The truth does not win; the truth is just what is left when everything else is wasted
Quote of the day
Email & RSSSign up to oD's editorial summaries email:
openDemocracy likes
NavigationOur writers |
 |
George Clooney: the new expert on African affairs?
Posts: Joined: 2004-05-05
What I'd like to know is, since when, has the millionaire, Oscar winning actor, George Clooney become an expert in the political affairs of the Sovereign state of Sudan? The self-proclaimed expert of contemporary Sudanese politics, Mr Clooney, apparently, has knowledge of what is happening in the Darfur region of Sudan.
Clooney told a audience of the world's media that, events unfolding in Darfur could only be discribed as 'the first genocide of the 21st century'.
I'd like to let openDemocracy members and supporters into a not so well known fact: there is no evidence of 'genocide' in the Darfur region of Sudan. Of course, Mr Clooney doesn't need evidence to support his unfounded claims. He speaks, the world listens, and that is that - who needs evidence?
There is no evidence of a 'genocide' in Sudan - an indepth UN investigation concluded in Feb of last year that there was 'no evidence' of 'genocide' in Darfur. An investigation led by the European Union in the summer of 2004, drew the same conclusion, that the killings in Darfur 'were not genocidal'.
Clooney, has become what the U.S. Department of State would call a first-class 'prognosticator'. Clooney has done what many in the west do in order to draw attention to their particular cause, he has grossly overemphasised the degree to which violent deaths have contributed to large-scale mortality in Darfur. Or in other words, more people in the Darfur region die of malnutrition and infectious diseases, than they do at the hands of the Sudanese government forces.
Clooney is a major American celebrity who think its ok to be cavalier with the facts, and he seems to think its perfectly fine to present Africans in the most horrific terms possible, even if its inaccurate.
I, for one, welcome an honest debate about whats happening in Africa. What we don't need is overpaid Hollywood actors rehearsing powerful and emotive stories about nonexistent 'genocide', in countries they know very little about.
Submitted on Mon, 2006-05-08 17:03
Re: George Clooney: the new expert on African affairs?
This surprises me, Courtney, as George Clooney is a card carrying liberal and a vocal opponent of the Bush administration. His views on most matters would please you.
Clooney recently toured the Sudan with two Senators, Obama and Brownback, one Democrat, one Republican. and gave a joint interview with them on what he observed. This is a reason for some upset?
Message was edited by: fdbjr
Message was edited by: fdbjr
Submitted on Mon, 2006-05-08 18:59
reply
Re: George Clooney: the new expert on African affairs?
fdbjr,
"This surprises me, Courtney, as George Clooney is a card carrying liberal and a vocal opponent of the Bush administration. His views on most matters would please you."
Your right, not so long ago, Clooney appeared to become the new cheif-of-staff of American anti-Bushism. But, that's all changed now. Now, Clooney is the loudest supporter of US millitary intervention in the sovereign African state of Sudan. Its only taken him a couple of months to completlely transform himself from an ardent critic of the Bush administration, to something that resembles an imperialist lackey - with his idea that American forces can somehow save the Sudanese people from... well... themselves.
Clooney also reminds me of the lack of political principles that exist amoungst many in the anti-war movement of recent times. The fact is, they have no principles of sorts - they can change their minds about important issues at a drop of a hat. People like Clooney are morally outraged when they see terrible things happening in far away lands, so instead of engaging in a critique of western millitarism in African countries, his anti-war feelings have actually ended up becoming a pro-war stance.
No, I'm not at all pleased with his views on Darfur, Clooney paints a caricature picture of the conflict in the Darfur region, as if it were a simple battle between good and evil, and of course, the west must protect the good people at all times. Just as Clooney noted to the world press 'It's not a political issue. There is only right or wrong'.
So, according to Clooney, the conflict in Darfur doesn't stem from any political, or territorial question, oh no, there is only 'right or wrong' in Clooney's Darfur - and the only right-minded thing to do is send in the marines, asap.
I believe that Clooney is being cannonised by the anti-war brigade in the west. But, Clooney has no authority, or right to speak on behalf of the people of Darfur. Nor does he deserve any respect for his new pro-war position.
Submitted on Tue, 2006-05-09 09:34
reply Re: George Clooney: the new expert on African affairs?
I think Clooney and both senators were suggesting United Nations intervention. I can guarantee you Barack, who is regarded as a real comer by the Left side of the Democratic Party, is not advocating unilateral action.
Does it ever occur to you that the people involved in these issues are not simply tokens on some maaive Parker Brothers board game, but real, live, human beings, whose lives, suffering, and death are affected directly by these events?
Submitted on Tue, 2006-05-09 22:41
reply 
Re: George Clooney: the new expert on African affairs?
