70,76,77 and Long Journey - Julia C

The chapters of this week showed a sociological side of globalization. First, in chapter 70, Peter Evans argued that the neoliberal institutions that we see as the face of globalization are not the only forces behind this process. Nonetheless, counterhegemonic forces, like NGOs, labor groups and feminist organizations challenges this status quo, questioning the inequality that hegemonic cause, and forcing more global systems. In the feminist cause, they work for better working conditions for women, fair salaries and women's rights. Through global networks, this groups press governments and corporations, and organize to improve quality of life independent of the global regimes. Then, we see that globalization has a lot of bad things to offer, but countering that, there is always good to be done by those who organize to resist. 

Chapters 76 and 77 talk about the bad parts of globalization, and just as we saw in chapter 70 that groups get together to fight for the good, other groups claim to do the same, also unsatisfied with globalization, nationalists. Haidt in chapter 76 argues that the global claim for economic advantages are not the only motivation for people to live, but humans need to feel included, secure, belonging, and then they resist globalization. With globalization rising, the world feels more and more the same, and people fell a sense of losing their cultures and traits. Nationalist movements use this and appeal to a rescue of tradition, taking political advantage of people's fear. It suggests that globalization resistance through nationalism is not about economy, but a cultural and emotional movement, an expect consequence of it. In 77, Mishra deeps this thought, talking about the phenomena of nationalism and anger towards modernity. While some benefit, many feel out of this progress, and sometimes betrayed by the promises of globalization. This sense of exclusion gives power to nationalist anger, leading to extremism and political violence. The author reminds us of other periods of time that the same happened, like the actions after 9/11, where the strange emotions of people became anger and nationalism. 

 Finally, in the Long Journey article, we see social hierarchies and how unequal Mexican society is. This sentiment of being trapped in a position in poverty, lacking ways of getting on the upper classes and a better life. It is necessary to fight a lot more the lower you are, and even so the system can make it harder. The author shows that it is not just the economy, but the social places shape the opportunities people receive. 

70, 76, 77, & Long Journey

Chapter 70 and the concept of "counterhegemonic globalization" shows how the concept of globalization in general can be utilized not just by corporations, but by movements seeking to expand their efforts of social progress. This sort of reminded me of one of our previous chapter about Greenpeace, and their global network of organization branches that span multiple countries. This comes to mind because building an international social movement is rather complex, and as mentioned in the Greenpeace chapter, the organization has to concentrate their efforts on environmental issues specific to different regions of the globe. This is something that I imagine a lot of social movements looking to globalize must take into consideration. Feminist movements, for example, have "wrestled with the contradictions of building politics around the universal language of rights," (552). Due to differing culture norms and practices, feminist issues vary from country to country and from circumstance to circumstance. 

Chapter 76 provided an interesting prospective on the clash between globalism and nationalism. Prior to reading this chapter, I never interpreted authoritarianism in any sort of  sympathetic light. When I think of authoritarianism, I think of overarching governments imposing extreme ideologies and mass control over a population. The author does acknowledge how there are these extreme subsets of nationalists that exist, whom are openly racist and refuse to accept those different from themselves. However, the author emphasizes that the ultimate goal of the generic nationalist is to protect their "group" or their "culture" in society. This of course does not justify any hate or discrimination that stems from the same parties of conservatism and authoritarianism, but it does show in a clearer way to me how a lot of people who consider themselves to be nationalists of their country can end up turning to far-right political parties and to people like Trump.  

Chapter 70, 76, 77, Long Journey from Despair to Hope

Chapter 70 explains that globalization is not just a natural process, but something shaped heavily by powerful corporations and neoliberal ideas. At the same time, it also showed how social movements, like labor and environmental groups, try to challenge these systems by connecting people across countries. One thing that stood out to me was how workers are often treated more like parts of a market rather than people with stable jobs. I didn’t really think about that before. This chapter made me realize that globalization itself isn’t necessarily the issue, but rather who controls it and how that power is used. It also helped me understand why not everyone benefits equally, which connects to the rise of nationalism.

Chapter 76 focuses more on the divide between globalism and nationalism, which is something we still see today with events like Brexit and the rise of Donald Trump. Before this, I didn’t fully understand why nationalism appealed to so many people. After reading, I now see that nationalism gives people a sense of identity, stability, and unity, especially during uncertain times. On the other hand, globalism promotes openness and connection, but can sometimes make people feel disconnected from their everyday lives. This helped me understand that the divide isn’t random, but comes from both economic inequality and differences in values between groups.

Chapter 77 takes a different approach by focusing on frustration. It explains that globalization has not lived up to the expectations of steady progress for everyone. Because of this, many people feel left behind, powerless, and constantly comparing themselves to others. I didn’t realize how much this comparison could increase resentment and anger. The chapter shows that extremism and conflict are often reactions to these feelings, rather than something that appears out of nowhere. This made me understand how important it is to address inequality before it leads to larger issues.

The “Long Journey from Despair to Hope” reading made these ideas feel more real by showing how inequality looks in everyday life, especially in Mexico. The breakdown of society into levels like the “penthouse,” “middle,” and “basement” stood out to me, especially how those at the top are often disconnected from those at the bottom. It helped me understand how people in lower positions can feel invisible or ignored. The reading also showed how globalization can push people to migrate just to survive, even if it means facing difficult conditions. While there are some benefits, like being able to send money home, it still reflects a system that does not work equally for everyone.

3/25

Chapter 70 has more of a focus around the morality of globalization and less of an economic focus. Most of the readings we have had so far have touched on the impact that globalization can have on citizens of different states, but chapter 70 tells us about the important role groups who fight against unethical practices can have. States globally deal with the negative effects of globalization through unfair labor practices, environmental issues, and the list could continue on seemingly forever. One thing globalization can also cause is global change, which many groups are fighting for to better the downsides of globalization. 

Chapter 76 focuses on nationalism and globalism. Nationalism can be dangerous in my opinion with globalized countries, because the belief of nationalism is based around one's country being number one and “the best”. I would see it as difficult to understand why someone who thinks they are better than the rest can add themselves into the global market. Whereas globalism is more open to supporting other nations and the idea of building up together with no self bias. Chapter 77 shows how the origin of globalizations were planned to bring peace and prosperity but due to widespread frustration there has been a rise of nationalism and instability. This is true across all nations that these struggles happened. 

The article talks about how Mexico and how divided the country is economically. At the top where the wealthiest are, all of the power is, and the lower class or “poor” seem to be excluded from any decision making. This really made me think how this is going on in more places than we realize, even in everyday life it seems like the power always comes from “rich” people when there are lower class people with more knowledge of what can be done to help issues instead of only serving one class of people.

 

70, 76, 77, and "Long Journey"

     Chapter 70 focuses on how vital environmental groups are to globalization.  Environmental and other non-governmental groups often give light to major corporations about what they need to improve on, s well as educate the public.  NGO's sometimes have more of a reach for globalization than corporations, and are more critical of problems made by major companies.  They work to keep major powers and corporations accountable, but whether or not they are able to influence major change is another story.

