The China Symptom
With close to 1.5 billion people, China comprises 20% of the world population. Their appetite for natural resources is on a steady incline, doubling oil, steel and aluminum consumption since the early 1990’s to support both their increasing population and booming industries. They are the world’s premier exporter, producing everything from televisions and tennis balls to tea and tilapia. What may seem like innocuous efforts to bring economic growth to this nation are also bringing great risk to the world market.
China is the world’s number one exporter of fruits and vegetables, and the United States number one supplier of shrimp, rice and tea. They rank third in the world as a source for U.S. agricultural and forestry imports; sales jumped from $2.9 billion to more than $7 billion last year. While we get significantly more produce from Mexico and Canada, Chinese items are at the top of the list for being refused entry by the FDA, mainly because of high-level microbial and chemical contaminations. The European Union and Japan have banned exports of shrimp, tea and spinach from China since 2000, citing excessive antibiotic residue as the cause.
SARS and Avian flu seem almost passé in a banner year of lethal factory-made products from China. This spring more than 14,000 American pets became severely sick, some even dying. The culprit was traced back to feed coming from China, forcing recalls of more than 60 million packages of pet food. Melamine, the chemical believed to cause the outbreak, is a coal by-product (also often used in industrial applications) not approved for use in human or animal food in the U.S. Melamine also increases the adhesiveness of gluten, the tainted ingredient linked to the kidney-damaged animals. Exposure to high levels of melamine proved toxic to rats and mice in laboratory tests, and became all too obvious to the many unsuspecting families who lost pets. No known nutritional benefits are found in melamine, but the high nitrogen content mimics the appearance of proteins. This has caused it to be secretly added to feed and other food products, which falsely augment the nutritional profiles – a value to potential customers. The perceived higher quality demands a higher market price in what’s becoming a cutthroat manufacturing environment.
Sadly, it appears the short-term financial gain from selling potentially lethal products outweighs the long-term benefit of full-disclosure and honest business practices. This is quite telling of a nation that may in fact represent a very real picture of the future for all humankind. On a planet where competition for quickly diminishing resources is becoming the norm, quality and safety measures are too often an afterthought.
Within weeks of the massive pet scare, two of the largest toy brands, Mattel and Fischer Price, recalled close to 1.5 million toys produced by The Lida Toy Company in the southern region of the Guangdong province, due to toxic levels of lead content. It almost seems as if China's strange intention is to ruin the lives of millions of American children. First, Fido drops dead after eating a treat, and if that doesn’t send Junior over the edge, a lead-induced coma should do the trick. The impact of the devastating recall led to the suicide of the manufacturer’s chief operating officer, who hung himself in one of their warehouses.
Who-Sucks.com cites more than fifty recalls or faulty product reports related to Chinese made/manufactured products between January and July of this year. A whopping half of those listed were due to lead contamination, and all of those were products made for children.
In 2006, Panama reportedly produced more than 250,000 bottles of an over-the-counter cold medicine with glycerin purchased from China, which contained toxic levels of diethylene glycol (DEG), a lethal ingredient used in antifreeze. Close to 400 deaths have been associated with the DEG-tainted cold medicine. DEG also turned up in a Florida-based toothpaste brand (manufactured in China) earlier this year, urging the FDA to alert consumers to throw away all toothpastes made in China.
Recently David Barboza of The New York Times reported 774 people were arrested in connection with contaminated food and drug products manufactured in China. This news comes as the Chinese government promises to tighten regulations on manufacturing and exporting. But is China capable of meeting the production standards they’ve invited? Or is the fertile manufactured goods market imbued with a sense of greed that will ultimately destroy this nation and possibly, the rest of the made-in-China obsessed planet?
World population has doubled in the last forty years, putting unsustainable pressure on our resources. As the planet is expected to reach 9 billion by mid-century, more than 5 billion people will live in Asia (China and India), even after China's draconian birth control efforts. Their ability to support the current population is problematic, let alone their capacity to continue to safely handle the international demands for quality food and factory production exports. Ten percent of China is living in poverty, with many more hovering just above. Factory jobs have taken the place of many family farms – with health and working conditions nothing short of a nightmare.