I'm always amazed when actors -- as a group, perhaps the stupidest, most (groundlessly) egotistical, most ill-informed and self-promoting dingbats on the planet -- stage these kinds of events and expect to be listened to. Being an actor -- especially in these days of overpriced films and undertalented stars -- gives no one any special perspective on such issues. Quite the reverse seems to be true -- anyone having spent any time among movie stars quickly learns that, aside from their own box-office numbers, the most important thing to these people is the perception others have as to the correctness and visibility of their "activism." I've been to political events where actors verbally vie with each other over who has more impact on the world political stage -- an amusing show in itself.
George Clooney's comments should be given the respect they are due -- the same as you'd give to any schmo who's read a newspaper or watched the TV news.
HH
Submitted on Wed, 2006-05-10 00:32
reply Re: George Clooney: the new expert on African affairs?
henry_hart_1,
Ronald Reagan
...
Courtney Hamilton,
I spoke to Sten Rylander, the head negotiator from EU in Darfur, (Sweden is heading the talks) sometime during 2004. Collin Powell had just then made a statement where he had said "the conflict resembled a genocide". Sten told me that this statement would put pressure on the Sudan government but it could go two ways. Clooney is not the foreign minister in the US so they do not care that much. And even if I have never been in Sudan, my general experience of Africa tells me that they only watch American movies if there are black actors in the lead roles - so I don't think that they know anything about him.
Secondly, it is my opinion that Clooney is simply argumenting for an UN intervention. Just as the refugees in Sudan.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/africa/05/08/darfur.talks/index.html
What seemed then to be the biggest problem during the talks was the unexperienced rebell negotiators that for example did not understand the difference with setting an order for the talks and the final content of the agreement. But I have not followed this too closly so I'm happy that other people do. It is Swedish tradition for high officials to be accessable to ordinary people so here is the e-mail to Sten and I am very sure that he would enjoy your opinions and that he would answer any questions you might have about Darfur:
Sten Rylander
ambassaden.harare@foreign.ministry.se
tel: +263 (4) 302 636 / + 46 8 405 32 43
//CL
Submitted on Wed, 2006-05-10 11:40
reply Re: George Clooney: the new expert on African affairs?
One of my disagreements with HH. The human disaster shaping up in Darfur should be of concern to the world, and - although Clooney is an ass in many ways - he should be commended for lending his voice to the call for intervention.
Message was edited by: fdbjr
Submitted on Wed, 2006-05-10 14:37
reply
Re: George Clooney: the new expert on African affairs?
fdbjr,
"The human disaster shaping up in Darfur should be of concern to the world"
The problem I have with this is the timing - Sudan has been a hell-hole for well over 50 years. Why is there all of this concern for Sudan now?
I think the concern stems from the fact that there's two Sudan's. There's the real Sudan, were there is a small, but desperate civil war being waged for scarce resourses like water and food. Then there is the other Sudan, a mythical Sudan, a caricature created by NGO's, western foreign policy-makers, the western media, and now by overpaid Hollywood actors like Clooney.
In the mythical Sudan created by Clooney and co, all the different social and political conflicts are reduced down to one basic horrible fact: genocide. In this Hollywood version of Sudan, the scale of the 'genocide' is boiled down to the refusal of the 'international community' (i.e. western governments) to meet their moral and legal obligation to militarily intervene and put an end to the conflict.
I remember reading Matt Murrell's blog on Sudan last year, where he mentioned the 'g' word in relation to the conflict in the Darfur region. After a short debate were I showed Matt there was no evidence of 'genocide' in Darfur, he conceded, and withdrew the inaccurate word from his piece.
The problem is, we can't have a debate with Clooney. We can't tell him that, in the first instance, he is wholly ignorant of all the facts, and despite his liberal pretensions, his support of outside interference in Sudan rests on the assumption that the West has a mission to save the Sudanese from themselves - but from Rwanda to the former Yugoslavia, to Iraq, western military intervention in the third world has not brought peace and stability, on the contrary, western militarism has historically exacerbated and prolonged local conflicts, not solved them.
Finally, I have a message for all you un-principled foreign interventionists out there:
"For God's sake, do not drag me into another war! I am worn down and worn out with crusading and defending Europe and protecting mankind; I must think a little of myself. I am sorry for the Spaniards - I am sorry for the Greeks - I deplore the fate of the Jews; the people of the Sandwich Islands are groaning under the most detestable tyranny; Baghdad is oppressed - I do not like the present state of the Delta - Tibet is not comfortable. Am I to fight for all these people? Am I to be champion of the Decalogue and to be eternally raising fleets and armies to make all men good and happy? We have just done saving Europe, and I am afraid the consequence will be that we shall cut each other's throats. . . ."
- Sidney Smith (1771-1845), Anglican clergyman, c. 1820
Submitted on Wed, 2006-05-10 16:02
reply Post new comment |
|
|
