For a period of about five years during the mid to late eighties a phenomenon occurred. The use of euphemisms in obituaries. Causes of death were obscured as were the nature of relationships. As the majority of deceased were young men the obfuscating objective usually failed. Spelling out AIDS in bold type wouldn’t have made it any less obvious what had happened.
Predominantly this type of diversionary tactic was practised by the victims blood family. In the days when it was still considered mainly a homosexual illness shame outweighed the truth for too many people. Whether it was the cause of death or the sexuality that people were trying to hide is irrelevant. What mattered was that this attitude was merely a reflection of how society wanted to deal with the whole issued of AIDS.
Homosexuality, promiscuity and the decease were irrevocably linked in people’s minds. The popular press, politicians and preachers of social conservatism (which was just then getting a foothold in the public eye) latched onto the idea that this was some sort of retribution for the life style. Beyond the gay community there was little or no interest in finding a cure let alone talking about the manners in which the decease could be checked.
Even the first cases of heterosexuals contracting the AIDS were dismissed as being the result of deviant behaviour. Intravenous drug users and prostitutes are not about to garner the sympathy of the general public. It wasn’t until the first victims of tainted blood transfusion’s began appearing, and politicians realized there were political points to be made, that any action was taken to check the spread of the infection.
By the time the “innocent victim” stage was reached it was too late. AIDS had gained a significant foothold and was widespread enough to no longer be isolated and confined. The apathy, bigotry, and shame that had condemned it’s first victims, had come back to haunt society. If a concentrated effort had been made in the early stages of the decease to at least take preventative steps there is the possibility that the spread could have been controlled.
Article comments
1 - Marc
"If we are truly genuine in our desire to assist Africa we must do more then forgive a few loans. What has been destroyed through the actions of the developed world must now be rebuilt. The real debt that is owed has still to be paid. The one that is owed the people of Africa."
What has been destroyed has been done through corrupt, despotic governments all across Africa. The West (mostly the US) has poured trillions of dollars into that sinkhole with little getting to the people that need it. Whose fault is that?
Certainly not the West.
2 - Dave Nalle
The title of this is a bit confusing. The US certainly doesn't 'owe' Africa anything, except in the sense that we have an obligation to generally do good for our fellow man. We should certainly do what we can to help, but the idea that we have some sort of special obligation to Africa is misguided.
BTW, why do you never capitalize the 's' on the end of A.I.D.S.?
Dave
3 - Victor Plenty
Marc and Dave lack a sense of history if they think we don't owe Africa anything.
Much of the West's wealth was built by extracting resources from Africa, both natural and human resources.
Corrupt governments, as mentioned by Marc, are far less common in Africa than is commonly believed. Even the truth behind that myth came about when Western governments installed and supported dictatorships willing to play along with the ongoing theft of resources from their own countries.
Restitution for that theft is what the West owes Africa. Nothing more and nothing less.
4 - Tan The Man
You're talking about slavery right? If so, slavery was inacted by many other countries. It was a horrible event, and there is a sense to help Africa, as a whole, out. Repayment would be out of the question, but any other form of help goes wasted because of how inefficient the continent works to better themselves (government, people helping each other out). The continent needs to help themselves if they want to utilize any aid given to them.
5 - Victor Plenty
Slavery is only part of it. Theft continues today, as natural resources are still being extracted from the continent while very little money is being paid to its people for what they are losing.
By "restitution" I do not mean a one-time cash payment, as some people do when they talk about restitution for slavery in the United States. What I mean is our responsibility to help rebuild what we have chosen to destroy.
Our responsibility will not end when we have paid out a specific dollar amount. It will end only when the rebuilding is done.
6 - Tan The Man
With that mindset, do you think that the US shoul continue its rebuilding efforts in Iraq? It kind of connects. I just want to know your opinion.
7 - Victor Plenty
The U.S. is not the only country with a responsibility to help rebuild Iraq, just as it is not the only one with a responsibility to help rebuild Africa.
At the moment the other Western powers are doing more than the United States to help Africa, but not so in Iraq.
So if they asked my advice, I would urge the Europeans to increase their contributions to help rebuild Iraq, even though they dislike the Bush administration. Just as I urge the United States to increase effective aid to Africa.
8 - Dave Nalle
America's role in extracting wealth from Africa was relatively small compared to the European colonial nations. We may have provided a market for the diamonds and wood and ivory, but we generally weren't the ones raping Africa to get it. Let's see the Dutch, French and English doing their fair share first.
Dave
9 - Victor Plenty
America benefits, Dave, as you are very well aware.
When the topic is extracting oil from Alaska, you tell us it doesn't matter that most Alaskan oil goes to Japan and not to the lower 48 states. You tell us it will still help lower prices at the pump, because increasing the world supply of oil will make everybody's oil cheaper, everywhere.
But when it comes to the ongoing increase in the world supply of many other commodities (including oil) by extracting them from Africa at artificially low prices with help from kleptocratic dictators, suddenly you change your economic theory? Now you want to compartmentalize the global economy? Blame the Europeans and let them pay to bring Africa out of its colonial destitution.
Well, when it comes to Africa, the Europeans are already paying a higher percentage of GDP. It is the United States government which is failing to fulfill its promises in this case.
