The atrocities committed in this undercover Mercy For Animals video show the lack of ethics of the workers in these factory farms. These are exceptional acts of cruelty because there was absolutely no reason for the people shown in the video to torture the animals with pipes and pitchforks. These acts weren't for self defense, the cows were obviously contained in enclosures where they were unable to move even they wanted. These acts were unprovoked and were conducted because these people have a twisted, sick sense of humor and thought it was entertaining. In order to work in this type of establishment, one must have a detachment from morals and from caring for the welfare of animals. This attracts people who may be prone to abuse. One of my co-workers is a strong advocate for animal rights and told me about how in a book called "Slaughterhouse", there is an interview done where a couple constantly experiences domestic violence. This also shows how this industry can spawn violent behaviors. These are also considered exceptional acts of cruelty because in addition to the confinement and stress that these cows already face on a daily basis, they are being stabbed with pitchforks in the face, flanks, udders, and legs, and beaten over the head with steel posts and fists.
Standard industry practices require industries to follow certain requirements and regulations, however, factory farming seems to be an exception. I cannot help but assume that Billy Joe Gregg has terrorized and abused animals on more than one occasion, and it's not likely that he was alone when doing so. So why wasn't anything done? He was in clear violation of the Animal Welfare Act. These animals are thought of as a resource, as something that has no intrinsic value, feelings, or thoughts, and are therefore thought of as mere objects, not beings that can feel, think, and have a will to live. Since they are only thought of as a commodity, people tend to stop caring how they are treated. From the employees, to the management, to the corporate level, the gap of detachment from being able to sympathize for animals grows larger and larger. The agribusiness world described in Mason's "Brave New Farm" is an overcrowded, terrifying place. In 2004, PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) did an undercover investigation of a chicken slaughterhouse. Pilgrim's Pride is the "second-largest chicken company in the U.S." and the investigation "revealed sadistic abuse of birds, involving laborers, supervisors, foreman, and managers. In responding, the President and CEO assured the public that "Pilgrim's Pride strictly adheres to the animal welfare program recommended by the National Chicken Council."" (Mason, 169). Since chickens aren't covered under the Animal Welfare Act, I don't believe that these employees were ever prosecuted in any way. Thankfully Billy Joe Gregg was arrested on twelve counts of animal cruelty, however, he wasn't the only one committing the abuse, and there are countless others who are doing these horrible things on a daily basis. The law needs to change and needs to actually be enforced. I know if I'm caught going six miles over the speed limit, I'll probably get a ticket. These people do not care because even if they have the longshot chance of being caught, no one is likely to do much about it.
The movie Avatar has made a gigantic cultural impact on us in the year 2009. After racking up major box-office bucks, the movie has touched our hearts now through our blue-ray/DVD-players for the subsequent years. The reason it has had a titanic impact, forgive the pun, is solely on the fact that it touched a racial segregation line between two different groups of people. The Na'vi, a born species to the world of Pandora, claimed the rightful throne of their homeworld until the human beings came in with their anthropocentric view of the universe and attempted an overthrow of its original inhabitants. This touched many people because, even though it had been shown through movies such as: The Last Samurai, Dances With Wolves, and even to a lesser extent, Star Wars, this one was the most recent "awakening" from the anthropocentric view we guide our children and grandchildren to believe day in and day out.
As the Master Narrative tells us, through textbook, news casts, and even webcasts, the world we live in, or don't for that matter a la Pandora, seems to offer only one scapegoat of a persepective, "all shall bow to the humans." The major flaw in such a one-sided view is that the humans invading Pandora for their own means of gaining wealth and colonialism, do not live the life of the natives. Rarely do such exquisite stories get told, but in this case, Sam Worthington, or Jake Sully as he is known in the film, does experience such a tale, and even embarks on a heroic tale to recapture the land for the true colonists. The heroic ethics he taps into are needed to rectify his ineffectiveness of pleasing either side of the story which at one point left him with no home to call his own. This allowed the self-narrative to occur and guided him through wastelands left behing by his own race to approaching these drastic times with drastic measures. His careful preparation was unhindered and he managed to capture the biggest creature known to the Na'vi -- a creature that held a symbolic and even noble standing in the Na'vis' hearts. This allowed him to claim the title of "World-Traveler" and completely changed his philosophy on life and allegiance once sworn to the armed forces and human beings. Through his eyes, the narration exposes us to a not so anthropocentric view on matters, as an audience, rather it portrays a truncated narrative-- a view not seen often enough. As we are experiencing in Texas currently, Cesar Chavez, the pioneer extraordinaire, is being deleted from knowledge because of the state government. Known for hating illegal immigration with a passion, Texas government has moved forward with their blinded, delusional decision-making for this paradigm on the true forefathers to this great land. As the Tools for a Cross-Culture Feminist Ethics: Exploring Ethical Contexts and Contents in the Makah Whale Hunt states on paragraph two of the fifth page in the reading: "In 1979, the Makah Cultural and Research Center opened as a place to display the artifacts from Ozette, representing the 'historic continuity of Makah efforts to self-determine their ways of knowing and living in the world around them.'" Is that what we expect to do everytime a colonialism take place? To give back to them a grain of salt after we had taken the entirety of their existence? The Native Americans received sacred land to live on dozens of years after they were assimilated into a European, white-man culture. The Mexicans that once held Texas as one of their own properties were forced out at San Jacinto when Santa Anna declared defeat to the Texan hoards fighting for independence and sorrow in their hearts post-Goliad and post-Alamo. Are we to give them anything? We are seemingly still punishing them in Texas for their rule eons ago. Are the Na'vi just as unlucky? When their sacred tree is decimated through colonialization, are they to receive a small prize for playing the human's game centuries down the road? It isn't a good enough consolation to have your belief system wiped out by madmen with hovercrafts of destruction. The simple living the Na'vi led couldn't compare to the white man's technology. The only thing on their side at the climactic end was the knowledge of the white man's culture through their fearless, new leader, Jake Sully. Their heart, home-field advantage and tactical planning proved too much for the technological fleet of doom with their impending attack on the tree of life-- their sustenance on Pandora. They prevailed, but by a hair when the armed forces leader had his life taken away for his maniacal need to commit genocide; the karma finally caught up to him and hopefully enstilled a lesson in all audiences' minds.
