The interview with Judi Bari discusses the collaborative efforts between EF! and workers in addressing the issues related to logging industries and the communities that depend on it. Bari describes communities that were controlled or created by large corporations and the economies that are based primarily on logging. In the 1970’s urban “hippies” came in and began to influence small groups and there began a movement that weakend the communty foundations. This practice went against the social/cultural groups within the communities and created a “bipolar social situation”, playing "hippie against logger" (2). Unlike many of the environmental groups that were popular at the time Earth First! appear to go about addressing the logging industry in an alternative way, responsibly. Being a small grass roots operation (at the time) they used alternative non-violent means to protect the forests. They also did something the bigger environmental movements failed to address, the people who would be devastated if their livelihood was taken away. More...
They (EF!) concentrated on the practice of clear cutting and proposed alternative ways to harvest timber in a more long term management process. In the active efforts to stop logging the folks of EF! had the opportunity to meet face to face with the workers, separated the workers from the production. They found some workers did not agree with that the way the big corporations conducted business, it was at the risk of the worker and the land. EF! created relationships with loggers and millers, it was a risky alliance but it helped impact not only logging but also working conditions in the mills. In doing this it helped address the problems that were created economically by the clear cutting process and the rights of the workers. Logging was the focus but it brought light to others issues that plagued the industry.
Judi Bari bared a lot of the weight of creating a movement that was blurred the line between the environmental and social movements. Being framed for bombing herself was an example of how corporations/capitalism influences government structure; we still see examples of that. What EF! created was a movement that targeted not only industry but also labor inequalities. Creating ways for the worker to confront problem within their own venue may open up avenues in addressing environmental issues, “The potential for bringing out change is greater if the radical ideas are held by the workers” (29).
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Earth First! in Northern California: Interview with Judi Bari
In an interview with Judi Bari, leader of Earth First!, Doug Bevington and the activist discuss the work she has done with the organization, her struggles with local logging companies, and other related topics.
More...
The interview begins with Bari's description of the region in which her organization is located. She explains that the area is "impoverished," which has resulted in the scaling down of police and areas becoming "virtually lawless." She then goes on to name the big logging companies in the region--Louisiana Pacific, Georgia Pacific, and Maxxam-- and explains the problems associated with each. She points out that a locally-owned company, Pacific Lumber, which boasted the reputation of "hav[ing] the best of what is left in the world" as well as having "the closest thing to sustainable logging practices" was unfortunately taken over by one of the big name companies (p. 2).
Next Bari discusses environmental groups in the region, noting that Earth First! and the Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) are the most prominent. EPIC deals with filing lawsuits on timber harvest plans and Earth First! is in charge of "defining the issues and also does the direct action, the logging blockades" (p. 4). Bari also points out that there is little influence by national groups, and that the movement is a "very locally-based, grassroots" one (p. 4).
When asked about agreement and conflict concerning the coalition with timber workers, Bari explains that the interests of the environmentalists who wish to protect the forests and the interests of the workers coincide because "both forests and the workers are exploited by out-of-town corporations" but that there is conflict where envormentalists who believe there should be no logging come in. Bari talks about how large environmental groups are "primarily urban, priveleged people" and the workers are a rural, less priveleged class and that it's exactly this difference that timber companies try to exploit to make the environmental movement seem like it's filled with uppity urban people who have no concern for the rural people. However, by educating the groups on either side of the conflict--the workers and the environmentalists--and making sure the each party's concerns are expressed and addressed, Earth First! has been successful in buidling alliances with the timber workers (p. 5-7).
Bari next comments on the threats and lawsuits received by Earth First! as the coalition became stronger. She talks about threats on her life, including a near-fatal bombing incident and receiving a picture of herself with a scope and crosshairs on her face. The corporations were trying anything and everything to stop the work of Earth First! (p. 13).
When discussing why the big timber companies have little interest in sustainable forestry, Bari suggests that because the companies (specifically Louisianna Pacific) are so large and own forests all over, they aren't concerned with long-term investment in the region where Bari works. According to the activist, these companies can sell the land after they have used it and move on to exploit other forests.
Towards the end of the interview, Bevington discusses with Bari her opinion of what it will take to have a sustainable relationship with the forests. She explains that what is needed is Revolutionary Ecology. We need to find a way to stop destroying the Earth and that way must exclude exploiting lower classes (p. 27).
