Sudan, The Olympics, and Human Rights

Final Blog

2008-07-03T19:47:00.000-07:00

“As World War II ended, the world beat its collective chest defiantly and proclaimed it would “never forget” the genocide of the Holocaust so that it could “never again” be repeated. The world- as history has now proven- has a short memory. The Holocaust was not the world’s first genocide and it has not been the last” (Kahn 2007, 1).

In closing I believe Darfur is an issue that we- meaning protestors, other countries/governments, organizations, the citizens of the United States, and citizens around the world- need to solve. This genocide, which began in February of 2003, has not ended. U.N. Peacekeepers are waiting to enter the region, but the Sudanese army and government which support that army will not allow them entry. Governments around the world cannot invade Sudan for many reasons discussed in Text-Based Assignment #1. China becomes a huge player in the Darfur issue. China owns 2/3 of Sudan’s oil, which they also export, and currently have soldiers stationed in Sudan protecting their oil. The Save Darfur Movement, United States government, Britain, France, Olympic Athletes, George Clooney and many more people/organizations want china to take a stand. Demand Sudan let peacekeepers into their country or else they will not export their oil. Sudan, although currently involved in war and genocide, is economically dependant on China to support their horrible economy and troops. If China would stop paying Sudan for oil and oil lands, the killings would eventually stop because they would have no way of purchasing weapons, ammunition, and food for their soldiers and citizens. This is my plan, but it could possibly backfire. I would hope China’s threat scares the Sudanese enough and they allow peacekeepers to enter. But if the Sudanese do not believe China will follow through with their threat, then China could be out of oil which would devastate their country along with Sudan. China must use their leverage in the situation because no other country or government has leverage to use.

The Olympics will be used as a protesting ground for many social issues, especially Darfur. China’s slogan for the 2008 Summer Games is “One World, One Dream”. But one world and one dream for whom, only China? Viewers tuning into see the games will wonder why so many athletes are wearing clothing items that say Darfur, Save Darfur, and/or Team Darfur. Even if protesters cannot go to China to demonstrate at the Olympics, the athletes competing at the games will be there advocating. These advocates will not be wearing clothing items that say Nike or items that represent their country. They are playing for one dream, the dream of a peaceful Darfur.

As far as the Save Darfur movement goes, I think it has been some-what successful, but will thrive in the upcoming months. The Olympics begin at the start of August; the movie Darfur Now hits theaters November 2nd, 2008; and the Presidential election is two days later on November 4th 2008. Darfur will be an issue which Barack Obama and John McCain will have to take a stand on. What are they going to do about? Publicity about Darfur will start in August with the Olympics, and continue through the September and October advertising for Darfur Now.

The only reason I think the movement has not been success is many people still do not know about Darfur. My friends, family, and even some professors had no idea what events were occurring in Darfur when I asked them. It’s sad something so horrific can be occurring and people do not even know about. The Save Darfur Movement uses celebrity ambassadors, t-shirts, website, concerts, rallies, and wristbands to get the word out. They use the same tactics as past social movements, but they have yet to gain enough momentum in order to solve the problem. From today and until the Presidential election will be the time period which determines the fate of Darfur. The Save Darfur movement must use these key days and events to inform citizens and get them involved. I cannot predict the future, but I see the fate of Darfur being positive. I think the American people, governments around the world, and China are going to realize how passionately people feel about Darfur.

Samantha Power’s states: “The U.S. policies crafted in response to each case of genocide…were not accidental products of neglect. They were concrete choices made by this country’s most influential decision makers after unspoken and explicit weighing of costs and benefits.”( Power 2002, 508). Samantha Power states the most important factor of why nations of people do not become involved with genocide: cost. The United States and the UN will be the ones left holding the bill for Darfur when all is said and done. Because these displaced people have nothing, they will not be able to pay anyone back for their efforts. China already has claimed Sudan’s oil. Nothing Sudan has to offer is of interest to the United States, any other country, or to the United Nations. Genocide and mass murders are still occurring in Darfur today. Hopefully this will be the last genocide, but the end to Darfur’s horrific struggle cannot be seen. Martin Luther King, Jr. has summed up the end result of genocide and the crisis in Darfur in one sentence: “In the end, we will remember not the works of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” (Kahn 2007,1).

Kahn, Leora. Darfur Twenty Years of War and Genocide in Sudan. Brooklyn, NY: Powerhouse Books, 2007.

Power, Samantha. “A Problem From Hell”. New York, New York: Basic Books, 2002.

Opinion Post #4

2008-06-27T19:00:00.000-07:00

In her piece, the Bono-izaton of activism, Naomi Klein calls many of you, “the Pro-Logo generation that is more likely to buy a wristband and ticket to Live Earth than hit the streets in protest.” Even those of you who are close to 40 like I am probably have at least considered wearing a rubber wristband or pink ribbon at some point! Klein argues that this “corporatized” form of protest is “less dangerous and less powerful" than grassroots demonstrations. Looking back on and incorporating references to the movements we looked at this semester either in readings or on the internet, please give your opinion as to the following:
Is Klein correct in her assessment of activism today? Is it really less effective? Less dangerous? If Klein is correct, what factors do you think have made activism by young people today different from that of the Freedom Riders or anti-Vietnam protests? If Klein is wrong in her assessment, what is it about today’s social movements that you think has the potential to be powerful?

