Updates from December, 2018 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Earthling 3:55 am on December 14, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: connectedness of all things, creation, evolution, food chain, hawaiian creation chant, hawaiian creation hymn, Hawaiian spirituality, indigenous hawaiian religion, kumulipo, liliuokalani, martha warren beckwith, , oneness of all things, Queen Liliuokalani, queen of hawaii   

    The Hawaiian Creation Chant, Kumulipo 

    By Carroll Colette J. Yorgey

    The Hawaiian Creation Chant, also called the Kumulipo describes the birth of the world or of Earth and how the intricate ecosystem web of life continues up through the food chain.

    The Hawaiian Creation Chant was translated in 1897 by the last Queen of Hawaii, Queen Liliuokalani. She translated the Creation Chant while in prison, being imprisoned by the Europeans who took the Hawaiian Islands from the native people of Hawaii. Queen Liliuokalani wanted the native Hawaiian people to forever know and understand the Kumulipo or the native Hawaiian chant of creation/evolution that describes the natural chain of life on Earth.

    All living things need energy to survive and get their energy from other living things in a bio-community of life where animals eat plants to survive and animals eat other animals to survive. This is the food chain.

    Today scientists know and talk of the food chain and how the beginning of life begins with the coral polyps and all the one-celled sea creatures that live with the corals in the seas.

    Hawaii’s creation chant is an epic poem of the food chain and how life began in the sea with the coral

    Hawaiian spirituality embraced the natural order of life and all living things as one whole. All of life was
    connected, and so the Hawaiian Creation Chant goes through the entire evolution of life from the coral polyps to man.

    Hawaiian spirituality describes “nature and culture as one,” how land and sea are connected, and that all creatures were born in pairs.

    Ancient Polynesians navigated the waters by natural means called wayfinding – navigating by the stars, ocean swells, clouds, sun, the seabirds, and the winds. And as with their natural ways they also understood the meanings of the sea creatures and the sea plants and the land creatures and land plants; and how all were connected.

    The Hawaiian Creation Chant is divided up into eras. In the first era it describes the beginnings – “A coral insect was born, from which was born perforated coral” and “…water is life to trees.” The first era also describes the seaweeds and grasses.

    In the second era fish were born and also the porpoise, the eel, and the crab. They were “born in the sea and swam.”

    In the third era the insects, caterpillars, ants, dragonflies, grasshoppers, flies, and birds of the land and the seas were born.

    In the fourth era, turtles and lobsters were born. In the third verse of the fourth era, “the Earth was born and lived by the sea.”

    And so the Hawaiian Creation Chant goes through the entire creation/evolution of life from the beginnings in the sea to the land; and in the final eras, the emergence of man.

    There are fifteen eras in the Hawaiian Creation Chant.

    The Hawaiian Creation Chant has also been translated by Martha Warren
    in 1951.

    Both translations, the one by Queen Liliuokalani and the one by Beckwith, are masterpieces in
    translation of the epic poem, the Hawaiian Creation Chant that describes in detail the beginnings of life in the sea and the beginnings of life on land and how all is connected. The Hawaiian Creation Chant describes the bottom of the food chain, the coral polyps, all the way up to the top of the food chain, man.





    http://www.sacred-texts.com/pac/lku/index.htm (translation by the last
    royal Queen of Hawaii).

    http://www.sacred-texts.com/pac/ku/index.htm (translation by Martha Warren

    Copyright © 2018 Carroll Colette J. Yorgey. Edited and used with her permission.

  • Earthling 6:59 am on December 13, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: agricultural economics, american oppression of asians, american oppression of blacks, american oppression of mexicans, american oppression of native americans, bracero program, clyde ross, coolies, discrimination, enclosure laws, enslavement of colored people, farm workers, farmworkers, hmong, injustice in us food system, marginalization, nafta, natasha bowens, racial injustice in america, , racism in amerca, racism in american food industry, racism in us food industry, redlining, slavery, upside-down triangle politics, white supremacism, wwii   

    Pillars of Racism in the United States’ Food System 

    By Mo Constantine, May 15, 2017

    Through trade agreements, technology, and a strong political economy, the United States’ agricultural system has become a global force, affecting food production, nutrition, and farmer livelihoods across the world. Many present-day farmers and agrarians speak of past generations, when the United States was home to thousands of small, family-owned farms that sustainably produced food to feed their local communities. It was not until the World Wars and the Earl Butz era that agriculture became agribusiness and farms began to consolidate into large, industrial corporations unconcerned with workplace safety, environmental sustainability, or nutrition. However, this narrative is misleading in that it overlooks many predecessors to agribusiness that operated not too differently than the oppressive, industrial agricultural system present today. In order to achieve a fair, sustainable, and equitable food system in the United States, we must understand the origins of our nation’s agricultural system and the foundation on which it stands. This requires understanding our history of exploitation, enslavement, disenfranchisement, and racism. Only once we acknowledge that our current food system is rooted in the systemic discrimination of a designated “other” can we begin the process of effectively dismantling the injustices present in the food system.

    United States agriculture has relied on systems of oppression and racism from its very inception. When Europeans began settling on the coast of what would be the United States, they quickly began conquering the native peoples through massacres, enslavement, and the spread of disease. Colonists arrived to find that “capital could be created out of thin air: one merely had to capture an Indian or find an Indian to capture another” (Gallay 10). In the Carolinas, Virginia, and Louisiana, the enslavement of the Native Americans provided the means through which the colonists began building a booming economy. The slave trade spread west, eventually reaching California, where members of the Apache and Sioux nations were kept as slaves until the nineteenth century (11). Many Native Americans were forced to work on farms that were being developed by the European settlers on their stolen land.

    Without their land, Native Americans went from a population that had survived for thousands of years off the land to one of the most impoverished groups in the United States. Many scholars, including W.E.B. Dubois and Walter Rodney, have pointed out the “importance of land as a source of wealth (and its absence as a source of poverty)” (Norgaard, Reed, Van Horn 26) and also that “the destruction of the land becomes a vehicle for racism and hunger” (43). Beginning with the European colonization of America in the 1600s, the following three centuries witnessed the confinement of Native Americans to increasingly small plots of land with no means to fight unfair land treaties or instances where such treaties were broken to benefit white Europeans. Many natives were forced to assimilate into European culture in order to survive since they could no longer subsist off the land.

    On the stolen land, the settlers began planting barley and peas, among other sustenance crops. The Native Americans they had enslaved were used as agricultural workers with their knowledge of the land, they were key players in ensuring the settlers’ success (Gilio-Whitaker 3; Gallay 2). They introduced the Europeans to corn, among other crops, showed them how to cultivate it, and it quickly became their most important crop. As the agricultural economy grew throughout the 1700s, large cash crop plantations were introduced, on which Native Americans were also used as slaves until the Civil War (Snyder 4).

