Why is African violence ignored?

New York Daily News ^ | 4-10-2003 | Stanley Crouch

[jocon307]

A couple of days ago, I went to a lunch to celebrate Paul Theroux's new book, "Dark Star Safari: Overland From Cairo to Cape Town."

"One of the epiphanies of my trip," he writes, "was the realization that where the mode of life had changed significantly in the Africa I had known, it had changed for the worse."

When Theroux and I talked, he observed that he had noticed something very strange in The New York Times in the last couple of days - a short Associated Press story about "966 victims [who] were killed in an April 3 assault on the Roman Catholic mission in Drodro and 14 surrounding villages, 50 miles northeast of Bunia, the provincial capital [of the Democratic Republic of the Congo]."

Theroux was disturbed because he had seen another story in the same edition - twice as long, by my word count - in which great concern was expressed about the declining gorilla and chimpanzee populations of Central Africa; they are being killed off by the Ebola virus and poaching.

To me, his observation is not about a greater concern for animals than for people. It is about the double standard for oppressive behavior. In other words, if those 966 people had been victims of a white colonial regime as opposed to being victims of tribal warfare, it would be a front-page story.

Black journalists, TransAfrica, the Congressional Black Caucus, the NAACP, the Revs. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, the Nation of Islam and every leftist periodical and radio station would be screaming bloody murder, and for good reason: It would be bloody murder. But it takes some imagination to blame everything, yet again, on the white man as opposed to the ever-ready demons of human nature. So such atrocities are met with silence.

That silence was also exposed on Oprah Winfrey's March 12 show about the female sex slaves of Africa who have been kidnapped, raped, mutilated, made into erotic toys and slaughtered by the thousands by tribal warriors and rebel units as brutal as any violent men in recorded history.

Again, if those women were the victims of Europeans, you can be sure American Negroes and their leftist compatriots would, correctly, scream down the moon.

But it seems we have no loud concerns about what is going on in Sierra Leone or Uganda, the two examples discussed on the Winfrey show with Naomi Wolf, the writer and journalist, and Catherine Wiesner, head of child protection programs for the International Rescue Committee in Sierra Leone.

Wolf described what she saw in Sierra Leone as an unprecedented sexual holocaust, then introduced Wiesner, whose team sends videotaped messages between abducted girls and their families. The emotional tapes have led to the release of 50 girls. "It's the most rewarding job I can think of having," Wiesner said.

Such atrocities prove that we need a single standard, let the chips fall where they may. Or we need to shut up and stop pretending we are so concerned about the troubled fates of Africans.

[Kenno]

Since April 1, 2003 Welcome to FR. Total BS. Nice try. What is this about? You need to see a shrink to take care of that paranoia. If you were right in the head, you'd see that it would not make sense, if I were some troll, to make probably over a hundred posts and wait nine days before dropping the bomb. Get some rest; you obviously need it.

[Anamensis]

Wow, that really WAS a sophisticated argument: they can't be Marxist, they're too broke. I bow before such incredible insight. Well, don't waste any more of your valuable time on me, I'm sure you have heads of state to advise.

[cherry]

"Not the real reason. Mainly, nobody cares. "

not that either....I care....but

we can't say anything at all about blacks, minorities, Africans, or any variation there of....we just can't ....

we can't do that in this country and we certainly can't do that in Africa....

Africa is declining further....

Sanger could not have written a better script to kill off black people....

its like its a leftist plot launched a century ago to slowly let Africa kill itself...and its working according to their schedule, isn't it?

[cherry]

"Loyalties are almost entirely tribal "

which is why we are one of the best and luckiest countries on earth....

tribalism is limited thankfully....

I hope it stays that way but it seems that segregation is in fashion again.....

[thegreatbeast]

African violence is ignored because it isn't news. It is a commonplace. It is not alone in that regard either. Malaysia seems to suffer from the same kind of tribalism that makes this same old, same old.
You'd all do well to realize that you live in perhaps one of a score of countries in all the world where your life is worth more than the deposit you paid on the can of coke you are drinking.
I remember back during the Miss World riots that there were dead bodies lying about the side of the road of this African city and people just walked by without paying notice like the corpse was just empty shopping cart or something.
Death & dying are not news in Africa.

[thegreatbeast]

Go hitching in America and you might find how common violence is too, BTW.

[cyborg]

To their credit, the only sector which has been interested in these stories are the Christians in this country.

* Yeah I was going to point that out. I knew someone would pick up my mental vibes :-) Thank goodness for the missionaries.

[cyborg]

You are right. I had time to think about it. As much as I want people to act like missionaries, in the end it is not the United States or any other nation's responsibility. You are also right in pointing out the UN's place in this.

