Monthly Archives: March 2012

Kony 2012: The Goal is Not Our “Awareness”

In the West, it’s almost inconceivable that the universe doesn’t revolve around us. We believe the Americas weren’t “discovered” until a European stumbled across the land; the natives just don’t count, apparently.

Hollywood has created dozens upon dozens of films about white Westerners going to Africa to save the Africans who apparently just need white people to lead the way. It’s just fascinating.

The recently viral “KONY 2012″ video is a perfect example of all of this.

Don’t get me wrong: if you watched the video and were moved, then that’s perfectly understandable.

It was well made, and part of the video focused on real victims of a real tyrant. It was shocking and sad. You reacted because you have empathy, and that’s absolutely wonderful.

But unfortunately, as I wrote yesterday, that’s only part of the story. The “activism” requested in the video would support Uganda’s tyrannical government, make matters worse, stir up the fires, get the US military involved in another continent, and kill innocent people. It’s dangerous and misleading.

But What About Awareness?

This is where the self-centered thing comes into play. It’s almost impossible for many of us to comprehend this idea: we aren’t the focus. Us being “aware” of a problem shouldn’t be the goal. The goal should be for the people in Uganda to be helped. And that’s it.

“Awareness” is a feel-good word that simply means, in this context, “the charity is good because it’s focused on me and how I feel.”

At one point in the video, the narrator literally said, “That promise is just not about Jacob or me its also about you.

It’s a brilliant marketing touch, because charities which focus exclusively on the victims aren’t necessarily going to be nearly as romantic or viral as charities based on the viewer feeling they’ve become a better person by simply noticing something wrong. The self-focused standard is so low, it’s really just surreal.

Selfishness without reason is just one huge game of Russian Roulette, especially when dealing with foreign policy, killing people, and helping Uganda. This should be deeply concerning to everyone.

Let me make this brutally clear: awareness only matters if it helps people. That’s it. Us just happening to notice isn’t the goal. Helping victims is the goal.

It’s not about us; it’s about them.  

Someone told me earlier today that if invading Africa at all to fight Kony isn’t a good idea, then that would mean almost every international “intervention” by our military would be a bad idea.

He’s on the right path.

Self-Obsessed Charity

Self-obsessed non-profit organizations are dangerous, because there’s no market mechanism for keeping the organization “accountable”. If people feel good about themselves giving you cash, your group can grow whether it’s doing good at all or not.

That’s one of many scary revelations about the recent Kony video. The most common response I’ve heard from dozens of people today alone is that while, yes, the organization might be shady, manipulative, and supporting a military conflict that is dangerous and would likely cause blowback, the video is great because of “awareness”.

The Ugandan people aren’t amused.

One of the photographers of the infamous RPG image is grossed out.

AllAfrica.com is even outraged.

The Atlantic Wire is even upset.

Foreign Affairs is concerned.

The video oversimplifies, is misleading, and is trying to encourage people to get DC to make the region even more violent than it already is. The organization is a war-lobbying group — their focus just happens to be on Kony. This is scary. Real lives are at stake.

What’s Wrong With “Invisible Children”?

You can read a longer article here. But this is a quick summary about what the problems with Invisible Children are:

Less than a third of the budget goes to helping anyone in Africa.

No Africans are serving in positions of leadership. Only non-Africans lead the organization.

IC is publicly calling out for more international violence and meddling in Africa.

The three young founders are enjoying $85,000+ per year salaries, plus expenses paid and other perks, at the very least.

Invisible Children refuses to provide documents to BBB for accountability.

Removing Kony empowers Uganda’s government even more:

  • Uganda’s government is working on literally mass slaughtering its gay population.
  • Uganda’s government is one of the most corrupt in the world.
  • Uganda’s government is constantly using torture and murder and other crimes against humanity.

Even the Ugandan people are reacting with complete anger over the video.