    Native Americans were not unilaterally freed until the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment in 1865, but their numbers decreased rapidly after the eighteenth century. They were difficult to enslave, as their knowledge of the land and connection to communities outside of the settlers’ provided them with a means of escape, and their lack of immunity to European diseases made them uniquely susceptible to illness. By the 1700s, Native American enslavement had given way to the Atlantic slave trade. Africans were taken from their homelands in West and Central Africa and forced to work the land in the newly established United States. They, too, brought valuable agricultural knowledge and are responsible for the success of the largest agricultural industries of the time, such as cotton and tobacco. They introduced their superior methods of growing certain crops and invented machines that would make agricultural work more efficient and therefore more profitable. According to oral history, “enslaved African women brought okra and rice seeds to the Americans by hiding them in their braided hair. The plants [became] essential to the development of the United States” (Bandele, Myers 3). Through their transportation of crops across the Atlantic and aided by the sustainable and effective agricultural practices learned from ancient traditions, African slaves greatly aided the success of the South’s agricultural economy.

    When slavery was abolished in 1865, the government and white landowners had to find other methods for ensuring the subjugation of people of color if they wanted to continue white domination and maintain their profits that depended on exploitation. Though the government set up what seemed like good opportunities for freedmen, such as the Southern Homestead Act of 1866 which attempted to transfer public land to freed slaves, most freedmen did not have the material means to take up such property, and the efforts were mostly wasted. By 1910, there were 175,000 black farm owners and 1.15 million white farm owners, with the average white-owned farm nearly twice the size of the average black-owned farm (Higgs 150, 162). Those who were able to obtain land often had it seized or vandalized by the government and white neighbors. Clyde Ross, born in Mississippi in 1923 to two former slaves, remembers when his family lost everything to an unjust legal system committed to the oppression of black people: “Mississippi authorities claimed his father owed $3,000 in back taxes. The elder Ross could not read. He did not have a lawyer. He did not know anyone at the local courthouse. He could not expect the police to be impartial. Effectively, the Ross family had no way to contest the claim and no protection under the law. The authorities seized the land. They seized the buggy. They took the cows, hogs, and mules. And so for the upkeep of separate but equal, the entire Ross family was reduced to sharecropping (Coates 5).”

    Though slaves were free, the United States had been founded on principles of racism, which continued to create struggles for freedmen. Racist policies were built into the agricultural system and the “impact [was] cumulative and has created multi-generational exclusions from opportunities that manifest today” (Center for Social Inclusion). Agriculture was not just about growing food, but was a means of power; without property, black citizens were denied the stability and advancement that accompanies the formation of communities, providing the white population with continued control and domination.

    At first, racialized policies were explicit. After slavery came the Black Codes, enacted by southern states during the Reconstruction Era. Varying from state to state, the Black Codes intended to restrict black labor, forcing black people to work for low wages and punishing them if they broke their contract. They enacted heavy penalties for vagrancy, yet required black people to pay an annual tax if they worked as anything other than a farmer or servant. Moreover, some states used the Codes to limit property ownership, forcing black people to work as sharecroppers and enter into unfavorable work contracts (Black Codes 1).

    The Black Codes were quickly deemed unconstitutional, only to be replaced by Jim Crow laws at the end of the Reconstruction Era. Though slightly less harsh, Jim Crow offered little improvement to the situations of black farmworkers. Most remained sharecroppers, unable to own their own land or buy insurance, since black clients were “scientifically” deemed substandard risks (Heen 387). They were also prevented from competing for better wages due to the enticement and emigrant agent laws, which made it difficult and sometimes illegal to change jobs. The vagrancy laws established by the Black Codes were still in place, said to be “reserved almost exclusively for black men” (Blackmon 1), and often resulted in black people being forced into indentured servitude. Douglas A. Blackmon tells the story of Green Cottenham, a man arrested for vagrancy in 1908 and sentenced to a year of hard labor. The police department, through a standing arrangement between the county and the area’s industries, would sell men like Cottenham mostly to local farmers, but also to corporate prison mines. Once there, the owners of the farm or the mine could treat the prisoners however they wished: “The brutal forms of physical punishment employed against ‘prisoners’ in 1910 were the same as those used against ‘slaves’ in 1840” (Blackmon 23). Once again, thousands of black people were forced to work the land as slaves, contributing years of labor to the food system and getting nothing in return.

    The Black Codes and Jim Crow laws were implemented to ensure the continuation of white dominance, especially in the agricultural south. They ushered in a period of neo-slavery, so that the large plantations dependent on slave labor that had shaped the South’s economy could be maintained. It was not until the beginning of the civil rights movement in the 1950s that this form of black neo-slavery ended. Black citizens were still denied equal rights, however, and faced structural racism in the form of job and housing discrimination. A study by the U.S. Civil Rights Commission showed that “the USDA…unjustly denied African-American farmers loans, disaster aid, and representation on agricultural committees…earning it the nickname ‘the last plantation’” (Bell 4). It was not until the very end of the twentieth century when Pigford v. Glickmana class-action lawsuit brought against the USDA by black farmers for unjustly denying them loans was settled, providing some compensation for the discrimination they had faced. However, nearly 60,000 farmers were left out of the settlement, so it was not until 2010 and the signing of the Claims Settlement Act under President Obama that the $1.25 billion owed to the claimants was made available (4).

    Housing discrimination was also common during the 1900s and is still evident today, causing higher rates of hunger and poverty in majority black communities. Many black people in search of home ownership in the early- and mid-1900s were denied mortgages and forced to pay much higher rates than white people. In order to keep neighborhoods segregated, “black people across the country were largely cut out of the legitimate home-mortgage market through means both legal and extralegal; whites employed every measure, from ‘restrictive covenants’ to bombings” (Coates 36). The Federal Housing Administration rated neighborhoods for their supposed stability, or the quality of house insurance available to them, which translated into the number of black people in that area. All-white areas were given a rating of a green “A,” while mostly black areas received a red “D” rating, making them ineligible for FHA backed loans. The practice of drawing a red line around the areas on a map that were home to black families became known as “redlining” and was another way to ensure the oppression of black people (see Figure 1).