    Chapter 76 gives some good insight about the differing views of nationalist and globalist supporters.  Nationalism is much more of a self-preserving idea, as nationalism relies on the basis that ones own state/nation is superior to all others.  Nationalist ideas are often viewed as racist, as claiming that your group in your nation is better than another.  Globalization differs from nationalism in the sense that immigration is much more encouraged.  While globalization sees immigration as a vital part of growing society, nationalism aims to prevent immigration to preserve their way of life and culture.

    What I found particularly interesting from chapter 77 highlights how the internet can cause fear and be used as an effective marketing strategy.  The internet has made hiding issues a much more complicated problem.  It's similar to what's talked about in chapter 70, in where holding major companies accountable has gained traction and importance in recent years.  It's caused a much larger outlet for those to spread not only global prosperity, but also things like hate speech or other negative propaganda.

    The Long Journey article discuss how Mexico has been impacted by neoliberalism and globalization.  It's a prime example of how funds from the IMF can be either a blessing or a curse.  It shows how the IMF may seem like a good idea in theory, but can be incredibly risky for countries who may not gain the means to pay off the loans involved.  I like how it highlights the incredible disparity between the upper class and the lower and middle classes.  This is almost certainly the doing of the effects of globalization, benefiting the top percent of wealth over the rest of Mexico.

Chapters 70, 76, 77, "Long Journey"

Chapter 70 discusses various topics involving "counterhegemony" labor events that occurred globally. For example, the 1997 UPS strike. The strike itself was caused by the IBT, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. UPS had been known for their major use of part-time / temporary workers. Being a temporary worker means you don't get as much pay as a full-time worker, nor do you get as many benefits, if any. This caused a world-wide uprising against UPS, with the ITF, the International Transport Workers Federation's tagline in their pamphlets, "UPS: importing misery from America." Additionally, the chapter talks about the "feminist movement without borders", in which it is noted that historically, and even currently, there has been a notable amount of discrimination against women in the labor field and global economy. This led to the creation and adoption of CEDAW, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, as well as SEWA, Self-Employed Women's Association. Both organizations target the inequalities and needs of the workers of the "informal sector," being where the jobs are not regulated, nor governmentally monitored. The informal sector makes up over half of the global working population, and primarily consists of those who are bordering, or are in poverty.

Chapter 76, as its author, Jonathan Haidt says in the title, "Nationalism "beats" Globalism." (Sidenote: I got a good laugh at the second sentence in the entire chapter. "the rise of Donald Trump in the United States..." as if the author is saying that he's a force to be reckoned with or something.)

The chapter discusses the recent events occurring in the Western world, namely North America and Europe. It also talks a lot on the subject of immigration, and how it splits the "Nationalists" and "Globalists" further apart. The author of this particular section, Jonathan Haidt, breaks these topics into four different sections. The first section discusses the commonly found trend of the turn from communism to capitalism. This was found in a World Values Survey of 60 countries, and how nearly all of them had followed that path. The survey had found an additional trends in these counties. First, as a country becomes more industrial, there is a shift away from the "traditional values" of the people. Second, as the country becomes wealthier, the people seem to move away from their "survival values" that highlight the securities of one's family. (I tried to paraphrase but the author used the words I wanted to).

The next two "chapters" that Haidt created focus on immigration, and what it brings. Chapter two of Haidt's essay focuses on the growth of the gap between Nationalists and Globalists, and how the topic of immigration had influenced the gap. Nationalists see their country as something that is theirs and is worth keeping unique. Their country is their main priority. Globalists are essentially the opposite. They think "national borders are arbitrary and immoral" as there are countless individuals who are in dire need and their only option is migration from one country to another, seeking hopefully better conditions than they were given. The end of chapter 2 creates a bridge to the next chapter, focusing primarily on the immigration of Muslim individuals to Europe. Nationalists began to panic and say their traditions and cultures were at risk.

Chapter 3 focuses on the perceived racism that was created and spread about the immigration. Nationalist's aversion to the incoming migrants is seen as racist, by Globalists. The Muslim population that is migrating toward the western world poses a "threat" to the national identity of countries, as well as a "threat of terrorism" in the western world.

Chapter 4 acts as a sort of summary, and asks questions about the future of globalism vs nationalism. "How can we reap the gains of global cooperation, while respecting the world's many local and national identities, rather than diluting them?"

Finally, Chapter 77. The chapter begins by providing a baseline for what will be discussed. A brief period of hope that had started after the Berlin Wall was felled in 1989, then the USSR collapse in '91. Things were looking good, and no negativity seemed to be in sight. However, the hope was short-lived, as there were issues almost right after the hope started. Within the span of just two decades, many events had occurred that shot down the hope. All of those events happening in such a short amount of time caused a massive flux of global anxiety and widespread xenophobia.

The E-Reserve reading, "The Long Journey From Despair to Hope" goes over the various "parts" of Mexico. "Penthouse", "Middle", "Lower", and "Basement." "Penthouse Mexico" is where the "24 richest men in the country" reside. The Penthouse section talks about those 24 men having billions of dollars.. The "Middle" section is immediately worse than the Penthouse. In the words of the author, "Middle Mexico survives in the worst possible way: thinking that it is alive." It "has all the disadvantages of Penthouse Mexico: ignorance and cynicism. And all the disadvantages of Lower Mexico: economic instability, insecurity, and loss of hope..." The next "layer" of Mexico, Lower Mexico, has worse conditions. Half of the population is living in "cramped conditions," meaning 3+ people per room, as well as make far less than the minimum wage; in poverty. The residents of "Lower Mexico" are the service people; almost all jobs that one can think of. The author writes, "Lower Mexico has absolutely nothing... but it has not yet realized it." The final layer that the author writes about is "Basement Mexico." Basement Mexico is a historically significant layer, being the start of it all, with all of the distinct groups that made up the "Mexico-before-Mexico."

January, 1994.

On New Year's Day, 1994, Mexico had a major event take place. The Zapatista Army of National Liberation, EZLN, rose up, demanding freedom, and fighting NAFTA. The uprising lasted nearly two weeks, but the EZLN is still fighting to this day. 

The final part of the reading discusses Women, and the even poorer conditions they must go through in the lower parts. Their illiteracy, their salaries, their living conditions, etc. are all far worse than what the rest go through.

In all, the E-Reserve reading discusses the conditions of the various settings in Mexico, and why there is such a push to get out of there as quickly as one possibly can.

70, 76, 77

 70. In chapter 70, the author discusses his opposition to corporate, neoliberal globalization. He also emphasises the importance of transnational social movements. In today’s world, social movements are connected globally. Labour movements, women's movements, and environmental movements are now united from far away places through a common struggle. This chapter argues that globalization is not solely about domination and economic control. Globalization can be harnessed to promote social causes and sustainability.

76. In chapter 76, the author examines the tension between “globalists” and “nationalists” in western democracies. The author ties the recent rise in right wing populism to increasing economic inequality and immigration. He also argues that the conflict between nationalists and globalists reflects deeper moral tensions or differences. While globalists prioritize prosperity and openness, nationalists prioritize loyalty and shared identity. The author asserts that these are not just ideals based in economics or racism, but a psychological need to find security and belonging. He believes this is what is causing the rise of right wing populism. The author thinks to address global conflicts we need to understand the moral motivations behind nationalism and not dismiss them.

