flux, adj.

ever-changing

[fee-fi-flow-flux]

The Powerful Youth

While reading through the Time article on the Person of the Year for 2011, I couldn’t help but hear this song reverberating between my ears. 

The oily mixture of music and voice feels like your own marrow making its way to the surface, exposing your true innermost.

"And if you’re still breathing, you’re the lucky ones/Cause most of us are heaving through corrupted lungs/Setting fire to our insides for fun/…We are the reckless/We are the wild youth/Chasing visions of our futures/One day we’ll reveal the truth/That one will die before he gets there.” 

We, the reckless and we, the wild youth, have the potential to create unprecedented change in our world. Our world. Having grown up as the first real generation to experience our own growth with the insane exponential growth of technology, we have an extreme advantage over history. We have had remarkable access to knowledge unlike any other generation in the history of the world, and we are just now learning how to use these tools to truly effectuate change. Even a decade ago, activism was using the internet as a tool for basic communication, but it had not enveloped yet the concept we know today as globalization. 

This goes to show, I think, the force of untampered will in a youth with bordering-on-feral potential. In the article, it was greatly stressed the degree to which the protests of 2011 brought the youth of the world together. It is inspiring for me to think such a thing possible in a time when destruction is so prevalent that it is often overlooked. It is amazing to think a nation suffering under mass oppression can find a breath of cold winter air to revitalize its lungs in the form of social media platforms. Not only are the youth taking to the streets, but they are defying space and time to raise a virtual voice. From the Arab Spring to Spain to Greece to New York to Libya and so forth, it is the first time since the 60s that the energy of change feels tangible on a global scale. It is at once exhilarating and terrifying to imagine real change.

Websites like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have exploded because of their ability to rapidly spread awareness and conceal identities of their users. Under Mubarak’s regine in Egypt, real consequences existed for people speaking out against their quality of life. Videos of senseless violence and up-to-date narratives offering knowledge and inspiration gave the protests momentum and life. Likewise, in the Time article, Russian blogger, Alexei Navalny, wrote from his jail cell, "It’s impossible to beat and arrest hundreds of thousands, millions. We are not cattle or slaves. We have voices and votes, and we have the power to uphold them." His internet usage brought attention to his opinions that ultimately led to his incarceration, but his spirit could not be snuffed out. When Occupy Wall Street began in New York, Adbusters created the ballerina and the bull poster:

and before long, the Occupy Wall Street hashtag was responsible for transmitting information about the occupation faster than anyone could keep up with. Though this information may have been at times impulsive and unreliable, it brought attention to the physical presence of Occupy that gained incredible public momentum on a global scale.

This is why we - the wild youth, chasing visions of our futures - have introduced an unprecedented expectation for change. We have more information than ever before, more tools than ever before, and - like it or not - there are more of us than ever before. Used properly and tactfully, I believe this combination could create a new history for our future. 

[fee-fi-flow-flux]

Occupy, a Narrative

            Mysterious as it may be, humans crave commonality. We want to connect with other humans and relate. This becomes a problem, of course, when hundreds of millions of people share a common space and have experiences too unique to unite. Some of those people over time either lose sight of or lack that desire for personal human connectivity, and abandon it for material wealth. For those who haven’t lost sight of their empathy, hope remains that those heartless humans will come around and someday be whole again for the good of humanity.  

            In part, movements like Occupy gain considerable momentum by arguing from a narrative standpoint. By tugging on the heartstrings of those around you, or sharing a story similar to that of a stranger around you, people feel much more connected and vulnerable. This vulnerability allows them to ignore their inhibitions and take risks for one another. Recognize injustice and fight for the people. It’s not an easy thing to initiate. It’s intimidating. But once the movement has momentum, there is no turning around. In an interview with NPR, Kalle Lasn uses a metaphoric narrative to explain the omnipresence of corporate influence in our lives as Americans. By planting the seed about Egypt's violent dictator regime, Lasn gave himself an opening to compare corporate power to this "oppressive regime." Lasn says, "...you know, it - certain very rich people and financial-type people on Wall Street who control much of the economy, and in Washington, D.C., you have corporations and lobbyists somehow controlling a lot of the laws that are passed and the policies that are implemented. And every day in our lives, you know, the food we eat and the medical attention we get, and every aspect of our life is somehow controlled by megacorporations. And certainly brainstorming with occupiers in America, I have this feeling that, you know, a soft regime change in America is something that a lot of people feel very strongly about."

