We're reading the next two chapters in Farmer's book for this week and we'll cover a number of themes discussed in both of the chapters accordingly. However, I want you all to focus on only the first chapter for your commentaries this week. In "Pestilence and Restraint," Farmer describes how HIV-infected Haitian refugees were detained in refugee camps by the US in Guantanamo in the early 1990s. He compares this with Cuba's treatment of HIV-infected patients and their mandatory stay in sanatoriums. For your commentaries this week, I want to you focus on one of two following themes in relation to his discussion (only choose one!):
(1). Throughout his discussion of US-Haiti and US-Cuba relations, Farmer highlights how each ended up being represented in the American press and, in particular, in the NY Times differently. I have looked through the NY Times archives and found a number of the articles he refers to (most of them very brief) and have linked to them below. Take a look at one or more of these articles and write about how the NY Times representation differs from Farmer's account of each place. Further discuss how this supports (or not) the ideas that we discussed from the Chomksy video on Wednesday: how do the NY Times pieces express selection and framing in the media? Do you think this shapes public opinion and how might it be part of a "manufacturing of consent"?
HIV Could Cut Haitian Entry to the US
7 Haitians Held at Guantanamo Unconscious in a Hunger Strike
US Base is an Oasis to Haitians
Selfless Devotion or Misguided Zeal?
Patients Pay High Price in Cuba's War on AIDS
(2.) In your history course, you learned about the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. Do you see similarities between Farmer's account of the treatment of Haitian refugees in the 1990s and the earlier treatment of Chinese immigrants in the US? In what ways are the sentiments and ideologies expressed similar or different?
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Friday, November 26, 2010
Pathologies of Power I
This week, we're continuing our discussion of "structural violence," inequality, and disease/health. We'll be concentrating on the first two chapters of Paul Farmer's book, Pathologies of Power.
The introductory chapter of the book draws heavily on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which can be found here: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml
For your commentaries this week, simply choose one of the following topics and write a brief commentary only on that topic:
Describe what structural violence means for Paul Farmer and why he has written his book on it. With that, what unites the two stories that Farmer relates--those of Acephie and Chouchou--and why does Farmer suggest that the level of suffering expressed in these stories is difficult to know and to relate (see passages beginning on 39-40)?
Farmer very clearly articulates the goals of his book. What are they and to whom are they directed? Why is he particularly well suited to address those parties and what kind of evidence does he draw on to do so?
Why does Farmer suggest that the "reigning ideologies of public health" runs counter to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? What are the reigning ideologies of public health (and what other ideological framings do they fit with)?
What does it mean, for Farmer, to "bear witness"? What are the different ways of bearing witness that he defines? Why is the distinction important?
The introductory chapter of the book draws heavily on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which can be found here: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml
For your commentaries this week, simply choose one of the following topics and write a brief commentary only on that topic:
Describe what structural violence means for Paul Farmer and why he has written his book on it. With that, what unites the two stories that Farmer relates--those of Acephie and Chouchou--and why does Farmer suggest that the level of suffering expressed in these stories is difficult to know and to relate (see passages beginning on 39-40)?
Farmer very clearly articulates the goals of his book. What are they and to whom are they directed? Why is he particularly well suited to address those parties and what kind of evidence does he draw on to do so?
Why does Farmer suggest that the "reigning ideologies of public health" runs counter to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? What are the reigning ideologies of public health (and what other ideological framings do they fit with)?
What does it mean, for Farmer, to "bear witness"? What are the different ways of bearing witness that he defines? Why is the distinction important?
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Cholera in the Time of War--"A Microscopic Insurgent"
This week, we're switching gears again to our final unit on health, medicine, and disease. We will revisit a number of themes that we've discussed throughout the course, namely geographies of exclusion and the production and reproduction of poverty. We'll also continue to look at different ways of understanding, explaining, and representing the world and the interests expressed therein. In short, we'll be looking at the politics of microbes and how their spread and management are not only "natural" but also the result of social and political histories.
The first reading that we're doing on this topic is Jenna Loyd's "A Microscopic Insurgent: Militarization, Health, and Critical Geographies of Violence," which is to be found in your course packets. Loyd is going to take us to Iraq to look at the connection between health (particularly representations of health and disease) and the US military intervention there. Heads up: this is an academic journal article is vastly different in approach and tone to the chapters we've just been reading in Neuwirth. While it is fairly brief, don't be fooled--it's also very dense. You should take your time with this reading and work to really understand it. At the same time, try not to get frustrated at its difficulty. Try to focus on how Loyd makes the claim that "health is entwined with violence."
