Is KONY 2012 a good solution to the problem in Uganda?
Asked by
DominicX (
28813)
March 8th, 2012
(Changed from original as I realized a similar question had already been asked).
So, there has been a lot of cynical buzz about the KONY 2012 movement, which aims to stop Joseph Kony and his child soldiers in Uganda.
Is this charity worthwhile? Is the social media buzz about it pointless or will it actually make a difference? Does cynicism triumph here?
Does anyone know any alternatives to it, that may be better?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
12 Answers
Everyone should lay off Kony. He’s a great asset to the Lakers.
I dunno about you, but I wouldn’t support a charity that only gives 32% of its profits to its cause.
NO
The US is already involved as well as a few European Nations, helping “train” mainly Ugandan soldiers in apprehending Kony and other leaders of the LRA. Assisting the Ugandan military however, is fairly sickening as they are pretty much the same monster as the LRA, just a different face.
I have mixed feelings on this myself. At first I looked at it as a way for “privileged people” who support the movement, to feel good about themselves without actually doing anything. But then I thought who am I to care about their level of involvement? The situation is pretty bad in parts of Africa, and anyone who wants to raise awareness about it should do so. If positive changes are made from that, then I am all for it. But, I am not going to support it just because it is “the cool” thing of the moment.
Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t this group just pushing for greater Western military intervention in Uganda? I’m skeptical as to how much overall good more military aid to those countries would do but I’m also wondering why should the focus be on Uganda specifically and not other African nations such as Somalia or Liberia which IMO are in more need of help?
That’s not to say that what Kony does/did isn’t morally reprehensible on many levels, it is very much so, it’s just sad to say that there are places that are in greater need of help if the West is going to be providing it.
As to the group pushing for this action, I have to say that I find them very suspect.
Kony 2012 really just reeks to high heavens of being some White Man’s Burden bs.
Joseph Kony is still out there, and is still abducting children for his murderous gang and his messianic vision of himself as the leader of his own theocracy, as “revealed” to him by God. He has been indicted for crimes against Humanity and there is a warrant out to bring him to The Hague for trial. Unless we can determine that his is truly dead, the need to bring him to tria has not gone away.
Pressure from The Invisible Children, the group behind Kony 2012, did help push the US to send in 100 special forces troops to help train the Ugandan Army and, perhaps, if we get a fix on Kony’s location, swoop in and arrest him.
The guy behind Kony 2012, the executive director of The Invisible Children, gets an annual salary of $90K for running a charity that’s taken in $13 million in a year. That’s not a high salary to administer such a charity. The administrative and fund-raising costs of the organization are also pretty typical for charitable operations its size.
All the criticism of The Invisible Children’s efforts strike me as Indicative of the saying, :“No good deed goes unpunished.” Some of the critics, I think, find it easier to do nothing when they explain why anything done by those who care is wrong.
@ETpro And see, I think a lot of the enthusiasm for Kony 2012 comes from an over-eagerness to do something, anything, that people don’t check out if this is better, if this is helpful, if this is involving the communities’ voices and amplifying the voices of actual Ugandans, not the voices of the privileged, white, American men who actually run Invisible Children. Just because the CEO has a low salary doesn’t mean the rest of the money goes to actually helping Ugandans -in fact, most of it goes to their media campaign. CS Monitor has a good article on how Kony 2012 can be better.
@Aethelflaed My answer stands. Reading the Christian Science piece, it seemed to me that the Jason Russel and his staff were being held guilty of being white. I fail to see how his efforts are stopping Africans from helping themselves.
Yes, Invisible Children could spend less on media production and distribution. That might allow them to use a larger percentage of donations collected on their mission, but it wouldn’t necessarily mean they could help more children. Which would you rather have. 35% of $10 million or 75% of $100,000?
@ETpro They aren’t stopping Africans from helping themselves, but there’s a horrifyingly patronizing view in assuming that Africans really only come in two varieties – evil warlord and helplessly incompetent – and I want no part of it. If IC wants my money, they need to treat Africans with more respect.
But you are right. They are guilty of being white, in the sense that they assume some racial superiority.
In my opinion, the British should never have left. The country has a dismal human rights record and a long history of brutal dictators. If they have a weak leader, the country degenerates into tribal warfare. If they have a strong leader, they violate a whole range of human rights including inducting children into the military. I wish the U.N. had a civil leadership component that would be capable of taking over leadership in a country and training the populace into a peaceful democratic country that will eventually regain the right to rule itself.
Answer this question