No, I do not think Klein is correct in her assessment of protests/movements in today’s world. The reason protests were so common in the 60s and 70s can be attributed to many fatcors. The first important factor was the babyboomers (BB) becoming young adults. For example, music around this time period totally changed with the presence of Bob Dylan and the Beatles. Parents of the BB despised this music since they were accustomed to the popular Frank Sinatra, but the BB protested and revolted against their parents because they loved the Beatles. Sure, the Beatles opened the doors for future artists, but it is the BB who allowed them to open these doors by: protests and revolts. The same BB’s helped fight for Civil Rights, Women’s Rights, Gay and Lesbian Rights, and the Vietnam War movement because they realized how powerful they could be if they just banned together. Protesting also achieved the end of the Vietnam War.

Perhaps nothing has been that important in an overall societal view lately? But if there was an issue that was detrimental to our society or the majority of society’s belief’s? I know Americans would protest. For example, when the idea was on the table regarding Iraq and the possibility of a draft, people became horrified. It would have been a non-gendered draft meaning that even women 18-25 would be drafted along with the men of those ages. There is no way in hell that our parents, majority of which are a part of the BB, would just let their children be drafted. They have seen first hand what Vietnam has done to their friends, familiy, and society. The possible draftees had also learned from Vietnam, but through history books and not personal experiences.

The reason protests have dimisinshed is because the majority of citizens in the United States are happy or content. Protests occurr when the government or people in charge are not listening to their citizens wants and needs. Unequal treatement by the government has been the basis of the majority of movements which occurred in the United States. The Civil Rights movement happened because black citizens were displeased with their government treating them unequally. The Gay Rights movement and the Women’s movement are other movements also based on unfair applications of law . Lack of protests during the last few decades should be viewed positivley since now the majority of citizens are content with laws and government treatment. If Klein wants to see protests, then she must want to see a socitey who is discughsted with some aspect of their lives. I’m not saying the period of protests has ended, I just think that nothing ‘big’ enough has occurred where the citizens of the United States need to ban together to change something. When something is not affecting you and/or your community directly, for example Darfur, then protesting is not as necessary because the people areoung you are not in immediate danger.

The internet has also helped alter the ways in which people decide to become active with movement. Since communication can be done faster than ever, people know of injustices from the beginning; before riots, protests, and rallies need to be resorted to. Rallies are still useful ways to protest and they have not been totally scrapped. For the Save Darfur movement, rallies only occurred in big cities like NY, CA, Washington D.C., etc. Just because people changed their way of protesting and becoming involved in movements does not mean they are less effective. Our approaches to conflicts have evolved overtime.

Although I have stated the many reasons why Klein is wrong with her defition of protestors today, I do think there is a problem. I think that people are scared of their government and democracy. People elect those individuals in charge and the government should be afriad of its people, and not the other way around. I think young adults are a lot more selfish in todays world and focused on their little problems in stead of thinking about the big picture. The new commercial advertisements for the army have the slogan “An Army of One.” But isn’t an army a group of people? The government and army has realized the change in its peoples wants/beliefes and have changed accordingly. “An Army of One” attratcs people who want to be independent, but we are suppose to be working together. Even though I believe Klein is wrong, I also want people to ste-up, even though their lives are busy.