To provide some background, Loyd (like many of the authors that we've read) is taking issue primarily with the misrepresentation of place and history in the New York Times. In particular she takes aim at the way in which Mark Drapeau presents the history and emergence of a cholera epidemic in Iraq (the article that she is critiquing can be found here). In doing this, Loyd explores the link between humanitarian causes and military violence, arguing that the former are often used to legitimate the latter. We can see Loyd's article as part of an ongoing conversation about "structural violence." This is not a term that we've used in class, although much of what we've discussed to date--the effects of "free trade" and agricultural policy on farmers as well as displacement in urban area--can be considered "structural violence." This term simply refers to the (often unintended and under-examined) effects of economic and governmental policy that do physical and mental harm to certain groups or individuals within a population. Structural violence often produces or intensifies existing social inequalities, placing certain populations at greater risk of disease, premature death, malnutrition, and general insecurity. Loyd makes the argument that the violence of war should not only be measured in its direct costs to life, but also in the forms of structural violence that it creates.
As you read, pay attention to how Loyd frames her argument against Drapeau. Her argument is very similar to that of Professor Lindskoog's in his open letter to David Brooks about Haiti. Where do you see similarities? What evidence does she use to make her claim? What do you think she is suggesting about the US's role in Iraq in relation to histories of Imperialism? And what do you think the implications are for how we think about humanitarian aid?
The first reading that we're doing on this topic is Jenna Loyd's "A Microscopic Insurgent: Militarization, Health, and Critical Geographies of Violence," which is to be found in your course packets. Loyd is going to take us to Iraq to look at the connection between health (particularly representations of health and disease) and the US military intervention there. Heads up: this is an academic journal article is vastly different in approach and tone to the chapters we've just been reading in Neuwirth. While it is fairly brief, don't be fooled--it's also very dense. You should take your time with this reading and work to really understand it. At the same time, try not to get frustrated at its difficulty. Try to focus on how Loyd makes the claim that "health is entwined with violence."
To provide some background, Loyd (like many of the authors that we've read) is taking issue primarily with the misrepresentation of place and history in the New York Times. In particular she takes aim at the way in which Mark Drapeau presents the history and emergence of a cholera epidemic in Iraq (the article that she is critiquing can be found here). In doing this, Loyd explores the link between humanitarian causes and military violence, arguing that the former are often used to legitimate the latter. We can see Loyd's article as part of an ongoing conversation about "structural violence." This is not a term that we've used in class, although much of what we've discussed to date--the effects of "free trade" and agricultural policy on farmers as well as displacement in urban area--can be considered "structural violence." This term simply refers to the (often unintended and under-examined) effects of economic and governmental policy that do physical and mental harm to certain groups or individuals within a population. Structural violence often produces or intensifies existing social inequalities, placing certain populations at greater risk of disease, premature death, malnutrition, and general insecurity. Loyd makes the argument that the violence of war should not only be measured in its direct costs to life, but also in the forms of structural violence that it creates.
As you read, pay attention to how Loyd frames her argument against Drapeau. Her argument is very similar to that of Professor Lindskoog's in his open letter to David Brooks about Haiti. Where do you see similarities? What evidence does she use to make her claim? What do you think she is suggesting about the US's role in Iraq in relation to histories of Imperialism? And what do you think the implications are for how we think about humanitarian aid?
Cholera in the Time of War--"A Microscopic Insurgent"
This week, we're switching gears again to our final unit on health, medicine, and disease. We will revisit a number of themes that we've discussed throughout the course, namely geographies of exclusion and the production and reproduction of poverty. We'll also continue to look at different ways of understanding, explaining, and representing the world and the interests expressed therein. In short, we'll be looking at the politics of microbes and how their spread and management are not only "natural" but also the result of social and political histories.
The first reading that we're doing on this topic is Jenna Loyd's "A Microscopic Insurgent: Militarization, Health, and Critical Geographies of Violence," which is to be found in your course packets. Loyd is going to take us to Iraq to look at the connection between health (particularly representations of health and disease) and the US military intervention there. Heads up: this is an academic journal article is vastly different in approach and tone to the chapters we've just been reading in Neuwirth. While it is fairly brief, don't be fooled--it's also very dense. You should take your time with this reading and work to really understand it. At the same time, try not to get frustrated at its difficulty. Try to focus on how Loyd makes the claim that "health is entwined with violence."
