By: Lauren Anderson
Since going viral a couple of weeks ago, the Kony 2012 film campaign has sparked an unprecedented measure of support and controversy. Produced by Invisible Children, a non-profit organization founded in 2004, the film profiles Joseph Kony, the infamous leader of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) in Central Africa, and advocates for his immediate capture and prosecution for war crimes. The fundamental facts of the video have been, for the most part, undisputed. The LRA has been responsible for a horrendous number of rapes, killings and child kidnappings since its emergence in Uganda in 1988, and Kony’s use of child soldiers, in particular, most certainly belongs with the worst of such instances in the region.
No, any legitimate criticism of Invisible Children’s latest public awareness crusade cannot disregard the violence that has occurred in Uganda at the hands of the LRA. Nevertheless, there are a few valid dissenting points that have been raised. Most notably, the film has created a stir regarding its support for military action in ending the LRA once and for all. This support has been explicitly for the Uganda People’s Defense Force (UPDF) and, as some critics have suggested, implicitly for U.S. military intervention. In turn, the stance of heightened military involvement has brought into question other problematic themes, such as the fact that recent studies conducted by the New York-based Social Science Research Council (SSRC) and the Brussels-based International Crisis Group have implicated the UPDF in acts of rape, child exploitation and timber and diamond looting in the near-by Central African Republic. Furthermore, there is the issue of how Invisible Children’s message has been received locally as well, with screenings of the film in Uganda reportedly inciting outrage over the campaign and its perceived “celebration” of the LRA victims’ suffering through “Kony 2012” merchandise.
In the midst of the growing debate surrounding Kony 2012, what has been perhaps most overlooked in ongoing discussions is the significance of the film in terms of how it is reshaping the space of humanitarian activism. As of this writing, Kony 2012 has received 79.2 million views on YouTube, having been shared, reblogged and reposted on social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter at least that many times following its release. Regardless of the film’s substance or one’s opinions of it, Invisible Children has struck marketing gold with the “Kony 2012” movement, somehow prompting twenty-somethings across the country to take interest in an African conflict thousands of miles away (or at the very least, helping them be able to locate Uganda on a map).
So what does the success of Kony 2012 say about the millennial generation’s concern for international crises, or better yet, the potential future of 21st century philanthropic initiatives? For the many non-college students who have sought to answer t
his question, it demonstrates this generation’s developing sense of “slacktivism,” the idea that simply posting a video on the Internet translates into activism and social consciousness and fulfills one’s civic engagement quota for the day. This is a rather harsh view of American youths’ utilization of communications technology, but it unfortunately holds some merit. In following the history of Western charitable interactions with the developing world, one of the core objectives of Invisible Children’s production of Kony 2012 is to solicit financial donations. Consequently, it promotes the notion that, by buying a $25.00 t-shirt or a $30.00 “Kony 2012 Action Kit,” even the most politically apathetic person can lay claim to caring about children in Africa without having to contact a Congressional representative, enroll in a course or even read an article on the subject. In fact, the viral nature of Kony 2012 lends itself to taking this “slacktivism” one step further (or lower), because if one is seemingly unable or unwilling to become informed about the context of the violence in Northern Uganda or buy an Invisible Children t-shirt, poster, etc., he or she can at least share the video on Facebook and rest on the laurels of contributing to the “awareness” of the issue.
Which brings this discussion to a final point. As an individual interested in the political and social challenges facing the African continent at present and generally supportive of the work of NGOs and non-profit organizations when implemented with the expressed needs of communities in mind, this writer would like to add yet another dimension to the Kony 2012 discourse. Besides demonstrating a “slacktivist” streak in young people’s involvement in contemporary affairs, the widespread dissemination of Kony 2012 ultimately reflects a generation’s preoccupation with itself, as part of a concept the author perceives as “pop activism.” Pop activism entails promoting a cause as a means of gaining some sort recognition for doing so, hence Invisible Children’s deceivingly brilliant use of emotive visuals, t-shirts, posters, bracelets and stickers, to reel in a youth preoccupied with cultivating the perfect self-image. Thus, when the anticipated thousands of students hit the streets on April 20th to “make Kony famous,” it should be acknowledged as to exactly who is gaining the most notoriety from the campaign and whether such initiatives truly contribute to the solutions of existing problems in Uganda.
For Further Resources Pertaining to the Kony 2012 Campaign and the LRA:
“Kony Screening Provokes Anger in Uganda”
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/03/201231432421227462.html
Invisible Children: Defense of Critiques
http://www.invisiblechildren.com/critiques.html
Alice Lakwena and the Holy Spirits: War in Northern Uganda 1986-1997
Written by anthropologist Heike Behrend, the book details the origins of Uganda’s Holy Spirit Movement, a movement founded by Alice Lakwena and whose message eventually gave way to the militant efforts of Lakwena’s cousin, Joseph Kony, and the formation of the LRA.
