Author Archives: ewc53

Sea Glass

Posted on by
2

Last week I attended an incredible talk about a Cornell professor’s attempt to discover all the marine life found in teh Blaschka models. The pictures of these models were absolutely incredible and there were times that I could not tell the difference between what was glass and what was alive. I love snorkling but the scuba diving that the video showed demonstrated just how beautiful our ocean really is.  After her talk, I actually searched the Mann library for the models. Cornell offers so many incredible things that we don’t even know about so I enjoyed hearing about one more thing that makes Cornell amazing.

 

The discussion after the video after the viruses that different aquatic animals, specifically starfish, are getting sparked my interest. The professor effectively explained just why it is so devastating for these starfish to be extinct, which could very well be a reality soon.  I know that fishing practices are terrible but I would never imagine that people would be capable of dynamiting coral reefs for a few fish. The video of the dead reef was devastating. The ocean is so big and, being out of sight most of the time, is a resource that we have really taken for granted. Conversations usually center around the water rising or pollution. The professor talked about the potential effect of rising water temperatures on the vast array of marine life’s ability to overcome these terrible viruses and diseases.

 

 

Are any Means Justified?

Posted on by
Reply

Last week, I attended Marshall Curry’s screening of “If a Tree Falls” at the Cornell Cinema. I had not been to the cinema before and this was a great first experience. The documentary asked more questions than it answered about whether eco-terrorism fulfills a need in our apathetic society. The film focused on the ELF, Earth Liberation Front, which recognized that peaceful protests about the environment were not effective or getting the recognition that they deserved so began to engage in eco-terrorism, burning wood companies, greenhouses believed to hold genetically modified plants, and many more.

 

The documentary shows the audience how the EFL was born out of desperation and also police brutality. Peaceful protesters sitting in tress to prevent them from being cut down would be violently harmed by the police to get them down. Police would cut their pants and pepper spray them, they would put pepper spray on q-tips and stick them in their eyes, they would violently beat peaceful protestors. This created a convincing argument for ELF’s inception.

 

Although there were times that the ELF seemed justified because they did not directly hurt any people, they still wreaked havoc and made countless people feel unsafe. The owner of a tree cutting company talked of the fear he felt after their plant was destroyed, about the alarm systems he and his sons installed in their homes. Terrorism can occur even if people are not hurt. Eco-terrorism, although it does not inculcate the same fear and repulsion in us as domestic terrorism, is just as costly. Additionally, the audience was made to question if ELF was always justified in what they destroyed.  The tree cutting company would plant six trees for every one that they cut.  Curry left it to the audience to decide if that justifies the destruction of forests.

 

Many of the past Becker-Rose cafés that I have attended have focused on the environment and what we as individuals and as a society should do to help save it, how we can get people to care, and what options there are. This film further complicated the issue, asking if any means are justified in creating the awareness that is so critical to the campaign against global warming.

Just a Little Effort

Posted on by
Reply

Professors Shanjun Li, Greg Poe, and David Wolfe candidly discussed environmental issues that we face around the world and in our own backyard. I was most intrigued when fracking in Ithaca was brought up. I just saw today that Cornell is the sixth most beautiful rural college campus in the U.S. While I was not on campus when people were fighting those who wanted to do fracking here, I understand the outrage. I probably would think twice about coming to a school where I know the water could be contaminated. Global warming is a major issue but so often people are overwhelmed by everything that they need to do to solve it that the result is inaction. Although they did not specifically say this, it seems like people generally become the most invested in a project about global warming when it is tangible. Fighting fracking in Ithaca had a clear purpose and timeline. This makes it easier to commit to. The problem is that global warming is not, nor will it ever be, something easy to fix and the professors acknowledged this. Due to their different backgrounds, there was often disagreement about the best approaches economically and environmentally to reduce pollution. The ambiguity that results from no one really knowing how to solve climate change means fewer people are prone to try to solve it. In a room of arguably engaged and intelligent students, you would think there would be more environmental activism but there was very little. It is important that we remember that while this is a big issue, it can be broken down into more specific goals, such as getting Cornell to divest from fossil fuels and that these are the things we should focus on if we want to get anything done.

How will Technology Change War?

