Live Aid - another lesson from history

Twenty-two years ago today Bob Geldof asked "..why do people starve on one side of the world while on the other people are paid not to produce food, or "surpluses" are allowed to rot? He said that no-one had yet answered that question for him satisfactorily.."

Well, in an article titled 'Politics of Live Aid (Socialist Standard, September 1985) we let him know that "famine is not a temporary upset in an otherwise harmonious world order which can be put right by a quick injection of money and sacks of grain: it is an endemic feature of a world system of society which dictates that those who have money to buy food can eat, and those who have no money must starve; that unsold food produced in one part of the world will not, in general, be transported to where it is needed because no profit would be made. For in our society food is not produced because people need it, but because those who own the farms and land can make a profit from it. And if it cannot be sold profitably then it is left to rot."

Fast forward twenty years and things must be better, after all Bob received a gong and the first Live Aid was thought to be a great success? Not at all: "Over the years, agencies of the United Nations such as the Food and Agricultural Organisation have posted the numbers suffering poverty. For example, in 1975, 435 million people were seriously undernourished. By the year 2000 this had doubled to 820 million. UNICEF states that approximately 40,000 children under five die each day from preventable causes. These figures indicate that since the first Live Aid concert in 1985 the numbers dying from poverty have been increasing horrendously, which leaves little doubt that pop concerts and the charities have made no significant impact on the problem. The grim facts are that the present methods of the "Make Poverty History" campaign stand no more chance of ending deaths from hunger. If we are to be serious stopping this perpetual holocaust, the many thousands of people who support this campaign should have a serious re-think about how best to go about it.."

Clearly Sir Geldof has not done so. We even sent him a letter , apparently to no avail. We cannot expect help from him to bury this murderous system. But capitalism's gravediggers can be found in the most unlikely places. The Economist (July 7th-13th) for example, provides some food for thought, although, to be sure, the short piece titled 'Why poverty isn't history' comes a poor second behind 'The trouble with private equity': "...The 1980s were supposed to bring water and sanitation to the great unwashed; the 1990s were supposed to provide “education for all”.." Referring to the UN's latest drive against poverty as "half crusade and half charade", the article concludes, unsurprisingly, with the statement that countries should inch "..their way out of poverty by their own efforts.." Ho hum. But it is the final sentence which Socialists would endorse: "To make poverty history, you have to understand how history is made."

RS