Environmental Ethics, Spring 2013: Reflective Essay #1

It can be argued that most people are speciests. It is simply part of our nature to believe that we are inherently most important and have inherited this earth as the dominant being. This idea is analyzed and criticized by utilitarianist philosopher Peter Singer. Singer defines speciesism as giving moral preference to the interests of members of a particular species over interests of members of a different species solely because it is a member of one's own species. In other words, humans will give preference to their own interests solely because they belong to the human race. The is evidence of human speciesism in daily life. Most people do not consider a kidnapped or killed animal important to be on the ten'oclock news. Animal interests are simply not a priority nor a primary consideration for most people. This is not to say that people do not care for animals. Society is faced with several comple issues every single day. Placing animals issues or concerns as important human people would be unrealistic, unreasonable and place human society at an overall disadvantage. Human evolution is a story of survival of the fittest. From caveman to modern times, man has been fighting to stay alive despite dramatic surroundings. Even though survival has shifted from caves to mortgages and car payments, people still are fighting to maintain a certain lifestyle (their own survival). People are forced to build a hypothetical pyramid to keep their priorities in order. Our self interests are of the utmost importance to ourselves. Protecting our priorities does not make us immoral beings or selfish. It simply allows our species to flourish which is in itself a moral notion. Animals also protect their interests as well. They watch over their young and obtain food and shelter when necessary. If people decided to place the interests of animals over maintaining a functional human society, that society would spin out of control. The foundations of human existence would eventually cease to exist. Is it then moral for a breakdown of human society to appease every other species who act in the same manner? The answer is no. Animals have adapted to their own society within ours. If our world collapses, many animals will suffer as result. What is the value of human and animal life? This question raises more questions with it. Humans will do almost anything to protect themselves or their loved ones from harm. We put things in place to protect ourselves at any cost. An example would be the "burning building". If there was a burning building and a dog and a child were stuck inside, who should be saved first and why? The impacts felt from the death of a dog while upsetting would be far less traumatic to society than that of the child. It would be immoral to deprive society of a potentially valuable asset. In some cases, the dog may possibly try to help save the child risking their own safety and well being. People would also question the reasoning and logic of a society that would have to think twice about who to save first. The dog cannot go on to become a functional member of that society and help it to flourish. The facts is we need the child more than we need the dog. Human speciesism is part of our being. It is a part of our DNA to ensure the security of our future and longevity. This is not to say that we are innately selfish simply survivors. It is similar to being on a plane and the flight attendant saying in the event of an emergency a person should put on their oxygen mask prior to placing somene else's on. It's is not to be selfish or uncaring, this is to ensure you can assist other is the best possible manner. A person cannot be helpful if they are unable to help themselves.

Protecting What's Theirs

Protecting interests is a simple concept. If something is worth having and preserving, than it should be protected by any means necessary. Protecting capital interests knows no bounds. Corporations have been proven to go to many great lengths to secure their investments and money. In the book Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser, corporate moguls went as far as to have committed illegal acts just to gain profit in their market.

Archer Daniels Midland was considered a “supermarket to the world”. The supermarket chain was very successful at the expense of its customers. In 1999, three of Archer Daniels Midlands top officials including its vice chairman Michael Andreas, were sent to federal prison for conspiring with foreign rivals to control the international market for lysine. Lysine is a feed additive that optimizes growth in animals such as chickens, pigs and cows. From August 1992 to December 1995, the Justice Department investigated a massive price fixing scheme. It is estimated that Archer Daniels Midland overcharged farmers approximately $180 million dollars. This same company also met with foreign competitors to set the global price of citric acid which is also a widespread food additive. At a meeting with Japanese executives, the president of Archer Daniels Midland is quoted as saying,”Our competitors are our friends, and our customers are our enemies” (Schlosser 143) What lengths will corporations go to protect what’s theirs? Integrity seems to be a price that they’re willing to pay.

Supply meet Demand

Supply and demand is a very intense relationship. When demand is high for a particular product, corporations come under intense pressure to supply by any means necessary. Cutting corners in fast food companies production lines have made imposed unthinkable risks and dangers to consumers. In the book, Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser the reader is introduced to the way in which meat provided to fast food companies is produced. Schlosser also discusses the effects this poor production of meat has on its consumers. Because of the high demand for "Big Mac's" and "Quarter Pounders",cows are fed corn in order to produce heartier cows faster. Thus, consumers can get their meal whenever, wherever.