More...
The interview begins with Bari's description of the region in which her organization is located. She explains that the area is "impoverished," which has resulted in the scaling down of police and areas becoming "virtually lawless." She then goes on to name the big logging companies in the region--Louisiana Pacific, Georgia Pacific, and Maxxam-- and explains the problems associated with each. She points out that a locally-owned company, Pacific Lumber, which boasted the reputation of "hav[ing] the best of what is left in the world" as well as having "the closest thing to sustainable logging practices" was unfortunately taken over by one of the big name companies (p. 2).
Next Bari discusses environmental groups in the region, noting that Earth First! and the Environmental Protection Information Center (EPIC) are the most prominent. EPIC deals with filing lawsuits on timber harvest plans and Earth First! is in charge of "defining the issues and also does the direct action, the logging blockades" (p. 4). Bari also points out that there is little influence by national groups, and that the movement is a "very locally-based, grassroots" one (p. 4).
When asked about agreement and conflict concerning the coalition with timber workers, Bari explains that the interests of the environmentalists who wish to protect the forests and the interests of the workers coincide because "both forests and the workers are exploited by out-of-town corporations" but that there is conflict where envormentalists who believe there should be no logging come in. Bari talks about how large environmental groups are "primarily urban, priveleged people" and the workers are a rural, less priveleged class and that it's exactly this difference that timber companies try to exploit to make the environmental movement seem like it's filled with uppity urban people who have no concern for the rural people. However, by educating the groups on either side of the conflict--the workers and the environmentalists--and making sure the each party's concerns are expressed and addressed, Earth First! has been successful in buidling alliances with the timber workers (p. 5-7).
Bari next comments on the threats and lawsuits received by Earth First! as the coalition became stronger. She talks about threats on her life, including a near-fatal bombing incident and receiving a picture of herself with a scope and crosshairs on her face. The corporations were trying anything and everything to stop the work of Earth First! (p. 13).
When discussing why the big timber companies have little interest in sustainable forestry, Bari suggests that because the companies (specifically Louisianna Pacific) are so large and own forests all over, they aren't concerned with long-term investment in the region where Bari works. According to the activist, these companies can sell the land after they have used it and move on to exploit other forests.
Towards the end of the interview, Bevington discusses with Bari her opinion of what it will take to have a sustainable relationship with the forests. She explains that what is needed is Revolutionary Ecology. We need to find a way to stop destroying the Earth and that way must exclude exploiting lower classes (p. 27).
Judi Bari and Earth First!
The CNS interview with Judi Bari focuses on the efforts her group, Earth First!, to slow and eventually eliminate the clear-cutting of old growth redwood forests in Northern California. This strategy was multi-faceted and multi-leveled, in that the group sought to achieve goals through direct action and legal action while engaging and enlisting environmentalists and loggers. The group was a grassroots organization, operating almost entirely exclusive of large environmental groups like the Sierra Club.
More...
Bari herself had “seen the light” while working as a commercial carpenter building “Yuppie houses” out of old growth redwood. Starting Earth First! from the finished product end of the business, she was hearing primarily the complaints of the environmentalists, who she said held the loggers themselves in contempt despite the fact that the loggers had been trying to fight clear-cutting for years.
While it is the interest of the big environmental groups to purchase and preserve wilderness areas, the loggers’ interests were their own economic well-being. Logging as a profession was multi-generational and often the only means of employment in the sparsely populated counties where Bari worked. She makes the point that unionizing millworkers and loggers at the time of her activism would have been useless, as the big corporations who were doing the clear-cutting would simply abandon their operations. While this surely would have satisfied those solely interested in the environment, Bari understood that workers certainly would never organize only to lose their jobs.
Her solution was to propose a legal push for sustainable foresting and the enforcement of existing legislation (The Forest Practices Act). Meanwhile, activists engaged in direct actions, such as occupying trees and chaining themselves to logging equipment. This latter proved effective as it then gave the activists a chance to engage the loggers directly. Also, after the group publicly renounced tree-spiking (a direct action with potentially fatal consequences for millworkers), the coalition of activists and workers grew.
