After LIVE8 3.5 million Nigerians starving

[Tigran of Sasoun]

I think LIVE8 was stupid from the begening. It was about some stars coming out for publisity and a few thousand people coming to watch them because they think that they changed the world in a few hours, lol. After that what happened? Millions are still starving, 3.5 million Nigerians are ans many millions more in Africa. Most of the starving are not shown unless their country has people dieing in the millions. Niger was still a nation starving, but now its in the news because it is in the millions now, a few hundred thousand not enough to get attention i guess. So what did Live8 do? What are the stars doin now to help? instead of singing you idiots why not go to a country like Niger with a few thousand people and give food and volunteer for a few hours?

[Kagetora]

Becasue even though people in Live8 paint the rest of the world as greedy and unhelping, its just propganda, they are the same way as everyone else, just using peoples poverty as a way to get money.

[Tigran of Sasoun]

Becasue even though people in Live8 paint the rest of the world as greedy and unhelping, its just propganda, they are the same way as everyone else, just using peoples poverty as a way to get money.

Thank you! and it is very true. Governments and nations do the same. They give aid to have a control or influence over them. If do something agaisnt that lending nation, guess what? no more money for starving people. A way to keep weaker nations in check with money and poverty. Is this not the same as colonalism? kepp the natives poor to control them while the imperial nation uses them?

[Kagetora]

Well what can governments do, they have to take care of their own people first and if the people see their government more concerned about someone else they would get ****** off. The governments get all their money from taxing their own people, and if you chose to save millions of starving Africans instead of helping your own by building better tax plans or whatever, you might find yourself in the midst of a revolution/civil war.

[Tigran of Sasoun]

Yes, but ok think about the US. It gives Billions of dollars in aid to countries that do not need it. They give aid to miltary to nations that are at war. Its not just the US but many nations. If they claim to care about these people give them money instead of giving Turkey 150 million dollars for military.

Edit: Just one example.

[PandaRegent]

I always wondered why the more influential countries dish out somuch money, if they were to leave them alone then they would probably decide to get off their *** and do something.
It's like having a homeless dude saying he's hungry. Give him food, not money and don't go back again to help him out.
US giving money for weapons is used as a tool to get them on our side or to recieve favors.
I was even more ****** about LIVE8 when Angelina Jolie decided to adopt another baby because she felt bad about about their situation. We should send her to other impoverished nations, let her have a collection of ethnic babies.

[MoROmeTe]

Live8 was not going to pay for the food of Nigerians, but try and determine world leaders to do so.

Yes, it is unrealistic to ask people to look out for others before themselves. But a little aid could go a long way...

[Tacticalwithdrawal]

It also was very effective, it gave the leaders at Gleneagles one hell of a fright when they realised that so many people were behind the campaign (and I'm speaking with inside knowledge here). You have to remember they are elected politicians and the one thing that really gives them a fright is their electorate getting upset.

However, I'd agree on a couple of things. Firstly the early campaign made it seem like the G8 conference was going to solve all ills, that was never realistic and the campaign co-ordinators changed their message later on to make that clear.

Secondly, the main G8 concerts were pretty naff, lots of bands reforming (Pink Floyd for example), other bands turning up for the exposure and loads of the crowd just turning up for the music. The really good concert was the one at Murryfield on the Tuesday, much more like a political rally with good music, a hell of a lot more inspiring and if the main Live8 rallies had been like that it would have all meant a lot more.

And, to my mind, the best demonstration of the whole thing was 250,000 people walking round Edinburgh in white, no violence, on the Sunday.

[Rowan11088]

I don't think we need be so cynical about it. Yeah, there are definitely supporters/organizers who are far to idealistic in their aims, but the people who performed themselves I believe did it for free...plus somehow paid for all the equipment/security/etc. out of their pockets. It's not greedy for a huge celebrity to do a completely free concert when they're used to getting paid hundreds of thousands of dollars. It may not be world-altering, but I think it still deserves a little respect at least. Plus I would be willing to bet none of the posters on this thread have personally gone out and fed the hungry in Africa, myself included, so it's hard to judge.

[RusskiSoldat]

The thread author seems to have just discovered propaganda.

[enkidu]

feeding them wont help the problem any, these countries have more people than their land/society can support. The human population on this planet is becoming way overbalanced, even the sea is starting to lose a drastic part of its animal population. It wont take many more generations until starvation hits the rest of the world. This is a pretty ugly idea, but feeding someone today that wont be able to feed themself tomorrow just delays and increases the scope of a future disaster. If you want to help, send Africa the means to start feeding itself. Of course after colonization and apartheid they may not be so eager for that kind of interference.

I admit such truths do not have much power in my heart when faced with suffering on an individual level. China is the only country I am aware of that is trying to balance its population with its environment, and its controls are no less distasteful to the emotional part of me than the problems it seeks to fix.

[sephodwyrm]

Every country is actually trying one way or another to achieve population control.