How to Help

Helping is important, of course. But the goal is to really help — not just feel like we’ve helped. One way to help is to donate money to any charity — helping a person is helping a person, regardless of how dramatic their story is.

For example, giving money to Water.org can help save real lives — rather than just take part in a pro-war marketing campaign, which is what happens to most money given to Invisible Children.

Here are two good options:
Water.org
Africare

Please donate to those charities if you want to help people who really need it. Thanks for reading. Remember, there’s nothing wrong with having shared the video if you hadn’t done research about the topic — that’s understandable for most people. But not that you’ve done your homework, remember to let other people know about the truth behind this Kony movement.

Our goal should be to help people — not just to focus on how aware we are.

The Real Story About the “KONY 2012″ Video

Nothing is more dangerous than a populist backlash. When groups of people begin chanting, reason of the individual often gives way to the mindless rants of the collective.

Nothing could be more obvious about this than the recently-viral video put out by the political-activist group Invisible Children (IC) called ”KONY 2012″. This video has gone viral, getting millions of views in an incredibly short amount of time.

The organization exists to get a “movement” set up to apply political pressure from international governments to be more heavily involved in Africa, specifically to focus on supporting Uganda and other nations fighting Joseph Kony, a terrorist leader. The image to the left is a picture of the founders of the group posing with militants. These founders of the organization have taken sides and are trying to manipulate the American people to do so as well.

It’s both dangerous and fascinating.

Please Note: If you found yourself emotional after watching the video, don’t feel bad at all. If you hadn’t yet studied the topic, then you reacted as you should — with horror at the rights of children being violated. But now let’s focus on the rest of the story — including the part of the story about the organization behind the video would prefer you not see.

About the KONY 2012 Video.

The video is a self-labeled “experiment” in social media, and focuses on building up an over-the-top emotional platform for the story about Joseph Kony, a Ugandan guerrilla group leader who is known for using thousands of child soldiers and making millions of people displaced throughout Uganda and Africa for decades. Make no mistake: he’s an evil guy, just like a lot of other evil men in the area.

Like many “youth” targeted movements these days, the focus of the video is extremely vague about what exactly social media “activists” are supposed to do, while making it seem incredibly romantic and important that the social media users have the ability to click the “share” button to help their organization become more famous. It’s a clever way to get users pumped up on powerful soundtracks and clips to click the share button. And it’s worked.

Sounds innocent, right? What could be wrong with starting an organization dedicated to raising awareness about an evil man? In this case, a lot. Experts in foreign affairs and politics have long known that extremely emotional, shallow, and one-demensional views are often just as bad as they are useful in whipping up the “masses” into a violent fervor set to the drums of war.

Let’s look at Invisible Children as well as the situation in Uganda with Joseph Kony.

Invisible Children: The Marketing Group.

The Invisible Children organization spends only a third of its budget, according to their own documents, directly helping anyone in Africa. The rest goes to administration, salaries, and the media campaign mostly in the US. A huge portion of the proceeds go to self-marketing.

There’s nothing wrong with all of this, of course. A marketing campaign can be important if the marketing campaign is actually getting people to do something that helps rather than hurts, then that’s wonderful. This is not one of those times.

The reason so much is not spent on helping children is simple: this is not primarily a charity. It’s primarily a political action force with the goal of getting more international governments to get violently involved in other continents. That’s literally the goal.

When it comes to international relations and violence, reposting emotional stories, dressing up in melodramatic gear, and raising up artsy red flags and posters all over the place in some sort of V for Vendetta wannabe style achieves absolutely nothing except getting politicians in the US to sit up and take notice. Politicians love a good populist cause — that’s one of the reasons wars are so common. It’s easy to get people to support a war and the politicians get a huge short-term popularity boost. It’s one of the oldest tricks in the book.

I’ll talk more about this in a second. First, let’s cover the troubling facts about “Invisible Children” that are unavoidable and should make everyone stop and pause before donating a dime.