To have such a different understanding and going forward allows us to accept nature and its belongings as a possession of Gaia, and not Uncle Sam, or any human-made poster child. The feelings towards Avatar were mixed in that the political standpoint James Cameron decided to take this movie in either angered and offended some, or showed them a whole new perspective on the matter, which enlightened them. Either way, this movie made an impact in everyone's life, as it's safe to say, because the box office numbers reflect the massive quantities that viewed, and then reviewed this movie over the course of six months. A cultural impact, surely, it will be remembered as the new milennium's take on the dualisms that still remain in society, albeit a fictional society, it still revealed to us how even decades and centuries after how the Native Americans, African-Americans, and serfs were handled, we realized deep within ourselves that "HATE" is still a word that seems to be a self-proclaimed moniker even in today's standards when we are dealing with either each other's races, lands, or our fellow air-breathing comrades. A shame to admit this horrid truth it is, but to avoid it is futile.
Life’s decisions are continuously made upon judgmental views. The way these views are weighed out and determined is by a person’s perspective. The movie Avatar demonstrates one of the most basic and common perspectives that many people living in today’s day carry out. Riches and materialistic wealth heavily surpass the value of life and nature. Throughout this entire film there will be subliminal messages about the undisposed respect for nature lining the plot of this story. This was instilled to subconsciously effect the way you think or see things. Some of these messages are more obvious than others; I want to bring attention to a few.
Observing as a student, Jake learns that "they have a deep connection to the forest; a network of energy that flows through all living things.” Nothing is taken for granted and every thing is appreciated. They don’t kill for sport, nonchalantly, or aggressively. They kill cautiously and swiftly with positive intent, assumed to preserve the animals as much as possible. During the scene where Jake has made his first kill, once the animal has been struck, he quickly rushes to it’s side to quickly end it’s suffering. Simultaneously he professes his appreciation saying things like "I see you Brother and thank you. Your spirit flows with Eywa; your body stays behind to become one with the people." This was done with the acknowledgment that he would still be recognized under Eywa, that he was not killed out of recklessness, and his sacrifice will be for a better cause.
Modern Thought
Much like in Jakes powerful last speech amongst the people,
he addresses issues relevant to the way we live now. He addresses how we’re
under the impression that we can take
whatever we want and no one can stop us. This isn’t the case. This world is not ours to
destruct. Neytiri begins to break down
explanations of the how to go about the ecology of things, she mentions that “All energy is only borrowed; one day you’ll
have to give it back”
This is in reference to the readings of Leopold “Thinking
like a Mountain” because they also believe in the strong rotation of the cycle
of life and nature in it’s entirety.
They know not to mistaken their place; they don’t take things out of
order. They realize that it’s a world they’re
able to live in but not in control. That
is exactly the point that superficial people forget. I believe the scene I’m about to post can
refrain specifically back to when the boy looked into the deep emerald green
eyes of the dying wolf and reached a point of realization.
It’s like we’re draining the life out of Mother Nature
slowly, and her love isn’t unconditional. We cannot keep taking from her
without putting back in. I would like to
close my post with my last quote from the Movie:
“I’m probably just talking to a tree right now, but if
you’re there, I need to give you a heads up. If Grace is with you look into her
memories. See the world we come from.
There’s no green there. They killed their mother and they’re going to do
the same here. They’re going to come like a rain that never ends, unless we
stop them. “
From the Movie Avatar, The Forest of the Planet Pandora
huwDavid.wordpress.com
EARTH IS ART. In the epic film Avatar, directed by James Cameron, it is clearly brought before our eyes that our world is a place of art, beauty, life, and knowledge that we the people are slowly killing without second thought every second of the day. Our environment is here before us not to just be drained of every resource, but instead is here to be a companion, a teacher, a mother.
