Habermas Visits Rwanda

Habermas would respond to “Ghosts of Rwanda” by first responding to the concept of the public sphere in reference to the transmission of information from the film and how it is received. This documentary-style video is exactly what Habermas would refer to as the media of the public sphere, and that public sphere is something in which people can form a public opinion around. I believe the truth of the matter of the “Ghosts of Rwanda” video lies in the Habermas article “The Public Sphere: A Encyclopedia Article” in which he states: “Though mere opinions (cultural assumptions, normative attitudes, collective prejudices and values) seem to persist unchanged in their natural form as a kind of sediment to history, public opinion can by definition only come into existence when a reasoning public is presupposed.” It is the worldly interest in the affairs of Rwanda that similar interests are formed, and through this a public opinion is made.

So in this scenario, the public sphere can be understood as the sphere of public individuals who have assembled in agreement because of the dire cries for help and support from other nations in the world because of the genocides in Rwanda. “Ghosts of Rwanda” is a perfect example of how political documentaries affect the public sphere, as well as other modes of communication. This allows for other people to join in the functioning public sphere and then join the struggle for Rwanda, since after the public sphere went international it then became a principle to follow.

But because of the world we live in today, Habermas had this to say: “The public, which must now mediate these demands, becomes a field for the competition of interests, competitions which assume the form of violent conflict. Laws which obviously have come about under the "pressure of the street"can scarcely still be understood as arising from the consensus of private individuals engaged in public discussion. They correspond in a more or less unconcealed manner to the compromise of conflicting private interests.” In this way, larger more bourgeoisie organizations have to come up with compromises with the state in order to accomplish their needs, and usually this is achieved by ignoring the public sphere altogether. But they must also maintain to have the continued support of the masses, in it is through this “open” support of the public sphere, specifically Rwanda in this case, in which anything can be done.