Things That Make You Go Hmmmmm

Warning! Serious Navel Contemplation Ahead

 

   
          OK - so this week our assignment was to read the Conservationist Manifesto. Yeah, I know, I got all excited too when I read it on the syllabus, BUT NO - I read it wrong, its not the Communist Manifesto . . . bummer, right?

(FYI Karl Marx was a little more interesting) So the author, Scott Russell Sanders is a retired Indiana University professor  - Brown and Cambridge alumnus, married to a biochemist.
They are well heeled, well educated, well traveled, and own a home in Bloomington.

     What's that got to do with the price of tea in China? Just hang on to your granny panties because the irony of this will become apparent a little later on.

      Dr. Sanders seems like a nice enough guy. He's written a gazillion books which you can buy on Amazon. He holds seminars across the country, has intriguingly furry white eyebrows, wears nice sweaters and when he was still teaching,  I bet he had a legion of graduate student sycophants following him around campus carrying his pens.

          The whole premise of his book can be summed  in one sentence; we can live better lives and treat the earth better if we live more simply and stop being massive, greedy voracious consumers. There are only 2 problems with this - first, after laying out this thesis in the opening paragraphs Sanders drones on for another 265 pages - about what? . . .EVERYTHING. At times he goes into such touchy feely flowery description of minutia, that I can't help but wonder if he dropped some windowpane or shrooms before he hit the keyboard.

         Don't get me wrong, it's not like I'm hating on all my granola eating, herbal tea drinking, Kumbaya singing brothers and sisters - its just that JEEZ - sometimes a tree is just a tree. And sometimes, a book is little more than literary Ambien. And if I had a dollar for every time Sanders says I, Me, My or Mine, I might actually have enough to buy his books - and that  leads the second and I feel the biggest problem of the book - Sanders is a total flatout, undeniable hypocrite. He preaches about the evil of consumerism, yet he himself does not abstain. He sings the praises of trade and barter but sells his books. He waxes poetic about the virtues of making your own clothing, yet his clothes look very J. Crew to me  - either that or he is not only furtively keeping sheep in his basement, but also some very talented third world seamstresses as well.

       There are a bunch of other ironies, such as Sanders decrying the despoilment of the land that is tourism, which he calls 'merely another form of private consumption' yet justifies his own travels as exempt because they are in pursuit of wisdom. WTF? I guess the paid speaking engagements he flies to from coast to coast don't count either. Or maybe Sanders like Phileas Fogg travels by hot air balloon - or maybe he is secretly a super hero like Superman and doesn't require a plane - or better yet - maybe he can be teleported to far off locations like in Star Trek. The possibilities are titillating.


       Perhaps most absurd of all is that Sanders says that all means of transference of wisdom and education should be free and open to everyone - this had me both laughing out loud and shaking my head. This from a man who was paid handsomely for a thirty year career teaching at a public university where students now have to finance their education with loans that amount to more than what their parents paid for their houses.

       And this is where very heart of the problem lies - too many hypocritical people at the top trying to demand of others what they themselves are not willing to do. Should you read the book? . . . Naw, if you really care about the environment you'd be better off reading Gary Larson's Far Side. And if you want, you can barter for it, trade for it or check it out from the library, hell, I'll even lend it to you - I LOVE the free transference of knowledge. Now, beam me up Scotty.

A spectre is haunting America — the spectre of consumerism.

Check out these 2 clips from South Park: College Know It All Hippies & Hippie Infestation
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/154822/college-know-it-all-hippies
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/103809/hippie-infestation

Whoever Smelt it Dealt it . . . An Environmentally Sound Thanksgiving?

          OK, so this assignment was supposed to be a Thanksgiving debate with a family member about a provocative environmental topic - when mixed with the proper amount of alcohol, sure to invoke scenes of screaming, broken glass and a bail bondsman . . . and while that sounds ever so appealing, it just didn't apply to my situation. So, instead, I invite you to A Flower Family Celebration, an imagined tale of food, friends and foes.

          

          This is the Flower Family residence, a cozy little studio apartment just off Pete Ellis Drive, in the bucolic college town of Bloomington Indiana. Let me get you an Everclear on the rocks while I recap the evening. We had an eclectic group of people to be sure.

