12. Human Rights: Defending the Defenders

2»

Comments

  • @fionaw said:
    Something this discussion makes me think about is who are the activists that are fighting for each cause. General environmental protests are really popular. The activists in Latin America that we read about seem to way more frequently be fighting for the land they live on being taken or destroyed, for resources they depend on, and sometimes for their lives. If environmental issues impacted people around the world as much as they do indigenous people the culture surrounding environmentalism and development would change drastically I think.

    This is a good point. I think, in a way, it is easier for governments and private companies to exploit the indigenous in this way. Because those affected (typically indigenous peoples) are in a way, isolated, it makes it easier for these acts to go unnoticed. This obviously also brings up problems with prejudice faced by the indigenous.

  • @Madison said:

    @a_hipp said:

    @cara said:

    @fionaw said:
    This isn't new information to me but every time I read about it I am always shocked and upset. I think the next steps are tracking down those accountable for the murders and making it way more present in the news that these are happening. This would at least lead to more people caring and trying to protect these people. The whole situation doesn't alter my worldview very much, I have very little faith in the world because of stuff like this already, it's disappointing that more people don't know about it though.

    I feel similarly - While the criminal activity is not a surprise to me, reading about criminal violence against environmental defenders is shocking. I think at the core of my surprise is just how blatant the violence is. Its shocking to read about crimes going unanswered for, even if they violence is as fragrant as it is, especially when the people targeted are defending something that is a benefit to all of humankind. What is the best way to pressure authorities into action.

    I agree with both of you as to the cynicism that hearing about these injustices can produce. I think that for me, one of the saddest components of this blatant violence is the scale of it. Whole communities and families become targets, as we saw in the film on Chico Mendez. The amount of civilian casualties is heartbreaking. Not to say that the activists' being murdered are not... Another aspect that saddens me is the internal violence within these communities. The ranchers and loggers are in similar socio-economic positions as the indigenous activists, something Chico was quick to point out. It is the larger businesses that cause or intensify intercommunal rifts.

    I think it's important to mention the ranchers and loggers as well. It's easy to think of them as the ones driving these industries forward and the reason for the violence. It's important to remember that they are also just trying to make a living. It's the big industry that is driving the violence and the environmental destruction.

    I do really think this is important. I can't quite remember which article it was but it talked about indigenous people who have lived on the land for decades are beginning to transition to ranching (sometimes illegally) it really is a complex issue. Kind of off topic, but a recent trend that I've heard about here in the US is the idea of a carbon tax. Specifically one on individuals, meaning you would have to pay more tax if you commuted further to work, because you are polluting the air more. To be honest I think that's outrageous that someone would have to pay more because they have to live further from their work. Someone (forget who) in the office of sustainability actually suggested something like this should be implemented for CC....

  • @cara said:
    I feel similarly - While the criminal activity is not a surprise to me, reading about criminal violence against environmental defenders is shocking. I think at the core of my surprise is just how blatant the violence is. Its shocking to read about crimes going unanswered for, even if they violence is as fragrant as it is, especially when the people targeted are defending something that is a benefit to all of humankind. What is the best way to pressure authorities into action.

    This is a good point. The violence is so severe and brutal sometimes I'm surprised these go unanswered for. Murder is always brutal but in these cases it is so clear that it was unjust and morally wrong that I don't think anyone but the extractive/ anti-environmental organizations would be remotely okay with it. I think one way to pressure authorities into action is just to make the violence a very known and present part of the news reel. Awareness leads to more people fighting for their protection and this could have a good outcome.

  • @fionaw said:
    Something this discussion makes me think about is who are the activists that are fighting for each cause. General environmental protests are really popular. The activists in Latin America that we read about seem to way more frequently be fighting for the land they live on being taken or destroyed, for resources they depend on, and sometimes for their lives. If environmental issues impacted people around the world as much as they do indigenous people the culture surrounding environmentalism and development would change drastically I think.

    There is definitely a huge difference between environmental activists here and those fighting to defend their lands and livelihoods. It's interesting to think about what kinds of things people bring up here during environmental protests. During the environmental protest in December (I think it was in December?) there was lots of discussion about greenhouse gas emissions, warming ocean temperatures and dying polar bears. Nothing was said, at least while I was there, about the loss of livelihoods and even cultures due to environmental exploitation. I think needs to be part of the narrative in the mainstream movement, it adds a level of humanity to the issue and needs to be more known amongst the public.

