Arquivo da tag: participatividade

The Revolution Begins at Home: An Open Letter to Join the Wall Street Occupation (The Independent)

Arun Gupta
September 28, 2011

(Photo courtesy of Flickr.com/pweiskel08). 

What is occurring on Wall Street right now is truly remarkable. For over 10 days, in the sanctum of the great cathedral of global capitalism, the dispossessed have liberated territory from the financial overlords and their police army.

They have created a unique opportunity to shift the tides of history in the tradition of other great peaceful occupations from the sit-down strikes of the 1930s to the lunch-counter sit-ins of the 1960s to the democratic uprisings across the Arab world and Europe today.

While the Wall Street occupation is growing, it needs an all-out commitment from everyone who cheered the Egyptians in Tahrir Square, said “We are all Wisconsin,” and stood in solidarity with the Greeks and Spaniards. This is a movement for anyone who lacks a job, housing or healthcare, or thinks they have no future.

Our system is broken at every level. More than 25 million Americans are unemployed. More than 50 million live without health insurance. And perhaps 100 million Americans are mired in poverty, using realistic measures. Yet the fat cats continue to get tax breaks and reap billions while politicians compete to turn the austerity screws on all of us.

At some point the number of people occupying Wall Street – whether that’s five thousand, ten thousand or fifty thousand – will force the powers that be to offer concessions. No one can say how many people it will take or even how things will change exactly, but there is a real potential for bypassing a corrupt political process and to begin realizing a society based on human needs not hedge fund profits.

After all, who would have imagined a year ago that Tunisians and Egyptians would oust their dictators?

At Liberty Park, the nerve center of the occupation, more than a thousand people gather every day to debate, discuss and organize what to do about our failed system that has allowed the 400 richest Americans at the top to amass more wealth than the 180 million Americans at the bottom.

It’s astonishing that this self-organized festival of democracy has sprouted on the turf of the masters of the universe, the men who play the tune that both political parties and the media dance to. The New York Police Department, which has deployed hundreds of officers at a time to surround and intimidate protesters, is capable of arresting everyone and clearing Liberty Plaza in minutes. But they haven’t, which is also astonishing.

That’s because assaulting peaceful crowds in a public square demanding real democracy – economic and not just political – would remind the world of the brittle autocrats who brutalized their people demanding justice before they were swept away by the Arab Spring. And the state violence has already backfired. After police attacked a Saturday afternoon march that started from Liberty Park the crowds only got bigger and media interest grew.

The Wall Street occupation has already succeeded in revealing the bankruptcy of the dominant powers – the economic, the political, media and security forces. They have nothing positive to offer humanity, not that they ever did for the Global South, but now their quest for endless profits means deepening the misery with a thousand austerity cuts.

Even their solutions are cruel jokes. They tell us that the “Buffett Rule” would spread the pain by asking the penthouse set to sacrifice a tin of caviar, which is what the proposed tax increase would amount to. Meanwhile, the rest of us will have to sacrifice healthcare, food, education, housing, jobs and perhaps our lives to sate the ferocious appetite of capital.

That’s why more and more people are joining the Wall Street occupation. They can tell you about their homes being foreclosed upon, months of grinding unemployment or minimum-wage dead-end jobs, staggering student debt loads, or trying to live without decent healthcare. It’s a whole generation of Americans with no prospects, but who are told to believe in a system that can only offer them Dancing With The Stars and pepper spray to the face.

Yet against every description of a generation derided as narcissistic, apathetic and hopeless they are staking a claim to a better future for all of us.

That’s why we all need to join in. Not just by liking it on Facebook, signing a petition at change.org or retweeting protest photos, but by going down to the occupation itself.

There is great potential here. Sure, it’s a far cry from Tahrir Square or even Wisconsin. But there is the nucleus of a revolt that could shake America’s power structure as much as the Arab world has been upended.

Instead of one to two thousand people a day joining in the occupation there needs to be tens of thousands of people protesting the fat cats driving Bentleys and drinking thousand-dollar bottles of champagne with money they looted from the financial crisis and then from the bailouts while Americans literally die on the streets.

To be fair, the scene in Liberty Plaza seems messy and chaotic. But it’s also a laboratory of possibility, and that’s the beauty of democracy. As opposed to our monoculture world, where political life is flipping a lever every four years, social life is being a consumer and economic life is being a timid cog, the Wall Street occupation is creating a polyculture of ideas, expression and art.

Yet while many people support the occupation, they hesitate to fully join in and are quick to offer criticism. It’s clear that the biggest obstacles to building a powerful movement are not the police or capital – it’s our own cynicism and despair.

Perhaps their views were colored by the New York Times article deriding protestors for wishing to “pantomime progressivism” and “Gunning for Wall Street with faulty aim.” Many of the criticisms boil down to “a lack of clear messaging.”

But what’s wrong with that? A fully formed movement is not going to spring from the ground. It has to be created. And who can say what exactly needs to be done? We are not talking about ousting a dictator; though some say we want to oust the dictatorship of capital.

There are plenty of sophisticated ideas out there: end corporate personhood; institute a “Tobin Tax” on stock purchases and currency trading; nationalize banks; socialize medicine; fully fund government jobs and genuine Keynesian stimulus; lift restrictions on labor organizing; allow cities to turn foreclosed homes into public housing; build a green energy infrastructure.