[philetus]

The only way to help Africa is to shoot the leaders, wait two weeks, shoot the leaders, wait two weeks, shoot the.....

[Porterville]

Because the liberal press hates blacks...pure and simple, isn't it???

[Starstruck]

There are probably many reasons why the U.S. should or should not get involved in Africa. Hopefully these reasons are more altruistic than the alledged respecters of individual rights are willing to give individuals. DU doesn't have a total monopoly the clueless.

[Naspino]

I remember a study on resources. The center of Africa did not provide enough resources to sustain a population (without importing / wealth). However the coast of Africa did. Looking at the population it was heavily weighted in the center.

[crobnson]

What is the biggest scream going on in this country? What is the one thing that almost everybody is holding their breath to hear? WMD. Why? Because human slaughter by evil dictators is not a good enough reason to do anything. It isn't here, so it doesn't affect us. It's none of our business, let somebody else take care of that problem, I don't want to spend my money on THAT!

What has been the major theme of the war in Iraq? Freeing these people who have been treated like animals by a devil, allowing them to take control of their country, human compassion, trying not to cause too many civilian casualties, soldiers with a military weapon in one hand and a bleeding baby in his other. The world expects a reason, a "we are threatened by them, they are a threat to their neighbors, they are creating wmd. If this country stood up and said, "We are going over to end this evil regime, because they are killing, torturing, starving and oppressing their people". We would have alot more enemies. Without the "legitimate" reason (WMD), this war would not have happened. What in the hell has happened to human compassion? The strong helping the weak, Not standing back and watching human lives being totally wiped off the face of the earth. The song, God Bless the USA, may be appreciated by some Americans, but I belief that alot of people just plain take it for granted. The Iraqi-Americans and the Iraqis themselves, haven't. </rant>

[ninenot]

Your post raises some interesting points.

First off, I am as shocked, horrified, and genuinely sorrowful about the slaughters going on (not just in Africa...) as anyone can be without being present on the scene, or without having relatives who are victims. Please understand that, or at least take my word for it.

Our prosecution of the "liberation" of Iraq rested on two separate but related facts: 1) Iraq had financed and sponsored acts of terrorism against the USA; 2) Iraq's possession of WMD's constituted a 'clear and present danger' to the USA because they COULD be used against civilians in this country. Under commonly-accepted moral laws, these facts gave us the justification for prosecuting a war (under all the OTHER moral restrictions applicable.)

As you can deduce from the above, the United States had clear national interests (primarily self-defense) in Iraq's regime-change.

George Washington, TJefferson, BFranklin, and hundreds of other American statesmen have made it clear that the ONLY foreign-affairs mission of the USA is the national interest of the USA. It is fair to say that other US Presidents have ignored this dictum at their peril. (E.G., the presumption that Vietnam's fall would permanently harm the interests of the USA...)

There's the foundation.

Now as to the Just War: in an aphoristic definition which is accurate, Chesterton stated that 'the ONLY just war is a war of defense.'

The conflagrations in Africa simply do NOT rise to the level of harming the National Interests of the USA. Nor can we commence warfare in Africa under any possible stretch of the "just war" theory--a moral necessity.

There is NO justification for US involvement.

On the other hand, there IS, UNQUESTIONABLY, a justification for UN involvement. The UN should establish order, at the point of arms, if necessary.

Call Kofi Annan and wake him up.

[Under the Radar]

I remember a study on resources. The center of Africa did not provide enough resources to sustain a population (without importing / wealth). However the coast of Africa did. Looking at the population it was heavily weighted in the center.

Excellent point, one which I had not considered. Thank you for teaching me something.

[crobnson]

Is my argument legitimate? I completely understand that the US cannot be the world's police force. But it is so frustrating to sit back and watch as so many human beings are brutalized. What is to happen if nobody ever does anything about it? I know that the US and Britain went to Iraq in the name of national security. But I see that the biggest potential reward will be for the Iraqi people. The evil blood that escaped could very well start somewhere else, which could bring the national threat back. The way I see it, at least somebody did something, regardless of the reasons. Are people like myself to continually hope that a nation becomes a threat so that the people can finally be helped? I have had such an intense education lately in exactly how useless the UN is. How can there be hope for the people who truly honestly need help, from a group of people that include members from countries that are brutal. If the group that is responsible for helping doesn't care, what good are they? Maybe I am bothered by the human suffering too much. Seems that having your back turned and your eyes closed to the pain and suffering is the world's answer to these problems. All I can say is, thank god that at least the Iraqi people will now have a chance. Of course it is now up to them to be forever diligent in keeping their country safe from evil.