            Lasn uses the comparison of Egypt's oppressive dictatorship as a fear tactic to imply that if Occupy is not successful, our oppression will see no end. It is extreme, for certain, but it is effective. On an Occupy website, short, inspiring commands introduce a small story about the Occupy beginning. It begins: 

RESIST. INSIST. STAND TOGETHER. BUILD. NEVER SURRENDER.

The story then goes on to say Occupy was "born," giving the impression that its life is much like what we know a life to be as living beings. We-ness emerges, as the narrative says, "We began to share food, clothing, and shelter. We sought refuge in the shell of a concrete jungle and found community. Inspired by our actions, occupations began throughout the globe." Family. Surely these heartless bankers have families? That they care about? Or could it be they lack all sentience and have never shared food, clothing, or shelter?

            Adbusters recently wrote a short piece about the blowback the 1% has coming to them as part of their seasonal magazine segment The Epic Human Journey. In the middle of the one-page post,  Adbusters writes, "It always follow the same pattern. The rich and privileged overstep their mark and trigger an almighty backlash of feeding-frenzy-like-violence and cruelty." By then using revolt in Paris, Russia, and China as historical evidence, the article brings its point home by saying, "Today we are living through another one of those moments, though this time it’s not the royalty, not the land owners nor the intellectual elite ... but the financial 1% running around making money off money off money off the backs of the 99% and being very arrogant and remorseless about it." As a unit, Americans have allowed the rich to get richer and, in essence, given them utmost power over us; however, it was only a matter of time before we found the error in our ways. Having found it, it is our responsibility to make sure the 1% finds the error in theirs. Without employing the use of narrative in this case, it would be much more difficult to really speak to the motivation of a wide audience. 

            Amy Goodman from Democracy Now! interviewed former Labor Secretary, Robert Reich, whose rhetoric shows the sense of urgency he feels in mending the democracy for the sake of the citizens. He says the 99% are on a "downward escalator," while the 1% are only going up. The disparity of wealth in our country is greater than ever, and the distribution of power is growing less and less. For a a little perspective, this short video provides an easily understandable visual. 

            The Tumblr "We are the 99 Percent" collects narratives from the 99% and posts them to the blog in hopes that they can be seen and provide motivation for change. When stories are gathered in such a concentrated space, it is easy to see the struggles many people have in common. Hot topics include living wages and healthcare. In this narrative, a young woman struggles with both. 

            Occupy is not the only movement that benefits from the use of narrative as an argumentative tactic. The Civil Rights movement, healthcare reform and immigration reform all use experiences of past or present to illustrate the potential light of the future. We humans use narratives as tools almost every day to relate to our peers, so to use the same heuristic to enlist change in our quality of life only seems natural. 

*photo taken from here

[fee-fi-flow-flux]

For the Love of Information

        In reading about publics, counterpublics, and the public sphere by Habermas and Warner, my brain wandered in the direction of the Internet. Almighty deity, the World Wide Web is a lifeline for a lot of people, and serves as the primary facilitator in the transportation of information globally. In the past twenty years especially, the hunger for information has become insatiable; in recent years, it has come to the public attention that our freedom of information is being compromised by corporate power on both a national and global scale. It occurred to me in outlining the qualifications of a public that when the concept of a public was first coming to light, it may have done so through the manifestation of people in the physical sense; today, however, with the mass-connectivity through social media, strangers have the opportunity to form a public in a completely virtual sense.