The global climate crisis is conjoint to our egregious dependence on fossil fuels, which are being pumped out and dug up at alarming rates. The BBC reports that China is now building two coal power plants a week, and will be doing so for some time (80% of China's electricity comes from coal), causing, among other things, severe air and water pollution. Despite this, China is the world leader in aquaculture. Meanwhile, 3 billion tons of sewage spills into rivers, lakes and coastal water each year. Unlike the rest of Asia, less than half of the country has any sewage-treatment facilities.
Maybe then it is not such a surprise that Trader Joe’s, the second largest natural food chain in the U.S., announced last month that it would ban all single-ingredient products from China by January. Amidst a series of unprecedented contaminants, there are also serious concerns about the country’s ability to follow USDA organic standard regulations for exported organic crops. After all, these are the U.S.'s regulations, not China’s. State governments and/or large private companies oversee the typical industrialized farms; small family operations are almost absent in the smog covered agricultural provinces. China continues to produce DDT and use pesticides on a mass scale. In 2004, when more than 7 million acres became certified organic (over 90% of the country's organic farmland), skeptics suggested it was an impossible feat in such a short time frame, especially considering their heavy chemical dousing practices.
An action plan is expected to be presented to President Bush any day now with recommendations for improving import safety standards. But will the bureaucracy of implementing such a program come in a timely manner? More to the point perhaps, the organic movement in general is coming under scrutiny as many argue that shipping food halfway around the world wastes resources and damages our already imperiled environment. “Food miles” are being calculated as detrimental, and purists challenge the organic status of a food if it travels too far. The emphasis on buying local is being promoted at stores like Whole Foods. But the growth of the organic industry is outpacing its current supply, making regional options scarce while national solutions remain elusive. Stonyfield yogurt recently revealed that they may have to mix powdered milk all the way from New Zealand into their New Hampshire based product line because the reality of sourcing enough locally raised organic dairy is currently unrealistic.
Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) regulations are already in effect in the U.S. on fish (several Chinese sources are already banned). The remaining regulated foods (beef, lamb, pork, perishable agricultural commodities and peanuts) are scheduled to comply with mandatory label disclosure by September 2008. A recent USA Today poll revealed that 46 percent questioned were very concerned about the safety of food imported from China. Over the last decade, the United States, like most of the world, has become increasingly reliant on China as a source of agricultural products. China exported over $1.5 trillion worldwide in 2006. And despite the onslaught of product scares, the country is now the number one choice for outsourced global manufacturing, according to a new study from Deloitte & Touche.
In what reads like a really sad fortune cookie, the situation actually invites evolutionary answers. Like Dorothy discovered, all she ever really wanted wasn't in Oz after all, but right in her own backyard. When we look closer to home, there we find more sustainable, cost-effective and even compassionate choices. They've always been right in front of us, just like most things we seek. In 2005, for the first time, all of our 50 states could boast some certified organic farmland. With millions of acres now being allocated to the organic expansion, it still represents less than five percent of all U.S. farmland. Organic doesn’t just taste better, but recent studies show it actually is healthier. As much as 40% more antioxidants were found in the biggest study ever condcuted on organic food.
Moreover, the ecological virtues of organic farming are equally, if not more significant to our collective well being. Imagine the impact of transitioning the remaining 95% of our farm and grazing land in this country to organic. From the reduction in nitrogen to less ground water contamination, organic farming is one of the most important means to reversing global warming, especially when implementing the practice of permaculture. [Interesting aside: Microsoft Word dictionary does not recognize permaculture as a legitimate entry. So just in case one of Gates’ programmers is reading…. per•ma•cul•ture noun – a system of cultivation intended to maintain permanent agriculture or horticulture by relying on renewable resources and a self-sustaining ecosystem.]
With Trader Joe’s and Whole Foods setting new standards in food safety and implementing rigorous local sourcing efforts, there’s no telling how many more retailers and their customers will begin to look for healthier and tastier alternatives closer to home. Perhaps parents, too, can become less impulsive, buying fewer meaningless toys for their children, inspired instead to contribute to a livable future, one less obnoxious than our current situation. Or is it our planet's fate to be undone by faulty gadgets covered in lead paint?