But how can we get broad agreement on any of these? If the protesters came into the square with a pre-determined set of demands it would have only limited their potential. They would have either been dismissed as pie in the sky – such as socialized medicine or nationalize banks – or if they went for weak demands such as the Buffett Rule their efforts would immediately be absorbed by a failed political system, thus undermining the movement.

That’s why the building of the movement has to go hand in hand with common struggle, debate and radical democracy. It’s how we will create genuine solutions that have legitimacy. And that is what is occurring down at Wall Street.

Now, there are endless objections one can make. But if we focus on the possibilities, and shed our despair, our hesitancy and our cynicism, and collectively come to Wall Street with critical thinking, ideas and solidarity we can change the world.

How many times in your life do you get a chance to watch history unfold, to actively participate in building a better society, to come together with thousands of people where genuine democracy is the reality and not a fantasy?

For too long our minds have been chained by fear, by division, by impotence. The one thing the elite fear most is a great awakening. That day is here. Together we can seize it.

8 Reasons Young Americans Don’t Fight Back: How the US Crushed Youth Resistance (AlterNet)

July 31, 2011
By BRUCE E. LEVINE

Bruce E. Levine is a clinical psychologist and author of Get Up, Stand Up: Uniting Populists, Energizing the Defeated, and Battling the Corporate Elite (Chelsea Green, 2011).

Traditionally, young people have energized democratic movements. So it is a major coup for the ruling elite to have created societal institutions that have subdued young Americans and broken their spirit of resistance to domination.

Young Americans-even more so than older Americans-appear to have acquiesced to the idea that the corporatocracy can completely screw them and that they are helpless to do anything about it. A 2010 Gallup poll asked Americans ‘Do you think the Social Security system will be able to pay you a benefit when you retire?” Among 18- to 34-years-olds, 76 percent of them said no. Yet despite their lack of confidence in the availability of Social Security for them, few have demanded it be shored up by more fairly payroll-taxing the wealthy; most appear resigned to having more money deducted from their paychecks for Social Security, even though they don’t believe it will be around to benefit them.

How exactly has American society subdued young Americans?

1. Student-Loan Debt. Large debt-and the fear it creates-is a pacifying force. There was no tuition at the City University of New York when I attended one of its colleges in the 1970s, a time when tuition at many U.S. public universities was so affordable that it was easy to get a B.A. and even a graduate degree without accruing any student-loan debt. While those days are gone in the United States, public universities continue to be free in the Arab world and are either free or with very low fees in many countries throughout the world. The millions of young Iranians who risked getting shot to protest their disputed 2009 presidential election, the millions of young Egyptians who risked their lives earlier this year to eliminate Mubarak, and the millions of young Americans who demonstrated against the Vietnam War all had in common the absence of pacifying huge student-loan debt.

Today in the United States, two-thirds of graduating seniors at four-year colleges have student-loan debt, including over 62 percent of public university graduates. While average undergraduate debt is close to $25,000, I increasingly talk to college graduates with closer to $100,000 in student-loan debt. During the time in one’s life when it should be easiest to resist authority because one does not yet have family responsibilities, many young people worry about the cost of bucking authority, losing their job, and being unable to pay an ever-increasing debt. In a vicious cycle, student debt has a subduing effect on activism, and political passivity makes it more likely that students will accept such debt as a natural part of life.

2. Psychopathologizing and Medicating Noncompliance. In 1955, Erich Fromm, the then widely respected anti-authoritarian leftist psychoanalyst, wrote, ‘Today the function of psychiatry, psychology and psychoanalysis threatens to become the tool in the manipulation of man.” Fromm died in 1980, the same year that an increasingly authoritarian America elected Ronald Reagan president, and an increasingly authoritarian American Psychiatric Association added to their diagnostic bible (then the DSM-III) disruptive mental disorders for children and teenagers such as the increasingly popular ‘oppositional defiant disorder” (ODD). The official symptoms of ODD include ‘often actively defies or refuses to comply with adult requests or rules,” ‘often argues with adults,” and ‘often deliberately does things to annoy other people.”

Many of America’s greatest activists including Saul Alinsky (1909–1972), the legendary organizer and author of Reveille for Radicals and Rules for Radicals, would today certainly be diagnosed with ODD and other disruptive disorders. Recalling his childhood, Alinsky said, ‘I never thought of walking on the grass until I saw a sign saying ‘Keep off the grass.’ Then I would stomp all over it.” Heavily tranquilizing antipsychotic drugs (e.g. Zyprexa and Risperdal) are now the highest grossing class of medication in the United States ($16 billion in 2010); a major reason for this, according to theJournal of the American Medical Association in 2010, is that many children receiving antipsychotic drugs have nonpsychotic diagnoses such as ODD or some other disruptive disorder (this especially true of Medicaid-covered pediatric patients).

