Final Thoughts

Being very new to me, I initially thought that blogging would be a rather painful and boring process. However, much to my amazement this was not generally the case. I often found myself very immersed in my blog writing; this is particularly shocking since I prefer more formal styles of writing.

As is noticeable in my first couple of blog entries, I tried to model my weekly posts as if they were essays. I usually wrote more formally and usually did not add pictures, links or other interactive aspects. Nevertheless, because I feared my grades would drop in the blog I started including pictures and links to my posts. Ironically, I ended up actually enjoying this part. In fact, in some of my posts I even added my own pictures, so as to give a personal character to it. For example, I recall posting a picture of me playing percussion, which I used to illustrate how I can have a positive influence on other people through my art. Additionally, I later added a picture of a perplexed me, in order to show my state of confusion at the time of writing that particular post.

Despite the epiphany which I have so far described while writing my blog, there have been some moments of frustration. I must say certain posts felt endless and pointless. For example, blog #2 was very boring for me. We had to make a list of green things we already did. To be honest, I felt like I was in elementary school once again. Sort like writing that “what you did over the summer” thing we used to do after returning to elementary school in September.

Overall, I think blogging was very effective; it not only works for a writing intensive course, but it also makes the task of writing weekly assignments much more easily and comfortably. In a way blogging allows for more freedom and personality.

Meeting the deadlines was not a problem at all, because we were not restricted to a specifc hour or class. Instead, all we had to do was submit the writing before a certain time. And that, it think, worked amazingly.

Nevertheless, this freedom of expression can either work very well or not well at all. You might get some students who enjoy writing this type of stuff, yet others because of its apparent freedom undermine the writing.

I think there is a possibility that I might continue blogging. Maybe not in the near future though.

The Green Book

After reading the Green Book I must say that some these steps are simple, but nevertheless incredibly hard to commit to. It is so convenient and comfortable to simply leave the water running while brushing our teeth that most of us would not close it even considering its simplicity. Thus, I think part of the problem is that parents are not raising their kids appropriately. We need to start instilling good habits in the youth, especially here in the United Sates, where resources are so readily available. For instance, I see the carelessness that my brother has for everything that surrounds him. In part I blame my parents for the situation. But I also think that because my older sister and I grew up in a different country where water and electricity are not taken for granted; we have a different outlook on wastefulness.

While reading the foreword of The Green Book, I almost immediately related to William McDonough. He mentioned how during his childhood in Hong Kong his family only got water access every four days. The same was the case for me while growing up in the Dominican Republic. Not only did we not get water all the time but we did not have electricity all the time. As was also true for McDonough we had to learn how to save water and in my case how to not rely so heavily on electricity.

But, my brother did not grow up in the Dominican Republic and did not experience bathing with a bucket of water; he does not know what 8 hours of electricity a day feels like. In fact I don’t even think he can envision being away from his computer for eight hours. Here is the problem with America. Because in the United States you can get things relatively easy, Americans fail to see that they get all these privileges at the expense of other countries.

Anyhow, here are my steps in order of difficulty:

Closing the faucet while brushing my teeth: I think this is something I can do relatively easily since I did it very much while growing up in the Dominican Republic.
Using high Speed Internet: This is also an easy thing to do. But does anybody actually still use dial-up?

Closing faucet while shaving: Well this one is a little trickier because it is just way to comfortable to leave it running. I know this might seem particularly odd since I do it while brushing my teeth. I do not know why it is so difficult for me to even remember to close the faucet while shaving.

Reusing plastic bags: This could vary in difficulty depending on the circumstances. I find it very hard to actually carry used bags for the supermarket or for shopping for anything else. However, in my house we do save bags and reuse them for garbage as well as other things.

Using porcelain or glass containers: I simply cannot imagine a world without plastic. For example, it would be very difficult to carry around your lunch in a heavy glass or porcelain container. But, I think the real problem is not that we are using plastic, but that we are not recycling it. Whenever I order food I save the plastic containers and use them to store food in the fridge.

Not Flushing the toilet as much: This I find incredibly hard to do and impractical. It is not particularly pleasant to leave the toilet unflushed. Additionally, I do not see how we can control going to the bathroom. Should we take Pepto-Bismol and limit the amount of liquids we intake? I do not think that is the answer. Maybe this is something we cannot do much about.

Blue ray discs: Well, yes this is easy to do. However, not everyone can afford to buy blue rays. If the prices of these discs were to go down then it would be a possibility.

I want to publicly commit to close the faucet while shaving and to reuse plastic bags. I will also try as much as possible to refuse bags when buying at the grocery store or deli.

Reviewing My Peers

Rhodine

1) Does the draft have a main point (thesis)?

It is not clear to me what her thesis is. However, from what she has what looks most like a thesis to me is: “all these places of a couple of things in common, one they
are all places of low income two they are places that get dumped on.” Perhaps, she is trying to prove that low income neighborhoods are being subject to high levels of pollution. I think this kind of thesis would guide her more towards a report than a research essay.

2) Find an instance of what you consider an interesting or useful example, image, chart, etc. and explain why.

She has only completed part of the paper. Therefore, she has yet to incorporate examples.

3) Find a place in the paper that you consider confusing or boring and explain why.