    Figure 1: Map of Chicago’s neighborhoods. The areas marked in red were denied FHA-backed mortgages due to the presence of people of color. The Atlantic: Frankie Dintino



    Redlining quickly became the law of the land, with many city officials such as those in Chicago and Baltimore “instructing city building inspectors and health department investigators  to cite for code violations anyone who rented or sold to blacks in predominantly white neighborhoods” (Rothstein 3). Denied mortgages and restricted to certain areas, black neighborhoods became overpopulated, leading to overcrowded schools and diminished education, which in turn gave rise to gangs and crime. Due to the marginalization and discrimination that has left them facing higher poverty rates and fewer resources, communities of color experience food insecurity over twice as high as white neighborhoods (African American Poverty). In an effort to mitigate hunger, the Black Panther Partya community-based, anti-racist organization founded in 1966began the Free Breakfast for Children Program, which was one of the first school breakfast programs in the United States. By 1971, the program was operating at thirty-six different sites across the nation (Potorti 45), feeding over 10,000 children every day before school (Baggins 7). It was one of the most successful programs of its time, not only providing thousands of children with the nourishment they needed to go to school and build healthier communities, but also bringing attention to the hunger and poverty faced by communities across America, something that was just then coming to the public’s attention.

    However, then-Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation John Edgar Hoover was suspicious of the Black Panther Party and its efforts to combat racism. The FBI was concerned with the Party’s self-defense programs meant to “police the police” in order to protect black citizens from being unjustly detained, harmed, or killed by a racist police force. Director Hoover declared the Black Panther Party to be a national hate group and issued a memo throughout the FBI: “The BCP (Breakfast for Children Program) promotes at least tacit support for the Black Panther Party among naive individuals and, what is more distressing, it provides the BPP with a ready audience composed of highly impressionable youths. Consequently, the BCP represents the best and most influential activity going for the BPP and, as such, is potentially the greatest threat to efforts by authorities to neutralize the BPP and destroy what it stands for (Collier 14).”

    After making the Breakfast for Children Program a national target, it was only a matter of time before both the program and the party were dismantled. As a result, disenfranchisement continued and black communities still experience higher rates of poverty, food insecurity, hunger, and crime than white communities. Though slavery and segregation have legally ended, structural racism is present in every institution and system, the food system being one of the most glaring examples.

    Asian and Latino immigrants have also experienced injustice at the hands of the food system. In the 1850s at the beginning of the California Gold Rush, there was an influx of Chinese and Filipino immigrants looking for jobs and money to bring back to their families. Many found employment in California’s agricultural sector, which was the fastest growing agricultural economy in the United States at the time (Minkoff-Zern, Peluso, Sowerwine, Getz 69). However, the Chinese referred to as “coolies” in California which was a rough translation of the Chinese character meaning “bitter labor” were blamed for depressed wage levels because of their willingness to work for less. This led to the passage of the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882, which was the first United States law prohibiting the immigration of a certain ethnic group. Restricting Chinese immigration minimized competition for white agricultural workers since at the time, seven out of eight farmworkers in California were Chinese (69).

    By classifying Chinese immigrants as nonwhite and noncitizens, it “set the stage for later enclosure laws” (Minkoff-Zern, Peluso, Sowerwine, Getz 66) that negatively impacted the influx of Japanese immigrants in the 1890s. By 1910, the agricultural sector in California housed two-thirds of Japanese laborers (70). Despite the fact that Japanese landowners were paying higher rents than their white neighbors and that there were relatively few Japanese farmers compared to white farmers, white Californians felt that the Japanese were taking away their labor and land opportunities, so in 1913 the state passed the Alien Land Law Act that prohibited Japanese people from acquiring land. This effectively eliminated any possibility of Japanese immigrants owning farms and participating in agriculture as anything but underpaid and marginalized laborers. Matters only became worse in the 1940s: after the internment of the Japanese during WWII, many were never able to regain their lost land. The United States, through its settler colonialist history, developed a pattern demonstrating that “as the state regulates agricultural resources, it creates racial categories that separate lawful members of society from ‘alien’ outsiders” (66) in order to ensure white accumulation and success. This results in the marginalization of people of color to the “unpropertied classes of America” (73)

    In the 1970s, there was an influx of Hmong immigrants after they were deemed political refugees due to the United States’ Secret War in Laos. Many Hmong people had practiced subsistence agriculture in their home countries and so continued their practices in the United States. A large portion of Hmong refugees settled in southern and central California, one of the largest agricultural producing regions in the world. In Southeast Asia, farming was a family practice in which everybody was expected to participate and exchange in-kind services for their extended family, but in the United States it is considered illegal to not pay farmworkers and not provide the necessary benefits. Hmong farmers, who found it difficult to find, much less understand, government regulations, were therefore cited for many Occupational Health and Safety Act (OSHA) violations that required them to pay costly fines (Minkoff-Zern, Peluso, Sowerwine, Getz 77). Hmong agriculture was seen by the United States as problematic and illegal, another example of the difficulties faced by refugees and immigrants that limited their ability to access land and provide their families and communities with nourishment.

    As Asian immigrants were finding it increasingly difficult to own and operate farms, black farmers were moving to other industries, and native tribes were still fighting to regain their land, agribusiness was looking toward Mexico to provide cheap labor. In 1942, the U.S. government initiated the Bracero Program, which allowed contract laborers from Mexico and Central America to come to the United States as agricultural workers in order to solve the labor shortages. It also guaranteed the workers a minimum wage, good living conditions, and safety from discrimination. But because the Bracero workers had no representation on any committee, board, or agency and had little control over their own daily lives, abuses were rampant. Many employers provided low quality food and housing and paid workers irregularly and often below the set minimum wage. And unlike other workers, Bracero workers did not have the freedom to change jobs, so complaints often led to deportation. The U.S. Department of Labor Bracero Director Lee Williams even went as far to call the program was a system of “legalized slavery” (Southern Poverty Law Center).

    The Bracero Program helped open the doors for an increase of illegal immigrants who were quickly hired by employers looking to pay less than the program allowed. The ability of agricultural employers to control immigrant workers with threats of deportation and abuse has led to systemic exploitation, today’s neo-slavery. Immigrant farmworkers are subjected to harassment and mistreatment, exposed to dangerous pesticides and machinery, live in poverty, and are unable to report injuries or obtain health care their many for work-related illnesses and injuries. Even though the Bracero Program was dismantled in 1964 for its abuses, legal immigrants that are imported under the H-2 sections of the Immigration and Nationality Act face equally appalling conditions. Since they are prevented from becoming citizens and must return to Mexico once their temporary work visa expires, H-2 workers are known as “the disposable workers of the U.S. economy” (Southern Poverty Law Center). Most Mexican and Latin American workers, regardless of status, are viewed this way, constituting an invisible majority of the agricultural workforce that provides the food for a nation built and dependent on exploitation.