  • @slothman said:

    @Madison said:

    @a_hipp said:

    @cara said:

    @fionaw said:
    This isn't new information to me but every time I read about it I am always shocked and upset. I think the next steps are tracking down those accountable for the murders and making it way more present in the news that these are happening. This would at least lead to more people caring and trying to protect these people. The whole situation doesn't alter my worldview very much, I have very little faith in the world because of stuff like this already, it's disappointing that more people don't know about it though.

    I feel similarly - While the criminal activity is not a surprise to me, reading about criminal violence against environmental defenders is shocking. I think at the core of my surprise is just how blatant the violence is. Its shocking to read about crimes going unanswered for, even if they violence is as fragrant as it is, especially when the people targeted are defending something that is a benefit to all of humankind. What is the best way to pressure authorities into action.

    I agree with both of you as to the cynicism that hearing about these injustices can produce. I think that for me, one of the saddest components of this blatant violence is the scale of it. Whole communities and families become targets, as we saw in the film on Chico Mendez. The amount of civilian casualties is heartbreaking. Not to say that the activists' being murdered are not... Another aspect that saddens me is the internal violence within these communities. The ranchers and loggers are in similar socio-economic positions as the indigenous activists, something Chico was quick to point out. It is the larger businesses that cause or intensify intercommunal rifts.

    I think it's important to mention the ranchers and loggers as well. It's easy to think of them as the ones driving these industries forward and the reason for the violence. It's important to remember that they are also just trying to make a living. It's the big industry that is driving the violence and the environmental destruction.

    I do really think this is important. I can't quite remember which article it was but it talked about indigenous people who have lived on the land for decades are beginning to transition to ranching (sometimes illegally) it really is a complex issue. Kind of off topic, but a recent trend that I've heard about here in the US is the idea of a carbon tax. Specifically one on individuals, meaning you would have to pay more tax if you commuted further to work, because you are polluting the air more. To be honest I think that's outrageous that someone would have to pay more because they have to live further from their work. Someone (forget who) in the office of sustainability actually suggested something like this should be implemented for CC....

    I have heard people talk about ideas like that before as well. I really don't think that should be implemented. I could see some benefits in specific instance but I think it would end up being a reason to tax people more heavily if they can't afford to live in cities and have a further commute. I also feel like if I've learned anything from this class it's that governments tend to be dishonest and corrupt when in comes to the environment. There would need to be a system in place to ensure that extra tax money doesn't go into projects that destroy the environment.

  • @Madison said:

    @fionaw said:
    Something this discussion makes me think about is who are the activists that are fighting for each cause. General environmental protests are really popular. The activists in Latin America that we read about seem to way more frequently be fighting for the land they live on being taken or destroyed, for resources they depend on, and sometimes for their lives. If environmental issues impacted people around the world as much as they do indigenous people the culture surrounding environmentalism and development would change drastically I think.

    There is definitely a huge difference between environmental activists here and those fighting to defend their lands and livelihoods. It's interesting to think about what kinds of things people bring up here during environmental protests. During the environmental protest in December (I think it was in December?) there was lots of discussion about greenhouse gas emissions, warming ocean temperatures and dying polar bears. Nothing was said, at least while I was there, about the loss of livelihoods and even cultures due to environmental exploitation. I think needs to be part of the narrative in the mainstream movement, it adds a level of humanity to the issue and needs to be more known amongst the public.

    I agree. I think this is where the big organizations can come in to play. If instead of placing something like a polar bear on the front of their direct mail they did images/stories about some really important issues we've discussed thus far in the class, the narrative could be changed. I think many peoples energy is just misguided at the hands of the big organizations. I also think something like this would help to close the gap between said organizations and land defenders.

  • @fionaw said:
    Something this discussion makes me think about is who are the activists that are fighting for each cause. General environmental protests are really popular. The activists in Latin America that we read about seem to way more frequently be fighting for the land they live on being taken or destroyed, for resources they depend on, and sometimes for their lives. If environmental issues impacted people around the world as much as they do indigenous people the culture surrounding environmentalism and development would change drastically I think.

    I feel like that is such an intresting point. When doing a lot of the readings, even within elites there was a difference between the elites that dependend in the natural resources and needed them to be productive for a longer time period (who usually cared way more about environmnetal issues) and the elite that did not own land and did not care about destroying it. Regardless of economic class or regional origin, it seems that when we have a stronger connection with the natural resource we care more, even if it is merely an economic interest. Because even in th United States a lot of the environmental movements are indegenous land protection or water rights movements. I nevertheless think that the relationships between nature and human is also really cultural based so it will never be the same across countries, but still for sure important if it affected us more directly.

