The smell in the air of supermarkets

An important question that Raj Patel raises in the full speech is that to what extent conscious buying can really help solve the problems of global economy, social justice, and the environment.

Related to the clip, see also this story from the LA Times: How businesses coax shoppers into buying
http://www.latimes.com/health/la-he-shopping-psychology-20101122,0,1283284,full.story

The article provides a good summary of the tactics that businesses use to coax shoppers into spending. The article also illuminates how the ideology of 'choice' can be illusionary. I may think that I am buying this particular item out of my personal, independent choice, but in reality that choice or preference is conditioned by a number of stimuli, both within the store and from outside (ads, culture, media).

On how consumers are now lured by slogans of "Green" and "Fair Trade", see

The Great Green Swindle
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/oct/23/ethicalbusiness-consumeraffairs

But the question for me is more than just social-justice-environment-conscious consumerism. It's consumerism itself: to not be dependent on consumption to find fulfillment in life. That perhaps is the key to freedom.

Choose freedom - Consume Less

Freedom from the rat race for bigger, better, faster, more. Freedom from big corporations telling you and determining for you what you should have, what you should wear, how you should look, feel, walk, talk, and interact with others. How: By consuming less, by adopting modesty and simplicity, prioritizing relationships over possessions, genuinely caring for humanity, changing standards of 'success', 'fulfillment', and 'beauty', and bringing spirituality in life. They can be truly liberating and expose one to things and experiences that are 'real' and substantially much more 'meaningful'. The concern here is more than just becoming better environment-n-social-justice conscious consumers. It's consumerism itself: to not be dependent on consuming things to find fulfillment in life. In the clip, I especially liked how sight, sound, and smell are contrasted to project the difference between the 'real' and 'artificial'.

On TV: TV can have both good and bad uses. The technology is not in question here. The concern would be the content (what is shown on it?). The concern is also how we regard material possessions (have they become the most fundamental preoccupation in our lives? does having them make any difference in how we measure our 'success' and 'self-worth'?). The concern is also excessive indulgence: I don't think it's very constructive if for someone TV becomes the only or primary form of entertainment or pass-time, and the person ignores (or never discovers) the 'real' experience and joy of being close to nature, in good people's company, helping people in need, etc.

[Credits: Courtesy docminho on youtube. Production team: Bijoy George, Caro Liu, Dago Schelin, Daniel Yanik, Jan Pieniak, Maria Helena Toscano, Rogério Nishizawa, Simon Schulz. Supervised by Professor Cristoph Althaus.]

Majid Majidi's Movies

An internationally acclaimed writer and director, Majid Majidi was born in Tehran in 1959. He studied at the Institute of Dramatic Art in Tehran. Baduk (1992) was his debut as a director and screenwriter. Below are trailers of some of my favorites.

The Children of Heaven - Bacheha-Ye aseman (1997)



The Color of Paradise - Rang-e khoda (1999)



The Willow Tree - Beed-e majnoon (2005)



The Song of Sparrows - Avaze gonjeshk-ha (2008)

The truth about how your sportswear is made

Here is a visual depiction along with excerpts from The Independent report:



Alternative link

Blood, sweat and tears: the truth about how your sportswear is made
By Martin Hickman
Factories used by biggest brands abuse staff, employ children and pay pitiful wages - while stars earn a fortune

"Inspections by Nike, Puma and Adidas, identified 281 rogue factories, whose failings ranged from the unsatisfactory to the abysmal."

"A decade after some shoppers boycotted Nike over the issue, the leading players in the £134bn-a-year global sportswear industry seek to protect their reputations against allegations they profit from sweated labour by inspecting factories and blacklisting the worst. However their own reports show they have had only partial success in cleaning up the industry, and that they continue to outsource production to countries where trade unions are banned or restricted."

"Of 479 factories checked last year, on average 168 failed to meet Nike's standards, meaning they had "serious system failures" or a "general disregard" for codes of conduct. One in five failed to provide contracts, honour collective bargaining, occasionally used children or worked staff seven days a week without a break."

"Of 362 factories that supply Puma, one in five – 75 – failed audits two years ago. About half of those flouted rules on hours and pay, and most endangered workers' health. Three-quarters failed to follow rules on the handling of chemicals. Puma says it is committed to trade union-rights, but it outsources to China and Vietnam, which restrict those rights. In its Team Talk report, Puma admitted: "Considering these limitations, the social standard on freedom of association and collective bargaining is admittedly difficult to enforce at many of our supplier factories."