Summary of movie. ATTENTION: Spoiler Alert!!!
General Concepts of the Movie Avatar
Master Narrative- The humans who come to Pandora believe that man is the center of all importance. They believe they can take what isn’t theirs and make it theirs with no problem on pandora.
Anthropocentrism- is non existent with the native people of Pandora. The Na’vi do not view themselves as the central or most important element of existence. Instead, they view themselves as one with the environment or mother earth. Though the humans on Pandora think differently. They support the idea of Anthropocentrism to the fullest.
Dualism- man v. nature, violence v. peace, life v. death, male v. female, knowledge v. lack of knowledge.
The movie Avatar to sum it all up is a story of nature and how man is greedy and a killer for resources. Avatar explains how modern humans are killing the earth and is sends an important message that we the people of today need to start doing something about our careless ways or else we will be left with nothing. Throughout the whole movie tons of quotes reveal the ways of humans and how we are seen to the Na'vi people (the natives of the planet Pandora)
"learn well Jake Sooley, and we will see if your insanity, can be cured"- Neytiri's mother
This quote is a perfect example of how the Na'vi people view the humans. She states, "we will see if your insanity, can be cured" insanity meaning, humans being so clueless about our own earth as well as the environment of Pandora. The Na'vi know how horrible the humans have been to their own homes and they hope to teach "Jake Sooley" all they know. They hope to expand the idea of mother earth and becoming a student of her teachings.
"Sky people cannot learn, you do not see."
Another quote explaining the cluelessness of humans and understanding our Earth and Pandora.
Modern Thought
"This is how it's done. When people are sitting on sh*t that you want, you make them your enemy, then you justify it and take it." - General, Movie Avatar
This quote truly justifies how we modern humans think. We take from our environment and in the end become enemies because the one we are taking from is dying.
"Energy is borrowed and one day we have to give it back" -Neytiri, Movie Avatar.
If we do not respect what we are given and don't give back to our earth we will end up with nothing.
"For some men care only to know nature, others desire to command her" -Robert Boyle p 46 of Merchant reading.
Humans in the movie Avatar are the "bad guys" they are referring to the people of the Na'vi as "blue monkeys" and "roaches" clearly stating to have no respect for life around them. They come to take their land and kill all that gets in the way including the trees, plants and even the Na'vi people. The humans are on this planet because all that was given to them on their own land they took and never gave anything back, "they killed their mother". Thus, we must think about the consequences today. Today we have a Mechanistic Worldview, we view nature as “dead”, composed of inert, substitutable, discreet parts that operate like cogs in a machine. We use and abuse it. We look at our selves as individuals, we are selfish and greedy only thinking of one’s self. We do only what benefits ourselves in result we sometimes hurt others. Atomism and Reductionism, are other reasons we humans base life selfishly. We are all worked up into science “atoms” and all types of theories we lose what is important to pay attention to. We loose the idea that our earth is here for us and that we are here to learn and grow with “her”. We forget to keep her healthy. All we do is take and take without giving back. All in all, through the movie Avatar our humanistic world view is shown clear giving us the motive to change. Lets learn from this movie and stop what we are doing wrong and CHANGE. We can create a better tomorrow just change our Modern Thought. Think of earth as our "Mother" and she will take care of us.
As an eager patron of the Cinermark movie theater in College Station I ignorantly watched Avatar for nothing more than a $4 thrill with big guns and blue aliens. When I went back and analyzed Avatar with ecofeminism in mind I realized that this movie demonstrates recurring themes of male domination and female/nature oppression while developing Gaard's eco and anti racial feminist ethic observations.
Avatar shares the same plot as such movies as: Pocahauntus, and Dances with Wolves. The themes of these movies focus on a dominant male character who shifts from the role of an antagonistic oppressionist that follows the master narrative of society through oppression to a protagonistic hero through the world travelling idea presented by Greta Gaard. Jake, a white marine with no education besides how to pull a trigger, begins by taking the place of his brother as a researcher to occupy an anatomic machine disguised as member of the indigenous tribe that occupy the planet Pandora. Grace, the leader of research, is a strong female character who struggles to overcome the oppression of the Colonel, an anthropocentric white male,who is only concerned about the colonization of this planet for use of it's rare and valuable "Unobtantium". The mission for colonization is headed by Parker, another white male, who carries himself as successful and is oblivious to anything besides his narrative self, which is him and his goal to obtain what cannot be obtained.
Avatar is a perfect example of dualisms including: man versus nature, and man versus women (Parker/the Colonel versus Grace). The dualistic idea of man versus nature is blatantly clear when the Colonel and his army follow the orders issued by Parker to destroy home tree. The notion that this is someone's home does not matter.What matters is that there are valuable resources under the tree and their home is an acceptable loss.At 1 hour and 35 minutes into the movie the Colonel acknowledges his awareness of home tree being the Na'Vi home and at the same time his lack of care."Alright people, let's get this done. I want every gas round you got right in the front door." With no hesitation he destroys this massive tree and follows with "first rounds on me", insinuating his victory which should be followed with celebration.
