The
Environment; War, and Terrorism: Discussion Points from Chapters 17 and
18
|
1. Today, the link between terrorism,
war and the environment is stronger than it has ever been. Why?
Because technology has increased to the point where we can literally
destroy ourselves and life as we now know it on this planet. Our options are many: nuclear, biological, or chemical—Or we
can, in peace time, continue to pollute our planet beyond its ability to
recover in any short period of time.
(We are a very short-lived species.
On a planetary scale, I have no doubt that even the most devastating
nuclear war, while leaving permanent scars, would not overcome the earth’s
ability to reach some new ecological balance over a period of a million years
or so. (Others would strongly
disagree with their prognostications of nuclear winter, etc.). No matter, the basic point is that we can
now destroy ourselves and throw our planet’s ecosystem out of equilibrium for
very long time. |
|
|
|
|
|
2. Lets come back to the POET model as a
point of departure: |
|
|
|
|
|
Although primarily
regarded as an ecological model best applied to studying the relationship between
human beings and their environment, the POET (Population, Organization,
Environment, Technology) model can shed light on a wide variety of social
problems. Palen has stated that,
“Solving social problems in the real world involves social and economic
costs. The solution to one problem
may produce problems elsewhere (Palen, 2000, p. 24).” Social institutions are
tightly interconnected-- a change in one institution will very likely produce
changes in another. For example,
raising air and water quality involves trade-offs (more expensive cars; a
switch to mass transit, etc). |
|
|
|
|
|
Macionis emphasizes
the relation ship between technology and the environment- a theme that flows
through Chapter 17. |
|
|
Ecology: |
|
|
|
|
|
Ecology is the scientific study
of the relationship between organisms and their environment. Modern environmentalism differs from
conservationism of the past.
Environmentalists are really ecologists in that they emphasize the
impact of changes in population, technology, and social organization on the
environmental system. |
|
|
|
|
|
Example of
Environmentalism: Build a coal-fired
power plant in Tennessee and all states down wind from it will be
impacted. Cut down forests in Brazil and
you have the potential to harm air quality around the world. Environmentalists see the environment as a
series of interdependent areas that are linked together. Example of
Conservationism: set aside a part of the forest while permitting extensive
logging in another part.
(Conservationists conserve or save resources for future use).
Conservationists see the environment as a series of independent and isolated
areas. (Land is set aside and "conserved" for future use). |
|
|
|
|
|
The "POET" scheme: |
|
|
|
|
|
This is an ecological model--
(functionalist)-- that emphasizes the interrelationship between four
variables-- Population; Organization; Environment; and Technology: According to the Malthusian model, the
population "explosion" will have dire consequences on the
environment (See Chapter 6). Marxists
argue that changing the form of social organization from capitalism to
communism could control the impact of population growth on the environment. (History has not supported this claim as Marxist
societies have horrible environmental records). |
|
|
|
|
|
Thus far, the "green
revolution" representing advanced technology in food production has
enabled food supplies to keep ahead of population growth. (The horrible famines
of recent in Africa resulted from politics involving food distribution, not a
shortage of food supplies). Technology also has been used to develop cheap
and effective methods of birth control which can be used to control
population growth. Technology also increases the amount of damage that can be
inflicted on the environment-- nuclear power is the most often cited
example. |
|
|
|
|
|
Technology |
|
|
Sociologists argue that
"Social Organization" is a critical variable in this model. As previously mentioned, famine is just one
social problem caused by politics, not a lack food. The use of birth control
is another issue where a safe, effective technology exists, but politics
determines whether or not a society will endorse it. The environment, itself,
has become an intensely political issue-- if social groups do not resolve
their differences regarding the environment our future prospects may be dim,
indeed. |
|
|
|
|
|
Finally, it may appear that the
environment is treated as the dependent variable in this model-- this is not
necessarily the case. Major
environmental changes will have a tremendous impact on all the remaining
variables in the model. ("El
Nino" is a very recent example of a global environmental condition that
has had a very significant impact on human living conditions. For example, we are very close to knowing
for certain whether or not a "green house" effect is already under
way-- (the green house effect is currently regarded as a "political issue"
by many of those holding power in our society). If such a phenomenon does
occur, we are bound to see an intensification of efforts to counter its
effects. (We've already placed restrictions on industrial emissions,
automotive exhausts, coolants like freon, etc.) |
|
|
|
|
|
The former Soviet Union provides
an example of how human engineering on a massive scale can disrupt the
environment with diversion of water flow into the Aral Sea and the nuclear
disaster at Chernobyl. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some statistics from Macionis: 1.) The United States generates 1 billion pounds of solid waste
every day. 2.) Rainforests are shrinking by 65,000 square
miles every year 3.) In the U.S. the average person consumes 50
times as much steel, 170 times as much newspaper, 250 times as much gasoline,
and 300 times as much plastic as the typical person in India. 4.) Other problems include an adequate supply
of clean, pure water. According to
Macionis, “The global use of water (estimated at 2 billion cubic meters per
year) is rising faster than the world’s population…” (p. 431). Individuals in households use 10%,
industry uses 25%; and agriculture uses about 66% of all annual water
consumption in the world (Macionis, p. 431).