"Adidas, which was praised by the campaign group Playfair in 2008 for introducing complaints processes and for ending short-term contracts, gives little information about life inside its factories. Last year it ranked 60 per cent of 1,200 suppliers in the bottom three "compliance" ratings, but since it declines to explain the criteria, it is unclear how many failed audits. Last year the German firm warned 38 suppliers that they were so bad they could lose contracts."

"Conditions may be worse than publicly stated because factories falsify wage and time records to pass audits. Puma acknowledged "many factories" covered up excessive working hours with two sets of time records – one genuine and one for inspections. The firm said: "It is common knowledge in our industry that software programs have been developed specifically for this purpose, with workers being coached on how to answer questions." "

How to Reduce Your Carbon Footprint - English

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7zwrzEyzkA

These steps only 'reduce' carbon footprint; they don't relieve us of our responsibility - that is, if we are complacent in other aspects or if we are apathetic to the exploitation of environment and people by big corporations and by people in our very neighborhoods. The steps in this video can only be a starting point.

On a different note, on the use of tap water, obviously the suggestion in the clip applies only to some countries - mostly in the west. But over in those countries too, it is recommended to use effective filters: Pharmaceuticals - like antibiotics, mood stabilizers, and sex hormones - have been found in drinking water supplies in America. See here http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/pharmawater_site/day1_01.html

The last point about factory farming of cattle and greenhouse effect in the clip relates to the issue of excessive meat consumption. The more the demand for meat, the more grain would be fed to cattle, instead of humans. It takes about 7 gm of grain to produce 1 gm of meat protein. About 40% of world grain is fed to animals, whereas you have more than 1 billion people in the world who, as per UN estimates, sleep undernourished or hungry each day.

On top of that, there is environmental degradation (with excessive emission of 'methane') that the clip refers to.

According to one analysis food 'production' process is more environmentally costly than food 'transportation', and if average Americans replace only 1/7 of their meat consumption with vegetables, it can minimize environmental cost equivalent to that which can be obtained through maximum localization (eating local). See more about that study at: http://www.ethicurean.com/2008/06/23/food-miles-vs-food-choices/

Some people want to make it an argument about "food miles vs. food choices". I think we can incorporate all of these good ideas into our lifestyle - as we encourage eating local and organic (wherever it's realistically possible), we should also encourage cutting down on meat consumption.

Nikola Tesla - The Forgotten Wizard of Science - English

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoiC9EtELGg

Nikola Tesla's scientific discoveries are a reminder that there are alternative ways of imagining and doing science. They also highlight the fact that the current fossil fuel based economy is not a result of some natural (and inevitable) development in the history of science and technology but was guided in this particular direction by materialistic greed.

Some suggest that because of Tesla's eccentric behavior and views it became easy for the likes of Thomas Edison and J. P. Morgan to defame him and sweep him under the carpet. Tesla's works remain classified and are perhaps still used in classified scientific and military projects.

Would you buy a diamond if ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsfwEj6yqSA

More regulations on the diamond trade - specifically, to purchase only certified diamonds - would only reinforce the monopoly of De Beers and its likes.

Human beings are exploited on both ends of the diamond trade. From the poor miners in Africa to those people who are made to believe that their love could only proven by diamond. They probably do not know how much blood is on that diamond. And some, despite knowing, have simply become indifferent and cold (and therefore, in-human).

We need to re-think if we need diamonds at all to feel happy about ourselves or express our love toward others?

A related question to consider is that Are diamonds really that rare? Is diamond scarcity real or man-made?

Even if somehow we manage to address the problem of "scarcity" by dismembering the diamond cartels and etc., would that solve the problem? If today we address diamond scarcity somehow, tomorrow the hearts-with-illness will desire for some other “precious” metal or material. Instead of De Beers, you will have some other unscrupulous, profit-hungry business doing similar exploitation.

