But I know my excuses for remaining silent in the face of such behaviour don't wash. And I don't understand why my UN colleagues are prepared to put up with the behaviour...
Look at what our silence hides: polygamy, which denigrates women and spreads the virus; early marriage, which directly violates UN conventions (ratified by Swaziland!); monumental extravagance in the face of pernicious illness and misery. It's alright to speak out about Darfur, about the Congo, about northern Uganda, but not about Swaziland? Conflict is indictable, but wanton death from disease is acceptable?
At moments like these, it seems almost as if Lewis is calling himself to action along with Martin and Blair and Bush and Koizumi. Though Lewis was never a man without a voice, it's as though the lectures are the starting point of a new wave of activism, as he reaches the conclusion that none of us can afford to be silent.
It seems to me that those of us who care about the United Nations have an ethical responsibility to point out its failings and to suggest constructive alternatives. There is a tendency to think dissent should be contained or that self-censorship is to be applauded. I regard both as the last refuge of an intellectual wimp.
Lewis offers up more than admonishments and complaints. The final lecture/chapter focuses on what can be done to improve the situation in Africa and to move towards achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. He emphasizes the need for governments to make commitments to development — and to be held to those commitments. These commitments must also be genuine, and free of impossibly tangled strings. Lewis gives darts to the US for forcing NGO's receiving foreign aid to agree not to "support" prostitution; Brazil gets laurels for refusing to accept such a conditional donation, with its "ideological (read: fundamentalist) fiat."
Lewis believes in what governments could do, but he makes it clear that patience isn't a virtue when it comes to foreign aid.
In the circumstance of AIDS, there is no time for cerebral self-indulgence. The rich countries just won't deliver, and the poor countries can't deliver, and the dying increases exponentially.
Article comments
1 - Eric Olsen
tremendous, powerful, articulate, passionate review Bonnie - thanks so much!
2 - gypsyman
Bonnie,
I think you have managed to capture the essence of what makes Mr. Lewis such an inspiration. The fact that unlike the rest of us he lets his anger and frustration fuel not sap his energy.
I was sickened by our so called national news magazine in Canada, you know the one, for their hatchet job on Mr. Lewis (along with David Suzuki and Bono) How people can be in such denial that the world is heading down the toilet is beyond me.
Stephen has gone from being the moral conscience of Ontario as leader of the N.D.P. in the seventies to be the moral conscience of the world.
You've give one of the more accurate pictures I've read of him and his passion yet... well done.
(p.s I know what you mean about repeating yourself, I was reviewing my blogs today and realised I had basicly written the same piece twice about Stephen Lewis, two months apart. One was on the foundation, and one was just mentioning him as one of the true heroes in the world. Sometimes though if you keep pounding away people may start to listen...at least that's my hope..
gypsyman
3 - Jochen Jesinghaus
According to the MDG Dashboard, Swaziland is overall a good performer, for African standards: Pretty high scores for Goal 1 (hunger), 2 (education), and 5 (maternal health). However, they fail completely in fighting HIV/AIDS. In contrast, neighbour Botswana has similar problems with the disease but has started vigorous efforts to handle the problem. Swaziland's gender equality performance is average, while child and infant mortality are indeed worse than the African standard. It might be worth asking why the country has such a specific problem with HIV/AIDS - and to recall that neighbour South Africa denied for a long time the existence of the problem.
Re ODA & Canada: 0.27% of GNI is indeed not particularly impressive. But then, ODA is only part of the story. Most African countries are oil importers. Right now, some of them have to use all of their modest export revenue to pay the oil bill. Nothing left for education, hospitals, technology, ... and guess why the oil price is so high nowadays? If North America had always applied European level fuel taxes, the World oil price would still be 20 US$/barrel. ODA is peanuts compared to the impact of "cheap oil is good for the economy" policies.
4 - bd
nice book