  • edited April 2020

    @caroline22 said:

    I just read the Enemies of the State article and it had a link to a short video in it (Enemies of the state? | Stand with Defenders of land and our environment_). It really makes me think back to earlier discussions we had about environmentalism in the United States and all the criticisms of it. It really is insane how exclusive it is- it is not encompassing of nearly enough perspectives. The clip depicts "environmental defenders" of what appears to be many local activists (mostly POC) standing up for their land. If environmental defenders and environmentalists united forces, the power it could have would be unstoppable... world wide! I think I finally really understand what we were meaning earlier in the course by saying the environmental movement has failed because it is not representative enough.

    I completely agree! I was also thinking about that when I was watching the short video that appeared in the article on Enemies of the State. In the video there were showing from indegenous activists in the Amazonia to protests in the US, which made me think how within the environmental activists circles and protests I took part in the US, the realities were completely different from those in Latin America. It was really family friendly, people singing and chilling. There were two policde guards for more than 300 people. In Urguay they protested for UPM (the pulp mill) a couple of months ago, and the police doubled them, and in Ecuador many of the organizations were in terorrists lists in the US (and somo US organizations also are). It is shocking to see how much mainstream environmnetal movements are way more accepted because they present no harm to the state and the status quo. I wonder what it would be like if people at this protests also focus more on the human right violations that the US is supporting against environmental movements.

  • @Julieta said:
    I feel like that is such an intresting point. When doing a lot of the readings, even within elites there was a difference between the elites that dependend in the natural resources and needed them to be productive for a longer time period (who usually cared way more about environmnetal issues) and the elite that did not own land and did not care about destroying it. Regardless of economic class or regional origin, it seems that when we have a stronger connection with the natural resource we care more, even if it is merely an economic interest. Because even in th United States a lot of the environmental movements are indegenous land protection or water rights movements. I nevertheless think that the relationships between nature and human is also really cultural based so it will never be the same across countries, but still for sure important if it affected us more directly.

    I didn't think about an economic connection to the land but that is a good point. The most powerful/passionate activists are often those fighting for their livelihoods. I think there is a lot of privilege in being an activist when you don't have to be and I don't think that is understood enough. Of course, everyone should care about the environment and everyone can, but some people don't have a choice.

  • A lot of these stories were new to me, and I was woefully under educated on the violence against environmentalists in these regions. I really appreciated learning more about the role that international organizations play, and really how they hold very little power. I had been wondering about this over the course of the block, and how these power dynamics could shift. The Glazebrook article was really advocating for extending international power, and allowing organizations like the UN to prosecute governments who cause unnecessary or irresponsible environmental degradation without the consultation of indigenous communities residing near or on the land. I think that this was an interesting idea, and one that's been on my mind in every case we've read. But I wonder if there's another method for creating the same sort of accountability through a grassroots network? Or could grassroots help build these international organizations, creating a stronger global network rooted in advocacy and activism?

  • I do really think this is important. I can't quite remember which article it was but it talked about indigenous people who have lived on the land for decades are beginning to transition to ranching (sometimes illegally) it really is a complex issue. Kind of off topic, but a recent trend that I've heard about here in the US is the idea of a carbon tax. Specifically one on individuals, meaning you would have to pay more tax if you commuted further to work, because you are polluting the air more. To be honest I think that's outrageous that someone would have to pay more because they have to live further from their work. Someone (forget who) in the office of sustainability actually suggested something like this should be implemented for CC....

    @slothman I've also heard rumblings of this proposal on campus. I think that it's a really terrible idea that will do little for the environment and just further issues of inequality on campus. Also, from everything that we've learned about carbon offsets from this class I would be very skeptical of CC trying to implement even more offsets in an attempt to brand the community as even more sustainable. I think that a lot of the actions that CC takes for the sake of creating a "green" campus are incredibly performative, and this would only emphasize that issue in my mind. Although, in an EV course I took earlier this year we got into this conversation about carbon offsets at CC, and how offsets have proven to be so problematic, and really started railing on CC Office of Sustainability. My professor kind of sat back and let us vent until we'd all started to settle down. Then she informed us that CC actually does a great job of tracking where their offsets go, and ensuring that they are making a positive impact, and that often we search for negatives in positive actions that may not actually be there. I haven't yet looked into how CC allocates their offsets, but my professor's comment has definitely changed my perspective on how I critique CC. There are so many terrible aspects of institutions, but I may have jumped the gun on criticizing CC's offset program.