People should definitely engage in political activism, pressuring politicians and companies through protests and boycotts. But just that doing that won’t be enough. What is needed is a deep cultural shift in how people think and desire and somehow re-orient the focus away from the rat race for bigger, better, faster, and more, that you see in almost all segments of society around the world - those in the middle and upper classes that can afford such luxuries and those among the working and poor classes who can't afford but their hearts long for these luxuries, and if tomorrow they become rich, they would probably join the rat race with similar enthusiasm.

Change has to start from within ourselves, from transforming our hearts, from changing our standards of beauty and value. More than just sympathy we need to get angry at our complacency and at the exploitation of people and environment and turn our passivity into concrete action.

The sorry state of local and packaged milk in Pakistan - Urdu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSfyRc-9lw4

This is from the program, Hasb-e-Haal, run by Dunya TV. The host is known for coming up with researched content. So the argument should be taken seriously even if we don't accept it at face value.

I had some idea previously, but this is terrifying. I don't have high hopes from the big companies. From what I have been told most don't own dairy farms; that is, their production is largely dependent on these gawalas. Perhaps the international companies taught some of these techniques to the gawalas. Even if not all gawalas use these techniques to the fullest extent, I have been told that most, at least, do use emulsifier-s, to preserve milk for longer period (in the absence of cooling facility) and thicken its texture. I have been told that these practices are also applied to milk (khula dood) supplied to local shops. What is fed to these animals and the conditions under which they live is another terrifying story.

It's time people took "halal organic" seriously, which was, more or less, already part of established farming practices in Pakistan - though, obviously, not with that name - before the arrival of big companies and the so-called "green revolution". We need to scale down and make food production part of farming methods that are more humane, local, diverse, seasonal, and sustainable. We need to re-connect to our food sources to better appreciate the value of what we eat and associated environmental and human cost-s. We need more awareness of what we already had and what we could improve but that we are losing due to short-sighted greed and corporate gains.

----
From the above clip:

The formula for artificial preparation of milk:

1 kilo milk
1 kilo cooking oil
10 kilo water
1 kilo dry milk

CMC powder (a stabilizing agent) - to increase density

"LR" (?) content found in natural milk - is made up for by adding urea, salt, and detergent.

Liquid hydrogen to preserve overnight.

If milk gets bad (phat ja'ey) then they add Caustic Soda.

Oxytocin and other booster injections to animals given for easy milking and increasing productivity.

---------
From Daily Times: http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\12\10\story_10-12-2009_pg7_12

Mixing of harmful substances in packed milk confirmed

"Petitioner Dr Muhammad Yaqoob Bhatti, central executive member of the Watan Party Pakistan, had challenged the alarming situation caused by adulterated milk being supplied in market. The petitioner relied upon a report published in a newspaper on Feb 4, 2009, which stated that dairy farms and milk supplying companies had been adding various chemicals and unhygienic material in milk.

The percentage of impurities includes urea, or melamine as protein booster (30 percent), substandard cooking oil (70 percent), powdered water chestnut (40 percent), unhygienic water (50 percent), formalin, a chemical used by doctors to preserve human body (35 percent), penicillin for enhancing the thickness and fragrance of milk (47 percent), hair removing powder (29 percent), zoonotic pathogens (27 percent) and other adulterants including soda bicarbonate, to improve the taste."

----------
From: http://www.defence.pk/forums/current-events-social-issues/52817-packaged-milk-being-sold-tainted-melamine.html

"PSQCA says that it allows 5 mg melamine in one kg milk for adults’ consumption and 1mg in one kg milk for children. The Chinese milk controversy involved < 0.2 mg/kg per day consumption causing renal problems in infants.

Melamine Tolerable Daily Intake across the world are as follows

EU : 0.5 milligrams per kg of body mass per day
Canada : 0.35 mg per kg of body mass per day
US : Originally 0.63 mg but now 0.063 mg per kg of body mass per day
WHO : 0.2 mg per kg of body mass per day
China : 2.5 mg per kg in products with more than 15% milk content

So, the FDA says that we should not be consuming more than 0.063 mg of melamine per kg of body mass per day. That means a 20 kg child shouldn't be consuming more than 1.26 mg of melamine per day, and that is the tolerable limit. If these guys have been found exceeding these already relaxed limits set by the PSQCA, I wonder what the kids have been consuming."

"As for the petitioner, an internet search reveals that Dr Muhammad Yaqoob Bhatti is on the HEC Control Panel as well and is an Associate Professor of Livestock Management at the University of Agriculture, Faisalabad."

