Why Invisible Child’s #Kony2012 Campaign Gets No Applause From Me

In short: #Kony2012 #StopKony misrepresents N. Uganda, spreads misinformation abt Kony/the LRA, denies Africans’ agency and is imperialist. It raises the perennial question of “Who represents Africa?”

For example: This tweet (one of many prime examples) succinctly exemplifies all that I critique in this piece:

In fact, it reminded me of my post-colonial readings of Karl Marx. Reading this quote from his “The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte: “Sie können sich nicht vertreten, sie müssen vertreten werden” spurred me deeper into my anti-colonialist, post-colonialist fervor. Literally translated from German, “Those who cannot represent themselves must themselves be represented,” the quote revealed to me just how insidious the narrative of “saving” and “speaking for” the subaltern is.

HOW DOES THIS TIE INTO Invisible Children’s #Kony2012 CAMPAIGN?

If “awareness” is the payoff for paternalistic, imperialist, “white man’s burden” NGO campaigns, I don’t want it. (Just the name “Invisible Children” denies and co-opts the agency of Ugandans- many of whom have organized to protect child soldiers…). I stand by this: if you’re more comfortable talking about Africans than you are talking to an African person, you really should not be in the business of representing Africa. Furthermore, if you cannot find an African nation on a map, let alone acknowledge Africans’ agency, you should not be providing “solutions” or “aid. Certainly, if you think that Uganda is in Central Africa, you should not be disseminating (mis)information that could have implications on policy.

Presumably, this campaign is supposed to raise awareness in the international community of Joseph Kony and lead to his arrest and/or death. The assumption is that taking down the leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army will eliminate the problems. Thing is, Kony and the Lord’s Resistance Army are symptoms of corrupt governance. Invisible Children’s video strangely omits Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni’s complicity in the horrors of the conflict that began in the late 1980s in Northern Uganda at the beginning of his (prolonged) presidency. Clearly, the international justice community is aware of Joseph Kony, because his name has been on top of the International Criminal Court (ICC)’s “most wanted” list for nearly a decade. Not to mention the fact that the United States armed forces have made several attempts at fighting the LRA and killing Joseph Kony, all of which resulted in the displacement of Sudanese and Congolese civilians as the LRA scattered about Central Africa.

[Also, I suggest a little light research into Invisible Children's spending practices.]

Article: Drought, Reforestation and Ethiopia’s Land-Tenure Problem

[Cross-posted at Future Challenges Organization's blog]

[Macrotrends: Climate Change + Natural Resources & BioDiversity]

Ethiopia is set to reforest 15 million hectares  as part of a plan to be energy-neutral by 2025. The reforestation initiative accompanies efforts to develop renewable resources in hydro (dams on the Nile, which the Egyptian government opposes), wind, geothermal and bio-gas. The Millenium Reforestation Project is projected to generate 338,000 tons of carbon credits, of which the World Bank‘s BioCarbonFund will purchase 165,000 Co2e. The reforestation project will earn Ethiopia carbon credits under the Kyoto Protocol‘s Clean Development Mechanism.

The project falls under the umbrella of the United Nations‘ seventh Millenium Development Goal: environmental sustainability. However, the increased use of land for biofuels as an alternative to wood as fuel is problematic, because it diverts land away from food production, while Ethiopia is the African continent‘s biggest recipient of food aid. Some 85% of Ethiopia‘s rural population are subsistence farmers living on less than 1USD a day. Nearly 10 percent of Ethiopians rely on food aid. In February 2011, the Ethiopian government requested food aid for 2.8 million people, citing a drought in the Somali region.

On Aid: Why Good Intentions Are Not Enough

[Cross-Linked w/ my other blog]

Let’s take the story of a giant, engorged on wealth and privilege. This giant trods upon the earth with greater might and size than his compatriots. He has had the advantages of being able to manipulate a global system that dictates who gets what- even down to potable water, fresh food and life-saving pharmaceuticals. Somewhere in the progression of history, this giant grew to prominence- likely after a world war that left his former rivals indebted to him. He turns his attention to the nations that his rivals colonized- namely those African, Asian and South/Central American nations many of us cannot name.