In many ways this movie follows along with what Greta Gaard points with the Makah tribe. The Na'Vi are like the Makah, and the Tree of Souls is their version of the gray whale. White man comes in and tries to take what is not theirs and in doing so, they crush what is spiritual to the tribe. Grace can be labeled as a feminist border crosser as she follows what Gaard is pointing out by learning the language of the Na'Vi. "The arguments on both sides of the Makah whale hunting issue articulate the logic of different moral voices, stemming from different cultural contexts." (Gaard) To prevent the breakdown in cross cultural languages, Grace makes her researchers learn the the indigenous language. Gaard supports her point with an excerpt from an essay written by Maria Lugones and Elizabeth Spelman: "We do not talk the same language. When we talk to you we use your language, the language of your experience and of your theories." One must realize, however that in Avatar, a part of the colonization is the implementation of schools to teach American language and American tradition. This is an example of racial oppression. Some might argue that these are simply made up tribes of made up beliefs from the head of James Cameron. Although, they are blue, they are also not white. Avatar can be rationalized as just a simple movie with a good plot and nothing else, however the similarities are there. Are the Na'Vi really any different than the Native Americans from so long ago that nobody remembers?
The master narrative of our society accepts and hails such movies like Avatar because it portrays white man dominating nature and becomes a reigning hero. Realistically, humans do not act like what is shown by Jake's character. Ideally, however, nobody wants to see the reality of white man's oppression, so we candy coat it with movies of heroic ethic that ignore the truncative narrative and go for glory. Nobody cares about female oppression, so, in the end, we focus on Jake (man) being the hero rather than Grace (woman) having her research used as a tool that led to the inevitable deforestation (nature) of Pandora. In order to break free from the oppression of females and possibly the oppression of whatever else man deems himself worthy of dominating, we must step outside of what Tony Porter calls the "man box."
Have you ever wondered what makes us human? Well, human is defined as “a person as distinguished from an animal (in science fiction) an alien; of or characteristic of people’s better qualities, such as kindness or sensitivity”. Nevertheless, what if a colony of individuals was found who posed the same characteristics of a human, who inherited their identities and inequality through the environment they inhabited. There are all different kinds of people living on this planet, and no matter what we all do and believe, I believe that no one should use anthropocentrism in a way to detour other creatures. We all should "see" at the same level. What made me discovery this fact was in a recent film showed in class.
There is no doubt that the most inspiring box office film of 2009, came under the direction of James Cameron. The film Avatar, took in $760.50 million at the box office, with a whopping ten-year span to create such a marvelous production. However, it is not the breakthrough of developing this film through 3D viewing and stereoscopic specially designed cameras, but the underlying science-environment fiction of the theme.The interdependence of components of nature and the protection of biodiversity by native people fighting against imperialism. According to the film director, it shares themes with “At play in the field of the Lord and the Emerald Forest”, “which feature clashes between cultures and cultivations”. I acknowledge the film’s connection with the movie “Dances with wolves”, in which a battered soldier finds himself drawn to the tribal culture he was initially fighting against.
Avatar, ( Neytiri and Jake) Photographer Unknown
The story of the film starts on Pandora an earth-sized moon, where one of the fictional gas orbiting can only be breathe by the inhibited tribe. Human being than cannot survive in the atmosphere of Pandora without using a breathing device. The indigenous people on Pandora belong to a tribe called Na’vi; creatures that are blue skinned and live in harmony with the nature of Pandora. They worship mother Goddess Eywa. Nonetheless, what makes Pandora special is its rich precious mineral reserve of unobtainium. Humans then seek to exploit this endemic mineral resource and biodiversity of Pandora, and organize a human corporation employing former marines and soldiers under Parker Selfridge, who tries to use a paradigm of conveying the Na’vi as enemies, who is trying to kill them. In the scene when Jake arrives at the presentation of the strategy.The main character in this film Jake Sully, is paralyzed below the waist, and is convinced into taking a diplomatic mission of obtaining the trust of the Na’vi clan to convince them to abandon their home tree, that sits over the large deposit of unobtainium. However, as every other superhero movie, Jake falls in love with a Na’vi named Neytiri, and learns how to become what leads up into a powerful leader in their world. Jake then assembles a large number of Na’vi to fight with human forces, and prays to Eywa to support Na’vi in the battle. The wildlife of Pandora launches a mass attack suddenly and humans are defeated and forced to leave Pandora. The soul of Jake is transplanted from the human body to his avatar body near the tree of souls. With this, the film ends, thus showing victory of biodiversity on imperialism. In addition, this film the master narrative was easy to catch. The dominant story that offered a unifying and total explanation of the world’s history, present structure, and ultimate purpose came from the anthropocentrism of the white man, portrayed through the eyes of the characters, Jake, Grace, Selfridge, Tsu’tey, and Colonel Quaritch.