Coupled with this is increasing levels of water pollution, world-wide. Macionis cites Sierra Club claims that
streams in the U.S. absorb about 500 million pounds of toxic material each
year (p. 433). Even something
seemingly as harmless as fertilizing your lawn can harm rivers and streams
through runoff. 5.) Air pollution: Industrialized nations of the world fare better than the
developing nations because the former have taken steps to monitor and control
air quality. Cities in developing
nations may lag as many as 50 years behind the post industrial world. Acid Rain is a related problem. Exhaust from burning fossil fuels
condenses in the moist air forming sulfuric and nitric acid. 6.) Global Warming is a real threat to the
ecology of the planet regardless of its causes. 7.) Declining Biodiversity on the Planet: Macionis claims (p.435) that the planet
loses about “…several dozen species of plants and animals each day…” The problem with this is that it may 1.)
it reduces our ability to cross-breed different strains of plants to make
more productive and disease/plan resistant forms. 2.) biodiversity is vital to genetic research which can help us
develop new life-saving drugs, etc.
3.) biodiversity creates beauty in our environment and adds to the
enjoyment of life. Macionis (p. 435)
claims that 75% of the world’s 10.000 species of birds are in decline and he
expects that 1000 of them will become extinct in the 21st century. |
|
|
3. Food, energy, and the environment: |
|
|
|
|
|
One widely known statistic—The developed
nations (comprising 23% of the world’s population) use about 70 percent of
the world’s energy. As the rest of
the world develops, energy consumption will increase. We see this in places like Mexico City—The
world’s largest. Developing nations do
not (or are unable to) enact (or enforce) environmental controls, so places
like Mexico City are very unhealthy.
Just breathing the air is the equivalent of smoking two packs of
cigarettes per day (Palen, p. 463).
Food: Overfishing—The world
fish catch has been declining since 1970. Today the increase in agricultural
production is less than the rate of population increase (Palen, p. 161). The more that we stress the environment
with air and water pollution, the more we endanger our food supply. Palen reports (p. 471) that 25% of people
who swim at Florida’s beaches develop “ear infections, sore throats,
respiratory or gastro-intestinal disease…”
What causes this? He suggests
runoff from the state’s 1.6 million septic tanks! |
|
|
|
|
|
4. War and Terrorism: (Go to “Course Documents” under
Blackboard) and look at the lecture diagram that I have placed there. |
|
|
|
|
|
Macionis
raises very important points on a global perspective about war (p. 447) 1.) War (and the preparation for it) is
expensive. The world spends about $2
trillion dollars each year on the military 2.) Today, most of warfare’s casualties
are civilians. 3.) Worldwide, approximately 300,000
children are serving as soldiers 4.) The destructive power of war continues
to grow and is higher today than ever before as weapons of mass destruction
target civilian populations |
|
|
Warfare
(organized conflict) occurs between nations (nation states). It can also occur between tribes of
people—“Tribal warfare.” Terrorism
consists of violent acts (not necessarily against a military target)
performed for political purposes—(as a “political strategy” in the text’s
words). The three sociological
perspectives shed interesting light on the difference between war and
terrorism. Functionalists suggest
that war is a “last resort”—It exists because all other avenues of settling
differences have failed. Terrorism
can occur when there is a lack of cohesion in one society-- (Merton’s
“Rebels”). Conflict theorists say
that war occurs because it benefits certain powerful segments in society that
can mobilize entire nations to do their bidding. They also make a distinction between “just and unjust” wars and
“revolutions.” Interactionists are
interested in how people are socialized for warfare. |
|
|
|
|
|
Macionis lists 7 causes of War-- (or reasons for going to war): 1.) Perceived Threats 2.) Cultural and Religious Differences 3.) Political Objectives 4.) Moral Objectives 5.) Wealth and Power 6.) Social Problems (The intention is to
divert the attention of the nation’s citizens away from existing social
problems). 7.) Absence of alternatives Unfortunately,
he lists only 4 strategies for Peace: 1.) Deterrence-- (MAD or Mutually Assured
Destruction is an example of this. 2.) High Technology Defense—The key word
here is “defense”. SDI the Strategic
Defense Initiative is one example of this. 3.) Arms Control: Problems with this tactic is that it has
problems dealing with newly developed weapons; there are problems with
verification; and it does little to resolve underlying conflicts that may
cause war in the first place (Macionis, p. 455). 4.) Resolving the Underlying Conflict—This
can be tough if it means that people will have to adjust or change their
basic values. Recent progress in the
conflict between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland would be an example
of the success that can be obtained in this regard. |
|
|
Terrorism is not warfare—it’s the use of violence to
achieve political ends. Revolutionary
terrorism is an attempt by individuals who are under the control of a
government to overthrow or change that government. State terrorism is the government’s use of violence (terror)
against its own people—savage brutality to keep the population under
control. Its hard to fit individuals
like Timothy McVey and Ted
Kacyznski into these categories—To be a terrorist, it is assumed that you are
part of a web or organization with a political purpose—not a loner. |
|
|
Macionis gives a good summary of terrorism in the
U.S. Some of the examples that he
mentions include the KKK; the Industrial Workers of the World; the Weathermen
of the 1960s; and Timothy McVey’s attack on the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma
City in 1995. There are many more
examples besides the attack against the World Trade Center and Pentagon on
Sept. 11, 2001. Which of the
strategies for dealing with Terrorism mentioned on p. 499 do you think would
be most effective over the long run?
Why? |
