Grassy Narrows: Sustainability Experts

According to the Peace and Friendship Treaty, the Canadian government promised to protect the right of Indigenous people on Canadian soil but has failed to hold onto this promise. Personally I feel the reason for this poor support of the rights and values of the Aboriginals is the lack of common values between mainstream society and the culture of the native people. They have lived off the land, only taking what they needed for centuries and are one with the land. One of the comments that Alex said that I found interesting is that “the land is their mother”. It is seen as a member of their family and many cannot understand why anyone would murder or try to hurt a precious member of their world. I found the concept of seven generations an interesting philosophy to live by because it is about reciprocity and giving for the future generations. It seems the Aboriginal population understands the most in Canada about sustainability. To respect nature, they are doing something that most of capitalist Canada has pushed aside for future industrial and economic growth and international competition.
The people of the Grassy Narrows First Nation in north-western Ontario have said no to industrial development in their traditional territory. I found the Grassy Narrows in interesting case study looking at the interactions between the people of native community and the progression of the logging industry in the area. Having the first hand expert of Alex was greatly beneficial with the passion and knowledge he brought about the topic on hand. These people had a struggle to overcome the legacy of these assaults on their identity and culture has been greatly compounded by the impact of additional inequalities in the 1960s and 1970s. Much like the people of the global south First Nations individual have learned to live off the land and with the land. It is sad to me that those perceived as different are thus seen as expendable and not worth rights because they do not make a large enough impacts on the economic or technological growth of Canada (demonstrating ecological racism). My hopes for the future is that government will take on some of the values and sustainable practices demonstrated by these people, but I feel a more practical appeal would be just the acceptance of difference as valued.

The Global South : Blue Gold

This week’s presentation was on the Global South and movements around the world. I found it interesting how the north and south react to global issues in such different ways. While the North reacts with money and tries to solve all their problems with it and technology, the South tends to use their bodies and voices to physically stop inhumane acts. This is an interesting feature of the Global South and leaves me wondering how individuals in foreign countries feel when northern activists come in and try to solve their cities problems with money.
The presentation then focused on the Water Wars in Bolvia which I found to be an interesting case study into an issue of the Global South. In Cochabamba the privatization of water would result in unsanitary and health risk concerns for a community that could not pay for the life necessity. The film Flow focuses then on the movements around the world and the externalities too often spared for the benefit of the Northern capitalist. Strategies used throughout the film included literacy movements, foot marchs, and local solutions to make a difference in their home town. I found it awful that the technology to keep many of these poor families alive could have been invented long ago (the water pump solar electric system) but wasn’t because of environmental racism and capitalist advancement.
Maude Barlow, who wrote Blue Gold discusses the plotting of a global take over of one of the worlds most precious and natural resources. How it is to be done on a global scale may be a threat we should watch out for in the future. I continue to wonder how companies feel they have the right to rain that falls from the sky. This new “oil”, the gold of the future, is a limited and precious resource and seems to be a race to the privatization and ownership to its power.

This is a Global Warning

During the presentation on climate change is becomes clear that our effect on the environment is translating all over the world. It is not an issue specific to one type of country or even just the Global South or North. Many people are “climate deniers”, this is a concept I have never heard of but can see a lot of in our high consumption and technically demanding world. With the increase of 2 degrees a decade, the world is becoming more susceptible to flooding and hurricanes in countries that cannot afford to rebuild. I found the link interesting between inequality and environmental issues as poverty, racism, and gender strongly influence people’s power to control “goods” while the “bads” must deal with risk and illness they get in life. As previously discussed it is an issue of imperialism in which the poor countries are servicing the richer countries with the resources they need to contribute to the polluting and the poorer countries then have to deal with the waste. (It’s a lot like the article we read in class on the track of the computer). This article demonstrates the severe divide between people in our world whether it is people who believe in the future impact of global warming or those from richer versus poor nations. The pollution of wealth is controlling the issue and polluting thousands of times more than the world’s poorest. In the Kyoto Protocol there was a debate on how to calculate who is polluting, how much and how to reduce these emissions in the future. I believe that the “contraction and convergence” which would allow the poor nations to sell their rights to wealthy nations in the short term would benefit both parties. I also found it interesting and inevitable how the differences in the way the world is physically changing is having a large impact on both human and the environmental sustainability of our world. Within the case of ice sheets disappearing, discussed throughout the article, I found it astonishing just the numerous issues to come out of that (the polar bears and Russian tankers). I also found it refreshing that a political leader (Al Gore) is able to stand up for an issue that he believes in. By being such a figure head and not afraid to upset corporate leaders he is able to impact Americans in an overarching common sense presentation of global warming.
Q: GLOBAL WARMING: the topic seems so over arching and luminous. Al Gore did a wonderful job of discussing the issue of global warming in a manor that was easily understandable and relatable to the general public, do you feel they will now go out of there way to find ways to make an individual difference?

Disastrous: Katrina

During the presentation by Steph and Alison the discussion was turned to the issues of how sudden natural disasters are and their origins in the workings of the earth’s physical system. Even with different triggers, all are caused by interactions among three overlapping systems including the human social and cultural system, the built environment, and the preexisting natural environment in which they are embedded. I found the presentation on the social consequences of environmental disasters to be interesting especially with the presenters first hand experience in a disaster zone rebuilding project. Hurricane Katrina, in August of 2005, was a great example of human and non human factors coming together to produce traumatic events that impact all levels of social and economic development. The fact that the city of New Orleans, being built in such a vulnerable area, had little precaution for such a natural and unexpected event seems outrageous to me. Hurricane Katrina is a good example of environmental racism as the individuals of the nine ward are those who are both physically and socially vulnerable because of their economic situation. I find it ironic that corporations and industries are thinking of setting up shop with tourist attractions as I believe the say “strike me once shame on me, strike me twice shame on you” will tend to take effect. I also continue to wonder how those with in this low income area of the city will manage to maintain their homes in New Orleans with the increasing prices of insurance and the cost of rebuilding. Independent insurance companies are creating an unrealistic cost for this necessity of living in which the corporate interests are able to maintain and manipulate the results for a better economic value in the land. I also found the idea of a conspiracy theory to be intriguing, it tends to feel that issues at seem to unreal to be true, tend to no longer be natural or social ways that things in this world are going wrong (global warming or the holocaust) but that it must be a conspiracy of government agents against the rest of the world (9/11 or 2012).
-After seeing the cost of lives and 1.15 billion dollars do you think that the corporation of the city would/should now pay more attention to the externalities previously disregarded?