3. Schools That Educate for Compliance and Not for Democracy. Upon accepting the New York City Teacher of the Year Award on January 31, 1990, John Taylor Gatto upset many in attendance by stating: ‘The truth is that schools don’t really teach anything except how to obey orders. This is a great mystery to me because thousands of humane, caring people work in schools as teachers and aides and administrators, but the abstract logic of the institution overwhelms their individual contributions.” A generation ago, the problem of compulsory schooling as a vehicle for an authoritarian society was widely discussed, but as this problem has gotten worse, it is seldom discussed.

The nature of most classrooms, regardless of the subject matter, socializes students to be passive and directed by others, to follow orders, to take seriously the rewards and punishments of authorities, to pretend to care about things they don’t care about, and that they are impotent to affect their situation. A teacher can lecture about democracy, but schools are essentially undemocratic places, and so democracy is not what is instilled in students. Jonathan Kozol in The Night Is Dark and I Am Far from Home focused on how school breaks us from courageous actions. Kozol explains how our schools teach us a kind of ‘inert concern” in which ‘caring”-in and of itself and without risking the consequences of actual action-is considered ‘ethical.” School teaches us that we are ‘moral and mature” if we politely assert our concerns, but the essence of school-its demand for compliance-teaches us not to act in a friction-causing manner.

4. ‘No Child Left Behind” and ‘Race to the Top.” The corporatocracy has figured out a way to make our already authoritarian schools even more authoritarian. Democrat-Republican bipartisanship has resulted in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, NAFTA, the PATRIOT Act, the War on Drugs, the Wall Street bailout, and educational policies such as ‘No Child Left Behind” and ‘Race to the Top.” These policies are essentially standardized-testing tyranny that creates fear, which is antithetical to education for a democratic society. Fear forces students and teachers to constantly focus on the demands of test creators; it crushes curiosity, critical thinking, questioning authority, and challenging and resisting illegitimate authority. In a more democratic and less authoritarian society, one would evaluate the effectiveness of a teacher not by corporatocracy-sanctioned standardized tests but by asking students, parents, and a community if a teacher is inspiring students to be more curious, to read more, to learn independently, to enjoy thinking critically, to question authorities, and to challenge illegitimate authorities.

5. Shaming Young People Who Take Education-But Not Their Schooling-Seriously. In a 2006 survey in the United States, it was found that 40 percent of children between first and third grade read every day, but by fourth grade, that rate declined to 29 percent. Despite the anti-educational impact of standard schools, children and their parents are increasingly propagandized to believe that disliking school means disliking learning. That was not always the case in the United States. Mark Twain famously said, ‘I never let my schooling get in the way of my education.” Toward the end of Twain’s life in 1900, only 6 percent of Americans graduated high school. Today, approximately 85 percent of Americans graduate high school, but this is good enough for Barack Obama who told us in 2009, ‘And dropping out of high school is no longer an option. It’s not just quitting on yourself, it’s quitting on your country.”

The more schooling Americans get, however, the more politically ignorant they are of America’s ongoing class war, and the more incapable they are of challenging the ruling class. In the 1880s and 1890s, American farmers with little or no schooling created a Populist movement that organized America’s largest-scale working people’s cooperative, formed a People’s Party that received 8 percent of the vote in 1892 presidential election, designed a ‘subtreasury” plan (that had it been implemented would have allowed easier credit for farmers and broke the power of large banks) and sent 40,000 lecturers across America to articulate it, and evidenced all kinds of sophisticated political ideas, strategies and tactics absent today from America’s well-schooled population. Today, Americans who lack college degrees are increasingly shamed as ‘losers”; however, Gore Vidal and George Carlin, two of America’s most astute and articulate critics of the corporatocracy, never went to college, and Carlin dropped out of school in the ninth grade.

6. The Normalization of Surveillance. The fear of being surveilled makes a population easier to control. While the National Security Agency (NSA) has received publicity for monitoring American citizen’s email and phone conversations, and while employer surveillance has become increasingly common in the United States, young Americans have become increasingly acquiescent to corporatocracy surveillance because, beginning at a young age, surveillance is routine in their lives. Parents routinely check Web sites for their kid’s latest test grades and completed assignments, and just like employers, are monitoring their children’s computers and Facebook pages. Some parents use the GPS in their children’s cell phones to track their whereabouts, and other parents have video cameras in their homes. Increasingly, I talk with young people who lack the confidence that they can even pull off a party when their parents are out of town, and so how much confidence are they going to have about pulling off a democratic movement below the radar of authorities?

7. Television. In 2009, the Nielsen Company reported that TV viewing in the United States is at an all-time high if one includes the following ‘three screens”: a television set, a laptop/personal computer, and a cell phone. American children average eight hours a day on TV, video games, movies, the Internet, cell phones, iPods, and other technologies (not including school-related use). Many progressives are concerned about the concentrated control of content by the corporate media, but the mere act of watching TV-regardless of the programming-is the primary pacifying agent (private-enterprise prisons have recognized that providing inmates with cable television can be a more economical method to keep them quiet and subdued than it would be to hire more guards).

Television is a dream come true for an authoritarian society: those with the most money own most of what people see; fear-based television programming makes people more afraid and distrustful of one another, which is good for the ruling elite who depend on a ‘divide and conquer” strategy; TV isolates people so they are not joining together to create resistance to authorities; and regardless of the programming, TV viewers’ brainwaves slow down, transforming them closer to a hypnotic state that makes it difficult to think critically. While playing a video games is not as zombifying as passively viewing TV, such games have become for many boys and young men their only experience of potency, and this ‘virtual potency” is certainly no threat to the ruling elite.