The giant’s steps invariably crush the voiceless, disempowered and disenfranchised as he drafts documents outlining what a human right is and how to measurepoverty in terms of numbers and indicators. The problem is- those numbers and indicators fail to take into account the most basic of human needs- access to potable water, access to and ability to produce food, access to vital knowledge. Additionally, the assumed universal of “modernization”- a teleological progression from hunter/gatherer to subsistence farmer to an industrial/urbanized society is adopted as a model of “progress.”

So the well-intentioned giant takes it a step further. He introduces Structural Adjustment Plans that require the liberalization, privatization of state-owned enterprises, demonization of labor unions and de-regulation of the “lesser” nations’ governments and economies. He normalizes debt, reduces tariffs, disincentivizes government provision of public goods and undermines the building of taxation structures- in the name of neoliberalism. Meanwhile, multinational corporations threaten the biodiversity of African and Asian ecosystems through intellectual property rights and patents. Claiming plants with medicinal properties and seizing the land on which they grow, these corporations displace the inhabitants of the land, forcing them to move to cities that are urbanizating too quickly to develop the infrastructure that would support the burgeoning urban populations.

In the wake of the destabilizing effects of these myriad policies

Al Jazeera: People & Power – Slaves to Football

For many African youth, football is a dream, an escape from locales bereft of opportunities. The glamourous images on the TV contrast greatly with the grinding mundane of daily life and restless youth chase after those dream images. Many are talented footballers. Some are not. The fact remains that their dreams are the foothold of unscrupulous traffickers.

Yes, human trafficking and football are connected. It is a multi-billion dollar industry that feeds off of the dreams and aspirations of African youth. Football recruiters transport boys thousands of miles away in Europe (or even domestically) with the promise of training at football academies for budding talent. There they are forced to work in conditions of forced labor or indentured servitude- even abandoned to become beggars and unskilled laborers in a strange land.

Unscrupulous traffickers and coaches profit from the domestic, international and transnational trafficking of Africa’s aspiring football stars. In the video, you see the example of one man in Côte D’Ivoire, who housed boys in his house and “sold” them to traffickers masquerading as recruiters.” The report indicates that he was investigated by the Ivorian government.

Fatou Diome, Senegalese author, tells the story of Moussa in her book “The Belly of the Atlantic.” Moussa, a Senegalese youth who was trafficked to Italy under the pretense of receiving training in a football camp and gaining exposure to FIFA’s talent scouts, offers a cautionary tale to the other football-obsessed boys in his home village. Instead of meeting talent scouts, he is rejected and abandoned, forced to beg to get the money back home. In his home village, he is seen as a failure because he came back from the alleged ‘land of plenty’ with nothing in hand. The story has a tragic ending.

However, this is not to say that all stories end in tragedy. Instead, I’d like to raise awareness about this issue. I will be blogging more about the organization I work for- Free Generation International and their ground-breaking initiatives.

Article: How a Street Drug Affects South Africa‘s Fight Against HIV/AIDS

Crosslinked at Future Challenges Organization‘s blog

Macrotrends: [Pandemics + Security & Antiterror Policy]

A new drug, whoonga, has hit the streets of South Africa- most prominently in Durban‘s impoverished townships. Whoonga is a cocktail of heroin, crystal meth, cannabis and various unknown chemicals- which likely include detergent powder and rat poison. More relevantly, one of the more popular ingredients of this street drugs is antiretroviral drugs for AIDS. Increasing demand for whoonga has had detrimental effects on South Africa‘s fight against HIV/AIDS. There have been reports of clinics being robbed, as well as illicit sales of life-saving antiretroviral drugs to drug dealers and addicts. These factors undermine impoverished HIV-positive patients‘ access to treatment.

Whoonga in Durban today is comparable to Tik in Cape Town in 2007. Both are highly addictive and relatively cheap. Both also have crack meth as active ingredients. However, whoonga costs about twenty Rand (about three US dollars) a hit, whereas tik is about thirty-three Rands (about 5 US dollars) a hit. When 40 per cent of all South Africans survive on about $2 a day, this no doubt, contributes to crime rates (particularly theft). Consequently, the demand for whoonga is affecting South Africa‘s fight against HIV/AIDS directly. The average whoonga user needs six or seven hits a day, but for most users, this is too expensive.

