Emily
toujoursjacques
Cam
Stefanie
mandarineFiled under: Cam, Eating organic/local, books about environment | Tags: Add new tag
In today’s New York Times, several authors were asked to recommend books to the 3 current Presidential contenders. Michael Pollan’s recommendations are pertinent to anyone concerned about the environment and justice issues:
I would urge the three presidential candidates to read — or reread — two books from the 1970s that could help them confront the deepening (and now deeply intertwined) problem of our food and energy economies. Long before either climate change or the obesity epidemic were on the national scope, Wendell Berry’s “Unsettling of America” made the case for a way of life and a kind of agriculture that might have averted both — and could still make an important contribution to solving these problems. In “Diet for a Small Planet,” Frances Moore Lappé shone a light on the wastefulness and environmental costs of meat-eating, predicting that humanity’s growing appetite for meat would lead to hunger for the world’s poor. Together these two visionary writers — who fell out of favor during the cheap-food and cheap-energy years that began in the ’80s and are just now coming to a calamitous close — still have much to say about the way out of our current predicament.
You can read the entire article — including recommendations from a diverse group of writers such as Junot Diaz, Barbara Kingsolver, Scott Turow, John Irving, Steven Pinker, Gary Wills, and a most succinct response from Gore Vidal — here.
Cross-posted at Cam’s Commentary
I came across a link to this site today: Chris Jordan’s Running the Numbers art exhibit. As the disclaimer on his site indicates, I’m sure that the full impact of these works is only when viewing them in person. Nevertheless, looking at the work on line will really make you think about your consumption patterns. The photos are beautiful; the trash is ugly; our actions that make these statistics, in many ways, are uglier still.
You can also view this trailer: Chris Jordans Intolerable Beauty DVD trailer from Yvonne Stoose on Vimeo.
On my blog (here) I’ve written previously about the Millennium Development Goals, the 8 goals adopted by the United Nations for halving by 2015 extreme poverty throughout the world. Goal 7 is generally referred to as “Environmental Sustainability”. But this goal is about much more than being ‘green’.
Goal 7 of the Millennium Development Goals sets out by the year 2015 to:
-
* Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes; reverse loss of environmental resources.
* Reduce by half the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water. This includes access to safe sanitation, something that more than 40% of the people on the planet do not have, according to a 2005 WHO/UNICEF report.
* Achieve significant improvement in lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers, by 2020.
I sometimes, and with increasing frequency, hear my socio-economic peers (fellow affluent Americans, many who would balk at ‘affluent‘ and protest they are middle-class; in global terms, middle-class Americans are affluent) say that ‘we’ must be concerned about the environment for the sake of our children and grand-children.
But, what about the current children of the earth, regardless of their ages? As you read this blog, and the posts of those participating in this challenge on their own blog sites, consider how your actions impact not only the environment, but the lives of all who share this planet. Is it just our empty water bottles that need to be recycled — or should we be considering the sale and use of the water inside the bottle and the geo-social-political issues involved in water rights throughout the world? If we recycle used tires and replace incandescent bulbs with CFLs, we may be reducing landfills and emissions, but, what about those who have no access to needed transportation, no electricity in their homes, no access to healthcare or education, who live not in metaphoric “dumps”, but real ones, dumps filled with our disposed goods and packaging, our thrown away food, rodents and other vermin, and disease?
In his last speech, “I See the Promised Land”, Rev Martin Luther King preached:
It’s alright to talk about “long white robes over yonder,” in all of its symbolism. But ultimately people want some suits and dresses and shoes to wear down here. It’s alright to talk about “streets flowing with mild and honey,” but God has commanded us to be concerned about the slums down here, and his children who can’t eat three square meals a day. It’s alright to talk about the new Jerusalem, but one day, God’s preacher much talk about the new New York, the new Atlanta, the new Philadelphia, the new Los Angeles, the new Memphis, Tennessee. This is what we have to do.”
We can extend Rev King’s words to our world today. What we have to do is take actions so that there can be a new Kibera where 1 million people will not live in 630 acres, or a new Guatemala City where over 2500 families will not need to live and work in the city dump, or other new places around the globe to replace existing slums and favelas.
Green actions are a good idea; the consequences and impact of those actions are social justice — eco-justice.
Filed under: Cam
I told Emily that I would regularly publish a link roundup of posts related to the EcoJustice Challenge. Several people commented on Emily’s original post that they would write about this on their own blog rather than posting here. That is a great way to participate, but, remember to link to the EcoJustice Challenge blog so that your posts can be included here. That way, those who don’t regularly read your blog (but would if they knew what a great blogger you were!) can see what you are doing for this Challenge.
How frequently will the link listing be posted? Frequency to be determined based on volume and time availability. Let’s see how it goes, ok? I’m aiming to publish the first link roundup soon after May 15.
Thanks everybody for participating in this blog. I think Emily has created something terrific here!
Filed under: Cam
I posted late yesterday on my site about joining this challenge.
The term ecojustice is a new term to me, although the concept is one that agrees with my thoughts on the environment and our obligations to protect and preserve our world while working to eliminate those activities that threaten, harm, and impoverish others by damaging the environment and consuming resources. I’m endeavoring to learn what that means in practicality. How do I put into everyday action what I believe to be the right approach? I don’t have the answers, but I’m willing to learn.
What I posted yesterday was the small, practical actions I’ve taken thus far (canvas grocery bags, replacing incandescent lights, etc), and my current commitment to make use of an energy efficiency kit my local power utility has distributed. You can read my entire post here.
While the Energy Efficiency kit is promoted as a ‘green’ effort as well as one to save money, I intend to think about what the other consequences are to taking such steps. How does turning my water heater down or using my car less often do more than prevent me from being scalded and my checking account from being brutalized by high prices at the pump? Will I use more gas if it costs less than $50 to fill up a tank? Yesterday was the first time I experienced the $50 fillup. Is that the threshold that forces one to change her ways? Maybe for some; for others it might have been $30, or the price where one had to make decisions between food and gas to get to work.
If it is only about the money or one’s personal comfort, I think one’s efforts, while good for the environment, are less likely to be followed. If money were the only issue, it would be easier to not be as concerned. My goal is to think about the consequences of my actions and my consumption patterns and what that means to not only my world, but the world at large. That is why I’ve joined this EcoJustice Challenge site.
- posted by Cam