“Environmental racism is when one particular group, usually people of low income have to take on the burden of caring for another group’s environmental mess.” This part is a bit confusing to me. I don’t think this is the appropriate definition of environmental racism. Instead, she is observing what occurs as a consequence of environmental racism.

4) Does the draft acknowledge where information comes from IN THE BODY OF THE TEXT?

No, citations have not been included yet.

5) If the draft has a fictional "human interest story," discuss whether it is convincing/imaginative/detailed or forced/tedious/general.

Not included.

6) Would you recommend that the writer get some help with grammar before turning in the last draft? Why? Why not?

I do not think she necessarily needs help with grammar. Nevertheless, she does have several grammatical errors, which I think she can correct herself once she proof-reads the paper.

Jocelyn

1) Does the draft have a main point (thesis)?

Well, it is not explicitly stated in the beginning, but it is later developed. If the professor wants a standard form essay then she needs to write it in the intro. However, I do not think is necessary. As it is it works fine because it builds up in intensity. Based on what I read her thesis is something like this: Guarani Indians are strongly connected to the environment and thus, do not feel compelled to join the modern industrial society. Nevertheless, money driven investors have been buying land, which the Guarani do not legally own but have inhabited for hundreds of years, for raising cattle. The consequence of this has been terrible for the Guarani people. Because the Guarani have been dispossessed of their land, many now have sought to abandon their traditional ways and tried to join modern society by obtaining low paying jobs. The Guarani are now ostracized and discriminated against.

2) Find an instance of what you consider an interesting or useful example, image, chart, etc. and explain why.

“Thus, even though the indigenous tribe has occupied an area for decades, they have no claim over it. Land purchases by big corporations and the constant expansion of ranchers have forced them deeper into the forest or onto small plots of land that have already been cleared, and are of no use to anyone. Up to a thousand of them are crammed into these sections, where they can barely sustain themselves with what little crops they do manage to grow. Malnutrition plagues the communities, increasing the child mortality rate; some children barely make it to their fifth birthday. Sadly, even these plots do not provide security to the populations.” It is interesting to me how over and over we see that the wealthy continuously attain wealth by the suppression of the poor majority. The same holds true for my topic. In Haiti, foreign investors, who during the American invasion dispossessed the Haitian peasants, have largely contributed to the destruction of agriculture and horticulture in Haiti.

3) Find a place in the paper that you consider confusing or boring and explain why.

I find that Jocelyn is doing a god job at maintaining the reader’s attention. I do not find anything boring or redundant.

4) Does the draft acknowledge where information comes from IN THE BODY OF THE TEXT?

Generally yes. However I found an instance where I believe she needs a citation: “Ranchers often ravage the villages, shooting their rifles near small children in play areas and raping women who have ventured out of sight of their families. Men who come to the aid of the helpless are beaten relentlessly, or shot point blank.” Since, this information could be a bit controversial and unknown to many, I deem it necessary to insert a citation.

5) If the draft has a fictional "human interest story," discuss whether it is convincing/imaginative/detailed or forced/tedious/general.

Not included.

6) Would you recommend that the writer get some help with grammar before turning in the last draft? Why? Why not?

No, her grammar is impeccable. I also like her style; it flows masterfully.

Progress

As I continue to write my paper my frustration just keeps on increasing. I feel completely powerless. Without exaggeration, Haiti is at the brink of destruction. Haiti is the epitome of an ecologically, politically, socially and economically collapsed state. Without significant international intervention Haiti is hopeless.

I feel powerless, but at the same time ashamed; ashamed, because I live in a country that has been responsible for many atrocities in the world including in my native country. As a research more and more about the situation in Haiti, I continue to discover that the United States has in large been responsible for the demise of Haiti.

Until this day the United States continues to try to impose their ways on other people in order to better benefit from them. The cyclone in Myanmar has been cataclysmic for humans, yet the Bush administration seems to think the problem is not worthy or in need of help. With deaths surmounting the hundred thousands, Bush had the audacity to demand certain preconditions before any aid would be given to the devastated country. Human lives are apparently of not much importance to Bush. How can the United States have a political agenda in a time when people have died and are continuing to die?

I am outrage by American foreign policy.

Sorry for rambling on about things unrelated to my paper, but I feel compelled to express my feelings.

Anyhow, so far my paper is going fine. However, I have still not been able to find much information about actual deforestation in Haiti. Things that I have found merely state that the use of wood as fuel has been primarily the cause for deforestation in Haiti. Thus, I need to continue researching about this stuff.

Additionally, I am now working on diversifying the sources of my paper. I figured I need to give my paper more validity by using several sources as proof. But finding sources and using these sources is very time consuming. I have spent most of the time reading books and articles rather than writing. I have about 7 articles and 3 books, which I have been using to write my paper.

Nevertheless, despite all the holes in my paper as of now, I feel good about the 9 pages that I have written so far.

Research Paper Progress

As I wrote before, my topic regards Haiti. More specifically I am going to focus on the problem of deforestation in Haiti.

It seems like the problem in the western part of the Caribbean island is now almost irreversible. With 98% of the land deforested, Haiti now represents hopelessness at its best.

