Live8
by Kerim
I didn’t see the concert, but I’ve been following responses on the blogsphere. Here are some highlights:
- Ethan Zukerman wonders
whether the whole process really needs to involve Robbie Williams. Or whether it wouldn’t benefit from the involvement of a few more Africans.
African artists that is – although it seems they’ve been ghettoized to their own event.
- K-Punk laments the death of punk rock brought on by the first Live Aid:
Live Aid was the anti-punk, its ideological blackmail requiring that we give up on aesthetics AND politics. If post-punk had demanded, and for a brief moment, had got, everything – sonic innovation and/as political insurgency – then Live Aid convinced us that in a state of emergency such excessive demands would have to be suspended.
- Tim Burke says that Live8 was worse than nothing:
Bob Geldof responds that at least he’s doing something, and that doing something is better than doing nothing.
No. It’s not. Not when your concert is designed to create awareness of something that the audience is already screamingly aware of, the poverty of many African societies, without trying to make them aware of what they don’t know: about how aid is dispersed, about the actual processes of globalization, about the specific humanity of specific African societies. Hell, anything beyond, “Africa’s really poor”. That’s the one thing the rest of the world already knows.
Flickr has nearly 5,000 photos from the event.
UPDATE: MMK says that Live8 is “simply an exercise in white, Western megalomania.” (via Global Voices)
Starving For Answers
Have you heard? The revolution to end poverty began Saturday – right on your TV set of all places. According to some delusional artists and media types, nine pop music concerts have empowered millions of people to begin an end to poverty in Africa.
Gotta love that adjective “empowered”, which literally means “invested with legal power or official authority.” So if we are to believe the hype, a bunch of middle to lower class scrubs have been provided with the legal power and/or official authority to make poverty history.
Question: If you don’t have a shitload of wealth and blue blood, how are you supposed to have power??? And don’t give me this power in large numbers bullshit, since the world economic decision making is done by a select few.
I know this feel good empowerment bullshit works wonders for shallow talk show hosts like Oprah, but when it comes to serious issues like world poverty, it is nothing more than a public relations stunt. Yeah, make people feel like they have a voice, when the truth of the matter is they have no say in anything at all, their own lives included.
Here is an example of the powerless masses: It is safe to say that most people were against the invasion of Iraq. Were they able to stop the war?
Sorry for being cynical, however, I fail to see how nine mediocre concerts (presented rather poorly and with numerous commericals) can change the world. Imagine, like John Lennon used to sing, for every horrible problem on this earth, we can have a concert to kickstart the solution. Ah, if it was all so easy.
Does the average world citizen really know why people are dying in large numbers in Africa? Is it just the luck of the draw, as some would have you believe? Or is it because plundering the rich resources of Africa is a much simpler task when there are fewer people inhabiting the land?
You wanna talk foriegn aid? No problem. Aid money is shoved down the throats of these African nations with the condition they hire Western contractors to improve their infrastructures. Of course, this is assuming the aid money is not first grabbed by some dictator who specializes in genocide. Funny how the activist artists tip toe around or outright avoid these vital issues when talking about Africa.
The solutions to the African poverty and AIDS problem proposed by these Live 8 do-gooders are naive and ignorant. And we have yet to discuss the issue of overpopulation on this planet.
So there you go! All you need is some well heeled finger snapping and back slapping to get the ball rolling for Africa. And don’t forget those life saving text messages while you’re at it.
So you say you want a revolution Madonna? The fact of the matter is we don’t all want to change the world. Especially those of us who are truly empowered.
-END
PS: Where was U2 during the closing ceremonies at Live 8? Had to run off and play a concert for a few million bucks?
If this issue is oh so important to Mr. Bono, why couldn’t he cancel his concert and show support by being on that stage with the rest of the performers? There are people dying here dude, where are your prioritie$?
So cynical. And misinformed. First off live8 was not done to ‘inform the public’ that Africa is poor. Nor was it done to raise money. It wasnt even a charity event. The organizers repeatedly said both and all these things. It was done specifically to pressure 8 individuals. Hence the name. The G8 leaders meeting this week. To pressure them to forgive debts of African nations and pledge 25 billion or so in aid which incidentally between Blair and Bush’s pledges was just about covered, so it was really just about debt forgiveness of existing debt. That was about it. It wasnt anything more than that. Not for raising awareness, but for signing a petition that was presented to the folks at the G8 meeting. Thats why – if any of you armchair-cynics had actually watched any of it – there was constantly scrolling across the screen the website and text-number to call or visit to add your name to the petition. Thats all they were asking.
Another common misconception from archair-cynics, is that this was somehow to be a celebration of Africa and things african. No, it was not. But because of this impression you archair cynics bemoan the lack of ‘Africans represented’ at the event, and then bemoan the usual suspect which is of course white megalomania. No, from the start that was not the intention of live8. Get it right or stop carping. It wasnt FOR africans or for black americans as such. The audience was an ‘audience of 8′, as one of the organizers put it. The entire focus was on the 8 members meeting in scotland. Pressure on them, pressure on them. Debt forgiveness, debt forgiveness. That was it. Make a lot of noise to put pressure on them. Not to celebrate anything.
Lastly. Punk did not die at live aid. Green Day playing in Berlin for Live8 proves that. Punk turned into pop-metal on the one hand and into grunge on the other. It did so of its own accord, not because of live aid.