After winning several court battles, the corporations (together with their always-willing accomplices, the FBI) coordinated a counter-attack. Using the unconstitutional practice of COINTELPRO (Counter-Intelligence Protocol), the FBI and the corporations’ PR firms attempted to break up Earth First! from within. Forged letters were sent to various media outlets, and from member to member, in an attempt to create rifts within the group. The FBI and the PR firms also attempted to paint the group as a terrorist organization, despite its record of non-violence.
The efforts of the FBI and the corporations culminated in the attempted assassination of Bari and colleague Daryl Cherney. The FBI then arrested and charged the victims with being blown up by their own bomb, despite photographic evidence that the bomb had been hidden beneath the driver’s seat and had been triggered by the motion of the car. Bari and Cherney sued the FBI for civil rights violations. Bari, however, never fully recovered from the attack. She did some writing and spoken-word performances in 1994 and 1995, but developed breast cancer and died in 1997. Cherney and Bari’s estate won the court case against the FBI and succeeded in getting Congress to investigate the FBI’s methods in regards to environmental activist groups.
Philosophically, Bari shared with this author her opinion of one notion that has plagued the movement for decades. As she put it, “Unfortunately, the language of the theoreticians is often so dense that you have to wade through it with hip boots. It's actually kind of funny the way academic Marxists talk about the working class in language that is designed to exclude working people from the conversation.” (p. 27) She goes on to mention the same John Bellamy Foster that we’ve spent so much time trashing, in that he blames working people for being too ignorant to analyze class analysis. Of course, the working class is quite often victimized by establishment propaganda. However, academics are also often victimized by their own certainty in their positions, without ever having been “in the (expletive)”. Bari points out that her efforts led to her own assassination attempt. She also mentions loggers that stood up to the corporations and were subsequently blacklisted, and often ostracized from their own families.
Clearly, movements like Earth First! have the potential to be the most successful, given their different levels of analysis, recruiting and action. However, real social change is going to raise alarms among very powerful people who have no qualms about murdering to keep their power. A “soft” transition is obviously more likely than outright Marxist revolution, but it will not come without cost or casualties.
More...
Bari herself had “seen the light” while working as a commercial carpenter building “Yuppie houses” out of old growth redwood. Starting Earth First! from the finished product end of the business, she was hearing primarily the complaints of the environmentalists, who she said held the loggers themselves in contempt despite the fact that the loggers had been trying to fight clear-cutting for years.
While it is the interest of the big environmental groups to purchase and preserve wilderness areas, the loggers’ interests were their own economic well-being. Logging as a profession was multi-generational and often the only means of employment in the sparsely populated counties where Bari worked. She makes the point that unionizing millworkers and loggers at the time of her activism would have been useless, as the big corporations who were doing the clear-cutting would simply abandon their operations. While this surely would have satisfied those solely interested in the environment, Bari understood that workers certainly would never organize only to lose their jobs.
Her solution was to propose a legal push for sustainable foresting and the enforcement of existing legislation (The Forest Practices Act). Meanwhile, activists engaged in direct actions, such as occupying trees and chaining themselves to logging equipment. This latter proved effective as it then gave the activists a chance to engage the loggers directly. Also, after the group publicly renounced tree-spiking (a direct action with potentially fatal consequences for millworkers), the coalition of activists and workers grew.
After winning several court battles, the corporations (together with their always-willing accomplices, the FBI) coordinated a counter-attack. Using the unconstitutional practice of COINTELPRO (Counter-Intelligence Protocol), the FBI and the corporations’ PR firms attempted to break up Earth First! from within. Forged letters were sent to various media outlets, and from member to member, in an attempt to create rifts within the group. The FBI and the PR firms also attempted to paint the group as a terrorist organization, despite its record of non-violence.
The efforts of the FBI and the corporations culminated in the attempted assassination of Bari and colleague Daryl Cherney. The FBI then arrested and charged the victims with being blown up by their own bomb, despite photographic evidence that the bomb had been hidden beneath the driver’s seat and had been triggered by the motion of the car. Bari and Cherney sued the FBI for civil rights violations. Bari, however, never fully recovered from the attack. She did some writing and spoken-word performances in 1994 and 1995, but developed breast cancer and died in 1997. Cherney and Bari’s estate won the court case against the FBI and succeeded in getting Congress to investigate the FBI’s methods in regards to environmental activist groups.