Many people believe and argue that the Haitian problem is due to internal conflicts and political corruption. Nevertheless, the problem goes beyond that. Haiti since its beginning has represented everything that opposes the aristocratic west. Not only is it a predominantly black republic but also the first country to really declare every citizen free. As opposed to the American revolution which only offered “natural human rights” and “the pursuit of happiness” to white wealthy males, the Haitian revolution freed the enslaved Africans and even welcomed and admitted other blacks and Native Americans as free human beings once in the republic.

Thus, since its independence in January of 1804, Haiti threatened the American way of life. At the time of the Haitian revolution the American economy largely subsisted on the slave labor of African Americans. For this reason, the United States did not recognize the Haitian Republic until 1862.

It is important to note that this pattern of declaring the opposition illegitimate is a distinctive American method of maintaining power. Anything that opposes American ways is then declared undemocratic and savage. The same could be argued for countries like Cuba. Because Cuba threatened American “freedom and democracy” an embargo was raised and Cuba became stigmatized as a backward country that represses human freedom.

How then has the United States influenced the Haitian catastrophe?

Beginning with the invasion of Haiti in 1915 by the Wilson administration, Haiti entered an economic downshift that till this day continues to thrive. The Wilson administration proposed that Haiti become essentially an American Plantation. The proposal was greatly opposed in Haiti and could not be established.

The Wilson administration then proceeded to impose measures of agro-importation. Haitians were then forced to buy from the American companies. According to the American administration this measure aimed to provide more affordable food for the very poor.

Nevertheless, this caused a disparity between the rich few and the poor majority, and the inability for agricultural self-sufficiency. American companies then benefited from the Haitian people while the Haitian peasants could not compete with the American companies. While the Haitian peasants are extremely productive, they cannot compete with the industrialized companies of the United States.

Population growth together with an underdevelopment of infrastructure rapidly caused the degradation of the environment in Haiti. Because of the policies of the American government towards Haiti during the invasion of !915-1934, Haiti could not develop a fuel infrastructure for cooking. As insignificant as this might seem, this has been the major contributor to the environmental disaster. Most Haitians use wood as their only source of fuel for cooking. And over the years this has amounted to more and more deforestation. To this day Haiti cannot afford to bring other sources of fuel for the people.

Thus, the environmental crisis in Haiti has been a consequence of multiple U.S invasions and policies, which have hindered the ability for Haiti to develop alternative methods of fuel. In turn, the Haitian people completely subsist on wood for cooking.

As more evidence for this paper I will also look into the History of the ex-president Aristede. After Aristede made efforts to increase the Haitian minimum wage and establish measures of self-sufficiency the Bush senior administration sponsored military groups responsible for the overthrow of Jean-Bertrand Aristide. It s important to note that Aristede is considered to be the first democratically elected president in Haiti. After the coup, the OAS (organization of American States) decided to impose an embargo on Haiti. The United States violated the embargo allegedly in the interest of the people. Clearly, America wanted to continue to benefit from the exploitation of Haitians. America has never been interested in democratizing the Republic of Haiti.

Furthermore, when in 1994 the Clinton administration supposedly helped reinstate the democratically elected government, they did under the condition that Aristede, again rely on importation of American produce. This measure of course benefited the American Agri-business.

Over and over we see that the United States has imposed policies on Haiti, which simple benefit the American companies and the very rich few. This is largely the reason for which Haiti has not developed the economical means to provide its people with alternative fuel sources or even electricity. In turn this has caused the virtual disappearance of forests in Haiti.

I know that right now my argument is a bit unclear and unsupported. Nevertheless, this was a brainstorm so as to get me started. Now that I’ve put my main ideas on writing I can go back to some of the sources I have read and look for supporting information. Moreover, I now realize that I need additional sources about the environmental problem in Haiti; I have many sources about American policies towards Haiti but not enough about the environmental problem in Haiti.

I am writing this paper because I find it troublesome that though the United States is considered by many the land of the free and the exemplary representation of democracy, the American elite continues the autocratic and oppressive patterns present before the democratic revolutions. It is quite paradoxical that a nation built on the ideas of respect for human rights and democracy, continues the colonialist legacy of exploitation.

In writing this paper I hope to reach all those who care about the existence of all people, and about respect for human rights and freedom. I hope that this paper can become an eye opener. We continue to see that our government is still an oligarchy, ruled by the very small wealthy class who pursue egotistical and self-centered endeavors.

List of Sources additional to the three in the previous posting:

• The Uses of Haiti by Paul Farmer (book)

• Hegemony or Survival: America’s quest for global dominance by Noam Chomsky (book)

• Haiti Profile from the U.S Department of State

• “Haiti: Hope for the Future” by Robert M. Pedrito (article)

• “The Haiti Dilemma” by Daniel Erikson (article)

Haiti: An Environmental Disaster

It came to me that in writing a paper I should choose something of much relevance to me and to all people as well. Thus, I decided to focus on issues of my native island, Hispaniola as they now call it or better Ayti-Quisqueya, the Native American name. But, more specifically I will focus on the Republic of Haiti, as this country is the epitome of a man made environmental disaster.

Haiti is now only 2% forest land compared to 60% in 1923. This disaster is a direct consequence of human exploitation of the land. Most Haitians rely on wood for subsistence, and this in turn caused an almost complete deforestation of the land. Now, this case is rather different than most scenarios of environmental depletion where big corporations are responsible for the disasters. Instead, the poor people, which constitute over 90% of the population of Haiti are responsible for the problem.

