Trust on the Farm

       Bell's concepts through chapter 10 suggest that developing and mobilizing our economy (or any economy) is all about trust. Trust in the knowledge that we ourselves obtain and trust in the knowledge of others. We must trust the information we are distributed if we hope to navigate through our system with an understanding of our surroundings.

     The trust that we place in each other to maintain and protect our environment is one of the most important trust we as people can have for one another. The way one treats the environment has direct effects not only on those who may live in their community but everyone who is dependent on the same resources we are. Things like using water, gases and other natural resources have an environmental effect on the entire world. This effect and trust can rightly be applied largely to the agriculture setting and how farmers utilize and preserve land.

     The struggle between conventional and sustainable practices in farming all stem from trust when it comes to farmers making such a drastic decision. Farmers rely on their crops and herds to make a living. The more product they can put out at a decent quality the more profit they will make. I grew up in a small farm town where nearly everyone was, in some way, connected to a local farm. In most cases generations of families all lived within about a mile of one another where they could all fulfill their duties on the family farmers. Generations for men grew up taking over the farmland and animal stock as their fathers and grandfathers grew too old to continue in the production. The knowledge of farming isn't something you learn in the classroom. It's learned through hands on experience working on the farm and following what your parents and grandparents instruct you to do. Farmers have instilled trust in their elders and grow constantly utilizing the knowledge they have obtained from their elders. The trust they have in the knowledge they have gathered allows them to trust their work and themselves to produce a good product. This trust the farmers have in their families past generations of work and one another leads an entire community to place trust upon them from food and to preserve our environment the best they can.

     

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1dKUhUN5Yx4

     Trusting in your past generations and your production to gain a living is a wonderful thing. But what happens when something out of a farmers control goes bad? What happens when there is no production due to lack of resources or their land is too nutrient deprived to sustain crops?  
This is when farmers have to consider making that shift from their conventional values grown through generations to sustainable farming that will allow them to gain profit and keep their farm and production alive. This structures the economy, environment, personal beliefs and be placed on the same playing field when deciding between conventional and sustainable farming.
  

"We do not act in our own interests when we act in our own interests"

"The Tragedy of the Commons", it sounds like a play from Shakespeare or some sort of soap opera, but in fact it is a biological and sociological concept.

Bell sums up the idea best when he talks about a plot of land owned by an entire village where everyone's sheep are allowed to graze. The idea is that a farmer realizes he can increase his flock, while at the same time every other farmer also realizes he or she can increase his or her flock. All the farmers increase their flock, there is not enough grass, the resources dry up, sheep die, and the farmers all wind up with less than they had to start with. As Bell states, "We do not act in our own interests when we act in our own interests".

The Tragedy of the Commons is not an idea that has no implications elsewhere. Bell describes a term called The Dialogue of Solidarities. The basic idea is that "sentimental commitments" can lead to a promotion of interests, even if the parties involved do not know that such a phenomenon is occurring. That flies right in the face of the "rational actor model" discussed in The Tragedy of the Commons. Sentiments can possibly promote interests, but do not reduce them. In basic terms it is the idea that people can have sentimentality towards one another and develop trust that each party will do what is necessary to satisfy the interests of each other.

The question then becomes, can we just have a dialogue of solidarities with other people? The answer is no. There are things besides other people that have interests and have a connection with interests of our own. Copy and paste the link since Youtube has decided it does not want anyone to see this video apparently:http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=6vr48K3AeTc
The basic idea is that we rely on trees to breath and control the climate, and the trees rely on us to not destroy their natural habitats. There is a Dialogue of Solidarity between humanity and trees, the speaking part just lies exclusively with the human side.

It's All About Trust

I encourage you to evaluate the ideas that Bell discusses in this half of Chapter 10. Especially, because we are college students and we are surrounded by the same group of people and environment for four years. How is it possible to share this common ground, yet still provide enough resources for each individual person? Bell presents the question .... "How do we get that togetherness together?" This question of course, just like any other, has obstacles it must overcome. One of these being, The Tragedy of the Commons. Garret Hardin explains that this theory is the idea that commonly owned resources are doomed to fail. This is because humans are greedy and only pursue what is in their best interest. Take the example of cattle grazing on common land (while herders are trying to make the most profit). It is expected that the once the grounds become thin, herdsmen are going to add more cattle in attempt to bring their profit back up. This will create a domino affect: everyone's sheep will eventually die off, you will end up with less sheep then you started with, the ground will erode and is  now unable to support the environments surroundings and therefore, economic damage will occur.

Nevertheless, Bell argues a good point - this is not so much a problem of collective ownership but more a problem on the individual level. So would it not make more sense to call this, Tragedy of Individualism? Stepping back to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, people are going to consume what they want based on their own self interests, what is most important for them to survive - that being basic needs such as food or if it is safety needs (doing what they can to put a house over their heads).

So lets get back to the main question here, how do we get people to come together to make our economy work? We all have certain values and or beliefs that make us interested in specific things.  Bell says, interests promotes sentiments. Just like the example of the Lion and Androcles, where they spared one another's lives because they knew what it was like to be hurt and alone. They made this decision based on their pure self-interest. And because they learned to rely on each other they shared a sense of commitment to common norms of social behavior. Bell would define this phenomenon as, complementary.

While I was reading this I kept referring back to Phi Mu and the living circumstances we are encaged in. How is there enough hot water to go around for 47 girls everyday? How are we suppose to get our laundry done with only 3 washers and dryers - which 50% of the time one is always broken? Not only are the resources scarce, but what about our personalities?! How do they mix? There are always issues of space in complementary action. We cannot keep track of each other 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. We cannot keep track of who needs to clean up what or whose food is whose. So we require one thing ... trust.