   

          There was Me, slightly menopausal hostess and damn good Mahjong player, Miss Cleo, television psychic extraordinaire channeling, Wendy's founder Dave Thomas, The Mongolian, my 17 year old daughter, (if you know anything about Atilla the Hun, then you understand why I call her The Mongolian), conservative presidential candidate Michele Bachman's anti-gay husband Marcus Bachman, gun-slinging, deer hunting, decrepit rock star Ted Nugent,  and the ever belligerent and hairy Alec Baldwin.  

             

              Being a destitute college student, I supplied the cheese ball  and everyone else pitched in. Alec Baldwin's yoga instructor, arm candy girlfriend sent him over with a mysterious rash and steaming plate of Tofurky, a vegetarian, inedible gelatinous mound of quivering tofu and wheat gluten . . .yum? Ted Nugent showed up a Turducken, a chicken inside a duck inside a turkey, encased in bacon strips and stuffed with a White Castle slider dressing. Dave Thomas was supposed to bring the corn salad, but I think Miss Cleo ate it on the way over, and last but not least, Marcus Bachman brought dessert - cream puffs!

          A bit of tension began to develop as the buffet line began to form, vegetarians on one side of the card table, carnivores on the other, but things remained politely civil as we discussed Beyonce's baby bump, fake or fierce? The evening rolled along in a rather genteel manor as we debated whether Ryan Gosling was indeed robbed by not being named People Magazine's sexiest man alive, and if we thought Justin Beiber was anybody's baby daddy. And then, the unthinkable happened . . . Ted Nugent raised his left buttock slightly off the couch and let loose with a very loud, very odoriferous flying air biscuit. That was when the evening fell apart. 

          Alec jumped up off the bean bag, his Chinet plate and plastic fork tumbling to the carpet. Unleashing his best array of f-bombs he called Ted a rude little pig and lambasted him for his contribution to global warming via his evil Republican carnivorous ways - Nugent whipped a jackknife out of his boot and began waving it in Baldwin's face calling him a G.D. pinko tree hugger. Miss Cleo pulled off her earrings and popped on some brass knucks while Marcus screamed uncontrollably. One thing led to another and the next thing you know, Bill Nye was on the speaker phone. 

                             

            Bill had a calming effect, because he is The Science Guy. Yes, the PBS Kids scientist told the party, farts were indeed the second biggest contributing factor to global warming, specifically cow farts, but flatulence of all kinds did its part to contribute to the changing climate, even turkey farts. Then of course we had to Google it. *Sure enough, a single cow emits 280 liters of  methane a day. The average person toots out a half a liter, while a soy bean does not emit any. Self righteously, Alec gathered up the remains of his inedible, environmentally friendly dish. Securing it in a maroon Tupperware bowl, he bid us goodnight as Ted flipped him a grease covered middle finger. Miss Cleo and Dave claimed they had to get up early the next morning and Marcus Bachman left for the midnight madness sale at Nordstrom's, saying there was a pair of pink feathered sling backs just waiting for him, 40% off no less.  

              Me and The Mongolian looked at each other, shrugged and headed down to the gas station for some rollers and a couple of Yoohoos.  

                                                                                                                

               * So, just how much is 280 liters of cow farts? That would be 102,200 liters per cow, per year (remember, Ted Nugent only farts about 183 liters per year . . . Alec Baldwin maybe a little bit more). That translates to the equivalent of 230,386 cans of Yoohoo or the blood of 21,599 human bodies, (zombies) which would fill Conseco Fieldhouse (OK, maybe not for the Pacers). This is equal to 3,609 cubic feet of gas, multiplied by  the 96,669,000 heads of cattle in the U.S. and that gives you enough bovine gas in 1 year to fill up 49,403 Hindenburg sized zeppelins full of cow flatulence floating over the friendly skies of America (a zeppelin and a blimp are not the same thing - Google it Sweet Cheeks).

                       BUT - as if that isn't bad enough, according to cattlenetwork.com, the U.S. only makes up 10% of the entire world cattle population. India, Brazil and China have significantly more cattle than the U.S. which ranks 4th globally. India alone has over 280,000,000 cattle, nearly 30% of all the cattle in the world. Can you imagine what it would be like if Hindus ate hamburgers?! Think about that the next time you're having Kung Poa Beef or Panneer Makhani. So will everyone just get off America's Hot 'N Juicy Burger eating backs . . .jeez chillax and crank up a little Wango Tango.