Nevertheless, this is a mere superficial understanding of the situation. Through my research paper I will seek to prove that this is a consequence of racist foreign policies, especially American policies, that have driven the Haitian peasant to completely subsist on wood because of such drastic poverty levels. The American government claims to have intervened in Iraq because people were subject to many human rights violations, yet neighboring countries such as Haiti have remained virtually ignored despite obvious violations of human rights.

I know my topic is rather controversial and difficult to support; nevertheless, I think it is an important point to prove. Not only does this thesis convey what exploitation of the land can do to entire countries, continents and eventually the world, but also that ecological destruction is a political issue as well.

I intend to write this paper for American people who care about helping others and themselves as well. I contend that a lot of the problems of the world, especially those in countries in the Americas, have been caused to large degree by the United States and the American powerful corporations that exploit the resources and the people of other countries.

Sites I will use:

Hartford-Hwp: This site provides general environmental background of Haiti. Moreover, it has records of different economic policies throughout Haiti’s history.

Haiti Innovation: This site is very thorough. It contains the latest news about Haiti and its economy. Although, I believe this is a blog, it does have lots of information that will at least get me started in the process of writing my paper.

Zmag: This is not a website but an article I find to be veryrelevant to my topic. This article was written by Noam Chomsky and though I know I probably will not use this as a source per se, it is a great starting point.

Reflection

Before taking the LIB 200 course I was oblivious to the environment to say the least. Yes, I did hear all the time that Global Warming was affecting us and that soon the world would end. Nevertheless, these claims just seemed like exaggerated presumptions. I often regarded such assertions as mere conspiracy theories.

Nevertheless, we live in a world that entirely consumes and suppresses our feelings and ability to reason. Why would I think about the environment if I am struggling just to live my daily life? The increasing complexity and time consuming nature of our society has stripped us from the ability to take care of an essential part of our existence; our collective home that is.

On this, I would have to agree with Al Gore. We are completely disconnected from the environment. In fact, many of us even hate interacting with it. “Why would I wanna go out and hang out, when I could just talk to my friends through myspace”? asserted my brother. How about a nice park? I said. To which he replied:

“for what, to sit on the grass and get itchy.”

It seems to me that we are trapped in the world of “manufactured information” as Gore says. We are failing to see that we engaging in patterns of self-destruction. Just today I read an article in the New York Times, that talks about an American Government high school book that downplays the relationship between green house gasses and global warming. The books claims that there is little evidence linking global warming to green house gasses. The authors go on to say that though coastal areas will suffer because of a sea-level rise, the world will also benefit from a warmer temperature because of better production rates of crops.

Note that this is an American Government textbook.

Is there then a political Agenda for ignoring Global Warming? Perhaps there is, but I would even say that it is more than simply a political agenda. It is a mechanism of maintaining the status quo. Gore says that we were able to overcome segregation and discrimination after the civil rights movement, but is this really the case?

Why is there still a correlation between being a minority and having a low level of education? Why are minority communities subject to the highest levels of pollution? Why are illnesses connected to pollution, ever-present among minority communities?

Simple: we are still dealing with the same problems we were 50 years ago.

The history of humanity has unfortunately been one where the few who hold power and wealth do whatever it takes to maintain their status. We have never been moral beings concerned about others and the environment. Here I fundamentally disagree with Al Gore.

The solution to the problem is not to reestablish a sense of morality that we once had. I contend that has never been the case. We have essentially always generally been egocentric beings. I propose a more practical solution:

pragmatism.

We need to realize that we are facing a fast developing problem. We need practical solutions that will generate fast results. Otherwise we will cease to exist. And though, Gore’s solution is noble, taking that route would simply take to long if not an eternity.

But going back to the issue of race and the environment, as minorities we have to quickly seek to resolve the problems. The fact is, minorities are the ones experiencing the effects of pollution first hand. Do you think George Bush thinks about Global Warming while smoking his Cuban cigars (isn’t this ironic) in his multi-million dollar estate?

That is why I agree with Terry Cole when he says that we have duty to fulfill with the environment; an obligation.

So, have I learned anything from this class?

I must say I have. I try to be as aware as possible. I evaluate my actions and try to maintain a purpose to my daily life. It’s been a shock. I remember watching the An Inconvenient Truth film. I realized the seriousness of this problem at that point. My brain is now filled with incessant worries and I still don’t know whether we will make it or not.

But it truly is hard, to completely change your lifestyle, the lifestyle that has been inculcated in you since childhood. I find myself struggling with this. Yet, as I browsed through other people’s blogs I realized that others are struggling with the same thing.

I hope the knowledge I have gained in this class will take me in a long journey, a journey of survival.

Exploring Blogs

Sustainable Cities Blog: It seems to me that this blog is an attempt by CUNY to organize and gather all the different environmental groups and institutions of New York City, so as to work symbiotically in creating sustainable cities. I have to say though, I was not particularly fond of this blog; it seemed a bit static to me. Somehow I felt that it has not been updated for quite some time.

Gristmill: I liked this blog very much. It has lots of information written accessibly. However, I think it is a bit overwhelming. It has way too many links and stuff; it is a complete chaos for the beginner environmentalist. However, once you pass the mess, there is lots of information. I especially liked the articles about Martin Luther King. I like the analogy of what Dr. King would say if he were still alive and dealing with the environmental problems we are facing today.