What DID change at live8, none of you archair cynics have grasped. What changed was the the left no longer expresses itself through popular music, the way it used to, the way it could count on popular music to be an outlet for so many decades. Live8 proved that that era is over for the left. Because the message at live8 – from Geldoff hugging bill gates to the nearly total lack of berating of traditional bad guys – was that anti-establishment messages via music concerts will no longer fly in this day and age. And thats a shocking change, tho it reflects the ongoing change in our political culture at large. Its shocking to see even such a reliable anti-establishment venue as the free concert bow to its pressure. Or to see Geldoff *praise* bush and blair for their generosity with African aid/debt forgiveness. U2′s Bono was asked about this. He simply said, “when they’re wrong, we have to say they’re wrong, when they’re right, we have to say they’re right.” Such is the *pragmatism* with which this free ‘liberal’ concert was organized and with which it was executed by its organizers. THATS something to notice. End of an era. And maybe its not such a bad thing for the left to keep up with changing times and be pragmatic if it will bring results. This wasnt ‘for the people’ – it targeted the corridors of power, as a new york times article also noted. Things were different at live8, but not for the reasons you cynics bemoan. Larger changes are afoot. But if you’ve got your traditional leftist goggles on, you’re not going to see them and wont be a part of them.
And – seeing Pink Floyd unite after 24 years, made any other silliness about the event more than worth it.
I know some people who would probably agree with the Pink Floyd bit
not sure I buy the argument that this wasn’t about Africa though…
Didn’t say it wasnt about Africa… talking about content, audience, and goals of the event. It was about Africa insofar as it was about debt forgiveness. Thats about it. In no other way was it about Africa. Not in terms of intended audience; not in terms of content of the presentations, not in terms of charity, health, or any other aspect of Africa. In that it was very different in organization, execution, and goals, from the original live aid. But a lot of people seem to have assumed it was ‘live aid II’. It wasnt in terms of these things.
I see your point, but looking at the official web site, Africa seems to be mentioned quite prominantly throughout.
It is also inaccurate and unfair to call some of the folks I’ve quoted above “armchair critics” if you look at their bios you will see that at least two of them have long histories of working in Africa and on African issues.
Granted I dont know any of you. But then if these folks know what its like to work in the field, they should also know that putting together a record-breaking event like live8 *also* involves an enormous amount of effort – and care. I don’t get why they would belittle all that effort and care so flippantly. That goes twice if they themselves have worked in the field.
It took a lot of effort and care to plan an invasion of Iraq, too, but that in and of itself doesn’t mean I ought to say nice things about it.
To some extent, investing lots of effort and care on a wrong-headed approach inclines me less favorably to it, because the waste of goodwill and labor seems even more lamentable.
Well, perhaps we’ve really hit bottom in terms of perspective when we can compare live8 to the invasion of Iraq.
Given that its a good cause, I myself am inclined to grant people a lot of leeway in how they want to go about contributing, whether its merely raising attention, or merely giving money, or contributing in a more personal and dedicated way. I find it unproductive in the extreme to berate such good causes merely because they ‘werent good enough’ in some absolute or extreme sense.
Like I say; for the next comment I expect Bob Geldoff to be compared to the Nazis, and then we will have seen everything.
Jak: Are you intentionally misreading Burke?
He doesn’t compare Live8 to the invasion of Iraq. Just because the two are mentioned doesn’t make it a comparison. Please read more carefully before responding.
Well, I’ve been reading for a while now (many years). Lets look at it again. Burke’s post has the following syllogism: a) iraq war took a lot of effort. b) Live8 took a lot of effort. Therefore, c) live8 and iraq war are equivalent in some way that bears upon the present conversation.
Is that a wrong reading? Seems pretty clear to me. Whats more, Burke did this intentionally to make his (rhetorical, unstated) point that he couldnt see anything much worthwhile in live8 the way I could. The reduction actually is his – In my own post I never said that the reason for valuing live8 was ONLY the effort that went into it. But he read my post as if that was what I had said, reductively, in order to make his rhetorical point.
Yes, I wish you guys would read these posts more carefully.
All I was pointing out therefore, is that the analogy he generates with (a) and (b) of his syllogism, is a reductive and absurd one. Live8 is not Iraq, on any of the levels of valuation that this series of posts was concerned with: its ethical consequences, its moral consequences, its practical consequences, as an event.
You guys seem to think it was a collosal waste of time. I disagreed on the points which you brought up. I’m not sure why the iraq war came into this, except via Burke’s easy analogy. No, effort alone doesnt make something worthwhile. That was never my point, so I’m not sure why he made it his. If he wants to argue that live8 was ‘wrongheaded’ – why not say why he thinks that, instead of the easy and absurd comparison to the iraq war? With all its baggage?
I know you guys think live8 was wrongheaded. But so far virtually all the reasons you give for thinking so are either factually wrong (“live8 was done to tell people Africa is poor”) or ridiculously ungenerous (“if you’re not in the field like us you’re worth shit”). And so on.
Jak. Tim was directly responding to your statement in which you said the following:
He is suggesting that this is a fallacious argument and that one might in fact consider the inverse relationship: the more effort goes into something the more it is worth criticizing.
When you make your syllogism:
You intentionally ignore the important nature of the comparison being made. How are the equivalent? Solely in terms of effort, not in any other way. Why is effort important? Because you made the argument that effort was important. Tim was making a counterfactual argument and one that I happen to agree with. Now you are attempting to discredit this argument by making it seem like he is positing an equivalence between Live8 and the Iraq war. It is clear that he is not doing this.
You can argue however you like, but nobody is going to take you seriously if you deliberately misrepresent the arguments of others. Your other misrepresentations seem equally disingenuous.