Philosophically, Bari shared with this author her opinion of one notion that has plagued the movement for decades. As she put it, “Unfortunately, the language of the theoreticians is often so dense that you have to wade through it with hip boots. It's actually kind of funny the way academic Marxists talk about the working class in language that is designed to exclude working people from the conversation.” (p. 27) She goes on to mention the same John Bellamy Foster that we’ve spent so much time trashing, in that he blames working people for being too ignorant to analyze class analysis. Of course, the working class is quite often victimized by establishment propaganda. However, academics are also often victimized by their own certainty in their positions, without ever having been “in the (expletive)”. Bari points out that her efforts led to her own assassination attempt. She also mentions loggers that stood up to the corporations and were subsequently blacklisted, and often ostracized from their own families.
Clearly, movements like Earth First! have the potential to be the most successful, given their different levels of analysis, recruiting and action. However, real social change is going to raise alarms among very powerful people who have no qualms about murdering to keep their power. A “soft” transition is obviously more likely than outright Marxist revolution, but it will not come without cost or casualties.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
In the Name of Solidarity: The Politics of Representation and Articulation in Support of the Labrador Innu
There is a large (but somewhat connected) difference in going about the politics of representation and those of articulation. Representation, or identity politics are the more stagnant, one-image-fits-all, and indignation-when-things-change views. Articulation (including subject-position) politics are more flexible, collective-yet-distinct, and understanding-when-things-change views. Both are useful in some ways and limiting in others, though I see representation as more short term effects, and articulation as more long term.
More...
The politics of representation has confused the movement of the Innu First Nation of Labrador to keep land rights and self-government. Local support is lacking due to “racism and other frictions” (probably competition for resources is one of those frictions) and “requires tangible personal connection.” Stronger support comes from non-Innu southern Canadians, Americans, and Europeans who have picked up the Dances with Wolves card where all Innu are stewards of a pristine land, unchanging, and generally generic. Authentic (whatever that means, stuff changes all the time). The plus side is that these politics are quite convincing and quickly grab widespread attention, and can help with moral authority and ecological legitimacy. The flip side is that representation limits options, like “Native loggers” sounding like an oxymoron rather than a sustainable practice.
The politics of articulation carry the less familiar (at least to me) definition of “a joint, or flexible connection” where emphasis on subject-positions (environmentalist, Innu rights activist, etc.) creates support not based on inherent meanings or established identities, but rather on adjustable positions. This works on several levels. 1) With articulation, all positions are “authentic,” where the validity of the concern is the strong point. 2) Working “for mutual understanding between actors” rather than saving a symbol means the Innu can be opposed to irresponsible development (not all development). 3) Local support is more possible, like the common rival of NATO planes when they downsized some of their employees. 4) Articulation “is fundamentally coalition politics” where groups find a common ground to work from. This is reforming society in a way that works for everyone. And, 5) Contingency is ok. This allows meaning to change, and each subject-position to engage their “support as negotiation”. One example was that if the Innu were to exploit the land same as NATO planes and the mining companies, some subject- positions would drop their support. However, if someone drops out, someone else will probably come in. This also “demands a keen respect for the other’s perspective”, which is difficult because people don’t always agree on everything (I think this is a reason I find it difficult to affiliate with a political party). Thus, the politics of articulation brings solidarity in specific issues.
More...
The politics of representation has confused the movement of the Innu First Nation of Labrador to keep land rights and self-government. Local support is lacking due to “racism and other frictions” (probably competition for resources is one of those frictions) and “requires tangible personal connection.” Stronger support comes from non-Innu southern Canadians, Americans, and Europeans who have picked up the Dances with Wolves card where all Innu are stewards of a pristine land, unchanging, and generally generic. Authentic (whatever that means, stuff changes all the time). The plus side is that these politics are quite convincing and quickly grab widespread attention, and can help with moral authority and ecological legitimacy. The flip side is that representation limits options, like “Native loggers” sounding like an oxymoron rather than a sustainable practice.