One thing is for sure: China did us a real favor by poisoning our children and killing our dogs, as it forces us to look seriously at our choices and options. Wasn't it Confucious who said that we get what we pay for?
[ Note: This incredible story just appeared after I finished this piece. Toys, from China, turning into GHB, the “date rape” drug once ingested by children. – JE 11/08/07]
- 12-13-07
- Jill Ettinger's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
ShareThis






Comments
china is big and scary
Great piece!
Hi Jill,
Thanks for this piece. I appreciate getting this information in a single package.
I would be interested in more pro-active information about what citizens can do to help change the situation. ("Write to your congressman" always seems incredibly lame). I suppose the best answer is that more people should be involved with production of their own food. It is staggering that less than 5% of US farm land is organic.
I wonder if anyone has assembled models that go beyond Community Supported Agriculture, where people actually invest money or time or both into the productive working of a local farm? Something like that might be interesting.
Alas it seems like it would be a great time to stop eating fish and shrimp - apparently even farmed shrimp that is not from Asia still has very negative ecological consequences due to ocean run off. I admit, myself, to not being very good at reforming my own eating habits, but pledge to try harder.
The deeper question is how do we change deeply entrenched cultural habits and social behavior patterns? People may skip or scan an article like this one as "bad news" to ignore - but we have to find a way to make use of factual knowledge to help social transformation happen faster. I hope to address this soon in an essay for the site.
"Will the transformation."-Rilke
dude! ever heard of...
World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms (WWOOF)
growfood.org
permaculture
eco-tourism
the wide and wonderful world of mycology... among the many community transforming projects going on in sustainable ag
Face it
http://www.dieoff.com
The sooner, the better!
All this "Act NOW, it's not too late, we can make a change" blah is becoming increasingly comical...or tragic. Maybe 20 years ago it wasn't too late...
Death is a bit of a conversation dead-end, but unfortunately the only foreseeable way out of this is a major reduction of human populations. Does anyone honestly believe that the billions of people hooked onto toxic "progress", as exemplified by China and the US are going to suddenly become enlightened , abandon technological comforts and take up organic farming?
"The days of the oil shortages are over," said economist William Wilson of Comerica Bank in Detroit, adding that's welcome news for truck owners. "Trucks are here to stay because Americans like them." -- Detroit Free Press, 12/13/97
Soon we'll see just how little is here to stay...
LOL
btw , Jill, many thanks for the link to who-sucks.com!
some great videos there....just the thing after the doomy-gloomy news!
If we're going down, we may as well go down laughing our heads off!
or a total reduction...
can't make change? but change... is happening! and it is happening through people! in almost every way imaginable! those who aren't making change are going to get run over...
Too Late for Green Capitalism?
Ecolocal: "All this "Act NOW, it's not too late, we can make a change" blah is becoming increasingly comical...or tragic. Maybe 20 years ago it wasn't too late... "
A friend sent me this quote, I'm not sure where its from but it seems to share your feeling: "The moral pieties, that are voiced today by many well meaning environmentalists, are as naive as the moral pieties of multinationals are manipulative. Capitalism can no more be "persuaded" to limit growth than a human being can be "persuaded" to stop breathing. Attempts to "green" capitalism, to make it "ecological", are doomed by the very nature of the system as a system of endless growth."
That certainly seems to be the case, and many have already closed themselves off from the necessary inner transformation that would allow them to even envisage an alternative paradigm. Its a form of suicide: media-entranced consumerist mentality as the ego's pre-emptive strike against the coming of the self. In other words they have already unconciously opted out of a radical reorganisation of psyche and society. I see this in members of my own family.
The other aspect of this of course is that many people are waking up to the deep changes occuring - albeit slowly: but then, don't great symphonies usually start of quietly? It seems that a green capitalism can't or won't emerge fast enough (is impossible perhaps), and a period of chaos is therefore inevitable. But the "we can make a change" attitude you cry against is essential, and should be encouraged not derided. We need to have structures in place that will survive a collapse, ensure continued food production and supply, community cohesion, care of the sick etc - people are working on this. We can make a change!