8. Fundamentalist Religion and Fundamentalist Consumerism. American culture offers young Americans the ‘choices” of fundamentalist religion and fundamentalist consumerism. All varieties of fundamentalism narrow one’s focus and inhibit critical thinking. While some progressives are fond of calling fundamentalist religion the ‘opiate of the masses,” they too often neglect the pacifying nature of America’s other major fundamentalism. Fundamentalist consumerism pacifies young Americans in a variety of ways. Fundamentalist consumerism destroys self-reliance, creating people who feel completely dependent on others and who are thus more likely to turn over decision-making power to authorities, the precise mind-set that the ruling elite loves to see. A fundamentalist consumer culture legitimizes advertising, propaganda, and all kinds of manipulations, including lies; and when a society gives legitimacy to lies and manipulativeness, it destroys the capacity of people to trust one another and form democratic movements. Fundamentalist consumerism also promotes self-absorption, which makes it difficult for the solidarity necessary for democratic movements.

These are not the only aspects of our culture that are subduing young Americans and crushing their resistance to domination. The food-industrial complex has helped create an epidemic of childhood obesity, depression, and passivity. The prison-industrial complex keeps young anti-authoritarians ‘in line” (now by the fear that they may come before judges such as the two Pennsylvania ones who took $2.6 million from private-industry prisons to ensure that juveniles were incarcerated). As Ralph Waldo Emerson observed: ‘All our things are right and wrong together. The wave of evil washes all our institutions alike.”

Dancing, Climate Change, and Human Perseverence

Posted by Douglas Joseph La Rose at the EANTH list. 23/07/2011 12:20

“This Wednesday, I had one of the most powerful experiences of my life. I went to a small village in the Upper West Region of Ghana named Bakbamba to help conduct research on climate change and social-cultural adaptations to a changing environment. I have been doing this work for a few weeks now, beginning in coastal eastern Ghana and moving north. But what I experienced today was a life-changing experience. I will do my best to convey my feelings here, but no words would ever be ample to describe the emotion, compassion, and appreciation I felt in this community.

The Upper West Region of Ghana is the poorest region in the country. Outside of the regional capital, Wa, there is really nothing else but vast savanna covered with Shea and baobab trees. The people are primarily subsistence farmers and fishers. The farmers plant guinea corn, maize, yams, beans, bambara beans, millet, groundnuts, and some other crops. Fishers set traps and mobilize nets in the black Volta river that separates Ghana from Burkina Faso. Women also gather Shea nuts and sell them to foreign buyers who process them into cosmetics and edibles. Over the past ten years, rainfall has become sporadic, inconsistent, unpredictable, and unreliable. In these Wala, Fulani, and Lobi communities that have been surviving for centuries, people are beginning to give up and move out. They are suffering from observable climate change and often becoming climate change refugees.

In the course of doing interviews with rural farmers, fishers, and gatherers I heard many stories about failed crops, declining catches in fish, and even lack of fruits from Shea trees, which have been a productive alternative economic resource for decades. Their story is a bleak one. Most crops fail and the only foods Wala and Lobi people can depend on are fish and maize, which takes three months to grow and can be opportunistically planted. Though they plant other crops, many of them are failing because rains are becoming increasingly unpredictable and deluges and floods more common. There is no source of potable water, so people in the village drink from stagnant, muddy ponds. Guinea worm is still a widespread problem. There is no other option. Most of the people we were able to interview were only in their 30s and 40s – because that is about as old as they live. In this village of 300 people, 20 have already died this year. One particular woman I interviewed was 30 years old, but she looked like she was 60. Poor nutrition, hard work, and no access to clean water are taking their toll.

At the end of the day, the women in the town gathered in a circle and began a traditional dance. The women around the circle were clapping poly-rhythmically and singing with beautifully sculpted, angelic voices. I watched as, one by one, the women would enter the circle and do an energetic, stomping dance. At the end of the dance they would throw themselves into the surrounding circle and be caught by the other women. This went on for almost 45 minutes. I asked one of our local research assistants what they were singing and he explained that the dance was about a fighting couple, and they were saying that if the husband no longer loved the wife he should leave her. The women who were catching each other represented the community. “We should support each other,” a woman told me. I sat down and watched the dance, how the women were moving around in passionate whirls, heaving themselves into the boundaries of the circle to be caught by other community members. In this poor village of hunger, desperation, and confusion about a changing environment they were finding the energy to remember and celebrate the perseverance of the human spirit. It was an overwhelming experience to watch frustration and unity translated into cultural performance.

Throughout our interviews and participation in the community, I felt both alarmed and reassured. Alarmed that the situation in this part of upper Ghana is much worse than I expected, and reassured that people are forging ways to adapt.”