To provide some background, Loyd (like many of the authors that we've read) is taking issue primarily with the misrepresentation of place and history in the New York Times. In particular she takes aim at the way in which Mark Drapeau presents the history and emergence of a cholera epidemic in Iraq (the article that she is critiquing can be found here). In doing this, Loyd explores the link between humanitarian causes and military violence, arguing that the former are often used to legitimate the latter. We can see Loyd's article as part of an ongoing conversation about "structural violence." This is not a term that we've used in class, although much of what we've discussed to date--the effects of "free trade" and agricultural policy on farmers as well as displacement in urban area--can be considered "structural violence." This term simply refers to the (often unintended and under-examined) effects of economic and governmental policy that do physical and mental harm to certain groups or individuals within a population. Structural violence often produces or intensifies existing social inequalities, placing certain populations at greater risk of disease, premature death, malnutrition, and general insecurity. Loyd makes the argument that the violence of war should not only be measured in its direct costs to life, but also in the forms of structural violence that it creates.
As you read, pay attention to how Loyd frames her argument against Drapeau. Her argument is very similar to that of Professor Lindskoog's in his open letter to David Brooks about Haiti. Where do you see similarities? What evidence does she use to make her claim? What do you think she is suggesting about the US's role in Iraq in relation to histories of Imperialism? And what do you think the implications are for how we think about humanitarian aid?
The first reading that we're doing on this topic is Jenna Loyd's "A Microscopic Insurgent: Militarization, Health, and Critical Geographies of Violence," which is to be found in your course packets. Loyd is going to take us to Iraq to look at the connection between health (particularly representations of health and disease) and the US military intervention there. Heads up: this is an academic journal article is vastly different in approach and tone to the chapters we've just been reading in Neuwirth. While it is fairly brief, don't be fooled--it's also very dense. You should take your time with this reading and work to really understand it. At the same time, try not to get frustrated at its difficulty. Try to focus on how Loyd makes the claim that "health is entwined with violence."
To provide some background, Loyd (like many of the authors that we've read) is taking issue primarily with the misrepresentation of place and history in the New York Times. In particular she takes aim at the way in which Mark Drapeau presents the history and emergence of a cholera epidemic in Iraq (the article that she is critiquing can be found here). In doing this, Loyd explores the link between humanitarian causes and military violence, arguing that the former are often used to legitimate the latter. We can see Loyd's article as part of an ongoing conversation about "structural violence." This is not a term that we've used in class, although much of what we've discussed to date--the effects of "free trade" and agricultural policy on farmers as well as displacement in urban area--can be considered "structural violence." This term simply refers to the (often unintended and under-examined) effects of economic and governmental policy that do physical and mental harm to certain groups or individuals within a population. Structural violence often produces or intensifies existing social inequalities, placing certain populations at greater risk of disease, premature death, malnutrition, and general insecurity. Loyd makes the argument that the violence of war should not only be measured in its direct costs to life, but also in the forms of structural violence that it creates.
As you read, pay attention to how Loyd frames her argument against Drapeau. Her argument is very similar to that of Professor Lindskoog's in his open letter to David Brooks about Haiti. Where do you see similarities? What evidence does she use to make her claim? What do you think she is suggesting about the US's role in Iraq in relation to histories of Imperialism? And what do you think the implications are for how we think about humanitarian aid?
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Squatting in NYC
This week, we're going to continue our discussion of squatting, the making of private property, and ways of understanding poverty and uneven development, this time focusing our attention on our own city. In the chapter we'll be reading from Shadow Cities, Neuwirth takes us through the history of squatting in New York. As you read, pay attention to how squatter settlements in New York were eradicated. What justifications did the city use for evicting squatters from the land? Were those justifications valid or not? If not, what were the real reasons that the city wanted to take land from the squatters and how was the land used and transformed after the squatters were evicted?
In addition to Neuwirth's chapter we're also going to be looking at some more recent examples of tensions over housing and property in the city and we'll be returning to a topic we discussed two weeks ago: "gentrification." In particular, we're going to discuss what happened on the Lower East Side of Manhattan in the 1980s and 1990s. It's not required, but if you have time, take a look at Neil Smith's description of the conflict between squatters and the NYPD around Tompkins Square Park in the late '80s and early '90s. The essay is titled, "'Class Struggle on Avenue B': The Lower East Side as Wild Wild West." [[CLICK ON THE TITLE TO ACCESS THE ARTICLE]] So, as you can guess, we'll also be retuning to ideas about the role class struggle in the making of uneven development that we left off discussing this week. In your commentaries, you are encouraged to grapple with and question some of the theories of poverty (and critiques of them) that we covered in class.
