Mickey Z
Cool Observer
Sunday, July 03, 2005
What? You're still poor? Well, don't blame Bill, Bono, or Blair
ugh.
Posted by Owen on from Barcelona 07/03 at 07:48 AMYes, that was horrible. These self-indulgent pop stars are convinced they get the credit for the “end” of apartheid, and now they feel that playing a few tunes will help to eradicate “poverty”. As in any other circumstance, they benefit from all the bright lights, except that this time they manage to totally eclipse the existence of real activism. But is there still a point to protest? I’m beginning to wonder if all these concerts, G8 and Davos summits aren’t specifically designed to divert attention and ressources that could be efficiently used for less “symbolic” issues. Imagine if NOBODY wen’t to these concerts and protests, wouldn’t that have been a stronger message?
Posted by onclepsycho on from 07/03 at 09:28 AMThis Live 8 nonsense really gets me climbing up the walls. In the short term at least, the exploitation of labor is the real problem so how in the hell does debt relief make a damn difference in making poverty history. As the structure gets reproduced every day one can only admire your life-style Mickey....treading as lightly as possible.
Posted by Fiona on from San Diego 07/03 at 09:55 AMI’ve been able to hear a range of criticisms and compliments of the Live8 cause.
For what it’s worth, I think bland criticisms of pop stars is as counterproductive as bland celebrations of them.
Other weak criticisms include “if they cared that much about poor people, they would give them all of their millions”. This was one of the more ridiculous criticisms. To what length does that logic extend to? I suppose if one doesn’t move to Africa and live there, than one has no say in the issues? I eat food produced through European agricultural subsidies, is my opinion now disqualified?
I’m sure there are some people who attended the conference only for entertainment purposes, (the reunion of Pink Floyd, the diversity of acts, etc.). I’m also sure that some people won’t do much about the problem after a few weeks have passed.
But there are positive results from these concerts, and I wouldn’t feel comfortable simply make snide comments, as it does nothing to advance the understanding of the issues. There are a lot of people listening to pop music that never come across a political message. Country music went from Johnny Cash to Garth Brooks, hip hop from Krs-One and Public Enemy to P Diddy. Many people received a progressive political message with their music for the first time. I think that in itself is an accomplishment.
As a side note, it was interesting to hear the lyrics of many pop acts under the spotlight of these political issues. An entertaining demonstration of the poverty of lyrics.
I am also certain that there are people who will be encouraged to protest in Scotland because of Geldoff’s and Bono’s messages. U2 played Dublin last weekend, and had many messages for the crowd, from Aung San Suu Kyi, to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to fair trade, etc. Bono also asked people to get involved in Dublin and Scotland protests. I don’t view that as him trying to shephard the flock, but more that he does feel strongly about these issues, and he’s trying to raise awareness of them.
I’m not particularly a fan of the group, but I think it was a positive message to give to people. Should that be ignored, and instead focus on attacking Bono for wearing those sunglasses, or living in a mansion out in Dalkey?
Criticisms of these Live 8 concerts should not dismiss rational argument, or honest debate. Talk about the removal of anti-war banners from recent G8 protests, and the significance there. Talk about the conditions being demanded of African nations for the removal of debt. Talk about the real reasons behind the debt. Talk about the demands (trade justice, debt removal), but then ask what exactly constitutes these issues.I have no problem with celebrities getting politically involved. If anything, it should happen more (particularly their lyrics).
I do have a problem with inane celebrity gossip, whether it be in the form of petty criticism or trivial celebration.
Posted by mike on from dublin 07/03 at 12:37 PMIt’s been a while, Mike. Good to “hear” your voice.
I’m not sure if you were aiming the “snide” label at me, but I wouldn’t blame you if you did. I considered that before making this (admittedly sarcastic) post and that’s why I focused on specific comments that, I feel, trivialize the issues and the fact that these pop stars are giving Gates, Blair, etc. a free pass...allowing them to seem like do-gooders merely by associating with long-haired “rebels.”
It’s a tricky business...but I’ve always felt it would be incredibly helpful if more “famous” people were informed and active. Their influence is huge. But I guess both “informed” and “active” are in the eye of the beholder. This beholder truly believes Bono’s heart is in the right place...but he is woefully uniformed and, as a result, plays into the “leader” role.