My sisters and I are bonded by similar values and beliefs.  They may not all be carried out the in the same manner or even the beliefs we have at home might not be similar to my neighbor on the second floor. However, we all have affection towards one another and a sense of common commitments to common norms. These could be donating our time to serve others, being there for our sisters when they need to be cheered up ... we know what it is like to be in one another's shoes depending on the situation. And in that sense, we are individuals that come together as one. We complement each other in ways that are hard to explain. We rely on trust. Trust not only allows us to be best friends, sisters, and most importantly family, but it is also what makes our chapter so successful.

Risky Business

After reading this chapter you might be questioning whether you should ever get into a car or eat a hamburger ever again.  At least that's what I was thinking.  I do agree with Ulrich Beck that we have become what you could call a "risk society."
 We partake in many activities even though there is a large risk associated with them.

1. Driving/riding in cars
2. Swimming in shark infested oceans
3. Skydiving
4. Skiing
5. Eating Hamburgers (mad cow disease sounds terrible)
6. Mountain Climbing

  The list goes on and on.....

So my question is WHY?  Why do people continue to do things that they know are risky to the point of possible death?  Why in the world do people decide to free climb a mountain with no safety harnesses.  (I get scared just thinking about it.)
 The national risk assessment says that we shouldn't be so foolish as a society.  But is it really foolish to partake in activities that we enjoy?  Would it be more foolish to live a life never having taken risks?  I think so.  Life's only worth living if you take the occasional risk that makes you feel alive.  So are we really a foolish society?  I don't think so..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_H46iBP_8Nc  ( I couldn't upload this from youtube, but it's a really interesting ted talk so you should watch it!!)

-Georgia

Stop! Collaborate! Listen!

Today we finished reading Richard Reed's Forest Dwellers, Forest Protectors, in which he describes the lives of a group of indigenous agroforesters who lives in Paraguay and Brazil.

 

These agroforesters have been able to do quite well for themselves. While they have maintained loose connection with the Western industrial Market - they buy goods to help them with their labor, and they sell good to earn some extra money on the side - they have still been able to maintain very much of their culture and traditions. This, in the world of today, is a shocker.

Because the Guarani are argoforesters who use several useful farming techniques, they are able to keep the forest in which they live alive and healthy. They don't use more than they need, and they live in coexistence with nature. Did I mention they make a surplus, and can have enough food to feed their families, with extra to share with other locals?

I read or heard once that indigenous hunter/gatherer societies worked less than Modern Western societies do, and they have more time for fun and games later. They get to spend more time with their families, and they usually have enough to get by.

 

Americans, I think, work more and enjoy less. Office Space is an example of art imitating life. Are we really happy with ourselves? I think it's an appropriate time for a Vanilla Ice quote:

"Stop Collaborate and Listen!"

Perhaps it's time we stop what we are doing as a society, collaborate with each other on sustainable means to solve our community's problems, and listen to one another for effective means to solve these problems. The Guarani provide one example that leads me to believe that the answers to the problems we face in our day-to-day lives may be in our back yard. Or someone else's backyard many many miles away in South America.

Agroforestry

Before we can get started on agroforestry, we need to address the question, "What is agroforestry?"

Now that we have a basic idea of what agroforestry is, lets look into its pros.

It seems common sense to grow what is native to the land, yet we seem to have molded our culture around growing mass crops more for their quantity, rather than their quality. Profit has become more important than the product.

Here's a preview of how to implement agroforestry into your farm:

We Want More PSLs

While reading about the Guaraní people, naturally I began to compare our culture and theirs. If you have been doing the readings you may realize how hard that is. In America, we get upset if the season changes and we can no longer order the Pumpkin Spice Latté at Starbucks while the Guaraní people actually have a season where many of their people go without corn and beans for months...oh and without Pumpkin Spice Lattés. This is called the karuvaí or also know as the hunger season. After this season is over, the Guaraní have religious gathering and initiation rites. During this time, the religious leader announces the new children and praises them as well as they recognize and appreciate the corn initiating both into the community. 

How interesting is it that we live such different lives and value such different things than these people? While thinking of things in the American culture to compare to the Guaraní culture, I focused on foods we value. I came to the conclusion that many Americans seem to value the huge feast we all prepare for on Thanksgiving and Christmas, but if you're anything like my
family you prepare it at home and bring it to to Grandma's ready to eat. I leave you all with one question..what is something your family values greatly and celebrates every year? It can be anything. 

PERMAnent agriCULTURE

An example of agroforestry

In the forests of Paraguay, the Guaraní people participate in a holistic way of life which values productivity, ecological diversity, and sustainability. This way of life is also known as agroforestry, which is a system that integrates tree crops with cash crops, food crops, animal raising, foraging, fishing, hunting, and trapping. As described by Richard Reed in “Forest Dwellers, Forest Protectors”, the Guaraní’s choice to employ this agroforestry system allows them to participate in the global market but does not tie them to it. This is to say that while they have the freedom to purchase food and goods, they do not rely on these items to survive. Their survival, instead, lies in the successes of their gardens and their hunting, trapping, fishing, and foraging skills. Each man and woman has all that they need to thrive in their own backyard, so to speak.

Suburban permaculture

While the positive prospects of agroforestry are many, the question remains: can we, as Americans, employ a similar system successfully within our own culture? Although it seems unlikely that we will be able to completely separate ourselves from the bonds that we have formed between ourselves and the capitalist market within our lifetimes, there are steps that we can take to at least mimic the ways of the Guaraní.
The answer to our question, posed above, may lie in a movement which has already taken hold on a small scale within our society: permaculture. The word “permaculture” was coined in the mid seventies and it derived from the words PERMAnent agriCULTURE. In short, permaculture can be defined as an ecological design system which aims for sustainability in all aspects of human life. It teaches us how to design natural homes and abundant food production systems, regenerate degraded landscapes and ecosystems, develop ethical economies and communities, and much more by following nature’s own patterns.