Edit: the above quote is from Murray Bookchin.
We can, but will we?
I believe we will not make a change, rather , change will re-make us in perhaps more than one way. Many readers here will know from inner experience that life/consciousness (whose energy springs forth eternally from cosmic love) itself is essentially indestructible, but forms are emminently recyclable.
My views on the matter come not only from rational assessment, (i'm all too aware of reason's limitations, one of my favourite mottos is Burroughs' "Exterminate all rational thought!") but also from vision and dream.
I have had visions of apocalypse since i was a baby. I don't hold fast to any beliefs other than that it is impossible to foretell the future. We are in a time where everything falls apart to be reconfigured, and prophecy is a thing of the past, not the future.
I applaud the gallant efforts of people who wish to set up post-collapse structures to ensure survival of the species, but it is not something i personally feel is worth putting much energy into. I feel our purpose here is to familiarise ourselves with our higher Selves and death so that we (you , me , it , living, loving self-reflective consciousness) may move on to what is beyond without getting lost in the chaos by trying to hold on to anything.
The rest is just maya.
What is it exactly that makes the human race as it is now worthy of immortality?
Thanks for all the thoughtful comments.
The Beyond?
"I believe we will not make a change, rather , change will re-make us in perhaps more than one way. Many readers here will know from inner experience that life/consciousness (whose energy springs forth eternally from cosmic love) itself is essentially indestructible, but forms are emminently recyclable."
I agree that change is happening on a level immune to our frightened egocentric intentions, but I also think that if we surrender too readily to what is happening, be it in dreams or on the street, we risk giving our tacit support to narcissistic elements, whomever they might be. If we are victims of chance we are prisoners of time, but if we are creators of opportunity we can make time instead of waiting for it to run out.
Jean Gebser, 50 years ago, surveying the history of consciousness evolution recognised that the modern "mental-rational" way had reached a dead end, and came to the conclusion that,
"... if we do not overome the crisis, it will overcome us; and only someone who has overcome himself is truly able to overcome. Either we will be disintegrated and dispersed, or we must resolve and effect integrality. In other words, either time is fulfilled in us -- and that would mean the end and death for our present earth and (its) mankind -- or we succeed in fulfilling time: and this means integrality and the present, the realisation and the reality of origin and presence. And it means, consequently, a transformed continuity where mankind and not man, the spiritual and not the spirit, origin and not the beginning, the present and not time, the whole and not the part become awareness and reality. It is the whole that is present in origin and originative in the present".
I take it from this passage, and from my own experiences of dreams and visions, that there is no beyond to prepare for - we are never out of the beyond: this is it. Therefore our actions here and now are our actions always and forever. Thats why I choose to lend a hand occasionally to those around me who are attempting to build a life-affirming vision.
You write, "The rest is just maya.
What is it exactly that makes the human race as it is now worthy of immortality?"
I think we are shedding the familiar human form and becoming more humane. It's a difficult process because of our deep conditioning, some of us are closing our eyes, but it is worth staying with it eventually. The paradox we are experiencing now is that our tomb is also a womb. We are all dieing and we are all being born; I suppose I prefer to focus on the birth.
Also I would say that maya is nirvana and nirvana is maya; it is the quality of consciousness of the subject is the changeable thing.
Anyway, it seems to me that we're basically in agreement about the quality and inevitable fate of the current socio-political system.
Best wishes,
Thom
Yes
Thom, thanks for your excellent and challenging reply!
When i wrote the above i was all too aware of the contradictions in almost every sentence. This is it, there is no beyond, and at the same time this isn't it... Seems we come to the limits of what we can express with language in these matters.
We can't imagine how the transformation that Gebser and many others have intuited and attempted to describe will come about , as there is a perceived serious threat to our biological substrate, the living matrix that sustains our consciousness and bodies in this continuum.
In my observations on myself and others I see we have a lot of work to do in terms of being able to survive when the system we are curently hooked onto really goes down , as survival depends on our abilty to form sustainable communities. Human beings are social animals and need to form small cohesive groups so as to surive and prosper. These are the ecological facts.