For what it’s worth, I’m a BIG fan of U2’s music and have been for decades.
I’ve added this to the original post: http://www.zmag.org/Sustainers/content/2002-12/07z.cfm
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 07/03 at 12:47 PM“snide” had a more generic target, not meant to be specific.
I’m not sure I understand what you mean by Bono being uniformed, (was it uninformed?), but I think that both he and Geldof sincerely believe the conditions in Africa are intolerable. They want to suggest solutions, through Jeffrey Sachs and others, and they have invested a lot of time and energy into this. Geldof has been at it for years. No one can question that committment. I also think they’ve made very real, positive improvments.
One lesson from their struggle is that they have admittedly been “single-issue” activists. Bono, when asked, opposed the assault of Iraq. However, he never attended any protest, or gave much of his time towards the anti-war movement. He said he is only going to concentrate on the issues involving Africa, which I think is not possible, but it’s his approach/strategy, and I respect that.
This has, however, forced them into odd positions. Bono and Geldof both come from Labour Party roots (both Irish and British), and some of their recent decisions are more than questionable. Bono supported the Nice Treaty, which will do damage to people for years. Geldof gets very cosy with Blair, which I find hard to watch. They both do this to help their campaign, and it makes you question how much one must sacrifice in some areas in order to make some progress in other areas.
All of this should be fertile debating ground for those involved in politics. I personally think that these very important questions should be the real focus.
Added to which, is the historical location of both Geldof and Bono. Both born in Ireland (though not entirely Catholic), and both acting like missionaries. Much to be said about the direction of that movement.
Also, a small fact ignored by most. Gleneagles is owned by Diageo, who owns Guinness, who have long been brewers of Empire (the example in Ireland is very signficant. I’m not sure what’s worse, Irish Americans who drink Guinness to “be Irish”, or people in Ireland who wear their Guinness rugby jerseys at international matches to “be Irish”.) The business activities of Diageo in Africa are vast, paricularly in Nigeria. Actually, to study the beer market in Africa can provide very useful insight into the problems the continent faces.
Posted by mike on from dublin 07/03 at 01:20 PMYou make some great points here Mike. Bono believes that he is “informed” just as much as anybody on the left believes that they are “informed”. Indeed, Jeffrey Sachs has been regarded as a leading authority on international finance for sometime. His resume is impressive as it includes being one of the youngest tenured professors in the history of the Harvard economics department, a twenty year-journey through the developing world which Sachs recounts in his book, “The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time”( Bono writes in the intro of this one). Also, he has been leading the Earth Institute at Columbia University and directing the United Nations Millennium Project, a multinational task force of economists, scientists, and development experts. Perhaps Sachs is sincere when he writes, “We can realistically envision a world without extreme poverty by 2025.”
While Sachs commends the anti-globalization protesters for ending years of self-congratulation by the rich and powerful, he regards them as fundamentally misguided. World trade could be a powerful motor to reduce poverty and support economic growth, but that potential is being lost which is exactly what the Make Poverty History campaign is about. Rigged rules and double standards lock poor people out of the benefits of trade, closing the door to an escape from poverty. For example, when developing countries export to rich-country markets, they face tariff barriers four times higher than those encountered by rich countries. Those barriers cost them $100 bn a year. Importantly Sachs admits that reform of world trade is only ONE of the requirements for ending the deep social injustices that pervade globalization. While I may not agree with this argument, accusing Sachs, Bono and others as uninformed does nothing to stimulate social inquiry.
Posted by Fiona on from San Diego 07/03 at 04:38 PMAccusing Bono of being uninformed is simply my opinion and has obviously stimulated social inquiry...as do these articles (not by me):
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=1997
http://www.counterpunch.org/bond06172005.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/browne03042003.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/okeefe03232005.htmlAlso, Mike, I’m not sure what you mean when you say Bono and Geldoff have made “very real, positive improvements.” Can you elaborate?
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 07/03 at 04:45 PMGreat Article, at ZNet, Mickey. I’ll carry the image of Chomsky leaping from the stage into the crowd, with me forever…
As to the general discussion. I guess we have to work toward “reform,” as much as possible, as diminishing poverty and misery, even to a minor degree is important. Yet, I’ve come to profoundly distrust all ideas of reform, as such. Corporate Capitalism and the Global governments which, essentially ARE Corporations, seems to gobble up new ideas and initiatives almost as soon as they are born. Nothing escapes their suffocating tentacles - including and perhaps especially, reform. Everything is twisted and subverted into simply another corporate resource. Governments exist “almost” exclusively to guard and enhance the interests of the very rich and powerful. This is not what they “do.” This is what they “are.”
