The Constant Gardener

[question everything]

Is a movie based on a book by John Le Carre. A very depressing movie.

But what I was thinking constantly was not so much the plot of the pharmaceutical companies as the bad guys. No, I was thinking of the locals - Kenyans, in this case - who were preying on their country men. Of the corrupt leaders, which, as we know, are many in Africa.

We know of Darfur, but we no longer hear about it. But there is misery all over Africa and the misery is inflicted by Africans, not by white colonialists.

And what are we - the developed nations of the world - doing? The only good guys there were the U.N. pilots who would drop bags of flour and other foodstuff into different remote areas. In one case, African raiders came to steal the food, to set the huts on fire, to terrorize the people there.

I don't know. Perhaps Bolton is right. Perhaps we do need to shake the U.N. We know that for many delegates this is like the pot of gold. Nice income, apartments, limousines, expense reports - a life style that they would never have had they stayed in their countries.

Perhaps the U.N. should be in a small shuck and missions around the world to help starving people, to help tribes that are being destroyed and, when necessary, to mobilize armed forces from many countries to protect persecuted people, as it was in Rwanda, as it is in Darfur as it is in Niger.

[malaise]

1. The corrupt leaders are all over the planet

Africa has no more or no less than the rest of countries. An old professor once told me that the most corruption had to take place whereever you find the most resources.
The irony of it is that there would be no corruption if Western multinationals were not trying to violate laws.

Which African government is as corrupt as Bushco?

[question everything]

3. The main difference is that Western countries have, if not free media

at least website like this one that can expose any nefarious activity by the government.

Indeed, the Internet plays an important role in the movie in exposing the trials by the pharmaceutical companies.

[malaise]

4. Websites in developing countries

also expose corruption these days.

[jazzjunkysue]

2. A truly beautiful film.

[question everything]

6. For some reason, the Sandy character reminded me of Jeb Bush

which make it difficult for me to trust..

[bleedingheart]

5. I read the book this summer...it is depressing.

however it was a good book and to be honest the book really points out how money will prompt people to forget their humanity....and how typically corporations are filled with individuals who do things for the almighty dollar that they would not do otherwise.

[leftofthedial]

7. great book.

Le Carre is a wonderful author.

The book is even a more scathing indictment of global pharmas and the politicians who enable them.

I honestly have no idea how to address the problems of Africa. There is so much death, corruption, hatred, violence, disease, poverty and hunger that it just seems impossible.

[question everything]

9. Last week there was an op-ed in the Wall St. Journal

wondering how did the pharmaceutical companies, that have developed so many life-saving products, ended up being the bad guys in the book and in the movie.

And the conclusion, correctly, in my mind, was that it all started when they were allowed to advertise prescription drugs.

Because, of course, we cannot just go and buy a prescription drug, even a Viagra-type. So what, are we supposed to pressure our physicians to write a prescription?

At the same time, they are blocking importation of drugs from Canada becaue... it cost so much money to develop a drug. But it that case, how do they have the millions to pay for the TV ads? A 30 sec ad during the Super Bowl is about $2 million a shot. And we remember how many there were, at least in 2004, during the Janet Jackson baring it all moment.

[leftofthedial]

10. advertising prescription drugs is a bad thing, but

global pharmas were bad guys before that.

There is one simple reason.

$

[ClassWarrior]

8. The problem with the movie versus the book...

...was that the villians, rightly so, were the blood-sucking corporatists who were pulling the strings of the synchophant bureaucrats. Some of that was lost in the movie.

But what a visual tour de force!

NGU.

[mitchtv]

11. I'm sure it was a good book, the movie however,

was slow, dull, and depressing. Could've been much better, and shorter.The photography was superb