Nevertheless, this summary can be broke down into a much simpler meaning. In an in class reading of “On Biocultural Diversity: Linking language, knowledge, and the environment”, by Luisa Maffi and Jeffrey Wollock, the theme of this film and the concepts of biocultural conservation and ethnocentric go hand-and hand.Ethnocentric is evaluating other peoples and cultures according to the standards of one’s own culture and beliefs. On the other hand, biocultural conservation understands the biological, cultural, and linguistic diversity as fundamentally interconnected, different manifestations of a single, complex whole that have developed over time through mutual adaptation, co-evolution. Thus, the conservation of endemic environments goes hand-in-hand with conservation of endemic cultures and languages, as these embody systems of inhabitation and knowledge that are more likely suited to an endemic environment than foreign ones.
This may have come from the extinction of experience, as stated in Maffi passage, that “This phenomenon has been called the “Extinction of experience”: the radical loss of the direct contact and hands-on interaction with the surrounding environment that traditionally comes through subsistence and other daily life activities.” Like the white man of Avatar, who do not care about destroying the indigenous planet on Pandora, because they have already destroyed their own Earth.In the opening scene, when Neytiri saves Jake from being attacked by the animal, she tells him “it’s your fault; you’re like a baby, making noise, don’t know what to do.” The fact that it was he’s fault and that the creature was not meant to be killed. However, Jake has an underlying narrative self that distinguishes him from the other humans; he has a strong heart.
By the white man applying the indirect driver of trying to give the Na’vi medicine, education, and roads, to figure out what they want, they try to order them to move out of their village. However, the direct driver behind this would lead to the destruction of bringing down the home tree. In its realization by Maffi, “conservation biologists and ecologist were becoming familiar with the concept of biocultural diversity, especially since the role of indigenous and other local peoples in the conservation of biodiversity found its way into international instruments…” (Maffi, pg8).
Encounter to that Wollock explains that “It is ethnocentric to assume that, to the extent that a culture has not shaped its environment as we have, it is merely because they did not know how to. This ignores the basic psychological fact that desire comes before achievement “(Wollock, pg 249).
However, Jake makes a point to absorb and integrate the Na’vi people, ideas, and culture through assimilation. Though the Na’vi places dualistic perspectives in their tribe, it is not as a greater factor than the emphasis that the humans create. In Pandora, there is a relationship drawn between man and women, sky people and Na’vi, mind and body, but there is no relations drawn between mother Eywa and man. Like we place here on Earth, between man and nature. The controversial over whose hierarchy over the other. Even the Na’vi is defined as relational, because they support the fact of caring for their environment.
Through this film and the reading by Maffi and Wollock, maybe humans can better defy the true meaning of life and the environment around us. It is an important aspect to break the interpretation of man’s master narrative what we "see" through our eyes, but instead figure out what people like the Na'vi in this instance "see". Sometimes as seen in this film, we can destroy the biocultural reserve of a thriving society, just because of the greediness of “us” humans.
Listed below are References and for More Information:
Wollock Jeffrey, Luisa Maffi. "On Biocultural Diversity: linking language, knowledge, and the environment." Maffi, Luisa. On Biocultural Diversity: linking language, knowledge, and the environment. Washington : Smithsonian Institution, 2001. 1-259.
Imagine living on the same land as your ancestors, knowing each landmark like the back of your hand, connected to the earth in a way that no outsider could ever fathom. Then, one day without warning, the world around you begins to crash down. An unfamiliar presence is in your home, and it instills a fear in you unlike anything you've ever felt before. Why are these people destroying your home? Don’t they see that “every rock and tree and creature has a life, has a spirit, has a name”?
As Americans, we often fail to see the intrinsic value of the world surrounding us. We have become anthropocentric and so disconnected from the Earth that we have forgotten that the world is connected in ways that are unseen. The master narrative drilled into our minds is to take what we want, to defy and control the Earth as we see fit, and to mold others to be more like “us”, even though we will never see them as being on “our” level, and instead as untamed “savages”.
In “Thinking like a Mountain” by Leopold, he learns that the wolves are essential to the stability of the mountain; but only realizes this after he sees the “fierce green fire die in the wolf’s eyes”, symbolizing the extermination of the wolves of the mountain. We never seem to think about the long-term consequences of our actions until it is too late. Instead of the “hunter’s paradise” he had envisioned, the deer have overpopulated the mountain, eating all of the vegetation until the mountain is left barren and the deer starving to death. What right do we have to upset the complex balance of nature so?
Upon seeing Avatar with this question in mind, I saw just how destructive our quest for resources could be to an entire civilization. Growing up in America, we never see the story from the eyes of the victims of displacement. In the movie, the manager of the project, Parker, continuously uses terms such as “blue monkeys” and “savages” to describe the Na’avi people. At one point he even mentions that the only reason they have not removed these people by force is because by doing so, the government “looks bad”. Parker represents the white upper-class American male, who wants nothing more than the most valuable resources the planet has to offer. So even though indigenous genocide looks bad, money matters more. At the end of this scene, Jake is left wondering what would happen if the Na’avi people don’t move from their homes.
