Suffice it to say, I'm a little brain-dead this week. What with rehearsal 4 hours a night almost every night and homework and exams fast approaching I'm definitely feeling the end-of-semester-crunch. Given that and since there's not much news coming out of Burundi I was at a little bit of a loss as to what to write about this week.
Of course, like every college student I have survival food in my room for those late night, oh-my-God-will-I-ever-finish-this-paper kind of moments; and the cornerstone to college survival (besides Ramen noodles): PEANUT BUTTER, a jar of which is right beside my laptop so it's extra-handy.
So, I thought, "Huh, peanut butter is kind of like 'genocide'(the word, not the act)." Genocide is a word you hear from activists a lot to describe the situation in Darfur but something you rarely hear from politicians and supranational actors. Why is this? The answer: fear, or, more politely, apprehension. You see, "genocide" is a very politicized word, much like many other things this day and age. For "genocide" carries with it certain responsibilities, like the responsibility to act to prevent genocide. Luckily, the conflict in Darfur has been labelled a genocide by certain institutions including the International Association of Genocide Scholars, the Committee on Conscience of the USHMM, and the US Congress. However, the UN has resisted calling it genocide and so has the AU.
As I mentioned a few posts back I don't care what you call the situation in Darfur so long as you agree that what is going on there is going from bad to worse and that the international community has the obligation to do something about it.
So, why is "genocide" like peanut butter? Because it's a word that sometimes gets stuck in your mouth. For student activists likes us "genocide" is like peanut butter in that in that it's often in our mouths at least once a week. For politicians, on the other hand, "genocide" is like peanut butter in that, for them, it gets stuck to the roof of their mouths and just stays there.
Of course, like every college student I have survival food in my room for those late night, oh-my-God-will-I-ever-finish-this-paper kind of moments; and the cornerstone to college survival (besides Ramen noodles): PEANUT BUTTER, a jar of which is right beside my laptop so it's extra-handy.
So, I thought, "Huh, peanut butter is kind of like 'genocide'(the word, not the act)." Genocide is a word you hear from activists a lot to describe the situation in Darfur but something you rarely hear from politicians and supranational actors. Why is this? The answer: fear, or, more politely, apprehension. You see, "genocide" is a very politicized word, much like many other things this day and age. For "genocide" carries with it certain responsibilities, like the responsibility to act to prevent genocide. Luckily, the conflict in Darfur has been labelled a genocide by certain institutions including the International Association of Genocide Scholars, the Committee on Conscience of the USHMM, and the US Congress. However, the UN has resisted calling it genocide and so has the AU.
As I mentioned a few posts back I don't care what you call the situation in Darfur so long as you agree that what is going on there is going from bad to worse and that the international community has the obligation to do something about it.
So, why is "genocide" like peanut butter? Because it's a word that sometimes gets stuck in your mouth. For student activists likes us "genocide" is like peanut butter in that in that it's often in our mouths at least once a week. For politicians, on the other hand, "genocide" is like peanut butter in that, for them, it gets stuck to the roof of their mouths and just stays there.
1 comment:
You know, that's a pretty good analogy.
Post a Comment