hats off to bob geldof! he deserves the next nobel peace price!

but..., will it make a difference in the greater scheme of things? will the day-long upswell in consciousness and emotions be sustained, and how best to do so?

more broadly, in the age of globalization, will music and popular culture/consciousness assume a greater political role? are the 60ies or the 70ies about to break out again?

will commercialism hijack the aspirations of Live8, and it will be no more than another jokeying for position on billboard's 100? note that while all commercialism in advance of the concerts seems to have been strictly surpressed, commercialism broke out with a vehemence within hours of the performances......

what can joe-q-public do to really help?

will the G8 indeed double aid to africa, and, if so, is $0.02/person enough? see 'the girl in the cafe' in this regard.

will this be another insignificant collective charity, designed to alleviate our collective guilt, but being terribly insufficient, inefficient and largely misapplied? can we really trust the G8 to do much good, considering how little collective good they've done so far?

any thoughts?

throwing money at Africa and forgiving their debt will not resolve the problems. The instability in many countries with war lords is the real problem. Until they can reform from within, I'm afraid the money we send is just wasted.

Look at the farms in Zimbabwe. This country use to be one of the main bread baskets of Africa. Now they have siezed all the farms from the white farmers and the countrh can not even feed itself now.

oh snowman, u're snowing yourself.....

when apologizing for gwb, everything is simple, straight, logical and so simple that only dumb liberals can miss it..... all the fuck-ups, big, huge and small alike, are readily excused and dismissed.....

but, when it comes to doing something for the needy, things become complicated, and the excuses focus on justifying inaction.....

u prove my point too

If people that want aid to poor countries do not push for political change in those countries then their efforts will be wasted. It is somewhat illuminating that the same countries are constantly on lists of the needy - those countries, not coincidentally, have some of the worst imaginable people running them. So what happens if the G8 forgives the debt to those countries? The most likely outcome will be that the countries' leaders or dictators, their cronies and family members, will steal from the treasury and have the countries back in the same boat.
What can be done. Aid agencies should continue to work to head off humanitarian disasters, but should also teach populations that they serve self sustaining techniques like farming and light manufacturing of saleable goods. Politicians worldwide should take a stand against corrupt leaders and give them no have for the money that they steal, and if the situation warrants direct intervention, take military action to remove them from power.

-- Modified on 7/4/2005 4:14:50 PM

People in Africa like Robert Mugabe are huge problems. They take countries that are potentially self sustaining and turn them into basket cases. A similar situation exists in Nigeria, a country with some of the world's largest oil reserves and other natural resources of value, but it is high on the debtor list and it's citizens mostly live in abject poverty.
The solutions to the problems in Africa and other poor regions of the world will come from within, as Snowman pointed out. I wish I live long enough to see the day when a military leader or rebel overthrow one dictator then turn around and make his or her country the envy of the world by bringing it peace, high literacy and prosperity.
I am no fan of President Bush and his occasinal tendency for pooly thought out adventurism, but the gross problems of Africa and other poor regions of the world existed before he took office and will be around long after he is out of office, unless people in those regions take matters into their own hands.
The problem is a vexing one. Before you accuse me of inaction please understand that I contribute on an ongoing basis to one charity (even have a "foster" child that I support) and regularly open my checkbook to others that request money. But I also realize that to a large extent, my money only allow the people that it helps avoid starvation. True progress will come from enlightened leaders that have their skin tone, similar facial features, who call themselves patriots of their country and live up to their claim.

-- Modified on 7/4/2005 4:36:48 PM

i'm aware of bad governments and corruption in africa (and elsewhere) and the problems they pose, and i applaud your personal action.
i was railing against collective inaction and in favor of a more globalized thinking - where Africa is everybody's problem (because it is!). today its the middle east, and we're not doing well there; if Africa goes the way of the middle east - can the rest of the world cope?

what about our complicity in the problems of Africa and elsewhere?

but one need not evoke fear or sympathy to want to see more, and perhaps new and different forms of collective action. shear positivity/optimism, along with a realistic assessment of the present situation, should suffice to feel the need for better collective action.

and other poor regions of the world will be solved by the people that live in those areas, not by us or the rest of the industralized nations. The first step of the solution is removing the tyrants that rule those countries and given our track record at such an activity, I do not think that we would be of much good helping achieve that end.
There was a time in my life when I worked to bring about change on a massive scale because I believed that what I was doing was right and just. History has shown me that much of what I did was infact right, but the cause which I did it for was questionable. When it comes to saving the world, I now focus on small victories like fostering a child in a developing country or contributing funds to build a fresh water well or help supply a clinic.
The problem with large scale debt relief is that it goes to the government and not the people of the country that the relief is applied to. I doubt that the ordinary citizens of struggling countries are aware that their country owe a nickel of debt. I also doubt that any of them will see a nickel of debt relief.
Our country has made mistakes where it has propped up tinpot despots when we would have been better off to let our covert agents put a bullet through their brains. But I also think that we work hard to right our mistakes and our efforts at that are broad in scope. How many other countries in the world give financial aid (even tiny amounts) to every country that need it. We sometimes look away, but when it is crunch time we are first in line to offer assistance and often the last to leave the blighted areas. What other country can say that? Did Sweden, Finland, Britain or France supply troops and transport equipment to assist sunami victims in the West Indies? Did any of those countries sacrifice the lives of their soldiers in a misquided attempt to save Somalis from their warlords? France, Britain, the Netherlands, and Belgium were colonial powers in Africa. Of that group, only Britain appears to be making a concerted effort to make a difference on the continent.

agree that action is better than no action. But we diverge on the type of action that is appropriate. Keep on doing what you do and I will continue to do what I do, maybe those efforts will one day converge at a solution.

do we want to try to help people who do not help themselves? You know, there are causes right here that could use that money.

BTW, I never said it was "complicated", I just pointed out that they don't seem to help themselves. Seems pretty simple to me...

" do we want to try to help people who do not help themselves? You know, there are causes right here that could use that money.

BTW, I never said it was "complicated", I just pointed out that they don't seem to help themselves. Seems pretty simple to me..."

Iraq??

It was in our interst to invade Iraq because of their capability to create Chemical Weapons and their support for terrorism.

Are you recommending we invade Africa??

The reasons seemed to have changed from the original "WMD" reason to "the reason of the moment".  Africa?  No, but the oft brought up North Korea, Iran, ..  I don't want to hijack this thread so I'll stop.