Out of the Frying Pan, Into the Fire.

Posting a well-made, proudly-emotional video on Facebook and believing that suddenly that makes one some sort of crime fighter is a wonderful-feeling narrative. It’s also a completely unearned emotion, especially in this situation. It stirs people up into thinking a single new policy can “fix” the situation, even though sometimes the best policy is the most difficult one — that of not using bombs, more soldiers, or getting the US involved violently in another continent. A crazy viewpoint, I know.

The reason is this: the idea that Kony is the biggest problem in the region is absolutely absurd. He’s a relatively small fish in a very big pond. It’s like there suddenly being a world-wide campaign with kids going crazy over a small criminal gang in the middle of New York — it’s completely missing the fact that organized crime won’t go down if one small-time thug is taken out, especially if that thug gets replaced.

Even Foreign Affairs agrees with this, saying:

“The violence in Uganda, Congo, and South Sudan has been the most devastating — anywhere in the world — since the mid-1990s. Even conservative estimates place the death toll in the millions. And the LRA is, in fact, a relatively small player in all of this — as much a symptom as a cause of the endemic violence. If Kony is removed, LRA fighters will join other groups or act independently.”

Even then, the “activism” of Invisible Children isn’t just about helping schools or rehabiliate the children victimized. They support an international violent intervention. Anyone with any sort of background in international relations should instantly see why this is an all-around horrible approach — it’s dangerous, it’ll mess up the power structure, rekindle even more decades of violence and achieve nothing. There will still be violence, killings, murders, rapes — and possibly even more.

Just because you figure out who one of the small-time bad guys is doesn’t mean that the solution won’t lead to more lives saved. It’s not that simple. If it was, we’d all be living in Utopia by now. In almost all wars in the history of mankind, the conflict wasn’t between “good” and “evil”. In almost every situation, the wars were about “evil” against “evil”.

There can be more than one bad guy in town at the same time.

Africa is a screwed up place. The idea that taking out Kony would be a huge event in the history of Africa is completely backwards and makes no sense. It’s misleading and it’s manipulative. This is absolutely unavoidable, and only seems plausible to anyone who has absolutely no idea what the dramatic, violent, and bloody history of Uganda, Sudan, and the surrounding area has gone through over the last decades. It’s not just Kony. Sorry. He’s just a very small player. All intervention will do is make more angry people remember that it was the US who invaded their country, further invigorating them.

Uganda is Evil Too.

Perhaps the most insane thing about the movement is the attempt to essentially have the international community take sides and support Uganda. The founders make it clear they don’t support the torture, murder, rape, and crimes against humanity that Uganda inflicts — but yet they still say they support the Ugandan government for being the best equpped government to fight Kony.

This is insane. Supporting evil men to fight other evil men is what causes terrorism, mass killings, and who knows what else. It’s also wrong.  Maybe I should make an extremely “artsy” video making Uganda’s government famous. Then we could support Kony to fight him. See? That’s where this insane logic gets us.

The founders of the movement support better empowering Uganda in the region, essentially taking sides in a “bad guys against bad guys” conflict as though it will somehow do good. Uganda, who they have made excuses for, is famous for torture, being one of the most corrupt governments on earth, arresting opposition members for purely political reasons, and other absurd violations of human rights. They’re also internationally known for murder by their troops, rape by their troops, and other atrocities.

Right now, there’s a movement in Uganda to kill all gay people. Uganda’s government is evil, and yet that’s who these people support. It’s crazy.

The “White Man’s” Burden.

Perhaps the most embarrasing of all of the many problems with this shady organization is the “white man complex” that exists in such a brazen fashion. Many movements have existed in the past of treating people of other races as though they are hopeless altogether and need a superior race and group to save them. The narrative is a common one, leading to many privileged white kids to indulge in the egocentric storyline by going on “missionary vacation” to a place where there are people of color, and then get the cliche’d cute picture which is –obviously– for Facebook friends to see how charitable they are to those little colored children. It’s nauseating.

