Save Africans!

Bono has guest edited an issue of Vanity Fair.

It is all about Africa.

I heard on the news that he had sent journalists all around Africa to write about it.

First thing that pops into my head:

"Were any of them African?"

looking at the table of contents, from what I can tell, only one story written in the entire magazine was written by an African. Wouldnt an issue about Africa and what needs to be done there be more effective or more powerful if I was reading African voices?

Is this the eighteenth century? Are we going to save these poor people with missionary politics?

just an aggravation.

I wonder how Bono would feel if I guest edited a special issue all about Ireland, and I sent a whole lot of people from Kentucky. I wonder what sort of insight we would gain...

Now, dont get me wrong, I dont think it is bad for an outside perspective or for peopel to want to help there, but I think it needs to be balanced and probably balanced more towards the voices of the people there. They are not mute people. I am pretty sure they have voices, and things to say. Then we could get the point of view of a couple people going there the first time or who have some experience working there...

More Education Stuff... Plus

The other day Heather asked me what I call myself if I dont call myself a teacher or an educator. She was thinking Facilitator, which I think is in danger of losing meaning, and so I said "learning enabler" because I was trying to remove myself from a position of too much power. Im not the one who directs the learning or makes it happen, Im just there to kinda answer questions and help make sure it keeps going... (ideally).... and then after a while I came up with "learning assistant" Heather made the comment that this one works because it puts the learner in the position of power.

Also, Im slowly working through Al Gore's new book "The Assault on Reason" I originally decided I wouldnt buy it because it would be just another book by another politician, but after seeing him on enough programs and deciding he is incredibly smart, and has a good sense of humor, and aware of his own inconsistencies, I decided to pick it up.

I think the thing that works best for me, and the way I think, is the way he jumps between subjects and makes connections between things like brain chemistry, evolutionary psychology, media studies, politics, history, constitutional scholarship, law, the environment and his own life is pretty impressive. Plus, and in many ways because of this, it is a very acute criticism of mainstream culture and the culture of the present administration: Al Gore admits as much, but there is a seemingly "good old days" nostalgic blindness to his discussion, but I think when he discusses earlier societies he is talking more about the big idea driving them than how they really were... similarly when he talks about the "reason" lessness of present day I dont think he is necessarily implying people are stupid and without reason (see idiocracy!) I think he is making a bigger comment on the "big idea" driving corporate culture and presidential/legislative politics, and I dont think he is very far off at all.

Enough gushing, although it is very weird for me to sit back and say I hope Al Gore runs, because Obama and Hilary are strong symbols but I am not sure of their ideals and consideration, which I know Gore has... screw the inconsiderate truth bullshit-- Im talking more about his conviction, calmness and attitude towards it all--

politics schmolitics.