On the contrary -- I gather that Make Poverty History started with NGOs, as many other campaigns do. Geldoff and Bono etc. then got on board and made it a huge international event. It has been said that some NGOs consider them to have "hijacked" the campaign, but I'm not sure if that's true.

Anyway, if you're referring to how Blair congratulated the Make Poverty History campaign at the end of the G8 summit, that either means that he just happens to agree with someone elses campaign, or that he had to say that, so he didn't seem too unaffected by the public he's supposed to be serving.

Check the Red Pepper special, War on Want and WDM and you get a good idea how a lot of us thought. Some stuff is reposted on Indymedia.

A nice day out with some music and spin. The chattering classes fell they have achieved something without having to face the necessity for social change or the devellsh details/links of industrialisation/climate change/imperialism/arms and food industries. It was a mixed demo though with not all people there in line with the Make Poverty History By Privatising Africa after First Robbing It Blind line.

it's easy to blame 'bad protestors' then go back to shopping at Wal Mart ( yep the ASDA signs are starting to be 'complimented' before being removed... ) driving to get your Guardian, and consume consume consume ( sweatshop Guevara t-shirt and ready made placard etc etc ) - Loved the pro-capitalist demo by the way. So people just don't want to 'get it'. The need for change is greater than ever.

At one anti-g8 music gig the singer asked if there were any Americans here protesting to which he offered his condolences.

Perhaps the sweatshop wristbands summed it up.

The make poverty history is a well-meaning campaign set up by by a coalition of charities and NGO's that has easily been hijacked by the Blairite government and Bono and Geldolf, and steared in the direction of their reformist agenda. It's failings have been in not acknowledging the G8 as the problem, but the solution, since the g8 some groups within MPH have sought to distance themselves from geldolf/bono/brown.

hope that helps

Make History: shut down the G8

'Make Poverty History' started life as a campaign by some large NGOs, some Unions, Charities, Church Groups, Grassroots Activist Groups etc to pressure for massive change. It ended up being co-opted by Geldof, Bono and even Gordon Brown. See the attached excellent piece by Red Pepper and comments by activists.
 http://indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/06/315058.html

The Make Poverty History campaign large and well publicised campaign, with lots of billboards, media coverage etc. as well as the links with celebrities and the Live 8 events.
The objectives of this campaign were undoubtedly good (who can seriously argue with the aim of making poverty history?), and most of the marketing literature seemed to be well informed and delivered (there was clear coverage of what needs to be done, more and better aid, fairer trade rules, drop the debt unconditionally).
As you suggest, I think the main problem many people have had (including myself) is the co-opting of this campaign by the government and the media. Even the most right wing media (like The Sun) supported it, and the governments Treasurer Gordon Brown, and Prime Minister Blair fully endorsed it. (Again, how could they not support it?)
I think what the government and mainstream media were trying to do (and unfortunately I think they very much succeeded) was to divide the protestors into 'good' and 'bad' protestors. The good protestors were the conservative/Church groups that formed the MPH march. The bad protestors were the ones doing the street parties and the Gleneagles march. These 'bad' protestors are of course the ones who believe that the Government and the G8 are the main causes of poverty, and are part of the problem, not part of the solution. The 'good' protestors, are the ones that ask the G8 politely that for a few more crumbs from the rich man's table for the world's poor.
Of course, from the point of view of the Government, this makes perfect sense. Why on earth would they support protestors who want to replace the G8 with a new system which could really deliver prosperity to the world's majority?
I think it is important as well to look at the way the media lavished such huge attention on the pop stars, models and other celebrities during the campaign. It is all part of a very conscious strategy to marginalise and oppress ordinary people, and make it look like celebrities are the only people who can really make a difference. It reinforces the feeling that we all need to wait for a hero to come along to speak for us, whether it is a Gandhi, a Martin Luther King, or a Bob Geldof. The media meanwhile paints the masses of ordinary people as dangerous violent mobs who are to be feared.
Which is why Indymedia is so damn important.


!