Green as a Thistle: Very interesting blog. Vanessa really went on a quest for being green. Nevertheless, this blog addresses only certain types of people. Not very many people live in those circumstances. Maybe her blog appeals to suburban America. I do admire what she did; it was an incredibly valiant pursuit. But, I just somehow cannot connect to her story. I don’t feel part of it; it seems so distant from my reality. Again, I am not condemning her blog, just expressing my feelings of detachment from her story.

No Impact Man: This is by far the best blog of all. I particularly like the idea of being eco-effective. In other words, in order to live in harmony with the environment we must learn to keep a balance; we must assess nature not only by what we can take from it, but also by what we can give to it. He then conveys how bees don’t have to go on “crash diets” or crash solutions to save the environment because their very lifestyle is eco-effective, and that is the key to solving the problems; we must change our lifestyle. Moreover, as opposed to Vanessa’s blog, No Impact Man is about an urban family. This is especially important since the majority of the world’s population lives in cities. As Colin says, “it is an urban problem.”

Eco Geek: Something like this is absolutely needed; people must actively seek for eco-technology. But, this is a slow developing industry. The fact is that as of now eco-friendly technology is significantly more expensive, and in a world where rich and the poor economical disparity is ever-increasing, eco-technology seems impalpable for the majority. Nevertheless, it is good to know that some corporations are taking steps towards developing this environmentally friendly industry. What corporations must realize is that adopting this new industry will create economical growth. In other words, we will not have to give-up money for eco-technology. In fact, this can be a push to the current receding economy.

BBC Environmental Pages: This website has the latest information about the environmental issues and problems. Check it out.

I left a comment on the No Impact Man blog, in his “Life Style Change Required” post.

Pragmatism: The Source of Survival

We have reached a point of disaster. Maybe irreparable, yet will fail to recognize that by virtue of destroying our environment we are destroying ourselves. Many place their recklessness on that god gave us “dominion” over the Earth. In other words, through religion people have come to justify the belief that the world is ours to do as we please. But, this is not a logical premise that allows us to destroy the environment. We are failing to make the connection.

The world may very well be for us to do as we please. However, the undeniable fact is that soon it will not exist as our home. That you own something does not mean that you do not have to take care of it. In fact, it is in your best interest to care for it.

Take, for instance, the owner of a mansion. According to the law once a person buys the house it is for them to do whatever they want. Now, do you think whoever buys this house would want to bomb and tare it down? A person who does this is a very foolish. Because why invest in the house if you are later to destroy it.

It might be simple to make the connection with a person who invests in a house. But it is the same for us and our environment. The environment is our collective home. Why would we want to destroy it? Why destroy our investment? The truth is we are in fact destroying our investment, our hard work. That is the connection we are failing to make.

Thus, even if in fact the world is for us to do as we please that does not mean we should completely wreck it. That is stupid and economically speaking unproductive.

Using the old testament’s story of Adam and Eve, as a pretext for destroying Earth, is completely inconsistent with the laws of business, in that we are going to loose our investment, and inconsistent with survival, in that we are virtually self-destructing ourselves.

Somehow people view the environment as something distant and unrelated to us. And that is at the epicenter of our problem. And yes, people hear that destroying the environment is amoral and that we should not do it, but is that really how we should solve the problem?

The fact is that people know that lies are not moral, yet most continue to do it. We don’t seem to be bound by what is moral, at least a lot of us. Thus, we must see the problem in more practical terms. Yes, the problem may be a moral one as Gore puts it, but that is not a problem we are readily able to solve.

The concept of morality has not been part of humans for the vast majority of our existence. Not even with the beginning of cities in 3000 BCE were we moral or even morality recognizing beings. One can say that the concept of morality only appeared in the last 2500 years.

Morality as we know it started to appear in the world around 500 BCE. Hence, historians call it the Axial Age. They call it axial because historians tend to think that we as a species suffered a significant spin in our views and beliefs of the world. This is when the Golden Age of Athens took place, when the Buddha lived, When the Confucius lived and when the Hebrew prophets started to appear.

In Athens, the discipline of philosophy was developed after the Axial Age. Philosophers started acknowledging the concept of justice. The Greeks started thinking about what was right in itself and what was wrong in itself.


In India, the social division of caste started to be questioned by the Buddha. The Buddha, started questioning the idea that people are born in a certain caste and hence, fulfilling the dharma (duty) of their caste was everybody’s obligation. For the Buddha, people had to escape the cycle of birth and rebirth by means of avoiding fallowing ones pleasures and desires. For him the establishment of the caste system was no longer and moral or ethical thing to impose.

In China, Confucius developed his ideas on filial piety, during the Axial Age. Confucius philosophy now placed significant importance in family ties. People owed respect to their elders and ancestors; that is what being a truly virtuous person meant.

In the Middle East, a group of people called the Hebrews started developing the ideas of the Judeo-Christian belief, during the Axial Age. Hebrews started developing a monotheistic belief system, where the sole god of worship must be the omnipotent god Yahweh. Here rests the birth of morality in the Middle East, which later influenced the birth of Christianity. People no longer saw themselves and the supreme beings as egocentric and inconsiderate. Being virtuous and moral now meant people had to do what was right not to expect anything in return but just because it was the moral and right thing to do.