Article: The Global Food Crisis & Land Grabs in Africa

[Crosslinked at Future Challenges Organization: Article: The Global Food Crisis and Land Grabs in Africa ]

Land grabs on the continent of Africa are partly driven by recent food crises, which led to food riots all over the globe.  Currently, Africa has about a third of the world‘s arable land.  Long-term land leases and purchases of Africa‘s arable land are increasing as a response to the global food crisis. The implication is that the creation of commercial food plantations on the continent of Africa will not facilitate mutually beneficial arrangements between African nations and people and the multinational corporations that are buying up the land.

The global food crisis is exacerbated by the fact that unsustainable consumption patterns exist in North America and Europe (the „West“). Moreover, it is telling that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is pushing Monsanto‘s genetically modified seeds toward African farmers, touting increased productivity, while ignoring their detrimental effects.

„Using strains of crops that required fertilizer, pesticides and irrigation, the Green Revolution methods increased yields. But they also damaged the environment, favored wealthier farmers and left some poorer ones deeper in debt.“ (Seattle Times: Gates Foundation’s agriculture aid a hard sell, 20 January 2008)

The fact remains that much of the land in North America and Europe is not arable because of unsustainable farming practices. These practices include the use of Monsanto’s GMO, single-yield seeds and the cultivation of non-native or invasive species, which essentially strip the soil of essential nutrients. Urbanization and suburbanization is another factor in the decrease in arable land tracts in North America and Europe.

A World Bank study released in September tallied farmland deals covering at least 110 million acres — the size of California and West Virginia combined — announced during the first 11 months of 2009 alone. Over 70% of these land deals are concentrated in Mali, Libya, Sudan, Ethiopia, Madagascar and Mozambique. These deals usually stipulate the transfer of land ownersship to investors or long-term leases. (NYTimes: African Farmers Losing Land to Investors, 21 December 2010) Before 2008, the average rate was 10 million acres per year. This 1000 per cent increase in land deals is due, in part, to the global food crisis. Governments and multinational corporations buy the land to havegreater control over food prices and production.

In 2009, a land deal with a South Korean conglomerate that would have handed over half of Madagascar‘s arable land was met with mass protests and led to the overthrow of President Ravalomanana. The unpopular former president was replaced by his opposition leader, the former mayor of Antanarivo, Andry Rajoelina.

In Mali, nearly three million acres along the Niger River and its inland delta are controlled by a state-run trust called the Office du Niger. Multinational corporations from China and South Africa are investing heavily into Malian land for the cultivation of sugar cane.  Corporations based in Libya and Saudi Arabia are investing in land for the cultivation of rice. Other nations with heavy investment into African landgrabs includeCanada, Belgium, France, South Korea, India, the Netherlands and multinational organizations like the West African Development Bank.  One problem, for example, is that the Libyan government intends to import its agricultural products (rice, beef, etc.) produced on Malian land into Libya, rather than sell in local markets. This would be good news if the land deals weren‘t displacing Malian farmers. As Mali is still largely agrarian, displaced farmers face a dilemma.  By and large, they do not have the option to migrate to urban centers in search of work. Similarly, they do not have the choice to remain on the land that they tilled for generations.

Here is a map diagramming the buyers and sellers of Africa‘s arable land.

Will this have a disproportionate impact on women?

Traditionally, farming is the domain of women – especially subsistence farming. In some parts of Africa, the cultivation of certain crops, like yams and millet, is gendered. It is estimated that in Burkina Faso, women account for 48 per cent of laborers in the agricultural sector. In Zimbabwe, women comprise 61 per cent of farmers and 70 per cent of the labor force in the agricultural sector.  It makes sense to frame landgrabs as a threat to women farmers‘ autonomy.

As commercial food plantations replace smaller-scale farmers, the concentration of land wealth will place African women at a further disadvantage. Globally, women only own one per cent of land, despite accounting for about 66 per cent of all labor [household, agricultural, etc.]  In Uganda, only 7 per cent of women own land. In Kenya, customary land laws still bar women from owning land.  Senegalese law stipulates that men and women have equal rights to land ownership, but the reality is that economic discrepancies still favor men. It is fair to assert that poverty has a feminine face – and this is particularly true for Africa‘s women.