        A group of internet “hacktivists” that call themselves “Anonymous” emerge occasionally in news reports, and gained a lot of fame for the 2011 Sony Playstation hack. (http://www.npr.org/2011/04/27/135778729/after-security-breach-playstation-users-cant-connect) Their loose collectivity is formed around the freedom of information and the freedom of speech. (http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAnonMessage) While some believe the Playstation hack was to steal financial/identity information, I believe it was simply to force the millions of people glued to the gaming system to look up from their controllers and think about real-world matters. In addition to the Anonymous group, there is a volunteer-based group called the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) that serves “to make the internet work better by producing high quality, relevant technical documents that influence the way people design, use, and manage the Internet.” (http://www.ietf.org/about/mission.html) Within the group, there are two publics: the Inner Circle and the Suits. The inner circle, like Anonymous, works in favor of the freedom of information for all, while the Suits work in favor of large corporations controlling and profiting from Internet usage and limitation. (http://books.google.com/books?id=g7hduew1u1IC&pg=PA173&lpg=PA173&dq=ietf+inner+circle+suits&source=bl&ots=j_rGBqXZ_V&sig=JW2QSj6J70ebgNPtddPLOekRvcI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=zoNTUqXxHobjqgGqnoGIAQ&ved=0CCkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=ietf%20inner%20circle%20suits&f=false ,Case Studies in Organizational Communication: Ethical Perspectives and Practices, pages 172-174)

            Because of the threat to lose access to information, or perhaps more rawly stated, to be censored from information that corporations and the government don’t want the public to see, groups of people are coming together in cyberspace in an attempt to defend our constitutional rights. Just last week, 13 Anonymous members were arrested for attacks in the name of transparency and free information. (http://www.democracynow.org/2013/10/4/headlines#10412) While their attacks may not gain additional freedom immediately, the resulting press at least helps gain awareness of the behind-the-scenes happenings of information restriction. In an article written for The Atlantic back in August, the NSA’s extensive surveillance is ousted and the author pleads with organizations to fight for their independence and resist the secrecy. The rhetorical plea at the end of the article elicits strong emotional appeal by saying, “Already public opinion is changing, against the government and their corporate collaborators. If you want to keep your users’ trust, demonstrate that you were on their side.” (http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/08/the-nsa-is-commandeering-the-internet/278572/) To expand on this idea, Freedom House published an extensive study early this month titled Freedom of the Net 2013 in which they discuss everything from new laws, attacks, blocks, surveillance, and a user-friendly graphic that displays the “freedom” of the internet geographically. (http://www.freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/resources/FOTN%202013%20Summary%20of%20Findings.pdf) 

            Warner states in his article Publics and Counterpublics, that a public is “self-organized,” “a relation among strangers,” and “the address of public speech is both personal and impersonal.” He says, “A public is constituted through mere attention.” All of these statements, to me, beg the idea that the IETF and Anonymous serve as publics within the public sphere. In fact, all people tweeting tags like #FOIA, #transparency, #informationfreedom, etc., are involved in the creation of a public with the common goal of keeping the internet and our access to information open. 

[fee-fi-flow-flux]

Question Everything

            Woody Harrelson opens the Ethos documentary saying, “Every day we turn on the TV and there’s more bad news: another environmental catastrophe somewhere, or more starving refugees, or innocent victims in war zones. And most of us are busy trying to make ends meet in our own lives, and we see these images and we feel helpless to do anything about it. I think the deep shame we feel about that is paralyzing. Certainly one of the reasons we turn away.” He employs pathos to give himself more credibility, and I can attest to its effectiveness. I found the documentary very compelling, albeit guilty of using the same manipulative strategies it begs the viewer to question.

            That being said, several of the topics brought up in the film were intriguing to me, including the concept of “corporate personhood.” Once the slaves were freed and the constitution needed to be amended to qualify black people as “whole” people instead of a fraction of a whole, corporations took the opportunity to gain identity as “people” as well. (http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate-personhood/) Up until this point, corporations operated under the restriction that their purpose had to be for the good of the public. Once the amendment was changed, corporations had the ability to pursue any goals to any lengths desired. Since that shift, corporations have transcended their original role in society and have essentially conquered the globe. (http://www.globalpolicy.org/social-and-economic-policy/international-trade-and-development-1-57/transnational-corporations.html à http://www.globalpolicy.org/social-and-economic-policy/international-trade-and-development-1-57/transnational-corporations/52255-without-rules-a-failed-approach-to-corporate-accountability.html?itemid=id#47070) This corporate greed, then, clearly (and by law) values its stockholders over all else; their community is completely disregarded in favor of increasing profit for their stock.

