Indigenous resistance and racist schooling on the borders of empires: Coast Salish cultural survival

The article “Indigenous resistance and racist schooling on the borders of empires: Coast Salish cultural survival,” is about the consequences of the creation of the United States and Canadian border for the natives.  The natives who have lived on the land for thousands of years were spread out in what is now the United States and Canada.  The Indians do not understand the concept of owning land, so after the border was drawn, the Indians continued to cross between the countries freely.  Although this is not legal, it is understandable because many families were split up when the border was set.  In addition to the Indians having trouble with being split up, many also were cut off from their fishing lands.  Since the Indians could not fish, many had trouble with eating and supporting themselves.  The Indigenous people also had trouble with attending school in both the United States and Canada.  Both countries attempted to assimilate the Indians and stop them from practicing anything relating to their culture.  The best tool to accomplish this was thought to be through the schools.  At first, both countries had residential schools, meaning that all of the Indians attended the same schools.  To assimilate the natives more, the countries decided to integrate schools.  This caused the culture of the Indigenous people to decline and for many students to experience racism in school.  Due to these negative experiences, many parents took their kids out of the integrated schools, and put them back into boarding schools, which were previously thought to be terrible.  Overall, the schooling practices in the United States seem to have been more positive for the Indigenous people than those in Canada.  However, in total neither system of schools succeeded in assimilating the native people.

Coastal Plains Fish Sustainablity

The North Carolina Coastal Plain region depends on fish as a major source of food and they beneficial to their economy.  Fish are caught in large numbers from the ocean and then sold to other regions in the state.  This provides a source of income to many fisherman.  The restaurants and stores which the fish end up at depend on these fishermen for their incomes as well.  If a seafood restaurant no longer had a shipment of fish coming in everyday, their business would suffer drastically.  Both of these reason are why it is so important for people to note the decline in fish populations.  If fishermen and business owners who rely on fish sales no longer can catch/sell fish, it could very well damage the North Carolina economy.  Fish are being caught at rates which are much higher than the rate the fish can reproduce.  If this kind of over hunting keeps occurring, some species of fish may become extinct.

Environmental Ethics Artifact

In the article “Polar Bears Still on Thin Ice, but Cutting Greenhouse Gases Now Can Avert Extinction, Experts Say,” the possibility for the extinction of polar bears is discussed.  Polar bears can be saved however if the people of earth decide to be more responsible with how they treat the environment.  Scientists have found, “if humans reduce greenhouse gas emissions significantly in the next decade or two, enough artic ice is likely to remain intact during late summer and early autumn for polar bears to survive.”  These steps should be taken so the environment is not harmed even more.  

Polar bears were listed as a threatened species in 2008 due to the fact if artic ice keeps decreasing at the rate it is going now, the polar bears will no longer be able to survive.  A new nature study has been made which indicates “if greenhouse gas emissions were reduced substantially in the near future, rapid ice losses would be followed by substantial retention of the remaining ice through this century, as well as partial recovery of the ice that disappeared during the rapid ice loss.”  Polar bears need the ice because that is where they find their source of food, seals.  If polar bears are unable to be on the ice and find seals, they will lose about two pounds a day, causing them to eventually die.

350 ppm

In the article “A Last Chance to Advert Disaster,” Dr. James E. Hansen talks about the dangers of climate change.  Hansen explains how greenhouse gasses are responsible for the climate change and that humans have caused it to occur.  This change has led to the alteration of the water cycle, causing more droughts, heavier rains, and more floods.  Even with all of this data collected, many people do not see the seriousness of the issue.  The United States has declined putting limits on carbon emissions, and other developing countries have increased their emission rates.  The possible consequences which could occur if the earth is allowed to rise even two degrees fahrenheit in temperature are also described.  Glaciers could melt completely, causing a two meter rise in sea level.  In addition, the extinction of all polar species would be put at risk due to this. 