    In 1994, The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was implemented, eliminating most tariffs on trade between Canada, Mexico, and the United States. This forced the immigration of thousands more Mexican workers as their economy plummeted due to the agreement. Whether this was an intentional or unintentional outcome is up for debate. Through NAFTA, the United States was able to flood the Mexican market with subsidized American corn, among other products, forcing Mexican corn farmers out of business. Corn prices soared, making the nation’s staple crop too expensive to grow and buy. Mexico is where corn originated and the country is heavily dependent on it, hence the saying “Sin maiz, no hay pais”no corn, no country. The United States controls seventy-percent of the global corn market (Bhandari, Sturr 2), so Mexican farmers were destined to go out of business once the trade tariffs were removed under NAFTA. Mexican farmers now earn half the amount for their corn but must pay fifty-percent more for their tortillas (James 33). As a result, 20 million Mexicans live in food poverty, twenty-five percent of the population does not have access to basic food and one-fifth of Mexican children suffer from malnutrition (Carlsen 5).

    Many Mexicans came to the United States, desperately in search of better pay through employment by the very same agribusiness regime that made it impossible for them to earn a living wage in their home country. Forced to leave their homes and families, Mexican agricultural workers were met with horrible working conditions and the xenophobia and racism of the American people who blamed them for stealing their jobs. Discussing NAFTA and the plight of farmworkers in California, Sandy Brown and Christy Getz write, “Immigration policy has historically served as a mechanism, not only for managing labor flow, but also for actively producing an ‘other,’ in this case a labor force that can be viewed as undeserving of the right and benefits afforded citizen workers and that can be scapegoated during periods of economic downturn” (Brow, Getz 125). The racism already built into American culture encourages the creation of an “other,” based on appearance and ethnicity, that then serves to justify the mistreatment and oppression of people of color and immigrants. The efficient and cheap food system of which the United States often boasts is only made possible by a political economic system that seeks never ending accumulation and power at any cost, reliant on a social system that uses racism and xenophobia to erase the existence of the people who, through their exploitation, make America the powerful country that it is.

    Today, immigrants and people of color must contend with environmental racism, a term coined to describe the habit of placing toxic waste dumps, factory farms, and other health and environmental hazards near low-income communities of color who have been rendered unable to fight against it. Black, Latino, Asian, and immigrant farmers are even more food insecure than non-agricultural workers of the same demographics. Those who have been historically discriminated against by the American food continue to feel the effects, facing more subtle systemic injustices such as lack of access to healthy and affordable food, displacement from land due to gentrification, and placement of environmental and health hazards in communities of color (see Figure 2). The food movement is attempting to remedy some of these issues, yet many white “food justice activists,” who constitute a majority of food justice initiatives, fail to see the connection between race and food injustice.

    Many practices of the food justice movement and spaces within it are seen as only white, “not only through the bodies that tend to inhabit and participate in them but also through the discourses that circulate through them” (Guthman 266). This is because white people often have more resources and time to devote to activism and nonprofit work. However, since they are more likely to not have faced the same obstacles as those most adversely affected by the food system, their efforts can sometimes serve to further silence and oppress the very groups they advocate for. For example, many food justice initiatives are focused on sustainability initiatives and its advocates promote the organic and Slow Food movements, which should only become a priority once more pressing issues are solved. For many immigrants and people of color, “it’s hard to think about the sustainability of our farm without land security” (Bowens 6). To suggest that consumers “vote with their dollar” and buy more sustainable, and usually more expensive and more difficult to prepare, food items can be insulting to those who are struggling to access any healthy food at all to feed their families.


    Figure 2: People of color and immigrants experience discrimination at every level of the food system, from unjust agricultural policies, to lack of access to healthy food and the placement of hazardous factory farms and disposal sites primarily in communities of color.


    It would be more inclusive and more effective to prioritize the dismantling of structural injustices that have been built into and continue to operate within the food system. Since racism and food injustice are causes and effects of each other, one cannot be solved without the solving the other. As Natasha Bowens, author of The Color of Food, writes, in today’s world, “the food justice movement and the Black Lives Matter movement are fighting the same beast” (Civil Eats 4). Since the American food system is built on racism and xenophobia, the food justice movement must have anti-racist and pro-immigrant efforts as a center of its focus.

    Such efforts, in the past, have shown that when structures of exploitation and discrimination are exposed and addressed, positive change will follow. For example, in response to the Bracero Program, the United Farm Workers was formed by César Chávez and Gilbert Padilla that transformed migrant labor (Southern Poverty Law Center). They led the charge in demanding better wages and taught farmworkers how to fight for their rights and livelihoods, eventually achieving the passage of a law that protected union activity, the only one of its kind in the nation. Additionally, the Black Panther Party, though dismantled by the government, eventually inspired the USDA to start the School Breakfast Program that now feeds nearly thirteen million students daily (Collier 18).

    To remedy the food injustices prevalent in the food system, the United States needs to make reparations to those it has stolen from, oppressed, disenfranchised, and discriminated against. Native Americans need to be given back enough land to sustain healthy communities, and in fact there has been steps taken by the United Nations correspondent on indigenous peoples, James Anaya, to return land to Native Americans, but Congress has refused to meet with him (UN Official). However, in 2016, under the Obama administration, the U.S. government paid $492 million to seventeen Native American tribes for “mismanaging natural resources and other tribal assets” (Hersher 1), which is one of many steps that should be taken toward full reparations. Additionally, neighborhoods of color, especially majority black neighborhoods, need to be allocated state and federal funds for school education, better access to healthy and affordable food, and improved maintenance of the community. The USDA must also enforce better treatment standards and better pay for agricultural and factory workers to make sure that no worker goes home injured, sick, or hungry. And within the agricultural system, there must be an acknowledgement of different cultural practices among immigrant farmers and enough flexibility to address issues as they arise.

    The government should eliminate NAFTA and ensure that the United States is not a motivator of global hunger and food insecurity through unfair trade agreements and exploitation of international land and workers. Instead of flooding the market with cheap, subsidized American products and incentivising the exportation of crops by hungry nations and communities, the United States should support international food sovereignty. As one of the current world superpowers, the United States has the ability to set up the framework for food sovereignty across the globe simply by making it a goal for America itself. In order to achieve self-sustainability, the United States would have to ensure that it can produce the food needed to feed its citizens and support farmers without relying on imports and profits from an international market. This would require a restructuring or elimination of the agricultural subsidy system and a market that responds to consumer demand. Without the pressure to survive in a market controlled by the United States’ artificially cheap products, developing countries would find it easier to achieve food sovereignty and address hunger. Though it would likely still be challenging until food sovereignty becomes a global objective, the United States could take the first steps in leading us to a more equitable food system.