77. The author of this chapter argued that the extremism that exists globally today is not a product of religion, but actually a response to the pressures felt by people subject to neoliberal globalization. He argues that the rapid change has intensified economic and social inequalities, and has alienated people from their labour. This has laid the foundation for extremist movements world wide. I agree with this author that the rise in terroristic attacks and radicalization of people generally is, in large part, due to the economic strain people feel from globalized free markets.

Chapters 70, 76, 77, and "long journey from despair"

One thing that stood out to me in Chapter 70 is how the reading pushes back on the idea that globalization is just something that naturally happened because of technology. Instead, it describes what we have now as a kind of corporate or neoliberal globalization that is controlled by powerful groups. That part stuck with me because it changes how you think about the system entirely. The section about workers being treated more like a market than people with stable jobs also stood out, because it shows how little security people actually have in this system. At the same time, the chapter talks about global movements like labor and environmental groups trying to fight back using the same global connections. That made me realize that globalization itself isn’t necessarily the issue, but who controls it. While I don’t support how that power is used, it is interesting to think about what it might be like to be in that position and why holding onto that control might seem necessary from their perspective.

Chapter 76 stood out to me because it explains the divide between globalists and nationalists in a way that connects directly to what we still see today. The reading talks about events like Brexit and the rise of Donald Trump as examples of nationalism pushing back against globalization, which makes it feel very relevant. The part about how wealthier and more secure groups tend to be more open, while others focus more on stability and protection, made a lot of sense when thinking about those events. It also challenged the idea that nationalism is only based on racism, since the reading compares it more to a sense of loyalty to one’s country. Looking at things now, it feels like that divide has only gotten stronger, with people still split between global ideas and national priorities. It made me realize that this isn’t just something that happened in the past, but something that is still shaping politics and society today.

Chapter 77 takes a different tone and focuses more on how frustration builds over time. The part that stood out to me most was the idea that people once believed globalization would lead to steady progress, but that expectation didn’t fully come true. Because of that, people are now dealing with disappointment and uncertainty instead of optimism. The reading also talks about how globalization allows people to constantly compare themselves to others, which increases feelings of resentment. That explains why anger and extremism are becoming more common, because people feel like they are part of a system that isn’t working for them. It shows that this anger isn’t random, but actually a reaction to how globalization has played out.

The “Long Journey From Despair” made these ideas feel a lot more real by showing how inequality actually looks in everyday life. The way it describes Mexico as divided into the “penthouse,” “middle,” “lower,” and “basement” levels really stood out, especially how the people at the top are completely focused on money and economic decisions while ignoring what is happening below them. The description of the “basement” being made up of people who are basically treated as if they don’t even exist was one of the most powerful parts of the reading . It also shows how people at the bottom eventually reach a point where they push back and resist. Looking at all of these readings together, it becomes clear that the main issue isn’t just globalization itself, but the imbalance of power within it and how different groups react to that imbalance in different ways.

70, 76, 77, Long Journey

The chapter reading seems to follow a theme of explaining how other movements and world events can play a role in attitudes and actions toward globalization. Chapter 70 discusses the concept of counterhegemonic globalization, or globalization that works backwards against the dominant powers of the world. Social movements can disrupt the dominant flows of globalization by presenting alternatives or by denouncing the so-called solutions proposed by those dominant powers. The point that stood out to me was when the author explains why the environmental social movements typically gain more success than the labor and feminist movements. Since the other two are so politically interwoven with the goals of globalization, environmental activism gets a clearer lane because they focus more heavily on combating externalities. I think this can be seen in the Greenpeace case we discussed earlier this semester.

Chapter 76 discusses the differences between the nationalist and globalist perspectives on immigration. Globalists support the movement of different people and cultures into an area because it creates a more diverse and strong world. Nationalists strongly oppose immigration because of a racist sense of protecting their culture and way of life. They see the flow of people into their country as a threat. I think the part about this chapter that was most striking to me was the way that immigrants were described almost like a commodity to the larger powers like Europe and the United States. I undertsand that the flow of people into a country ultimately determines said country's globalist/nationalist views, but at the end of the day they are all still people, not just resources. Chapter 77 expands on a lot of the ideas in chapter 76, discussing how globalization and economic policy are directed by anger towards other nations or groups of people. This is extremely apparent in the world around us today, especially since 2001. The actions of few people could influence a nation to take action againts a larger set of people. We saw it with the controversial invasion of Iraq and we will continue to see it in the future. Anger and fear are a resource to powerful nations because they are a way to mobilize or weaponize their populations. 

The Long Journey article discusses the effects of neoliberalism and globalization within Mexico. The author describes the economic classes as if they were levels of a building, with the wealthy members in the penthouse, middle and lower class people below, and then the indigenous populations in the basement. This reflects how the effects of the globalized world only benefitted those who were at the top and could profit from them, while everyone else struggles even more as social classes pull apart from each other. The author discusses true change for Mexico coming from the bottom up, starting with the Zapatistas at the basement level resisting the elites and trying to rebalance the power dynamic in the country. I like the section at the end that discusses the role of women in the movement. It discusses that women are even more marginalized at each "building level," however those in the basement have twice as much motivation to fight back as the men do, making them a powerful force.

Ch 70, 76, 77 + Long Journey

 In Ch 70, we see one of the more positive outlooks on globalization in the class so far, and talks about the strength in reaching beyond country borders and broadening our horizons about the world. Allowing communication between countries brings support to areas in need and helps problems be given important spotlight across the world. This was a nice chapter to read after learning about all the ways globalization causes harm, and this reasoning is what I originally thought of when I thought of globalization.

In Ch 76, it talks about the draw of nationalism instead of globalization. Multiple movements across the globe are based off of the idea of nationalism. People turn to this during uncertain times, because it gives them a sense of familiarity and security. While I personally do not agree with a lot of nationalistic viewpoints, I understand where it comes from, but I hope in the future people realize there can be a good mix between both nationalism and globalization. Even though we've seen the harm of globalization, there are still many benefits like cross-communication and sharing between cultures and people.

In Ch 77, there is a very negative opinion of globalization. The average person feels like they don't get the benefits that the few people with power get from globalization, only getting the negative effects that come along with it. They are getting left behind and start to become angry at those that get these benefits. I also feel this way sometimes, as living in a middle class family in the middle of nowhere Pennsylvannia, I'm getting affected by politicans with anger problems starting wars and making life more expensive while both me and others are just trying to get by. It doesn't feel fair, and it isn't. I don't think cutting everyone off and becoming a closed off country is the answer either, but I wish those in charge of globalization actually had the best intrests of the people below them in mind.

The Long Journey looks at Mexico and how the author (Subcomadante Marcos), sees the levels in the social hierarchy. Those on the highest level do not care for the intrests of those on the lowest levels. Those on the lowest levels have been left behind from globalization, hurting the poor farmers by bringing in large company competition. Unfortunately, this isn't only in Mexico. We see it all around the world, which is something that makes me angry just thinking about it. People deserve to be seen and valued, no matter what their socioeconomic status is. 