Unless something, like major trauma , forces people to break down their egoic armoring and actually realise in their heart and guts -not just their minds- that we need each other I just can't see how we will stop playing our idiotic games... The film Mars Attacks gave some pointed examples of this...
Most people are still playing the same individualistic game, and every movement towards a positive future for humankind becomes compromised by ego trips and insecure career-seekers, and eventually yet another "product" or "service" in the capitalist markerplace, advertising itself with all the latest buzzwords. Many activists get their kicks off holding the moral high ground and place their ideals and theories above respectful and dignified human relations- and in this act their rhetoric and their action becomes hollow and self-serving.
I wrote that our purpose here is to familiarise ourselves with death, but of course we are also here to learn about life. We are part of the earth's cosnciousness and we are here to feed the earth with our experience. I don't believe our demise will also be the earth's demise, as homeostatic processes that may well be quite harsh for our frail little bodies will surely kick in sooner or later. I would like to think that mother earth will come up with the gentlest and most caring way to restore balance, but....
I think i've posted this quote of McKenna in RS before, but it is worth repeating:
"The dualism built into our language makes the death of the species and the death of the individual appear to be opposed things" (!!!)
The new Green Revolution
Excellent story, Jill. Informative, and alarming yet hopeful -- especially in your reporting on Whole Foods and Trader Joe's (two prominent national grocery chains) leading the charge for local organic foods.
Still, I am compelled to examine the China symptom as a direct result of our over-extended global population, dependent as it is on mass production. Can organic farming methods truly feed as many people as factory farms currently do? It was the "Green Revolution" of industrial agriculture and widespread petrochemical pesticide/fertilizer use that initially allowed population numbers to soar up to the ceiling of unsustainable limits.
I wonder if it is feasible within current demands to imagine an end to these loathsome yet highly productive practices. The food might be healthier and the land more fertile, but would there be enough to go around?
-st
I think the answer is a resounding 'Yes!'
if we halt monoculture from ruining the soil, that is. i've heard from a lot of organic farmers that the whole 'organic can't be produced on the level of industrial farming' meme is a myth. one of the bullet points at the 2006 bioneers conference was that an adult male can subsist on 100 square feet of well managed garden space. that's a 10 by 10 plot in your backyard. the cutting edge of sustainable aggriculture is loaded with brillient techniques like biodynamics that prove that the only impediment to mass market organic (and i don't just mean USDA organic) is the willingness to participate in food production (which 99% of Americans now lack). nobody is dependent on the GM corn that blankets the midwestern US except in the sence of abject addiction to sugar and red meat.
Reclaiming the garden
Perhaps it could work in such a way, where each family/homestead/community provides for its own sustenance with local plots of land. Yet my point is directed towards the federally subsidized infrastructure of farming and food delivery currently serving urban/suburban populations across the developed world.
It seems a wholesale switch to organic farming would necessitate a tremendous shift in organization, linking local communities to local farms and eschewing the agriculture-industrial complex with its endless chains of supermarkets. Even still, I have always understood the population boom of the past century to be a product of industrial farming's power to amass a surplus of food, albeit nutritionally degraded and environmentally destructive. For certain, it is encouraging to see the advance of conscientious farming into the Whole Foods agenda. Yet in order for the Monsanto/ADM tyranny to cease, there must be a powerful movement to reincorporate localized food production across the world. Organic methods will of course be at the heart of this shift. Perhaps it will take a true crisis, like Cuba underwent after the Soviet collapse, to usher in this return to the garden.
