DeletedUser14786
Guest
A number of my friends in American universities have recently started promoting a campaign started by a nonprofit organization called Invisible Children which is attempting to raise awareness about a dictator named Joseph Kony that has historically terrorized Uganda. The link will take you to their website where if you've got the time you can watch the MTV-like 30 minute video that they have put together and donate.
While I typically am supportive of social activism, I am not particularly excited about this for a couple reasons. Here is a link to a blog that was written in 2006 that outlines some of my concerns far more eloquently than I can. In general, I am happy that this goodwill and enthusiasm poured out for Uganda. I dislike the use of excessive pathos (as the video employs) to educate people about these issues. Moreover, this seems to me a perfect case of "white man's burden" where the paternalistic US now needs to go to Africa to "fix" the problems inherent in there. In reality, most dictators/Warlords in Africa exist because our Cold War policy was to empower anybody that wasn't communist, no matter the cost. The CIA assassination of Patrice Lumumba in Congo comes to mind.
I study developing world economies and my concern is that understanding the conflicts in Eastern Congo/Rwanda and Uganda fully is incredibly difficult because of each central African country's use of proxies to promote their interests. Kony is obviously a very bad guy and easy to demonize. But he's a symptom, not a cause of the problem in Eastern Congo/Uganda. If you've got even more time on your hands, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Congo_War is a great place to start. Basically there are no angels in African politics, and the Congo's wealth is really what everybody is after. Anybody that has a stake in establishing control ("security") of eastern Congo has an agenda, whether it's cobalt, diamonds, gold, oil, tungsten, etc.
Back to Invisible Children--The US is now educated about Kony. Now what? I have some questions that I'd like to muse over with the people in this debate section of the forum:
Is awareness in any form of activism for the better? Does this video/publicity campaign mean the start of a new American foreign policy based on morality? Since when has morality ever been a part of US foreign policy? Should charging criminals for war crimes be the decision of the public? If so, who is a criminal? If you ask Egyptians, Tantawi is a criminal. If you ask Palestinians, Netanyahu is a crook. Ask the Israelis and Abbas is a terrorist. Should justice be subjected to who has money and influence over public opinion? What's more, is this the right way to popularize and mass-market social activism?
While I typically am supportive of social activism, I am not particularly excited about this for a couple reasons. Here is a link to a blog that was written in 2006 that outlines some of my concerns far more eloquently than I can. In general, I am happy that this goodwill and enthusiasm poured out for Uganda. I dislike the use of excessive pathos (as the video employs) to educate people about these issues. Moreover, this seems to me a perfect case of "white man's burden" where the paternalistic US now needs to go to Africa to "fix" the problems inherent in there. In reality, most dictators/Warlords in Africa exist because our Cold War policy was to empower anybody that wasn't communist, no matter the cost. The CIA assassination of Patrice Lumumba in Congo comes to mind.
I study developing world economies and my concern is that understanding the conflicts in Eastern Congo/Rwanda and Uganda fully is incredibly difficult because of each central African country's use of proxies to promote their interests. Kony is obviously a very bad guy and easy to demonize. But he's a symptom, not a cause of the problem in Eastern Congo/Uganda. If you've got even more time on your hands, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Congo_War is a great place to start. Basically there are no angels in African politics, and the Congo's wealth is really what everybody is after. Anybody that has a stake in establishing control ("security") of eastern Congo has an agenda, whether it's cobalt, diamonds, gold, oil, tungsten, etc.
Back to Invisible Children--The US is now educated about Kony. Now what? I have some questions that I'd like to muse over with the people in this debate section of the forum:
Is awareness in any form of activism for the better? Does this video/publicity campaign mean the start of a new American foreign policy based on morality? Since when has morality ever been a part of US foreign policy? Should charging criminals for war crimes be the decision of the public? If so, who is a criminal? If you ask Egyptians, Tantawi is a criminal. If you ask Palestinians, Netanyahu is a crook. Ask the Israelis and Abbas is a terrorist. Should justice be subjected to who has money and influence over public opinion? What's more, is this the right way to popularize and mass-market social activism?
Last edited by a moderator: