Geldof and Bono discuss progress on G8 pledges

May 16, 2007 5:04 AM

Where's the money?[YouTube] In a short interview with the BBC, Bob Geldof and Bono discuss ongoing efforts to get G8 members to fulfil commitments made at the Gleneagles summit, their own credibility or lack of, and whether or not the current focus on climate change is taking attention away from the situation in Africa. This Guardian article has more details.
posted by teleskiving (39 comments total)

The DATA Report. Looks like interesting reading.
posted by Firas at 5:22 AM on May 16, 2007 [3 favorites]

...the rock star warned there was a risk of a return to the violent street protests of Genoa and Seattle at the turn of the millennium unless the G8 acted next month.

I suspect there will be violent "protests" whatever the G8 does. It seems to me that far too many of the people who attend these events are there for no other reason.

It is utterly irresponsible for Bono to threaten this in advance, but I guess it's uncool nowadaýs for "rock stars" to preach non-violence to their fans.

The spirit of Woodstock and the hippie movement is well and truely dead.
posted by three blind mice at 5:35 AM on May 16, 2007

Yeah, mentioning the possibility of a couple of Starbucks getting smashed up is way more 'irresponsible' than breaking your signed promise to increase aid to Africa and thereby letting millions die.
posted by MrMustard at 5:41 AM on May 16, 2007

Race-to-the-bottom-Filter.
posted by Firas at 5:46 AM on May 16, 2007 [1 favorite]

I just cant stand Bob Geldof and Bono. I cant believe anything they do is done for any other reason than they're own personal promotion.

Neither of them are saints.

This was just another promotional exercise.
posted by 13twelve at 5:53 AM on May 16, 2007 [1 favorite]

mentioning the possibility of a couple of Starbucks

And threatening violence is the best way to get your point across?

Go and have your fun MrMustard. Smash some windows, burn some cars, beat up some cops, kill a few capitalists, and save those starving childrens in Africa. Count me out. I grew up in a time when peace was the word so you won't find me anywhere near your "protest."
posted by three blind mice at 5:56 AM on May 16, 2007

Neither of them are saints.

You're doubting the credentials of St. Bono the Pretentious? Geldof hasn't been canonized yet, but he's already responsible for once miracle: preventing Michael Hutchence from further assaulting humanity. So we'll just have to wait.
posted by Mayor Curley at 6:01 AM on May 16, 2007

Where's the money?

As in "who can account for all the billions that already went to Africa?" Good question. We may as well have taken most of it out to the back yard and set it on fire for the good it did.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 6:06 AM on May 16, 2007

three blind mice - I'm no real fan of Geldof or Bono - I kind of agree with 13twelve about them - but I didn't see Bono threatening violence. Perhaps I missed the part where he said, "Unless this gets sorted, we're going to smash everything up." I thought he was warning that there may be a repeat of previous violence unless governments come good on their promises.

And for what it's worth, I've never burnt a car, beat up a cop, killed a capitalist or even saved a starving child in Africa.
I have smashed a couple of windows, although not deliberately.
posted by MrMustard at 6:14 AM on May 16, 2007

Average Person's Capacity Chart
Does the matter involve... Subtract Mental Acuity By:
Celebrities? 30%
Economics? 60%
Africa? 10%
posted by Firas at 6:15 AM on May 16, 2007 [1 favorite]

Bod Geldof is not a fan of Al Gore's "Live Earth" concert(s).
posted by pruner at 6:23 AM on May 16, 2007

More on Bono's credibility.
posted by doublesix at 6:46 AM on May 16, 2007

I thought Geldof was alright in The Wall.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:56 AM on May 16, 2007

and whether or not the current focus on climate change is taking attention away from the situation in Africa.

I think one of the problems with the, for lack of a better term*, do-gooder movement is that there is a perception that different causes should be seen as competing rather than synergistic (again, for lack of better term). The development and global civil society industry has formed in such a way that they are often bound by the whims of market and trend-driven charity: this year it's cool to donate to terrorist victims, next year it's the tsunamic, this season Africa, and so forth.

End Poverty Now did not end poverty, partially because the problems present in the world are not conceptual, they're structural. Changing our concepts will help to shape the overall structures somewhat, but it is very easy for the structures to shape the process and not the other way around (for example, the popularity of organic food has led many agribusiness companies to lobby for measures that will make it easier or cheaper for them to label their food as organic even if the theoretical point of being organic -- to benefit the health of the earth -- is bypassed. Which is why of course it's far more healthy for the planet, at this point, to purchase low-spray apples grown in your county than 100% organic apples grown at the other end of your country.)

So it is very easy for people to get the idea, "Okay, we will forgive the debts of Africa" and ignore the structural realities that made African nations take on debts in the first place (no, not just despotic rulers, although that played its part). Africa needs to establish some semblance of political and social stability, and then focus on building up an effective infrastructure (try flying from one country in Africa to another without flying through Paris or London) and a productive economy with broad-based participation.
posted by Deathalicious at 7:13 AM on May 16, 2007

That Newsnight interview needed a question about Mr. Bono and his tax havens.
posted by reklaw at 7:24 AM on May 16, 2007

Another lecture on poverty from a man wearing £6000 sunglasses. It is, incidentally, Christian Aid week.
posted by WPW at 7:33 AM on May 16, 2007

I just cant stand Bob Geldof and Bono. I cant believe anything they do is done for any other reason than they're own personal promotion.

Neither of them are saints.

This was just another promotional exercise.

Which is better: a rich and famous rock star trying to use his influence to make the world a better place, or a rich and famous rock star who doesn't do anything to make the world a better place?

There is a difference between somebody who doesn't have the influence these people have than myself, who has none, even if we have the exact concerns. I can't call up presidents and prime ministers and get them to actually listen to me.

So,while neither of them are saints, few people are. And few people care enough about the plight of millions to do anything about it. Good for Bono and Geldof and every other rich and famous person who tries to do something. They certainly don't have to - they could sit back on their millions, just as most of us sit back on our thousands, and enjoy the fruits of their labour.

And while I don't think this was just another promotional exercise, I also don't believe that the two are mutually exclusive. I don't see anything wrong with multi-tasking.

As to U2 being hypocrites about their taxes, well, maybe they are, but I certainly don't blame them. You can include me in the camp of wanting to be more "tax efficient," and I'm sure most people would like that too.
posted by ashbury at 7:40 AM on May 16, 2007 [1 favorite]

I thought Geldof was alright in The Wall.
I've always wondered if his nipples grew back
posted by Flashman at 7:58 AM on May 16, 2007

Good for Bono and Geldof and every other rich and famous person who tries to do something.

The trouble comes when doing something makes the situation worse than doing nothing, as cash-injection-style aid has arguably done. An end to usurious debt and trade barriers might help Africa, but a big pile of cash hasn't, and won't.
posted by hoverboards don't work on water at 8:00 AM on May 16, 2007

That's a misguided cliche. It hasn't been true since at least the 80s. There is a lot of good governance in Africa, and many accountable ways of distributing the aid. The key part is, as someone said upthread, the structural capacity. Capital helps build infrastructure like nothing else does.
posted by Firas at 8:04 AM on May 16, 2007 [1 favorite]

It seems to me that far too many of the people who attend these events are there for no other reason.
Smash some windows, burn some cars, beat up some cops, kill a few capitalists, and save those starving childrens in Africa. Count me out. I grew up in a time when peace was the word so you won't find me anywhere near your "protest."

just ducking in for a second to say that you got it wrong. people that smash stuff are probably 5% (if even that much)of the folks that show up to those protests. i went to the wto protests in seattle and it wasn't anything like you saw on tv. most of the breaking stuff was several blocks away by kids taking advantage of the situation. in the middle of the protest anyone i saw breaking anything was stopped by protesters, not cops. it was the police (i'm sympathetic to the situtation they were in, by the way) that beat people up, i was walking across a street the next day and my friend was hit in the face with a baton, i got it in the back. for walking across a street. only protest i've been to. be a little more critical of the news you ingest, they generally spin in the direction the police press conference does.
posted by andywolf at 8:43 AM on May 16, 2007

Issues in Africa™ certainly won't fix themselves in a New York minute despite the wishes of impatient western newspaper editors, self important rock stars and concerned letter writers. Moreover, to reduce the complex nature of the African continent into to a single definable problem (Africa™) with a single point of action, more money (IncreasedAid™ and DebtRelief™), trivialises the sovereignty and politics of 53 countries (well, 52 + one "disputed" territory) and the day to day problems experienced by the innumerable number of cultures and traditions therein*.

I think one of the major issues with regards contemporary Western views of solving the AfricanProblem™ is that it seems impossible for many organisations to ask Africans™ what they want to do about stuff before they have put together a strategy to do what they think should be done about it.

The solutions for the "AfricanProblem™ whereby concerned westerners lump together similar issues across disparate regions, come up with a one size fits all solution, get donor funding and bung some celeb on the front of it to garner (western) public support is not really a coherent strategy to fix broken economies in far off places. This method helps to foster huge amounts of overlap on the ground whilst doing little to discourage compassion fatigue in the west.

Anyway, I've just realised what I've written is a bit ranty and has sod all to do with Bono and Geldorf and possibly even less to do with the topic at hand. All I can say about those two great saviours of the African Continent is, for a laugh, ask an African™ (in Africa™) who either of them are and what they do. Comedy gold every time.

*That is not to say that I think increased aid and debt relief are bad ideas. Clearly they aren't. It's just that Africa isn't just one place, aid isn't a single pot of money and a government's first priority is it's own people (viz Italy who are taking some stick here despite having an economy holier than a swiss cheese)
posted by davehat at 8:51 AM on May 16, 2007 [1 favorite]

The spirit of Woodstock and the hippie movement is well and truely dead.

Yeah. There was NEVER any violence at demonstrations in the 1960's. < --- sarcasm!!! bono isn't saying that he is going to lead an arson front at g8... he's saying that people are getting increasingly frustrated witnessing how their money is being misused and outright stolen by their governments. and like that great example of non violence aka the boston tea party - people will act out their frustrations. small>I suppose you missed the part where Bono explicitly states how he despised the violence in places like Seattle.

Another lecture on poverty from a man wearing £6000 sunglasses. It is, incidentally, Christian Aid week.

...said the guy typing on a $1000+ computer burning tons of carbon a year lecturing a guy who has spent millions of his own money helping starving people.
posted by tkchrist at 9:45 AM on May 16, 2007

As in "who can account for all the billions that already went to Africa?" Good question. We may as well have taken most of it out to the back yard and set it on fire for the good it did.

Pretty cynical, but you do have a point.

It seems like the biggest problem in Africa with regard to AIDS is an educational one. Many Africans, including the presidents of South Africa and other countries still don't believe that HIV causes AIDS. Think about that for a minute. If you don't even accept the nature of the disease, how can you possibly hope to fight it?
posted by Afroblanco at 9:51 AM on May 16, 2007

tkchrist: Bono reads Metafilter? Wow. And are we talking about carbon use or poverty alleviation?
posted by WPW at 9:52 AM on May 16, 2007

tkchrist: Bono reads Metafilter? Wow. And are we talking about carbon use or poverty alleviation?

I was talking about hypocrisies and empty cynicism.
posted by tkchrist at 9:58 AM on May 16, 2007

Many Africans, including the presidents of South Africa and other countries still don't believe that HIV causes AIDS

Many Africans? You've met many Africans who deny HIV causes AIDS? My partner has met one and we've just spent 19 months living in rural Kenya, where she was undertaking fieldwork for her PhD entitled "Caring responses to HIV and AIDS".

As for bringing up carbon emissions in a thread about poverty...

...I'm at a loss for words.
posted by davehat at 10:13 AM on May 16, 2007

Hypocrisy is lecturing the public on poverty and sacrifice while shunting your vast fortune around tax havens and wearing a piece of facewear that costs more than a family car. That's enough to make anyone cynical. But what really gets my goat is the secular canonisation of Bono and Geldof, which means that this unelected, unrepresentative, unaccountable and consequence-free duo cannot be criticised for the very real shortcomings of their posturing, silver-bullet approach to a situation that defies single-shot solutions. They make themselves a lightning rod for public anxiety, sell a very quick fix, and bask in the admiration of self-righteous slack-jawed claque that is so desperate to pretend that these problems can be reduced to soundbites that it cannot countenance hearing a word against their heroes.
posted by WPW at 10:15 AM on May 16, 2007

Firas, thanks for the link to the DATA Report. I would encourage those who think all that is being offered here are simplistic, symbolic solutions to actually take at look at it. I know we're all tired of celebrities telling us what to do, but I think this case really is different.

Also, for all that this thread reveals about the problems of having Bono and Geldof as representatives for this cause, I still don't know who would be better. Maybe Bono is wearing £6000 sunglasses but the debate is no longer about private citizens voluntarily "giving us your fockin' money" and hasn't been for years. It's about getting national leaders to do the right thing.
posted by teleskiving at 11:21 AM on May 16, 2007

Hypocrisy is lecturing the public on poverty and sacrifice while shunting your vast fortune around tax havens and wearing a piece of facewear that costs more than a family car.

Blah blah blah. What a load of shit. YOU are rich. Compared to the average African. YOU are rich.

So what do you do? Do you spend a proportional amount of your wealth and time as these guys helping alleviate poverty?

Most people who bitch about guys like Bono sure don't. So pardon me if I completely ignore childish critiques like "he has expensive sunglasses on!" Who cares. It's his money.

Besides. You would trade places with Bono (as in be wealthy) in a second. And even if you SAY you wouldn't MOST people would. I know I would.

As for taxes? Well I got to say I just sent of a 30K+ check to our fine federal government. You know how that feels? I am funding a government who is engaged in activities that I find abhorrent on every level. A government using my hard earned cash to murder innocent Iraqi's. If could shelter MORE of my wealth I sure as shit would. That way I could give it to more charity as I see fit. Rather than hand it over to George Bush. Again, good for him.

AS for his expenditures? Look around your room right now. You telling me there isn't one thing that is conspicuous consumption? You have not one frivolous purchase? Any frivolous pursuit? Your computer have any games on it? Golly. That was money and time you could have spent perusing your multi-shot non-silver bullet solution to world poverty.

Oh. yeah. WHAT was that again?

I am so sick of this pretentious cynicism masking itself as some sort of superior form of concern for the worlds poor.

Can they use their wealth better? Yes. Could they search for better solutions to problems in Africa? Sure. But the fact is they ARE doing something.

If you'd prefer they do nothing then make that argument... it would would be a stupid one.

If you have a BETTER solution for them to spend their money on... do tell. You could contact them and convince them. Your obviously so concerned as to how they spend their wealth. So quit bitching and DO something.

But you won't. This has nothing to do with problems in Africa. This is simply symptomatic of the popularity backlash of a given celebrity. Nothing more. Pardon me if I don't take it seriously.

While I'm not particularly a big fan of their pop music - thank god for rich people like Bono and Geldof. If only there were more.
posted by tkchrist at 11:24 AM on May 16, 2007 [1 favorite]

It's about getting national leaders to do the right thing.

Exactly.

Now we can debate what that "right thing" actually is... but the fact remains until very recently most world leaders couldn't pretend to give two shits about Africa. Now at least, thanks to the attractive prospect of photo ops with a pop star, they at least pretend.

It's up to us citizens to hold them to the promises they have made. Not Bono.
posted by tkchrist at 11:42 AM on May 16, 2007

tkchrist, defending Bono's conspicuous consumption is fine, but you're displaying a quite serious failure of judgement and critical thinking in endorsing tax avoidance. I could make the point that Bono is avoiding paying American taxes, he's avoiding paying (already very gentle) Irish taxes. One of the things that is really holding back development in Africa is capital flight, and Bono is endorsing the use of the havens that allow that to happen! Not simply using them, actively endorsing them.

I'm not responding to your personal attacks because they're just that, and I am not about to get into a pissing match about who's doing more about Africa. I'd remind you that you don't know a damn thing about me, though.
posted by WPW at 11:43 AM on May 16, 2007 [2 favorites]

As for bringing up carbon emissions in a thread about poverty...

...I'm at a loss for words.

Yeah. That's how I felt about the sunglasses thing. Though not a "loss" exactly.
posted by tkchrist at 11:45 AM on May 16, 2007

I am not about to get into a pissing match about who's doing more about Africa.

Uh. You already did - by making a statement about Bonos personal expenditures. Though you don't appear to understand it.

Look. You could be head of the UN Debt Relief Project for all I know (in which case you wouldn't be harping on Bono) but your criticisms are way off base and attitudes like yours are not only cynical they are counter productive.
posted by tkchrist at 11:50 AM on May 16, 2007

Now at least, thanks to the attractive prospect of photo ops with a pop star, they at least pretend.

Things are better because they're now feigning concern? If anything it's worse. Why do world leaders queue up for photo ops with Bono and Geldof? Because it makes them look absolutely great, very compassionate indeed, while actually doing as little as possible.
posted by WPW at 11:54 AM on May 16, 2007

If anything it's worse. Why do world leaders queue up for photo ops with Bono and Geldof? Because it makes them look absolutely great, very compassionate indeed, while actually doing as little as possible.

What? It IS better than nothing.

And, anyway, how is that Bono's fault? You make zero sense at all.

Bono is not a politician. He is not the head of a pharmaceutical corporation. He is not even a Phd.

He is a POP STAR. Okay.

His currency is his fame. The best he can do is use that currency to get politicians to notice a cause.

If said politicians make promises, and they HAVE in this case, it's up to people like YOU to hold elected representatives accountable. All Bono can do is get headlines about it.

Bono is just one guy. And here he is telling you that the politicians are not owning up to their promises.

And here you bitch about the one guy that got all these world leaders to notice and admit that millions of people were dying in agony. This is your problem? This you say is worse than nothing?

Dude your argument is without foundation. And frankly it's an all too common and ignorant attitude that does way more damage than one well meaning pop star could.
posted by tkchrist at 3:32 PM on May 16, 2007

George Monbiot explained it better than I could.
posted by WPW at 4:49 PM on May 16, 2007

Yeah except you TOTALLY dismiss this part:

George Monbiot:The two musicians are genuinely committed to the cause of poverty reduction. They have helped secure aid and debt-relief packages worth billions of dollars. They have helped to keep the issue of global poverty on the political agenda. They have mobilised people all over the world. These are astonishing achievements, and it would be stupid to disregard them.
posted by tkchrist at 8:27 PM on May 16, 2007

well said tkchrsit,

I cant agree more. Just because you may think Bono is a wanker or a hypocrite there is no way you can argue that his efforts to combat poverty have created more harm than good and for that i thank him ond bob geldof for the effort they are going to.
posted by benny at 4:27 AM on May 17, 2007