Thursday, January 01, 2009

Why Is It That African Mass Killings Get So Little Attention While The U.S. Makes Global Headlines?


Congo civilians massacred at church

Uganda: Troops will protect against rebel attacks

The United States creates "colateral damage" in which 40 innocent people are killed in a bombing in Afghanistan or Iraq directed at destroying armed combatants that are hiding withing highly concentrated civilian areas and international outrage and protests are garnered.   George W. Bush is burned in effigy or has a shoe thrown at him.  Certain operatives in the USA are happy and will make cartoons about the incident.

400 Black Africans are purposefully slaughtered in the Congo, central Africa and little is heard about the carnage or the inhumane action.



What about these two situations make for the differences in the world's reactions?

I have surmised previously that the underlying issue is the assumptions that go along with the contructs of "supremacy" and "inferiority" of people and the SYSTEMS which they are attached to.  The supreme power of the United States lends itself to the higher level of expectations placed upon it by the greater world.  Likewise the expectations that go along with those who are perceived as  "the savage" speak for themselves.  His antics are seen as "a savage proves his stripes any chance that he can".  

Where as I am one to expose the bigory of the activists around the world the true focus must be placed on the people in conflict before real change can take place.  The concepts of "equality" and "human rights" are constructs that must be made organic to the people who are seeking valuation.  If the value of a human being is said to be intrinsic then the KILLER of such a person cannot be allowed to be the prime determinant factor in the question of his worth as a basis for protest.  This is a truth both on the urban streets of America and in the Congo.

To be clear - I am not proposing that the world create some roaving faction who seeks to protest every single killing of a human being as evidence of our equal worth.  This is the centralized approach.  Such valuation must be distributed where the enforcement of the valuation of the individual is maintained at the PERIPHERY.  Lets start with that human himself.  In valuing himself and the person next to him we'd expect that person to translate that valuation into a set of actions that fit within a general range which prove such valuation.

The situation in Congo or Haiti or Pakistan is not going to work itself out nor will external forces be able to enforce a permanent solution for them.

No comments: