Lobbying congress does nothing. Congressional leaders know that Darfur isn't where their votes are. Even Gen. Romeo Dallaire, when I spoke with him recently, admitted that immediate and direct intervention by America isn't likely to happen at all, and that this lawmaker pressure will only have a marginal impact.
They were trained to start local anti-genocide groups, which is the only way to put standing against genocide on the political agenda and create a political cost for elected officials who would rather do nothing.
See above; this won't make a real-world difference. Also, unlike the civil rights movement, you're working against the clock - Darfur civilians only die once, and once they're dead, they're dead. The clock has mostly run out; in a lot of areas they're running out of people to kill. So, again, a "wait and hope" approach is not justifiable.
(although this wasn't mentioned in the post) They help to raise money directly funding the AU peacekeepers in Darfur.
Okay, that at least is useful.
People say there's nothing we can do, or that speaking out is ineffective, or that supporting the flawed but functional peacekeepers is not reasonable, or that it's tribal war that will last forever, or whatever other cop-out reason you can come up with. And they convince themselves that there's nothing we can do about it as a way to justify the fact that they don't want to do anything about it.
I've given you solutions for what we can do. You just don't like them because they don't fit with your preconceived, inflexible ideology.
Also, here's my reply to your post on the previous thread, since that one will be falling off the frontpage soon:
That's your Hamiltonian streak acting up again. I'd much rather have a million effective advocates among the democratic public agitating for mass mobilization on an issue than a small cabal setting the tone on any given issue.
I'd much rather have the latter, because the latter actually works. "People power" only really works for issues within - the draft for Vietnam, the civil rights movement - not for issues without. Case in point: The Iraq War. Not to say that we agree on the war as a whole, but I think we can both agree that the worldwide antiwar protests have done a grand total of nothing.
As to hiring mercenaries, what you've overlooked in noting their purported effectiveness in Iraq (though we don't know how many have been killed, or how many they have killed), is that they have essentially been given free reign. When we're trying to stop a Sudanese civil war as well as a genocide, setting a bunch of unaccountable oafs with big guns in the middle of things might not be the best idea.
"Might not be the best idea"? As opposed to a genocide that, as it stands today, is largely done and went entirely unprevented?
Unaccountable means the results might not be perfect - but as it stands now, we've gotten no results.
Marginal cost, marginal benefit.
Ironcially, we were just discussing Machiavelli's thoughts on the Condottieri in MilSec class. It's important to keep in mind Machiavelli's perspective; he was writing for the prince, the head of executive power. If the anti-genocide movement is behind the mercenaries, they aren't subject to the same concerns.
Again, I'm not arguing that any of my options are perfect. I'm just saying that they'll get some results. What results has your way gotten thus far? Essentially none. You're stuck in it because you have an ideological paradigm that tells you this is how a movement "should" achieve its goals.
I'm not concerned with "should". I'm concerned with getting the job done, by whatever means.
You Are Commenting On This Post:
The Unprecedented Student Movement Against Genocide
They made more than 300 appointments with the staffs of their representatives and senators, in each case pushing for support of the African Union peacekeepers in Darfur and a larger, stronger multinational force with the power to protect civilians from genocide.
On Saturday, students gathered at George Washington University for training in community organizing. This summer, these high school and college students will serve as the catalyst to start local anti-genocide groups in their communities — groups that will continue long after they return to school in the fall.
And on Sunday, these students joined 25,000 people in Washington, rallying alongside people in dozens of other cities in the United States and Canada, demanding a commitment to stopping the atrocities that both Congress and President Bush have declared to be genocide.
At the opening address of the conference, GI-Net Student Coordinator Bryan Collinsworth told the students, "Your efforts over the past year have genuinely accomplished something that still seems incredible to even imagine: you have moved the world closer to stopping a genocide."
This is absolutely unprecedented. Never before, in the face of mass atrocities, have we heard such a forceful and immediate outcry from everyday students. Even the great student movements that came before us took far longer to build to critical mass and burst onto the national scene than has our movement for Darfur.
But again, here, today, after just two years, we have almost 900 student advocates who have made your way to Washington come hell or high water to stand up for the basic human dignity and human rights of the people of Darfur.
And this weekend, you will be heard. If we've been inching the world closer to stopping genocide, we come here this weekend to give the biggest shove it's ever had.
And students were ready to take action. Telling their elected officials that "the time for complacency, for gradualism, for foot dragging, for anything but immediate and overwhelming action is over," Collinsworth and the students sent the message that "the dying in Darfur could stop this instant if those in power followed our lead and dedicated their hearts, consciences, talents and influence to making it happen."
