Indigenous Resistance Response

          The essay “Indigenous resistance and racist schooling on the borders of empires: Coast Salish cultural survival” discusses the difference between two empires and how the people of British Columbia and Washington State had borderland regions with contrasting policies. By definition, the term colonization education means “one nation or territory taking control of another nation or territory either through force or acquisition.”  The experience of the Coast Salish people was tough considering they were separated and put into schools that were segregated, where they could not practice their own values. 

            Often, the impact from colonization of education led to leaving those who were a part of change with a lack of identity and few memories of the past. Psychological problems even developed during this time from such a dramatic change. The reason that the victims of these schools cannot remember their past is because their customs and beliefs that were once practiced would “slowly slip away.”  The Coast Salish students “land claims, treaties, and fishing rights were at stake.” The students were resisting this education all the way up until the 20^th century. However, there was a right to resist since their culture was being completely stripped away. 

                   I do not think it is morally right to take the culture and heritage away from a group of people. Now, thankfully, there are rights against actions such as these, and people can attend to schools as they please. In schools, students are now able and allowed to speak their own languages. It is unjust that their precious culture was a thing of the past, and the only way to keep it alive was to tell or listen to stories from the elderly. It is traumatic to read and attempt to understand what these people went through, and how hard it must have been. People need to be more appreciative how lucky we Americans have it today. 

Meatrix

After watching the videos on Meatrix, one will undoubtedly have a huge wake up call. The Meatrix is described as “the story we tell ourselves about where meat and animal products come from.” The main purpose of factory farming is to grow a mass production of a meat or dairy product in a short amount of time. The catchy videos put the techniques of farming today in an elementary viewpoint, which is easy to understand for all ages. The way that the environmental problems are put into fun videos is much more effective than an article in a magazine or newspaper article. The videos take the role from the animals perspective and how they are put together in tight areas, where it is difficult to even turn around. Not only are these animals being treated in such a cruel manner, the amount of excrete in a small area builds up and pollutes the air and water, which effects humans through simply breathing or drinking water.  This act causes humans whose homes are around factory farms to stay sick. By supporting these industries we are allowing our health to be put at risk.  

This is happening everywhere, and effects everyone associated in factory farming, including the workers and the consumers. Most people have always heard that fast food is unhealthy, but now it is just as unhealthy is eat the meat or dairy products purchased from the grocery store. Now that I’ve seen these videos, I have a completely different outlook on factory farming. Meatrix is by far a great way to start and become aware of these harmful factors. We, as a community, need to come together and get involved! Americans should not have to settle for unhealthy food!

 

Real Text-- Biotechnology

In chapter 6 of the Real Text book, the authors discuss how to persuade with balanced arguments. Real Text provides the reader with 3 specific steps in which biotechnology writers should complete in order to achieve such balance. First, “use a moderate tone”. By using a moderate tone, a person can still show respect to the people who disagree and give everyone a right to their own opinion. Second, “present evidence that everyone respects and understands.” Using evidence that people can respect benefits the person presenting the argument because if they do not fully understand the information being presented from inappropriate terminology, that an average person can not comprehend, or data that people do not agree with, the argument will likely end in a different way than planned. Last, “provide practical solutions.” Providing practical solutions is important because the writer wants the reader to understand that it is the best and realistic option, while also demonstrating that the option may not be perfect. Using these 3 strategies effectively will better one’s chances of appealing to all readers. 

              Biotechnology is a study, in the field of biology, in which there is a use of living organisms and they are conducted through engineering, manufacturing, technology and medicine. Some applications that are preformed through biotechnology are as follows: production of drugs, hormones, and genetically altered bacteria.  Many humans have different opinions on whether this study is ethical. The chapter demonstrates how each individual would go about arguing such a sensitive subject. An issue is genetically altered food (GM) and environmentalists would certainly not agree with this because they are borrowing genes from another species. The fact of the matter is this; our population is growing at such a rapid pace and by 2020 there will be an extra 1.5 billion people, with not enough food to suffice the population. Our society needs to come together and agree on these problems. Through persuasive arguments, the problem will be carefully considered in all angles and will be better organized. 

Natural Gas Fracking Linked to Water Contamination

            In the article, “EPA: Natural Gas Fracking Linked to Water Contamination” federal environmental agents link the water contamination in Pavillion, Wyoming to hydraulic fracturing.  By definition, hydraulic fracturing is an act in which one attempts to “create fractures in rocks and rock formations by injecting a mixture of sand and water into the cracks to force the underground to open further.” Gas companies such as EnCana, the owner of the Pavillion wells, believe the fracking process is safe. Their belief is that the hydrologic pressure forces fluids down; therefore, the “deep geologic layers provide a watertight barrier preventing the movement of chemicals toward the surface.” Thus, water contamination will not occur through the use of fracking. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) disagrees with companies like EnCana.

            The Environmental Protection Agency states the contamination of Pavilion, Wyoming is an effect of the gas drilling process, better known as fracking. The EPA believes that the contamination leaked from the gas wells, which contained 10 different compounds. The draft report clearly states, “alternative explanations were carefully considered” before publishing the cause of the pollution. Whereas there are those who support the findings of the EPA, Senator James Inhafoe found the report to be “offensive” and has accused the environmental agency to be biased. Whether the findings are true or inaccurate, the report will bring much needed debate on stronger federal regulations of hydraulic fracturing. After the EPA finalizes its report in the spring, this environmental issue could completely change the way our country regulates and develops natural gas resources.

            While each side, environmentalist and those of the drilling industry, have evidence to support their position, neither group is going to take rejection easily. The debate will continue until someone “gets to the bottom” of water contamination in the areas which fracking happens. Amy Mall, Natural Resources Defense Council, declares “no one can accurately say that there is ‘no risk’ where fracking is concerned.”  Mall is attempting to explain that there are different factors that come into play during hydraulic fracturing, and that any of those could go wrong. Mall’s solution is to strive to make and abide by stricter rules for construction and to keep threats away from natural water supplies. Water supplies people use to drink and bathe.

            The debate continues to whether the drilling process accounts for water pollution. After the people involved with EPA “drilled two water monitoring wells to 1,000 ft.” The EPA investigators found extreme levels of chemicals, such as benzene and 2 Butoxyethanol, which are normally used during fracking. The finding of these chemicals further supports the evidence of the cause of water pollution.

            Though the two chemicals were found, it did not conclude the research. Agriculture, drilling and old wastes are still considerations of contamination. I agree with the Environmental Protection Agency. Regardless of the causes of water pollution, citizens need to find solutions. Water pollution is not only detrimental to our planet, but also to our health.

            For further thought, imagine if a gas company provided drinking water for your family. This indicates, at least at some point, they felt a sense of responsibility for the brown water.