                                                               

   

A Little Friday Fun

And We're Very Very Pissed Off

          The Things you own end up owning you.  Ah, the wisdom of Tyler Durden from  Fight Club.


           So we were studying about Garrett Hardin, an American ecologist who worried about over population, yet had like 5 or 6 kids of his own. Aptly, he went on to develop his theory , The Tragedy of the Commons, to explain why people go ahead and do things when they know that in the long run its going to hurt them. It states basically:

1. People are selfish douchebags and are only looking out for #1
2. Because we are all greedy bastards, we are going to deplete our resources and f*#k 
    everything up
3. And like a fat lady blowing her diet on a donut - we go ahead and do it anyway


           Hardin theorizes that there only two things that will stop us:

 - Adding yet another layer of greed by turning over our resources to multinational capitalist corporations so they can privatize things like land, air and fresh water - because, of course only the rich deserve to breathe. All joking aside, Hardin thought that privatization was an efficient way of conserving resources . . . well duh.
                                                                     -OR -
- Adding an authority - laws, penalties, sanctions that will bully, guilt, coerce and strong arm people into changing their ways - kind of like a red-faced, harried angry mother screaming at her kids "you better straighten up - or else . . ." What the or else means, I don't know, but sounds scary.

The Age of Stupid, a really really funny mockumentary movie that perfectly demonstrates the Tragedy of the Commons, but you haven't seen it and you won't see it because it's British and Netflix sucks.
 In the desolate future of 2055, an archivist (Pete Postlethwaite) combs through a vast collection of videos to learn what went wrong with the planet. His research points to the first decade of the century, when humans blithely ignored the warning signs of climate change. The footage he views is actually culled from real-life interviews conducted by the filmmaker, whose sharp -- and darkly funny -- insights populate this sobering documentary.

                                    And to a leaser degree, though equally hysterical  is the movie Idiocracy, which touches on certain elements of the Tragedy of the Commons, particularly  in regards to a certain segments' over eagerness to procreate. Private Joe Bauers, the definition of "average American", is selected by the Pentagon to be the guinea pig for a top-secret hibernation program. Forgotten, he awakes 500 years in the future. He discovers a society so incredibly dumbed-down that he's easily the most intelligent person alive.






                      So, with a firm grasp of the Tragedy of the Commons in mind, the question arises, what does it mean to own a natural resource - and is privatization a good or a bad thing?  Answering like the Pinko my mother accuses me of being - I say, oh hell no - no one has a right to own a resource that is necessary to maintain life. While I think that pizza and Yoohoo are integral  to a high quality of life, they are certainly not essential. So if the manufacturer decides to be a jerk and raise the price of  Yoohoo to $10 a bottle, or decides to stop selling it in Indiana (never going to happen) no big deal, I'll switch to TruMoo or something. But what if Bloomington decides to sell control of it's municipal water supply to Donald Trump and The Donald decides he's going to charge a $5000 hook up fee and raise the rates to $20 a gallon - then I'm screwed. I don't have that kind of money. What am I going to do - Febreeze and waterless shampoo only go so far. It sounds crazy - but it's not.


                        Folks all over the world face this very dilemma - water sources are privatized and poor people have no access. Think of the implications: cooking, hygiene, health. . . what would you do? And it's not just happening in countries like Bolivia and Tanzania -  it's happening right here in the USA,.as city water supplies around the nation are being sold off to the highest bidder. Prices are raised to insure maximum profit for shareholders, while the poor must do without and endure the suffering. Municipalities claim they can no longer afford to supply the water and privatization is prudent. Private water suppliers claim that higher rates lead to water conservation - and rich folk just don't really give a rat's butt, they can afford it and they don't find it necessary to conserve - they can pay the bill - no problem. So where is the accountability? There is none. Corporations don't have to answer to voters. Chalk it up to the inhumanity of commerce. 


                       But what's next? How else are they going to commandeer natural, vital resources and sock it to the poor all in the name of conservation - housing and food costs are already exorbitant, you have to pay to poop and bathe (sewer and water). . . if there was only a way they could charge for air . . . I am sure the World Bank  has a think tank full of jackasses trying to figure that one out. Garrett Hardin aside, it all comes down to the fact that first and foremost we are human beings, and the basic necessities needed to maintain life should not be commodified,because if they are, we all lose our humanity. Sound conservation of the Earth's resources require stewardship, not ownership. Plentiful resources for the rich should not be bought with the misery of the poor. 
                      