Dilma Rousseff – a favela with a presidential name (The Guardian)

Renaming of Brazilian shantytown puts spotlight on problems facing country’s 16 million citizens living in extreme poverty

Tom Phillips in Rio de Janeiro ; guardian.co.uk, Monday 27 June 2011 16.58 BST

Three-month old Karen da Silva – the youngest resident of Dilma Rousseff – with her mother, 23-year-old Maria da Paixao Sequeira da Silva. Photograph: Tom Phillips

They call her Dilma Rousseff’s daughter: a dribbling three-month-old girl, coated in puppy fat and smothered by cooing relatives.

But Karen da Silva is no relation of Brazil’s first-ever female president. She is the first child to be born into one of the country’s newest favelas – the Comunidade Dilma Rousseff, a roadside shantytown on the western outskirts of Rio de Janeiro that was recently re-baptised with the name of the most powerful woman in the country

“She’s Dilma’s baby,” said Vagner Gonzaga dos Santos, a 33-year-old brick-layer-cum-evangelical preacher and the brains behind the decision to change the name of this hitherto unknown favela.

Last month, just as Rousseff was about to complete six months in power, Santos says he received a heaven-sent message suggesting the renaming.

“God lit up my heart,” he said. “The idea was to pay homage to the president and also to get the attention of the government, of our leaders, so they look to us and help the families here. The poor are God’s children too.”

Until recently, the 30-odd shacks that flank the Rio-Sao Paulo highway were known simply as “kilometre 31”. But its transition to Dilma Rousseff has not been entirely smooth.

At first, locals plastered A4 posters on the area’s walls and front doors, announcing the new name. But the posters referred to the Comunidade “Roussef” – one “f” short of the president’s Bulgarian surname. In May a sign was erected welcoming visitors to their shantytown, but again spelling proved an issue. This time the name given was “Dilma Rusself.”

That mistake has now been corrected, after an intervention from the preacher’s wife, who took a pot of red nail varnish to the sign. Locals say the name-change is starting to pay off.

“It’s been good having the president’s names,” said Marlene Silva de Souza, a 57-year-old mother of five and one of the area’s oldest residents. “Now we can say our community’s name with pride. Before we didn’t have a name at all.”

Dozens of Brazilian newspapers have flocked to the community – poking fun at its misspelt sign but also drawing attention to the poor living conditions inside the favela.

“It has brought us a lot of attention … The repercussion has been marvellous. Today things are starting to take shape, things are improving,” said Santos, who hopes local authorities will now formally recognise the favela, bringing public services such as electricity and rubbish collection.

Still, problems abound. Raw sewage trickles out from the houses, through a patchwork of wooden shacks, banana and mango trees and an allotment where onions sprout amid piles of rubbish. Rats and cockroaches proliferate in the wasteland that encircles the area.

Ownership is also an issue. Dilma Rousseff is built on private land – “The owners are Spanish, I think,” says Santos – and on paper the community does not officially exist. Without a fixed abode Karen “Rousseff” da Silva – the favela’s firstborn child – has yet to be legally registered.

Last month the Brazilian government launched a drive to eradicate extreme poverty unveiling programmes that will target 16 million of Brazil’s poorest citizens.

“My government’s most determined fight will be to eradicate extreme poverty and create opportunities for all,” Rousseff said in her inaugural address in January. “I will not rest while there are Brazilians who have no food on their tables, while there are desperate families on the streets [and] while there are poor children abandoned to their own fate.”

Residents of Rousseff’s namesake, who scratch a living selling biscuits and drinks to passing truck drivers, hope such benefits will soon reach them.

A visit from the president herself may also be on the cards, after Santos launched an appeal in the Brazilian media.

“We dream of her coming one day,” said the preacher, perched on a wooden bench outside his redbrick church, the House of Prayers. “It might be impossible for man to achieve, but for God everything is possible.”

Naming a community

Tear-jerking soap operas, political icons, stars of stage and screen – when it comes to baptising a Brazilian favela, all are fair game. The north-eastern city of Recife is home to favelas called Ayrton Senna, Planet of the Apes and Dancing Days, the title of a popular 1970stelenovela,

In the 1980s residents of a shantytown in Belo Horizonte named their community Rock in Rio – a tribute to the Brazilian rock festival that has played host to acts such as Neil Young, David Bowie and Queen.

Rio de Janeiro is home to the Boogie Woogie favela, the Kinder Egg favela and one community called Disneylandia. Vila Kennedy – a slum in west Rio – was named after the American president John F Kennedy and features a three-metre tall replica of the Statue of Liberty. Nearby, locals christened another hilltop slum Jorge Turco or Turkish George. Jorge was reputedly a benevolent gangster who ruled the community decades ago.

A RIO+20, o IV CBJA e a democratização da informação ambiental (REBIA)

Por Vilmar Sidnei Demamam Berna*

Durante a ECO 92, os países se comprometeram a encontrar alternativas para a democratização da informação ambiental sempre que existissem obstáculos como os que existem para a mídia ambiental no Brasil, e até assinaram o capitulo 40.18 da Agenda 21, com este compromisso. Entretanto, vinte anos depois, a promessa ainda esta no papel.

Em 2012, o Brasil estará sediando a RIO+20, de novo na Cidade do Rio de Janeiro, um novo encontro global para avaliar o que avançou das promessas feitas a 20 anos. Pode ser um momento oportuno para a união de forcas dos que estão conscientes sobre a importância estratégica da democratização da informação ambiental para que a sociedade possa fazer escolhas melhores no rumo da sustentabilidade.