Urban Permaculture

In its ideal form, permaculture encompasses the cultivation of a relationship between domestic and wild animals in the effort to encourage success within the sustainable ecosystem as well as in the garden. It also focuses on rainwater harvesting, watershed restoration, incorporating heirloom (non-GMO) plant varieties, the natural building of the community, and waste management. Although, typically, permaculture does not facilitate a total break from the market, it does, in fact, decrease the dependency of an individual on capitalistic commodities.
At this point, if you’re thinking that the establishment of a self-sustaining garden in your backyard is impossible, think again. Check out this video of a man in Seattle who will prove that growing what you need to survive is possible, even in a relatively small space: 

  Permaculture can be successful in both the suburbs and the city. If these people can do it, what’s your excuse? Despite the fact that the prospect of agroforestry being a prevailing system within my lifetime or yours seems unlikely, there are steps that you can take in order to make your life a more free, sustainable, and fulfilling one. So get up, plant something! Be proactive, be the change!

~Carly

May the Odds Be Ever in Their Favor

The year is 3050, and the time has finally arrived. It's everyone's favorite part of the year: the 84^th annual Hunger Games. You enter the arena confidently: after all, you have a solid Hanover College education, about $700 in your bank account, and you're in, like, the greatest sorority ever (shout-out to my sisters watching at home). “You're fine, you've got this,” you think.. Until you see the competition. It's a 20 year-old member of the Guarani community. This is about the time you start thinking that you hope he takes credit cards or will trade 35 used text books for a chance to live. Otherwise, you're screwed. That's that. I don't know how to trap my own food. I don't know how to fight, and I don't run fast. In this setting, these are the things that matter. However, these are not the things that my life in rural North America has taught me because these are not the things we value. We often mistakenly use our title as Americans interchangeably with “better.” Because we are “civilized,” we MUST be better than a tribe in the rainforest. However, while their definitions of good/bad, important/useless, edible/inedible vary from ours, that does not make ours better. There are so many things that our culture could learn from theirs, if only we could admit that.



There were so many things in this chapter that stood out to me about the Guarani way of life. One of them was their independence. Because of the farming and hunting abilities within the communities, they are able to operate completely autonomously from market systems. They know that they can grow or catch what they need to survive, so buying from retailers is an option that they avoid when they are unhappy with prices. I don't know of anyone who can do this. (In fact, while reading this chapter, the closest comparison that I could make with the Guarani tribe was Wendell Berry. I then realized how strange it is that Wendell Berry has received years of national publicity and praise for choosing to do with his life what every Guarani man and woman has been doing for generations.) The importance of their economic independence is that they have not become slaves to the market. While people in the Global North may feel sympathy for these people for being constrained by the forest or for lacking our level of freedom, we voluntarily lock on the handcuffs of society and capitalism every time we purchase at Walmart what we could have grown in our own backyards.

The second thing that interested me about the Guarani culture was that one third of the daylight hours are spent "resting, relaxing, and socializing" (52). As a North American college student always striving for more (just like I've been taught and told to do), I feel fortunate if I interact with people for more than 30 minutes between 8 am and 10 pm. The Guarani people are able to spend so much of their day socializing because that is something that their culture values. Yes, there is emphasis placed on success and production, but what are the benefits of these things if there are no friends with whom to share them?

This summer, I had the privilege of volunteering with an organization in the Peruvian Amazon called crees. This organization serves two purposes: one is to research the rainforest's biodiversity in order to gauge the rainforest's ability to regenerate after deforestation (which, it has been concluded, is almost fully). The second goal of the organization is to improve the lives of the forest's inhabitants. Given permission by the homeowner, the organization plants gardens in yards and teaches civilians how to grow food and tend to their garden. A second part of this community education focuses on agroforestry, which is something that the Guarani seem to have perfected. However, not everyone is as knowledgeable about the rainforest as the Guarani. As the chapter stated, the rainforest actually has very infertile soil and in order to reap its benefits, a worker of the land must know how to interact with nature rather than against it. Unfortunately, many people in the forest do not know how and are not willing to learn, preferring to continue planting unprofitable banana trees than to integrate more profitable plants, such as hardwood trees, into their agroforestry plots. The following video shows Reynaldo, a crees employee, practically begging his fellow forest dwellers to practice agroforestry and choose to live in harmony with the nature around them, much like the Guarani have been doing for centuries.



Can the Guarani Tribe Teach Us (United States) a Lesson?

Throughout the entire reading I noticed one common theme that really stuck out to me, the importance of kinship in the Guarani tribe. Kinship is different from family in the fact that kinship involves a person's extended family (cousins, aunts, uncles, etc.) rather than just brothers, sisters and parents. Kinship decided where people could live, it's seen in the politics of the tribe, the religion of the tribe, and even the economics of the tribe. What really struck me about the importance of kinship was how they relied on each other very heavily in the food exchange system. Everyone holds everyone accountable to feed each other in the tribe. If you give someone rice one week, the week after, you'll most likely get something in return, and its an ongoing cycle. Which leads me to the question, do they have it figured out better than we do?

It was made clear that the Guarani tribe wastes no food. Each member will strategically harvest one food item, while the others harvest other important food items. Although they do harvest in large quantities they share the abundance with each other so no food is wasted. Should this be something we turn to, if possible? America has turned agriculture into just another corporation. Farming is no longer about feeding yourself and family. Its about mass production and making the most money from all of the products that you produce. We cannot seem to feed our own country efficiently with the abundance of food we produce, so maybe we should try the other extreme, the Guarani food exchange system. Radical? Yes. Efficient? Again, yes.

In the video above we are given the evidence of just how wasteful Americans are with food. I believe that the Guarani tribe gives us a good way to think about food. Yes, we can produce it in abundance, but let's make it worth it. I believe small communities in this nation could realistically adopt this method between farmers, but it's the willingness that I'm not sure about. Nevertheless, it was nice to see some alternate ideas about food, kinship, and taking care of one another just because it's expected of you. We have lost that in this nation.