As long as human beings seek social and economic justice from organizations which are, to their very core! exclusively predatory - they’re doomed to failure in the long term. Sure, it’s nice when Bono or Sting or Brad get involved, and bring attention to some of the world’s agonies. However, sooner or later they’ll have to stand up and actually bite the hand that feeds them, drawing much blood and cries of “Foul!” from near and far - if they’re to actually have any long term, positive effect. The very systems which create rich, powerful celebrities and their gasping, adoring audiences are the same systems which create and sustain world-wide horror. They are NOT two…
- joePosted by joe on from Oregon 07/03 at 05:12 PMMickey, I forgot to mention, I think the last time we wrote, we discussed “O’Che”. During some recent travels, I came upon an “O’Che’s” pub in Prague. Interior had a mixture of Cuban and Irish design. Several pictures describing Che’s Irish heritage. No pictures of red-headed granddaughters though.
George Monbiot had an excellent piece of criticism of both Bono and Geldof in The Guardian:
http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2005/06/21/bards-of-the-powerful-/I should state, in clearer terms, that I don’t fully subscribe to Bono and Geldof’s message, and my second point is, I don’t need to. I appreciate the fact that they have entered the phrase “G8” into public discourse. For many people, that phrase meant absolutely nothing. Now, young kids and others can look it up on the internet, they can discuss it with their friends and so on. It’s a great accomplishment. Bono discussing the troubles in Burma at a concert is a great thing. All of these discussions, in my opinion, have great potential. When people are getting arrested outside of Gleneagles, media audiences (more in Europe than in United States) will not merely write them off. Many people will remember Bono and Geldof’s, and many other’s, opposition to the G8. Before these concerts, many people would just tune out, as they were not aware of what the G8 does, and can do.
I don’t agree with the conclusions that Geldof and Bono draw, nor do I agree with the concessions each make. That’s why when I do hear discussions of their work, I do not merely talk about their sunglasses or how rich they are (their fans already know this), instead I try to talk about what I believe would be better solutions to the problems.
People have problems with Bono and the religious right. Why? This is Bono’s approach to the problem, and besides, he’s religious himself. This is his way of trying to improve things. He is also trying to change the way the religious right views Africa.
I don’t think this is the best avenue for change, not by a longshot. But both he and Geldof put critical issues on the radar of many people, and I think that should be acknowledged. Just because it hasn’t happened the way that I would have liked it to be done, does not mean I should be completely opposed to the guy.
As it’s been said, “Good is not the enemy of the best”.
Posted by mike on from dublin 07/04 at 05:44 AMi am going to be very snide about celebs. The leaders of the Make Poverty History march in Edinburgh would not allow the Stop The War Coalition or any of their speakers anywhere near the stage. for a while it looked like they were trying to stop them from joining the march. Their reason (or attempt at reason) was that they did not want to turn it into a political event. This formula was repeated at some of the other stages around the world. The absurdity of
A- trying to say that poverty is not a political issue, and B- deliberately ignoring or not understanding (i am not sure which is worse)the link between poverty and war is a disgrace.There are some positive benefits in terms of awareness being raised but if that awareness is raised in terms which are wholly acceptable to the G8 leaders and the responsibility for dealing with the problems of poverty, war and all the rest of it are left to the G8 leaders and f*cking bono and Geldof (or is that Blairo and Bushoff - i really can’t tell anymore) then nothing is going to happen. the supposed debt relief package announced preG8 was not debt relief at all. it was a restructuring of existing funds and will solve nothing as it comes with a whole load of privatisation conditions.
Bono describes Blair and Brown (for US readers Gordon Brown is the second top man in the UK government - officially at least) as the Lennon and McCartney of Debt relief. This is disingenous an destructive. Geldof said that Bush was the best US president there has ever been when it comes to Africa (even if it were true that isn’t much of a claim). This is ridiculous. If these two can’t say or do something snesible or useful then they should both just f*ck off and take, madonna, elton john, will smith, robbie williams and all the rest of them with them. Madonna shouted its time for a revolution. She has a house here in Scotland and in Scotland there is a right of way law for people who want to walk in the countryside - she tried to stop people from walking anywhere near her house - she was going nuts about it...wanted the law changed and everything. Just one example of many.