    We need to form a society that makes live and lets live, an improved version of Foucault’s concept of biopower and one that recognizes that disempowering groups of people in order to support an illusion of unity among the collective body is unsustainable. It collapses as soon as enough of the oppressed and their allies take a stand against the system, realizing that it relies on their continued silence (see Figure 3). The agricultural and food systems rely on their abuses and those they abuse remaining invisible, so the food justice movement’s primary goal should be to spread knowledge of our exploitative history and awareness of the contemporary oppressive politics at play. Those already fighting for food justice should direct their efforts at policy change. Even small changes, such as a redirection of a portion of the subsidies given to commodity crops to instead support the production of fruits and vegetables, can dramatically improve the food system and the health of the nation. In this era of globalization, small changes will quickly snowball, hopefully eventually requiring a restructuring of the global food system, helped along by the crisis of climate change.

    Though such decisions are controlled by powerful corporations whose only goal is profit, history has proven that even in a corrupt market, consumer demand and a few loud voices can lead to change. Rachel Carson and her supporters were able to persuade the USDA to remove DDT, the most harmful pesticide from the market, with the publication of Silent Spring. Cargill, one of the largest meatpacking companies in the world, has recently shifted its focus to more sustainable protein alternatives, responding to consumer demand for “cleaner meat.” Ireland is attempting to create a legal right to food, New Zealand has eliminated agricultural subsidies, and France just renewed its commitment to combating climate change. It will be difficult and will take time that many do not have, but it is possible to believe that the United States government, with enough activists fighting for better policies and enough consumers and citizens demanding change, could begin to address the structural inequalities, racism, and exploitation that remain as pillars of the food system.

    Figure 3: On the left is the traditional view of power, which flows downward from the leadership to the people. The graphic on the right represents the functioning of power that relies on the abuse and oppression of groups and individuals, as is true in the United States. If you remove the pillars of support, you eliminate the power. Source: Daniel Hunter

    This paper represents the views of its author, who does not necessarily endorse the views of other authors on this site.

    Copyright © 2017 Mo Constantine. All rights reserved.

  • Earthling 4:56 pm on December 11, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: ecocide and immigration, environmental argument for immigration reform, immigration policy and the environment, theresa may   

    The Environmental Argument for Immigration Reform 

    The current global visa system is harming the environment by encouraging people to take many flights. Airplanes contribute greatly to climate change.

    As things currently stand, the global visa system encourages short-term visits and makes long-term residence difficult.  Tourist visas are the easiest to obtain; often you can just buy a ticket and get a tourist visa on arrival. This is because governments are prioritizing short-term profit over the long-term well-being of humanity. Long-term visas minimize the amount of superfluous flying to and fro, and thus benefit the environment and humanity as a whole. The whole global visa system needs to be reversed. Let people take less frequent but longer vacations, when they need to go far. (You’ll actually get to know the place a little that way!)

    Perhaps governments are afraid terrorists will reside in their country on long-term visas. Well, climate change is far more dangerous than terrorists. The way things are going, climate change will cause mass migrations, and governments will have more trouble with unwanted immigrants in the long run.

    The current global immigration system is ineffective and mainly motivated by greed and selfishness. Most countries offer a small selection of visa categories that do no justice to the great diversity of human situations and intentions. To get a visa you need to meet some bureaucratic requirements and pass the stupid profiling, whereas realistically a person’s intentions are what determines their value or risk to a country. The most dangerous people in the world, the rich, have the easiest time getting visas, whereas countless well-meaning and harmless people can’t get visas because they have a useless passport (Africa, India, etc.) or they are not rich enough. If you are rich and white there will always be a way to live where you want, even if your concealed sole intention is to harm the country and its people in every way possible using your abundant resources (start a company that poisons the environment, do human trafficking, get friendly with the mafia).

    There is no reason for the current global visa system to exist except that governments are universally too incompetent and amoral to implement something better. Historically, this system did not exist before the time of World War I; people would wander around willy-nilly without even a passport. Would it be that bad if we went back to the old system? How can we know if we don’t try it out? Instead of making visas hard to get, just stop drilling for oil and let the cost of travel skyrocket, then people will buy less plane tickets and the climate crisis will be averted, preventing mass migration. Kill two birds with one stone.

    By Edgar Smith

    The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily coincide with those of other authors on the site.

  • Earthling 4:35 am on December 7, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: biodegradable home, build your own log home, butt and pass log home, environmental home buildin, green home building, Log Home Builder's Association of North America, log home builders, log home building, log home kits, log home kits suck, recyclable home   

    The Log Home As a Good Natural Building Solution 

    By Carroll Colette J. Yorgey

    Log homes are the best homes for providing a natural green building solution. They easily blend into the natural environment because they are part of the environment.

    Log homes are biodegradable, recyclable, and energy efficient. Logs are of course solid wood from trees and offer the same life-giving properties of the tree. They are carbon sinks and remove carbon dioxide from the environment. Logs offer the best source of a construction material that doesn’t pollute the water or air and give off greenhouse gas emissions and solid waste.

    However it is very important that logs are manufactured to industry standards, using efficient and technologically safe cutting methods, and that they are manufactured properly. Harvesting of trees should be done according to renewable and responsible forestry practices.

    Therefore, if you are planning to build a log home, it is better to purchase already manufactured logs rather than doing it yourself, providing the company you are purchasing from does indeed follow all standards and codes regarding environmentally efficient and safe forestry practices.

    Wood is the most highly adaptable construction material. It offers natural temperature control and insulation. It is easy to build with, offers a robust exterior and interior, and is processed simply.

    A log home that is built to excellent standards is 100% green. You are not exposed to harmful chemicals that are processed in the building of an ordinary home. Health related problems such as asthma, respiratory illness, and migraine headaches associated with the chemically structured home are eliminated in the log home. It is a truly green home.

    If you were to purchase a tract of land that was wooded, you could easily build your log home with the wood on your land, making sure to replant the same type of trees that you are taking down. However, it is important that the trees are milled properly and also that once you build the home that it is built properly so that you are not using chemicals and sealants that harm the environment.

    Log home kits are not the way to go according to the Log Home Builder’s Association of North America. They recommend the butt and pass log home which will not use chemicals or sealants. According to their information the log home kits are not totally environmentally friendly and have included chemicals and sealants.

    They state that you can build a butt and pass log home from scratch for as little as $7,500. With the log home you will be both environmentally natural, economically natural, and entirely green – a good green and natural idea all the way around.

    Reference: http://community.loghomebuilders.org/

    Copyright © 2018 Carroll Colette J. Yorgey. Edited and used with her permission.

  • Earthling 1:16 pm on December 6, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Algeria, Algerian study, ecological construction, ecological home, ecological house, energy efficiency, , green living, greenhouse emissions from a home   

    The environmental impact of an ecological house 

    Here are translated excerpts from an Algerian study that compared the environmental efficiency of the same house before and after it was rebuilt with ecological materials in place of conventional ones.


