Are We Really “Saving” Africa?
Featured, Social Justice — By Penny Carothers on September 21, 2009 at 12:10 amIt’s important to note the founders of Invisible Children have always had good intentions. Good intentions can do a great deal of good, but when they’re not examined, they can also do a great deal of harm.
Mary Anderson in her book, Do No Harm, discusses this first hand. Policies used by NGOs around the world have been created based on her work in conflict areas. A sample of her philosophy is included below:
Aid is not neutral in the midst of conflict. Aid and how it is administered can cause harm or can strengthen peace capacities in the midst of conflicted communities. All aid programmes involve the transfer of resources (food, shelter, water, health care, training, etc.) into a resource-scarce environment. Where people are in conflict, these resources represent power and wealth and they become an element of the conflict. Some people attempt to control and use aid resources to support their side of the conflict and to weaken the other side. If they are successful or if aid staff fail to recognise the impact of their programming decisions, aid can cause harm.
Numerous sources who prefer to remain anonymous have concerns Invisible Children is doing harm with some of their methodologies and approaches. Their actions on the ground, particularly in the early stages, lacked cultural sensitivity, sophistication, and knowledge of the complex dynamics that arise when white people with resources and power enter a war-torn, resource poor environment. In many respects, they seem to have grown up in the intervening years. However, in some areas they still need to develop sophistication and a complexity that comes with maturity.
Simplistic messages and solutions
"Saving Darfur...via thong?" Sisqo would be proud.
In their campaigns, Invisible Children often uses simplistic characterizations of the solutions to the conflict or the child soldiers themselves, such as “The Abducted” or “The Rescue” campaign. This simplistic language exacerbates stereotypes about Africans, reinforcing that they have no resources, expertise, and/or ability to help themselves, while at the same time propagating the erroneous belief Americans are responsible for saving poor Africans who have nothing. Nowhere in their messaging do they appear to be using empowering language (like CARE International’s I Am Powerful campaign). It is difficult to describe the impact of the words we use, but it can mean the difference between empowerment and stripping power away, between hope and despair.
As this site points out,
Organizations like Invisible Children not only take up resources that could be used to fund more intelligent advocacy, they take up rhetorical space that could be used to develop more intelligent advocacy. And yeah, this may seem like an absurdly academic point to raise when talking about a problem that is clearly crying out for pragmatic solutions, but, uh, the way we define problems is important. Really, really important. Choosing to simplistically define Congolese women as “The Raped” and Ugandan children as “The Abducted” constrains our ability to think creatively about the problems they face, and work with them to combat these problems.
Additionally, like other campaigns, but perhaps even more so, Invisible Children has heavily used a consumerist thrust to get their message out. Their (always creative, often overly provocative, sometimes crossing into bad taste and worse) t-shirts are coveted and sell very well. There is nothing inherently wrong with selling t-shirts to raise money, but the way it functions at Invisible Children and some other groups, is troubling. When the first thing a supporter sees on their website is “look good, do good” it promotes a belief that purchasing something is one of the most powerful things a person can do to end the abduction of child soldiers and do good in the world. A less prominent emphasis on image and consumption would promote a more accurate picture of what the solutions to conflict and injustice really require.
In discussions with a representative from the organization it appears that much of the disconnect between the greater sophistication of their programs on the ground and their simplistic messaging has to do with the fact that “none of the decisions” about creation of the messaging “are ever made in Uganda,” though Uganda staff is consulted “from time to time.” According to this representative, the rationale is that “it is difficult for the context of many of the media and merchandise to cross such a cultural divide, especially when both are so heavily marketed to teenagers in the U.S.”
Many organizations that work in the developing world have had a difficult time relating the complexities of what they do to a desensitized, oversaturated population. However, they overcome these hurdles because they know it is their responsibility to portray the individuals with whom they work with dignity and respect. Especially in the last several years they have taken the leap, believing that their supporters can assimilate a nuanced and complex picture of the issues and people who they desire to aid. They still use slogans and soundbites, but they use empowering language that invites reflection. Invisible Children should follow in the footsteps of the organizations that came before them, providing their supporters with a vision of the conflict and the children involved that is not reduced to slogans or simplistic characterizations of incredibly complex issues.
16 Comments
Penny,
I think this may be the most important and provocative article the Writers Collective has ever published. Thank you for your hard work. Thank you also for the article’s integrity, fairness, and generosity.
Agreed. Burnside is proud to finally run this.
Wow. That was well written, and very thought provoking. Thanks for your honesty, Penny. I really appreciated that (it’s hard to say I enjoyed it…)
Wow- that was really informative and very well-researched. I’m glad you wrote it; it does make me think a little harder about the best ways to effect change in developing countries. One of my (very wise) college professors said that our tendency as people was to simplify stories and conflict and life in general, and that he was working to ‘muddy the waters,’ so to speak, to bring out the complexities involved in various (environmental) issues. I think he would really appreciate your article, because it does bring up some of the complexities that people prefer to distill down in ways that are harmful. Good job
(I’ll be sure to e-mail it to my prof!)
Good. Thank you.
As one who has been to Africa several times, and who has family there doing “mission work” (are we not all missionaries in our work?!), I appreciate this piece.
And I just have to agree: Yes.
