So being in the UK without easy Internet access and distracted by the girl I’m here with has made me kinda lax about posting on my blog but I’m seeing lots of things from the European (or at least uk) perspective. Unfortunately, for the most part my reaction is that while the news and parliamentary talk is more intellectual over here the citizens or at least the idealistic youth are even worse.

I don’t know what it was like back in the states but here in the UK the live8 concert (inspired by live aid an anti-poverty concert years ago) on Saturday is being regarded as the best thing since text messaging. I think it’s a great thing people are having memorable cultural and musical events apparently many these people are going around believing they are ‘doing their part’ or whatever by going to see their favorite bands play. So while I think many of the celebrities had the best of intentions, and have no beef with the people who just went to see some good music and maybe donate a little money to charity I was appalled at the stupidity expressed on stage and the hypocrisy of many concert goers who are now congratulating themselves for supporting the movement. In fact I’m not even convinced that live8 didn’t do more harm than good. Let’s start with the stated aim of the concerts, to encourage G8 debt relief. It is possible that here in Britain this sort of exhibition does put pressure on the leaders and society to be generous. However, as I have heard anti-poverty campaigners who have worked in both countries comment the guilt tactic doesn’t play so well in the US where people seem much more concerned with forward looking opportunity and hope. Despite all the hype about ending poverty the real thrust of the concert was to point out the suffering in Africa in contrast to our comfort and continued failure to do anything about it. However, the UK is already a strong supporter of debt relief, it is the US which is dragging its feet and far from putting pressure on GW to support debt relief this type of high profile activism makes it more difficult for him to support the debt relief. Even the hint that GW changed US policy based on a bunch of European youth in a hippie style concert would not play well with his base or almost anyone in the US except the Berkeley folk. Perhaps the concertgoers might not be expected to know this but the performers and organizers should consider these things before they put on this type of show.

Still this criticism is a little unfair. Realistically I don’t think any reasonable person expected this concert to really affect the upcoming G8 decisions. I suspect this just provided an opportune issue to rally around as part of a broader attempt to raise awareness of African poverty and our failure to contribute serious resources to the problem. I agree raising public awareness of poverty is a good end but what I find doubtful is the wisdom of associating this cause with this sort of hippie/liberal/youth idealism (greenthumb in Europe) and the idea that that the right course of action is government or personal giving.

The question is whether this save the world with music event truly encourages people to put in the hard work of political lobbying, personal contribution, volunteering or most importantly thinking seriously about hard issues like trade; or does it instead just encourage people to engage in more high profile festivals and conspicuous hand-wringing? If Live Aid (the original) itself was any indication or any of the other similar spectacles it seems quite plausible this just makes a bunch of people feel good about themselves and repeat the same thing again without any real progress for Africa. After all it can hardly be said to be an encouraging sign that after the original live aid was criticized for insufficient charitable contribution they have retreated to the unfalsifiable goal of raising awareness.

Even worse in the newspapers today they describe the large amounts of money and efforts many youth expended in going to the concerts. Ignoring for a moment the inherent hypocrisy in spending hundreds of dollars (or more some people flew in from the states) to attend a concert to help people making two dollars a day it seems likely that this sort of expenditure will deplete the charitable resources of those spending lots of money to attend. People only have so much money and if they think of the couple hundred dollars they spent to go to live8 as a virtuous act they probably will donate less money this year to real charitable causes. Even worse it seems to convince a great many people that this is the right sort of action to take in response to world problems. Instead of supporting hard-headed economic decisions, prioritizing and trading off between competing concerns (the environment and poverty), or donating time or effort to substantive causes they learn that ‘protesting’ by hanging out with friends and scoring with hippie chicks is the appropriate way to react. After all it’s a lot easier and when you are only protesting you can feel good about yourself and avoid criticism from friends by never needing to make those tough decisions like supporting nuclear power to stop global warming.

This brings me to the most pernicious effect I fear from the live8 concert, connecting the cause of debt relief and combating African poverty with liberalism (i.e. green parties in Europe) and hippie youth culture. So long as poverty is a politically neutral issue people can agree we should do something about it and leave it to the economists and policy gurus to figure out how best to tackle the problem. The more an issue becomes entangled in political ideology the more contentious government programs addressing the concern become and the more warped and emotionally/rhetorically driven policy choices become.

Consider the effect of the strong association between marijuana and psychedelics with socialism and hippies on policy choices in the states. The taint of association prevents rational or compassionate positions on medical marijuana or harm reduction. Similarly the strong association between AIDS and homosexuality and a permissive cultural agenda cripples public health programs. Poverty, FGM, sexual harassment, discrimination and women in math/science are other issues where we can see the taint that association with various liberal agendas and movements can bring. Conversely, lowering trade barriers, school vouchers, eliminating corporate tax, and pollution credit trading (though this has been mostly overcome now) are issues crippled by their conservative associations. Of course in both cases their may be valid objections/concerns but the clear message is that close association with a political ideology interferes with rational policy and reasoned consideration.

Despite some admiral attempts by some of the participants to deter overt anti-Bush rhetoric or ideological identification and the appearance of Bill Gates, live8 clearly conveyed a very progressive and anti-capitalist view. To some degree this is inherent in a rock concert attended by young people with an emotionally sympathetic cause. This is simply the cultural association people make this this sort of event. However, live8, or at least the surrounding rhetoric, went well beyond this. Given the sort of people likely to attend, the nature of the music industry, the GW’s reluctance to support Blair’s level of debt relief, and current European and world opinion about Bush this was only to be expected. However, this doesn’t mean it won’t be harmful or that the concert was a good idea.

For instance the extensive efforts, complete with moralistic tone, to deter ticket scalping conveyed a certain anti-capitalist sentiment even before the start of the concert. Apparently their was some sort of ideological decision that selling tickets at projected market price or raising ticket price proportionally to the number of tickets sold was inappropriate. Even if they were not willing to do so themselves why not simply allow scalping and encourage/demand scalpers to donate a percent of profits and customers only to purchase from complying individuals? More tellingly was the many messages and comments from the musicians themselves and the newspapers the following day clearly connecting the concert to causes like fair trade products (see my next post about their doubtful efficacy) and general demonization of the capitalistic framework and more conservative leaning solutions (pressure on corrupt governments to change).

In summary I do think this effort was well intentioned and most likely it will have little to no effect either way. However, it is worrisome that this approach might have enough influence to permanently associate the issue of African poverty with a certain liberal/green attitude. This association could very well interfere with pragmatic solutions to real problems. However, whether you agree with me or not it is surely absurd and hypocritical for all these young people to congratulate themselves on spending hundreds of dollars to hang out, listen to music and get laid thinking they are doing such a good thing for the world.

However, despite my suspicion of the live8 concert I am quite impressed with UK news, at least on TV. They do go into the problems with agricultural subsidies and tariffs as well as the unclear effects of repealing them (Asian countries entering the market and dropping prices). While the US news would likely present just as balanced a view the news here seems considerably more intellectual and in depth.