I just thought I would share this clip on Noam Chomsky on Democracy Now! about his involvement with the publishing of the Pentagon Papers, and what he thinks about WikiLeaks. Enjoy!
Today in my econ class we read a New York Times article by Robert Frank called “Income Inequality: Too Big to Ignore,” which pointed out a lot of issues similar to those that Bill McKibben addresses in Eaarth. The two paragraphs that I found the most interesting and also most relevant to our class are as follows:
Recent research on psychological well-being has taught us that beyond a certain point, across-the-board spending increases often do little more than raise the bar for what is considered enough. A C.E.O. may think he needs a 30,000-square-foot mansion, for example, just because each of his peers has one. Although they might all be just as happy in more modest dwellings, few would be willing to downsize on their own.
The rich have been spending more simply because they have so much extra money. Their spending shifts the frame of reference that shapes the demands of those just below them, who travel in overlapping social circles. So this second group, too, spends more, which shifts the frame of reference for the group just below it, and so on, all the way down the income ladder. These cascades have made it substantially more expensive for middle-class families to achieve basic financial goals.
Frank argues that the small segment of the population that holds the majority of our nation’s wealth, our “social elite” is actually indirectly influencing how we define the desired standard of living. We generally consume in excess because we live in a society that seems to measure happiness by the amount of material goods we have.
McKibben argues that the only way for us to begin solving our environmental crisis is for us to reduce our consumption, decrease our growth, and learn to live with less. But where does this change need to start? Will it be with the upper class, who hopefully will set an example for the middle and lower classes? Or do these lower classes have to instigate change themselves and break away from this new “norm” of living in excess?
Really fascinating article about a Amazonian tribe that has partnered up with Google Inc. to help save the rainforest. Interesting example of how technology can help protect the environment. The story is absolutely phenomenol, you should really check it out!
Two important stories that will make sense to all of you, but specifically to those “I wanna be a doctor” folks among us. As you’ll learn in the California story, doctors get paid by the task — office visit, exam, surgery, etc. This is not sustainable given where health care may be headed; it’s certainly not beneficial to the consumer. Also as you’ll hear, given the cost of medical school and the loans MD’s have to pay back after graduation, specialization in the system drives doctors away from where they are indeed needed — primary care.
In California, Facing Down a Family Physician Shortage
In another story that shows us how wonderful we are, this is concerns Global Health. In fact, this link will take you to several stories concerning Global Health — cholera perhaps spreading to the DR and Miami, organ trafficking, and a global food crisis.
As you ponder your last “mini” essays, think about some of these challenges.
Another TED talk. This is John Hardy who has created a Green School in Bali with his wife Cynthia three years ago. The schools is really green–in all senses. The school teaches both traditional “school” subjects as well as green subjects (like growing food). The school is committed to keeping about a fourth of it the student population Balinese as well as making sure the teachers are as well; with that said, from the images and clips in the video it seems as if the school is not that ethnically and racially diverse. This short talk is very interesting and I would encourage everyone to check it out. I have also included a link to their website.
Best,
Alex
This, according to the famous Henry Jenkins, media scholar at MIT, could be the way the next wave of activists gets nurtured. Jenkins calls this “Avatar Activism.”
About 100,000 Harry Potter fans have been mobilized by HPA for causes including marriage equality, genocide prevention and literacy. They raised enough money to send five cargo planes to Haiti bearing medical supplies after the earthquake there, and they’ve bought thousands of books for libraries in Rwanda and the Mississippi Delta.
Harry Potter: Boy Wizard … And Real Life Activist? addresses what may be an evolving phenomenon around activism. Reading this, I am reminded of Plato’s Republic and how he warned that the poet is a threat to the State. I’m wondering whether this new form of narrating could be a place for storytelling for a new generation?
I found a really disturbing and interesting article about the 2010 Pakistan floods. It reminded me a lot of what McKibben was talking about in Eaarth, especially in the first chapter. Notice how the article mentions the floods affects on infrastructure, politics, international relations (foreign aid and U.S’s regional strategy to combat the Taliban and Al Quaeda) and military issues, disease, food shortage, economics (severe inflation), and
political instability.
Imagine what will happen when the number of climate-related storms, floods, and droughts continues to increase around the world? What role will the U.S play?
I had an interesting discussion with my architecture professor, James Butler, who introduced me to the source of New York’s horrible infrastructure in low income areas. Robert Moses, who is seen as a savior to residents of Westchester County, Rockland County and Long Island, pushed for the construction of major freeways throughout NYC. One of his projects, the Cross-Bronx Expressway, abruptly cut through the South Bronx, demolishing countless apartments and displacing over 600,000 working class people on a month’s notice. Since Moses was well-connected with the upper-class and was also backed up by Master’s from Oxford and a fancy PH.D from Columbia, he neglected the voice of the neighborhoods he destroyed and just let business dominate. My professor states “Moses was so politically powerful, that all he needed was to find the most talented architectures, and manipulate them to fullfil his projects.”
Another point about Moses is that his environmental projects, i.e Riverside Park, East River Park and Central Park were reserved for areas where mostly the upper-class lived. Although willing to destroy and increase car pollution in countless neighborhoods for highways, he never decided to place a pool or a park in Hunts Point or Bed-Stuy.
Also,
I also found an interesting interview with Majora Carter. Addressing the same tensions, Carter states the reasons why environmental concerns in low income areas are inevitable. Her point express how corps can still profit by engaging in projects that equalize environmental sustainability in all neighborhoods.
Check it out. It was intriguing to listen to, and they typed-up the interview if you just want to read through the ideas.
Edit 11/16/10 : Her interview basically reiterates the points in Cooper’s essay which we read today. Thanks Cooper for introducing us to Majora Carter’s ideas.
For those of you driving back home for Thanksgiving, think about the cities/towns you pass by. Is it evident that infrastructure has cut through low income areas near you? Please share.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/22/neither_the_destruction_of_the_9th – link to Carter interview.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Moses
http://gothamist.com/2007/01/25/caro_gets_snubb.php
Pic of the Cross Manhattan Expressway Moses designed.
“There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action.” - Johann Wolfgang
Best,
Frederic
I just read an interesting article from The New York Times, Cost of Green Power Makes Projects Tougher Sell, about the high costs of renewable energy and how the government is reacting to them. The main problem that the article presents is how it has become increasingly difficult to create successful green power industries because the costs of production are so much higher than those of natural gas and fossil fuels. Because it costs so much to set up and maintain wind power facilities, for example, “a growing number of projects are being canceled” because many governments are “unwilling to add even small amounts to consumers’ electricity bills.”
However, the end of the article weighs the monetary costs of renewable energy and the environmental and health costs of nonrenewable:
Fold in the higher costs of extracting and burning fossil fuels on human health, the climate and the environment, many advocates argue, and renewable technologies like wind power are already cheaper.
Do you think that we, as Americans, would be willing to increase our own personal expenditures for the sake of the environment? As Bill McKibben says in his book Eaarth, we’ve reached a point at which carbon emission levels must be decreased. But with the government currently impeding our progression towards sustainable energy, how are we going to achieve this goal? What will it take for Americans to realize that our planet is ultimately more important than money?
Sonam, Fred, Cooper and I will discuss McKibben’s solution of localizing food production that he proposes in the last chapter of the book.