John Prendergast, special advisor to the International Crisis Group, gave the keynote address on Friday. More Photos from D.C. to Darfur
"One hundred ten students boarded a bus from Chicago to D.C. to tell our representatives that our community will not sit idly by when 15,000 are being slaughtered every month," said Brian Schwartz, 22, from Wilmette, Ill.
"Genocide is happening right now in Darfur," said Sarita Rosenstock, 13, from Princeton, N.J. "After the Holocaust, America said 'never again.' I believe it is important to keep that promise."
Creating a poster for the meeting between D2D participants and the staff of Sen. Paul Sarbanes of Maryland. More Photos from D.C. to Darfur
Saturday began with a keynote address from genocide scholar and Pulitzer Prize–winning author Samantha Power, who lauded the students on their tenacity. "We have incubated and aided inaction [on genocide] in the past," she said. "We're not doing that any more." Principally, she said, that was because of student action.
The only sanction on countries in bed with Khartoum ... has been by students. When did you start making foreign policy?
While the United States has been the "least worst" country in taking action on Darfur, "everything the U.S. government has done on Darfur has been because of this public pressure," Power said.
Patrick Schmitt, the 2005–06 STAND Executive Director, identified students as the leading edge of both the anti-genocide movement and student organizing in general. "From an origin of a few young people at a few schools, we have launched what many are calling the largest student movement in more than a decade," he said.
We fought for the Darfur Peace and Accountability Act. In one day, we added 11 Senate co-sponsors. Then it stalled in the House, and we pushed again. After months of struggle, we broke through, and it's now passed in both houses of Congress.
We forced the resignation of one Robert Cabelly, a lobbyist hired by the government of Sudan to advance the interests of a genocidal regime in the Department of State and in Congress.
And students have created the most successful divestment campaign since the anti-apartheid movement, and the fastest-growing divestment campaign in history.
D2D participants joined 25,000 people on the National Mall, demanding the United States support the African Union peacekeepers in Darfur and support a larger, stronger multinational force to protect civilians from genocide. More Photos from D.C. to Darfur
And then the main event: On Sunday, 25,000 people converged on the National Mall, joining tens of thousands of others across the United States and Canada. Speakers included George Clooney, Olympian Joey Cheek, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Elie Wiesel, Paul Rusesabagina of "Hotel Rwanda," Def Jam founder Russell Simmons, Rep. Frank Wolf (R-Va.), Dr. Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, Samantha Power, Ruth Messinger of the American Jewish World Service, and Erin Mazursky, the STAND 2006–07 Executive Director.
The movement isn't over, because the genocide isn't over. As Samantha Power told the students on Saturday, it's important to remember that it's not about coverage, or turnout, or membership or donations — it's about stopping the killing, stopping the genocide in Darfur. We will never know how many people may have been saved through our actions, or how the government of Sudan would have acted without such a visible movement against genocide. We should celebrate our victories and our steps — however small — toward stopping the genocide. But there is much more work to be done.
STAND group photo.
Each miniature doll represents 1,000 victims of genocide in Darfur.
Dancing for Darfur.
Political attendees at the Rally to Stop Genocide included House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Donald Payne, Rep. Jim Moran and others.
2006 Olympian Joey Cheek donated his winnings to a Darfur rehabilitation project, and spoke to members of the press about the need for effective peacekeeping in Darfur.
Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.
!
See above; this won't make a real-world difference. Also, unlike the civil rights movement, you're working against the clock - Darfur civilians only die once, and once they're dead, they're dead. The clock has mostly run out; in a lot of areas they're running out of people to kill. So, again, a "wait and hope" approach is not justifiable.
Okay, that at least is useful.
I've given you solutions for what we can do. You just don't like them because they don't fit with your preconceived, inflexible ideology.
Also, here's my reply to your post on the previous thread, since that one will be falling off the frontpage soon:
I'd much rather have the latter, because the latter actually works. "People power" only really works for issues within - the draft for Vietnam, the civil rights movement - not for issues without. Case in point: The Iraq War. Not to say that we agree on the war as a whole, but I think we can both agree that the worldwide antiwar protests have done a grand total of nothing.
"Might not be the best idea"? As opposed to a genocide that, as it stands today, is largely done and went entirely unprevented?
Unaccountable means the results might not be perfect - but as it stands now, we've gotten no results.
Marginal cost, marginal benefit.
Ironcially, we were just discussing Machiavelli's thoughts on the Condottieri in MilSec class. It's important to keep in mind Machiavelli's perspective; he was writing for the prince, the head of executive power. If the anti-genocide movement is behind the mercenaries, they aren't subject to the same concerns.
Again, I'm not arguing that any of my options are perfect. I'm just saying that they'll get some results. What results has your way gotten thus far? Essentially none. You're stuck in it because you have an ideological paradigm that tells you this is how a movement "should" achieve its goals.
I'm not concerned with "should". I'm concerned with getting the job done, by whatever means.