Land disenfranchisement through land grabs and forced migration from rural-agrarian communities have particularly detrimental effects on women. The majority of Africa‘s farmers are women. The creation of commercial food plantations, the increased concentration of land wealth, and the exportation of foodstuffs produced on African soil will likely have a deleterious impact on emerging economies on the continent of Africa, as well as on the people.

 

William Wilberforce: Abolitionist or Opportunist?

[Cross-linked from Reclaiming the Narrative]

Interestingly imperialism’s ‘great saviour and hero’ Wilberforce was not amongst the original grouping (Hart, 2006, p. 1). Nor did he end up joining the society of his own volition or as a matter of conscience. Instead he was ‘recruited’ and sent into the abolition movement by the then Prime Minister William Pitt (Ferguson, 1998, p. 132; Williams, 1944, p. 123). The fake cover story about his moral and religious conviction compelling him to work for the abolition of slavery was made up later.

Excerpted from “Will The Real William Wilberforce Please Stand Up?”

The film „Amazing Grace“ gives the impression that Wilberforce recruited William Pitt, not the other way around.  It places him as a moral compass when he really was a political opportunist.

Background

The first enslaved Africans were brought to Britain in 1555.  They were likely kidnapped or deceived by slave traders and unscrupulous chiefs and elders.  An 11 million Africans were trafficked in the trans-Atlantic slave trade, about 1.4 million died during the voyage.  That’s a mortality rate of about 8%.  [Hochschild, Adam, Bury the Chains, The British Struggle to Abolish Slavery, London: Macmillan, 2005]

It is also interesting to note that all the time William Pitt, the man who appointed him, was Prime Minister all bills to abolish the kidnapping and deportation of Afrikan people failed to make their way through Parliament. It was only after the death of Pitt in 1806 that the abolition of the slave trade bill finally made it onto the statute book.

(Formerly) Enslaved Africans Freed Themselves

Too many ppl mistake abolition & nominal/legal emancipation for freedom. The fact remains that enslaved Africans claimed their freedom before emancipation. Without the active lobbying of Africans like Mary Prince, Olaudah Equiano, Ottobah Cuguano, Jonathan Strong, James Somerset, Joseph Knight, Ayuba Diallo, George Bridgewater, Ignatus Sancho, William Davison, Robert Wedderburn, Ukawsaw Gronniosaw, John Ystumllyn, William Cuffay and Julius Soubise there would have been no bill abolishing the slave trade in Britain’s territories.  There were 20,000 Africans living in Britain at the end of the 19th century, a significant number were free.  There are published autobiographies detailing the horrors of slavery.

The abolition of the slave trade in Britain occured at the confluence of several socio-political events

The Haitian Revolution (1791–1804) stirred fears of slave uprisings in British colonial holdings.  In some parts of the colonies, the population of enslaved Africans was nearly equal to the population of European settlers. In fact, the abolition bill was postponed when the Haitian Revolution erupted and the British sent troops to suppress the revolution.  It soon became clear that the continued importation of enslaved Africans would only fortify a slave  rebellion.  In March 1807, Parliament passed the Slave Trade Act. (Denmark abolished slavery in 1802.  The US abolished slavery in 1808)

However, making the law doesn’t make the crime go away. Don’t confuse legal/nominal emancipation for freedom. Don’t confuse abolition for freedom.  The state was required to compensate merchants for the cessation of the trade.  The British gov‘t depended on the tax revenue from slave-owners.  The law only abolished the slave trade- not slavery.  It did not make provisions for the emancipation of enslaved Africans, nor did it address the deportation of free Africans in Britain.  Slavery was not abolished in Britain’s territories until the passage of the Slavery Abolition Act 1833.  Wilberforce, in an effort to prove that he was not a reactionary, opposed the emancipation of enslaved Africans, instead calling for the gradual emancipation.  He deemed enslaved Africans unfit for emancipation.  (There is anecdotal, nay, documented evidence that Wilberforce was a virulent racist.  He refused to allow the few African and Asian guests he had to eat at his table, instead forcing them to eat behind screens where they were out of sight).

