In class, Dr. Gerstenblatt showed us with her example of Mart that people can put aside their differences (racial, religious) when there is a common goal in which everyone has something to gain. Social capital is exchanged and people's frameworks become altered. There's something organic about it because it's a tangible process full of interactions.
It is necessary for academics to do qualitative research and publish research about the problems people have in society. There should be literature to challenge people and make people from the hegemonic position feel uncomfortable. I knew there was discrimination against Muslims and Hindus and Sikhs, but I did not think it resonated until after 9/11. I did not know there were the Jersey City Dot Busters in the 1980's or the problems with the California Livingstone School District or city council issues because of the Indo-American festival of Navaratri in the mid-90's.
So the problems have been identified by these essays, and I think that is their end goal, but what about solutions? My complaint about these essays are that they rarely look to solutions. They provide context but seldom provide ideas to how we can take this context and forge new ideas that make radical changes. I suggest that community building like the project in Mart and focusing on the natural environment around us might be a first step to getting rid of some the prejudice and institutional oppression throughout society.
The philosophy of deep ecology-beginning in the 1970's- is one where us as humans are on a level playing field with nature where "'there is no bifurcation [or division] in reality between the human and the nonhuman realms'" (Devall; Sessions; 2). Our common denominator as humans are that we are part of the Earth. Every single person has something to gain by ensuring for ourselves that the Earth regulates itself properly. It is an intrinsic value.
Devall and Sessions point out that:
For thousands of years, Western culture has become increasingly obsessed with the idea of dominance:
with dominance of humans over nonhuman Nature, masculine over the feminine, the wealthy and
powerful over the poor, with the dominance of the West over the non-Western cultures.
(Devall; Sessions; 1)
If we shift our frameworks to where nature comes first and we as humans second, then the idea of dominance slowly goes away. Some of the ways we can apply that to our society today is by reenergizing poor and dilapidated neighborhoods, by creating more public spaces and upholding high standards for public transportation, and by doing more projects similar to the ones in Mart. If we treat our land and our environment around us accordingly, then a balanced multicultural world becomes much easier to achieve.
Devall; Sessions. "Deep Ecology: Living as if Nature Mattered."Gibbs M Smith Inc. Salt Lake City, UT. 1985.
http://www.earthandspiritcenter.org/Course%20pdfs/Class%204_Principles%20of%20Deep%20Ecology_Bill%20Devail.pdf
http://www.earthandspiritcenter.org/Course%20pdfs/Class%204_Principles%20of%20Deep%20Ecology_Bill%20Devail.pdf
Hey Ethan,
ReplyDeleteI agree with your insight about the articles successfully discussing discrimination and oppression, but not acknowledging any sustainable solutions. I get frustrated sometimes reading these articles that leave me totally depressed, without sharing any kind of reconciliation for these problems, leaving me feel totally worthless. However, I do believe it is a difficult obstacle to decipher...I don't think the authors themselves can think of any solutions to their oppression, or steps that we as readers could take to help end this cycle. Perhaps a step towards a solution is first and foremost reading and considering these articles, and acknowledging their position. This might be the first step to creating a solution for religious oppression by creating a space for reflection and discussion.
"There's something organic about it because it's a tangible process full of interactions."
ReplyDeleteI like your statement here because it speaks to the reality that things must be tangible. Theories that make us uncomfortable hopefully will lead us to a tangible action. If we're uncomfortable, we'll naturally try to get comfortable somehow. I think that when we look for comfort we can instinctively pull away and feel sad individually or we can seek comfort in coming together and walking this process towards a solution. It's in this process that reconciliation happens, like with the Mart story.