            By putting money before morals, we find ourselves in situations like factory farming – the majority of the food produced in the country, particularly from animals, is having a terrifying affect on the biosphere. (http://www.dosomething.org/tipsandtools/11-facts-about-factory-farms-and-environment) Not only is the environment being destroyed, but human consumption of these products is resulting in increased immunity to potentially critical antibiotics. In the video, Dr. Samuel Epstein recalls anonymously receiving a box of documents which revealed hundreds of lies told by Monsanto regarding the use of antibiotics in the raising of their dairy cows. Not only were the cows being treated with antibiotics, but tests showed chronic inflammation in nearly all of the animals’ vital organs, which clearly illustrates that the corporation was fully aware of the harmful nature of their practices. Once the immunity is built in humans from consuming these products, entering into an infected environment becomes exponentially more dangerous because antibiotics that would otherwise be used to treat the infection become futile. Furthermore, the unsafe conditions in which the animals are raised make them much more prone to carrying viruses like salmonella. And of course, through waste disposal, the toxic emissions of these poorly treated animals end up in the soil, water, and air, causing them to come full circle through the food chain. (http://www.motherearthnews.com/natural-health/health-hazards-factory-farms-zmaz09fmzraw.aspx#axzz2g9tXTb30) Sam Gibara, Chairman and former CEO of Goodyear, says in an interview on Ethos, “…governments have become powerless compared to where they were before,” in reference to their necessary subservience to corporate power. Thus, claims made by the FDA or the USDA essentially carry no weight under this philosophy because they are not government institutions, but rather servants to a conglomeration of corporations.

            Because corporations are required to increase their bottom line, their expansion is leading them to tap into the resources of other countries around the globe. This concept is commonly smoothed down into the palatable term “Westernization,” which has caused global unrest both culturally and environmentally. Consider, for example, the recent shooting in the Kenya shopping mall. A jihadi group al-Shabaab seized control over a shopping mall and commenced an indiscriminant slaughter of any non-Muslims present in the mall. (http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2013/09/2013921174856564470.html) As we have seen before with other radical Islamic acts of terror, they seek to eliminate anyone pursuing a lifestyle that does not comply with fundamental Islamic beliefs; people of Western descent, or people practicing Western cultures, are made targets by default because of our unapologetic commitment to greed. I certainly do not advocate for this violent radical behavior, but I can understand how this can be applied to the claim that our unwarranted imposition on other countries’ land and cultural system is viewed as threatening and with contempt. A documentary addressing this very issue was produced in 2005 titled Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West, and received press from all the major news channels using words like “must see” and “most important film of our generation,” leading America further down a path of fear and pending doom. (http://vimeo.com/46605232)

            Finally, I found it fascinating to watch the segment of the film about the psychology of dress. Because of the nature of my generation, I have never been exposed to a time when materialism and excess were not standard practice. The footage shown in Ethos portrays the turning point from austerity to indulgence, when Edward Bernays revolutionized the mindset of the people post-World War I. With the emergence of women’s rights, Bernays used his text, Propaganda, to persuade women to change their behavior; he psychologically altered the thought process to cause women to desire material things for vanity rather than practicality. As it is said in Ethos by Peter Levy, “Eddie Bernays saw the way to sell product was not to sell it to your inlet, that you ought to buy a automobile, but that you will feel better about it if you have this automobile. I think he originated that idea that they weren’t just purchasing something, they were engaging themselves emotionally or personally…” (http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/bernprop.html#SECTION7) As such, our culture became one centered around credit and debt, from which it cannot come out from under. We’ve all been so brainwashed to view these terms like “loan,” or “credit,” or “debt,” as simple realities of our day-to-day, and they are; however, that does not excuse them as being anything but evil. 

[fee-fi-flow-flux]

Cast The Widest Net; Overcome the Manipulation of Human Rights

            In reading Malcolm Sillars’ piece Defining Movements Rhetorically: Casting the Widest Net, I found the idea of defining a movement however one pleases as both romantic and even occasionally pragmatic. He suggests that in broadening the horizons of classifications of movements, the possibilities for the potential resulting movements are laterally broadened. He says in the second paragraph, “Movement studies offer several attractions that cannot be ignored. They recognize that greater social forces are at work than can be conceived of in the rhetorical biography of one person.” This is a resounding point because it so bluntly addresses the undeniable fact of our dependence on other people; group-work has proved far more effective in driving messages to the core of people’s emotions and enlisting an active response.