Opinion Based Assignment #3

2008-06-20T20:01:00.000-07:00

Think about the contrast discussed in the first week between Dr. Martin Luther King’s adherence to civil disobedience and Malcolm X’s mandate of “by any means necessary.” Are any of the “radical” tactics and practices discussed in this week’s readings, for example the Clothesline project, sidewalk picketing by the pro-life movement, or “outing” acceptable? If so, which ones and why?
I do not believe in the pro-life radical tactics. Sidewalk picketing by the pro-life movement is something that sickens me so much, that I do not have words to describe it! L On Saturday mornings is when the non-profit organization Planned Parenthood does its abortions, no other days. People involved with the pro-life social movement obviously know this and stand out there every Saturday. I know people have the right to assemble in America, but whenever I am driving by my local Planned Parenthood in Tempe, AZ on a Saturday morning I just become sick. I cannot imagine being one of those girls who are going there to have an abortion. They are making one of the most difficult decisions of their lives, that will most likely leave them with either emotional or health related side effects, and they have to walk by these people. These people that do not know them, know of their current situation, or if they are even in a state to raise a child. People usually have abortions because they cannot raise a child in their current situation, so if they did have the child and were not capable of properly raising it, it could turn out to be a murderer, rapist, or thief due to lack of parental involvement. The pro-life movement is trying to make drastic decisions concerning the live of people they do not even know. All social movements are trying to make decisions about people or for people to better them, but what if these people do not want their ‘help’? What if the United States tried to force civil rights on blacks and they did not want them? Would protestors have continued this movement if the people who this movement affected did not want these rights?
However, I do kind of agree with the radical tactics of the Clothesline Project. Although some individuals may not support the project, I think it empowers the women that have been victims and may even give them some form of closure. I do not know how I feel about the shirts that would display the names of people who were rapists. I mean what if a girl said she was raped, but really just drank too much and may have consented to sex drunkenly, but she would not have if she was sober? I have heard of this sort of situation many times; some people say its still rape and others do not. What if the names of the men on some of the T-shirts were involved in this type of situation? I can see why the school’s administration said ‘no way’ and I can also see how this would anger people. I can see both sides of the argument, but cannot pick a side.
In other words, what, in your opinion, are the circumstances under which “radical” or even anarchic protest might be a valid option for a social movement to undertake? What are the political or social circumstances that make it viable for a social movement to engage in “in your face” actions. If your answer is that social movements never should engage in radical protest, why do you think that way?
I think some of the tactics used in the Civil Rights movement were radical. The sit-ins and protests were pretty intense and were caught on camera. These radical tactics were necessary because the government and some of its citizens were not recognizing other citizen’s hardships. Blacks in the Civil Rights movement were citizens who were saying they we upset, but no one wanted to listen. Protestors who were against the Vietnam were also citizens displeased with their government not listening to them. Darfurians are Arab Muslim citizens of Sudan whose government and African-Christian citizens turned against and started killing. “In your face” actions are needed when the government is not listening to its citizens and the ignored citizens lives are in danger and/or being severely affected. Even though Darfurians are not citizens of the United States, we still need to act responsibly since the U.S. is one of the most powerful countries in the world.

Text Based Assignment #3

2008-06-20T19:58:00.000-07:00

What are the primary emotions that the social movement you are following appears to encourage in its members?
I think there are many emotions in the Save Darfur movement that attract protestors. I think one of the emotions that attract people to the Save Darfur movement is love for mankind. Love for the victims of Darfur leads to compassion for these people that did nothing to trigger the horrific events that have happened to them, their friends, their homes, and country. I think love and compassion is responsible for drawing people towards this movement and is also responsible for keeping people involved. People can only imagine the plight of others and they develop a desire to help them (p.159). Grief, sorrow, and loss are other emotions that draw to people to Save Darfur. People who have been victims of past genocides, or people who know victims of past genocides, resonate with these emotions and Darfur. They have experienced these ‘sad’ emotions and perhaps by becoming involved, they believe they can prevent others from expienecing them. Fear and dread are also among the emotions present in the Save Darfur movement. James A. Jasper says that “fear and dread arise from a sense of threat to one’s daily routines or moral beliefs; they can paralyze but also be developed into outrage” (p.159). For me, knowing about Darfur is a threat to my moral beliefs and is the reason why I have continued to follow this movement for an over a year now. I believe in helping people who cannot necessarily help themselves. Darfurians cannot help themselves because they have no one to turn to. Their own government is responsible for supplying the weapons that are being used to kill them.