For instance, Hebrews adapted the old Mesopotamian flood story to their monotheistic and moral philosophy. Noah’s Ark is almost an identical copy to the flood story in the Mesopotamian Epic of Gilgamesh. But they differed in one important aspect. First in the Epic of Gilgamesh, the gods (notice plural) sent the flood because people were being too noisy, whereas in Noah’s Ark the flood was a consequence of people’s misbehaving. For ancient Mesopotamians, the gods were beings with identical characteristics to humans; they were self-centered, illogical and driven by impulses and desires. The only difference was that the gods were immortal. But for Hebrews, after the appearance of the prophets, the flood was a consequence of peoples immorality and sin.

Thus, of the 160,000 years of human existence, morality has existed for only 2, 500 years. Yet it was not always consistent that people acted in a moral way. In fact, one can merely say that the concept of morality has existed for some 2,500 years, but not that people have been moral beings for 2,500 years. We are yet to be moral. Though we emphasize the importance of being moral and doing the right thing, we do not always act in that way. What makes Gore say that we have to go back to our original state of morality, when we have not ever been moral? In fact for most of our existence we didn’t even recognize what morality was.


Hence, in order to fix the immense problem, which we are facing today we must see it as a practicality. In other words, caring for the environment is in our interest because it is financially beneficial to us. Not only are we killing our investment and hard-work by destroying the environment, but we are jeopardizing our very ability to exist. That, I think is the connection people must envision. We must recognize the importance of the following equation:

Caring for the environment = Financial benefit and protection + survival.

The Audacity of Passion

How will you follow your passion?

How will you use your education to make the world a better place?

Getting people to care for the environment is going to take one important thing: we are going to have to inspire passionate emotions on other people. Humans seem to be fond of passion; often we only move to do anything when we feel an intense emotion. Take, for instance, a person in love. There is nothing or very few things this person wouldn’t do to fulfill their love passion. Thus, in order to get people to move one has to inspire some type of intense emotion in them.

Al Gore I think did a very good job at inspiring strong emotions, at least in me. Instead, of just seeing the facts, I was able to see a humane aspect of Gore’s life. We humans like to relate to other people, and the film encouraged just that.

Two of the things of which I am the most passionate about are Music and History. Somehow, I will have to find a way of connecting all of these together so that I can passionately inspire other people to care for the environment.

Although I am not a musician of popular music, as an artist I have tremendous power over other people. This is a very valuable tool I have in my hands. Maybe transmitting environmentally conscious statements before and during my performances can help inspire other people to care for the environment. In fact, as I am a performer of traditional Afro-Caribbean music, and our music often carries socially and culturally conscious beliefs then maybe adding the environment to the equation would not be a bad idea.

But yet a large part of being able to inspire other people has to do with having the tools to do so. Education is the vehicle that can conduce us to raise awareness and inspire others. We must possess the tools that will allow us to present things in an organized and interesting manner. Gore was particularly successful at this. He was able to present the slide show interestingly clearly and in an ascending way.

Additionally, people are skeptical as to whether we can actually do anything about the environment. Do we as a global community have the ability to make change for the better? Absolutely. But in order to visualize this people must be able to see specific examples in which groups of people have massively organized to achieve something. We must show people that history repeats itself, and not only the bad things. Positive portions of history can also be repeated. And this is how my degree in history will allow me to make the world a better place. I will convey that people do have the power to change for the better.

So, in conclusion, I think that saving our planet will require us to inspire passion in ourselves. Passion is an audacious trait. With passion almost everything can be accomplished; with passion nothing seems unsurmountable.

HYBRID CARS: Check this website out. I think that one of things that is going to cause the most trouble in the "going-green" process is the fact that Americans would have to give up their big SUV's. Therefore, i think it is important that we start to recognize the benefits of using Hybrid Cars. Not only are they cheaper, but also much more economical in terms of gas and repairs.

Obama's Speech on Race: I have also decided to include this speech because I think it is one of the most remarkable speeches I have ever heard in my life. With a touch of eloquence, Obama manages to talk about the sensitive problem that plagues the United States. In his speech he calls for change together as a people, as "Americans" regardless of race. Please if you have the chance listen to this speech; i can guarantee that it will not be a waste of your time.

Decorporating the World

All throughout our history of existence people have suffered; people have been victims to oppressive governments and kingdoms. Civilization or the beginning of organized power brought tremendous negative effects to people. Nevertheless, after the industrial revolution a new kind of oppression has arisen. “Corporate oppression” is the new source of brutality. This form of oppression is very different from all the preceding ones; it now not only affects people, but also all other living creatures on Earth. It is a universal oppression, which only temporarily benefits a small select group of people.

To some this might be an odd statement but, maybe if we were still living like the ancients did, we might have had a chance of surviving. Immediately, I can envision people saying that the latter statement is outrageous. Because, how can something other than “democracy” and capitalism allow people to survive longer; weren’t these people always under constant threat of being killed and oppressed by the tyrannies of their time? Well, the answer is yes, but today we are experimenting something very different. Corporations (the entities of power of our time) not only affect people or the people in their respective countries but they are also destructing our planet.