In addition to Neuwirth's chapter we're also going to be looking at some more recent examples of tensions over housing and property in the city and we'll be returning to a topic we discussed two weeks ago: "gentrification." In particular, we're going to discuss what happened on the Lower East Side of Manhattan in the 1980s and 1990s. It's not required, but if you have time, take a look at Neil Smith's description of the conflict between squatters and the NYPD around Tompkins Square Park in the late '80s and early '90s. The essay is titled, "'Class Struggle on Avenue B': The Lower East Side as Wild Wild West." [[CLICK ON THE TITLE TO ACCESS THE ARTICLE]] So, as you can guess, we'll also be retuning to ideas about the role class struggle in the making of uneven development that we left off discussing this week. In your commentaries, you are encouraged to grapple with and question some of the theories of poverty (and critiques of them) that we covered in class.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Poverty and Housing in Nairobi and Mumbai
In our readings this week, Robert Neuwirth takes us to two very different cities in Kenya and India. As you read these accounts of life in these two squatter cities, pay attention to the way that Neuwirth develops his descriptions of place. What does his ethnographic approach to understanding cities reveal? What kind of image of place does he develop in both of these accounts? Each place that he visits in the book tells a particular story of the conditions of housing and poverty in urban areas. In these two chapters what are these squatter cities like and how are they different in each place? Our goal for this week will be to look outside of these areas themselves to explore more why squatter cities exist in the first place and what conditions exist that produce change within and around them (or that prohibit change to take place). In class, we'll be discussing and debating the elements that "make" poverty as well as different explanatory frameworks used to understand those elements. So, as you read and in your commentaries consider the economic forces, political movements, and individual people that play a role in Neuwirth's depiction of these two places. What and who contribute to life in these squatter cities? As you think about this, consider what might be missing from Neuwirth's accounts? What are the potential limitations of his ethnographic approach (i.e. what is he unable to explain)?
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Digital copies of next week's readings
For those of you who requested them, the chapters that we will be reading for next week can be found below. We're reading the chapters on Nairobi and Mumbai for next week. We'll be reading the chapter on "Squatters in New York" the following week. Click on the titles to download the readings.
"Nairobi"
"Mumbai"
"Squatters in New York"
"Nairobi"
"Mumbai"
"Squatters in New York"
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Squatter Cities
Following up on our reading of Naomi Klein's chapter, we're going to look a little more deeply at the notion in inclusion and exclusion in cities this week. While Klein paints a fairly dire picture of what happens when populations fall (or are pushed) outside of the care and control of the government, Robert Neuwirth's work on "Squatter Cities" looks through a somewhat different lens to explore how some populations have survived and even thrived outside the law. We will spend some time on Tuesday and Wednesday thinking about what makes a "squatter" neighborhood and, inversely, what makes a "legitimate" neighborhood. So, as you read the chapters for this week (the Prologue and chapter 1 on Rio), think about what makes a squatter. How do we understand that term and, for Neuwirth, why should we consider these areas "squatter cities" rather than calling them "slums"? What do you think he is trying to express with this distinction?
Also consider what materials Neuwirth draws on to inform his readers about squatter cities. How is his evidence different from that of Raj Patel in Stuffed and Starved?
In the chapter on Rio, Neuwirth presents us with a series of characters and situations that tell the story of life in Racinho. How does this story reveal a tension (with benefits and drawbacks) to the neighborhood's status as an "illegitimate" part of the city? What are the benefits and drawbacks for the people living there? Based on Neuwirth's presentation, would you want to live in a squatter city?
Finally, we will also focus a bit this week on the difference between "asfalto" and "mutirao," so pay attention to what these words mean and what the implication of an encroaching "asfalto" is for the citizens of Racinho.
Also consider what materials Neuwirth draws on to inform his readers about squatter cities. How is his evidence different from that of Raj Patel in Stuffed and Starved?
In the chapter on Rio, Neuwirth presents us with a series of characters and situations that tell the story of life in Racinho. How does this story reveal a tension (with benefits and drawbacks) to the neighborhood's status as an "illegitimate" part of the city? What are the benefits and drawbacks for the people living there? Based on Neuwirth's presentation, would you want to live in a squatter city?