Os jornalistas ambientais já saíram na frente e anteciparam seu congresso para outubro desde ano, entre os dias 12 e 15, na Cidade do Rio de Janeiro. O IV Congresso Brasileiro de Jornalismo Ambiental estará sendo realizado em paralelo a outros três eventos, o encontro da RedCalc – Rede Latino-Americana de Periodismo Ambiental, o Iº Encontro Nacional da REBIA – Rede Brasileira de Informação Ambiental e o Iº Encontro da ECOMIDIAS – Associação Brasileira de Mídias Ambientais, uma tentativa ao mesmo tempo de economizar esforços e recursos, e também uma estratégia para facilitar a aglutinação de forcas entre movimentos e organizações com objetivos comuns.

A organização do IV CBJA estará, ainda, identificando e convidando parceiros estratégicos como a FBOMS – Fórum Brasileiro de ONGs e Movimentos Sociais para o Meio Ambiente e o Desenvolvimento, a FENAJ – Federação Nacional dos Jornalistas, a ABI – Associação Brasileira de Imprensa, entre outros cuja missão inclua o compromisso com a democratização e a formação e fortalecimento da cidadania, para reforçar esta luta.

Detalhe: os eventos serão carbono negativo, ou seja, a OSCIP PRIMA estará plantando mais árvores que o necessário para a neutralização das emissões de carbono, além de adotar práticas ecoeficientes, pois os congressistas querem ser o exemplo que esperam ver na sociedade.

Entre os desafios a enfrentar, está o de formar uma Coalizão de organizações pela democratização da informação, com representação permanente em Brasília, capaz de ir além das promessas e reclamações, e pressionar de forma efetiva e constante por políticas publicas e financiamento público para a informação ambiental, por que existe uma diferença entre a informação que o público quer – e se dispõe a pagar por ela – e a informação que ele precisa.  O mercado consegue ser uma solução no primeiro caso, pois para ele a comunicação é vista como um negócio qualquer, precisa dar lucros, ou não terá razão para existir. Para o segundo caso, o país requer políticas públicas inclusive para o financiamento da informação ambiental que o público precisa.  No verão, por exemplo, o público dá audiência aos assuntos das catástrofes provocadas pelas chuvas, mas com o passar dos dias, o interesse vai diminuindo junto com as chuvas, até virar desinteresse e então o assunto some da mídia, como se o problema tivesse sido resolvido, para retornar com as catástrofes do verão seguinte. O mesmo acontece diante de algum acidente ambiental. Enquanto o problema permanecer visível ao interesse público estará na pauta da mídia de massa, mas assim que deixar de ser visível, desaparecerá também da mídia. Quem já acompanhou graves acidentes de vazamentos de petróleo ou de produtos químicos em rios e oceanos sabe bem disso. A informação ambiental precisa ir além apenas da dor. O quanto pior, melhor, é pior para todo mundo, ainda que assegure o interesse do público, e, portanto, da mídia em geral, por alguns breves momentos.

Uma rápida olhada nos títulos das revistas expostas nas bancas mostra a falta de oferta de informação ambiental, para este público, que freqüenta as bancas, em torno de 20% da população. Enquanto existem diversos títulos diferentes sobre a vida dos ricos e famosos, ou de mulheres nuas, ou sobre moda e beleza, automóveis, culinária, arquitetura, não existe nenhuma mídia específica sobre meio ambiente, educação e cidadania ambiental, consumo responsável, sustentabilidade, excetuando-se um ou outro título com viés mais para turismo ou paisagismo. O que não significa que a mídia ambiental não exista. Existe, só não consegue chegar ao Grande Publico, permanecendo como uma mídia marginal, mal conseguindo atender direito a uns poucos segmentos de interesse especializado.

O Governo Federal já dispõe de mecanismos para o repasse de dinheiro público para a iniciativa privada, através das verbas de publicidade, mas não existe uma política pública que priorize a informação que o público precisa, mas não se dispõe a pagar por ela. A maior parte desses recursos é destinada à mídia de massa – inclusive para os veículos de comunicação ligados à base aliada do Governo -, e acaba ajudando a financiar `realyts shows´e outras informações que o público quer. A mídia ambiental costuma ser contemplada com algumas poucas migalhas dessas verbas, mas o suficiente para não deixá-la morrer de inanição, e não o bastante para que chegue a incomodar nem ao próprio governo nem às empresas com suas críticas ao modelo predatório de desenvolvimento.

A mídia ambiental é uma mídia de resistência, e incomoda aos poderosos ao criticar o modelo predatório e injusto que avança sobre os limites e a capacidade de suporte da natureza. E incomoda até quando aponta soluções e caminhos que poderiam ajudar a nos tirar do rumo de um colapso ambiental cada vez mais visível, pois deixa claro que as escolhas pelas tecnologias sujas e predatórias não resultam do acaso ou da falta de opção. E incomoda e desagrada também ao próprio público em geral, ao criticar seus hábitos e atitudes consumistas e ambientalmente irresponsáveis. Então, não é de se estranhar que as pessoas não queiram a informação ambiental, embora precisem dela.