The politics of articulation carry the less familiar (at least to me) definition of “a joint, or flexible connection” where emphasis on subject-positions (environmentalist, Innu rights activist, etc.) creates support not based on inherent meanings or established identities, but rather on adjustable positions. This works on several levels. 1) With articulation, all positions are “authentic,” where the validity of the concern is the strong point. 2) Working “for mutual understanding between actors” rather than saving a symbol means the Innu can be opposed to irresponsible development (not all development). 3) Local support is more possible, like the common rival of NATO planes when they downsized some of their employees. 4) Articulation “is fundamentally coalition politics” where groups find a common ground to work from. This is reforming society in a way that works for everyone. And, 5) Contingency is ok. This allows meaning to change, and each subject-position to engage their “support as negotiation”. One example was that if the Innu were to exploit the land same as NATO planes and the mining companies, some subject- positions would drop their support. However, if someone drops out, someone else will probably come in. This also “demands a keen respect for the other’s perspective”, which is difficult because people don’t always agree on everything (I think this is a reason I find it difficult to affiliate with a political party). Thus, the politics of articulation brings solidarity in specific issues.
In the Name of Solidarity
This article discusses the Innu community in Labrador. These people are struggling to stick to their way of life because of the modernization of everything around them. Much of their lands have been taken and they have been converted to Catholicism. The government has forced them to school their children, and live an increasingly sedentary life. They must also deal with low flying military aircraft, increased logging and recreational fishing and hunting, and hydroelectric developments. Because of their struggles and their attempts to fight NATO and the aircraft testing over their lands, the Innu have been gaining a lot of support from many other groups.
More...
Thus far, the supporters of the Innu struggle have been employing “representational politics.” The supporters try to represent the struggle by referencing popular cultural narratives. This form of politics basically entails people on the outside of the situation trying to talk for other people, “in their voice.” This is not an effective way of speaking up for a cause. It is important for people to bring to light the struggles and issues, but do so without attempting to speak for them.
An alternative solution brought forth for this issue is “articulation politics.” It is important to show the issues through direct personal encounters. To just show pictures in the media of generic “Native” people does not accomplish a personal reaction from people. They need to connect with the story before wanting to help. This connection can only happen by using real stories with real faces and names. There are still problems with this form of politics. It does not get as much direct attention to use real stories, because they are not as “sensational” as the generic stories and pictures that were chosen specifically for their heart-wrenching nature. In the end, perhaps the best way to raise awareness is to find a middle ground between the two styles.
More...
Thus far, the supporters of the Innu struggle have been employing “representational politics.” The supporters try to represent the struggle by referencing popular cultural narratives. This form of politics basically entails people on the outside of the situation trying to talk for other people, “in their voice.” This is not an effective way of speaking up for a cause. It is important for people to bring to light the struggles and issues, but do so without attempting to speak for them.
An alternative solution brought forth for this issue is “articulation politics.” It is important to show the issues through direct personal encounters. To just show pictures in the media of generic “Native” people does not accomplish a personal reaction from people. They need to connect with the story before wanting to help. This connection can only happen by using real stories with real faces and names. There are still problems with this form of politics. It does not get as much direct attention to use real stories, because they are not as “sensational” as the generic stories and pictures that were chosen specifically for their heart-wrenching nature. In the end, perhaps the best way to raise awareness is to find a middle ground between the two styles.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
“Living is for Everyone” is Giovanna Di Chiro’s account of her research trip along the US-Mexico border to explore the social and environmental impacts of NAFTA, its neoliberal policies and the subsequent transnational community responses. On her journey, Chiro follows activist transnational community activist Theresa Leal who regularly travels from Nogales, Arizona to Nogales, Sonora studying the relationship between the industrial pollution and deteriorating health of people in the surrounding community.
More...
As part of an economic development strategy in the mid 1960s, Nogales, Sonora was transformed to house a hundred maquiladoras. In these factories, commodities such as cell phones and clothing are produced by the women who are in constant contact with hazardous materials and toxic waste, inside and outside of the facilities. The toxic waste contaminates the Santa Cruz River, a watershed that extends from Nogales, Sonora to Phoenix, Arizona. This has a cross-national effect on the health of people who live in the areas surrounding the river and experience the same ecological health defects. These problems are transferred as the south to north flow carries pollutants into the homes and bodies of Arizona residents. Theresa Leal has worked hard to form a working coalition composed of local residents and various environmental organizations against the actions of the corporations at fault to hold them accountable and responsible for change. She educates local residents about the environmental and health impacts of maquilarodas and engages in binational health studies that blend science with local observation.