One of the most succinct explanations I’ve seen about this comes from another blogger, who sarcastically explained the “White Man’s Burden” approach to marketing:

“White people only care about White people and the only way to save Black people is to get White people to care about them, so to save Black people we need to talk about White people.”

Just watch almost any “activism” movie about Africa, and you’ll usually see this riddled throughout the movie.

If you watch this video in particular again, you’ll begin to see how this is fascinatingly obvious when you know what’s being done in the social media “experiment”. It’s about the “activists”. It’s about the viewer. It’s about the white guys saving the black people who need the white guys to do the saving.

I’m probably the last person in the world to scream out “racism” during a discussion, but I have yet to see any marketing campaign this obvious. Even Ugandans can see right through this, even though their government would be on the receiving end of the power shift:

The U.S. activists are “selling a pack of lies to unaware youth to raise money for themselves,” said Ugandan blogger TMS Ruge in one of a series of critical tweets.

Not a single African is a member of the executive staff or the board of directors of Invisible Children, he noted. Instead, he said, Africans have been relegated to a “sideshow” without a voice in their own story. “Stop treating us like children,” he said. “I refuse to let my voice stay silent as one more NGO continues to perpetuate an expired single story of us.”

It’s not just the obviously crass tactics, either. The organization is also shady when it comes to money, like many emotional-based charities are, unfortunately. Just because something is a “charity” doesn’t mean people aren’t living it up because of that charity.

Shady Finances

The finances of the institution have been incredibly controversial. Charity Navigator gives them a 2 out of a 4 star for accountability and transparency because of a lack of accountability. One of the reasons is that the group refuses to have their paperwork — so far — audited by a committee.

The Better Business Bureau has repeatedly contacted them and Invisible Children has flat-out refused to provide the appropriate information, saying

“While participation in the Alliance’s charity review efforts is voluntary, the Alliance believes that failure to participate may demonstrate a lack of commitment to transparency. Without the requested information, the Alliance cannot determine if this charity adheres to the Standards for Charity Accountability. A charity’s willing disclosure of information beyond that typically included in its financial statements and government filings is, in the Alliance’s view, an expression of openness that strengthens public trust in the charitable sector.”

IC responded with a link to a pretty graph, but essentially ignored the problems above or just said a non-statement like how it’s “voluntary”, so they’re not required to submit the documents. Of course it’s voluntary.  This isn’t Uganda, after all. But they should also do it for accountability.

The Undeniable Facts About Invisible Children (IC):

Less than a third of the budget goes to helping anyone in Africa.

No Africans are serving in positions of leadership. Only non-Africans lead the organization.

IC is publicly calling out for more international violence and meddling in Africa.

The three young founders are enjoying $85,000+ per year salaries, plus expenses paid and other perks, at the very least.

Invisible Children refuses to provide documents to BBB for accountability.

Removing Kony empowers Uganda even more:

  • Uganda is working on literally mass slaughtering its gay population.
  • Uganda’s government is one of the most corrupt in the world.
  • Uganda is constantly using torture and murder and other crimes against humanity.

In the end, while reading up to check my facts for this article, I stumbled across a comment left on one of the articles that presented an important point: just because it’s easy being a Facebook “slactivist”, as marketers call it, doesn’t mean that it should be done without research.

the problem with Kony 2012 is that it proposes an idealistic and overly simple solution to a deeply complicated and longstanding problem. Social media is an amazing way to distribute and share information but it doesn’t alleviate people of their responsibility to do their own research instead of just believing whatever they see in a video just because all their friends have liked it.

Kony is an unbelievably evil man. So are almost all the regional leaders and governments. One is planning on slaughtering all of the gay population. It’s literally that bad. But dumping guns into the hands of governments that are internationally famous for being evil, and sending our military? That’s just not the solution.