            Take our very pertinent issue of healthcare reform, for example; the Republican party is manipulating the rhetoric of their argument to instill fear in the fellow Republican-American population. By addressing the increase in taxes and posing the argument that requiring citizens to purchase insurance infringes on our freedom as American people, they directly avoid speaking to the ways a great percentage of the population would benefit from this health care reform. Immediate response from this audience is obviously to act in favor of avoiding this loss of freedom. Because the manipulation is coming from a "trustworthy" institution, a lot of people may not think to question its validity or morality. Taking every means necessary, the House has taken other behind-the-scenes actions as well. According to an article on the NPR blog It’s All Politics, a team of people intending to use a $2 million grant from the Federal Government “to help educate poor, uninsured Americans about how to enroll in the Affordable Care Act,” have been forced to postpone these education attempts in order to provide congress with a full report regarding the ways they plan to do this. (http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/09/26/226498730/republican-tactics-slow-down-obamacare-prep)

            This request is simply a way to divert their efforts in educating a less knowledgeable public. According to the Sillars reading, this small coalition can constitute a movement, threatening the potency of the Republican efforts. He writes, “What makes an act important and stand out from others is that someone takes notice of it. What makes a movement is that someone observes that it exists.” In the example of healthcare concerns, congress has acknowledged the momentum of this historical bill which would make healthcare more accessible to the American people as a whole; likewise, the Republican party's opposition has acknowledged the need to address healthcare as a human right for all citizens and has people like Lisa Hamler-Fugitt from the Ohio Association of Food Banks to represent it. To weaken the momentum of the bill, Republican congressman Ted Cruz even attempted to use a filibuster when he took stand on the chamber floor for the 4th longest amount of time in history. (http://www.infowars.com/ted-cruzs-filibuster-on-obamacare-is-4th-longest-in-senate-history/ ; http://www.infowars.com/obamacare-protest-ted-cruz-to-speak-until-no-longer-able-to-stand/) Even though the filibuster proved ineffective, the act in itself symbolizes the Republican commitment to fight for their economic goal through whatever means necessary, even if that means “shutting down” the government. (http://www.policymic.com/articles/58183/republican-threat-to-shut-down-government-over-obamacare-is-a-bluff-they-can-t-win) Perhaps one person taking action like this would be ineffective, but the collective group of the House of Representatives packs a much stronger punch and will form an alliance in some sense simply because of the loyal following they have in the country. 

            The umbrella movement here, of course, is healthcare reform, which dates back to the 19th century when activist Dorothea Dix (http://www2.webster.edu/~woolflm/dorotheadix.html) proposed the "Bill for the Benefit of the Indigent Insane." While it passed through both the Senate and the House, President Franklin Pierce vetoed the act. In his address he stated, “I readily and, I trust, feelingly acknowledge the duty incumbent on us all as men and citizens, and as among the highest and holiest of our duties, to provide for those who, in the mysterious order of Providence, are subject to want and to disease of body or mind; but I can not find any authority in the Constitution for making the Federal Government the great almoner of public charity throughout the United States.” (http://constitution.org/cmt/pierce/veto_18540503.htm) This response clearly passes off the welfare of the people unto the responsibility of the state and claims the Federal Government can’t be bothered with such tasks. Again throughout the 20th century, reform was proposed by Roosevelt, Truman, and Johnson; finally Nixon restricted reform in the 70’s and the controversy of healthcare has been tossed like a hot potato ever since. In most wealthy countries, healthcare is treated as a human right. The United States is the only country among these to disregard this belief. (http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/15839-greed-fear-and-other-barriers-to-health-care-as-a-human-right) It is because of this disregard that several studies have shown medical expenses are the number one reason people in the US claim bankruptcy. (http://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/health/2013/06/19/nerdwallet-health-study-estimates-56-million-americans-65-struggle-medical-bills-2013/)

            While this movement for healthcare reform - along with its longstanding history in our country - is being promoted to the front page of news this week, it has been an issue for 100+ years and often overlooked by an under-educated public. As far as the Republican party is concerned, the less educated Americans are, the easier it will be for them to prioritize their own instant gratification and ignore the welfare of upcoming generations.