Schlosser discusses different unfortunate outbreaks of e-coli that occurred throughout the US. One in particular was the January 1993 e-coli outbreak in Seattle, Washington. Several children were being hospitalized because of the tainted meat. In December 1992, six year old Lauren Beth Rudolph ate a hamburger at a San Diego Jack-in-the-Box. Lauren became ill, was admitted to the hospital and ultimately suffered three heart attacks before dying in her mothers arms. This tragic story along with others can possibly be avoided. Simply because Americans enjoy a good hamburger and french fries doesn't mean that we should be punished for it. Instead of providing the worst meat and being deceived, people should be told upfront what risks they run eating fast food meals. Either be honest or fix the production. Do what is necessary to make the consumer have control of their health and peace of mind.

Bb Global Politics: Prof. Monaco's Lecture on the "Arab Spring"

Bb Global Politics: Prof. Monaco's Lecture on the "Arab Spring": "On Thu, 3/31, we attended a 'Global Conversations' event organized by the Office of Student Life. Prof. Monaco lectured about the role ..."

White Rights

Being a white male in the US has its privileges. When the words “white pride” are uttered, people immediately relate that to the thoughts of white supremacy. But where does this superiority complex come from? Ever since the days of “Manifest Destiny”, Anglo men in the US felt that it was not only entitlement but their God given right to expand across the North American continent. Manifest Destiny served as a justification the war with Mexico. This pattern of “entitled justification” of white men has occurred throughout US history. During the height of slavery in the early to mid 1860’s, some Southern white men were plantation owners and overseers. They profited very well off of the oppressive slave labor.

During the 19th century, scores of Irish and Italian immigrants came to the US in search for a better life. These immigrants were also treated like second class citizens by the white Americans that were already here. The immigrants were called “Micks” and “Niggers” and were made to live and work in some of the worst conditions in US history. They weren't “entitled” to be considered white yet. This practice of “entitled justification” still occurs today. Many corporations, which have predominantly white board members, are making billions off a new type of cheap labor. In Eric Schlosser’s “Fast Food Nation”, chapter 8 entitled “The Most Dangerous Job”; the reader visits the High Plains More specifically Greeley, CO. Greeley is a major meatpacking town in rural America. Many of the workers in the plants featured in this chapter are low skilled immigrants mainly from Mexico and Central American countries such as Guatemala. Some are even illegal immigrants. This chapter documents the many atrocities that occur in these plants. Instead of receiving benefits, these workers are exploited because of their status in this country. “Some are considered second class and expendable.” They lose limbs, their lives and are raped all while performing such a hazardous job. The supervisors of these plants are mostly “Anglos” who don’t speak Spanish. Some of the supervisors are often harsh and belittling to the workers. While reading about these supervisors I got a mental image of the overseer 200 years ago. They’re purpose may not seem as deliberate as it was during slavery in the US but its intentions and end results are often the same. Even in the cases of the rapes and sexual harassment of female plant workers discussed in “The Most Dangerous Job.” On pg. 176, Schlosser discusses how many women were being sexually harassed, groped and even raped by their supervisors. Some of the women view these “assignations” as a means of moving ahead in the plant or possibly even in life. This also gave me a mental picture of the slave owners inviting themselves into the slave quarters and raping and/or sexually abusing the female slaves they owned. Some of the slaves bear the child of their master. There goes that sense of entitlement.

The girl who silenced the world for 5 minutes

"Stroking" the "Void"

Does money fill a ‘void’ or the emotional connection to our happiness? In the book "Fast Food Nation" written by Eric Schlosser (chapter 3)“Behind the counter”, he discusses a technique called “Stroking”. “Stroking” could be compared to a sort of emotional propaganda that made franchise employees feel a sense of pride and loyalty in their work. This technique prevented employees from creating unions and demanding increased wages. In the following chapter entitled “Success”, Schlosser takes us to the Peter Lowe “Success Authority” convention in which many influential figures such as, Henry Kissinger and Barbara Bush come to speak. Dave Feamster,an injured hockey player turned Little Caeser’s franchise owner, encouraged his employees to come to the convention to let them know about “a world out there, a whole world beyond the south side of Pueblo, CO.”. At the convention, Christopher Reeve, the 1980’s “Superman” talks about the millions he acquired and how they did not attribute to his happiness. He told them the emotional bonds he created after his accident, were way more important than any money he had ever made. Many audience members wept. What caused this weeping? It could possibly be that even though many people at this particular event were millionaires but at what cost? Are they happier from their success? Or is it that they agree with Mr. Reeve and his idea of happiness. On one hand, kind words or "stroking" minimum wage workers helped employees work harder and feel happier about their job without any financial gain. On the other, here we witness millionaires and wealthy people weep when they realize and sympathize with Mr Reeve that money and success don't necessarily equal happiness. The emptier pockets of the minimum wage employees could be no emptier than a wealthy persons happiness.