I took a class at Arizona State University called Genocide, The Holocaust, and Human Rights (JUS 394). The information taught in this class was about all the genocides that ever happened in the world. What was common with every case of genocide is: that when genocide is occurring, people/governments respond so slowly and it is always too late. It is not until years or decades later that we learn how this has affected our whole world, other cultures, history, and the future. Sudan is in Africa which is far from the United States. Many people say why should we (the United States) help them, where is Britain and France? My answer would be who cares about what other countries are doing, if we responded; everyone will surely follow or give us the necessary support we need to stop this. Sudan is a severely underdeveloped in the South meaning that most of it is desert or farm land. Sudan is also the home of the Nile River. Who knows what kind of cures lie in this undeveloped land and by the Nile? If we do not prevent these killings from continuing, Sudan will be a heap of metal and war after math. Then we will never know what this country could have offered to its own people or the world.
How do these emotions relate to the tactics being deployed by the organization?
Since the main emotions tied to the Save Darfur movement are love and compassion, the tactics used to get people involved are quite simple. I think the tactic is to get the word out any way you can: posters, T.V. shows, newspapers, magazines, websites, word-of-mouth-, etc. Once people know what’s going on, they cannot help wanting to become involved. A year ago, I knew something bad was going on in Africa, but I did not know exactly what was happening. I asked my friends, parents, and even some professors at ASU and no one could give me a ‘for sure’ answer. Now that I know what’s occurring here, I let everyone I come into contact know. I have ignited emotion in many of my friends and family members who have then gone online to sign the Save Darfur Petition and purchased Save Darfur clothing. Today, I was standing in line at the gas station and a man in front of me was about to buy a 2 liter of Diet Coke (this is a true story). The line was super long and I knew I had a few minutes to wait so I said to the man, “Sir, did you know that by buying that Diet Coke you are supporting a company that is contributing to genocide?” He did not know what I was talking about or how to even respond, so I just kept talking. I told him about China’s involvement with Sudan, how Coca-Cola is sponsoring the Olympics this summer, etc. Right before it was his turn to make a purchase, the man traded in his Diet Coke for a Diet Pepsi. I felt victorious. That’s all this movement needs is to get the word out because once people really know what’s going on, they cannot help but involve their emotions. Who knows how many people that man will inform about Darfur? Whether it is one, ten, or none, I got the word out.
Does the “face” the organization puts forth to the public differ from that presented to members or potential recruits? If so, how?
I do not think the Darfur “face” differs in public from the one that is presented in private. In other movements, like the Gay Rights movement, I could see the public face being different than the one presented to members. Perhaps the way they talk to one another in a meeting is different than the way they speak to each other in a public setting or public protest. If they would have acted like they did in private, people may find it offensive and may not want to support the movement based on that sole fact. I do not believe this is the case for Darfur. Since the Save Darfur movement is so globally recognized, it must have the same ‘face’ everywhere.
Concentrating on Bernstein’s and Jasper’s chapters, how do the emotions and tactics that currently are sanctioned in the social movement you are following, i.e., the “strategic deployment of identities” in that social movement relate to the larger social structure (or culture) in which the movement is taking place?
I think politics have definitely played a role in making the movement known in societies since President Bush will be out of office in a few months. The movie Darfur Now hits theaters November 2nd, 2008. Only two days before the Presidential election. I believe they planned to release the movie around this time because people will be aware of the situation and will want a President who will help these people. Darfur will be advertised all around the time of the Summer Olympics in August and then the movie Darfur Now around election time; October/November.
Rallies are a tactic that has lost its popularity, at least with the Save Darfur movement. There are some rallies, but they are only in big scities in the United States like Chicago, Los Angeles, Washington D.C., New York, etc. I think rallies are not that popular anymore because people do not have time. American lives are hectic and people want to use their spare time to relax. It’s easier for someone to jump on the internet at home or at work to make a donation or buy a hat. You can pay with a credit card, it takes under ten minutes, and you feel good about it afterwards. The internet is also used to provide people with factual, day-to-day information. This can help keep people emotionally involved because they know what is going on with movement and with Darufr. Because mass media keeps people so well informed, calls do not need to be made to tell people about a protest or movement meeting. Now a person can just send out an e-mail because they will have everyone on a mailing list.
These tactics were chosen over others due to their efficiency. The internet and mass e-mails are quick, easy, and low costs which allows for more time to be focused in other places than communication. Movies are also a great way to reach people. Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth made Americans and Congress realize we need to change our ways because we are damaging earth. Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 was very successful and made people question the President, his intentions, the events of that day, and our War on Terror. The craze of reality shows on television has pushed its way into the movie sector of our society which is what makes these movies so popular.