Thought-provoking, knowledgeable, and full of insight-the girl has done it again! Nice job Penny. Your hard work is apparent in every line. I am so proud to see you pursuing your passion. “America’s solution to Uganda’s problem” is only made more obtuse by your use of specific campaign and lobbying examples-really drives the message home. Well done!
Penny,
First, you have single-handedly elevated Burnside Writers Collective to a status comparable to a serious, credible publication. I’m no longer sure if we will ever be able to see stories about basketball or beer here without thinking, “what happened to BW; they were once writing on the cutting edge of social justice issues?”. I may never have another piece published here for lack of meeting the new quality standard you’ve provided with this article!
Second, you’ve touched on a point I’ve been thinking about for some time. What is our responsibility in Africa when in fact we can’t seem to get Americans to even reach out to our suffering neighbors, literally next door or sleeping in the parking garage where we work. In preparing a sermon on James 1:27 last week, I realized that there was no way I would see success in getting people to answer a call to action when that would require them to think about distant Africa. Instead, I worked very hard to get them, maybe for the first time, to take a much small step. I called them to help our “orphans and widows” in our neighborhoods. It is my hope and prayer that after people have a life-transformation with efforts locally (and invite others to do the same), there will be an army of folks whose hearts are so prepared to help others in the name of Jesus, that we will no longer have to look to secular NGOs, but instead see millions of transformed Christians ready to serve, bless, and help the world (whether from the US, Africa, or anywhere).
Whoa, whoa…let’s not get too hasty here about cutting out all the beer/basketball articles.
Which gives me an idea for an article about beer AND basketball.
Thanks guys. I really appreciate your words.
I also want to thank Invisible Children, and specifically Erica D’Alessandro, for her willingness to spend the time engaging with someone who was questioning her organization. She spent a lot of time developing lengthy and thoroughly responses to my questions and critiques. She is the main reason this article actually has a hope of being accurate and fair. (And I hope she and IC feels that it is – if not, I’d love to hear why.)
Thanks again everyone for taking the time to read 4,000 words about this topic!
Penny, your piece is amazingly well researched and well written. Thanks for not only pointing out problems, but also for offering candid and practical thoughts on how to better approach these issues.
Penny writes “What does it mean to serve, to pursue social justice in Jesus’ name, to lay down one’s life, to care for the least among us? The answers to problems like world hunger, family homelessness, AIDS orphans, and child soldiers are incredibly complex – but our response can be very simple.”
Yes, that is precisely what I love about the Jesus of the New Testament – he acts, and calls us to act – simply, directly and faithfully.
And yes, our lives, interactions and the consequences of our actions are incredibly complex. For example, who among us does not have a cell phone? A key component of every cell phone is coltan. Every ounce of coltan, that we use every day, has been smuggled out of the Congo. And every dollar, spent on behalf of our cell phone usage has gone to a variety of terrorists, kidnappers, murderers and rapists. (according to Wikipedia, about 5.5 million people have died in the wars in the Congo since 1998).
So I circle back to the nearly eternal question “What would Jesus do?
Would Jesus use – or not use – a cell phone? Would Jesus refuse to wear clothing made in Asian or African sweatshops?
And of course, what would Jesus expect each of us to do?
I firmly do not believe that Jesus would want us to live under a cloud of guilt. In fact, quite the opposite, Jesus calls us to be agents of fully orbed liberation.
Some of us will do that as individuals, some will work with large scale organizations. And I am convinced that it is not the celebrities or the petitions that will manifest the kingdom of God on earth; it will be each transformed life. And yes, it begins with each one of us.
And yes, the harvest, and the need is great; beyond measure in fact, but the New Testament is the blueprint for how a small group with a vision can transform the world.
Consider those few individuals who have refused to leave the world as it was – from St. Francis, to Mother Teresa to M. Ghandi. There is nothing stopping us from initiating our own faith in action – except our own inertia.
The ultimate deception is that we can’t do anything.
Our small individual steps are the best we can do – and they truly are the best we can do.
Excellent article.
In thinking about the debate over whether to encourage taking out Joseph Kony by any means necessary, or to advocate for the non-violent solution of peace talks, it occurs to me that there is a third option: praying that Jesus would personally visit Joseph Kony.
It’s completely impractical and maybe even impossible, but it’s happened before. A man named Saul used to murder Christians. Until he met Jesus.
Penny,
I really appreciated this article. IC played a big role in motivating me to spend a semester in Uganda last year. I did so through my school and ended up at Uganda Christian University in Mukono. It did a lot to challenge my western savior complex. Your article deftly navigates a sticky issue. I’ve been invited to work with the IC chapter on campus and I’ve struggled to respond in a nuanced way (that is, balancing my inner Sachs and Easterly).
All this is to say – it is good to know that there are people like you working to elevate the conversation and push past the damaging stereotypes of all things African. There is so much more to East Africa than the war and poverty – or smiling children and grateful recipients of aid.
I also have to point out your comments on trade in the beginning of your article to say that it is SO REFRESHING to hear someone (outside of academia) portray free trade as part of the solution to poverty, rather than the source of all evil. Clearly the issue is more complicated, but I’d love to see an article or two on farm subsidies for readers without an economics background.
Keep up the good work! I look forward to reading your next piece and
Cheers,
Jonathan