3/25

 Chapter 70 introduced me to the term "counterhegemonic globalization” which is basically just globalization with a conscience. I like the idea of moving toward labor as a social contract. Reading about the solidarity between German metal workers and Brazilian metalworkers was pretty cool too. I liked that the chapter discussed the “care deficit,” and how traditionally women perform most of the home labor but get paid for none of it. I think that is something that’s not talked about enough. Reading about the different views on environmentalism was interesting as well. It’s a topic my anthropology class recently discussed. There’s a sort of western or elitist idea that to preserve land and local flora/fauna, you need to let land “rest” and keep people off of it. This is in contrast to the people who live off that land. For example, the Marind people of Papua New Guinea consider the plants around them as members of their own family. These people have farming practices that are entirely sustainable, and believe they as they care for the land, the land cares for them. Problems arose when foreign conservationists designated parts of the land as private and kept the Marind people off of it. This was done in the name of sustainability, but plants on Marind land were more plentiful and grew better than plants on this private land, and having so much land being designated as private actually forced the Marind to people to follow unsustainable farming practices in order to survive. Outsiders think conservation means healing the environment by leaving it alone, but the real conservation is in working in tandem with nature.

Chapter 76 was mostly all information I had heard before, except for the last section. I hear a lot about how patriotism becomes nationalism becomes extremism, but never what to actually do about it, and how to get people on opposite ends of the political spectrum to actually agree on something (and create good policies instead of arguing and getting nothing done). However, it was a little disappointing to read that the strategy is to just police your tone and walk on eggshells with your words so as not to trigger an authoritarian reaction. It makes sense though. If you come out of the gate accusing someone of racism when their main concern is just that they don’t want their day to day lives to change, then yeah, I’d be pretty triggered too.

Chapter 77 was a throwback to my high school European history class. I admit that I, too, have found myself forgetting the connections between the French enlightenment ideas and eugenics, nationalism, and imperialism. It’s easy to feign moral superiority as a liberal when you forget that early liberalism was the starting point for totalitarian ideas.

The e-res article was a powerful read. Referring to “penthouse Mexico” versus “mud Mexico” really conjured an image in my mind about just how absurd the wealth and social disparities are. 

3/25

 The chapters assigned here give a much better and widespread view of globalization than I feel previous chapters have given. These chapters show how people use globalization to their advantage, to fight back against the big corps that use and abuse it. In chapter 70, Evans describes how people use globalization to magnify their local issues without diluting said issues. Efforts like these are what I imagine we would see a lot more worldwide with globalization, if the idea was not so intertwined with capitalism.

Chapter 76 is helping me understand where people who tolerate these nationalists are coming from. Haidt describes how these nationalists see their bloodline and heritage as in danger by refugees and immigration. I have never considered my “bloodline” something that needs protecting, but if someone did have that thought, seeing people from other areas enter your area would be scary and something they would see as worth fighting against. The only thing is, they never seem to have issues with immigration if the person is white or white passing. Even if these nationalists' true concern was protecting their culture and norms, it always extends into normal racism. Also, reading on, Haidt routinely mentions assimilation into a country as a sort of remedy to nationalism. This sounds all well and good, but an issue that happens a lot of the time is, once again, just racism. An immigrant can assimilate, change their values, norms, work on their accent, change their appearance, but they cannot change their skin, and these nationalists are viewing white as the acceptable color. I do think that these nationalists do care about protecting their culture, but they view their culture as something that is unable to be participated in by non white people.

I think chapter 77 best explains how I see globalization used outside of economic gain today. The internet has led people to constant marketing exposure, and the best way to market anything is anger and fear. People with bad intentions use this tactic to spread hate, anger, and fear, by influencing people to constantly compare themselves to others situations. No matter how good my life is, the goal of the internet and social media is to influence me to be angry about something. I think he summed it up best with “Competition, envy, and domination over others have become the essential condition of existence in commercial societies.”

These chapters show a few different sides of globalization, and being entirely honest, I think that if done with good intentions, globalization could have led us into an era of peace not seen before, but unfortunately, as Lord Acton said in the 1800s, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" so the people in power have and will continue to do their best to keep themselves in power, and that includes putting down anyone who they deem a threat.

Chapter 70, 76, 77 & "The Long journey"

 In chapter 70 The author talks about how globalization as we know it today is, just cooperate dominated, neoliberal globalization, but argues that this system of globalization can be changed with counter hegemonic globalization. This type of globalization is where transnational social movements are put in place to make a stronger, more sustainable globalization system. This chapter also shows examples of how social movements helped people that needed them, but while also explaining that these movements face challenges like balancing human rights with cultural norms for different countries, fixing the global inequalities of the North and South. Environmental movements target ecological problems as best as they can while also keeping in mind the things citizens need to thrive. This is gets harder and harder to do the poorer the country is. Despite challenges The author explains that these uniting ideas of democracy, human rights, and life sustainability unite people together and allow them to have a say about what they care about.

Chapter 76 speaks about how the expanding right-wing political view and Brexit show a future problem between globalist and nationalist in wester democracies. A main reason why the globalist and nationalist are at odds are not only because of economic inequalities, but because of the views they have are going against each other. The society that's gaining wealth tend to have more globalist views on life while the poorer societies have more nationalist views that focus on cultural stability, national loyalty, and shared identity. This means that countries that are starting to gain money are more likely to adopt right-wing views about life because those views and policies are how they built themselves up. Immigration is one of the biggest things each side debates about. nationalist believe that the movement of people and cultures are a good thing, while nationalist don't necessarily like immigration because they believe immigration is a threat to social cohesion and cultural norms. 

In chapter 77 Pankaj Mishra argues that modern extremism is not a rejection of modernity or limited to specific cultures, but rather its a result of rapid social and economic changed due to globalization that created these inequalities and weakened traditional structures. These changes made way for community anger and identity based movements that allowed extremist and populist leaders to use the peoples frustration to their advantage. 

The E-reserve reading brings everything together by focusing on progress from an individual point of view, especially within Mexican society and migration. It explains how globalization has reduced demand for small farmers and reshaped the economy, pushing many people to migrate—often to the United States—as a way to survive, even if it means taking low-paying, difficult jobs. The reading shows both the negative aspects of migration, such as separation from family and poor living conditions, and the positive ones, like being able to send money home or save for a house. Overall, it suggests that migration can offer opportunities, but it is also a result of global economic systems that do not benefit everyone equally.

Chapters 70, 76 & 77 and “the long journey’

After reading all three chapters, it seems clear to me that globalisation isn’t as simple as I often thought. For example, Evans’ idea of counter-hegemonic globalisation actually made me feel quite hopeful. He shows that globalisation isn’t just controlled by big corporations but also by people who use it to fight back. For example, workers in different countries supporting each other or global women’s movements pushing for equal rights. I like this perspective because it shows globalisation can be used for good and not solely just for profit. However, I think it must be really hard to organise globally, especially when people’s lives and priorities are so different depending on where they live.