Before the Live 8 event I spoke to a lot of people who were certain that the whole thing was a publicity sham designed to present an official opposition to the G8 summit and focus the public mind on Africa above all other concerns. These people were not even activists they were just people who live their lives quietly. During the event I realised that most of the performing acts were signed to EMI, had back catalogues owned by EMI, or in some way were related to EMI through subsidiaries like publishers etc. The stage, set based screens, soundsystem and espescially the golden circle enclosure were identical to those used for Robbie Williams Knebworth shows. For those of you who don't know these Knebworth shows were mainly an EMI concern with a little co-involvement from the BBC radio and Channel 4 TV. They were a massive money spinner engrained on the consciousness of a major percentage of the population. This is what EMI does best (just think of the Queen summer shows which followed Live Aid and the Robbie similarity is clear).

So why EMI (Empire Music International)? In it's history EMI has been a force to reckon with. They were responsible for and made the profits from The Beatles (A nice, frivolous counterpoint, that year, to the feelings everyone had had in America after the whole Kennedy thing). The EMI BBC link is so obvious that it shouldn't need highlighting. The history of this link is very interesting however. Particularly during the pre WW2 era and the advent of television in Britain. Much like VHS vs Betamax there was initial competition between two systems of broadcast. The BBC ran a competition between the two systems in which the population of London could buy one type of TV reciever or the other. Both signals were broadcast from Studios and Transmitters located in Alexandra Palace. One system was developed owned and run by John Logie Baird (the Scottish inventor of TV) the other system was developed owned and run by EMI-Marconi the massive joint music publishing/radio broadcast/electronics company. Somehow the Logie Baird studio transmitter system burned to the ground and EMI-Marconi won the contract to broadcast BBC TV to the UK by default. It all quickly became a moot point however when WW2 started, TV transmissions were halted and Alexandra Palace was turned into a concentration camp for Italians and Germans.

So make of that what you will.

I also found it interesting that Geldof had to be talked into the whole thing by whoever and yet the responsibility for the event was laid at his feet by most people involved. The events main sponsor appeared to be AOL Time Warner and Pink Floyd seemed to implly with their video show that Make Poverty History was just another brick in the wall.

"The media meanwhile paints the masses of ordinary people as dangerous violent mobs who are to be feared. "

Yes that is why Indymedia is important and the BBC, SKY et al are a bag of shite. We are ordinary people. Activists are ordinary people.

Cult of celebrity = Propaganda!!!! Come-on work it out.

Miners Strike, Dockers Strike, BBC Sun Newspaper - Bag of shite.

State propaganda and corporate proganda respectively. Why do they not show independent films - Corporate Media prism£££££

Corporate Olympics - It's all propaganda. They are not interested in the aspects of evictions or all the polluting urban 'regeneration (sic) scams they are doing or the fact that the money doesn't filter down ( unless you get employed in a shite job to help service these rich globetrotting parasites.

i wasn't sure. thanks for clarifying.

in solidarity,
a cascadian

Ive been both a socialist and a christian for over 20 years so I get hacked off when christians are automatically labelled conservative-----thankfully not in Scotland my friends!
The church of Scotland has a long history of championing social justice issues and many ministers have risked arrest at the gates of Faslane and Dungavel---not that you're likely to hear that from the corporate media------they'd rather folk think the clergy are out of touch and of course some undoubtedly are.
But---many of us resisted the negative propaganda and risked(we were led to believe)being caught up in riots in order to join the 250,000 strong march against poverty and although Id agree it was hijacked to a degree-----( largely-by Live 8 and the Olympic bid media coverage)
it was most definitely worth doing and hopefully "radicalised" some of the population for the first time who may have found it a painless enough experience that they'll consider protesting again and even better if they take their ideas home and use their consumer power
wher it hurts!

although there was an organised protest march I had my own agenda and would have been there even if I were the only one........ I think the organisers should have gotten out of my fucking way and not counted me in their ranks.....

No man 's an island Indie and sooner or later your gonna have to get off your "fuckin" high horse and unite with some"fuckin" body ---or you'll be a fuckin lonely old wanker!