-st
America, the cluttered
--
jill
jillettinger@mindspring.com
http://www.innercontinental.org
FYI David Barboza, who i mentioned in the article goes in depth on the chinese aquaculture issue in yesterday's times: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2007/12/15/world/asia/choking_on_grow... it's pretty frightening stuff. the story is long, but well worth the read.Where we’re at on the industrial agriculture issue is almost incomprehensible. In John Robbins book The Food Revolution, he says that there are roughly the same amounts of people dying of starvation as there are of obesity (which is the opposite side of the scale of the same disease: malnutrition). Though we’re “feeding” people, they’re still as sick as if they had no food at all.
the natural/organic industry is an incredibly important piece of the puzzle, but it still has its flaws. big corporate single bottom line giants are buying up holistic businesses and contributing to more monoculture and quality compromises. Albeit, they still maintain natural or organic status, the guise is transparent and sometimes it gives me shivers. The most recent astonishing example: the clorox company just bought the personal care brand burt’s bees for $925 million, though their sales are only projected to be $170m for this year. Clorox stock and sales have been dropping significantly, so they paid nearly double what Whole Foods shelled out to buy 100 Wild Oats stores to boost their portfolio and impress their stockholders. Burt’s Bees products, while free from many harmful chemicals and processed ingredients, is not even an organic based product line. Yet the demand for “green, clean” products made it one of the largest purchases in the history of the natural products industry. (other examples: bear naked granola just sold to kellogg who also owns kashi, danone owns stonyfield, dean foods owns silk, hershey owns dagoba etc etc). these buy outs will keep happening, and hopefully put healthy food into more people. though many people have an awareness about “we are what we eat” already, so many more do not.
when we see numbers like only 5% of our food in this country is organic, that really kinda pales in comparison to what the other 95% is actually made of…and that stuff - the taco bell, big gulp, oreo-dorito sludge occludes the ability to feel much of anything, let alone why it is important we move away from processed foods. There’s decadence dependence in this country. We’ll begin to have less of an attraction to meaningless “stuff” when bodies themselves become absent of it.
What seems to be the most significant thing anyone can do is continue to be conscious of every penny spent. It’s not a big giant leap, but it is the small things we do, that add up. I buy organic not just because it tastes better and is healthier for me, but because I can’t help but think about the farmers and their families who are spared being exposed to the hazards of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. and that's a really big reason to buy organic, even if we’ve not solved the monocropping or transport issues yet. We will. It happens in steps and stages, and as consumers, every purchase we make helps steer our future. (and remember: a pop tart is still a pop tart, organic or not.)
Corporate buy-outs: pros/cons?
Hi Jill,
In your post above you state that corporate buy-outs of successful natural brands are "contributing to more monoculture and quality compromises." Then you seem to imply that these buy-outs are a good thing, as they will "hopefully put more healthy food into people."Are these acquisitions a positive trend, or are we just watching the brightest hopes of organic business get degraded as they're subsumed into irresponsible corporate mega-brands looking to green their logos?
-st
just like masters of war
we're looking at steps and stages of progress in my opinion.
when organic companies first started selling out to big corporations there were lots of questions, unknowns. (the big buy out i remember that triggered tons of freaking was back in 2000 when boca burgers sold to kraft who was owned by philip morris tobacco....).
there are a lot of obvious knowns too, which create their own questions. as more organic options gets into mainstream channels, production demands put pressure on a system not yet capable of supporting that growth and thus, we symptomatically end up relying on countries with inadequate, potentially harmful safety measures. as well as our own issues here too. i mean look at the e coli spinach outbreak in the U.S. last year. It’s caused a wave of reactions that may result in MANDATORY sterilization of all leafy greens in this country. That’s some scary Orwellian stuff…
but even still, the way i look at it is a little bit like what my yoga teacher told me during my teacher training program back in 2001. he said that the mind/ consciousness does not have to be "ready" for yoga in order for it to work. by just being on the mat, breathing and moving through the postures, ( in india yoga is regarded as a science) a shift will happen whether we are conscious of it or not. I feel like the same is true for eating organic less processed foods. Whether we're conscious of it or not makes little difference. As more people consume food that's better for them, a transformation will happen which will eventually demand more from the corporatocracy.
that's not saying there aren't problems with the current capitalistic nature of this country, or with organic farming methods in this country and others, by all means there are many. but if we don't do something, and rather quickly, we might end up further away from ever finding a solution.