    From the Revue des Energies Renouvelables [Renewable Energy Journal] Vol. 13 N°4 (2010) 545 – 559

    Abu Bakr Barnes University, B.P. 119, Tlemcen, Algeria (received on September 3, 2010 – accepted December 26, 2010)


    Summary: An ecological house is more of a concept than a specifically defined kind of house. The idea is to combine various types of heating, ventilation and power supply for appliances to massively reduce energy consumption and cause an exponential decrease in CO2 emissions. This paper covers a study of the effects of an ecological house on the environment. To achieve this review, we first did a comprehensive study of the energy balance, from which we were able to determine, on the one hand, the usage times of each utility in the house, and thus a record of the CO2 emissions, and on the other hand, the carbon assessment in primary energy, as well as the lifecycle of the insulating materials. The results obtained were compared with the results from the same house built with non-insulating materials such as brick, concrete, etc. The comparison shows a significant difference in terms of energy, economics and the environment, which makes us very optimistic about the effectiveness of ecological houses.


    The ever surfacing reports evaluating and measuring greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are becoming increasingly alarming. In fact, according to a study published in the “Proceedings of the National Academy of Science” and carried out by M. Raupach for the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation’s Marine and Atmospheric Research and Global Carbon Project, the emission of greenhouse gases, which is responsible for global warming, is always rising. If measures are not taken to limit its rise, global warming will have drastic effects.

    As we see it, our obligation to respect our environment is greater than ever, and every individual must find a balanced solution that involves both comfort and a unique contribution to sustainable development.

    We’ll speak of ecological houses as being those in which two criteria are met:

    1. At least 80% of the house’s energy is more economical than the average, although this can be taken much further, to the point of no consumption, or even negative consumption (net production of energy).
    2. The usage of ecological, healthy and durable materials.

    The main requirements for an ecological house are:

    • Alliance between the land and local climate
    • Orientation: ability to make use of the sun
    • Carbon footprint: hunt down hidden emissions
    • Thermal insulation: absolutely necessary
    • Walls: healthy, natural materials
    • Ventilation: air sufficiently refreshed
    • Favor renewable energies for heating and air conditioning
    • Create a healthy and comfortable environment for the inhabitants

    The aim of our work is to make an environmental comparison between an existing house in Tlemcen, Algeria, built with conventional materials (concrete, bricks, etc.), and the same house built with ecological materials (cork, hemp, wood, etc.), to get a clear idea of the impact of such a house on the environment.

    The setting is in western Algeria in the Tlemcen region, Latitude 34°52’01” North, Longitude 1°28’01” West, at an altitude of 850 m, in a temperate climate.

    Energy efficiency will the major challenge of the years to come, because this issue inherently contains the issues of greenhouse gas emissions and embodied energy, that is to say the energy needed to manufacture materials and systems (heating and ventilation). The question of energy efficiency represents the essence of environmental performance.

    View of the House (East side)

    The area of the house is 100 m2, and it has three floors. The first floor features a hall, a garage, a living room and a bathroom; on the second floor, there is a living room, a kitchen, a small lounge and bathrooms; on the third floor, three bedrooms, a hall and a bathroom. The area of each room is shown in the below table.

    The architecture, orientation, compactness, and surrounding plants help the house capture solar rays and maximally benefit from solar gain. The living space is oriented from the southeast to the southwest, which is precisely the principle of bioclimatic architecture required for an ecological design. The conventional house was originally built with brick and concrete, with windows of wood and doors of wrought iron.”

    Types of materials used in the ecological house

    For the insulation of the house, we opted for:

    • Thick mineral-wool board (140 mm thickness) for the floor and foundations.
    • Flexible wood-wool board (220 mm thickness) under the roof.
    • Three hundred (300) mm of cellulose wadding for the ceiling and 200 mm for the floors of the rooms.
    • For the walls, a wood framework (U = 0.16 W/m2) with a sound-insulation level greater than 46 db. A double glazing of 20 mm with an interior volume filled with gas (U = 1.1) and a sound-insulation level greater than 31 db.

    In our study of the environmental performance, the difference between CO2 emissions from House1 and House2 is clear. This is difference is mainly due to the design materials (material types, primary energy, transportation of materials, life cycle, reduction of heating and air conditioning through better insulation).

    (The Pink is CO2 emissions due to natural gas. The Grey is CO2 emissions due to electricity. The ecological house is on the right.)


    We can draw a number of conclusions from this first environmental comparison, which can guide our actions for the protection and promotion of the environment.

    An ecological house cannot be entirely perfect for those who are seeking maximum comfort. Nevertheless, we were able to find materials that are largely compatible and at the same time help to reduce energy costs.

    These houses require a higher cost to build. Over time, these buildings will need less energy for heating, lighting, etc. This means less costs overall compared to other buildings.

    Ecological construction can meet the needs of current generations without compromising the ability of future generation to meet theirs, thus contributing to sustainable development.

    Translated by Zebulon Goertzel

  • Earthling 4:16 am on November 29, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: aberdeen proving ground, America Cyanamid, American Creosote Works Inc, California Gulch, , contaminants, epa, epa most polluted places in us, epa superfunds, toxic waste, uepa superfund sites   

    The Most Polluted Places in the US 

    By Carroll Colette J. Yorgey

    The most polluted places in the U.S. are listed on the EPA website and are designated Superfund Sites. Superfund sites are the most urgent clean-up areas in America. EPA lists all clean-up areas, but the ones listed as Superfund are slated for first clean-up, due to the highest amount of toxic pollution.

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) started the Superfund program as a remedial program for the most polluted hazardous waste areas in America.

    Some sites take years to clean up. Other sites may never be cleaned up sufficiently to make the area habitable.

    Toxic waste has been polluting our earth for longer than we know and it is just within the later part of the
    20th century that measures were begun to clean up these toxic waste dumps.

    Groundwater and river contamination is the worst type of pollution in all areas across America. EPA has
    listed 2769 sites where there is a record of decision (ROD). You can read these complete records at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/index.htm

    It is important to clean up these sites, as the pollution seeping into groundwater and rivers spreads from
    place to place, from river to river, from groundwater to groundwater, and from groundwater, to our soil and our drinking water.

    EPA divides up its Superfund sites into 10 different Superfund jurisdictions across America. Superfund sites exist in every state across America.

    I have looked at a few of them that seem to be the most prominent being there are many listings for the same site. Here is a list of some of them giving a bit of history of each so you can get an idea of the extent of damage caused by hazardous waste disposal to our groundwater, rivers, and streams and eventually our drinking water:

    1) Aberdeen Proving Ground (Edgewood Area), NC, MD. This is an enormous site comprising 72,000 acres in Maryland alone. More acreage is in North Carolina.