After Neytri and Jake connect, a team of bulldozers eradicate one of the most sacred areas to the Na’avi people. As the trees fall around them, Neytri is in tragic despair of the destruction. One line that really struck a chord in me is when Parker is asked by a worker if they should wait, he says “Keep going, he’ll move. These people have to learn that we won’t stop.” At that moment I thought, “Wow, these people have no chance at defending themselves or their land.” Before the Colonel orders an all-out ambush on Hometree, we see how passionate the Na’avi are and how they are willing to die to protect their home. They are told to “have no fear”, and I cannot help but wonder if the Native Americans had the same passion to fight for their land, despite the knowledge that they had a small chance of succeeding, or if the wolves could have processed what the hunters’ intention was, would have fought just as vigilantly? What truly amazes me about this scene is when Grace is verbally attacking Parker, asking him if he understood the magnitude of what he had just destroyed: a giant communication network through each tree--intertwined and connected to each Na’avi. In response, Parker jokes that they must have been taking some kind of drugs to induce this sort of thinking, showing how many upper-class white Americans feel about “tree-huggers” and “hippies”. But if someone had taken the time to wonder “how can the mountain/region/continent be connected to these wolves we are killing?” then maybe, they would have stopped before the mountain was left a desolate wasteland.
During the ambush on Hometree, the Colonel comments that it is “one big tree.” This shows his sublime of the tree’s massiveness, however, he cannot appreciate the value it holds enough to not annihilate it. As Hometree crashes to the ground, the music is emotional and dramatic ridden with the screaming of birds as their home is destroyed. The scene is quiet for a moment, then, the music billows into a dark cloud as the Na’avi sob in a mixture of emotional and physical pain as the camera pans out to show the destruction wrought upon them. The scene then skips to the Colonel’s vehicle as he says “the first round is on me tonight.” This shows his feeling of indifference as they simply leave the havoc they brought.
Many times, this is where the indigenous people’s stories end. Despite their efforts, the place their souls have known for centuries is destroyed and raped of its’ resources…and they are forced to begin anew under the watchful eye of their oppressor. Many times, it’s the American government. What has been affected by the Na’avi’s homes being destroyed? The animals and people now have no home, and have to relocate, possibly putting another group of people and animals out of their place. Perhaps a predator was kept in check by the Na’avi hunting them. Perhaps a food resource has moved, and another group of animals are left to starve and possibly harm the humans that are extracting their billion dollar resources. What happens when there is nowhere left to go to strip down to barren bone? What happens when we have killed off every small group of seemingly insignificant indigenous peoples? Americans seem to believe that “the only people who are people are the people who all look and think like [themselves].” But if we were to walk the footsteps of a stranger, would we learn things we never knew we never knew?
I don’t know about you but when a bee fly’s into my face the first thing that pops in my mind is to KILL IT. What about you? Yes, you too? Perfect, you and I both are great examples of following Anthropocentrism (regarding humankind as the central or most important element of existence) I mean what is a bee to us anyway? Humans are strong, independent, and smart. Why does a bee matter in our life? Right? ... oh my goodness I could never have been so wrong.
According to an Article by Michael McCarthy, the Environment Editor of the Independent, The Decline of honey bees has been in effect as of the mid 1960’s in Europe and the US soon realized they were in the same boat in 2007, close to 30 percent of the nation’s 2 million-plus managed honeybee colonies were failing, almost three times as many as usual, and a third of those were collapsing in mysterious circumstances. Now as of the year 2011 (today) the disappearance of honeybees is resulting into a global Phenomenon according to the United Nations. It is stated that with these decrease in bees the importance of crop pollination is at an all time high and increasing yearly. Many theories of why this is happening is everything to
-Habitat degradation (loss of food for bees resulting in death)
-Air pollution, which is said to interfere with the ability for the bees to find food or their way home resulting in death
-Cell phones, the signals that cellular devices give off effect the bees way to find its way home
-Expansion of city life and the distinction of the countryside have declined several homes for bees.
Thus being said all these theories lead to one thing...us...HUMANS are not only killing bees but are also killing our own future.
According to the reading by Merchant the the question of nature and mans relationship is brought to a point. Is nature there for man to control or is man there to learn and prosper along side it? Are we here alongside nature side by side as equals? According to the bee article it clearly states we are both in need of one another maybe even us humans in need of the bees more. "The fact is that of the 100 crop species that provide 90 per cent of the world's food, over 70 are pollinated by bees.” The reading published by Merchant presents that earlier years the natives embraced the land, became one with nature and all “her” teachings. That idea was later lost in “Modern Thought” when Europeans came into the belief of domination of nature. “For some men care only to know nature, others desire to command her” p46. Now today we result in the Humanistic ways that are fully concurring our worldview as well as the practice of Egocentrism (thinking only of oneself, without regard for the feelings or desires of others). Our world has fully become absorbed in what is good for humans and humans only. According to Merchant today we learn everything about nature and earth through science and every technical scientific explanation. The 20th century view stands at, all objects on earth are here to assure man’s domination over the earth and planets. Throughout time everything from DNA- Biotechnology and Laws based on nature help man figure out the meaning and understanding of our relationship with nature. Through all this man has lost total understanding in whats important and that’s maintaining an equal and healthy balance between nature and ourselves."Bees underline the reality that we are more, not less, dependent on nature's services in a world of close to seven billion people."