* Vilmar Sidnei Demamam Berna é escritor e jornalista, fundou a REBIA – Rede Brasileira de Informação Ambiental (www.rebia.org.br ) e edita deste janeiro de 1996 a Revista do Meio Ambiente (que substituiu o Jornal do Meio Ambiente) e o Portal do Meio Ambiente (www.portaldomeioambiente.org.br ).  Em 1999, recebeu no Japão o Prêmio Global 500 da ONU Para o Meio Ambiente e, em 2003, o Prêmio Verde das Américas – www.escritorvilmarberna.com.br.

 

Manifesto em defesa do Conselho de Comunicação Social e da democracia no Ceará

As entidades abaixo assinadas manifestam publicamente seu total apoio à criação do Conselho de Comunicação Social do Estado do Ceará e repudia, de forma veemente, as tentativas de setores conservadores da sociedade de desqualificar a decisão da Assembleia Legislativa do Estado de propor ao governador Cid Gomes (PSB) a criação de um órgão que possibilitará a efetiva participação da sociedade cearense na criação de políticas públicas em comunicação do Estado.

Um Conselho tem como finalidade principal servir de instrumento para garantir a participação popular, o controle social e a gestão democrática das políticas e dos serviços públicos, envolvendo o planejamento e o acompanhamento da execução destas políticas e serviços públicos. Hoje, existem conselhos municipais, estaduais e nacionais, nas mais diversas áreas, seja na Educação, na Saúde, na Assistência Social, entre outros. Um Conselho de Comunicação Social é, assim como os demais Conselhos, um espaço para que a sociedade civil, em conjunto com o poder público, tenha o direito a participar ativamente na formulação de políticas públicas e a repensar os modelos que hoje estão instituídos.

Longe de ser uma tentativa de censura ou de cerceamento à liberdade de imprensa, como tenta fazer crer a grande mídia (nada mais que uma dúzia de famílias) e seus prepostos, o Conselho é uma reivindicação histórica dos movimentos sociais, organizações da sociedade civil, jornalistas brasileiros e setores progressistas do empresariado que atuam pela democratização da comunicação no Brasil e não uma construção de partido político A ou B. E mais, falta com a verdade quem diz ser inconstitucional o Conselho de Comunicação, pois este está previsto na Constituição, no Artigo 224, que diz “Para os efeitos do disposto neste capítulo, o Congresso Nacional instituirá, como seu órgão auxiliar, o Conselho de Comunicação Social, na forma da lei”, com direito a criação de órgãos correlatos nos estados, a exemplo dos demais conselhos nacionais.

Uma das 672 propostas democraticamente aprovadas pelos milhares de delegados e delegadas da sociedade civil empresarial, não-empresarial e do poder público, participantes da 1ª Conferência Nacional de Comunicação (Confecom), os Conselhos de Comunicação Social são a possibilidade concreta de a sociedade se manifestar contra arbitrariedades e abusos cometidos pelos veículos, cuja programação é contaminada por interesses comerciais, que muitas vezes violam a legislação vigente e desrespeitam os direitos e a dignidade da pessoa humana.

A desfaçatez com que o baronato da mídia e seus asseclas manipulam a opinião pública, na tentativa de camuflar a defesa de interesses econômicos e políticos que contrariam a responsabilidade social dos meios de comunicação e o interesse público, merece o mais amplo repúdio do povo brasileiro. Eles desrespeitam um princípio básico do jornalismo, que é ouvir diferentes versões dos acontecimentos, além de fugir do debate factual, plantando informação.

É chegada à hora de a sociedade dar um basta à manipulação da informação, se unindo aos trabalhadores, consumidores, produtores e difusores progressistas na defesa da criação, pelo poder público, dos Conselhos de Comunicação Social. Somente assim, o povo cearense evitará que o Governo do Estado sucumba à covarde pressão de radiodifusores e proprietários de veículos impressos que ainda acreditam na chantagem e na distorção da verdade como instrumento de barganha política.

Que venham os Conselhos de Comunicação Social, para garantir à sociedade brasileira o direito à informação plural, a liberdade de manifestação de pensamento, criação, e a consolidação da democracia nos meios de comunicação.

Federação Nacional dos Jornalistas – FENAJ

Sindicato dos Jornalistas Proissionais no Estado do Ceará – Sindjorce

Fórum Nacional pela Democratização da Comunicação – FNDC

Instituto de Juventude Contemporânea – IJC

Associação Brasileira de Rádios Comunitárias – Abraço-CE

Centro de Defesa da Criança e do Adolescente do Ceará – Cedeca-CE

UNIÃO DA JUVENTUDE SOCIALISTA- UJS

MOVIMENTO PRÓ-PARQUE RAQUEL DE QUEIROZ

ASSOCIAÇÃO COMUNITÁRIA DO BAIRRO ELLERY

Associação Comunitária do Bairro Monte Castelo

UNIÃO BRASILEIRA DE MULHERES- UBM

Agência de Informação Frei Tito para América Latina – Adital

ONG CATAVENTO COMUNICAÇÃO E EDUCAÇÃO

Fábrica de Imagens – ações educativas em cidadania e gênero (Fortaleza CE)