Thoughts on the Israeli Apartheid Week 2010

Israeli Apartheid Week 2010 Trailer





6th International Israeli Apartheid Week Trailer


Many of the readers are already familiar with the Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW), an annual series of events held in different cities and campuses around the world. Last year, according to their website, these events were organized in more than 40 cities across the globe. This year's events, held in early March, have been widely covered by the international news media. I believe that this effort has a lot of potential, and I support it for that reason. The following points are meant to reflect on some aspects that can help make it even better.

While drawing attention to the striking parallels between the Apartheid South Africa and the Zionist State of Israel, the IAW promotes Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) as part of its tactics or strategy. But the specific demands or objectives of this effort, as I argue in this piece, are at best vague and limiting. The framework in which these demands have been formulated limit the scope of this effort. I am not sure if the organizers in various cities and different speakers invited to these events all have a unified understanding of those objectives and their implications. (What does "End the Israeli Apartheid" really mean? What does "End the Occupation" mean?) The following comments are based on their central (or 'official') announcements and documents.

Comparing Means and Ends

If the distinction between "tactics" (means) and "objectives" (end) is clear to the readers, the question that may be asked here is that what do we want to achieve by highlighting the Israeli atrocities? Similarly, what do we want to achieve with BDS? Suppose, we make a strong point about the apartheid nature of the Israeli state, and everyone is convinced in North America and the rest of the world... now what? What have we asked for as a solution during the movement? "Peace Process", "Two States", "One State", something else? And, what have we conceded in this process?

Looking at some current documents and online advertisements of this event, it appears that they all are couched in the vocabulary and framework of a two-state solution. The target is only on the Wall in the West Bank (and Israeli settlements beyond the 1967 borders), or the demand is equal rights for Palestinian citizens within "Israel", or the return of refugees under UN Resolution 194 (which, by the way, only protects the right of return of the original refugees, not their descendants). For some reason, among many pro-Palestine groups in North America, the two-state solution is seen as the most natural and realistic solution, whereas in reality, it is neither realistic nor sustainable. (See "How Realistic is the Two-State Solution?")

One finds an apparent contradiction in the IAW message, between the stated objectives and specific demands, where on one hand the IAW in its document "Basis of Unity" (all officially participating organizations are asked to sign on it) denounces the "racist ideology of Zionism" and "Israeli colonialism" and demands in the first point "Ending...occupation and colonization of all Arab lands". But on the other hand, in the very next point it recognizes the outcome of that colonialism – the entity of Israel – with the demand of "recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality". Isn't that contradictory? Perhaps not to those who subscribe to a two-state solution? (Consider also the truncation of their first demand with the simple slogan "End the Occupation" in the official 2010 trailer. What does this slogan mean in view of the second demand? A two-state solution?) I find the "Basis of Unity" quite limiting, if not contradictory, and I wonder if it really represents the wishes of all those that participate in these efforts and, more important, those that belong to Palestine.

My concern is that these narrow objectives are not only limiting but also self-defeatist, because, among other things, they legitimize the apartheid entity's ideology and existence in the process. Even if we win the demands or end-goals stipulated by the Israeli Apartheid Week, what would we have really gained? A reinforcement of the same apartheid state?

Thinking Strategically

A question that may come to mind: "What about strategy then; we can't get everything from the very first day; even our own people are not ready to go this far?" Sure, we can be strategic and the strategy may very well involve gradual steps, but it shouldn't be counter-productive to the overall cause. It shouldn't be contradictory to our principles. I think that the Oslo Accord has a lot of lessons to offer in this regard.

Let's also consider the implications of UN Resolution 194. I believe that this resolution won't take us too far if we confine ourselves within the framework of a two-state-solution. Because today probably only a few hundred thousands of those originally expelled are still alive. Yes, it may be a diplomatic achievement if Israel even allows those people to return. (However, at what cost to the Palestine cause? That has to be taken into consideration too.) But that achievement won't in itself resolve the problem of millions of people of Palestinian origin who are still living like second class citizens in several Arab countries.