[Rowan11088]

I'm not so sure about that...Last I checked Americans were free to have as many septuplets with fertility drugs as they want. Certainly not a good thing though. As to the pessimistic post above, I don't think the planet itself is unable to support us, considering how little of the landmass we actually use for food production. It's more about what people are willing to give up to make sure the poorest are fed. If Americans were willing to crunch closer together in bigger cities and fewer suburbs and rural areas, we could have twice the farmland and twice the food available from our country alone. Unfortunately there's not much profit in feeding people who by definition can't afford food

[TheBagelmeister]

I'm sure with modern agicultural technology, and a big change in Africa, the continent could be fed. People talk about some nations exporting food, and having people change their diets to help out the poorest people. However, that's unrealistic, as a nation or continent needs to be able to sustain its own population with its own food. Not to mention that the big problem is Africa is not that there is not enough food, it's that it doesn't get there. Africa is a prime example of corruption, as its a place where not even the basic neccesities of live can get to the people.

But yes, as for the starvation, I do agree that we aren't going to wipe out poverty in one G8 meeting. Not to mention not to implement these things can take years, so a famine in Nigeria happening less than a month after the Live8 and G8 meeting is not at all indicitive of any failures.

[Obi Wan Asterix]

Inhabitants of Niger are called the Nigerois not Nigerians.

[Petronius]

The world can support 12 billion people with current agricultural technology. We support, properly, a much smaller number than that. One of the reasons, and a big one, is cattle - while it tastes great, it is not efficient (the amount fed to a cow is not less than the amount gained from slaughtering it). If we grew more crops, then world hunger wouldn't be as big of a problem.

[TheBagelmeister]

Well, I think the question then becomes "Should I give up my hamburger so someone else can eat?". Of course, thats an oversimplification, as it overlooks the other problems in feeding the world. The world is, agiculture hasn't had a very successful time in sub-Saharan Africa. I bet with advances in GM plants, we may be able to allow agiculture to work in that region.

But as for the former question, thats the problem. I don't think too many people are going to want to change a part of their lifestlye for someone else, and somewhat understandably so. I think it will be GM crops that will really change things. Why? Pre-GM agiculture was an energy intensive process, causing pollution and requiring large amounts of resources. With GM agiculture, it's possible to make a crop grow in a very hospitable environment, yet produce a large yield.

[Tigran of Sasoun]

The thread author seems to have just discovered propaganda.

yeah ok, i first learned it from the russians a will back. Hey im not saying to people give every penny you have im saying that Live8 was about B.S and it was as much about getting attention as it was about getting aid to Africa. Than the people watching the show, for one day they felt like they were changing the world and were ditermined to change the world and :"make poverty history". So why had everything changed after a few weeks? do they have better things to do? and do the stars have better things to do? Its very easy to go to a show and sing along, than it is to actaully do something that will actaully change help the starving people, to actaully volunteer, give money, give food, ect..

[Tacticalwithdrawal]

It's the tradeoff they have to do.

To put pressure on the politicians you have to get a lot of people interested, to do that you have to attract 'headline' bands. It becomes a virtuous circle, the bands get lots of free publicity and access to audiences they probably wouldn't normally, the campaigners get a huge captive audience which has turned up (in the main) to see the bands but which can then be fed the campaign message.

Live8 in itself could be seen as very cynical, but the impact of it may be pretty impressive, we'll have to wait and see.

[Da Skinna]

Umm... the Live8 had actually a good idea, and some very noble people performing it. Bob Geldof wasn't trying to spread propaganda, or getting money for himself bys exploiting the starving peoples of Africa. He went to Ethiopia, and his life was changed, not lifestyle maybe (he has the right to wear silk suits) but his view on life. Anybody that goes to these deepply impoverished places will realise that. He's using what he knows best to make a world a better place.

The governments will only do **** if their public voice is ****** off. Unfortunately, the government's regime gains influence and bragging rights by doing that. Look at the Tsunami thing, the governments kept upping their aid funds by millions in a politically based race to gain these bragging rights, they cared nothing for the people. It is up to the public to decide these things about what's right and what is unacceptable, and what is humane, and what is just greedy.

Live8 was about raising awareness, and while I do not agree with what some of their specific aims were, I supported it, and I still do.

The world has enough food for that EVERY single person on this planet gets 2 POUNDS a day. That should be enough to help these people in places where they get about 2 pounds a WEEK, maybe, not even.

The way to go though, is to finance and aid in the irrigating of their fields, and their development of agriculture. That is the basis of reconstructing their continent, by allowing them to live first, then to decide what's best for themselves.

Being so conceited as to think this is some big gimmick, is, well, conceited and asinine to all of us. Sure there will be these corrupt louts who want to reap money. They're called the government, and the're cash-whores.

Don't be conceited and cynical, at least not in this instance, because the Live8 was a great idea and it worked to a degree. But since we're human, it'll be forgotten in a matter of time.



For starvation, though, the solution is to get it when its in its early stages. Ethiopia is a prime example of this, civil war, a dictatorship, and a drought. It could've been handled easily enough in its early stages, and though the Ethiopian regime barred any media from finding it, there was enough warning to indicate a crisis, at the least a crisis, because it escalated to a devestating catastrophe.

Nigeria, can be saved, there was enough warning, and there is enough food. So don't ***** about the LIVE8, because it helped in the short term, and possbily could come back to help in the long term in some form. ***** to the government, the ones that have their hands in everyones pockets, and the ones who control the purse strings.