Canada! Heal Thyself! Environmental Racism Is Raised In Nova Scotia...


Recommended Posts

It was really difficult not to put this into the humor section...

In April, the conversation about environmental rights took a significant step forward with a private member’s bill introduced in the Nova Scotia legislature. Bill 111 is called An Act to Address Environmental Racism. Although it wasn’t passed before the legislature adjourned for the summer, it shines a light on a fundamental concept in our work.

We cannot talk about environmental rights unless we also acknowledge historical and continuing injustice. Unfortunately, we have plenty in Canada. Environmental racism and the broader concept of environmental injustice and inequity describe situations in which disadvantaged and vulnerable communities bear a disproportionate burden of preventable environmental health hazards, such as pollution, environmental degradation and the effects of climate change.

And there you have it...

Climate change + Racism + marxism = __________________

http://bluedot.ca/stories/addressing-environmental-racism-to-ensure-rights-for-everyone-in-canada/?mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRoiuq7LZKXonjHpfsX76ewtW6W%2BlMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUfGjI4HSsJiI%2BSLDwEYGJlv6SgFS7jNMbZkz7gOXRE%3D

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was really difficult not to put this into the humor section...

Or in the "Is this a Quebec thing ...?" thread.

We cannot talk about environmental rights unless we also acknowledge historical and continuing injustice. Unfortunately, we have plenty in Canada. Environmental racism and the broader concept of environmental injustice and inequity describe situations in which disadvantaged and vulnerable communities bear a disproportionate burden of preventable environmental health hazards, such as pollution, environmental degradation and the effects of climate change.

And there you have it...

Climate change + Racism + marxism = __________________

Historically, private member's bills go nowhere. I doubt this bill will be passed. Perfitt ends her article hoping that at least the bill will lead to a 'conversation' -- it’s a conversation that’s long overdue, and this bill starts us down a path of seeing the environment, social justice, racism and our shared future in a new light: holistic, with integrity and improved health for everyone.

This is the kind of language that makes me gag a little bit, especially "Holistic" and "social justice." The terms are just too overdetermined for me ... here is another example that goes down sideways with me (and makes me a bad Morxist): Environmental racism is the disproportionate location of polluting industries, sites, and other environmental hazards close to racially marginalized communities and the working poor.

-- what would be a better term to describe a state of affairs in which 'minority' communities are subject to pollution or dumps or toxic storage or effluent pools or similar? I don't know, but I find 'environmental racism' is not descriptive.

Consider a situation in which an industry or dump or effluent pond is located in or beside a black community in Nova Scotia. Good stuff, jobs, knock-on economic effects, etcetera. Can there be a downside for the community's health or its water, air? In a few cases, it seems that environmental degradation in 'reserves' or black communities was far in advance of similar communities in the mainstream.

That aside, the phrase "climate change" is not part of the bill's language.

The background to this bill is long, and involves the history of Nova Scotia's black communities. If I could wrap it up in a simplistic sentence or two, and save you a jog though history, it would go something like this:

-- black communities have long had polluting enterprises located in their environs, as a function of 'where is the best place for our dump?'

If you are interested in the subject of Nova Scotia's black and native communities, and their history, here's a link to a story that tries to give examples of suspect practices. If some Nova Scotians feel dumped-on disproportionately, the story helps explain: Weekend Focus: The toxic sites of Nova Scotia racism. A brief sample:

Halifax city council minutes from the time suggest the facilities, not tolerated in white neighbourhoods, were considered well-suited to Africville lands. “Residents had no social, political or economic power to stop the city from using their community as a dump, in every sense, and from taking their land,” former Africville resident Irvine Carvery said in his research on the displaced community.

The dump at Africville, from the Weekend Focus article:

Africville-garbage.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it racism or is it poorism? The poor are more likely to get dumped on, pun intended and unintended (I stuck the former into the latter), because it's cheaper. The land tends to be cheaper. The time to get the dump going likely less. Any political battles are less likely. Etc. The poorer the country the more garbage and it's more visible. (Doesn't mean organized crime types won't take your toxic sludge and illegally dump it.) To a point. Then there is less garbage generated in the first place so there's less to dispose of and much of what we (oops!) think of as garbage is retained as valuable for reuse.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um...