In the 1990s Theresa and her team joined forces with Living is for Everyone (LIFE), a binational community-based organization founded by latino residents of Nogales, Arizona who, after experiencing wide-spread disease, launched health studies that convinced them the pollution coming from Nogales, Sonora was the source of their sickness. These studies received national media attention and Theresa agrees that both governments began to pay more attention to the rising health and environmental problems, but that is where it stops. They are aware of the consequences, but NAFTA provides no protections or provisions for environmental clean-up. And so their fight continues, building cross-border community alliances and using an extroverted sense of place to connect the local to the global, hoping that one day their persistence will overpower the most powerful.
It is not an easy fight as environmental management and regulation officials are merely illusionary protectors. It is not about shutting down the factories, Theresa says, because they will just relocate and do the same thing to another community and their people will be left without jobs. That is why the coalition seeks to build nontraditional partnerships between the community and corporations to discover environmentally friendly alternatives. It is not enough to simply accept the hazards of industry as ‘part of the job’, the technology for sustainable solutions exists but is denied because efficiency does not profit unless it is in the case of the production process and not the actual profit. Their motives are shaped by their connection to the community and their ‘global sense of place’. The land, the water and air is theirs and it is being destroyed at the cost of the health of their children and their families. They have the right to be protected and not exploited.
More...
As part of an economic development strategy in the mid 1960s, Nogales, Sonora was transformed to house a hundred maquiladoras. In these factories, commodities such as cell phones and clothing are produced by the women who are in constant contact with hazardous materials and toxic waste, inside and outside of the facilities. The toxic waste contaminates the Santa Cruz River, a watershed that extends from Nogales, Sonora to Phoenix, Arizona. This has a cross-national effect on the health of people who live in the areas surrounding the river and experience the same ecological health defects. These problems are transferred as the south to north flow carries pollutants into the homes and bodies of Arizona residents. Theresa Leal has worked hard to form a working coalition composed of local residents and various environmental organizations against the actions of the corporations at fault to hold them accountable and responsible for change. She educates local residents about the environmental and health impacts of maquilarodas and engages in binational health studies that blend science with local observation.
In the 1990s Theresa and her team joined forces with Living is for Everyone (LIFE), a binational community-based organization founded by latino residents of Nogales, Arizona who, after experiencing wide-spread disease, launched health studies that convinced them the pollution coming from Nogales, Sonora was the source of their sickness. These studies received national media attention and Theresa agrees that both governments began to pay more attention to the rising health and environmental problems, but that is where it stops. They are aware of the consequences, but NAFTA provides no protections or provisions for environmental clean-up. And so their fight continues, building cross-border community alliances and using an extroverted sense of place to connect the local to the global, hoping that one day their persistence will overpower the most powerful.
It is not an easy fight as environmental management and regulation officials are merely illusionary protectors. It is not about shutting down the factories, Theresa says, because they will just relocate and do the same thing to another community and their people will be left without jobs. That is why the coalition seeks to build nontraditional partnerships between the community and corporations to discover environmentally friendly alternatives. It is not enough to simply accept the hazards of industry as ‘part of the job’, the technology for sustainable solutions exists but is denied because efficiency does not profit unless it is in the case of the production process and not the actual profit. Their motives are shaped by their connection to the community and their ‘global sense of place’. The land, the water and air is theirs and it is being destroyed at the cost of the health of their children and their families. They have the right to be protected and not exploited.
Living Is for Everyone
Giovanna Di Chiro's article "Living Is for Everyone" is an account of a 'toxic tour' that the author and environmental activists, including Teresa Leal, take of the Ambos Nogales region. Di Chiro examines the work of Teal throughout the article, and focuses on the tour's border crossings to "narrate a history of community health and environmental action in a transnational context" (112).
More...
With Leal as the guide, the tour begins with the group crossing the U.S.-Mexico border from Nogales, Arizona into Nogales, Sonora. At this point in the article, Di Chiro briefly explains Leal's practices, saying that she is not only an environmental activist but also a cultural historian, women's right advocate, and a social activist who has devoted many years to" improving the environmental conditions endangering the health of her family, community, and native land" (114). Di Chiro points out that Leal's passion for environmental justice extends far beyond her own "local environment" and encompasses a larger 'community', and that this "community-environment concept defines a new ecosystem," one that will be further presented in Di Chiro's article.