Stuffing or Yerba - We're Not That Different

Avatar, one of my favorite movies in which a human assimilates into a foreign alien culture while his fellow man attempts to destroy the unfamiliar yet profitable land, might be the best representation of our author, Richard Reed, and his journey to the Guarani community of Itanarami. And just like the Navi people of Pandora in James Cameron’s Avatar, the indigenous people of Itanarami have lived for years in peace, working within their sustainable resources, and whether those tactics employ agroforestry or a neurological bond with the environment, the underlying lessons still resonate.

Reed continues by foreshadowing the looming possibility of an environmentally bland, urbanized, and dim future for the communities of the Guarani people in Itanarami. The ethnocide taking place in South America is another story which parallels our class discussions in which those in power exploit the naive indigenous populations. And in this video we can see the dull lives of those forced from the forest.  

Our author then spends the majority of the first chapter discussing the innervations that familial connections have throughout religion, social structure, economics, and spatial living arrangements. And although the Guarani world seems distant from the hustle and bustle of Wall Street, this indigenous community embodies our basic human nature. Think of a world in which our family exists as our only form of trade and socialization. The realization that a transaction requires more than money and profit, but rather feelings of an emotional connectedness, creates an unwritten agreement between the people of Guarani communities. Imagine your family’s Thaknsgiving coming up in which every family will bring something to benefit the whole; whether it be Aunt Kathie’s homemade stuffing, or my cousin’s perfect mashed potatoes, every family member has their role in the occasion. And in my family, my eldest and only living grandmother will lead us in prayer, be the first to eat, and will be catered to throughout the day, while the kids eat at a smaller table, and wait their turn. Fast forward to Christmas in which gifts are exchanged, and maybe an elder uncle offers his advice like the man who taught his nephew against domestic violence. Our lives do not deviate much from the traditions of the Guarani, and considering the social constructs that govern our closest relationships it is not surprising that we stay close to our families, and willingly share our possessions to benefit our loved ones. Therefore, if these interactions are derived from our humanistic mind which seems to transcends societal pressure based on our familial organization, the next step is realizing our intrinsic relationship with nature, and allowing those feelings to surface again, giving us a connection to earth like the people of Guarani have.     

Trapped Between Two Worlds

The Guarani people have been interacting with the outside world for hundreds of years. For many of these years, the Guarani people and the people outside their tribe traded ideas and goods freely. The Guarani people were able to find goods and food in the vast forests. They could use these goods to trade for other items they may need like tools.

However, after years of good interactions, the native people are losing their land to outside groups. The forests that they depend on are being destroyed at an alarming rate. The people are shoved onto small reservations. These reservations directly conflict with the Guarani ideas of community. The native people prefer to live in homes that have only the immediate family and possibly an elderly parent. When the people are placed on small reservations, they are not given the space they had grown up living with.

Since the Guarani people are losing their land, how are they going to survive? Is the government helping them? In the short video, a shaman pleads for help for his people.

The standard organization of the Guarani people is changing. Many native people across the world, however this group has been able to interact with outside people for years. Now, unfortunately, the interactions are less friendly.

A Changing World

Before reading the rest of this blog, I would like you to take a "quiz" that Bell provided in his book in order to classify people as more post materialist, materialist, or a mix between the two. For this survey, Ronald Inglehart, a political scientist with a theory about post materialism asks: Which two of the following four choices should be their country's top goals--

1. Maintaining order in the nation

2. Giving people more say in important government decisions.

3. Fighting rising prices.

4. Protecting freedom of speech

"Goals 1 and 3 are the materialist responses" which means they are the more traditional responses. Typically they would be chosen by the older population. "Goals 2 and 4 are the post materialist ones" which would be the more modern perspective typically from the younger generations. A mixture of the choices would be people who maintain both traditional and modern ideas of the way the country should be run. I personally fell under the mixture group.

In the past, security in terms of money, property, and safety were what people strived for. In today's world, there is a "greater emphasis on freedom, self-expression, and the quality of life" which are classified as post material values. As you can see on the pyramid below, the focus has shifted to the categories that are considered less of a necessity. This is called post materialism.




This idea of post materialism and finding self actualization is more common than it may seem, and the numbers keep growing. In simpler terms, it means that people are beginning to strive past their basic needs. After their basic material needs are met, they work toward deeper understandings and true happiness in all aspects of their lives.

I feel that this is very common in the society that I live in. Finding people that solely work toward their most basic needs is rare. This probably has a lot to do with my age as well. Because I am in a young generation, these modern ideas and practices seem normal to me because of their growing popularity.













Some people think that modernization and less traditional values aren't the best thing. However, focussing on things that are less materialistic seems to be a positive transition, rather than negative.

Environmental Invisibility

In Chapter 7, Bell talks about theories of environmental concern; postmaterialism [shift from concern about health and nature, materialism to a post materialistic view or freedom of self-expression view] and ecological modernization [recognition of environmental problems and how we can make it a part of our everyday lives]. The main topic of each of these theories is materials and how we view materials. 

I personally believe that we, in the US, are a combination of post materialism and ecological modernization. We are both an industrial and an aware of ecological problems society. Also, we value materials differently than we have in the past. I think that we have changed over the past years due to change in materialism. We went from appreciating traditional things like: concerns about economic and physical security to wanting freedom of expression (Bell, 187). The problem with this is that we are not focusing on what is important, the environment. We chose to ignore what we cannot see or touch. As we have learned in Bell, greater power does not lead to greater concern. My question is, why?

I think that we could help share some of the advances that we have and work together with other countries in order to distribute environmental awareness and prevention of further destruction. We have so much wealth in our country that we do not see how desperate other countries are. We walk around with non- environmentally friendly items like phones, car [most], and electronics while others figure out a way to make it through life. How is it that we are okay with not helping the environment when other peoples' and our lives depend on it? It is ironic to me that we have so much wealth but so little concern for our own environment. Doesn't that bother anyone else?