The College Bubble: Yes, College Is Incredibly Overrated

Every American teen has heard it. Whether it’s from a parent, a rich uncle, or an earnest high school counselor, the advice comes tumbling out in well-worn clichés.

“Go to college and invest in your future,” “Work with your head, not your back,” and even the occasional “Get a degree, and you’re set for life.”

The narrative is familiar, and the idea itself is a comforting one for teenagers unsure of their place in life, and their direction for the future. It should be no surprise that Americans are getting college degrees at a record rate. But the clichés surrounding higher education also help conceal a dangerous reality; college isn’t a sure investment. And like most investments, there are winners and losers in the college market.

Lifetime Earnings Uncertain
Speaking in generalities, the high end estimates of how much extra you’ll make in your lifetime with a bachelors degree hover around the one million mark.

Unfortunately, that number has been critiqued by scholars such as Mark Schneider, vice president of the American Institutes for Research, who points out that the million dollar figure doesn’t factor in the cost of higher income taxes, inflation, interest payments on student loans, and the basic cost of getting an education—four years of potential productivity and tuition.

An analysis by Charles Miller, (who headed former U.S. secretary of education Margaret Spelling’s  Commission on the Future of Higher Education), points to a more realistic lifetime earnings figure of $279,893.

A grimmer estimate by the National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges puts the number at $121,539. But still, in the aggregate, a four-year degree that can earn you $120,000-$280,000 more than a high school education over your lifetime doesn’t sound like a terrible investment. And it isn’t. Extra earning power, combined with the added prestige of a college education, is a decent investment for most.

But before we wholeheartedly jump on the college bandwagon, it’s a good idea to remember that general statistics do not justify individual decisions. And here is where the horror stories begin.

Students who spent four years and over a hundred thousand dollars majoring in Gender Studies or Sociology or Folklore often graduate with a crushing load of debt and realize—surprise!—that their degree is worth next to nothing.

Indeed some degrees appear to exist for no reason other than to limit graduates options to moving back into Mom’s basement, or dealing pot to make ends meet.

Not All Schools Are Worth the Time or Money

Like most investments, a college degree isn’t a one size fits all solution. The return on your investment depends on the school you get into, the degree you choose, and (horrifyingly for many students) your personal drive to succeed. Take for instance, the average student at MIT.

According to Forbes BusinessWeek, the total cost to graduate from MIT is $189,300, and the return on the investment over the next thirty years is $1,796,000. That’s a 12.6% annual return on investment across all majors. Not bad at all. Of course, MIT is the school with the best investment return, followed by Ivy League schools such as Harvard and Yale.

But what if you can’t get into the very top tier? The statistics become considerably grimmer. BusinessWeek notes that “over the past 30 years, the S&P 500 Index averaged about 11 percent a year. Only 88 schools out of the 554 in the study had a better return than the S&P.” The average student attending Willamette University in Oregon, for instance, would realize an anemic 6.3% annualized net return on investment, far worse than the stock market. Clearly, it’s possible to make a bad investment in college.

Yes, Your Major Does Matter

And here is some more bad news for prospective students: your major matters. According to the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE), “engineering disciplines account for eight of the 10 most highly paid degrees.” Computer science and information science rounded out the top ten.

Indeed, math and science majors average a much higher income than liberal arts majors across the board. The highest earning major for the NACE study was Petroleum Engineering, starting at $86,220. The lowest earning major was English, with an average starting salary of $28,430.

Overall, liberal arts majors consistently underperformed in terms of average starting salary. In other words, if you plan on majoring in “Community Studies” and partying your way through school, don’t call it an investment.

“Do What You Love” Will Probably Cost You

Ultimately, looking at college earnings expectations has the effect of bursting several precious myths propagated by colleges and the culture as a whole. Incoming students are encouraged to “do what they love,” and “follow their dreams, and the money will follow you.”

Unfortunately, if your dream is to major in liberal arts, the money probably won’t follow you.

