Visible People: Rough Cut

Posted by Caitlin on Thursday, April 7, 2011
Labels: , , , ,

Visible People's feature film, released 6 April 2011.

3 comments:

Wayne said...

I find your critique to be a valuable academic exercise on many levels. But like so many others commentaries, it lacks any true solutions to what IC is trying to bring and that is CHANGE. The real deficiencies that you have exposed make for excellent dialogue between academics and activist leaders and I hope will serve to inform them. It is however important to note that movements are not about nuance, and animating uninterested people does not come from a deep examination of all the points and counter points. This type of demand on engaging the masses would likely result in disillusioned people wondering why they are unable to effect change.

So many millions have died in Africa while the intelligencia argue about painting the sufferer as weak, and white guilt or the superiority that comes from a savior complex or the lack of nuance in the discussions about what need to be done. All this is true, but the solution is not more discussion. IC has found a way to move people. Hopefully some of these people will research more about the issue and others like it. Hopefully some of them will remain engaged as the focus changes or as the discussion becomes more sophisticated. Hopefully their effort will be bring to end to some peoples suffering, whose prospect for change without them may be dim.

March 12, 2012 at 8:58 AM
Unknown said...

Hi Wayne,

We appreciate your comments, and you are right - this was only an academic exercise for one of our classes. It does lack the solutions side. That is not our area of expertise, but we know people who have worked toward solutions, using less flashy, 'sexy', sensationalist ways. And they are many.

We don't really monitor this blog anymore, since all of us have graduated and are pursuing studies elsewhere. So we won't be updating new material or responding to further comments. Instead, I encourage you interact with the compilation below of articles and responses from academic leaders and Ugandans who have responded to the film and IC's work.

I hope you can see that there's no clear divide between academia and activist leaders. Many play both roles. And it's that lack of academic and expert input that IC continues to display that we are concerned with. IC, as activist leaders, need to be responsible in educating their audience. They've moved people to call for a simple solution when in reality there are none. At the same time, they use up valuable resources, time, effort, and space that could be directed toward aiding local efforts.

The most frequent response I hear is, "At least IC is doing something. At least buying an action kit is doing something." Our concern is that with aid work, "doing something" isn't necessarily the best thing and may cause more harm than good (Google SWEDOW and read up on the Doctors without Borders fiasco after the Rwandan genocide). Most peace efforts are slow, arduous, and takes years of dedication - totally antithetical to IC's quick-fix solution.

The critiques surrounding IC aren't new; its lack of change over the last 6 years and unwillingness to reevaluate their philosophy of aid is worrying. They may have riled people up and got a lot of action kit sales, but is it really the right way to use resources? Is raising awareness more important than actual on-the-ground solutions rooted in reality? Are American-style approaches going to solve Ugandan problems? Isn’t it problematic and arrogant to think they will? (Hasn’t Vietnam, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq… taught us anything?)

Though we don't propose solutions in our project, there are many people working towards that (most existing wayyyy before IC came along).

March 12, 2012 at 10:02 AM
Unknown said...

Here's the list:

Outlining Justice and Reconciliation Project, by our prof, the founder and links to other local peace initiatives http://www.opencanada.org/features/ugandans2012/

On their philosophy of aid:
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/10/opinion/kony-2012-video/index.html

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/03/solving-war-crimes-with-wristbands-the-arrogance-of-kony-2012/254193/#.T1lvaZrHVrc.facebook

http://globalspin.blogs.time.com/2012/03/08/why-you-should-feel-awkward-about-the-kony2012-video/?iid=sl-main-mostpop2

A sarcastic but true view of Kony 2012: http://www.wrongingrights.com/2012/03/the-definitive-kony-2012-drinking-game.html

Responses from Ugandans:
http://rosebellkagumire.com/2012/03/08/kony2012-my-response-to-invisible-childrens-campaign/

http://www.insightonconflict.org/2012/03/kony-2012-ugandan-perspective/

http://rosebellkagumire.com/2012/03/09/more-perspective-on-kony2012/

http://dignityinpoverty.blogspot.com/2012/03/i-am-visible-child-from-northern-uganda.html

http://thisisafrica.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/acholi-street-stop-kony2012-invisible-childrens-campaign-of-infamy/

From an academic working in Uganda:
http://kambale.com/kony-2012-response-from-adam-branch.html

The solution that IC proposes is to arrest Kony. The only way to arrest Kony is to send in more troops (there are already US military advisors in Uganda). That's another war in the region. It’s not a simple matter of walking into the jungle and snatching Kony out. If it were that easy, Kony wouldn’t be around terrorizing people for the last 25 years. War is something that the Acholi are finally getting past. Bringing another war into the region will plunge northern Uganda, the Congo, and maybe CAR into more chaos.

Right now, the most critical issue in Uganda is nodding disease: http://rosebellkagumire.com/2012/03/10/support-nodding-disease-victims-the-most-urgent-challenge-to-a-northern-uganda-child/

Because IC has taken over Internet rhetorical space, we hardly hear anything about this serious issue that the Ugandan government is refusing to address. Can you see that all this focus on Kony is allowing Museveni to sit on his hands about current issues in his country? IC is playing directly into his hands.

Hope you continue to read responses from every side, especially Ugandan voices. After all, it should be Ugandans who should be empowered to affect change in their own country. Ugandans don't need IC for change. They have their own initiatives: http://www.insightonconflict.org/conflicts/uganda/peacebuilding-organisations/ It is arrogant of IC to think that their solution is the best, most important one that concerns Ugandans. In essence, IC is replacing Ugandan voices with their own and representing Ugandans to the English-speaking world. As Ugandan founder of Project Diaspora TMS Ruge asks, respect my agency.

Best,
Linda

March 12, 2012 at 10:02 AM

Post a Comment