Kony 2012

Charlie Brooker did a pretty funny segment debunking Invisible Children a few days ago:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Igw8fA962X8

This video explains a lot; I highly recommend it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esB92NSIwdU

KONY 2012 is taking the Internet by storm and unlike 90% of the people who have watched this film, I completely disagree its call to action. But that is nothing new for a libertarian; we disagree with the other 90% on just about everything. Before reading any further, if you haven’t seen the film, please do so. Although it’s half an hour long, it goes by fast because it’s very well made and highly entertaining. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4MnpzG5Sqc

PREMISE

There is a bad guy in central Africa named Joseph Kony who has been committing crimes against humanity for over 20 years. The US and other world governments are unwilling to go after him since he has never done anything to them. Therefore, Invisible Children Inc. believes that everyone should demand that their government assist in bringing Kony to justice. A worldwide grassroots effort has been launched for this sole purpose, one that Invisible Children Inc. believes to be of monumental importance to the future of the world and humanity itself.

MOTIVATION

Like most human ideas, movements, and policies, this film is fueled by good intentions. However, it's not the intentions that I disagree with but rather the means of implementation, as well as the ambiguous reality that would ensue. There's an old saying about the road to hell and good intentions...wait, how does that one go?

LEGAL CHALLENGE

The Federal Government of the United States operates (whoops, I meant to say "is supposed to operate") under the rule of law of the US Constitution. KONY 2012 advocates a complete disregard for the framework of our Republic.

1. Using the Military - Only the Congress has the power to commit the US military. To do so, they must pass a Declaration Of War. In the film, the staff of Invisible Children Inc. are shown celebrating and cheering when they learn that President Obama deployed 100 troops to Central Africa. This highlights both Invisible Children’s and the President’s ignorance when it comes to the role of the Legislative branch regarding foreign affairs and war. Although the President is the Commander and Chief of the military once deployed, he cannot authorize the military’s deployment without Congressional approval. Furthermore, the Constitution makes no provision for US forces to serve under any foreign or global command.

1b. Letters of Marque and Reprisal - What's that you say? "The Congress cannot declare war on Kony and the LRA because they're not a foreign government or country!" Good point. However, our founders had this one handled as well. There is a constitutional provision known as a Letter of Marque and Reprisal which allows the Congress and the President to go after specific, even non-governmental threats. In 1815, James Madison followed this procedure in response to the Barbary Pirates. More recently, Congressman Ron Paul introduced the Marque and Reprisal Act of 2001 as a means of constitutionally going after the terrorists responsible for the attacks on 9/11.

We cannot legally use either of these Constitutional powers to go after Kony because he has not committed an offense against the USA. The idea that our military would be used to police the world was abhorrent to the founding fathers. They believed in the Christian Just War Theory, which states that only defensive/non-aggressive wars are ever justifiable. In fact, there are 4 concrete criterion that must be met before a war is justifiable:

The damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
All other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
There must be serious prospects of success;
The use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated.

America fought her own fight just as the people of central Africa must fight their own fight. Yes, we received the help of the French during our revolution but never did the colonists believe that the French help was something owed; we were lucky to have it. Subsequently, what happened when the French petitioned our first president to help with their fledgling revolution? Washington declined, sighting that it was none of America’s business. Later, when departing his presidency, Washington admonished us once again to stay out of foreign entanglements. I have no doubt that he would be shocked and appalled by our membership and participation in several world bodies, such as the United Nations.

Thomas Jefferson spent his whole presidency doing everything he could to avoid a costly war. He believed that a new war might threaten to destroy the very nation he had just helped to create. It’s possible that James Madison wasn’t quite as skilful as Jefferson when it came to negotiating peace with Europe. Within 4 years of Jefferson’s return to civilian life the White House was burned to the ground by the British in the War of 1812.

This non-interventionist foreign policy persisted into the 20th century. The American public wanted nothing to do with World War I and luckily we managed to avoid 75% of it. The same can be said for the tumultuous European affairs of the 1930s and the first 2 years of World War II.

“Mr. Republican”, Senator Robert Taft, staunchly opposed our involvement in NATO and the Korean War on strict Constitutional grounds: “My conclusion, therefore, is that in the case of Korea, where a war was already under way, we had no right to send troops to a nation, with whom we had no treaty, to defend it against attack by another nation, no matter how unprincipled that aggression might be, unless the whole matter was submitted to Congress and a declaration of war or some other direct authority obtained.”

There is a long non-interventionist tradition in the American Republic but sadly, over the last 60 years there has been an ever-growing propagation of unconstitutional involvement in foreign affairs. Kony is a criminal, no doubt about it. But if we need to bring him to justice then we must follow the Constitution. Breaking our own laws to catch him won’t make it right…I think there’s an old saying about this one as well.