All in all, we need not only the bees but all that nature has to offer us. "Human beings have fabricated the illusion that in the 21st century they have the technological prowess to be independent of nature." we cannot survive alone no matter what they believe. Facts are facts and the world around us and what is on it need to work together to create a better and healthier life.
It felt like all week until this day would finally come. On February 23, 2011 at 7:30 pm, Jeff Corwin made his appearance at the University of North Texas, and bought with him an extraordinary message. Jeff Corwin has worked for the conservation of endangered species and ecosystems around the globe. An expert on wildlife, ecology and conservation. However, not out of the ordinary Corwin's presentation featured exotic animals, most of which are snakes and reptiles. In his introduction video, scenes were flashed of him taking part among the different aspects in nature. However, fundamentally, the purpose he wanted to convey was on the conservation and the extinction of earth's wild animals and reptiles. In addition, that the precarious life of these animals are at stake.
Jeff Corwin (Unknown Photographer).
Jeff Corwin's lecture brought about the proposing thought of anthropocentrism, regarding humankind as the central or most important element of existence. He explained that we could see this through the growing number of swarm lands disappearing or posing dangers of man hunting down animals until they are near extinction. However, there is no doubt that through conservation, the progress of these creatures or becoming a certainty. Corwin's first presentation of a bullfrog, then following: lizard, anaconda, alligator snapping turtle, and crocodile, he discuss their discovery and their status as a specie. I agree on the marvelous adventure that Corwin is taking in order to save creatures on the verge of extinction. Everyone should take this idea into consideration, because we all share a common community.
Corwin lecture is an excellent example of land ethic. In the reading by, Leopold entitled "Thinking Like a Mountain", and "The Land Ethic", the terms land ethic and A-B Cleavage: “man the conqueror versus man the biotic citizen; science the sharpener of his sword versus science the searchlight of the universe; land the slave versus land the collective org" (Leopold, pg 8).
The in class video "Wilderness", in the eyes of humankind, land ethic is viewed as a thing that is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. Moreover, it is wrong when it tends to do otherwise. Nevertheless, indifference the biocultural conservation as explained by Maffi and Wollock represents the hand and hand conversation of endemic culture and language, embodies systems of inhabitation and knowledge that are more- likely suited to an endemic environment than foreign ones.
We are living in those moments were the ecological conscience of our symbiosis with the wild is viewed as direct driver. Through the lecture by Jeff Corwin and the participation of chosen participants, maybe we can better learn from the teachings of Leopold and Maffi. "Thinking Like a Mountain", perhaps may insure the longevity of Earth's disappearing creatures.
Caged cats after being rescued by China Small
Animal Protection Association from a market in in Beijing where
cats and dogs are traded for meat and fur. Photograph: AP
Mostly everyone is familiar with the phrase “Man’s best friend”, in a kindly reference to typical dog as a pet. However, in one article written by Jonathan Watts, there is controversial over the widespread and ancient practice of eating dog meat. A distasteful move for China is growing affluent, pet loving middle class. Entitled “Chinese legal experts call for ban on eating cats and dogs”, there is no doubt that this article represents the cultural hegemony and the resurgence of cultural essentialism.Published on Tuesday 26 January 2010, Chinese legal experts are proposing a ban on eating dogs and cats in a contentious move to end a culinary tradition that dates back thousands of years ago. In relations to the Makah tribe of northwest Washington, in ancient times, dog meat like whale meat was considered a medicinal tonic. However today, the meat is commonly available through the country, but in recent years, such traditions are increasingly criticized by an affluent, pet-loving, urban middle class. Nevertheless, the plan for banning dog meat has stirred up fierce debate between animal welfare groups and defenders of traditional values.
Watts article is an excellent example of cultural essentialism. In class we watched the TED video “Wade Davis on endangered cultures”, about how there are multiple forms of human existence, a mass extinction of languages, culture worlds, in response to what Greta Gaard “Tools for a Cross- Cultural Feminist Ethics: Exploring Ethical Contexts and Contents in the Makah Whale Hunt” called the truncated narrative. Truncated narrative is wrenching a small part of a narrative or ethical practice out of the historical and cultural context. This view goes along with the term of heroic ethic, when ethics are designed to treat the symptoms of the problem at the point at which conflict occurs, seeing only random metaphors and isolated problems- rather than the entire diseased worldview. In contrast, cultural essentialism disregards the diversity within and variation of culture over time. The idea that there is a timeless feature, that if it were changed or eliminated from a way of life, it would signify a fundamentally different culture.