                        Once again, Tyler Durden sums it up best . . . DO NOT F*#K  WITH US!

                            
For a heart wrenching look at the complexities, politics and pain of  the commodification and privatization of the water supply please check out A World Without Water 
                  
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3930199780455728313


             Every day 300,000 children die due to lack of water and poor sanitation. Billions of people do not have access to safe water. Environmental change threatens to make this situation worse but a more immediate danger is emerging. Control of the world's water is falling into the hands of the rich and water may soon take the place of oil as the world's most tradeable - and coveted - commodity - not a basic human right. In a future when market forces set the price of a glass of water, will many more people will be left too poor to drink?


Check out Water in the Movies: The Good the Bad and the Ugly
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-h-gleick/water-in-the-movies-the-g_b_686646.html

                         

Just For Fun

Ch -Ch - Ch -Changes . . .

In the immortal words of David Bowie . . . "Oh yeah - Mmm - Still don't know what I was waiting for . .."

      For those of you who may not know, the creation of this blog was an assignment for an Indiana University Politics of Sustainability class. After last week's posting on our views of the environment, this week's assignment is:  Have you refined or altered your philosophical stance toward the natural environment and its denizens since our class discussion or do you find yourself more confused and uncertain than ever? Elaborate. (Oh how I freakin love college). So, after reading nearly 20 blogs written by 20 classmates . . . I sat on my comfy couch, with my 32 oz Big Gulp of Mountain Dew in all it's non-biodegradable and chemically  enhanced loveliness, and I reflected on the environment.


       There were two common threads that ran through all the blogs when it came to the environment. The first was Ambivalence, that's right, ambivalence with a capital A. I, like my classmates, care about birds and trees  clean air and cute baby koalas -BUT - while we feel that the environment should be protected, none of us were doing much about it.  There was a definite lack of passion. Lets just say I doubt any future leaders of Greenpeace will spring forth from this particular poli sci 201 class.


        I attribute my lackluster enthusiasm and general slackertude toward environmental issues in part to my aging and menopausal crankiness. After all, what do you want from me? I myself am older than the United States Environmental Protection Agency, which was created in 1970 (thank you Richard Milhous Nixon XOXO). So, most of my childhood I grew up without without the government taking any kind of a active stance on the environment, it simply was not a part of my life. (yeah, I know . . lame excuse). Besides, we were much more concerned about the Russians nuking us in our sleep. Cold War worries seemed so much more urgent back then, much more important than throwing garbage out a window. OK, so that is my justification for why I didn't give a damn back in the day - so, why don't a give a damn now? Maybe because in comparison to how bad the environment and pollution used to be, today's issues seem as bland as a plate of cold mashed potatoes without butter. Or maybe, it is because today's problems have become a confusing mix of special interest group rhetoric and PR campaigns conjoined with elitist academic jargon. It's become too complicated, maybe I just don't get it anymore - forgive me - what exactly IS a carbon footprint?  It's kind of like my mother droning on about the latest gossip from her knitting club - I have no idea what she is talking about, my eyes glaze over and I tune out.   


       This brings me to the second common thread that ran through the blogs; a feeling of powerlessness. Much was said about the government, the federal government in particular, not leading the way, not enacting environmental legislation that would mandate  a more proactive behavior toward  the environmental. Even bloggers who did make attempts at recycling and saving energy felt their efforts did not make a difference. It was striking and a bit frightening that none, NONE of the bloggers even mentioned making changes at the local government level. The bloggers did not even realize how much power they actually DO have at the campus, city and county levels to affect change, their sole focus was their powerlessness at the national level. (you know this is stuff conspiracy theories are made of).


        So, how has any of  this changed how I think about the environment? It hasn't, I am still much more concerned about unwanted facial hair and middle age weight gain, but it DID get me thinking about WHY we feel the way we feel. Why do I and my classmates, separated by more than a generation in age share an almost identical feeling about the environment? They are from the era of Twitter and instant information, I am from an age before the internet - it is so perplexing that while we are from almost completely different planets, we share a same indifferent attitude. So then, I think the REAL question, the question that holds the most significance is not WHAT we think, but WHY do we think that way?


The Fabulous David Bowie, Changes, with lyrics