Black population of Chicago in the 1890;s was under 40,000 out of 1 million + total.

Early industrial activity concentrated along the South Branch of the Chicago River, in part because the sluggish waterway provided a convenient repository for waste. During the nineteenth century this waste consisted largely of decaying organic matter—blood, grease, offal, and manure from slaughterhouses, meat packing plants, glue factories, tanneries, and fertilizer manufacturers. In addition, planing mills and sawmills sprayed copious amounts of wood dust into the air. The working-class populations that settled the adjacent residential districts suffered the most immediate effects, but prevailing winds from the southwest carried noxious stenches into the prestigious neighborhoods close to downtown Chicago. Citizen complaints prompted a more vigorous enforcement of public health laws after 1860, the effect of which was to push the offending industries beyond the city limits into new industrial suburbs. Meanwhile, local officials turned to technological fixes to alleviate the continued threat that waterborne wastes posed to the city's drinking water supply. Repeated attempts to reverse the course of the Chicago River and to flush waste material away from the water-intake crib in Lake Michigan culminated in the completion of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal in 1900. http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/638.html

Upton Sinclair, a good little Socialist, wrote The Jungle and there were very few blacks in Chicago, approximately 40,000 out of 1 million + total population.

Additionally, "we need to have a conversation" is the new marxist dog whistle.

Holder, "we need to have a conversation about race..."

"In April, the conversation about environmental rights..." See?

Maybe we need to have a fight about the principle of the State intruding on each individual's freedom.

We can have the conversation after the fight.

A...

over a dram and a draft

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pollution exists, usually it's corporations dumping pollution in poorer areas. ..

What about countries that did not have corporations, e.g. China, Russia under Communism?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Selene to my understanding China does have corporations. I don't understand the inner workings of the USSR but I would suspect that the polluters acted much like state owned corporations.

@Brant I don't think anybody is, that's why I'm so confused about what Selene is trying to say with this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Selene to my understanding China does have corporations. I don't understand the inner workings of the USSR but I would suspect that the polluters acted much like state owned corporations.

Under Mao?

I will be kind here. What did you concentrate on in HS or college or military or work path?

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously not under Mao, I'm talking about modern day China... Was there even significant industry to pollute under Mao? How did he create it?

Can you explain why I'm wrong rather than asking me questions?

No, I cannot, nor would I even if I could.

http://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=15257&page=1#entry231579

If you are not going to read and just spit up answers, I will keep asking questions.

Again, without giving away any personal identifiers, what did you focus on whether you went to college, were in the military, are in your own business, etc.?

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The People In Charge have always found it convenient to dump their sh*t on folks who are less likely are able to sue them or protest the outrage. This is true in places like the Soviet Union (now gone) the Russian Federation, the Peoples Republic of China and, alas, in the United States of America. The Well Off have on the balance treated the Less Well Off like the crap they dump on the Less Well Off.

Read Aristotle's -Politics- and -The Constitution of Athens- sometimes. This kind of crap is as old as civilization.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The People In Charge have always found it convenient to dump their sh*t on folks who are less likely are able to sue them or protest the outrage. This is true in places like the Soviet Union (now gone) the Russian Federation, the Peoples Republic of China and, alas, in the United States of America. The Well Off have on the balance treated the Less Well Off like the crap they dump on the Less Well Off.

Read Aristotle's -Politics- and -The Constitution of Athens- sometimes. This kind of crap is as old as civilization.

Now we're talking purely about power relationships.

Way of the world. Without them the human world wouldn't work. This extends into everything animate and inanimate. Political power will, short term at least, trump economic power. The corporations didn't control the Nazis, they Nazified to the extent that benefited them. That's why Germany was post-war "de-Nazified" and why the corporations went along in turn with that.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now