Currently the earth is made up of 385 ppm of carbon dioxide and rising 2 ppm a year.  Earth is not sustainable unless a level of 350 or less ppm is reached.  There is not much time for the earth to reach this goal however.  “A level of no more than 350 ppm is still feasible, with the help of reforestation and improved agricultural practices, but just barely – time is running out.”  To solve this problem, Hansen believes coal should no longer be used.  It is necessary for the world to transfer over to carbon-free energy for cars, instead of fossil fuels.  This would cause less carbon dioxide to be released in the atmosphere, allowing the level of carbon dioxide to decrease.  Hansen also believes that a tax should be put on carbon, so people are less inclined to use it.  Lastly, the author says it is critical for our political leaders to believe this change is necessary too.

Hydraulic Fracturing Debate

            Recently in Pavillion, Wyoming, a discovery was made in which underwater groundwater pollution was linked to hydraulic fracturing.  This issue is discussed in Abraham Lustgarten’s article, “EPA: Natural Gas Fracking Linked to Water Contamination.”  This contamination was likely caused by the gas drilling process.  After the discovery, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a statement claiming the pollution of the groundwater in Wyoming was likely caused by gas wells whose contents had seeped up into the dirt.  This contamination of the ground water which was analyzed contained at least 10 compounds which are often used in frack fluids, backing up the EPAs assumption.  Currently there is a national debate on whether or not hydraulic fracking is harming the groundwater.  This discovery could be a huge turning point for environmental advocates because it could cause stricter regulations on fracking. 

            The drilling industry does not believe these claims and insists that hydrologic pressure keeps the harmful fluids from rising in the soil.   They argue “…that deep geologic layers provide a watertight barrier preventing the movement of chemicals towards the surface; and that the problems with the cement and steel barriers around gas wells aren't connected to fracking.”  In addition, when asked about the EPA’s findings, a spokesperson for EnCana, the company which owns the wells in Pavillion, denied that the contamination was caused by the company’s wells.  Instead the spokesperson claimed that the pollution was naturally occurring.

            For more than 20 years, residents of the town Pavillion have been complaining about fouled drinking water.  Some residents have encountered the water in their wells turning brown after fracking, and in response, the responsible gas companies supplied alternate drinking water.   In addition, many samples of the water have been taken, all returning results with trace amounts of contaminants, which are commonly used in fracking.  Residents have also been cautioned by health officials not to drink their water.

            Although this controversy of whether the fracking is to blame for the pollutants in the groundwater has not been settled yet, it is causing much debate.  These discoveries could lead stricter regulations being put in place on hydraulic fracturing.

Improvements to the Education System

After reading Richard Kahn’s article “Towards Ecopedagogy: Weaving a Broad-based Pedagogy of Liberation for Animals, Nature, and the Oppressed People of Earth,” a quote which really stood out to me was one found at the beginning.  It read “…it seems to me a lamentable contradiction to engage in progressive, revolutionary discourse and have a practice which negates life.”  This quote intrigued me because it is saying the progress which we have made in the world is not really a success because at the same time as progressing, we are regressing, by killing off people, animals, and the environment.  I agree with this statement, although I had never thought about it in that way before.  Is a form of technology really worth it if it is killing the living things on the planet?  People should be taught about issues like this.  An example of this learning is found in Richard Kahn’s article called Environmental Education.  This form of education should be found in all schools so people are aware of how precious the world is and all of the issues that it currently has.  If people are informed of the damage they are causing the earth, they will be less likely to continue those harmful actions.

Another change which should be made to the school system is equality.  Currently the education system is set up so the wealthy get into better colleges and therefore obtain better jobs.  The less fortunate on the other hand are accepted into less prestigious schools, causing them to have lesser paying jobs than the wealthy.  This cycle is similar to the quote from Kahn’s article because the wealthy keep progressing and making more money, while the gap between the rich and poor is growing.  The poor continue making the same amount of money, while the cost of living is increasing.  This eventually will cause the poor to become even poorer, resulting in them no longer to be able to support themselves.  If the poor cannot support themselves, then the economy could be harmed, similar to how the environment is being harmed and living things being killed.  This is another example of how progress is not worth the negative effects it may cause.

The way kids are accepted into college should be changed so the education system is more fair.  Parents would still be able to send their children to either private or public schools, but when the child’s transcripts are sent to a college only the GPA would be seen by the admissions office, not the school they attended.  This way if a child did not have the privilege to go to a prestigious high school, but is still brilliant, they will have the same chance to get into any college which a child with a similar academic record had who went to a private school.  I believe this change would be effective in creating a more just education system.