Too many students enter college with the comforting thought that as long as they graduate, lucrative employment will be waiting for them, only to find that their major isn’t much use to anybody but the professors that teach it.

Too many parents urge their kids to go to college against their will, because “you need a college degree to make it nowadays.” Unfortunately, for many, the exact opposite is true. All too often, a college degree means no job and a load of high-interest debt.

Horror stories of students being crushed by debt are a common fixture of the news landscape, and while it can be overly sensationalistic, media coverage of student debt reveals that it isn’t something to be trifled with. Students often borrow tens and even hundreds of thousands of dollars pursuing a degree, only to find that jobs are scarce, and the loan payments are high. Worse yet, student loans can’t usually be wiped out by bankruptcy.

In some cases, students who have racked up huge amounts of student debt preparing for professional careers have been barred from taking professional exams because of their debt. The bottom line is that starting a career thousands of dollars in debt isn’t as easy as it seems when signing loan agreements as a freshman.

And the alternatives to college are not as horrific as they’ve been portrayed. Many skilled trades are much more lucrative than those requiring liberal arts degrees. Often, high-earning fields such as computer technology, emergency services and investing don’t require a degree. And ultimately the things that make a successful career—like entrepreneurship, innovation and practical skills–are often learned better from real world experience than in the classroom.

Make an Informed Choice

The issue isn’t whether to get a degree or not. Instead, prospective students should examine what they want to do with their life, and decide whether they need a specific degree to achieve that goal.

Certainly, money isn’t everything, and many will chose non-lucrative professions for non-financial reasons. Many professions require a degree. But the key is making an informed choice. Going to college to “find yourself” or for no other reason than because it’s expected is a risk.

In short, college should be viewed as a potential means to a specific end — not a golden guarantee.

Investing in yourself is similar to every other kind of investment in one important way; you should do as much as possible to learn about your investment before committing. Vagueness doesn’t cut it when it comes to investing four years and tens of thousands on a degree. So go ahead, invest in yourself—wisely.

Originally published here by a student of UC Davis School of Law.

Christian Libertarianism

Yesterday, someone responded to the CapitalismInstitute.org’s newsletter. They had received an email linking to our “Jesus was a libertarian” article as well as our article on Romans 13, where we explained that the “Prince of Peace” taught a philosophy of violence only being justified in defense situations.

This was problem for her, and she wanted only secular analysis and for us to “spare” her the religious angle.

This was my response:

“Hey [Name],

There will likely be articles from the religious angle of libertarianism because it’s a topic that needs to be discussed. There are thousands of libertarians who are Christians — and they need to have a source for understanding the “Prince of Peace” that wasn’t written by a statist.

You’re welcome to ignore the religious articles, but they’ll likely be published. There are more than enough libertarian publications from a secular perspective, and I don’t complain about that. Please respect my faith as well.

Thanks,
Shaun”

It’s true. The vast majority of religious political analysis is from a statist approach. We’re going to publish occasional religious articles for the religious readers, because they exist too, and trust me — we read more than enough stuff from a secular perspective without being offended or generally even protesting.

The email exchange continued after the above, and my last email was:

“If you’d prefer the religious to only hear from the statists, keep protesting libertarian Christian publications. Meanwhile, I’ll try to reach the misled.”

An Andrew Breitbart Quote

Andrew Breitbart, the man behind BigJournalism.com, BigGovernment.com and Breitbart.tv, has passed away. He was 43. The only thing we know right now is that it was of “natural causes”. In the conclusion of his new book, he wrote: 

“At the end of the day, I can look at myself in the mirror, and I sleep very well at night.”

Sleep well, sir. You’ll be greatly missed. We’ve lost a lion, today. May we all aspire to live in such a way that we sleep well at night, because we know we’re willing to do what’s necessary and fight even the populist tyrants.

Andrew Breitbart

Copyright Capitalism Institute, 2011-present.