Dichotomy at its Finest

Man - Woman

Reason - Emotion

Civilization - Nature

Mind - Body

Human - Animal/Nonhuman

These dichotomies characterize everyday culture and we do not really have any control over it. Subliminally we are told that one of the things in each of these is better than the other, and as a result the group with the positive image has more power than the other group. As long as there is a stigma attached to one group, they will suffer at the hands of the other.

As one of the above dichotomies points out, civilization is pitted against nature. Civilization dominates, controls, and, in general, is not particularly concerned with nature's existence. However, Bell suggests that once people become concerned with the rights of people and society, they also become concerned with the decent treatment of animals and nature as a whole. When this occurs, environmental exploitation just doesn't feel right.

I find it crazy that we have removed ourselves so far from nature that helping ourselves isn't the same as helping nature. Helping humans is demeaning and destroying nature and helping nature is demeaning and destroying civilization. Everything that is nature is exactly the opposite of civilization so it helps all of us to forget that we are as much a part of nature as it is a part of us. Even using democratic sensibilities skews people's perception of the environment: it is something different from humans, an afterthought that has to be improved in relation to it's civilized counterparts. "Fixing" things, particularly nature, implies that there is something wrong with them to begin with. Personally, I believe that something is wrong with us, the "civilized" ones, and we are blaming the environment and nature because we cannot live with ourselves if we screwed up so horribly that it is irreversibly damaged and it is our fault.

Nature wins in the end because nature is in all of us. Nature is where we came from. Nature is who we are. Forgetting that is where many of our problems stem from.

Social Status Vs. Environmental Concern

In our discussion of Chapter 7 in Bell, we talked about whether wealthier or lower income people were more concerned with the environment? At first when this question was posed I really did not know the answer. I can also see explanations for how both wealthier and lower income people can be concerned with the environment more than the other.

The wealthier can be more concerned because big businesses who contribute to the majority of the reasons why we are concerned,  recognize this issue and have the means to fix it. On the contrary, big business might recognize they are harming the environment, but because fixing it might result in a lower profit, fixing it is out of the question.

Lower income people might be more concerned because as we discussed before, these are the people who are most effected by the causes of environmental problems such as pollution. Even though they recognize environmental issues, these people may not have the ability to fix the problem in turn making the concern for enviromental issues a non concern because it is simply something they have to deal with.

I found a youtube clip about a story in Detroit that relates to environmental concerns of both the wealthier and lower class. This clip shows the concerns of both sides, and is a way to look at social status vs. environmental concern as something that is in combination as a posed to against each other.
I posted the link instead of the actual video because the tool above did not list this video on youtube when I tried to search it so I apologize for that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDGb2_FQO8M

Wal-Mart or World-Mart?

Check out this article about Wal-Mart taking over the world! But really, it's pretty interesting...

Wal-Mart or World-Mart? A Teaching Case Study

Religions and the environment.

Have you ever actually sat down and thought about what different religions say about the environment? Do they tell us to care for the environment, or do they tell us that we dominate the environment, thus, can do anything with it?

Personally, I have never thought about it in that sense. Not until recently have I looked into what different religions, say about man and the environment. 

Below, I will start off by presenting a deeper description of the Christian view regarding the environment, and then briefly present Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism. Please note that the relationship between the environment and religion is focused on roles of inequality and hierarchy in the way we tend to think about the environment. 

Christianity-

In Christianity, Genesis 1:28, God orders that humans control the animals, and the earth. But what does God actually mean by control? This claim does not only challenge people from inside the church, but people from outside of the church as well. Many believe that the earth was created in order to be used for "profitable purposes" (Wolf, 1981), as people are on their way to life after death. However, I do not think this gives people the power to destroy what God affirms as good in His sight, his creation (Genesis 1).

Yes, God did give humans dominion over the earth, but not to destroy it, He gave them the privilege to take care of it. God put Adam in the garden of Eden to take care of it. Interestingly enough, when "take care" is translated to Hebrew, it means to watch, preserve, attend, and maintain.

In the west, the major source of ideas comes from Christianity. And ideas change the economy, just as much as the economy changes ideas.
The two major theories of Christianity, economics, and their relationship as dominions over the environment are that of Max Weber (Protestantism and capitalism) and Lynn Whites (the moral parallels of Christianity, science and technology).

According to Max Weber, we work for more money than we need. But have you ever asked yourself why that is? Well, to maintain a place on the consumption and production treadmill. But why are we even on the treadmills to start off with? Well, that would be due to the moral anxiety from Protestantism.

Moreover, Lynn White explains that it is no ideal to separate environmental problems from the western origins of science and technology because of the mold-board plow that occurred in the 7th century. Early Christianity however does teach man to exploit the environment (tampering with the it is not a sin). However, the greener side of Christianity supports the taking care of the environment, and that it challenges science; opposition to genetic engineering, and opposition to Galileo.
Being so, the bible asks to be fruitful and multiply. This biblical command does not only go out to man, but to all creatures.

Islam- 

Muslims believe that Allah gave humans the responsibility over the earth. Being so, man is impelled by Islam not to abuse the trust that Allah put, but instead to care and protect nature, and to be kind with the environment. Islam also tells man to make use of the creation, but to be careful at the same time (Quran, Sura 55:3-10). Lastly, the Quran provides guidance to its peoples relationship with the environment, as well as in dealing with nature (Quran, Sura 2, 11). 

Buddhism- 

Nowadays, I believe Buddhism is the inspiration for the protection of nature. The right livelihood, one of the noble eight fold paths, teaches man to take in consideration his/her actions as it would impact society, and the future. Buddhism has actually been influential in government (i.e Thailand) decisions when attempting to improve the economics by 'development', while damaging the environment. Based on Cakkavattisihanada Sutta, it is not only required and expected for man to protect people, but to protect birds and quadrupeds as well. 