However, what I am proposing is not a dilemma. In other words, I am not suggesting that we must either choose to live like the ancients and save the environment, or continue to live as we do and eventually destroy the environment. I must acknowledge that in many ways industrialism and modernity have brought about many good things. Advances in science and medicine have tremendously benefited people. Nevertheless, what we need to realize is that corporations are guided by only one goal: to get the greatest output with the least input. Simply put, they want to make as much money as possible with as little investment as possible. In no way are considerations for the environment and other people part of their equation.

Corporations are the main contributors to the destruction of the world. They are causing, deforestation, pollution and in turn global warming. But, what hurts Americans the most is that they are the major contributors to global warming. Corporate America now utilizes over 30 percent of the world’s resources. And as was said in the “Story of Stuff” film we are using a linear system in a world of finite resources. We are rapidly running out of materials. In other words, we are just extracting resources without putting anything back in the system. As a matter of fact we aren’t even recycling enough so that we can continue to reuse the available resources. Instead, we have chosen to take and take from the environment without considering that we will eventually run-out of resources.

The truth is that it is not only much more profitable for corporations to continue to do this but also much easier for the people. Consider, for instance, recycling. This would mean a much higher cost of production for corporations. Things would need to be recycled from American homes. In turn, this would mean that companies would not have the option of cheap labor as they do in other countries. Instead they would have to opt for “high-wage” working Americans and hence a reduction in profits. Moreover, this would also entail that Americans would have to spend a considerable amount of time recycling; not something many are willing to do.

So what then is the solution to the problem? Well, the solution is simple. We would have to recycle and stop exploiting the natural resources of the environment. We would have to create reconstructing campaigns so that our environment could be restored. Nevertheless, by doing this there is something we would have to give up or at least some people would have to give up: that is wealth and profits. Yes, corporations would have to stop being the blood-sucking vampires that they are today. They would have to stop getting wealthy at the expense of people and the environment.

Check-out the film: "THE CORPORATION."

Will We Survive?

It seems to me that a big deal of what is affecting the world today has to do with people’s egocentrism. As cliché as it might sound, it is a world where the “fittest” survives. I am puzzled as to whether humans are good or bad by nature. Are we the self-centered people about which Thomas Hobbes talks in Leviathan? Or are we the good cooperative people that Rousseau talks about? The answer to whether we would make it or not in this world lays in the latter set of questions. If indeed we are egocentric by nature, the hope for survival falls short. But, if instead we are the good natured people that Rousseau claims then we might have a chance.

History has shown that humans consistently fight for power; essentially for egocentric outcomes. Since the beginning of humanity war has been an ubiquitous event. Now, the question to ask ourselves is whether the rise of civilization or whether humanity’s innate egocentrism has been the cause of these wars. Interestingly enough, we have evidence of massive and atrocious wars only after the beginning of civilization. But then again before civilization people had not been cluttered together. We do however know that both, humans and proto-humans since the beginning of their respective existence have engaged in conflict. Though never to a massive extent.

Nevertheless, the fact that massive wars did not exist from the beginning of humanity does not necessarily mean that we were particularly more compassionate. The fact remains that for most of our history we have been nomadic hunters and gatherers. During these years of our existence, we only assembled together by family. Essentially, people organized in family based clans usually not reaching the double figures. Thus, the possibility of an organized and massive war was impossible. We had not yet accomplished a centralized power composed of very large populations.

It seems pertinent to point out that animals possess instinctive characteristics ,which often entail aggressiveness. And the fact is that we are part of the animal environment. Essentially we are thinking animals (whatever that means). It seems that we possess unique traits not present in other animals. Language, for instance, is the best representation of our capacity for creativeness and for creating abstractions. Though, other animals have communication systems, ours goes beyond mere communication. As opposed to humans other animals have a restricted form of communication. Often they cannot go beyond the present or beyond basic needs, such as food. We on the other hand can talk about the past and future and about things we have never seen or know to exist.

At this point you are probably asking yourself: what does all this garbage have to do with the environment? Nevertheless, I think that before we can understand what drives us to not care for the environment and whether we will wake-up or not, we have to first examine our very nature. Are we innately self-centered? Or do we genuinely care for other people and the environment? These questions are essential. As to whether we will survive or not, I am not sure at all. However, I do know that though we might be egocentric by nature, we possess a very special ability. And that is the ability to reason. Can we overpower our natural inclinations with the ability to reason? Well, the German philosopher Immanuel Kant certainly does believe it. In fact, the foundation for his theory of morality is based on the idea that we must learn to use reason to overpower our natural inclinations and desires. Maybe, the only solution is to use the tool of: reason, which every person has readily available. Only then, will we understand that we need to care for the environment and not only about ourselves. Only then, will governments and wealthy powerful people start realizing that making money should not be their only concern. Maybe I am being too hopeful; maybe we do not have the ability to overcome our natural inclinations, but it is certainly worth a try.

People and the Environment

Things I did today:

Brushed my teeth
Took a shower
Put some clothes on
Ate a sandwich
Grabbed my books and Notebooks
Checked my email
Took garbage out
Washed dishes
Dried my hands with paper towels
Turned-on my car
Drove to school
Bought a coffee
Went into the library
Read the newspaper online

My Thoughts:

One of the major reasons for which we do not apparently care about the environment, is that we are often unaware of the effects certain things have on it. For instance, I am not clear about how letting the water run while brushing my teeth negatively affects the environment. Additionally, we usually associate global warming with big industries, which release toxic waste on the environment; we tend to think that big oil spills and large metal industries are the sole contributors to pollution and global warming. Nevertheless, the truth is that we are connected to the environment in an innumerable amount of ways.

