Jann Wenner is a statist and promoter of mind-numbing consumerism; a necessary evil, a genuine reflection of the times, whatever the excuse, whenever his invisible hand makes an appearance to push a product buyer beware.
The most interesting question/answer exchanges in his Bono interview aren’t available online and deal with AIDS relief and Bono’s silence on the war in Iraq. In response to Wenner’s inquiring if Bush’s refusal to fund programmes that do not preach abstinence is “about saving lives or promoting a religious agenda” Bono replied “Some religious groups funded by the United States may refuse to distribute condoms, but overall this government buys more condoms than any previous administration, or, in fact, any other donor country – shock, horror!” He goes on to defend ABC – abstinence, be faithfull and condoms – so far, so good, so what. ABC in one form or another was being test-driven before God put Bush into office and Bono bestowed his blessings upon it. The question is down what road has the Bush administration taken it? So why defend as progress a gov’t that continues to fund programmes that refuse to distribute life-saving measures – the “C” in ABC as in “C” for condition – yet denies funding to those that refuse to condemn prostitution? Is it a step backwards? Yes. What greater cause is served by Bono’s diplomacy, which he says is tailored to serve the interests of 180,000 Africans who “owe their lives to American money”, when the same Congress he praises is considering legislation that will cut-off Medicaid services to 200,000 Americans with AIDS? And his shock jock approach to condom distribution is appalling especially when 40,000 Americans are newly diagnosed with HIV every year. Ah, progress or hey, job security? His silence on Iraq he defends as a “compromise”, one that’s difficult but necessary if he’s to continue gathering crumbs the Congress throws his way, so he suppresses his ego. Right.
Doug Henwood in Bono Meets Dr. Shock gives his take on Bono’s pairing with economist Jeffrey Sachs:
In thinking about the New Sachs, it’s worth recalling the Old Sachs. His debut on the global stage was as an adviser to Bolivia, where he recommended a combination of tight fiscal and monetary policy, which came to be known as “shock therapy,” that helped bring down the country’s inflation rate from 11,750 percent in 1985 to a mere 15 percent in 1987. That’s not a wholly bad achievement–almost no one likes hyperinflation–but the disinflation did nothing to change Bolivia’s status as one of the poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere.
That alleged “success” attracted the attention of politicians and development officials as Communism was about to make its extremely troubled “transition” to post-Communism. Sachs was hired as an adviser to several governments, most famously Poland and Russia. Living up to his nickname, Sachs generally advocated a rapid transition to a market economy, featuring overnight privatizations and the freeing of long-regulated prices. Poland is counted by some as a “success” story, even though unemployment and poverty rose. But Russia endured one of the worst economic and social collapses in history. Several years ago, when I asked Sachs to comment on Russia’s sorry outcome, he blamed the Yeltsin government for failing to take his advice. Apparently this is an old Sachs ploy; he told the banking magazine Euromoney in 1992 that the problems with Poland’s less than happy transition were the government’s fault, because it failed to privatize quickly enough.
Ah, but that’s history, as we like to say when we consign inconvenient facts to the trash. Pursuing a musical conceit, Bono referred to Sachs’s “early works” in Russia and Eastern Europe, forgetting that those works helped throw millions into poverty. Bringing that up might have interfered with the performance of their mutual boy-crush. Bono called Sachs “my professor, my teacher, my rock star”–and he confessed to being jealous of Sachs’s latest celebrity sidekick, Angelina Jolie. When Sachs took the stage, he returned the flattery by declaring that Bono should win not one but four Nobel Prizes: in economics, literature, peace and, most surprising, in physics–because just as Einstein demonstrated curvatures in space, Bono proved that in politics right can meet left. Someone should tell George W. Bush!
Jolie, like Bono, chose a damned strange partner if change is really her agenda. Henwood is kind to both for heightening public concern about poverty issues. But if you’re going to sound an alarm and generate concern, isn’t it more deleterious to your cause when the best you can offer is just more of the same – “dangerous pity“?
This is how a Nobel prize candidate should act.
“The evil that is in the world almost always comes of ignorance, and good intentions may do as much harm as malevolence if they lack understanding.”
– Albert Camus