The reason Clorox bought Burt’s Bees for nearly $1billion is the very same reason they can eventually stop producing chlorine bleach altogether. That's a real possibility, pretty damn exciting too. It’s a bit of a Trojan horse…these companies are getting into solving the bigger problems now because they see financial gains. Which again, their motives are obvious, but I think it’s acceptable at this point (even if somewhat nauseating) if that’s how we have to attract them to making change. That's because they are contributing to creating a new landscape of possibilities, by simply offering their customers heathier options instead of the high-fructose-trans-fat-pesticide-hormone-injected-deep-fried nastiness that erodes our inherent intuition and ethereal connection to the world around and within us. companies like Clorox are giving power back to the people simply by helping them get healthier. The healthier we are, the more in touch we are with what we need (and don't need) and the more we demand of our corporations. Heck, the more they’ll demand of themselves.
The answers to our farming and transport challenges will come as everyone gets healthier. So it starts with accessible answers, like choosing organic. I'd call that a positive trend, even if that means sacrificing profits to tobacco companies and (greedy?) stockholders in the short term. The long term benefits go to the farmers, to the earth itself, to our grandchildren. IF that means i have to pad some suit-and-tie-dinosaurs pockets for a few more years, let me tell you, i'll be the first one in line.
reminds me of dylan's masters of war:
" Let me ask you one question
Is your money that good
Will it buy you forgiveness
Do you think that it could
I think you will find
When your death takes its toll
All the money you made
Will never buy back your soul"
--
jill
jill@jillettinger.com
http://www.innercontinental.org
A rich man's world
Nothing good will come through the capitalist sytem of greed!
Mass production> mass marketing > mass consumption > mass destruction.
We Play with Plastics
"Perhaps parents, too, can become less impulsive, buying fewer meaningless toys for their children..."
I am astonished by how many plastic toys children have these days. One couple I know has a veritable sea chest full of plastic toys of all variety for their toddler, and they live on a fairly modest income. His collection at a few years old already eclipses almost all the toys I had over the course of my childhood. There is clearly such a powerful urge to feed our progenys' imagination and when that meets cheap China-made plastic toys it's like reunited lovers embracing in slow motion on a beach.
I do not have children and so am playing the looking-in-from-the-outside role on this one but I see a subtle "this is how much we love our child" subtext to the entire endeavor. I loved the toys I had as a child and in many ways they fed my imagination but I never, ever needed so many and wonder if in fact I was served by having to engage my own imagination to fill in gaps left by my less than extensive collection. There is an odd connection here between oil-based plastics and our imagination. How many toys do we see that are wood, that are stone, that are of substances that come more directly from the natural world instead of being thoroughly - and literally - refined? What is the effect of playing with a toy of individual specificity (read: hand-crafted) and of "organic" quality versus a toy that is the result of sophisticated manufacturing techniques and that solely reflects a mass entertainment product (Shrek, Transformers, et. al.)? How many adult objects of play (computers, cameras, etc.) are made of something other than plastic? When was the last time any one of us handled such a thing?
A curious tendril-like ebb and flow between global economics and our creative faculties starts to be seen. These things then appear to all be connected: our children's imagination has a direct relationship with China's exporting dynamics which affects our physical health which feeds into the quality of our ecosystem. But those lines aren't seen or heeded by so many parents, despite education or background. The primacy of providing for the child takes hold and dominates all other thoughts. The irony of it all: plastic is touted as being safer for kids to play with than other materials. [True or not? I don't really know.]
It's enough to make one want to willingly deprive one's children-in-potential of any plastic toys whatsoever. They'll hate me for it but dammit, it's for their own good! And the good of the planet!
Is that what it takes?
Triple-decker Sandwich
Just noticing how many of the stories on the front page right now tie into each other.
Jill's piece on China and organics brings up questions of the sustainability of a mass consumerist marketplace, which is expertly deconstructed in "The Story of Stuff" -- a video I learned of through Antonio Lopez's blog posting. And all of these issues are tackled by Reverend Billy and his Stop Shopping Gospel Choir, as witnessed in the timely new film What Would Jesus Buy? -- again, a Reality Sandwich featured topic thanks to Jamye Waxman and Jonathan Phillips' recent podcast.
Keep up the good work!
-st