Hinduism-

In ancient Hinduism texts, respect for nature and ecological awareness are significantly presented. Yajur Veda, 5:43 and Rig Veda, 6:48:17 are examples of of principles and traditions that are in relevance to man future, and are important to one's present life. In Hinduism, it is believed that if trees and animal life are protected, then man and his community will be safe and survive. Here, people are expected to defend our nature and our environment. 

Being so, the different religions do tell us to protect the environment, but as human beings, we misinterpret what is said in these different religions, and we think of ourselves on a higher level than nature. Religion places man falsely above nature. 

Please take some time and watch the spirited debate with Jeff Schweitzer regarding whether or not religion is harming the environment.  

What are your thoughts about what the different religions say in regards to man and nature? Do you think we are taking advantage of our 'dominance' over the environment?

~Please comment with your thoughts, beliefs, and ideas.

Thank you

Green Christians

     No, not necessarily an alteration of tared and feathered. It's a movement. Start by going to thegreenchristian.org and checking out what they have. I spent some time on their site and can really start to understand some of the views and beliefs that they link together to gain their philosophy. Watch the video below on a church that takes environmentalism seriously.

     The people at The Green Christian work with churches and pastors, giving them the tools they need to talk about stewardship of the earth, and what the bible says about caring for the planet and our animals. They work to inform Christians about the fact that there are almost a billion people in this world without access to clean drinking water, and that sadly in many cases this is the result of pollution and pesticide runoff from fields. They also supply logic and plenty of information to those who want it, while focusing on spirituality, ethos, and pathos; personal stories about how the environment actually affects people and it’s role in the Christian faith.

Reading some of their sermons and blog posts has really made me think about things I've read in the Bible. Take a second and go check them out. Make sure to watch the videos they have on their website.

To Change Our World, We Need to Change Ourseleves.

Patel brings to our attention a very compelling argument in regards to the food system and draws our focus on ways that it can be fixed. But before we can become superman and solve all the worlds problems we must take a step back and see EXACTLY what the problem is. Food - a basic need of human survival - could be seen as the exact opposite. The food system have contributed to aspects of diet-related diseases which in retro spec could be planting a time-bomb in our younger society (299).  This is happening because consumers are disconnected from the production of food and what we are putting into our mouths that we believe to be "enjoyable."

The food market is not only harming our environment but it is harming our bodies as well. Patel puts great emphasis on the government when it comes to the health of the local communities. Patel states in Stuffed in Starved that "governments have gone to great lengths not to hear the demands of both the consumers...We've already seen that in the US, for instance, over 90 per cent of consumers want labels on the food if it is genetically modified" (303). Not only does this prove to destroy the physical community but it is also creating "biological horrors" in accordance to Patel. Lets take the example of Mad Cow Disease. In order to boost the protein content of the animal food (aka to fatten the cow even more) meat and bonemeal were added to cattle feed. These so called "proteins" were what caused Mad Cow - it may have started with one cow but spread into a world wide epidemic that became unstoppable. When the infectious proteins were recycled back into the cow feed it entered the food chain and the cycle continued, with more animals eating more and more infected beef-based food. (305) This is all due to the fact the people in communities are not well informed consumers when it comes to the food market, as well as the government not looking more into the products that are being sold in the food market.

 

Lets take a look at another problem that falls under a consumers ignorance to the suffering that follows every mouthful of food that we enjoy eating. Patel makes a good comparison when saying just like everything else everything and everyone has its vulnerabilities. In the food market its vulnerabilities could be something along the lines of any oil-shortage. We are so dependent on the markets around us that if they fall a state of panic is revoked. Patel goes on to give an example of something similar to this phenomenon that happened in 2000 when the UK haulage industry blocked access to six of the eight major oil refining facilities. Fuel stations were closed, traffic was cut by 40 per cent, and within hours food was running out. A quarter of UK trucks are carrying food, and the average British family drives 136 miles a year to buy it.  I could see this becoming a weee bit of a problem.

 

 

So how do we stop this? What is the solution? Well, the answer simply lies in the next section of this chapter with one sub-heading blaring the words ... IT'S JUST WE, OURSELVES, AND US. There are ways that every person can reshape the dynamic of the food system, and they indeed need to do this.  Patel puts it in very motivation terms when saying, "there are ways of getting back what the food system has taken from us: dignity in refusing to accept what we are told we must want, and how we must work and live; control over our lives, bodies and self-image; the knowledge no matter where a child is born, she will be able to eat healthy ... " (307). Yes, that is very striking in all its ways so what do we do? We look at a vision known as Food Sovereignty. In the video below Patel tells us the simple definition of Food Sovereignty and the ways to go about it. He tells the audience to turn to  Wikipedia for a good definition. That is weird, yes. But let me tell you this, Wikipedia and I have became very close through out my college years. Wikipedia defines Food Sovereignty as:

 

Food sovereignty", a term coined by members of Via Campesina in 1996, asserts the right of people to define their own food systems. Advocates of food sovereignty put the individuals who produce, distribute and consume food at the center of decisions on food systems and policies, rather than the corporations and market institutions they believe have come to dominate the global food system.

 

 

It aims to reduce the abuse of the powerless from the powerful wherever in the food systems. One way in doing this is by looking at women farmers (which Patel also explains in the video below) and opening the doors to a new social change. Women farmers grow 60-80 per cent of the food in the Global South, yet they own less than 2 per cent of the land. This is an example of a huge weakness in the food market that needs to be fixed. This happens by those people who hold the most power BUT the most powerful people on the planet but have created something universal weak. This weakness is putting not only individuals at harm but also the globe. When trying to dismantle and reclaim control the world of the food market it requires everyone, starting with women and their rights (309).