HISTORICAL CHALLENGE

Having already highlighted a few instances throughout our history where Americans have gone out of their way to avoid foreign involvements, lets take a look at some of the instances where the US Government has strived for the very opposite: to take money from it’s own citizens and use it to risk the lives its young American soldiers for the stated purpose of ousting foreign bad guys and promoting human rights.

1. Afghanistan: When the poor and innocent Afghan people are suddenly attacked by an evil world superpower, a flood of US taxpayer money is sent to fund the Mujahideen and their golden boy, Osama Bin Laden, in the fight for freedom. Armed with the latest US-made anti aircraft Stinger missiles the poor Afghans fight back valiantly against the invading communists! But then the Americans turn their back on the conflict and once the Soviets have been repelled the Afghans become radicalized against their former ally. America’s favorite freedom fighter becomes the world’s most wanted man as well as an excuse to invade and occupy an entire country. Corrupt political and corporate influences result in the conflict developing into a nation building mission and the American taxpayer finds himself spending money to rebuild the same Afghan bridges and facilities that he paid to blow up in the first place while his own domestic infrastructure collapses around him. When Bin Laden escapes out of Afghanistan the Americans begin bombing the surrounding sovereign nations without the consent of those governments or their own Congress. It’s a storyline that would make a great suspense thriller if it weren’t all tragically true. 2012 Estimates put the cost of the Afghanistan war at over $500 billion with at least 19,000 killed and hundreds of thousands displaced or injured.

2. Iraq: Much like Kony, Saddam Hussein was a bad guy. He killed thousands of his own people (using weapons we gave him to invade Iran in the 1980s) and perhaps it’s for the better that he’s gone. But, what if it wasn’t for the better? What if Saddam Hussein couldn't have ever have caused as much pain and suffering as the resulting carnage of our war? The cost of the Iraq war is even more staggering than that of the Afghanistan War: 900,000 killed (90% being civilians), over 1.6million injured, $801 billion spent, an alarming epidemic of suicide and post traumatic stress disorder in our veterans, and for what, a better – more free Iraq? The new government of Iraq has done something that Hussein never did: removed the separation of church and state. The new “democracy” we were told was being established is now a full blown theocracy. Article 2 of the newly established Iraqi Constitution states: “Islam is the official religion of the State and it is a fundamental source of legislation: A. No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established.” Furthermore, Al Queda has now infiltrated Iraq, something they could never have accomplished when Hussein was in power. Lets not overlook the facts that this war was justified by the supposed existence of weapons of mass destruction (BLTs as Ali G put it) which were proven to have never existed. Secondly, we were never attacked, our national security was never threatened, and our Congress never declared war.

3. Egypt: After supporting Hosni Mubarak’s rule over the Egyptian people to the tune of about $50 billion over several decades, the tide of worldwide popular opinion finally caught up to that of the Egyptian people and in an effort to save face the US hopped on the “Mubarak Must Go” train. Funny how no American ever wondered where Mubarak got his tanks, guns, and tools of enslavement? Now, with Mubarak gone, Egypt has slid into an even worse state; where the people are now fighting against the very military that just freed them from their own oppressor. Where is the world support for the Egyptian people now?

4. Libya: Muammar Qaddafi, the “Mad Dog of the Middle East”. Although he was a thorn in the western world’s side during his younger years, he certainly toned down his angst and started playing nice as he aged:

In December 2003, Libya announced that it had agreed to reveal and end its programs to develop weapons of mass destruction and to renounce terrorism, and Gaddafi made significant strides in normalizing relations with western nations. He received various Western European leaders as well as many working-level and commercial delegations, and made his first trip to Western Europe in 15 years when he traveled to Brussels in April 2004. Libya responded in good faith to legal cases brought against it in U.S. courts for terrorist acts that predate its renunciation of violence. Claims for compensation in the Lockerbie bombing, LaBelle disco bombing, and UTA 772 bombing cases are ongoing. The U.S. rescinded Libya's designation as a state sponsor of terrorism in June 2006. In late 2007, Libya was elected by the General Assembly to a nonpermanent seat on the United Nations Security Council for the 2008–2009 term.