Finally, we will also focus a bit this week on the difference between "asfalto" and "mutirao," so pay attention to what these words mean and what the implication of an encroaching "asfalto" is for the citizens of Racinho.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Cities of Change; Lives of Inclusion and Exclusion
Nest week, we're going to be moving onto the second theme of the course: urban geographies of a globalizing world. In the first installment of the readings on this theme, we're going to carry on with a couple of threads of thought that we've been discussing since the beginning of the course, namely free-market or free-trade ideologies and the effects of their implementation as well as the spatialization of inclusion and exclusion. We'll see a film about hurricane Katrina on Tuesday. Wednesday we'll discuss it and the Naomi Klein article from your course packets.
Naomi Klein's chapter "Red and Green Zones" makes links between Iraq, post-Katrina New Orleans, and Atlanta, GA. As you read, pay attention to what links these cities for Klein. Iraq and New Orleans are united by what can broadly be considered disaster: one which, at the time of writing, was in the middle of a war, and the other post-hurricane. How have the governance of those post-disaster landscapes been similar? How are these landscapes of disaster linked to the areas surrounding Atlanta? What story is Klein trying to tell by bringing these cities together? Can we say that New Orleans and Atlanta both are somehow "militarized" landscapes? Or does the "corperatization" of wartime Iraq paint a slightly different picture? Either way, Klein's story has much to do with government policies--policies that organize place and populations--that are build in "free-market" or "free-trade" ideologies. Who is Klein referring to when she references "free-market ideologues"? What transformations has this population enacted in government as it pertains to all three of the locations that she describes? And how has this created geographic landscapes of inclusion and exclusion according to Klein? What does that kind of landscape look like?
Naomi Klein's chapter "Red and Green Zones" makes links between Iraq, post-Katrina New Orleans, and Atlanta, GA. As you read, pay attention to what links these cities for Klein. Iraq and New Orleans are united by what can broadly be considered disaster: one which, at the time of writing, was in the middle of a war, and the other post-hurricane. How have the governance of those post-disaster landscapes been similar? How are these landscapes of disaster linked to the areas surrounding Atlanta? What story is Klein trying to tell by bringing these cities together? Can we say that New Orleans and Atlanta both are somehow "militarized" landscapes? Or does the "corperatization" of wartime Iraq paint a slightly different picture? Either way, Klein's story has much to do with government policies--policies that organize place and populations--that are build in "free-market" or "free-trade" ideologies. Who is Klein referring to when she references "free-market ideologues"? What transformations has this population enacted in government as it pertains to all three of the locations that she describes? And how has this created geographic landscapes of inclusion and exclusion according to Klein? What does that kind of landscape look like?
Friday, October 15, 2010
Voting with your wallet?
Although you all will be preparing for your midterm this weekend, you do also need to write a commentary for this week. I strongly recommend doing this this week not only because they are required, but also because some of the themes in this week's reading will likely show up in the essay questions for the exam.
This week, Patel is going to take us away from the production of food to turn our attention to the consumer and corporate production of consumer desires. As you write your commentaries think about what Patel's overarching argument in this chapter is [hint: it might have something to do with ideologies of personal choice and personal freedom in consumption]. What evidence and examples does he employ to make that argument? How does he tie the issue of consumption in this chapter to the issues surrounding production and the lives of farmers that he discussed in preceding chapters? Does his argument change the way that you view your own relationship to supermarket shelves? Finally, what does Patel's argument suggest for the concluding recommendations presented in the film, Food, Inc.? Does it change how we think about the notion of "voting with your wallet" and "changing the world with every bite"? If so, how?
This week, Patel is going to take us away from the production of food to turn our attention to the consumer and corporate production of consumer desires. As you write your commentaries think about what Patel's overarching argument in this chapter is [hint: it might have something to do with ideologies of personal choice and personal freedom in consumption]. What evidence and examples does he employ to make that argument? How does he tie the issue of consumption in this chapter to the issues surrounding production and the lives of farmers that he discussed in preceding chapters? Does his argument change the way that you view your own relationship to supermarket shelves? Finally, what does Patel's argument suggest for the concluding recommendations presented in the film, Food, Inc.? Does it change how we think about the notion of "voting with your wallet" and "changing the world with every bite"? If so, how?