So I continue in my earlier stance. Europe ought to help more in the reconstruction of Iraq, and the United States ought to help more in the reconstruction of Africa.
10 - gypsyman
Thanks to Victor for fielding the questions raised by the first two posters. I tried to be very clear in pointing out that all the developed countries were to blame for the current state of affairs in Africa. In fact I think I laid most of the blame at the feet of the Europeans. This just left me puzzled with the defensive reaction of the first two posters.
I find it interesting that the attitude of corrupt leaders is used to turn blame back upon a people. It's the same attitude in Canada towards native people. It just seems like an attempt to throw up a smoke screen to divert attention away from the real problems.
Poverty and lack of education give rise to corupt leaders, because those are the situations where might makes right. There is not enough of an educated populace able to organise effective oppostition.
Acquired Immune Deficiency has no "s" in it. I do not capitalize the "s" because it's not part of the desease's name. I have no idea why we don't say A.I.D. If anyone can explain the "s" to me and why it should be capitalized I will gladly do so, until then I'll just continue to be odd.
11 - JR
Acquired ImmunoDeficiency Syndrome
12 - Steve S
There has been no discussion so far on the role of the Catholic Church. Most of the spread of AIDS in underdeveloped nations can be tied to the supression of lifesaving information. This information is supressed because the Catholic CHurch thinks that to talk about it, is to endorse it. So there is no discussion of safe sex, condoms or protection, to the majority of underdeveloped countries. It is no coincidence that these countries are now being ravaged by AIDS. But then any weakened, frightened, decimated populace will always end up being how religious institutions maintain power, isn't it?
13 - Dave Nalle
The S is there because AIDS isn't a disease as such. HIV is the disease, AIDS is the resulting Syndrome, and thus the S on the end is capitalized because it's part of the descriptive name.
Dave
14 - Phillip Winn
The thing about Africa is that while we do owe the continent some help in one sense (and not in others, but consistently applying that principle would lead to chaos), we also stand to gain by pursuing real reform and aid to Africa. If we don't act because we want to help our fellow man (and woman), then we should act to help create new markets around the world. As long as the continent is mired in poverty and AIDS, it remains a sinkhole and a magnet for corruption and war. If we (meaning at least the G8, not just the U.S.) can help to lift it out of that pit, we can create an environment of prosperity and freedom.
Or to put it more bluntly in the negative case, if we don't, we can't.
15 - JR
How free are the Bushmen if we turn them into a "market"?
16 - Nancy
Something conveniently overlooked or ignored by those advocating for Africa by arguing historical abuse is that to a huge degree, slavery was a product of Islam, muslims, and africans themselves. Slavery was endemic long before Europeans ever got down there, as was the slave trade, the native form of which was greatly expanded by the muslims when they first made incursions into subsaharan africa back in the 700s. Interesting that the arab/muslim nations are so very quiet about this, with good reason - or more likely, because it doesn't weigh on their consciences very heavily. As far as 'owing' is concerned, almost no one currently alive had anything to do with slavery, nor did their ancestors. US slaveholders were a very, very tiny group, numbers-wise, and furthermore included several currently prominent black american families, as well who got their financial start off slave labor - but no one talks about these people, either, probably because it's not only embarrassing but inconvenient. The reluctance of investors to sink money into african resource development is also understandable considering the unrest if not complete anarchy that seems to be widespread: not only is it fiscally unsound to put money into such a situation, it's probably at this juncture downright suicidal, physically as well as fiscally. And regardless of who started it, the truth is that far too many african nations are headed by leaders who are utterly corrupt if not outright nuts.
I point all this out simply by way of putting additional facts on the table which are usually left out because they're awkward and don't conform to the "evil european culture" syndrome usually used to justify why specific parties - usually the US - "should" do this, that, or the other thing, as if common decency weren't enough of a rationale.
17 - Phillip Winn
JR, it sounds like you would be surprised at the level of "modernity" scattered throughout Africa. It's not all bushmen -- they have cities and cars and tall buildings and such.
My point remains: there is both a backward-looking and forward-looking reason to act.
18 - JR
Phillip, it sounds like you would be surprised to learn that some people do just fine without being turned into a "market".
19 - gypsyman
When someone is H.I.V. positive they still are not considered to be sick with A.I.D.s. We say that a person has contracted "full blown" A.I.D.s, which to my mind means that it is a desease not a syndrome. But I guess that's just a question of semantics.
Since I wasn't specificaly talking about the spread of the H.I.V. virus (is that redundant to call H.I.V. a virus?) I decided not to open the can of worms dealing with the planned parrent hood restriction conditions placed on foreign aid by the U.S. or that various faiths have played in it's spread.
If we were to sit around aporting blame for the situation that parts of the world are in and being defensive about what role our home countries have played, nothing will ever be done. Isn't it more important to set an example then try and deflect blame?
20 - Victor Plenty
Perhaps Africans would like to choose whether or not to be part of the world marketplace, JR, rather than having that choice imposed upon them by continued neglect and isolation.
The global market can be not only a marketplace of goods and services, but also of ideas and cultures. Contrary to the popular myths of African cultural backwardness, the traditional cultures of the "dark continent" have a rich heritage of useful ideas to share with the world.
I am firmly convinced the long term benefits we can all gain from a revitalized Africa will pay back any initial investment far better than allowing the current situation to continue unchecked.