Rede de Adolescentes e Jovens Comunicadores e Comunicadoras do Brasil

Sindicato dos Operadores de Turismo do Ceará

Rede de Jovens do Nordeste

Cia. de Teatro Arte Amiga

Cia Tesouro Nordestino

Pastoral da Juventude do Canindezinho – PJ

Grupo Vida e Arte

Centro Cultural de Arte Capoeira na veia

Associação Zumbi Capoeira

Grupo Pensar Lutar e Cia. de Teatro arte amiga

Tesouro Nordestino

Pastoral da juventude (canindezinho)

Coral Vida e Arte

Futsal Caça e Pesca

Centro Cultural de Arte Capoeira na veia

Associação Zumbi Capoeira (Pirambu)

Grupo Pensar Lutar e Vencer (Pastoral da Juventude Maraponga)

Grupo Tapa (Temos amor pela arte)

Espaço Solidário (ESSO)

Juventude Negra Kalunga

Terreiro Capoeira

Grêmio estudantil Juventude Ativa

Vidas e Vozes da Juventude

Juventude Atitude (CDI)

Cine Rua

Centro de Apoio a Vida

Grupo Aprendizes de Papel

Grupo Budega Chic

Wildlife conservation projects do more harm than good, says expert

New book claims western-style schemes to protect animals damage the environment and criminalise local people

Amelia Hill
The Guardian
Thursday 29 July 2010

A new book claims that schemes to protect habitats of endangered animals, such as the Sumatran tiger, often end up criminalising local communities. Photograph: Bagus Indahono/EPA

Ecotourism and western-style conservation projects are harming wildlife, damaging the environment, and displacing and criminalising local people, according to a controversial new book.

The pristine beaches and wildlife tours demanded by overseas tourists has led to developments that do not benefit wildlife, such as beaches being built, mangroves stripped out, waterholes drilled and forests cleared, says Rosaleen Duffy, a world expert on the ethical dimensions of wildlife conservation and management.

These picture-perfect images all too often hide a “darker history”, she adds. Her new book, Nature Crime: How We’re Getting Conservation Wrong, which draws on 15 years of research, 300 interviews with conservation professionals, local communities, tour operators and government officials, is published today.

When wildlife reserves are established, Duffy says, local communities can suddenly find that their everyday subsistence activities, such as hunting and collecting wood, have been outlawed.

At the same time, well-intentioned attempts to protect the habitats of animal species on the edge of extinction lead to the creation of wild, “people-free” areas. This approach has led to the displacement of millions of people across the world.

“Conservation does not constitute neat win-win scenarios. Schemes come with rules and regulations that criminalise communities, dressed up in the language of partnership and participation, coupled with promises of new jobs in the tourism industry,” claims Duffy, professor of international politics at Manchester University.

A key failure of the western-style conservation approach is the assumption that people are the enemies of wildlife conservation – that they are the illegal traders, the poachers, the hunters and the habitat destroyers. Equally flawed, she says, is the belief that those engaged in conservation are “wildlife saviours”.

Such images, she argues, are oversimplifications. “The inability to negotiate these conflicts and work with people on the ground is where conservation often sows the seeds of its own doom,” she adds.

“Why do some attempts to conserve wildlife end up pitting local communities against conservationists?” she asks. “It is because they are regarded as unjust impositions, despite their good intentions. This is vital because failing to tackle such injustices damages wildlife conservation in the long run.”

Duffy stresses that her intention is not to persuade people to stop supporting conservation schemes. “Wildlife is under threat and we need to act urgently,” she acknowledges. Instead, she says, she wants to encourage environmentalists to examine what the real costs and benefits of conservation are, so that better practices for people and for animals can be developed.

“The assumption that the ends justify the means results in a situation where the international conservation movement and their supporters around the world assume they are making ethical and environmentally sound decisions to save wildlife,” she says. “In fact, they are supporting practices that have counterproductive, unethical and highly unjust outcomes.”

Duffy focuses on what she says is the fallacious belief that ecotourism is a solution to the problem of delivering economic development in an environmentally sustainable way.

This is, she says, a “bewitchingly simple argument” but the assumption that such tourism necessarily translates into the kinds of development that benefits wildlife is far too simplistic.

“Holiday makers are mostly unaware of how their tourist paradises have been produced,” she says. “They assume that the picture-perfect landscape or the silver Caribbean beach is a natural feature. This is very far from the truth. Tourist playgrounds are manufactured environments, usually cleared of people. Similarly, hotel construction in tropical areas can result in clearing ecologically important mangroves or beach building which harms coral reefs.”

But the World Wildlife Fund for Nature, one of the four biggest environmental NGOs in the world, maintains that the loss of wildlife is one of the most important challenges facing our planet. As such, a powerful focus on conservation is necessary: “Conservation is essential so let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater,” says a WWF-UK spokesman. “There are examples out there where ecotourism is working and has thrown a lifeline to communities in terms of economics and social benefits, as well as added biodiversity benefits.

“Let’s have more of those projects that are working for everybody and everything,” he adds. “There is no one-size-fits-all when it comes to ecotourism and conservation.”