What if as part of the negotiation over UN Resolution 194, Israel demands that the rest of Palestinians can no longer have any moral right or claim over Palestine anymore? Would that be a just solution? Would that be a true end of the Israeli Apartheid? Or, its reinforcement and legitimization? But this is exactly the kind of concession that would be expected if we make our demands within the available two-state-solution framework(s). Again, the Oslo Accord provides ample illustrations as to how something like this can really happen. What did the Palestinians really gain from giving so many concessions to Israel (which some may have sincerely thought of as 'small steps' or 'starting point' of their strategy) and in that process surrendering their moral claim and rights? Even if it is just for the sake of media and public campaign, we need to ask, what would we really gain by pressurizing Israel for those limited demands?

Wars won on the battlefield can be lost on the negotiation table. My concern is that we shouldn't let this happen to our struggles. This is not to question the sincerity of those involved in the IAW. But we should not be shortsighted about what we demand and how we define our objectives. The truth of the matter is that since the mid-1970s, the two-state solution has been quite instrumental for the entity of Israel to advance its ideological claims and at the same time violate international laws in the name of "fighting existential threats" and "security". It is actually in Israel's interest to keep the idea of this kind of solution alive in the international discourse because it gives Israel legitimacy, even when Israel itself is not sincere to this solution. One can see this instrumental emphasis on the two-state solution in a recent analysis published by the influential Israeli think tank, the Reut Institute. The analysis simultaneously calls for "sabotage" and "attack" on global justice movements that may be working toward de-legitimizing the Zionist Apartheid state.

Hence, it is not even strategically prudent to define the IAW objectives within the limiting framework of a two-state solution. In practical terms, the movement may want to keep its message very generalized (to appeal to a wide range of pro-Palestine/Justice groups with varying ideological orientations). It can just focus on educating people about political Zionism, and in the process, de-legitimizing this ideological project, without limiting the scope of this effort by recognizing the state of Israel in its demands. By keeping the objectives on that generalized level, it would not need to directly confront the choice between different solutions.

To conclude, I have suggested that the focus of an effort like IAW should be on political Zionism and the apartheid state and system that this ideological project has resulted in over the last 60 years. It should be clear that the purpose here was not to question the tactics necessarily. We can more or less use the same tactics (highlighting Israeli atrocities, BDS, etc.), but they should be framed differently with different demands and objectives. De-legitimizing political Zionism is a worthwhile objective in itself.

Additionally, in more specific terms, if the organizers and those whose cause they are representing can all agree, such efforts may want to target the unconditional American support for Israel – financial, military, and political. They may demand war-crime trials of the Israeli authorities. They may still call for ending occupation and colonization of all Palestinian lands. Finally, they may demand a true dismantlement of the Zionist Apartheid state and call for a just, democratic, multi-national/religious state for all the people of the land. If they cannot go this far, for ideological or strategic reasons, at least such efforts can make sure that their demands are considerate to other major perspectives on this issue and are not counter-productive to the overall cause of justice for Palestine.

For more on this line, see Joseph Massad, "How surrendering Palestinian rights became the language of 'peace'" (EI, Jan 27, 2010), Gideon Levy, "America, stop sucking up to Israel" (Haartez, Nov 2, 2009), Ben Ehrenreich, "Zionism is the problem" (LA Times, March 15, 2009), Joseph Levine, "History Matters: Why we must acknowledge the claims of the Palestinians" (Boston Review, Sep/Oct 2008), Jonathan Cook, "One State or Two: Neither" (JKCook.Net, March 12, 2008), Edward Said, "The One-State Solution" (NYTimes, January 10, 1999), Gaza Awareness, and Electronic Intifada.

Creative Strategies of Resistance: Bilin weekly demonstration reenacts the Avatar film

"The village of Bilin reenacted James Cameron's new film Avatar during todays weekly demonstration. Five Palestinian, Israeli and international activists were painted blue, with pointy ears and tales, resembling the Avatar characters. Like Palestinians, the Avatars fight imperialism, although the colonizers have different origins. The Avatars presence in Bilin today symbolizes the united resistance to imperialism of all kinds."

If you consider the audience that is intended here and the message and framework that this video can convey, I think it is a positive effort overall and does not necessarily trivialize the Palestinian resistance.

On creative strategies, see a previous post: "Culture Jamming for the Right Cause"

On the history of Palestinian plight and possible solutions, see Gaza Awareness.