    This is an Army installation and consists of various sites of contamination — 13 sites that have recently been evaluated, 10 sites that are completed but still contain contaminants and are not to be used by “hypothetical future residents.” There are over 35 more sites.

    Contaminants include VOCS, Benzine, PCE, TCE, tolieene, metals, and arsenic.

    The area of contamination is groundwater within the area of Canal Creek, the Canal Creek Aquifer, King’s Creek, and marshes of Canal Creek.

    This area was “a center for research, development, testing and manufacture of military-related chemicals and chemical agents” since 1917.

    “From 1941 to 1952, chemical-warfare agents including mustard, lewisite, adamsite, white phosphorus, munitions, contaminated equipment, and miscellaneous hazardous wastes were disposed of in 35-onsite unlined pits and trenches. Studies have shown that chemicals buried within the pits have compacted groundwater and also interconnecting surface water in Watson Creek from 1949 to the mid-1970’s.”

    Decontamination efforts have also resulted in contamination of the groundwater with chlorinated

    This site was first listed in 1991.

    2) American Creosote Works, Inc., Pensacola, FL and Jackson, Tennessee.

    This site was listed in 1989 It is a 60-acre site located in Jackson, Tennessee. It was conceived in the
    1930’s as a wood-preservation facility. The contaminants are inorganics, pesticides, PCBs, VOCs, PCP, PAHs, dioxin, arsenic.

    The contamination is located in sediments, soil, and surface water.

    The Pensacola, FL site lists contaminated groundwater, sludge, soil, and sediment.

    The contaminants are Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), phenols, and volatile organic compounds.

    3) America Cyanamid, Somerset, NJ.

    This company was listed in 1993 and is composed of soil and groundwater contamination.

    It has been involved in chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturing for over 75 years.

    The semivolatible organic contaminants are Acetone, Benzene, Methylene, Chloride, Sylenes, 4-Chloroaniline, N-nitroso-diphenylamine, Anthacene, Napthalene, and Phenonthrene.

    Inorganic contaminants are arsenic, copper, lead, zinc, and Polychlorinated Biphenol.

    4) California Gulch, Leadville, Co.

    This is a watershed contamination. Located 100 miles southwest of Denver, Co.

    The contaminants are Cadmium, Copper, Lead, and Zinc.

    Here the Yak Tunnel discharges 210 tons per year of Cadmium, lead, copper, manganese, iron, and zinc into the Arkansas River. The area surrounding the Arkansas River is a public recreational area. The Arkansas River is also used for irrigation, livestock, watering, the public water supply, and fisheries.

    These are just 4 examples of the most polluted areas in the United States. These are Hazardous Waste sites. There are other highly polluted areas such as air pollution, and brownfields, and many other hazardous waste sites that need to be cleaned up but have not made the Superfund list yet.

    Most of the Superfund sites are located at abandoned factories, chemical plants, pharmaceutical plants, and U.S. Military bases.

    The most highly air polluted places exist close to airports with extreme greenhouse gas emissions of CO2 from planes and other vehicles operating in the area. These are also located in large cities, which makes the large city a highly polluted place.

    So you have the isolated areas of hazardous waste pollution and the city concentration of air pollution.

    If you would like to help in cleaning up a hazardous waste site that may be close to your area go to http://www.epa.gov where you can find suggestions for helping in this massive cleanup effort.

    Source: http://www.epa.gov/superfund/index.htm

    Copyright © 2018 Carroll Colette J. Yorgey (Except for the image)

  • Earthling 12:08 am on November 29, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: air pollution in palestine, breathing freedom, , gaza toxic biosphere, , palestine forever, palestine freedom songs, say no to genocide, say no to mass murder, say no to zionism   

    Gaza Genocide Harms the Environment 

    Gaza now has a toxic ‘biosphere of war’ that no one can escape

    Air Pollution in Palestine

    Gaza’s drinking water spurs blue baby syndrome, serious illnesses

    With the resources at its disposal, Israel can take measures to prevent the land under its control from becoming uninhabitable toxic wasteland. Palestine has no such resources.



    I breathe freedom, don’t take my air
    Don’t push too hard, it’s better that we don’t both fall
    You will never be able to abolish me
    You must listen to me and talk to me
    And if you think you’re healing me
    This is not medicine
    If only you would listen to me
    In spite of everything that’s happened
    Power is what fails
    If it goes against thoughts
    This world is big enough for everyone
    Only the truth prevails
    And if you want we can find a solution
    If only we think together

    I breathe freedom, don’t take my air
    Don’t push too hard, it’s better that we don’t both fall
    The voice of freedom is louder than everything else
    No matter how much the wind of darkness blows,
    And the night covers the distances.
    You can’t color this whole world
    With the same color
    And change the order of the earth
    And the flow of the air
    I breathe freedom, don’t take my air
    Don’t push too hard, it’s better that we don’t both fall

    More freedom songs at https://palestineforever.home.blog/

    See also International Day of Living Together and Judaism’s Final Solution: Compassion

  • Earthling 7:07 am on November 20, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , constitutional protection of minorities, , diversity in islam, religious pluralism in islam   

    Diversity in Islam 

    The beginning of Islamic Constitutional Pluralism in 622 AD

    “The Medina Charter is arguably known to be the first constitution ever written incorporating religion and politics. Drawn up by Prophet Muhammad, the Charter was intended to end inter-tribal conflicts and maintain peace and cooperation among the people of Medina, which, after Mecca, is Islam’s second holiest place where the first Muslim community was established. It constituted a formal agreement between Prophet Muhammad and all the tribes and families of Yathrib (the old name for Medina) including Muslims, Jews, Christians and pagans.

    The Charter gave equality to all its citizens and accepted the coexistence of different religions in the community. Under the constitution, all religious, ethnic and tribal groups had equal protection, rights and dignity. They would live by their own beliefs and judge themselves by their own laws.”

    A Successful Implementation of Islamic Pluralism in Spain

    “Al-Andalus’ success has often been attributed to its tolerant and pluralistic character known as La Convivencia, or the Coexistence. Islamic pluralism, as exemplified in Andalusian society, helped to preserve and even champion cultural diversity, in contrast to modern globalism.

    Nowhere is this more evident than in the ‘Golden Age’ of Jewish culture that took root in Muslim Spain. This was a period of flourishing Jewish intellectual, cultural and religious life. Illustrious scholars of the time included Moses ibn Ezra and Solomon ibn Gabirol, both preeminent philosophers and poets, and Maimonides himself, a scholar of vast influence in Torah scholarship and philosophy. Yet, almost paradoxically, despite maintaining and advancing their own distinct identity they were very much wholly integrated into the fabric of Islamic society and its intellectual, cultural and political circles. Jews adopted Arabic, the lingua franca of the time, and made it their own wielding it with profound eloquence to produce everything from religious treatises to romantic poetry.”