Another factor in the abolition of the slave trade was the French colonies’ dependence on British slavers.  The French bought up to 50% of the slaves that Britain imported for its sugarcane plantations, which were much more productive than Britain‘s.  Abolishing the slave trade would undercut their comparative advantage (a specious term, yes) insofar as the slave population wasn‘t self-sustaining (generational slavery).  Basically, the cessation of the slave trade was advantageous to the British, because it meant that the French had to rely on Portuguese or Spanish slave traders (who were a smaller part of the slave trade).  It also meant that the French colonies would likely have to depend more heavily on multi-generational slavery, whereby enslaved Africans were “bred” for labor.

Another factor was the French Revolution.

Wilberforce’s Economic Interest in the Abolition of the Slave Trade

Wilberforce‘s family was heavily invested in the wool industry & the boom of cotton in the colonies was a threat to his family‘s holdings.  In essence, the abolition of the slave trade was a strategic move on Wilverforce’s part, to influence the global prices of cotton and wool- presumably to his advantage.

Wilberforce was not a men whose religious convictions compelled him to crusade against the continuance of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade.  He was compelled by his friend, William Pitt, to carry out an act of political and economic expedience.  It is nothing short of revisionist history to asset that William Wilberforce was an abolitionist of any sort.  He was simply a man acting in his own self-interest.

Article: How Trade Agreements Affect Access to Affordable AIDS Treatments in Africa

Crosslinked at Future Challenges Organization

(Macrotrends: Pandemics + Globalization)

„Because TRIPS (Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights)allowed countries to issue compulsory licences only for domestic use, however, countries without local drug-manufacturing industries, including 37 in Africa, were unable to use compulsory licences to keep medicines affordable.“ („A ‘crisis in waiting’ for AIDS patients:Trade rules will make it harder to get cheap generic medicines)

In the year 2009, an estimated 1.3 million adults and children died as a result of AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa. African women and girls are particularly vulnerable to HIV. As about 76% of all HIV-positive women in the world live in Africa south of the Sahara. Since the beginning of the epidemic, more than 15 million Africans have died from AIDS.

While access to antiretroviral treatment is beginning to mitigate the toll of AIDS, fewer than half of African AIDS patients are receiving the treatment.  In 2009, only 37% of AIDS patients have access to antiretroviral treatments, compared to just 2% in 2002. According to the UNAIDS factsheet, between 2004 and 2009, AIDS-related deaths decreased by 20% in sub-Saharan Africa.

HIV infections and AIDS-related deaths are on the decline among children on the African continent. In southern Africa, between 2004 and 2009, the number of children under 15 who became newly infected with HIV was reduced by 32% (fell from 190 000 in 2004 to 130 000 in 2009). Between 2005 and 2009, the percentage of pregnant women living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa who received antiretroviral drugs to prevent transmission of HIV to their children increased from 15% to 54%.

Addressing Poverty’s Role in Human Trafficking

The emphasis on the poverty’s influence on the plight of victims of human trafficking so often de-emphasizes the role of the entities that create demand for exploited labor.  It also implies, on some level, that poverty can be equated with a lack of virtue or a loss of humanity.  This is certainly not the case.  Wealth (or lack thereof) is no signifier of virtue or human worth.  This makes me consider the salience of Malthusian arguments for overpopulation predicated on the basis that the willful neglect of “redundant” and “impoverished” persons in the developing world is, in fact, beneficial for the whole.  The embedded assumption that impoverished subjects are devalued in a globalized world or in capitalist societies is (seemingly) tenacious.  At this point, it is necessary to critique the capitalistic mores that enable human beings to be commodified and judged based on their ability to consume- or the amount of effective demand they possess.

Is the Censorship of Craigslist’s “Adult Services” a Victory?

Craigslist.org CEO Jim Buckmaster, left, and founder Craig Newmark,are photographed outside of their office in San Francisco. Photo: AP

CNN: Critic Praises Craigslist Move to Censor Ads, Calls for More Info

Change.org: Debunking 5 Common Myths Defending Craigslist

Free The Slaves Responds to Craigslist’s Adult Services Takedown

The Frisky: Why Shutting Down Craigslist “Adult Services” Won’t Actually Make a Difference

Dana Boyd: Apophenia: How Censoring Craigslist Helps Pimps, Child Traffickers and Other Abusive Scumbags

…

Having read these, I have reached the conclusion that this is a fairly tangible victory that is overshadowed by the amount of work that has yet to be done.  We have to address not only the media of human trafficking, but the demand.