[fee-fi-flow-flux]

Consumerism vs. Counter-culture: Friends or Adversaries?

I have been thinking a lot about this idea that what we know to be counter-culture could very well be simply the alter-ego of consumer-capitalism. Furthurmore, I cannot decide if it is relieving or disappointing to imagine that neither of these things exist in any real way, but only as a way for us to fill in the gaps of the time we spend on our planet. In the Introduction of Heath & Potter’s Nation of Rebels, it is elaborated with a rather eloquent bluntness: “His [Guy Debord] thesis was simple. The world that we live in is not real. Consumer capitalism has taken every authentic human experience, transformed it into a commodity and then sold it back to us through advertising and the mass media. Thus every part of human life has been drawn into ‘the spectacle,’ which itself is nothing but a system of symbols and representations, governed by its own internal logic.” This quote feels particularly real to me now with the obvious areas of contention on the international docket. It is as though we are puppets who have allowed the vanity of our indulgences to rule our outcomes, ultimately sacrificing ourselves to become victims in our own lives.  The text goes on to say, “What we need to do is recognize that the entire culture, the entire society, is a waking dream – one we must reject in its entirety.” This statement packs a lot of weight, though I wonder how truly realistic such a goal may be; and where do you draw the line between the hubbub of social pressures and authentic, meaningful human interaction? A blog post from Adbusters vaguely addresses this by quoting Joanna Macy’s Active Hope, “When we include the natural world in our identity, we are brought into a much larger story of who and what we are. Recognizing ourselves as part of the living body of Earth opens us to a greater source of strength [especially in these times of global ecological crisis and global warming.” (https://www.adbusters.org/blogs/breathing-earth.html)

Finally, Heath & Potter start the Conclusion off strongly by saying, “The power that the myth of counterculture has exercised over political consciousness in the past half-century is ultimately a testament to the massive trauma inflicted upon Western civilization by Nazi Germany.” This implication that war and tragic destruction on a human-to-human level are responsible for stirring up an uncomfortable emotional vulnerability in the people, to the point of ineffective problem-solving (unable to fully participate in the dynamics of society), seems to have come full circle given that we are now very much involved in a war with the Middle East and a “new” case of human destruction in Syria. It has been reported that the death toll in Syria has climbed to over 100,000, not to mention the two million refugees that have fled the country and “another four million internally displaced.” (http://www.democracynow.org/2013/9/4/with_focus_on_us_led_strikes) In contrast, when you visit a website like Consumer Reports and are given reviews on everything from sunscreen to tires to kitchen appliances (http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/index.htm). So starkly different in every way, it is true to me that the life portrayed on the Consumer Reports website is more realistic than the conflict in Syria. When mentioned in Alinsky’s “Communication” segment of Rules of Radicals that you must be able to relate to people’s experience in order to effectively communicate with them, I wondered if perhaps this is the very thing that paralyzes, or at least inhibits, our ability to effectively make a true difference at this advanced stage of the Syrian Civil War. The reality of the matter is that sort of experience is unfathomable for most of the American public. This contrast can be easily seen by simply comparing two images, one from Deir al-Zor, Syria, in March 2013:

and one from Times Square in New York City:

Consider briefly being an alien to this planet and being shown these images. It would almost certainly seem as though they were from different worlds entirely. Basing communication on experience, one might find it restrictively intimidating to approach a conflict so complex as the Syrian Civil War when your entire experience has been a flood of material obsession and misguidance. Where do you start, and how can you use your voice for effective good? (Images taken from http://thestar.blogs.com/.a/6a00d8341bf8f353ef017ee8ee7bc0970d-pi and http://thejetlife.com/2013/06/22/new-york-city-times-square-night-tour/ respectively)  With potential attacks on Syria on the line, it seems the previously mentioned puppet-like manipulation from the “powers that be” could very well be at play in disguising a hidden agenda, getting into the heads of citizens with things like drops in the stock market and increased oil prices (http://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/Syrian-Uncertainty-to-Cause-Oil-Price-Spike.html). It is a disgusting admission that if we were not so reliant on oil from the Middle East (and its threatening implications with Russia and China), of which they control over half of the reserves globally (http://newsocialistproject.org/2010/11/21/middle-east-wars-much-ado-about-oil/), it is possible we would not be so concerned with reacting forcibly on Syria in an attempt to save face as a powerful international player. Such delayed response to an overwhelmingly cancerous crisis and unapologetic wreckage of a human population only solidify the fear that all we are doing is playing The Game of Life.  