I would say that Haidt’s argument takes almost the opposite view and feels more realistic in what’s happening today. He explains why nationalism is growing, especially in places like the UK with Brexit or in the US with MAGA and Trump. What I found interesting is that he doesn’t just blame racism, he suggests people feel like they’re losing their identity or control, particularly with immigration. I think this is quite important because it explains why some people react so strongly to globalisation. At the same time, I think his argument is a bit risky, because it could be used to justify negative attitudes if taken too far. Although it still made me realise that ignoring people’s concerns probably makes the situation worse especially in the long term as it can cause more uproar. 

Mishra’s text was probably the most powerful but also unsettling. He argued that globalisation itself is creating anger and extremism, especially because it increases inequality and makes people constantly compare themselves to one another. I think this is really relevant today. For instance, social media is a prime example of this. Nowadays people see others living better lives and feel frustrated and it is therefore easy to get caught up on an image of what people think others lives are like. I liked how he pointed out that extremism isn’t just something that comes from outside the West but has always existed everywhere. Overall, his argument feels quite negative to me although also realistic. It suggests that unless global inequality is reduced, this “globalisation of rage” will keep growing.

Overall I think these chapters show that globalisation is not just one thing. It has both positive and negative sides. It can connect people and create movements for change worldwide on both small and large scales. However, it can also divide societies and create tension. Personally, I think globalisation is still important, especially for things like climate change and human rights, but these readings made me realise that it needs to be managed more carefully. It goes back to some of our previous readings with the idea that globalisation itself is not the problem but it is truly how it is managed and dealt with. I just personally feel that if people feel left behind or ignored then it’s no surprise that they push back against it causing more issues for concern. 

The ‘Long Journey’ reading really shows a different side of globalisation and honestly feels quite shocking. It explains how Mexico is split into different “levels” of society, from the rich at the top to the very poor at the bottom, especially indigenous communities who are often ignored  . What I found most interesting is how globalisation and neoliberal policies seem to benefit the wealthy while making life much harder for everyone else. Personally, I think this makes globalisation feel quite unfair because not everyone is getting the same opportunities. It also highlights how this inequality can lead to anger like the Zapatista movement, which shows people won’t just accept being treated this way. Overall, I think this reading makes it clear that globalisation can create serious divisions within countries as well as between them.

70, 76, 77, and the long journey

     After reading all the readings, I wanted to specifically focus on the long journey. I wanted to focus on it because I can almost king of see it in my everyday life here in America, not to the extremes that Mexicans were dealing with during that time, but I can see the same structure in the people and class composition here. What really stuck with me was how Marcos explained the class structure through three terms, the lower class, the middle class, and then the penthouse class. Almost the entirety of the population in Mexico at the time were living in the lower or middle class with only the richest 24 people live in the penthouse class. This class disparity feels very dystopian to me, as the the richest of the rich live in another world compared to the majority of the population, they live as though everyone else in Mexico doesn't exist. With their wealth and power, these people are able to completely control the population and use them to work and boost their wealth. This is very much what we see in America, with corporations that have too much money and too much power use these to force workers to work more hours for less pay and less benefits, making us move closer to being slaves then we are to workers. Seeing the Mexicans revolt for this injustice shows that forcing a change with force does work and might be what we will have to resort to in the near future here in America.

Chapters 70, 76,77, & "Long Journey from Despair to Hope"

Chpt 70: In chapter 70 of The Globalization Reader, the author, Peter Evans, talks about how globalization is formed. It's not driven by powerful corporations, but rather challenged through social movements, allowing people to connect across countries. The groups worked together to combat issues, such as environmental issues, labor exploitation, and inequality. This chapter has definitely helped me better understand how nationalism has formed and why it continues to grow. The world around us has become so globalized in the last few decades. I see great value in global cooperation and why people need to recognize its identity. I also began to understand the connections within nationalism and that not everyone will benefit equally from globalization. 

Chpt 76: Author Jonathan Haidt argues that nationalism has often become more tempting compared to globalism. This is due to nationalism providing people with a sense of identity and unity. This can be crucial to certain groups during times of uncertainty. Globalism has its pros, such as promoting openness and interconnectedness. However, sometimes people can feel disconnected from their everyday lifestyle. Allowing nationalism to be more emotionally powerful for groups of people. The reading has helped me better understand why nationalism has continued to gain value among citizens. I now know that more aware people feel more secure identifying their nation through nationalism compared to globalism. 

Chpt 77: Throughout this chapter, Mishra, the author, explains that globalization has not only spread to a well-developed economic standard, but has brought some severe frustration in the modern age. More citizens feel excluded from its benefits and have experienced a lack of opportunity. As globalization aims to bring the world together, it continues to spread negative emotions that can lead to conflicts between other countries. Mishra wrote about people feeling left behind or powerless, contributing to widespread dissatisfaction. This chapter has helped me better understand the negative impacts of globalization on certain communities. It's important to give people opportunities and not ignore the issue itself. Continuing frustration will lead to more conflicts. The readings have changed my perspective on globalization and how negatively it can be. 

Long Journey from Despair to Hope: In "The Long Journey from Despair to Hope" readings, the author taught readers about basic real-life inequalities and social hierarchy in Mexico. The author, Subcomandante Marcos, elaborated on Mexico's social levels, which include Penthouse (holds wealthy and elite), Middle (those in between), and Basement (indigenous groups). This reading showed viewers how those living on the Penthouse level do not care about those who struggle on the Basement level. I understand why those who are wealthy couldn't care less about those who are poor when they are doing so well economically. However, I think it's important to consider giving back to the poor because they are treated unfairly. The readings made me realize how invisible certain low-level communities may feel. 

Ch 64, NYT, & WP Article

In Ch 64, Paul Wapner discusses the impact of transnational environmental groups, specifically Greenpeace, and their impact in global politics. The author's analysis of Greenpeace and their structure as  is meant to demonstrate their operations of a global organization, as well as their reach. One thing that stuck out to me was the author mentions that Greenpeace is best known for is their act of "bearing witness." Their non-violent, but eye-catching tactics of causing disruption within these environmentally toxic operations, and documenting them for the world to see helps them to bring attention to these global issues and their large network of coordinators and project directors allows them to tackle specific problems that affect different communities worldwide. I do find it interesting that he refers to the internet as "communication technologies" and the "mass communication system," when talking about how Greenpeace uses technology to their advantage. There is also mention of Greenpeace using more dated technology such as fax machines and telephones to relay information to their home offices. 

The Washington Post article about graphite pollution highlighted the detrimental effects of graphite production on the environment in China, as well as various companies failure to make any effort to address or fix the situation. Most companies, when asked questions about the pollution in nearby villages responded with the same vague promise to make their operations more eco-friendly. All the while the people living in places like Jixi are breathing in these toxic graphite particles that pollute the drinking water and poison their food. The insufficient response from both the government and the graphite manufacturers conveys that larger problems that communities have been facing due to China's global dominance in the graphite industry. 