 

Patel lists 3 ways to change ourselves and by doing this we can change the world. They are difficult challenges but are fundamentally needed if there is to be any progress made.

 

 

1. Transform our tastes - We are so use to eating the foods contained with the most sugars, starches, and salts - that my friend needs to be stopped now. By changing the way we eat could become in a sense a psychological behavior that produces a cultural invitation, in which reclaiming sovereignty in our taste will result in savoring food far more richly and deeply than we have ever before.

 

2. Eat locally and seasonally - Food that does not have to be treated for long distance travels not only tastes better but it also costs less. This does mean less fewer vegetables in the winter, but since we are going to transform our taste we our open to try broader range of foods. 

 

 

3.  Eat agro ecologically - Otherwise known as "organic." Which has now taken off in its own epidemic, where the food system can easily bend its production to accommodate foods with few pesticides in them.

 

 



 

 

Not one person has all the answers. And it is not going to take one person to start this revolution - but this chapter that Patel writes directs the audience in a direction that might better shape the future and gives us a little insight into wisdom that might push humanity to do just that. If we want something done we need to do it ourselves. Kind of like when you are told to chase a dream - you can not listen to those who say you will not succeed, or those who will try to hold you back. Anything that you want, that you demand, YOU need to go and fight for yourself. Then you will see who stands with you or against you. 

 

 



What can we do now?

As I read through the conclusion of Stuffed and Starved I cannot help but sit and think how depressingly true all of this is. The scarcity of water, energy and various natural resources. The abundance of poop and disease infesting our living areas. It’s absolutely ridiculous! All of these problems not only effect individual communities, but the communities who rely on their resources from a far.

 

Like we have previously discussed in class, I do firmly believe there are ways in which we can positively improve these problematic situations but it’s not going to be done overnight. And it is going to take more work than many of us can imagine.

Patel puts this transformation of the food and agriculture industries into ten fundamental changes (all of which we have previously touched upon)…

1.      Transforming our tastes

2.      Eat locally and seasonally

3.       Eat agroecologically

4.       Support locally owned businesses

5.       All workers have the right to dignity

6.      Profound and comprehensive rural change

7.       Living wages for all

8.       Support for a sustainable agriculture of food

9.       Snapping the food systems bottleneck

10.   Owning and providing restitutions for the injustices of the past and the present

 

What can we do now? As college students? On a daily basis?

My opinion is we can begin with numbers 1, 2 and 4of the fundamental changes listed above. We are broke college students who don’t have the time or money to change our entire diet. Yet, we can begin transforming our tastes and what we think we like and need to eat. We can take back over the choices that we have and not subside to the tastes we have been conditioned to like by the food industry. We can also start learning how to eat locally and seasonally. Although many of us eat on campus meal plans or in greek houses we can become aware of our options and how to gain access to locally grown foods and what it means to eat seasonally. Once we leave Hanover each of us will need to know where to obtain those local and seasonal foods. One way we can eat locally is by supporting locally owned businesses. Not only is the food cheaper, but it helps economically promote the community you’re living in.

Apocolypse Now

Imagine the Apocalypse is coming and you KNOW it. You have all the evidence, the proof, even the date when everything is going to hell...and no one will listen. You broadcast it to anyone who will listen, you get your story put on the news and radio, movies are made about your claim, you even get to talk to Congress MULTIPLE times and yet, no one acts. The world continues just as before, heading right for destruction. That is where we are friends, and here I am making another plea that will go unheard.

 

 

Just as Sheldon, Raj, Leonard, and Howard were oblivious to the amazing opportunities around them, we also have our heads looking down just keeping on the path we have always walked, ignoring the problems at hand, which include but are not limited to,

 

1. We're running out of water folks. Yeah, that liquid stuff we need to survive? Evaporating quicker than Usain Bolt with his butt on fire. 

2. It takes just as much energy to support our "green energy" initiatives as they produce. What's negative 5 plus positive 5? Zilch. Nada. Nothing. Not exactly progress.
3. Natural Resources are finite, not infinite. The problem with finite things? They eventually are gone. Forever.

4. There is ALOT of crap. No I do not mean the hot, steaming, rank pile of toxic waste pouring out of capital hill these days, I mean actual poop. There is a dead zone the size of New Jersey in Mexico.

 

 

5. Harsher and harsher diseases are coming out of the food we eat. From mad cow disease to bird flue, diseases caused by companies taking short-cuts to produce their product at cheaper cost to them are continuing to become scarier and scarier.

 

 

 

 

WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO??????!!!!!! you might ask. Never fear, there is hope dear friends.

1. Transform our Tastes: That's right, we're going to have to change. I know, I know, but do not shoot the messenger! We have to actually make the demand for bad food go down. We have to make the effort to like healthy things, make THAT the money maker.

2. Eat Locally and Seasonally: Yes, this means what you think it means. You know that watermelon you want in December? That corn on the cob you want in January? Gone. And instead of having pineapples coming in 5,000 miles from Hawaii, eat from the farmers stand 50 miles down the road.

3. EAT ORGANIC!!! You've heard about it, now do it!

4.

 



Support local businesses! Yes Wal*Mart makes the most sense for ease and comfort, but too much ease and comfort and its all over. Is it not worth the effort to travel a bit to help end the walk down the path where all the food goes away and we all cease to exist? Thought so.

5. Treat All Workers Fairly: Just because people are doing jobs we would not do does not mean we get to look down on them. We have to be better and demand that people are treated with dignity and respect.

6. REAL rural change. These areas are often stereotyped as "behind the times". There is a reason for that. Even though rural areas are some of the poorest areas, they are not being helped. 2+2=5 right?

7. An Actual Living Wage for EVERYONE: What? Equality? Martin Luther King had a dream, we've done ok with it so far, how about we extend it out?

8. A Long-Lasting Architecture: This is a bit hard to imagine, but yes, architecture and the buildings around us need a change as well. People adapt to the infrastructure around them, change the infrastructure, change the people.