Opinion Post for Assignment #2

2008-06-15T15:15:00.001-07:00

When thinking of the ideal figurehead for the 2008 women’s right movement, only one person comes to mind: Eva Peron. Eva Peron (a.k.a. Evita) was the wife of Juan Domingo Peron who was the President of Argentina in the early 1950s. She became a very powerful voice for labor rights in Argentina and founded the first female political party, the Female Peronist Party. Because of her position, Eva was able to bring the problems of the people to her President husband who had the power to make the necessary changes. Eva also fought for women’s suffrage in Argentina, which is why I believe she would be successful in leading the 2008 women’s right movement. She is intelligent; soft, but well-spoken; and wants to make a difference in the lives of ‘common’ people. As far as her race, religion, and age, I would not change any of it if I were to resurrect her so she would be able to lead this movement. Her politics combined nationalism with social democracy in the 1940’s, but I think today I would make her be a democrat and very liberal.
One benefit of having an iconic figure/celebrity tied to a social movement is that people feel like they can identify with them. I believe people feel better connected with individuals who have been in the public eye since stories have been written about various aspects of their life. Some potential downfalls are if that person makes a mistake, for instance, they say the wrong word or were affiliated with something that is/was publicly controversial in the past; it would be reflected negatively onto the movement. The 2008 Presidential election is a perfect example. Statements that Hillary and Obama made six years ago are being brought up today and could affect either person’s chance of winning the democrat nomination or could affect the chance of a democrat winning the office at all. Perhaps some people would not like Eva’s past political beliefs of nationalism because nationalism is sometimes tied to patriotism. I think the idea of patriotism over the past seven years in the United States has resulted in wars, our national deficit is in the billions, and now we’re in a recession because of it. I think the American people want someone who is on the other side of the spectrum when it comes to patriotism. I’m not saying we want people who are unpatriotic in charge, but patriotic ideals (“they bombed us, so let’s bomb them; referring to 9/11 attacks and the President tying them to the invasion of Iraq) has gotten the U.S. in a lot of trouble. People involved with the 2008 women’s movement might be apprehensive once they learn about Eva’s past ties with nationalism, but I believe they would get over it since she made so many positive advancements for her Argentinean women in the 1950s.
I think if Claudette Colvin spearheaded the Montgomery Bus Boycott instead of Rosa Parks, it would not have been as successful at all! I think Rosa’s ‘no’ was more powerful than Claudette’s ‘no’ based on the events which occurred after they both refused to get up. Claudette was taken off the bus kicking and screaming for which she was charged with assault. Rosa, on the other hand, left when the authorities came onto the bus to retrieve her, but she did make a scene by kicking or screaming. Claudette’s response used Black Panther Party tactics, whether she wanted to or not, she was angry and lashing out. People do not respond to anger and that’s why when Rosa said ‘no,’ she really meant it. She was not upset or vengeful towards white people anymore, she just wanted to sit because she was tired and her feet hurt. Claudette, who is twelve years older than Rosa, wanted the same thing, but when she did not get what she wanted, she threw a tantrum like a five year old. No one listens to five year old when they are tantruming because they’re in a temporary state of craziness where nothing and no one can reach them. Rosa, even though she probably wanted to act like Claudette did, refrained herself. She remained “calm, cool, and collected” so people responded positively to her actions versus Claudette’s which is why she was the perfect candidate to lead the Montgomery Bus Boycott. Our book states that all committed activists sense their commitment sets them apart from the majority of citizens and the extreme case occurs when activism requires illegal actions (p.150). Rosa’s actions prompted the Montgomery Bus Boycott in which many protesters and activists became outlaws by committing this one illegal act together.