The New York Times article "The Barbados Rebellion" discusses the financial crisis in Barbados and how it overlaps with the impact of climate change across the Caribbean. Much like in the documentary about Jamaica, Barbados is in an "economic purgatory" where they are forced to borrow money from larger countries, effectively indebting themselves to the rest of the world. This greatly limits how effectively small countries like Barbados are able to provide for their citizens and develop as a country while under the thumb of organizations like the I.M.F. and World Bank.  

Chapter 64 and Articles

 In Chapter 64, author Paul Wapner discusses Greenpeace, an organization that "uses peaceful protest and creative confrontation to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green, just, and joyful future." (Greenpeace.org/usa). Greenpeace is a nonstate organization. A nonstate organization, the way I understand it, is an institution that works outside of the government, like NGO's, and works to fill in and help with the holes that governments leave behind, particularly in rights and overall development. The chapter discusses the main functions that Greenpeace hosts, being a protesting group that focuses on bettering the general public's well-being and livelihoods. Greenpeace manually tries to alter the prevailing social norms and values, by attempting to change the public's "conceptions of reality." The organization hopes that this will allow people to take "more respectful" action that is most ecologically beneficial for the earth itself.

While reading through the NYT article, about the Barbados Rebellion in 2018, seeing the phrase: "Barbados was out of money" made me stop and think 'how can an entire country be out of money?' And then that thought train led me back to Jamaica and its (relatively) recent financial situation. While Barbados is in financial debt, sitting at around $8 billion, Jamaica is in an even worse spot, at nearly double. This made me further read and research the reasons for Barbados' debt, being a Caribbean island nation like Jamaica: the natural disasters that frequently strike on these areas. In addition to the overshadowing of much more powerful countries, like the US and England, which were kind of the reason for Jamaica's downfall, the climate / weather is another big player in the spiraling destruction of smaller nations. They have little in terms of fortification against such events, which leads to unstoppable destruction, such as the hurricane that made landfall in October of last year.

(couldnt access washington post article)

CH 64, NYT and WP

 The readings of this week were very informative and cleared the environmental subject even more. By reading the pages in introduction, I could start to see the relation between the climate and globalization. It shows the two sides, one where globalization makes damages like consumerism and industries, but also the good part were it allows cooperation and activism internationally. It is a great start to the paper of environmental movements, like the NGOs, and give these movements grow trans-nationally once we figure that the environmental issues do not see borders and don't affect only countries that are pollutants. 

In chapter 64, Paul Wapner talks about Greenpeace, one perfect example of the organizations mentioned above. He explains that Greenpeace works across borders, in a global effort to heal the environment. They use media campaigns and their propaganda to pressure governments and corporations to change policies. Wapner talks about them as political globalists, working for the world and not just a state. 

Then, the Barbados article puts together these ideas, and was one of the greatest news that I read in a while. The Prime Minister of Barbados, Mia Mottley, literally made a revolution in the talk about climate and globalization, defending her State but bringing ideas that can change the world. She saw her country drowning in debt, always rebuilding because of natural disasters and always renting money to do it. The problem is that this disasters are becoming more often because of climate change, and the debt is rising and turning into a cycle, that can end with the country breaking. She, with the help of scholars that study recovering from debt, proposed an idea to IMF and World Bank, financial institutions that rent the money and in harder conditions to small countries like Barbados. For Mottley, these institutions together with the wealthy countries should contribute more to the adaptation to climate disasters, with cheaper financing and debt relief. Bridgetown Initiative, her proposal pushes the idea that the countries that are less harmful to the environment are paying the price for the climate change, and the world should see this and not make a profit of it. 

To end, the China article continues in the idea of the environmental vs profit, in this case, with the lithium-ion batteries and graphite. We use them everyday in our electronics,  and their massive production in China is causing pollution in the villages around. People living there expose that black dust covers their homes, clothes and farms, killing crops and poising water. The article show that although electric cars and electronics can bring clean energy, the cost of it it's dirtying a lot of populations' environments. 

Chapter 64, 2 articles

 Chapter 64 is telling us that transnational environment groups are influencing politics by shaping public opinions about environmental protections rather than looking toward the government for help. Paul Wapner explains the idea that politics can happen outside of states due to social movements that influence norms, ideas, and everyday behavior. Environmental groups like Greenpeace works to spread the idea Wapner calls "ecological sensibility" where everyone has a shared sense of responsibility, and awareness for protecting the earth. This sensibility is like a set of laws we uphold our selves to that influence behaviors through our beliefs rather than what the government tells us what is right and wrong. The organization has grown so large that is has many offices in many countries, thousands of staff, and enough influence to participate in campaigns talking about toxic waste, and ocean ecology. To spread their message, Greenpeace uses media to influence their cause. They take actions like confronting wailing ships, or protesting at polluting factories. By doing actions like this and going to social media to spread their message, they are publicizing environmental destruction and inspiring public concern to shape global awareness and influence people and organizations to act in a more environmentally friendly way. 

This situation relates closely to the ideas discussed in Chapter 64 of The Globalization Reader. The chapter describes how environmental problems are increasingly addressed by organizations that work across national boundaries. Groups such as Greenpeace draw global attention to environmental issues through protests, media campaigns, and other public actions. Because these organizations include members from many countries, they can raise awareness about environmental problems occurring in different parts of the world and link them to broader global challenges. The chapter also highlights an ongoing debate about how environmental change happens. Some believe governments must lead efforts to protect the environment, while others argue that public awareness and activism are what ultimately pressure governments to take action.

The New York Times article “The Barbados Rebellion” presents another perspective on how global systems influence smaller nations. Barbados is facing serious financial difficulties while also coping with climate change impacts such as stronger hurricanes and periods of drought. The country’s prime minister has criticized international financial institutions for providing aid that comes with strict economic requirements. These conditions can make it more difficult for Barbados to rebuild and pursue policies that best serve its citizens. The article illustrates how smaller countries can have less control over their economic choices when powerful international organizations and investors play a major role.

Taken together, these readings demonstrate how environmental challenges, economic structures, and political power are deeply interconnected in today’s global system.

Ch. 64 & 2 articles - TYLER PRIVLER

The Washington Post article “In Your Phone, In Their Air” shows how global demand for technology can create environmental problems far away from the people using those products. The article focuses on graphite mining in China, which provides materials used in electronics like smartphones. While the industry generates a lot of money, the mining has polluted the air and environment in nearby villages. Residents have complained about the damage, but their concerns are often ignored by local officials. Some villagers who try to speak out even face intimidation. The article suggests that the profits from the graphite industry make the government less willing to step in and regulate the mining, even though it is harming the communities living nearby.

This situation connects well to ideas discussed in Chapter 64 of The Globalization Reader. The chapter explains how environmental issues are increasingly being addressed by organizations that operate across national borders. Groups like Greenpeace try to bring international attention to environmental problems by organizing protests, media campaigns, and other public actions. Because these organizations have members from many different countries, they are able to highlight environmental issues happening around the world and connect them to broader global concerns. The chapter also discusses the debate about where change should begin. Some people believe governments need to take the lead in protecting the environment, while others think public awareness and activism are what push governments to act.