Thursday, October 14, 2010
The "dark side" of the other white meat
Here is a link to the article that I mentioned in class yesterday about the massive amounts of pig waste generated by Smithfield's "farms". The piece is actually called, "Boss Hog." This isn't required reading, but take a look if you are interested; the article is quite compelling. Pasted below are the first three paragraphs, just to give you a sense:
Smithfield Foods, the largest and most profitable pork processor in the world, killed 27 million hogs last year. That's a number worth considering. A slaughter-weight hog is fifty percent heavier than a person. The logistical challenge of processing that many pigs each year is roughly equivalent to butchering and boxing the entire human populations of New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, San Jose, Detroit, Indianapolis, Jacksonville, San Francisco, Columbus, Austin, Memphis, Baltimore, Fort Worth, Charlotte, El Paso, Milwaukee, Seattle, Boston, Denver, Louisville, Washington, D.C., Nashville, Las Vegas, Portland, Oklahoma City and Tucson.
Smithfield Foods actually faces a more difficult task than transmogrifying the populations of America's thirty-two largest cities into edible packages of meat. Hogs produce three times more excrement than human beings do. The 500,000 pigs at a single Smithfield subsidiary in Utah generate more fecal matter each year than the 1.5 million inhabitants of Manhattan. The best estimates put Smithfield's total waste discharge at 26 million tons a year. That would fill four Yankee Stadiums. Even when divided among the many small pig production units that surround the company's slaughterhouses, that is not a containable amount.
Smithfield estimates that its total sales will reach $11.4 billion this year. So prodigious is its fecal waste, however, that if the company treated its effluvia as big-city governments do -- even if it came marginally close to that standard -- it would lose money. So many of its contractors allow great volumes of waste to run out of their slope-floored barns and sit blithely in the open, untreated, where the elements break it down and gravity pulls it into groundwater and river systems. Although the company proclaims a culture of environmental responsibility, ostentatious pollution is a linchpin of Smithfield's business model.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Future & Past Readings Online
September 15:
° Derek Gregory. 2008. “’Civilization’ and ‘Barbarism’,” in The Colonial Present, London: Blackwell pp. 47-75.
September 22:
° Saskia Sassen, “Cities in a World Economy,” in Cities in a World Economy, New York: Sage, pp. 32 – 55.
° Doreen Massey. 1994. “A Global Sense of Place,” in Space, Place and Gender, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 146 – 156.
° Stuffed and Starved not available in digital format
October 26, 27
° Naomi Klein, “Disaster Apartheid: A world of green and red zones,” The Shock Doctrine, pp. 406-422.
November 2, 3
November 9, 10
° Shadow Cities, “Nairobi” and “Mumbai” pp. 67-142. TO COME, NOT UPLOADED YET!
November 16, 17
° Shadow Cities, “Squatters in New York,” pp. 205– 240. TO COME, NOT UPLOADED YET!
° Jenna Loyd. 2009. “’A Microscopic Insurgent’: Militarization, Health, and Critical Geographies of Violence,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 99 (5): 863-873.
November 30, December 1
December 6, 7
° Pathologies of Power, “Pestilence and Restraint” and “Lessons from Chiapas,” pp. 51-114. SEE ABOVE DOCUMENT.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Chemical Imbalances
Our readings this week take a look at the industrialization of agriculture both in the the mid-20th Century and today. Raj Patel's chapters investigates the rationale for and effects of both the Green Revolution in India and those of today's "biotechnology revolution". In particular, he takes apart the conventional argument that we must advance agricultural technologies in order to alleviate hunger and poverty. As in past weeks, his argument proceeds by breaking down a series of myths around the relationship between hunger and agribusiness. As you read and write your commentaries for this week, begin by focusing on what those myths are, how Patel breaks them down, and what alternative ways of seeing the problem of hunger he replaces them with. What examples does he use to back up his argument? For example, what is the myth that supports the production of "Golden Rice"? Why can we consider it a myth and what is the reality of Golden Rice? And how does the state of Kerala in India present a different story of the relationship between poverty and hunger than those traditionally told?
Another issue that Patel's text raises is that of knowledge production and the circulation of information. What does the "privatization of knowledge" mean for Patel and how has it happened? Similarly, why does he argue that GMO crops "deskill" farmers? And why is that a problem for him? Drawing on both Patel and McKibben's article, how does the agricultural "knowledge economy" in Cuba work differently from that of the US and most of the globalized world? Why did Cuba's agricultural base develop differently? How is Cuba different in this respect from Jamaica (as we saw in Life and Debt)? How do universities in the US and Cuba differ in their relationship to agricultural production?
