Obama, McCain and the Politics of a Vacation

After Beheading, Greyhound Kills Ad Campaign

Mao Mao Mao Mao Mao. Enough With the Mao Already.

Travel in Mexico Getting More Expensive, Too

‘The Monster of Florence’: Murder and the Pursuit of Truth

Douglas Preston’s latest book, the true story of a serial killer in Italy, shows that the world is far from exhausted for those who want to travel deep. Frank Bures tells why. 

My Travels, My Feet

After taking one too many headless torso shots of herself, solo traveler Sophia Dembling started snapping photos of her feet around the world, from the Grand Canyon to Red Square

Affairs to Remember—On-Screen and Off

From “Roman Holiday” to “Before Sunrise,” Hollywood has understood the appeal of the overseas fling. Eva Holland explains the staying power of the big screen Euro-romance.

Seven Reasons to Have a Foreign Fling

Sure, having an overseas romance is fun. But Terry Ward points out seven other benefits to cross-border love, mon petit chou.

Susan Sessions Rugh: ‘The Golden Age of American Family Vacations’

Elyse Franko asks the author of “Are We There Yet?” about the rise and fall of the family vacation, segregation in travel and how family trips are changing today

As a Woman, Can I Really Travel Without Much Fear for my Safety?

Vagabonding traveler Rolf Potts answers your questions about travel

Break Bread and Brie in France

Great cheese abounds in the land of Gaul, but dig in and you risk committing any number of faux pas. Terry Ward explains how to partake of the nation’s famed fromage with savoir faire.

Burma Extends Activist’s Detention. Should Travelers Stay Away?

Thant Myint-U is right.  I’ve been to Burma and everyone I met there, while being critical of their government, were desperate to have more people come and visit.  Many said that the more they were isolated, the more the government would be able to do whatever they wanted.  Thant Myint-U’s book “The River of Lost Footsteps” is an excellent introduction to Burma and reads like a novel.

This debate makes me crazy. Why is Burma different from any other country where this sort of stuff happens every single day, sometimes to an even worse degree? Russia, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Azerbaijan, Tibet come immediately to mind.

I guess the difference is that none of those have an attractive, articulate nobel laureate and well-funded diaspora keeping their cause in front of the western elite. And also, maybe, because no one actually wants to go to some of those places, which makes it even more imperative that people go and see for themselves how bad it can be.

Refusing to travel to places like Burma or Uzbekistan or Russia is a meaningless gesture designed only to make the traveler feel better and more empowered. The absence of your pitiful $1000 or $2000 is hardly going to make an impact on a government that controls gazillions of dollars in natural resource wealth, particularly resources the west wants. Want to make a difference in some of these dictatorships? Stop using so much oil. 

OK. Rant over.

I think it’s a very interesting debate and I have very strong views.

One of my primary concerns is that most tourist destinations in Burma were formerly the homes of ethnic minority peoples, and many of the tourist facilities are built with forced labour.

For example, at Bagan the villagers were given less than 10 hours’ notice to vacate before their villages were razed. They were forced to porter and do construction work, during which many people are killed. After all that they were left homeless and without any of their belongings.

The Burmese government is trying to promote tourism to bring more money in. As more tourists go, more villagers will be internally displaced, forced to do hard labour and die. Tourists will not see this when they go to Burma.

I do not dispute that tourism can benefit some people. However, I think that the detriment suffered by so many of these people greatly outweighs any such benefits, and I thus strongly oppose tourism in Burma at this point.

E

In response to the comment from “E”, it’s not true that “most tourist destinations in Burma were formerly the homes of ethnic minority peoples”.  He/she gives the example of Bagan, where villagers were given 10 hours notice to leave.  Bagan, the old royal capital, is in the Burman-majority heartland, about as far from ethnic minority areas as possible.  Most tourist destinations - Rangoon, Mandalay, Bagan are not in minority areas.  Yes, people were forcefully moved from Bagan nearly twenty years ago (in 1989) but these kinds of forced movements ended in the early 1990s.  The forced movements today are confined to some areas near the Thai border where there is active fighting between the Burmese government, pro-government militia and a local insurgent group.

We shouldnt have double standards either - in Cambodia the government forcefully moves people, gives lucrative tourism-related contracts to their cronies, and rakes in millions in fees and licenses - why is there no Cambodia-boycott movement?

We need more honest assessments and not exagerated rhetoric on Burma.

I think “E” may be an exile Myanmar and who wants the foreigner to believe their propaganda and exaggregate about Myanmar. They don’t want to allow that the foreigners and tourists realize the real situation in Myanmar.
Most foreigners who have not been to Myanmar think that Myanmar have no safty, conflict civil war in everywhere and very poor situation. If they go and see to Myanmar, they will find out the real situation Myanmar ,they can deliver knowledge and create income earning opportunities to Myanmar people. Then they can evaluate the government actions for Myanmar people.
So please go and see. Find out the real things. After that you may decide and suggest the best decisions and ways to help Myanmar people.

S

How about staying away from Cuba, my lefties? Or China? Or Egypt, Yemen? Venezuela? Unless someone can make a coherent argument to show a significant difference between the two regimes. Interestingly, no one on this site (or at Lonely Planet for that matter) agonizes over travel to North Korea - the absolute worst of the totalitarian lot. In fact, travel to that hellhole is seen as a feather in a backpacker’s hat.

Suu Kyi - like a lot of activists - is wrong. (Not the first time a Nobel Peace Prize winner has been wrong - she shares this honor with Arafat and Carter.) The Soviet Bloc collapsed not because of a boycott (there wasn’t any! where were the activists then?), but because of opening to western influence - media and tourists.