The New York Times article “The Barbados Rebellion” shows another side of how global systems affect smaller countries. Barbados is struggling with large financial problems while also dealing with the effects of climate change, including stronger hurricanes and droughts. The country’s prime minister has criticized international financial institutions for offering assistance that comes with strict economic conditions. These conditions can make it harder for Barbados to recover in ways that benefit its own people. The article highlights how smaller nations can end up with limited control over their economic decisions when outside organizations and investors hold significant power.

Together, these readings show how environmental issues, economic systems, and political influence are closely connected on a global level.

CH 64, NYT, WP

The Washington Post article gives important information about the true cost of everyday electronic items. Most people look at an electric car or cellphone as a use of clean energy, but that is far from correct. Places providing the materials needed have to suffer for providing them. Villages desperate for job opportunities deal with graphite dust in their air causing unsafe air to breath, crops covered in graphite, and anything you can imagine ending up polluted. The water can end up unsafe to drink, wildlife can die off and citizens have to choose between living in a society like that or job security. This article shows us that products considered to be “green” aren't really that good for the environment. This does not apply to every product, but shows that exploitation can be hidden even when things this bad are happening.

The New York Times article shows the true effects climate change can have, and how it is not only the environment that can suffer. The example used is the country of Barbados who is at constant risk of major weather events, and rising seas. Barbados is in need of constant investment to fight these vulnerabilities. The issue is being able to afford these investments with their debt constantly growing.This raises the issues with organizations like the IMF who are less likely to support these countries with less money because of their lack of ability to make a return. Larger powers like the US can more easily borrow funds from the IMF when areas like Barbados suffer. 

In chapter 64 the Greenpeace is talked about which is a global organization that focuses on environmental issues. They will challenge government decisions, large corporations, and institutions. Greenpeacee is able to do this by the power they have built up by globalizing and building a worldwide network. This shows how globalization can be used to have a positive impact on regions, when usually we just see the damage so many large companies cause.

Ch. 64, NYT, WP

 Chapter 64 discusses the role of  NGOs like Greenpeace in shaping environmental policies in the world. The first thing that stood out to me is the complex system by which Greenpeace is organized. It is structured similarly to how a state's government would be, or to that of a large corporation. This is important because these are the two bodies that and organization like Greenpeace would be going up against over policy issues. Having a similar organizational structure means they can cover just as much, if not more ground and get their message across in a more efficient manner. The second thing that stood out to me was their aggressive marketing techniques, which center around media attention and the ue of stunts. I think that condcuting some sort of eye catching stunt like parachuting from a polluting smokestack is a great way to draw public attention to something that they otherwise may not want to pay attention to. It is even more effective when their stunts actively disrupt the operations of those they are fighting against, such as getting between the whalers and the whales in dinghies. The ability to draw the attention of people who aren't initially inclined to pay attention to pro-environemnt organizations is a very strong ability to have, especially in this day and age.

The NYT article discusses the financial troubles that Barbados has faced over time, especially in the wake of rampant climate change impacts. Barbados is a Caribbean country, meaning it is highly susceptible to tropical storms and hurricanes, which bring flooding in turn. These natural disasters destroy the economy of the country, and have become more prevalent over time because of climate change. The part of this that stands out is that Barbados's economy is not one that makes climate change worse, yet they are the ones who feel its effects. The countries that do make it worse are the ones they have to turn to for financial help. Another thing that stood out to me was Mottley's willingness to cut the budget of the country and raise taxes if they were to receive support from the IMF. This is something we've seen other countries struggle to be willing to do in other cases we've read about so far this semester, and it usually doesn't turn out well. Hoowever, the inclusion of the hurricane clause was an important development because it means that Barbados could defer some of its payments in the wake of a major climatic event that cripples its economy. This is significant because it is an example of a country with a smaller economy being able to push back against the dominant forces that control and take advantage of those who struggle.

The Washington Post article talks about the Graphite industry in China. Graphite is a main component in the lithium-ion batteries that are used to make phones, vehicles, and other forms of technology. The byproducts of the inductry in Chinese towns is that their environments, homes, and bodies become contaminated. There is widespread environmental degradation that resulted from polluted water and air, and graphite gets in the food, which means people ingest it through eating, drinking, and breathing. The aspect of this problem that I found most significant was the unwillingness of both corporate and local authority in solving some of the problems. While the corporate responsibility issue is less surprising since they do not reside in these areas, I find it interesting where the local governments align with. The issues that come from graphite production are more close to home for them, yet they still choose to side with the corporations because they are economic proponents of the area. This is yet another example of people on the bottom of the totem pole having to bear the weight of mistakes made by people at the top.

Chapter 64, Barbados Rebellion, Chinese Graphite

 This week’s reading was about how capitalism and climate change are intertwined. Chapter 64 explained how Greenpeace is organized and how they determine who is in charge of the campaigns they run. They preach about non violent protests and bearing witness to climate atrocities. Some of the protests they’ve run are pretty ballsy, and the people involved put themselves directly into the metaphorical (and literal) line of fire. I’ve seen a lot of headlines about “crazy climate change protesters,” but are they really that crazy if it works? 

The Barbados Rebellion article was a super interesting read for me. How climate change affects the politics of countries is another one of those things that I knew about but didn’t realize how much deeper the issue goes. I was frustrated to read that many investors didn’t want to sign a contract with a hurricane clause, even though it benefited both parties involved. It felt like the equivalent of someone telling me, “well that’s just the way things are done,” and my response to that is always, “why can’t we change the way things are done?” I admire Motley’s determination to make her country better, and her commitment to finding the best way possible to do it, even if it requires waiting and waiting until someone finally accepts a hurricane clause. I was disappointed to read that she later regretted making a deal with the IMF. Although, her leadership in Barbados affected all the other countries in the Caribbean, and that’s an important part to remember. 

The article about graphite mining in China was disappointing, but not surprising. While reading specifically about the graphite industry was new information for me, the story closely mimics others I’ve heard before. Lax environmental protocols leading to extreme crisis for those who live near industrial plants. You’d think after hearing the same story over and over again that big companies and governments would learn. When will we stop putting profits over people?

Ch 64, WP, NYT

 In Ch 64, it spoke about the various transnational enviromental groups making changes in politics. It specifically makes the claim that these groups bring change to the enviroment by bringing awareness to global concerns about the enviroment. It also talks about how certain people think the government needs to change first for improvements while others think that people need to make the change first for the government to make the improvements. The chapter specifically mentions Greenpeace, an international agency that oversees various enviromental issues. Members are from all over the world which helps bring light to different issues. One of their main goals is bringing these issues to light, from media to protests, they all show these problems to the common person. I think this is the best strategy, get enough eyes on something, its hard to hide it away an longer. Political pressure is the strongest pressure, and if enough people in an area are against a certain thing hurting their enviroment, a lot of people in power will try to satisfy them.

The Washington Post article talks about graphite mining in China. This mining is hurting the villages and causing damage to the area. However, the government doesn't listen to the locals, and intimidates these small villages through various means to try and silence them. The reason is the large amount of money these graphite mines are generating for China.

