An Off-Key Bandwagon

Sigh--just when you think it's safe to hop on the bandwagon, you hear a badly out-of-tune note in the brass section.

I ended yesterday's post half-convinced to finally join the Facebook group protesting the proposed Bahati Bill in Uganda, the bill that, among other things, condemns homosexuality as an act on par with rape and calls for the death penalty for people caught having homosexual relations. I don't see the group itself literally doing much to persuade Ugandans not to adopt the bill. Ugandans are capable of debating such bills themselves, and Western disapproval of anti-homosexuality bills can be/has been used as "proof" that the decadent homosexuals of America wish to further corrupt pristine, authentic Uganda.

Rather, I argued that the utility of such a group consisted in getting people who otherwise wouldn't be in community to join together and perhaps even begin re-encountering each other's differences. Culture war veterans who almost never have a kind word for each other now--for the space of this one issue at least--find themselves united. As they join on this one issue, as they talk and listen (well, write and read) each other's testimonies, they may in the future be less likely to dismiss their opponents as thoughtless or immoral.

But, as I checked the pro and anti Bill Facebook pages today, I find a plethora of posts by one gentleman, clearly anti-Bill, whose views are in their own way just as toxic as those contained in the Bill. A taste of two posts by this person (and, to warn, these are pretty offensive), the first from the pro-Bill page, where he's filled the visible fields with posts like this:

The african struggle for democracy - as evidenced by the creators of this group - was and still is an exercise in hypocrisy. It wasn't about liberty and the protection of human rights. It was, in retrospect, only about taking what the "bwana" or colonial master had - the big buildings, the mercedes benz, the nice sui...ts... [sic] If black people had TRULY suffered under oppression, I think we would find that they would today be the biggest supporters of freedom, the right to express oneself, the right to be who you are. That just clearly is not the case. It seems, for Ugandans (and other african people), it's alright that other people suffer, as long as "I" don't.

Or this (from the anti-Bill page):

I wish people would realise that there is no point trying to help Uganda (or the rest of sub-saharan africa for that matter) in any way. The more you try to help, the more that help is turned against you, with accusations of "imperialism", "neo-colonialism" and so on. They don't want to be helped, that much is clear. All the west has been doing for the last few decades is to encourage the dependancy cycle in african countries: liberal, white-guilt advocacy groups encourage governments to send more aid and poverty-relief schemes into Africa, the aid is rapidly used up or siphoned off by corrupt governments who use it to further entrench themselves, while asking for yet more aid. Meanwhile, on the ground, the pathetic, half-literate population follow the dictates of their own backward culture which encourages the view that political leaders are always right and the leader who shouts the loudest is the "most right".

Blech. With friends like these... I don't know the gentleman in question here, but regardless of who he is, the things he says are about as ethnocentric-racist-classist as can be. Worse, his arguments--especially as he posts them (again and again and again) on the pro-Bill page, do absolutely nothing but play into the Uganda-versus-the-West melodramatic propaganda that assists the Bill's proponents in Uganda. Nothing makes a draconian anti-homosexuality bill seem all the more vital as a defense of "authentic" Ugandan culture than a pro-homosexual rant that disparages Ugandan culture.

In defense of the Anti-Facebook page's administrators, his comments have for the most part been roundly denounced or dismissed. It's painful, though, that on the pro-Bill page he and his supporters seem to be the main face of the West.

Such are the vicissitudes of using Facebook as activism.

If there's any kind of bright side, he seems at least not to be trying to represent Western Christians. The more I think about/write about this debate, the more I think that it's a testament to the ways that Christianity can operate in ways that bypass nationalist loyalties and ideologies. Westerners as Westerners may not have much of a place to stand in criticizing Ugandans' anti-gay attitudes (attitudes which are of course by no means shared by all Ugandans). But Western evangelicals as Bible-believing conservative Christians--and, yes, as opponents of the GLBT movement--may have the ability to speak (some degree of) truth in love.

Again, I think the importance of this debate isn't so much the debate itself; indeed, I think this debate will flare out soon and people will barely remember it six months from now. Rather, this debate is a staging ground for how the Christian West relates to the Christian South.

God help us your children of all nations to recognize each other. Let all who see us engage cry out, "see how much they love one another!"

More tomorrow,

JF