The Amazon

As I read about the Amazon, the Brazilian government, and Chico Mendes, I couldn't help but feel overwhelmed by the many different dimensions to the issue of the environment and human rights. Where can I begin... The Amazon one of the world's most bio-diverse parts of the world is being deforested at a pace of 6 football fields a day, an incredibly alarming rate. Scott Wallace in his article "Last Of The Amazon" notes that "During the past 40 years, close to 20 percent of the Amazon rain forest has been cut down -- more than in all the previous 450 years since European colonization began." The Brazilian government during the 60s, 70s, and 80s contributed to the deforestation of the Amazon. They encouraged businesses, people, and all who could, to settle the Amazons. As I read about the Amazon and heard a presentation by my classmates on the topic, I thought that although we may want to preserve the Amazon what right do we have to tell Brazilians or other nations to stop the deforested the Amazon or to stop exploiting the resources? The United States and many other countries did exactly the same... At the same time, you have factions in Brazil that oppose the deforestation of the Amazon. Chico Mendes, who fought for environmental rights and for the rights of rubber tappers, demanded that we conserve the Amazon. His story, like that of many of the characters I mentioned in my blog, is truly inspirational.

Here are some of my thoughts on the Amazon and the environment: It is not clear who is to blame but it might be too late to place blame. How can anyone access the situation… Who would be the appropriate person or group to say anything…. Is it the native population? They are among the most affected but if we are saying that human rights are global then everyone should speak-up. When we say everyone, what does that mean? Is everyone, the developed world?

Helpful websites:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqgB2bzFrtg&feature=fvsr
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZolf7hxmRk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oz8tq5gTY0E&feature=related

While we are on the subject of the Amazon, I was impacted by a very interesting documentary that was presented in class. The documentary is part of a project called “Videos in the Villages” and the idea is to train natives to use cameras in order to record their own reality. I thought this was amazing and the documentary we saw was really something else. I was astounded by how knowledgeable the children in the documentary were about their environment: they were also incredibly resourceful. They were very much aware of their traditions and respected the memories of their ancestors and grand parents. They also knew of the outside world.

I thought to myself, wouldn’t these people want live in the “modern” world if they knew of all the conveniences? What would life be like without my iPhone? I had lost my iPhone earlier in January and was devastated. Is this arrogant on my part? Perhaps, the people I saw in this documentary seemed content and happy with their lives. They had enough resources and weren’t begging to leave their homes.


Helpful links:
http://www.der.org/films/vitv-collection.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbXvCSFcnr0

I was fascinated by the way Chile has dealt with the military regime’s many human rights violations. The military government in Chile lead by Augusto Pinochet was responsible for the disappearance of thousands of civilians. Any opposition to the ruling government was met with disdain and those who were part of the opposition were kidnapped, tortured, raped, and “disappeared.” The state, in the majority of the Latin American cases, has refused to acknowledge or condemn any wrongdoing; some, simply do not discuss the violations. I can’t imagine what it would be like to have survived being tortured and to then live in a state and society that doesn’t condemn the horrible acts that were committed against you.

I felt that the article “The Need for Moral Reconstruction In the Wake of Past Human Rights Violations: An Interview with José Zalanquett” brought many of these questions to the forefront. What happens in societies where there are divergent sets of common moral beliefs? One man’s hero is another’s killer. Zalanquett feels that the state can play a decisive role in healing and moving forward. Zalanquett admires the way President Aylwin acknowledged and condemned the many wrongdoings by Pinochet’s government. Zalanquett feels that talking about the human rights violations in a “sacramental” manner are a must and may help heal those on the receiving end of the many abuses.

During class we watched "Special Circumstances" by Patricio Guzman. Patricio was one of the victims of the military regime. He goes back to Chile after he learns of all the military members involved in his capture and torture and pays them a home visit. As someone watching the film, I noted that it was difficult to watch how people can justify genocide and how detached many of the people seemed. I thought of how difficult it must be to not feel validated. Many of the people he confronted either did not admit to having done anything or did not feel like they were to blame.

I’m not sure if confronting these people gave him closure. Can there be closure? I guess doing a documentary that showed their faces shames them. This raises many interesting questions, like is doing something like this ethical?

Youtube videos on the topic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-La1CVdwjY&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCzGeO6DFLU&feature=related

Beyond Bogota: THOSE MOST IMPACTED

Image 1: Map of the Afro-Colombian population distribution
Image 2: Afro-Colombian children


I've reflected upon my last question (who is the bad guy?) The book "Bogota and Beyond" by Garry Leech allowed me to see the situation in Colombia from a different lens. The question of "Who is the bad guy?" seems to be irrelevant. We are all losers when someone's life is taken or when someone is being torture. I feel that special attention should be given to the populations that are mostly impacted by the current political and social unrest and reflecting on how we can remedy or help these people is essential.

Leech sheds light on those that are most negatively impacted by the war. While those in the Colombian major cities live in fear that they or a loved one may be kidnapped or killed, it is those in the countryside that suffer the most. The Afro-Colombians & the indigenous communities are often displaced and disposed. I did my second-presentation on the Afro-Colombian and my findings revealed much about the inability of the government to better the live of those most impacted by the war it is waging on the guerillas. Here are a few statistics:

• 60% of Afro-Colombian settlements, in rural areas and town ghettos, exhibit extreme poverty rates

• 80% of Afro-Colombians do not have basic needs met

• Infant mortality rates in Chocó and Cauca are 54 per thousand

• Life expectancy in Afro-Colombian region is only 55

• Illiteracy rates for Afro-Colombians are estimated to be twice the national average

Afro-Colombian communities officially make up approximately 10.62 (4.311.757) of the population according to the 2005 census (The Ombudsman’s office considers that the figure is close to 25 percent of 10.5 million people)

In addition, Afro-Colombians are extremely poorly represented in political structures and institutions. Afro-Colombians, particularly those living in the country, are often displaced. The displacement situation in Colombia is alarming. 3,073,010 persons or 695,354 households as of May 2009 have been displaced (World’s second largest internal displacement situation).

After reading Leech’s book, I felt that those that are most impacted by the war have no voice. We hear very little in the news about indigenous and afro-Colombian communities being displaced. I also learned that there is much support for the FARC. The FARC control areas seem to have more peace and its citizens seem to want to live under a FARC controlled government.

Helpful Websites:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgzOlTAze3Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOv1c0mPWks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSq5FuhS1SE

WHO'S THE BAD GUY, the FARC?

"News Of A Kidnapping" was an interesting read. We learned about the many complexities involved in kidnapping operations as well as the hostage situation. Before having read the book, I was uninterested by the topic of kidnappings. Partially because they did no seem nearly as atrocious as say, a murder. In the case of Colombia as presented by Garcia's book, it didn't seem like the captors necessarily hated those they kidnapped, in fact, they even seemed friendly toward them. I was tempted, at times, to justify their hostage's capture. The case of Colombia, like that of El Salvador, Argentina, is difficult to understand who the bad guy is?

Let’s take the case of Colombia; there are so many different factions with many different agendas. Before my readings, my understanding was that there was a war between the guerillas and the Colombian government. It is clear that it is much more complex than this. There are also other institutions and organizations that claim the legitimate use of violence. We have the ELN, the right-wing para-militaries, and some cases civilians.

The FARC wants to better the lives of poor Colombians and of those in the country. Is this not a just cause? The Colombian government wants to better the lives of its citizens but poverty levels in Colombia are rampant and the government’s social agendas are not benefiting the poorer classes. As is the case for most Latin American countries, the government benefits the upper classes.


Helpful sites:

Must watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kma-zvuq5bY