Posted on by
Reply

I attended Professor Ohlins’ lecture on what war crimes are and who qualify as war criminals. He started the hour by giving us two equally valid perspectives about the Doctors without Borders hospital that the United States recently bombed; one said the U.S. should be held accountable for killing innocent civilians and the other that the actions were justified because loss of civilian lives is a natural part of war. I found it interesting that Professor Ohlin justified the inevitable casualties of war by citing rules of war. Actually being one of those soldiers on the ground, realizing they had just killed innocent people for no reason would be horrible. I can’t imagine the guilt they must feel. The rules that govern war, the idea that casualties are acceptable if the ratio is proportional, is convenient; it lets people off the hook. I haven’t made up my mind about how justified this rule of proportions really is because you can’t quantify a life.

 

I’m interested how we approach the loss of lives in a war zone versus somewhere like the United States. A death is a death and yet in one situation, we justify the death so that we can sleep at night while the other, we treat it as the tragedy that it is. I have learned a lot in classes about the impact of technological warfare on how killing psychologically affects people. There is a valid concern that as technology takes over how we conduct war, the justification that war is a game of ratios will become stronger.

What if there were no farmworkers?

Posted on by
Reply

I had the opportunity to go both to the talk by Professors Heuvel and Dudley as well as the tour of West campus last week.  I thoroughly enjoyed touring the tunnel of west campus and hearing all about the secret society that meets at the top of one of the Gothic dorms.  I have occasionally seen people at the top of that tower and was curious who they were and how they got up there.  Now I know that I’ll have to wait two years before I’m able to see what I imagine to be a magnificent view.

 

During the Rose-Becker talk, I learned some very surprising facts.  I never would have guessed that Walmart is the #1 buyer of New York apples.  The professors had anyone that had had even the slightest contact with farms raise their hands and I was amazed how few people in the room had any experience with farms.  A very interesting connection was made between certain political candidates’ desire to build a wall to prevent illegal immigration and how that would affect the availability of farmworkers.  It is estimated that up to 95% of farmworkers are undocumented, though this is hard to estimate because these people often want to remain invisible so that they are not deported.  If every illegal immigrant were suddenly deported, there would be enormous labor shortages.  Food would sit in fields because there would not be enough people to harvest it.  This provided an interesting perspective on the immigration issue, one that I had not considered in the past.

Systematic Removal of Identity

Posted on by
Reply

Professor Eric Cheyfitz, the former director of the Indian Studies Program at Cornell, gave a speech this past Wednesday at the Becker-Rose Coffeehouse about Native Americans. I was surprised to hear that Cornell’s campus is on the Cayuga tribe’s land and that the administration won’t acknowledge this at convocation and graduation. Simply delivering a sentence of thanks or even just including it in a program would be so simple and would go a long way towards giving these people the respect that they deserve.

I was intrigued when Professor Cheyfitz asked us how it is possible that we learn American history without native history because despite the settlers’ interactions with natives being a major defining aspect of America, it is not something that history classes focus on. It is important to remember and learn from our mistakes.  Instead, Professor Cheyfitz described a culture today that is aiming to systematically wipe out native culture through genocide.  Heritage is extremely important to the Native American identity script yet the US government often will not recognize their tribes. We live in a culture dominated by a black-white binary that does not consider how natives are ignored every single day.

Something Cheyfitz mentioned was that by ignoring the thought processes of these people, the West loses.  This is especially true considering global warming.  Because these people live so close to nature, they are adept at interacting with it in a way that does not simultaneously destroy it.  He said this to us as I sat freezing in the over air conditioned building, something that seems to be a major problem at Cornell.  I agree that we would do well to learn from the philosophies embedded in these cultures, something we can’t do if their cultures are wiped out.

Time is Time

Posted on by
Reply

Dr. Dan Shwarz offered tips to a packed room of mainly sophomores and juniors about how to succeed college outside of academia last Wednesday night.  He suggested keeping a journal to hold ourselves accountable.  There is always so much to do on Cornell’s campus that it is easy to get swept up in it all and suddenly a month has already passed. He stressed that it is important for each of us to make the time to not only get involved, but to take on a leadership position in a club or on a team as well because that responsibility gives you a new appreciation for the activity.  As an English professor, Dr. Shwarz emphasized that “time is time” and is the one thing we cannot get back.  Undergrads have a tendency to sacrifice a fulfilling job for the one that will look best on their resume. Dr. Shwarz reminded the room that happiness is more important. He stressed that laughing more is the most important thing that anyone can do and that everyone should do one thing for themselves everyday. Dr. Shwarz’s speech was engaging and by the end, everyone was inspired to be a little better and work a little harder.