The US rewarded Qaddafi’s efforts by blowing him up. Like all heads of state, Qaddafi, and particularly his sons, lived lavishly. Yet, unlike many dictators, he spread Libya’s wealth around:

Before Qaddafi, literacy in Libya was only 10%. In 2011 literacy was at 90%.
Malnutrition in Libya was 2%—a figure lower than the USA.
Education from grade school through college was free.
Healthcare was free and Libyan pharmacies and hospitals were comparable to high-quality European facilities.
Libya ranked No. 53 on the United Nations Index of Human Development.
Libya had the highest standard of living in Africa. In 1969, before Qaddafi, it was the lowest in the world at just $60 per year in income.
Qaddafi gave free land, livestock, machinery, and seeds to anyone who wanted to farm.
There wais virtually no homelessness in Libya as everyone was given a home. Home ownership was seen as a right.
Women in Libya had equal rights, not only in philosophy, but also in practice.
When a couple married they were gifted $50,000 to do with as they pleased; furnish their home, take a holiday, honeymoon, buy a car, etc.
There was no interest on loans. Banks in Libya were state-owned and loans were given to all its citizens at zero percent interest by law.
There was no electricity bill in Libya; electricity was free for all citizens.

Like the other newly freed countries of the Middle East, Libya finds herself struggling in the post dictator era. Radical Islam is taking root, Al Queda has come into the country, scores of weapons and money have gone missing, and the transitional government is in chaos. Will future Libyans look at America positively for our actions in their country’s early history or will they join today’s Afghans, Iraqis, and Iranians?

5. Vietnam: Today we have 100 “advisers” in central Africa to help capture Kony. The Obama administration claims that these troops won’t be used in active combat but as my dad says: “I’ve seen this movie before.” In 1950 the United States Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) was sent to South Vietnam. In May 1961, President Kennedy bolstered their numbers by sending 400 Green Berets as “special advisers”. By the end of 1961 there were over 16,000 US military “advisers” in the country and a full-blown war was underway shortly thereafter. In 1975, a quarter of a century since the first US military advisers arrived, after suffering 350,000 casualties, the US finally withdrew from Vietnam. Today, communist Vietnam is developing rapidly and is a major US trading partner. We can accomplish so much more for ourselves and for the world through peace and friendship than we ever could at the end of a barrel of a gun.

PHILOSOPHICAL CHALLENGE

This paper isn’t meant to delve into the deep, crystal clear waters of the libertarian school of thought but I believe that a few extra points should be considered:

1. The Line In The Sand: If we go after Kony, does that mean we should go after every bad guy in the world? Should we only go after the worst violators of human rights and ignore the lesser ones? What if those evil people command huge armies? What if they have nuclear weapons? What if the suspect escapes into a country that doesn’t welcome our presence? How many American lives are willing to lose to get Kony? How much money are we willing to spend? Why didn’t we stop the genocide in Rwanda or Sudan? What about the fact that the Chinese have killed hundreds of times more people than Kony?

2. The Pot and The Kettle: We never declared war on Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, and Pakistan, just to name a few. Yet, our unconstitutional involvements in these countries have destroyed more lives than an entire division of Konys ever could. Who are we to claim the side of all knowing righteousness? Isn’t there already too much blood on our interventionist foreign policy’s hands? Given the unintended consequences of our previous foreign involvements, what makes us think that this adventure will go any better?

3. Federal Reserve Notes: If the US is over $15 trillion in debt where will we get the money to pay for this overseas spending? Are the people of the USA willing to pay a Kony 2012 tax out of their paycheck to fund this mission? If not, will anyone lend us the money? If not, should the Federal Reserve print more dollars to fund this mission? If printing dollars makes every dollar worth a little bit less, won’t it take more dollars to by the same amount of goods? If prices go up here domestically, won’t they go up worldwide since our dollar is the reserve currency of the world? Won’t higher prices worldwide cause more suffering than Kony could in his small section of Africa? If the dollar has already lost 98% of its value in the last 100 years, what if our overseas spending finally destroys the remaining 2%? What will become of our country, or the world, if our currency collapses?

4. Morality: Is it moral to denounce one man’s killing of innocent life while at the same time sending young American soldiers to a war zone that isn’t authorized by the same Constitution they swore to uphold and defend? Is it moral to take money from one group of people and give it to another group, for any reason? Is it moral to help one group of people but ignore another? Is it moral to intervene in a conflict that does not directly threaten your safety?

SOLUTIONS OF LIBERTY

I, like the creators of KONY 2012, want Kony and LRA destroyed. It’s easy to point the finger of blame and this paper would be remiss if it did not present some solutions.

The best thing we can do for the world is restore liberty here at home and allow the world to see the benefits for themselves. Allow them to emulate us, not depend us. Allow them to respect us, not hate us. Without getting our own house in order we stand little chance of being successful in helping others.