  • I wish these stories has felt more surprising. Even though the exact context was different (I'm embarrassed to say I had never heard of Chico Mendes before these readings), the extent to which governments are willing to go to protect profit, the nature of corporations being hyper-focused on their projects, without concern for the people they are directly effecting, the way people are murdered in retaliation but governments simultaneously work to maintain an acceptable level of perceived concern for human rights. These cycles sound familiar to activists who have spoken out against the status quo of numerous different facets of global capitalism. I think these articles did a great job highlighting the ways in which this level of violence is specific to predominantly indigenous environmental activists, but this definitely isn't something that has only happened to environmentalists.
    I also want to echo what some other people are saying on this thread about the role of someone from the U.S. It's vitally important to be in solidarity with communities in the global south and the Glazebrook article offered some good ideas for a path forward for that. However, even in that solidarity work, it's important to recognize the ways in which this level of violence is also operating within the U.S. against indigenous people. Even while holding Western corporations accountable and the U.S. gov for atrocities committed abroad, for people living in the U.S. to fail to work for justice for indigenous nations here is only an outsourcing of a problem. One really amazing organization is MMIW (https://www.csvanw.org/mmiw/). While their website seems a little more tempered, they do really incredible work calling attention to violence against indigenous women in the U.S. and questions the government's role in the epidemic of their disappearances.

  • @ccstein said:

    I do really think this is important. I can't quite remember which article it was but it talked about indigenous people who have lived on the land for decades are beginning to transition to ranching (sometimes illegally) it really is a complex issue. Kind of off topic, but a recent trend that I've heard about here in the US is the idea of a carbon tax. Specifically one on individuals, meaning you would have to pay more tax if you commuted further to work, because you are polluting the air more. To be honest I think that's outrageous that someone would have to pay more because they have to live further from their work. Someone (forget who) in the office of sustainability actually suggested something like this should be implemented for CC....

    @slothman I've also heard rumblings of this proposal on campus. I think that it's a really terrible idea that will do little for the environment and just further issues of inequality on campus. Also, from everything that we've learned about carbon offsets from this class I would be very skeptical of CC trying to implement even more offsets in an attempt to brand the community as even more sustainable. I think that a lot of the actions that CC takes for the sake of creating a "green" campus are incredibly performative, and this would only emphasize that issue in my mind. Although, in an EV course I took earlier this year we got into this conversation about carbon offsets at CC, and how offsets have proven to be so problematic, and really started railing on CC Office of Sustainability. My professor kind of sat back and let us vent until we'd all started to settle down. Then she informed us that CC actually does a great job of tracking where their offsets go, and ensuring that they are making a positive impact, and that often we search for negatives in positive actions that may not actually be there. I haven't yet looked into how CC allocates their offsets, but my professor's comment has definitely changed my perspective on how I critique CC. There are so many terrible aspects of institutions, but I may have jumped the gun on criticizing CC's offset program.

    Your conversation on carbon offsets is making me think of another kind of tax program that could hold CC accountable for the ways it causes harm. I know in some cities in the U.S. people can calculate based on either their income or property value ( I don't remember which) a percentage to pay to the indigenous nation which the city stole land from . It's a kind of reparation for the ongoing occupation of stolen land. This is something that comes up during land acknowledgements a lot, that "acknowledging" is cool but not as meaningful as it should be without any action. I think CC participating in one of these programs would be important for the institution, especially given its location. I wonder if anyone's heard of that in colorado springs or has resources for learning more about the cities where it has worked. I know that type of tax is also feasible/ important for non-indigenous people with wealth privilege.

  • @ccstein said:

    I do really think this is important. I can't quite remember which article it was but it talked about indigenous people who have lived on the land for decades are beginning to transition to ranching (sometimes illegally) it really is a complex issue. Kind of off topic, but a recent trend that I've heard about here in the US is the idea of a carbon tax. Specifically one on individuals, meaning you would have to pay more tax if you commuted further to work, because you are polluting the air more. To be honest I think that's outrageous that someone would have to pay more because they have to live further from their work. Someone (forget who) in the office of sustainability actually suggested something like this should be implemented for CC....

