is used, such a leisure centre, the companies book apecific time in the week exclusivelly for their workers. The strkiking visibility also is evident from the large white 4x4 weel vehicles which the mine workers are driving in comparassion to the local, indegenous permanent residents there. This phenomenon is likely to grow until a measure to reduce the environmental and social impact take place. A researcher made a profit out of seeling mine-workers postcards for valentine days because this was the only mean for them to respond to the needs of their own family. Loliness, aliantion, health problems and broken up families are only some of the social impacts that such practice poses.

Staying together separatelly is not an isolated phenomenon, it exist even in a country like Australia.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".