In defense of KONY 2012

Immediately after the release of the Kony 2012 video, countless criticisms were made of the video itself and the Invisible Children organization. After looking at the criticisms, I found them to be unworthy of discrediting the organization and the campaign. I want to address these arguments in hopes of giving the movement its credibility back. I write this keeping in mind that I may still find an argument, which would make me doubt the integrity of the organization.

Criticism 1: The "KONY 2012" video oversimplifies the history and the conflict caused by the Lord's Resistance Army; therefore, it does not educate viewers on the conflict.

My reply to this argument is that the message of "KONY 2012" is made to be simple. It is emotional publicity that draws the viewer to the cause. Through using a personal narrative, the "KONY 2012" video is made to appeal to its audience. In that light, one hopes the viewers take the initiative to educate themselves more about the conflict. However, Invisible Children has also taken an extra step and will be releasing "KONY 2012: PART II" to go more in-depth in explaining the conflict.

Criticism 2: The LRA is not effective anymore in Uganda and Kony is not a big threat.

The video actually explains that the LRA has moved on from Uganda to different places. The people who say that Kony is not as active as he once was are correct. But, he is still operating. One can look at the LRA Crisis tracker and see that last month, three civilian deaths and 43 abductions were recorded. The point of the "KONY 2012" campaign is to stop Kony from any current and future harm, despite the decreasing number of casualties.

Criticism 3: The Invisible Children's profits are not being spent primarily on rehabilitating programs for victims of the LRA.

Jedidiah Jenkins, director of ideology and public relations of Invisible Children, has put the numbers of the organization's spending at 37 percent on central African-related programs, about 20 percent on salaries and overhead and the remaining 43 percent on awareness programs. Those include things like flying Ugandans to America to go on cross-country awareness tours we pay for. Invisible Children has always been primarily an awareness and an advocacy organization, not an active-aid program. Anyone who has criticized the organization for the way it spends its money, should have looked at the objectives of the organization before criticizing Invisible Children for faulty spending.

Criticism 4: "KONY 2012" video and Invisible Children are not doing enough to fix the LRA-affected communities.

Please refer to the above argument. In addition, the Invisible Children organization and "KONY 2012" presented the goal of capturing Joseph Kony and for all to be well dismembering the LRA, in hopes that currently abducted children can go home and communities will not fear the LRA. That step is what the organization intends to achieve, and it is only a small puzzle piece to our complex world. But it is an effort nonetheless. If anyone wants to focus on helping restore the communities affected by the LRA, there are other organizations that focus on these aspects.

The "KONY 2012" campaign never promised to fix everything. It focused on capturing Joseph Kony, and raising awareness, as its objective

Criticism 5: The campaign resembles the "White Man's Burden."

Anyone who condones that statement should know that the term refers to a principle of justifying imperialism by masking it as a noble operation. I hardly think that an organization trying to raise awareness about a warlord is a form of imperialism.

Criticism 6: "KONY 2012" is just a reason for the United States to send troops into Africa. The United States Armed Forces are deployed to serve as advisors to the national African militaries, to aid them in speeding up the capture of Joseph Kony. They are not sent to fight or occupy, but to assist.

Criticism 7: "Kony 2012" is just a venue for the "white savior industrial complex" and for American citizens to feel like the hero. First of all, people from all races and countries support the Invisible Children organization. Second, why can't a person simply be moved to action based on compassion, without having race or economic status come into play? And if people are supporting the movement for personal self-satisfaction, is that enough of a problem to stop supporting the "KONY 2012" campaign? I do not believe so.

Criticism 8: There are other organizations that do more to improve the LRA affected communities in Africa, so why focus on Invisible Children? The invisible Children are here as an awareness and an advocacy organization. The Kony 2012 video was made to achieve the organization's objectives. If one believes there are better organizations to spend time and money on, then they are free to do that. That does not legitimize the criticisms that the Invisible Children is ineffective.

I write this response in support of the Invisible Children and "KONY 2012" campaign. I do not believe that any of the above arguments should discredit the organization and their message. The organization is trying to make one change in hope of saving innocent lives down the road. And I urge you to consider which is more important, the aforementioned arguments, or the hope that through our activism, we may speed up the process of capturing Joseph Kony.