Libertarians believe that the fruit of your labor is an unalienable right. Thus, the income tax is immoral and unjustifiable (it’s also technically unconstitutional but we’ll save that argument for another day.) Imagine how much more charitable Americans could be with an extra 15-40% in earnings. Imagine how much more innovation and advancement the world would see if businesses were able to focus on advancing and producing new technologies rather than complying with over bearing governmental compliance and taxation.

In a free society you would be allowed to go over to Uganda and join the fight in any way you wish. You could form an armed militia or even an army of mercenaries and offer your services to the government in need. These options are of course illegal for a US citizen to do today.

If more of the world understood and adopted liberty, the chances of a Kony ever coming to power in the first place would be greatly reduced.

Under capitalism, freedom, success, the standard of living, and the chances of a peaceful existence all increase dramatically. Uganda, and the nations surrounding it, would be more equipped to respond to this threat if they were more advanced and prosperous. The ability of a single person to control another through violence is curbed in a truly free society because the right to self-defense is bolstered through supportive legislation and economic means. Also, uprisings and conflicts would be rarer if the Just War Theory was more widespread and recognized. I understand that these points are more long term and theoretical than anything previously stated herein but I do believe that painting the big picture is worth a few words.

PRIORITIES

The USA is over $15 trillion in debt (That looks like this: http://usdebt.kleptocracy.us/) We are fast approaching a sovereign debt crisis that threatens to destroy our currency and way of life. The US Military is stationed in over 130 countries around the world. In 2011 alone, the USA bombed 6 countries. The health of our troops and veterans is worse today than ever. Many troops have served multiple tours of duty overseas and have now come back to a wartime economy with few jobs to offer them. The division between Americans today is comparable to that of the 1860s. We now have laws that allow the US Military to abduct and indefinitely detain American citizens in secret prisons without ever giving them a trial. The Patriot Act allows our government to read our emails, listen to our phone calls, and break into our homes without the consent of a judge and search warrant. The President now claims that he has the authority to assassinate American citizens that he suspects are terrorists without ever having to present his evidence to a judge or jury. I’d much rather see Invisible Children Inc. focus their efforts on these invisible and ignored domestic issues.

Victor Hugo was correct when he stated that “Nothing can stop an idea whose time has come.” But KONY 2012 is the same idea that we’ve been following to our own detriment for the past century: more government, more force, more spending. KONY 2012 is not the idea whose time has come, that spot has already been reserved by the R3VOLUTION.

http://www.facebook.com/notes/marc-el-merica/stop-kony-2012-...

Okay I am a Ron Paul supporter I am a huge fan of liberty and Ron Paul will win , but I am kind of getting tired of this Kony thing right about now. I was wondering how come this one man gets all this attention on facebook and twitter smh I know everyone has seen the YouTube video. I looked on YouTube and he has over 38million views has anyone thought of that because I have. What am I trying to say is that all the moneybombs we have had and all the money that we the people have donated we should of have thought about something like the Kony piece. If we can just get a whole 30 minute piece like that man oh man I tell you we would have the establishment gone in a snap of a finger. We can do this guys I know that can be use as an TAKEOVER and we can take back our country ! But it is insane how this one guy can get all this attention and Ron Paul gets any I just do not get it we need make an effort like that I know we can do it I know we the people and the Ron Paul campaign has resources to make this happen! Oh yea I have one more thing to say before I end these thoughts on my about this whole thing I have a child myself a little girl I love her to death! My heart goes out to all the thousands of kids and families that have died and that our still missing really it does but I do not want to think that this whole Kony thing is just a subliminal message and an act of war just to go into Africa my heart says no how sad not but my mind says I do not know I just hope not :(. Please comment and let me know what you think and one last thin we can WIN this !

When I first saw this being continuously posted here on the DP the other day, it had this vibe like it was something from the same source as the Zeitgeist/Venus Project movements.

I still haven’t watched it and I don’t think I will because of the way it just came blasting onto the scene. When something becomes popular that fast it’s because there are some powerful forces behind it and in this age most of that power resides with sinister forces.

I'm sorry, if Uganda has criminals running around breaking the law the Ugandan government police forces are to handle it as an internal affair. Criminals are criminals and governments are constituted to deal with them. This is not an international affair. If Kony were running around in America the local sheriff would deal with him. If the sheriff needs assistance he can convene a posse or appeal to the state. He does not appeal to the American military, NATO or any other outside authority. If the Ugandan government is so incompetent to deal with this criminal then the Ugandan people need to correct their government, arm themselves or take whatever actions to assume personal responsibility for lawlessness in their own communities. Yes, they are victims - victims of their own irresponsibility and this of course can be corrected with a change in attitude. So far as I know there is nothing in Uganda worthy of America's blood and treasure. We can support them and teach them but they have to learn to stand up to their own bullies.