What do you think about McKibben's depiction of Cuban agriculture? Does it disrupt common conceptions of the "good" of globalization and free markets? Building from your knowledge about Jamaica in the world economy, what do you think will happen to Cuba's agricultural system when it "goes global"?
Another issue that Patel's text raises is that of knowledge production and the circulation of information. What does the "privatization of knowledge" mean for Patel and how has it happened? Similarly, why does he argue that GMO crops "deskill" farmers? And why is that a problem for him? Drawing on both Patel and McKibben's article, how does the agricultural "knowledge economy" in Cuba work differently from that of the US and most of the globalized world? Why did Cuba's agricultural base develop differently? How is Cuba different in this respect from Jamaica (as we saw in Life and Debt)? How do universities in the US and Cuba differ in their relationship to agricultural production?
What do you think about McKibben's depiction of Cuban agriculture? Does it disrupt common conceptions of the "good" of globalization and free markets? Building from your knowledge about Jamaica in the world economy, what do you think will happen to Cuba's agricultural system when it "goes global"?
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Free Trade in North America?
This week, we will be discussing international free trade agreements, which have been a major component of "globalization" over the past twenty years. We will discuss what international trade agreements involve, why they were created, the rationale behind them, and what effects they have had on the circulation of money and people within and across borders. We'll focus on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and its effects on people in the US and Mexico. The chapter that we're reading this week, Raj Patel's "You have become Mexican," explores the effects of NAFTA on agriculture in Mexico and the US and the relations between them. As you read through the chapter and write your commentaries, focus on the following questions:
- Patel's chapter focuses primarily on the effects of and responses to NAFTA by farmers in both Mexico and the US. What have the effects been? What are the various ways in which farmers have responded?
- Patel begins and ends his chapter discussing one form of response: that of protest. He frames the chapter with the global solidarity movement of farmers that was sparked by Lee Kyung Hae's death in Cancun in 2003. What linked Lee Kyung Hae's death to farmers in countries elsewhere? And why did Mexican farmers chant "Lee, hermano, te has hecho Mexicano"? Along the same lines, how would you link what has happened in Mexico with the transformations in Jamaica that you saw described in Life and Debt?
- How has NAFTA effected immigration in the US and how has it effected populations who remain in Mexico?
- What is the relationship between Mexico and California? California is in an enormous budget crisis today, while its population continues to have one of the highest average incomes in the country. According to Patel, what are some of the issues that California is facing? How are those issues linked to Mexico?
- What forms of resistance to economic inequality have been effective in making change to the system?
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Agribusiness in America and Around the Globe
This week, we will begin our unit on "Reproducing Life--Food and Agribusiness." As we move through this unit, I want you all to read the assigned texts keeping in mind some of the ideas we've discussed the past couple weeks: how ideologies work, geographies of inclusion and exclusion, and the importance of paying attention to place in accounts of globalization.
On Tuesday, we'll watch the film Food, Inc. about agribusiness in America. You'll also be reading the first two chapters of Stuffed and Starved, which explores the effects of growing agribusiness on different parts of the world. In both, we'll pay attention to what it means to question where our food comes from and the many forces that are at play in food production.
As you read and develop your commentaries this week think about the following:
- How does the author, Raj Patel, challenge the ideology of personal choice and personal freedom when it comes to food production and consumption? What other explicitly geographic ideologies does Patel challenge? For example, how is the myth of "Shining India" created and how does Patel reveal it as a myth?
- What does his look at coffee production tell us about the relationship between producers and consumers? When you buy a $3 latte at Starbucks, where does the money go? And why does the production and consumption of coffee have such an "hourglass figure"?
- What connects farmer suicides in South Korea, India, the U.S. and China and why does Patel write that the suicides he recounts are "not only individual tragedies, but social ones"?
- How does evidence presented in Stuffed and Starved challenge Thomas Friedman's vision of globalization?
Thursday, September 16, 2010
How to Post a Comment/Commentary Beneath the Post Below
Below is the first post on which you will attach your commentaries as comments. If you're still confused about how to do this, follow these directions: scroll down to the end of the relevant post (for your first commentaries, it's the post right below this one). At the bottom, you should see one of two things: either yellow text that simply says "0 comments" or a comment field below red text that says "post a comment." If it's the former, click on the text and the comment field should appear. You can then type or past your comments. When you are finished, click "Post Comment." Before Blogger will let you post, you will have to sign in with one of the following: Google. LiveJournal, AIM, WordPress, TypePad, or OpenID. If you don't have one of those accounts, I would recommend signing up for a Google account, which is free and takes about two minutes here: https://www.google.com/accounts. After signing in, you'll be presented with a preview of your post and then you'll click "publish post."