Text-Based Assignment #2

2008-06-13T19:54:00.000-07:00

Can the social movement you have chosen to follow be said to have a particular collective identity or “frame (s)”? What are these?
I believe the frame of my social movement is the realities of genocide. People resonate feelings with genocide because so much is known about past genocides. As soon as I hear the word genocide, I think about the Holocaust and Rwanda. Darfur is continuously referred to as “the new Rwanda.” A movie was made both about the Holocaust and Rwanda (Schindler’s List and Hotel Rwanda), and I bet people recall scenes of those movies when hearing the word genocide and thinking about the helpless civilians in Darfur. The collective identity of people involved in the Darfur social movement is the wish to end genocide. People are attracted to this particular movement because it is framed by the word genocide. Perhaps people feel guilty about not reacting to past genocides quick enough and are trying to make-up for their mistakes with the Darfur movement.
Compare and contrast the framing of the social movement you are following to those of the pro-life movement and the environmental movement. Does the movement you have chosen seem to have a particular iconic “face,” such as Rosa Parks or Cindy Sheehan?
Both the Save Darfur movement and the Pro-life movement focus on helping people who are being killed. Some people believe individuals who have abortions or take birth control are killing people and destructing society. The end goals of both of these movements are to save lives. They also differ from one another because frame work of Save Darfur is based on genocide (ethnic discrimination) whereas the Pro-life movement’s framework wants people to fight for a person who has not yet begun to have a social dimension to their life (p.145). A common factor shared by the Save Darfur and the Environmental movement is that both are trying to reach goals on a global issue. In order to protect the environment, everyone has to become involved and do something. In order to protect Darfurians, many countries and their leaders need to become involved to push China towards taking some action. The Pro-life movement is more of an American goal and not a global goal because the United States has the most relaxed laws when it comes to abortion/contraception when compared with the world.
The Darfur movement has a few iconic “faces”: George Clooney, Mia Farrow, and Steven Spielberg. George Clooney has gone on Oprah’s television show to inform people about the situation in Darfur and he has also spoken at many rallies. Mia Farrow’s point of focus regarding Darfur is the refugee situation occurring in East Chad. Over 2.5 million people are currently living in refugee camps in East Chad since that’s where Sudan and Chad share a border (Darfur is located on the western side of Sudan). Steven Spielberg is the newest celebrity spokesman of the Darfur social movement. Spielberg arrived in China since he was employed by the Chinese to be the Olympic artistic director. Upon arrival he learned much about Darfur, Sudan, and China’s lack of actions taken towards both. Spielberg, a Jewish man and director of Schindler’s List, was so upset that he asked China to take immediate action otherwise he would leave. The Chinese government did not fulfill his requests so Spielberg quit his job and returned to the United States.
Does the social movement appear to have strategies for attracting and retaining members, and what are these strategies?
I think the strategy for this issue is to just get the word out. News broadcasts, television specials, and the internet are all ways of mass communication that help this movement. Celebrity involvement always helps a cause because, for some reason people seem to believe genocide is really occurring when George Clooney states it, but not when President George W. Bush says so. But who can blame society for not believing Bush after all the lies he told? This movement also uses clothing items to get the word out. Online anyone who has a credit or debit card can buy shirts, hats, or wristbands (buy them here -->http://yhst-88482264721289.stores.yahoo.net/sadawr.html) that say Save Darfur or the movement’s slogan “Not On My Watch.” This is a great approach because it provides walking signs, who are the people that wear these items, while razing funds for the movement and the victims.
Describe the persons who have been primarily responsible for framing the social movement you are following and the persons who might join the movement. What are the salient characteristics such as race, gender, socioeconomic class, religion, political affiliation that would describe persons who join the social movement?
In 2004, after the US Congress and President Bush issued a statement that genocide was occurring in Darfur, well-organized Jewish groups and student activists brought the Darfur issue to a new level of attention (Newsweek). The United States Holocaust Museum and the American Jewish World Service helped put this movement in the public eye. Once the movement gained momentum, specific groups and organizations developed which focused only on Darfur and genocide: Dream for Darfur; Save Darfur Coalition; Students Taking Action Now Darfur (STAND); Team Darfur and many more.
Some theories state that individuals who feel alienated or marginalized are the most likely people to join social movements. I believe the people who join the Save Darfur movement are likely to be of African descent, Christian, a student, a women, or any who has the same ethnicity of a victim of genocide (I mean Jewish, Vietnamese, Rwandans, etc). I think African people and Christians are likely to join since the victims in Darfur practice Christianity and are of African descent. Students seem to engage a lot more social movements for many reasons: teachers talk about recent stories in the news and engage classes in discussions or debts. They may have more time on their since they are going to school and likely to be young and without a family/serious job. They have more time to give and have to complete projects where they main learn a lot about an injustice that they want to change (i.e. this class). I believe women are more likely to join than men because they feel a sense of shared identity. When the janwajeed commit their genocidal acts they do it systematically. They invade the village, set homes on fire, kill the men, and rape the women. It is extremely sad, but true, so the majority of living survivors are women and children. Victims of past genocides and their family members are likely to get involved because they also share the same identity in a way.
What are the consequences of the movement you are studying being framed in this particular way? Who may be excluded?
The consequence of the way the Save Darfur movement is framed could result in contradictory actions. The people committing genocide in Darfur are the janwajeed and the majority of them are Arab Muslim. Perhaps if an Arab Muslim wanted to become part of this social movement people may exclude him because of his shared ethnicity. This would be ironic because the reason this movement happened is due to intolerance and un-acceptance of a group of people based on their ethnicity: no ethnic discrimination! Another group which could be ethnically discriminated against is anyone who's Chinese. The movement looks down negatively on China because they are providing money which is fueling this fire. They buy 2/3 of Sudan’s oil and they money which buys that oil is then being used to buy guns and other weapons. Some people who are a part of the Save Darfur movement may not want a person who is Chinese involved. These are both possibilities and that’s why ‘perhaps’ and ‘could’ is used a lot. I think the movement would actually embrace these people and maybe they have better ideas of how to reach the people who share the same ethnic background as them. Other people that could be excluded are someone who works for or is affiliated with Nike or Johnson & Johnson. Rallies were held in May of this year in order for people and consumer’s of these products to voice that they did not want them to sponsor the Olympics, to advertise in anyway, or provide products/services. If someone who is a part of these corporations wants to join the movement some people could want to exclude them due to their affiliations, but again I think this would be an advantage.
Are there ways in which the social movement you have chosen might be re-framed to be more inclusive?
I think the Save Darfur social movement is an inclusive as it can get. Since this is a world problem, the only way to create a strong enough force is in numbers. Save Darfur will not discriminate against anyone who wants to join because the movement needs all the help it can get. I think this social movement has done its job so far as raising awareness and getting people involved enough to want to do something. Right now, we just need to push our elected officials and government to make China change their actions anyway they can without creating a huge problem.