Hence, the Chinese must stop the proposal of banning cats and dogs, but offer a solidarity agreement of feelings or actions. The urban middle class ethical dialogue may cause many problems. Watts states, “The drafters of the new proposal want far more drastic measures, which would oblige law enforcement authorities to close down thousands of dog restaurants and butchers which supply the meat”. As the dominant “culture”, the Chinese animal eating is no longer seen as a supposed “warming quality”. The media coverage of this is getting explosive. Online petitions against dog and cat consumption have attracted tens of thousands of signatures, the most popular videos showing the maltreatment of farmed dogs spurring protests at markets where animals are bought and sold.Through this type of media criticism, a new dominance over the aspects of a particular culture arises. However, it is far from certain that the government or the National People’s Congress will adopt the draft.
Photo By: M Scott Brauer, A Yangshuo dog butcher at work.
This article also falls into the paradox of the above mention article by Gaard, she discuss:
“ World –travelling means no just visiting as a tourist a community to which one is an outsider, but actually allowing one’s identity to be reshaped as a result of this repositioning, and allowing one’s perspective to identify with that community as well. It is a kind of double vision, shifting from mainstream culture to marginalized culture that is held by cultural border-crosses…” Gaard, pg 22).
Watts article does not give us a responsible view on the rights of animals, but rather than an illusory one. In place of a practical more of how to live within a culture, it suggests we must live together, and share the same inheritance. Thus instead of focusing one’s attention on the devastating idea of killing dogs and cats for food, why not question the nature of killing pigs, cows and sheep. Just like Americans who travel for example to a place like China, and view this practice as through the ethnocentric of one’s self. The world-traveler displaces this view and lets us see their culture through their eyes, not through our own. However, one class may try to practice colonialism over the thoughts and actions of the oppressed. At blame is not, what Greta Gaard might argue, ethical context and contents, but rather egocentrism or society in general.
For More information and about the Reference Click on the below links:
Gaard, Greta. "Tools for a Cross- Cultural Feminist Ethics: Exploring Ethical Contexts and Contents in the Makah Whale Hunt." Hypatia vol. 16, no.1 (2001): 1-22.
As long as I can remember, while growing up in a small town ranch, I would always see vast open pastures of seemingly endless acres. It was beautiful; as a small child, it could have easily been compared to how John Muir felt when he arrived at the Sierra Nevada and said “No description of Heaven that I have ever heard or read of seems half so fine. “As I got older and began doing chores around the ranch, I started learning more about what is happening on our land. To me it had always been about riding four wheelers at top speed with friends, camping under a big tree on the highest hill in the middle of one of our pastures, or swimming in a cat fish pond(yes, we swam in ponds) . No longer, however, was it about this. Nature in itself was no longer a place for my recreation. When I would come home or walk outside, I was no longer looking at my playground, but instead I was looking at where I worked.
The exploitation of nature for fiscal value has always been around. Just like my grandparents raising cattle, only to sell them at the local auction for a particular value, major companies are making profit by destroying an irreplaceable part of our earth. Oil companies drill, Lumber yards cut, Miners dig, and the list goes on.
Valmik Thapar, sums this up in his blog about the exploitation of nature’s treasury by saying “The only way to understand wealth is to illustrate how much of this wealth we exploit.” Simply put, the subliminal wealth that nature provides can be measured by how much money can be made from it.
Going back to the cattle we raised as a kid, the value of each head was not measured intrinsically, but according to my grandfather, instrumentally.
CLICK HERE FOR MEDIA SOURCE
According to the above link, “Commercial Uses of Natural Resources”, the damage just from the forestry alone include: soil erosion, blocking of natural flow of water, the degradation of landscapes, and displacement of wildlife. On this link, there is a table under a category called “forestry”. In the landscaping section of this table, the article states “the forest is not renewable resources”, meaning that once it is gone, it does not come back ABRACADABRA! Now you see it, now you don’t. John Muir (1865-1946), founder of the Sierra Club, was an advocate to eliminate this very idea of treating nature as an indispensable resource. William Cronon refers to this when he talks about the preservation of the frontier in “The Trouble with Wilderness”. Once people started to realize things were not coming back, they opted to preserve what they had left.
When lumber companies see a meadow of lush pine, they do not see this as the beauty of nature, they see dollar signs. Everyone has surely heard of Enron, and recently BP, and the corresponding oil spills. I wonder how much the CFO’s of each company felt remorse for their damage towards nature as opposed to the damage to their wallet.
There is a paradox to nature, though, some parts of nature are held on a higher ground than others. You can see this in Cronon’s reading.
FIRST, THINK ABOUT A REDWOOD TREE
NOW, THINK ABOUT A PINE TREE
Why is it okay to destroy pine and preserve redwood? If it’s for lumber, it seems to make more sense to chop down the bigger tree right? Bigger tree makes more wood right? WRONG! The redwood is "awe inspiring" and brings forth that sense of sublime that Cronon and Muir speak of. If humans lived this way I would be screwed. Would I suffer for being shorter than other people?