What is a "global" place?
On Wednesday (09.15), we discussed ideologies of global space. We linked visions of the globe with periods that have characterized global political relations: British Imperialism, the Cold War, and US involvement in Afghanistan post-9/11. The reading that we did for Wednesday by Derek Gregory made the argument that mapping the problem of terrorism onto the territory of Afghanistan enabled the US under the Bush administration to respond to 9/11 with a concentrated show of military force through the invasion of Afghan borders. He further contends that this move reified both America and Afghanistan as national spaces, calling this a "twin cartographic performance" that mapped visions of "good" and "evil" onto territory and its populations. He argues that this not only enabled military actions to be taken against an entire country of peoples, but that this vision of the world established zones of inclusion and exclusion where some populations were cared for under international legal statues and others were neglected, their lives (and deaths) unaccounted for by national or international law.
On Wednesday, we will continue this conversation about global spaces, but we will be shrinking our scale of analysis. Rather than think about politics on the global scale, we'll be discussing what makes a place--like NYC or the Caymen Islands--"global." Saskia Sassen and Doreen Massey will approach this question from different directions. Sassen explores the changing relevancy of urban spaces and infrastructure in a globalizing economy; she asks, "what does a "global city" look like today and how does ti function in the global economy? Massey is interested in enlivening a notion of the "global city" or "global place" they extends beyond the economic flows that shape it. Her essay challenges conceptions that imagine places around the globe to be subject to the same kinds of changes. In particular, she questions the notion of "space-time compression," a concept that suggests that a globalizing work is a smaller and more interconnected world for everyone. She instead wants us to envision--and engage with--the diversity and the "differential mobilities" found in the places in which we live. As you read these two essays and write your commentaries, here are some questions that you should consider (you don't need to answer all of them; they are meant merely as a guide to get you started):
- Why do cities remain such important sites for the global economy? How does Sassen identify and define "global" cities? What are the characteristics, for her, of "global" cities? How do we see the transformations that she describes expressed in the recent history of New York City's built environment? What might be missing in Sassen's account of the city?
- Why does Massey call for an analysis of the "power-geometry" of place? What does she mean by this? How does Massey think we should think about and imagine places in the global economy? What traditional ideas of place does she want to avoid and why? What characterizes a "global sense of place"? Finally, like Derek Gregory, Massey believes that how we think about and imagine the spaces in which we live transforms how we behave within them. If we accept that argument, how might a more "global sense of place" transform how you imagine your own role as a citizen of New York City?
Paste your commentaries in the comment field below. They are due Monday by 6pm. Remember that we will NOT be having class on Tuesday, so I will see you Wednesday.
Friday, September 10, 2010
course description
This is an interdisciplinary course devoted to understanding the role of the US in a globalizing world. In this course, we will think critically about the interconnection between social, cultural, political and economic dynamics within and beyond the borders of our own country. We will explore the meaning of globalization from a geographical perspective, interrogating how and where “the global” is constituted.
A geographical approach attends to the spatial dimensions of social, political, economic, environmental and cultural life. It explores the differences between places as well as the similarities and connections that unite them. Hence, this course will introduce you to how the fields of political, economic, and cultural geography address the relations between seemingly distant spaces. We will open up geographical concepts such as migration, flow, networks, boundaries, place, space, and scale in an effort to better understand and explain the connections (and disparities) between people and places in a world in which events in far-flung locales are intimately entwined with one another. We will also explore the ways that events outside of New York City—be they in New Orleans or New Delhi—are often not far from the social, cultural and political forms that we encounter in our everyday lives. Finally, we will pay particular attention to how and where these spaces, and notions of “the global” that unite them, are constituted unevenly.
The course is structured around a series of readings and case studies taken from different sites around the world. After a brief introduction to concepts in globalization, we will focus on three key themes: global agricultural production and its critics; contemporary forms urban governance, growth, and inequality around the world; and uneven geographies of disease and medicine. We will read these cases through three key questions that structure the course:
(1) What does it mean to live in an increasingly interconnected world?
(2) How do we speak about and study accelerated social, economic, and political change (i.e. what kind of language do we use to describe the contemporary world and what methods to we use to understand it)?
(3) What does ‘global citizenship’ mean at a time when people, economies, cultures, and politics are increasingly (and often unknowingly) entangled in integrated networks that span the globe?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)