    International Day of Living Together

    Call To Eco-Jihad

    Biodiversity in Islam

    Kindness to Animals

    By Khalil Abdulkareem

  • Earthling 9:56 am on November 19, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: 14 Latin American Countries Sign Treaty Providing Enhanced Environmental Rights, Agroforestry in Tajikistan, , Bees are Being Exterminated by Shortsighted Human Activity, , Bison Reintroduced to Wild in US, Canadian Senate Passes Bill to Ban Dolphin and Whale Captivity, China's Ban on Trash Imports Creates Crisis for Southeast Asia, Coastal Cities Around the Globe Are Sinking, , Deadly Diseases Caused by Climate Change, Environmental Groups Sue Government, extermination of biodiversity, fish, Global Warming Probably Causing Worse Cyclones and Hurricanes, gorillas, hawaiian hawks, Indigenous Amazonians Use Modern Technology to Fend off Colonial Invaders, , Many Critically Endangered Plants Can't Be Saved By Seed Banks, Massive loss of seagrass due to water pollution, Monolian National Socialists Defend the Environment, Oceans Are Warming Up, Ongoing Persecution and Murder of Environmental Activists in Latin America, prosperous gorillas, Severe Smog in Northern China due to Economic Preoccupations, Siddarth Singh Writes a Book About India's Smog Which is the Worst in the World, state of the modern world 2018, , The Seafloor Is Dissolving, Tian Shan Glacier Mining Pollutes Water in Kyrgyzstan, Toxic Factory Emissions Plague North Ossetia, US Border Wall Will Harm Fragile Ecosystems, US Crab Fishermen Sue Fossil Fuel Companies for Changing Climate   

    State of the Modern World Address — November 2018 


    Oceans Are Warming Up



    The Seafloor Is Dissolving


    Deadly Diseases Caused by Climate Change

    The Warming Earth is Waking Up Dormant—and Deadly—Diseases

    Many Critically Endangered Plants Can’t Be Saved By Seed Banks


    Massive loss of seagrass due to water pollution


    Global Warming Probably Causing Worse Cyclones and Hurricanes


    Coastal Cities Around the Globe Are Sinking


    Bees Are Being Exterminated by Shortsighted Human Activity




    Toxic Factory Emissions Afflict North Ossetia


    Agroforestry is Productive in Tajikistan

    Agroforestry saves soil and boosts livelihoods in Tajikistan

    Tian Shan Glacier Mining Pollutes Water in Kyrgyzstan



    North America

    US Border Wall Will Harm Fragile Ecosystems, Environmental Groups Sue Government



    Bison Reintroduced to Wild in US


    Global Warming Causes Unprecedented Wildfires


    US Crab Fishermen Sue Fossil Fuel Companies for Changing Climate


    Canadian Senate Passes Bill to Ban Dolphin and Whale Captivity




    Masses of Seaweed Afflict Caribbean Ecosystems



    Latin America

    Deforestation of Amazon Intensifies Under New President

    Bolsonaro’s deforestation of the Amazon has already begun

    Indigenous Amazonians Use Modern Technology to Fend Off Colonial Invaders (Donate Here)


    Latin America Increasingly Bans Plastic


    Guatemala to Use Bio-Fences to Reduce Plastic Pollution

    Guatemala to Use Bio-fences to Reduce Plastic Pollution

    14 Latin American Countries Sign Treaty Providing Enhanced Environmental Rights


    Ongoing Persecution and Murder of Environmental Activists in Latin America




    Ongoing Rebellion Against Ecocide in UK and Elsewhere https://twitter.com/extinctionr

    France Aims to Ban Deforestation Imports by 2030 http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/11/14/france-aims-ban-deforestation-imports-2030/


    Middle East and North Africa

    Drought is Killing Off Israel’s Trees

    Drought Is Killing Off Israel’s Trees, Says Groundbreaking Nationwide Study – Haaretz

    Egyptian Government Buys Straw from Farmers to Prevent Harmful “Straw Clouds”

    Egyptian pollution plan signals the last straw cloud – Environment and Development

    Alexandria is Sinking




    Fish Vanishing from Senegal Coast


    Republic of Congo Opens New National Park

    Republic of Congo names new national park, home to gorillas, elephants

    Mountain Gorillas Doing Well


    Massive Gas Flaring in Nigeria Harms Environment


    Tree Hopping in Kenya


    Seychelles establishes $15M Blue Bond to support marine wildlife




    China Resumes Suspended Coal Power Projects


    Severe Smog in Northern China due to Economic Preoccupations




    Mining Threatens Mongolian Environment


    National Socialists Defend the Environment

    Mongolia’s most unlikely new environmentalists also happen to be neo-Nazis


    Southeast Asia

    China’s Ban on Trash Imports Creates Crisis for Southeast Asia




    Endangered Forests Being Robbed



    Environmental Crisis in Kashmir


    Pakistan goes wild for coal


    Siddarth Singh Writes a Book About India’s Smog Which is the Worst in the World



    Hawaiian Hawks No Longer Endangered


  • Earthling 2:55 am on November 16, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: abuse of environment, cyberbullying, digital justice, digital justice and ecocide, ecocide, environmental hacktivism, FOSS and ecocide, Free and Open-Source Software and Ecocide, , internet freedom and ecocide, , privacy and ecocide, web freedom and ecocide   

    Digital Justice and Ecocide 

    Internet Freedom and Ecocide

    The free exchange of information is essential for the propagation of scientific information about the environment, journalism about ecocidal behavior and policies, and also to organize activities and protests in support of Mother Earth.

    Privacy and Ecocide

    Privacy is essential for freedom of speech. The absence of privacy makes it easy for authorities to punish journalism, activism and the propagation of scientific information about the environment (as can be seen in China).

    Free and Open-Source Software and Ecocide

    Commercial software is more susceptible to being manipulated and abused by ecocidal governments and corporations. Closed-source software cannot be freely evaluated by users for security and privacy, so consumers can’t know for sure what the software is actually doing. Free and open source software is also more efficient in terms of human and hardware resources. Open source projects can borrow from each other easily, whereas Apple, Google and Microsoft cannot.

    Cyberbullying/Hacking and Ecocide

    Cyberbullying and hacking are illegal in many places. Such behaviors can be harmful to environmental causes when the victims are environmental activists or journalists, or they could hypothetically be productive if used against ecocidal forces like illegally polluting companies. Here is a book covering the subject of environmentalist hacktivism.


    By Henry L. MacGregor

Compose new post
Next post/Next comment
Previous post/Previous comment
Show/Hide comments
Go to top
Go to login
Show/Hide help
shift + esc