9. Break the System's Bottleneck: FIGHT THE POWER!!! Yes, we have reached that moment; monopolies must be broken, power companies must be held accountable, a day of reckoning must come.

10. Making Good on the Injustices of the Past and Present: Change is great, and it is veeeeery much needed, but that does not erase what has and is occurring. Restitution must be paid for the evil and the bad that has been done. If we act now real positive change can happen and old would will scar and heal, but only if those who have been screwed over for so long are finally paid back for their suffering.

#firstworldprobs

With technology advancing each day, the first world and third worlds move further apart. Daily life can be hard in anyone's shoes at times, but I started to reflect on my life and all of the "problems" I have.

1. "I have nothing to wear!"

#firstworldprobs

2. "This building doesn't have WiFi?!"
#firstworldprobs

3. Having a flip phone.

(Almost worse than no phone.)
#firstworldprobs

4. "How do I reheat leftovers without a microwave?"
#firstworldprobs

5. "You only have an iPhone 4 charger?"
#firstworldprobs

6. The closest Starbucks is 5 miles.
#firstworldprobs

7. There's nothing to eat.

#firstworldprobs

8.

#firstworldprobs

9.

#firstworldprobs

10. This blog crashed three times and I had to re-find pictures on Google.
#firstworldprobs

So, as you can tell, these seem ridiculous when considering that some people in the world can't even get sanitary water to drink. Yet, I have to admit that I have had personal experience with all of these "problems". Consider what you have. Be grateful. Maybe help with the real problems in the world instead of complaining about yours.

P.S. Feel free to leave your #firstworldprobs in the comments below!

"Freedom" to choose

This chapter of Stuffed and Starved covered a lot of interesting information.  Instead of summarizing everything and rambling on for a long time I've decided to focus on one aspect that I thought was really cool.  I'm going to focus on CHOICES...or our lack thereof.

Patel said it quite clearly on the first page of Chapter 9 from Stuffed and Starved..."We don't really choose our food - our food chooses us."  You might find yourself questioning this simple statement, "we don't really choose our food."  If we don't choose our food, then who does?  No one is making me pick the Marie Calender's microwaveable dinner over the Healthy choice.  No one is forcing me to eat Tostito's scoops chips instead of On the Border chips....or are they?  Why am I drawn to some brands over others?  Why am I willing to pay I slightly higher price for a product that is basically the same as a cheaper product.  It really does come down to the littlest things.  For some reason ( I'm lazy) I prefer a chip that is already the perfect shape for scooping up dip, and I'm willing to pay more for it.  So you could say that convenience plays a large role in what we "choose" to consume. 

Patel makes the argument that our choices have already been made for us by our environment, our customs and our everyday routine.  He says, "Choice is the word we're left with to describe our plucking one box rather than another off the shelves, and it's the word we're taught to use."  So yes, we do have some say in our final purchase, but really, we're just choosing between the items that have already been chosen for us.  I thought of an analogy that I thought explained it well.  When I was a little kid my mom would pick out my outfits for me.  When I got a little older I was super psyched to finally be able to pick out my own outfits.  If you think about it though, my mom is the one who purchased all of my clothes and I was only able to choose my day's outfit from the clothes she had already deemed appropriate and bought.  I thought I was making my own choices (and on some level I guess I was) but my choices were limited to what my mom had chosen before me. 

I found an interesting video online that's all about the psychology of supermarkets and how they influence our "choices". 

Mindfulness or One Way to Find Happiness in Your Life Today

This day, we read more from Patel's Stuffed and Starved. Patel discussed in this chapter the shocking idea that the food that you and I pick up off the shelves is actually much less a matter of choice than we would expect.

There are plenty of factors that go into dictating what we can have for dinner. One of the first determinants of what was for dinner was war; the siege was a war-time tactic that effectively starved the competition. Embargoes are another way of restricting trade, and thereby controlling the food available for one country or another. Many means of controlling our modern-day food supply, you may or may not have guessed, are a direct result of money, and politics. Money and politics- for you conspiracy theorists, or sociology majors- are the bread and butter of the elites.

Our consumption, Patel argues, has been routinized in a way that is, to use the words of famed sociological theorist, Karl Marx, "external to and coercive upon us," meaning that it is - to some degree-  outside of our control, and controlling us.

Fortunately for all of us, there are people out there still fighting for our freedom from forces of social control present in the food market, and elsewhere. The Slow Food movement is an international social movement designed to alter the way we think about, and enjoy our food. Its name is derived as an opposition to the Fast Food that we commonly resort to in our busy lives. One piece of advice of the Slow Food movement is for us all to slow down, and to enjoy locally grown food.

I think this piece of advice can be helpful in many, many of our daily activities. Our lives are so routinized that, I think, it's often difficult for us to find enjoyment in little things, such as eating lunch and dinner. By the time we return home, as one friend of mine put it, "I am so exhausted, that I just want to watch television, and not have to think."

So, my challenge to myself, and to us all is to slow down! Slow....down.... Take time to find the small pleasures in life that are hidden right in front of our noses. What a wonder, what a pleasure it is to enjoy many tastes, sounds, smells, and sights. Take for example, the refreshing blessing of watching a bit of light shine off of a green leaf - have you ever noticed that? Let's go out into the world with new eyes, noses, ears, and skin, and taste buds, and experience the wonders of the world in a new way that is counter to our "hurry up and wait" existence. Enjoy these small wonders, and I hope that you too will feel what it feels like to be blessed in every second of every day.

Perhaps this is one way to combat many of the social problems in our society. We need to slow down, and look at the world around us with new eyes, and start asking ourselves deep and important questions about why things are the way they are, and what we can do to change them. Patel has done a good job by analyzing the food system in the world. What else can you think of that can change the world in a small way that may eventually cause big, important, and good changes?