Di Chiro goes on to talk about the Santa Cruz River, which, to the Tohon O'odhman people, has become known as hik-dan, or a parched "cut in the earth," due to overpumping and the dumping of toxic chemicals and untreated sewage. Also discussed is the Nogales Wash, a dry tributary, which has become a dumping site for garbage and other waste. Di Chiro notes that she learned that the protection of these water sources is at the heart of the fight for environmental justice in the Ambos Nogales (116).
Next the author discusses Nagoles, Sonora's city industrial park district with 100 facilities which began to pop up in the '60s as "an economic development strategy to encourage foreign investment and create jobs to bolster Mexico's flagging economy" (116). Due to lax enviornmental restrictions, the industrial parks have played a huge role in the poor health of residents, workers, and the environment. One activist group known as Comadres ("comothers") works to empower women to fight for improved living and working conditions. Di Chiro writes of various accounts of these poor conditions including women who's mental states are affected by working around glue in a factory, and a woman who lost two children to cancer because of radiation exposure.
The tour continued on to an old landfill, something Di Chiro notes that Leal chose as "a site of action" because of the health and environmental dangers associated with it. Because children were often found scavenging the dump, Leal set up a drop-in center called Mi Nueva Casa, that offered things like food, drug treatment, and literacy classes to the kids (122). In addition to this, Leal also worked with activists to monitor water sources near the dump. Poor regulatory practices lead to the dumping of waste outside of the site's fences and into nearby lagoons and washes.
Di Chiro ends her article by reiterating that water protection is the key to improving environmental conditions and that this is not just an issue for those living in arid landscapes, but a "larger-than-local water politics that spans borders of all kinds--national, racial, gendered, economic, linguistic, ecological, technological, spiritual, and epistemic" (129).
More...
With Leal as the guide, the tour begins with the group crossing the U.S.-Mexico border from Nogales, Arizona into Nogales, Sonora. At this point in the article, Di Chiro briefly explains Leal's practices, saying that she is not only an environmental activist but also a cultural historian, women's right advocate, and a social activist who has devoted many years to" improving the environmental conditions endangering the health of her family, community, and native land" (114). Di Chiro points out that Leal's passion for environmental justice extends far beyond her own "local environment" and encompasses a larger 'community', and that this "community-environment concept defines a new ecosystem," one that will be further presented in Di Chiro's article.
Di Chiro goes on to talk about the Santa Cruz River, which, to the Tohon O'odhman people, has become known as hik-dan, or a parched "cut in the earth," due to overpumping and the dumping of toxic chemicals and untreated sewage. Also discussed is the Nogales Wash, a dry tributary, which has become a dumping site for garbage and other waste. Di Chiro notes that she learned that the protection of these water sources is at the heart of the fight for environmental justice in the Ambos Nogales (116).
Next the author discusses Nagoles, Sonora's city industrial park district with 100 facilities which began to pop up in the '60s as "an economic development strategy to encourage foreign investment and create jobs to bolster Mexico's flagging economy" (116). Due to lax enviornmental restrictions, the industrial parks have played a huge role in the poor health of residents, workers, and the environment. One activist group known as Comadres ("comothers") works to empower women to fight for improved living and working conditions. Di Chiro writes of various accounts of these poor conditions including women who's mental states are affected by working around glue in a factory, and a woman who lost two children to cancer because of radiation exposure.
The tour continued on to an old landfill, something Di Chiro notes that Leal chose as "a site of action" because of the health and environmental dangers associated with it. Because children were often found scavenging the dump, Leal set up a drop-in center called Mi Nueva Casa, that offered things like food, drug treatment, and literacy classes to the kids (122). In addition to this, Leal also worked with activists to monitor water sources near the dump. Poor regulatory practices lead to the dumping of waste outside of the site's fences and into nearby lagoons and washes.
Di Chiro ends her article by reiterating that water protection is the key to improving environmental conditions and that this is not just an issue for those living in arid landscapes, but a "larger-than-local water politics that spans borders of all kinds--national, racial, gendered, economic, linguistic, ecological, technological, spiritual, and epistemic" (129).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)