The NYT article talks about Barbados and the finacial problems its facing. Part of this is global warming, which is causing droughts, hurricanes, and various other issues. The prime minister is trying to fight against organizations that are preventing Barbados from recovering from these finacial problems in healtier ways. These organizations are trying to invest in Barbados while giving demands that hurt Barbados in the long run. These companies are doing whatever they can to make a profit, even if it ends up ruining an entire company to do so.

NYT, WP & Chapter 64

I found the article about the Barbados rebellion really interesting because it shows how unfair climate change can be for different countries. Mia Mottley argued that small island nations like Barbados themselves are facing the worst effects of climate change even though they have hardly contributed to causing it. Things like stronger hurricanes and rising sea levels threaten their economies and communities due to their size, these countries are often heavily in debt and do not have the money to protect themselves. In my opinion, this clearly shows an inequality in the global system. Wealthier countries became rich through industrialisation and fossil fuels but now poorer countries are expected to deal with many of the consequences. I think Mottley’s argument that institutions such as the IMF and World Bank should help provide more financial support makes a lot of sense because climate change is a global problem and the responsibility should be shared out fairly.

The article about graphite mining pollution in China made me realise that technologies we often think of as “green” are not always as environmentally friendly as we expect. Lithium-ion batteries, which are used in phones and electric cars, rely on graphite that is mined and processed in large industrial facilities. According to the article, some of these factories release dust and pollution that contaminate the air as well as water and farmland. People living close to these factories have reported serious impacts on their health and livelihoods. We also saw this in the documentary in class. I think this raises an important question about the global supply chains behind the technology we use every day. For example, although electric cars and rechargeable batteries are supposed to help reduce climate change, their production can still cause environmental damage elsewhere. I would say that this shows that solving environmental problems is more complicated than simply switching to new technologies.

Chapter 64 ‘Greenpeace and Political Globalism’ appear to focus on how organisations such as Greenpeace influence environmental politics around the world. What I found most interesting is the idea that political change does not only come from governments. Greenpeace works across many countries and uses protests, campaigns and social media coverage to raise awareness about environmental issues. Their strategy often involves dramatic actions that attract attention and encourage people to think differently about environmental problems. Personally, I think this approach can be very powerful because it helps bring issues into the public eye that usually get ignored. I think by spreading awareness and encouraging people to care about the environment, organisations like Greenpeace are able to push governments and companies to take more environmental protection more seriously.

Overall, reading these pieces made me think more about how complex environmental issues are in a globalised world. For example, things like climate change, resource extraction and activism are all connected across different countries and societies. I found it quite frustrating to see how unequal the impacts of environmental problems can be, especially when some communities suffer the most despite contributing the least to the problem like Barbados. Overall I would say that these readings made me realise that addressing environmental problems will require not only technological solutions but also fairer global systems and more awareness of the consequences of our actions.

64, WP, and NYT

 Chapter 64 discusses the impact of transnational environmental groups on civil politics, especially Greenpeace.  He discusses the fact that these groups are able to effectively and efficiently establish communications across borders, establishing important connections in different locations.  One way an organization can do this is by using media, such as narrated news and television stations.  I think that since this book was written, media and use of technology has become increasingly effective in marketing your ideas across larger differences.  Using it in an effective and eye-catching manner is a key point in getting attention, and sets you apart from others if done well.  How they're using nonviolent action is key as well.  Nonviolent actions are also key in protests against major companies, as they are effective in getting your voice out, as well as opening less doors for a potential lawsuit.

    The New York Times article focuses on how smaller countries, such as Barbados, are impacted by globalization and the IMF.  The article showcases a prime example of organizations, such as the IMF, being strict with their loaning policies.  Even with financially supporting Barbados, there's a big problem.  The IMF isn't offering a grant, but a loan, which would extend the repayment period.  Repaying of investors doesn't completely address the debt issue, just stretches it out. 

    The Washington Post article discusses the impact that graphite mining has in rural areas of China.  Graphite, being one of the key minerals in batteries, is an important industry in which could not stall easily.  The rapid growth has caused expansion into small villages, in which the mining itself has negatively impacted the surrounding areas.  Pollution of both the air and water set the tone for the issues, and villagers are not oblivious.  While it may be hard to stop or slow down graphite mining overall, better management of pollution is key to creating a safe area for Chinese inhabitants.

64 and 2 articles

     What I first noticed after reading these two articles is how much smaller nations get affected while trying to conform to the new expectations that come from climate change. These nations don't have the economies to afford to both change their power producing technologies to new, renewable technology which would help reduce emissions, but they then also have to deal with the consequences of climate change. These nations are forced to create retaining walls to protect their communities from storm surges caused by larger storms which occur more frequently due to the new, quickly intensifying climate. I think this whole situation causes a stalemate, and without help from outside forces, these nations will continue to spend the money they could use to change from fossil fuels to renewables into defensive measures to protect against the thing they are helping to cause. This isn't their fault in my opinion, as these nations really have no other options, and forced into this really difficult situation between trying to make a change to help prevent the one thing that they are forced to spend money to stop from effecting them.

    I also really liked the article about China, as it really goes into something I've always argued, that all these new "environmentally friendly" alternatives to fossil fuels, tend to be worse for the planet than just using fossil fuels. The digging for the raw materials that are needed to make batteries and micro-chips and everything else that is needed is horrible for the climate, but people, from either purposeful or blissful ignorance, refuse to accept this fact and believe they are making a significant difference because they drive a tesla. I don't believe that as a singular individual you can make any significant change, as any difference you will make will just instantly be canceled by America bombing an oil facility in Iran, or Exxon spilling millions of barrels or oil into the ocean.   

Ch 64, WP, and NYT articles

 In chapter 64 of our textbook, author Paul Wepner does a good job of explaining that laws do not cause change but instead it's the social norms and ideas that cause the creations of the laws that, in the end, cause the change we see in the world. Wepner then goes on to talk about how the organization Greenpeace does this. Greenpeace is a global organization whose goal is to help the environment. I find it really interesting how they have many different committees and people in order to make decisions and they have different people to lead different aspects of their mission. I also liked how they have campaign coordinators who are meant to make sure that all their different projects support each other along with their overall goal. Fighting on so many different fronts even if they all fall under the same umbrella of environmentalism seems like a crazy undertaking and I am amazed that they make it work. I also love that they invested money in a hot air balloon in order to fly it over nuclear testing sites.

The NYT article written by Abrahm Lustgarten is a very in-depth look into the prime minister of Barbados and how she is fighting against organizations including the IMF in order to both gain the funds necessary to pull her country out of possible economic collapse without instilling harmful policies that those organizations want her to follow. The IMF has a consistent record of giving financial help to countries struggling economically but forcing them to follow policies that will in the end ruin any help the money provided. They offer short term solutions while causing long term problems.

The Washington Post article written by Peter Whoriskey talks about the effects graphite mining has on the small villages in China where the graphite is located. Their government is constantly ignoring them and the problems the mining creates in order to gain a big check by the companies who use that graphite in the technological products they produce. Through a mix of intimidation, failed clean up projects, and little to no fines given out the problem persists. The companies buying these resources, the companies they then sell those products to (mostly batteries), and the amount of pollution makes this issue a global problem that is only complicated more because of the global supply chain it is a part of.