    @slothman I've also heard rumblings of this proposal on campus. I think that it's a really terrible idea that will do little for the environment and just further issues of inequality on campus. Also, from everything that we've learned about carbon offsets from this class I would be very skeptical of CC trying to implement even more offsets in an attempt to brand the community as even more sustainable. I think that a lot of the actions that CC takes for the sake of creating a "green" campus are incredibly performative, and this would only emphasize that issue in my mind. Although, in an EV course I took earlier this year we got into this conversation about carbon offsets at CC, and how offsets have proven to be so problematic, and really started railing on CC Office of Sustainability. My professor kind of sat back and let us vent until we'd all started to settle down. Then she informed us that CC actually does a great job of tracking where their offsets go, and ensuring that they are making a positive impact, and that often we search for negatives in positive actions that may not actually be there. I haven't yet looked into how CC allocates their offsets, but my professor's comment has definitely changed my perspective on how I critique CC. There are so many terrible aspects of institutions, but I may have jumped the gun on criticizing CC's offset program.

    Your conversation on carbon offsets is making me think of another kind of tax program that could hold CC accountable for the ways it causes harm. I know in some cities in the U.S. people can calculate based on either their income or property value ( I don't remember which) a percentage to pay to the indigenous nation which the city stole land from . It's a kind of reparation for the ongoing occupation of stolen land. This is something that comes up during land acknowledgements a lot, that "acknowledging" is cool but not as meaningful as it should be without any action. I think CC participating in one of these programs would be important for the institution, especially given its location. I wonder if anyone's heard of that in colorado springs or has resources for learning more about the cities where it has worked. I know that type of tax is also feasible/ important for non-indigenous people with wealth privilege.

    @charlotte this is a really interesting initiative that I hadn't heard of! I think that it would be a really constructive program for CC to participate in. While renaming Tava quad and conducting land acknowledgements at any meeting or ceremonies is important, it has also felt rather surface level. I had been wondering if there were any larger forms of reparations being conducted and I'm interested in looking into these programs more. These payments could even be taken out of student board costs. Especially now that CC is profiting off of having more students per down (forced triples being charged the same as a normal large triple), a portion of that revenue should be allocated towards the indigenous nations whose land CC participated in stealing. Maybe even a portion of every ticket sold in the new hockey arena could be allocated to payment. While CC focusses so much on green initiatives and their carbon neutral mission, I believe that this would be a far better distribution of CC funds.

  • @caroline22 said:

    @Madison said:

    @fionaw said:
    Something this discussion makes me think about is who are the activists that are fighting for each cause. General environmental protests are really popular. The activists in Latin America that we read about seem to way more frequently be fighting for the land they live on being taken or destroyed, for resources they depend on, and sometimes for their lives. If environmental issues impacted people around the world as much as they do indigenous people the culture surrounding environmentalism and development would change drastically I think.

    There is definitely a huge difference between environmental activists here and those fighting to defend their lands and livelihoods. It's interesting to think about what kinds of things people bring up here during environmental protests. During the environmental protest in December (I think it was in December?) there was lots of discussion about greenhouse gas emissions, warming ocean temperatures and dying polar bears. Nothing was said, at least while I was there, about the loss of livelihoods and even cultures due to environmental exploitation. I think needs to be part of the narrative in the mainstream movement, it adds a level of humanity to the issue and needs to be more known amongst the public.

    I agree. I think this is where the big organizations can come in to play. If instead of placing something like a polar bear on the front of their direct mail they did images/stories about some really important issues we've discussed thus far in the class, the narrative could be changed. I think many peoples energy is just misguided at the hands of the big organizations. I also think something like this would help to close the gap between said organizations and land defenders.

    I really like the point you all are getting at on this thread. I wonder how the particular amount of violence that land defenders are exposed to is also out of an underlying fear of the perception of the State when it's made public the human rights violations that occurs against land defenders. Obviously, a lot of these articles highlighted the fact that calling people "terrorists" allows governments to spin the blame. Maybe I'm moving too far into conspiracy theory land, but I wonder if any of these corporations have a plan to "keep extraction palatable." One the ways to do that is to dehumanize the experience, to make it so that people who are calling attention to the sheer level of violence, don't reach too many people. Many people don't empathize with the long-term effects of oil & gas industries, but I think there's potential for outrage (not to mention lawsuits & criminal charges) if a broad enough array of the population is exposed to how indigenous people are being literally murdered at the sites of extraction. This is an arena in which international organizations could improve like @Madison said.

Sign In or Register to comment.