[fee-fi-flow-flux]

Overconsumption: A Global Pandemic

This video clip comes from the film Samsara (2011, directed by Ron Fricke), which looks at the rhythmic ties between humans and nature, nature and industry. 

While reading excerpts from Kalle Lasn's Culture Jam, I was reminded of this video and of time spent traveling around lesser developed parts of the world. Untouched beaches in Vietnam are littered with rubbish: plastic bottles, old lightbulbs, potato chip bags, toothbrushes, etc., and there is very little education in place to correct these wastes. Living under a "more" mentality is causing the destruction of our species, the animal populations living in our forests and oceans, as well as the forests and oceans themselves. Producing environmentally harmful packaging has skyrocketed partially because of the ripple effect of factory farming. Said ripple effect is responsible for an annual $864.2 billion in sales, according to the American Meat Institue (AMI; http://meatami.com/ht/d/sp/i/47465/pid/47465/#feedingoureconomy). Factory farming, while it may put a dent in solving global hunger, has greatly compromised the health of the global citizens in general. The practices for raising poultry and cattle at such a high demand are unsustainable and, frankly, unnecessary. Unfortunately, the revenue from the industrial farming industry only serves to encourage the people involved in this "destruction." 

According to research done by The PEW Charitable Trusts (http://www.pewhealth.org/reports-analysis/data-visualizations/record-high-antibiotic-sales-for-meat-and-poultry-production-85899449165), 29.9 million pounds of antibiotics were sold in 2011 to be administered to animals being raised in factories for "farming." That is not at all to say that all animals treated were ill or infected in some way. Most of them, in fact, were not. To put this number in perspective, in the same calendar year, only 7.7 million pounds of antibiotics were sold to treat sick humans. The scariest thing about this, in my opinion, is that by eating the animals treated with antibiotics (to avoid the inevitable infections that come with living in an overpopulated and filthy environment), we are in turn introducing the same antibiotics into our own bodies. Needless to say, by unnecessarily feeding these antibiotics into our systems, our bodies then have the ability to build immunities against them, making such antibiotics less effective - or worse, totally ineffective - in our systems when they are really needed. When something like the Spanish Flu or Bird Flu comes back around, we will have no defense. 

Lasn's line, "America has been subverted by corporate agendas. Its elected officials bow before corporate power as a condition of their survival in office. A collective sense of powerlessness and disillusionment as set in," really struck a cord in me because of the tragedy of it all. He mentions that America is no longer a country, but rather a brand that is being outsourced around the globe and vacuuming any real culture we have as a nation out of our very hands. A massive desire for material goods has made consumerism "God" in our country, and looking away is easier than confronting the problem - until the problem finally destroys us. 

In Jonathan Safran Foer's book, Eating Animals (http://www.eatinganimals.com/), he does his own rooting around of the system and finds one disturbing revelation after another. He says in the book,

"Whether we change our lives or do nothing, we have responded. To do nothing is to do something." 

Culture Jam sucker-punched me and left me out of breath for a moment, but in all the right ways. While rawly addressing the grim reality of our misguided goals as a nation, Lasn comes around with hope and optimism that we as a people will tire of pursuing such unapologetic vanity and revolutionize the standards for a promising life. To quote from the Introduction, "This instinct to be free and unfettered is hard-wired into each one of us. It's a drive as strong as sex or hunger, an irresistible force that, once harnessed, is almost impossible to stop."

I hope this desire for freedom can produce a real driving force to redefine our values as a global population, and put an end to the mass destruction of our planet and our people.