Newsweek. Packing a Tragedy. 26 Oct. 2007 Newsweek. 12 Jun. 2008. <http://www.newsweek.com/id/62115>

Opinion Assignment #1

2008-06-06T16:13:00.000-07:00

The Gay Rights movement approach used both radicalism and assimilation to achieve their goal of equality for gay people. The action, which triggered this movement, was radical. The Stonewall Inn raid prompted an all out riot in New York against police officers. The actions taken by the GLF and other gay rights organizations after the Stonewall Inn incident showed that these people of different backgrounds could work together to achieve their overall goal of equality. Many individuals still used radicalism for recruitment and to make their cause known, but their radicalism did not bring harm to anyone, like the first radical act did.
The Vietnam War movement seemed to use assimilation tactics more than it used radicalism. I think that approach worked for that group because many people across the country could identify with not wanting to be involved in the war. They did not need to use radical tactics to ignite the flame of their movement because people were already enraged. Since so many people felt strongly about not being involved with the Vietnam War, people massively assembled themselves to protest at the nation’s capital and at schools. I think universities saw the majority of the protests because the people who were being drafted were the same age as the majority of protestors there. I believe this shared identity was a very important factor in the Vietnam War movement.
When thinking about these social movements, the Sudan issue, and Dr. King’s/Malcolm X’s strategies, I believe that all the strategies used by each of these groups had some validity. When deciding on how to approach a social movement or issue I think it depends on two factors: 1.) What your cause is and 2.) How the population feels about it. If people cannot identify you’re your issue, for instance not everyone is gay, then you need to be radical. But if the general population is being affected by something, like the Vietnme War, then radicalism is not needed because everyone is already emotionally involved. The strategy that I would use personally is Dr. King’s strategy. I think people are more likely to listen to a person who is calm and collected rather than angry and frazzeled with a situation. If someone comes at me with a “you owe me this” attitude (Malcolm X/ BBP) versus a “can we talk” attitude (Dr. King), I am more likely to listen to the latter. I do believe that Carson is right that both of these apptoaches can work if used properly.
I found it interesting how Carson compared their, meaning Malcolm’s and King’s, backgrounds. Malcolm’s childhood was really rough. His father was assassinated, his mother went insane, and he was thrown into foster care. On the other hand, Martin Luther King, Jr.’s father was a Baptist minister and he grew-up in a wealthy, loving environment (that’s what Carson portrays). Once I learned about their childhoods, it totally made sense how each man approached the Civil Rights social movement.
Malcolm had anger inside of him his whole life, which was portrayed in his approached to the Civil Rights movement and also displayed in his involvement with the Black Panther Party (BPP). I interpreted the Black Panther Party Manifesto as a completely radical document. The second point of the manifesto states that the government should be obligated to find man a job with guaranteed income. It seems as though the Black Panther Party wants to implement new laws for the whole United States, because the government is not obligated to find anyone a job and never has been. Another point of the manifesto that I found extremely radical is point number three. Here the BPP tries to compare the 100 acres and a mule compensation with how the Germans were compensating the Jews for the wrongdoings done to them in WWII. Forty acres and a mule were awarded to the freed slaves in 1865. The Black Panther Party Manifesto was written in 1966, one hundred and one years later. How are the people of 1966 responsible for what the people of 1865 promised? The Germans are responsible for what they did to the Jewish people because it was only twenty years after the fact. I believe in Civil Rights for everyone, but think Malcolm’s approach was too drastic and I understand why people did not respond to his approach.
I think the Civil Rights movement could have been more successful if MLK and the BPP joined forces. They were both fighting for the same thing, but coming from different sides, which is a good “attack” method, but one attacker had peace on his mind while the other had retribution. People do not like to state when they are wrong and that is what Malcolm and the BPP wanted, along with their rights. MLK did not care about who did what in the past, he just wanted a better future. I think if the BPP would have been less concerned with accountability, MLK would have joined forces with them and perhaps neither leader would have been assassinated while in pursuit of their civil rights. I do not have any suggestions for MLK and the way he approached the issue of achieving civil rights. His methods –marching, speeches, and bus boycotts- did not harm anyone while they got his point across.

