I walked through campus and up Rabb steps last Thursday morning and saw my peers wearing green shirts, bracelets, ribbons, and other Darfur awareness paraphenalia. My initial reaction was actually one of ambivalence to this vivid display of solidarity. It is not that I disproved of the efforts of the campus division of STAND! to raise awareness about the genocide/ethnic cleansing occuring in Darfur; rather something in me was put off by what looked like a "fashionable cause," one which was more about image and appeasing our own moral consciences and less about actually working to make a difference in the world's response to Darfur.I think that this reaction was due in large part to a great deal of cynicism I have for the ability of activities such as these to actually effect a change in international policy - in the US or the UN. I read the green shirts people were wearing: "Stop genocide in Darfur!" and wanted to ask them what they expected me to do: donate money? call the white house? sign a petition? I thought to myself, "Fine, but don't expect any of those things to actually bring the genocide in Darfur any closer to ending." This is coming from someone who: donated money to different organizations, signed petitions/letters to US representatives and senators, and called the white house. After all, if massive worldwide protests against the Irag War did nothing to faze President Bush, why should this be any different? In this political day and age, cynicism is the name of the game - and not just regarding US policy.

Then I went to the Dinner for Darfur on Monday night. There I heard Glenn Gutterman, from the American Jewish World Service (AJWS), speak about his organization's efforts to mobilize relief and aid efforts in Darfur, as well as details of the extent of the genocide taking place there. I also heard Professor Mari Fitzduff, of the International Center for Ethics at Brandeis, provide insight into the underlying causes of ethnic wars and massive violence in places like Darfur, and the alarmingly minimal efforts at responding to the genocide which have been made thus far by the major political powers (the US, UN, and the African Union).

What was striking to me is that both speakers - rather than preaching idealism - succeeding in reaching out to the cynic within me. They said that I SHOULD be cynical, because there is much historical precedent for cynicism: disbelief in the democratic system to effect real change where and when it is needed most. Yet what I also realized during their speeches was that I have allowed cynicism to get the better of me.

If it is taken as a given, then cynicism will surely win out every time. My sense is that most of us - including myself - feel utterly hopeless when we see images of Darfur on our television screens or in newspapers (when the media actually report about the genocide): "We are here; they are there. What can I do? I'm not a politician..."

In my own Jewish tradition there is an injunction, "We are not required to complete the work; neither are we free to abstain from it." Action can and must be taken, even without ANY indication that various types of individual action will actually help to stop the genocide in Darfur. The Pressure we put on ourselves to "solve" the world's problems can actually be counter-productive if the task seems utterly insourmountable. Cynicism is a terribly logical conclusion when studying the political system of our world. Yet I cannot imagine telling someone in Darfur that my cynicism was the reason that I did not respond.