I am confused about what the environment is. Is it only all living things in the world like, plants and animals? Does it include other things? Are man made structures such as buildings and bridges part of the environment? I don’t know but I like to think of the environment as anything that affects us and anything that we affect.

It is complicated to understand the effects that individual things have on the environment. Our world is a complex chain of intermingling events, which as whole affect the environment. Therefore, understanding the effects on the environment caused by an individual event is a mere presumption. We have no real way of isolating any particular event and determining its effects.

I woke up this morning, brushed my teeth, took a shower, put on some clothes and ate something. Maybe, brushing my teeth negatively affected the environment because I left the water running for a little while and that, wasted some water others could use. Maybe, the clothe I am wearing was made out of cotton, and that cotton was grown on a field, which was initially a forest. Perhaps, deforestation affects the environment negatively by reducing the amount of carbon consumption. Nevertheless, the truth is that we cannot directly relate any of the former events to an effect on the environment.

I do not do much to care for the environment; part of it has to do with me being ignorant about the things, which affect the environment and about what I can do to care for it. Nevertheless, I generally try to be considerate about littering in the streets. Additionally, I also try to recycle as much as I can. For instance, I usually throw plastic bottles in the recycling bin around the LaGuardia campus. Although, I do not do much to care for the environment, I do have serious concerns about it. I am constantly thinking about the melting glaciers in the north and south poles. I constantly think about the deteriorating atmosphere. I think about the damages we are causing, which could be irreversible. But more importantly I am concerned about what the ultimate consequence of the deteriorating world could be: the end of humanity.

ABOUT ME

My name is Fidel Tavarez and I am currently working towards my Social Sciences and Humanities degree at LaGuardia. I am originally from the Dominican Republic, but have been residing in the United States since 2001. Oddly enough, 9/11 took place just a week after I arrived in New York; my first week of high school in the United States. An interesting aspect of my story is the fact that I have already been to four colleges and am currently planning to transfer once again. Private liberal arts colleges, Jesuit Colleges, public colleges, community colleges, you name it, I’ve been there. Nevertheless, to say the least, it has been an eye-opening experience; most importantly it has exposed me to the discrepancies that exist in the American educational system. For instance, I recall my first week at a private liberal arts institution. Sitting, in my introductory English class I found myself perhaps just looking at the professor. How was I to understand when 50% of the words coming out of his mouth were unknown to me? I simply sat and occasionally listened to the replying students whose vocabulary I could sometimes make out. An American Childhood by Annie Dillard, was one of the books assigned to us. I was Happy. Maybe through the books at least I would get something out of the class. “It can’t be so bad,” I thought to my self. After all, it was just an autobiography; who would use the word “cantankerous” in an autobiography as the professor had in the class. And besides, presumably college was a little harder than high school and considering the fact that Catcher in the Rye was one of the toughest books I read in high school, An American Childhood couldn’t be so terrible. Maybe the professor’s ego was the cause of his pedantic vocabulary. However, to my disappointment An American Childhood was probably worse. I found myself merely pronouncing or rather trying to pronounce words and sentences that meant nothing to me. I was confused. I had always done everything well in high school, everything I was asked for. Why couldn’t I understand? That is when I decided that maybe that school was not for me. Maybe “I am not smart enough” I thought.

As I reminisce, I realize that there was nothing wrong with me. Mediocrity of the New York public school system was responsible for my failure. How was I ever to compete with these boarding school students, when over the course of a semester in my high school we read maybe one book, if we were lucky, while those other students read four or five? How was I ever to compete with them, if my limited vocabulary was considered outstanding by my teachers? How was I ever to compete with them if they wrote two or three essays a week when we only wrote two a semester? I must say, it is not impossible but tremendously difficult. We like to think that people who work hard enough can succeed regardless. However, we never consider the fact that working hard is relative. Under the standards of my high school I was a hard worker. I pushed myself even beyond the school curriculum. Yet, my hard-working trait fell short to the standards of others. Therefore, if the public school system is to prepare students for attending rigorous colleges, they must raise their standards; they must expose students to what attending these schools entails. Not to say, that I am placing the blame entirely on the education system, because the students self-motivation is also huge aspect of it. But, we the victims of the New York public high school system need to see what is out there.

That is who I am. A struggling student who has encountered many obstacles but has; nevertheless, continued pushing himself. Here I am after four years of high school graduation, and still to complete my Associates degree. But I do not regret it. I have grown tremendously and expect to keep on growing. I am a student and musician who values learning for its own sake. I no longer care to compete with the “other America”; the elitist academia. I now care to grow at my own pace and to the best of my ability. That is the essence of me. I wish that some day the public school system be up to par with affluent schools of America. Until then I encourage the public school student to do his or her best. Yes, if given the opportunity to attend these snobby schools do so. But, also realize that our background is different from theirs; I urge my fellow students not to compare themselves with the others, because otherwise your experience will be very bad just as mine was. Realize, that years of inequality cannot be made up in a short-time; realize that it is a process well worth pursuing.