Text-Based Assignment #1

2008-06-05T21:35:00.000-07:00

In February of 2003, the attacks or genocide began in Darfur. There was no triggering event which ignited the fire of genocide in Darfur. Decades of prolonged civil war in Sudan led to the north, Arab Muslims, being pitted against the south, African Christians. The southern region of Darfur was not receiving any monetary support from the Khartoum government. The African Christians revolted against the Arab-Muslim supported government because they believed it was discriminating against their section of the country. The distinctive factor of who would be killed was ethnic based. It was the Arabs against the Africans.
The groups involved are the Arabic Janjaweed and the Government of Sudan (GoS) against the Sudan Liberation Army (SLA) and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM). The SLA is a militia/army located in the south of Sudan who oppose the government and armies of Northern Sudan. The Arabic name Janjaweed comes from jinn (“spirit”) and jawad (“horse”) (Prunier 2005, xvi). This name can be translated to “evil horsemen” or “ghost riders” and was given to the Arab militia who made the first attacks on Darfur (Prunier 2005,xvi). In December of 2003, the Janjaweed carried out attacks against African villages. They burned down the homes in the villages, and murderer and raped the villagers. This led to 10,000 refugees fleeing to Chad (Totten 2006, xx).
Even though China is a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, they are still supplying Sudan with weapons which are only fueling the fire. According to Amnesty International, China is selling military aircraft, parts, ammunition and other forms of arms to Sudan. Chinese soldiers are alleged to be in Sudan protecting Chinese oil interests.
China’s President, Hu Jintao, has refused to mix diplomacy with human’s rights issues, but the UN and other nations are forcing China to respond. China is the biggest consumer of Sudan’s oil, buying two thirds of the countries oil every year (Washington Post). China seems to be overlooking the issues in Darfur, perhaps for the purpose of gaining more resources. China and its President finally cracked under the pressure and in February of 2007, Hu Jintao told Omar al-Bashir (Sudan’s leader) that he must allow the UN to become involved with ending the conflict in Darfur...or else.
There are documents and signed agreements emplaced which should have prevented this genocide, yet four and a half years later, Darfurians are still being murdered. On such document emplaced is the Genocide Convention. The Genocide Convention document contains lists for the Prevention of Genocide and the Punishment for the Crime of Genocide. (Quigley 2006, 8). The Genocide Convention was a document constructed by the UN after the Holocaust. So it seems like the UN should be the first to declare genocide has occurred in a region..right?
The United States and the United Nations knew what was occurring before their “special investigative reports” came in almost two years after the genocide began. Other agencies and organizations inside the United States were speaking out for Darfur publicly. In January of 2004, The U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum’s Committee on Conscience issued a “Genocide Warning” for Darfur (Totten 2006, xx). Then in June of 2004, the museum closed all its exhibits for the first time in history in order to do a program about the humanitarian crisis in Darfur and called for “immediate action” to be taken (Totten 2006, xxiv). A month later, The U.S. Holocaust Museum and American Jewish World Service hosted an emergency meeting. The summit led to the creation of the Save Darfur Coalition (Totten 2006, xxvi). Even though it took the UN two years to react after the start of the genocide, they are “kind of” helping now. The UN Security Council has referred the situation in Darfur to the International Crime Court (ICC) (Quigley 2005, 87). Since then, the court has indicted State Minister for Humanitarian Affairs Ahmed Haroun and alleged Muslim Janjaweed militia leader Ali Mohammed Ali Mohammed Ali aka Ali Kosheib, in relation to the atrocities in the region. The UN is also offering Sudan peacekeepers, but the Sudanese government is rejecting offers.
Due to the UN’s slow response, other organizations and people have become involved with stopping the Darfur crisis. Dream for Darfur is an activist group who is trying to get nations involved in order to stop the crisis in Darfur. Dream for Darfur and other organizations want the International Olympics Committee (IOC) to use the Olympics that are scheduled to take place in Beijing, China, as leverage to stop the genocide in Darfur (USA Today). Since China has oil rights in the African region of Sudan and because of the upcoming Olympics, Dream for Darfur believes the IOC should pressure China into doing more to secure peace in the troubled region. But the IOC fails to make Darfur their issue. A representative from the committee stated that it would be inappropriate to address the situation or to write the UN Security Council since the committee is not a political one (USA Today).
Since the IOC is failing to take a stance on the issue, some athletes decided they have to. Some of these individuals who are competing in the 2008 Summer Games are using their status to let people know how the feel about the Darfur crisis. The Olympic athletes who are speaking out about the genocide are a part of what is now called Team Darfur. They said when not competing they will not be wearing shirts/hats of the country they are competing for, but will wear items advertising Save Darfur.
Mass society theory says that social movements occur when society no longer has mediator organizations that unsatisfied people can join. The definition of mass society theory paints a perfect picture of what has happened and is continuing to happen in Darfur. What are displeased Americans suppose to do, write their Congressman? That sort of passive action would take months for something to happen and we don’t have months. So organizations are being created on the internet, which is a fast way to get many people, masses of people, involved. On the Save Darfur website you can make donations; buy shirts, hats, wristband, etc., and they even have an online petition set-up. What is so great about this website is that people from all over the world can work together to achieve a peaceful Darfur.
Cultural approaches to social movements occur when citizens who have already have rights believe they must become involved in or create a movement in order to make a greater impact. I also believe that the cultural approach “theory” seems to define the Darfur social movement. I have the right to vote and hold office, but I feel I must write this blog and become a part of the Save Darfur website in order to make an impact.
The political process theory states that economic and political shifts happen which allow social movements to occur. This theory believes that changes made to political polices are the most important to a movements cause. The political process theory cannot be applied to the genocide in Darfur. Changes in Sudan’s politics are very unlikely to happen since the government’s army is responsible for the genocide. In my opinion, America does not need to change their politics regarding Darfur. I think the majority of Americans and politicians believe this is a huge problem and want to do every thing they can to help. Out of all three of the theories/approaches listed, I think mass society theory fits the best.

Sources

Chinese President Pushes Sudan on Darfur. 2 Feb. 2007. The Washington Post.com. 28 April 2008 <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/02/AR2007020200251.html>

Dream for Darfur group gives IOC an 'F' for Sudan response. 27 Jan. 2008. USA Today.Com. 28 April 2008 http://www.dreamfordarfur.org/

LeBlanc, Lawrence J. The United States and the Genocide Convention. Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1991.

Prunier, Gerard. Darfur the Ambiguous Genocide. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 2005.

Quigley, John. The Genocide Convention: An International Law Analysis. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company, 2006.

"About Me"

2008-05-28T11:44:00.000-07:00

Hello everyone my name is Lisa and I am a senior at ASU. This is one of the last classes I will be taking since once I'm finished with summer school I'm done! I am majoring in Justice Studies and receiving a supplementary focus in Spanish. This past fall I studied abroad in Alicante, Spain through ASU and it was one of the best experiences. The topic I am choosing to blog about is the Olympics and Human Rights issues. This past semester I wrote a 25 page paper about the genocide occurring in the Darfur region of Sudan. I was surprised to learn how much China was contributing to this conflict. China exports 2/3 of Sudan's oil. Any sort of intervention to stop the genocide/civil war could compromise their exports, therefore China is not being very helpful. Perhaps its because China is making a huge profit from the civil war in Sudan by providing guns and ammunition to the rebels. Since the summer Olympic games are being held in Beijing at the end of August, the Darfur issue and China's lack of response to it is one of the human rights issues that will be center stage (I believe). Hopefully protests and publicity displaying China's lack of compassion for a country, and its people, who is vital to its survival will make them rethink their actions. Although I want Sudan to be my main focus of this blog, I will discuss other major human rights issues that will be presented at the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games.