These whingeing hypocrites are no use to anyone. And i also don’t think that its wrong to say that these people should give some of their money. Rich people are rich because poor people are poor, not in spite of it.
If you want to read blogs from people who have been at all the protests/demos/alternative summits go to spinwatch.org where it will be being updated continually. they are G8 we are 6 billion
Posted by michael on from Scotland 07/04 at 08:41 AMThanks for joining in, Michael.
Being sincere doesn’t mean one is informed. I can’t see into Bono’s heart, but he seems somewhat sincere. Thus, I must assume he is being misled. If he wants to make a difference—a huge difference—why shouldn’t we ask him to spend some of his money...to support independent media, peace and justice groups, radical research, etc.? He could take out ads on TV, on line, in major publications and challenge the societal formula that spawns the poverty and injustice he speaks out against. With his notoriety, influence, and bank account, the possibilities are endless...but, as Joe says above, he won’t bite the hand that feeds him.
As Michael explains powerfully, Bono’s record speaks for itself. If he is truly sincere, I’m guessing (hoping?) he’s uninformed. If he IS informed and acts like this, well, he is part of the problem.
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 07/04 at 10:18 AMThe particularly annoying thing for a lot of us over here is that many people have been putting in a lot of time. postering, doing film showings,getting guest speakers, organising buses, flyering in the pissing rain in the middle of the winter - everything - for months. These assholes turn up for one day (or a couple of weeks as the case may be) then say ‘job done’ and slap each other on the back for saving the world.
even worse is the sycophancy in the face of power that is now being displayed by people like geldof who said something along the lines of ‘we have done our job now its over to you’ - meaning bush and blair.
i think mickey is right… they are not wicked, they are stupid and being deceived. either way - do you want them at the front of any movement you would care to be involved with?Posted by michael on from scotland 07/04 at 11:14 AMLots of good points here.
Posted by Fiona on from San Diego 07/04 at 12:29 PMTo reply to some of the contributions, many of which I believe put forward valid points.
I haven’t placed Bono or Geldof at the front of any movement. I’ve stated the fact that they have made certain people aware of the G8. They might show up and try to steal the spotlight, but I don’t think people are so naive that they believe it has only been Geldof and Bono. I think those that have dedicated more than Geldof and Bono certainly deserve much more credit. My point is that if Bono and Geldof bring even more people to the campaign, or even better, encourage people to arrive at the protests, which Bono asked probably over 200,000 people to do during his concerts in Dublin. (over 80,000 each night in Croke Park). When, or if, these people show up, others taking part have a great opportunity to say, “Glad Bono got you here, but now listen this this...” As previous arguments have shown, there is a lot to discuss further.
So, if Bono and Geldof have a strategy that is much different than yours, or, if they have answers that are much different than yours, so what? Now who’s putting too much emphasis on what pop stars say?
Of course Bono won’t do certain things. Look at his cosy relationship with Clear Channel, amongst other questionable dealings. Why expect him to do much different? I personally don’t, as it is very unlikely that he will do anything at all radical. Why expect it? I’m don’t agree with everything he’s done, but I do appreciate some of his work.
Why assume that he already hasn’t donated his own money? He’s already donated money to several causes, including those in Africa.
Why assume that he’s uninformed? He’s informed in a different way, one which I don’t agree with, but he has demonstrated a knowledge of many of the problems in Africa. His analysis certainly differs from my own, but I wouldn’t say the guy is uninformed. He’s also been informed in different ways than me, as I’ve never visited Africa, where he has.In the end, why completely discount their work when it differs from your perspective? They’re pop stars at the end of the day, I don’t invest too much of energy into what way the view the political structure. I can form my own opinions independent of their perspective, as can many other people. When they use their enormous microphone to ask people to attend protests, I appreciate it.
Posted by mike on from dublin 07/04 at 01:55 PM
Next entry: 144 years ago in the land of the free
Previous entry: Aliens, vegans, Paul Harvey, and some words from a King
Copyright © 2005-2007 Mickey Z.
