Dmitriy T.M. sent in a link to a 13-minute video in which Van Jones discusses the problems with patting ourselves on the back too much every time we put a plastic bottle in the recycle bin instead of the trash, and the need to recognize the link between environmental concerns and other social issues:
Also see our posts on the race between energy efficiency and consumption, exposure to environmental toxins and social class, race and exposure to toxic-release facilities, reframing the environmental movement, tracking garbage in the ocean, mountains of waste waiting to be recycled, framing anti-immigration as pro-environment, and conspicuous environmentalism.
Full transcript after the jump, thanks to thewhatifgirl.
I am honored to be here and I am honored to talk about this topic, which I think is of great importance. We’ve been talking a lot about the horrific impacts of plastic on the planet and on other species, but plastic hurts people too, especially poor people. Both in the production of plastic, the use of plastic, and the disposal of plastic, people who have the bulls eye on their foreheads are poor people.
People got very upset when the BP oil spill happened, for very good reason. People thought about, ‘Oh my god, this is terrible, this is oil, it’s in the water, it’s going to destroy the living systems there, people are going to be hurt. This is a terrible thing, this oil is going to hurt the people in the Gulf.’
What people don’t think about is, what if the oil had made it safely to shore? What if the oil had actually got where it was trying to go? Not only would it have been burned in engines and added to global warming, but there’s a place called Cancer Alley, and the reason it’s called Cancer Alley is because the petrochemical industry takes that oil and turns it into plastic. The process kills people and shortens the lives of people who live there in the Gulf. So oil and petrochemicals are not just a problem when there’s a spill, there’re a problem when there’s not. What we don’t often appreciate is the price that poor people pay for us to have these disposable products. The other thing we don’t often appreciate is that it’s not just at the point of production that poor people suffer, poor people also suffer at the point of use.
Those of us who are of a certain income level, we have something called ‘choice’. The reason you want to work hard, and have a job, and not be poor, and broke, is so you can have choices, economic choices. We actually get to choose not to use products that have dangerous and poisonous products in them. Other people, who are poor, don’t have those choices. So low-income people are often the ones buying those products that have the dangerous chemicals in them, their children are using [them]. Those people wind up ingesting a disproportionate amount of this poisonous (plastic?). People say they should just buy a different product. The problem with being poor is you don’t have those choices, you often have to buy the cheapest products, the cheapest products are often the most dangerous.
If that weren’t bad enough, if it weren’t just the production of plastic that’s giving people cancer in places like Cancer Alley and shortening people’s lives and hurting poor kids at the point of use, at the point of disposal once again its poor people who bear the burden. Often, we think we’re doing a good thing. You know, you’re in your office, you’re drinking your bottle of water, whatever it is, you say to yourself, ‘Hey, I’m going to throw this away. No, I’m going to be virtuous, I’m going to put it in the blue bin. I put mine in the blue bin.’ And then you look at your colleagues, you know, ‘You cretin, you put yours in the white bin. You know, you feel a moral tickle, you feel so good about yourself.’ But if we – maybe (??) not you, but I feel this way often. You know, and we kind of have this sort of moral, feel-good moment but if we were able to follow that little bottle on its journey, we would be shocked to discover that all too often, that bottle is going to be put on a boat, it’s going to go all the way across the ocean at some expense and it’s going to wind up in a developing country off of China.
I think in our minds we think that someone’s going to take the little bottle. ‘Oh little bottle,’ you know, ‘we’re so happy to see you, little bottle. You’ve served so well.’ They give it a little bottle massage, a little bottle medal, you know, and ‘what would you like to do next?’ The little bottle is all, ‘I just don’t know’, you know. But that’s not actually what happens. That bottle winds up getting burnt. Recycling of plastic in many developing countries means the incineration of plastic, the burning of the plastic, which releases incredible toxic chemicals and once again kills people.
And so poor people who are making these products in petrochemical centers like Cancer Alley, poor people who are consuming these products disprportionately, and then even poor people who are at the tail end of the recycling are having their lives shortened, are all being harmed greatly by this addiction we have to disposability.
You think to yourself, because I know how you are, you say, ‘That sure is terrible. For those poor people. It’s just awful, those poor people. I hope someone does something to help them.’ But what we don’t understand is, here we are in Los Angeles, we’ve worked very hard to get the smog reduction happening in Los Angeles, but guess what? Since they’re doing so much dirty production in Asian [countries], because environmental laws don’t protect the people in Asian [countries], almost all of the clean air gains, the toxic air gains that we’ve achieved here in California have been wiped out by dirty air coming over from Asia.
So we all are being hit, we all are being impacted, it’s just the poor people get it first and worst. The dirty production, the burning of toxins, the lack of environmental standards in Asia is actually creating so much dirty air pollution, it is coming across the ocean and it has erased our gains here in California. We’re back where we were in the 1970s. And so we’re on one planet, and we have to be able to get to the root of these problems.
The root of this problem in my view is the idea of disposability itself. If you understand the link between what we’re doing to poison and pollute the planet, and what we’re doing to poor people, you arrive at a very troubling but also very helpful insight: in order to trash the planet, you have to trash people. But if you create a world where you don’t trash people, you don’t trash the planet. So it’s really, we’re at a moment now where the coming together of social justice as an idea and ecology as an idea, we can finally see that they are really at the end of the day the same idea, and it’s the idea that we don’t have disposable anything. We don’t have disposable resources, we don’t have disposable species, and we don’t have disposable people either. We don’t have a throw-away planet and we don’t have throw-away children, it’s all precious. And as we all begin to come back to that basic understanding, new opportunities for action begin to emerge.
Biomimicry, which is somethiing that is an emerging science, winds up being a very important social justic idea. To the people who are just learning about this, biomimicry is respecting the wisdom of all species. Democracy, by tthe way, means respecting the wisdom of all people, and we’ll get to that, but biomimicry means respecting the wisdom of all species. It turns out, you know, we’re a pretty clever species, there’s this big cortex or whatever, we’re pretty proud of ourselves, but if we want to make something hard, you know, ‘I know, I’m going to make a hard substance. I know, I’m going to get vacuums and furnaces and drag stuff out of the ground, get stuff hot and poison and pollute, but I’ve got this hard thing! I’m so clever!’ You look behind you and there’s distruction all around you. But guess what. You’re so clever but you’re not as clever as a clam. A clamshell’s hard. There’s no vacuums, there’s no big furnaces, there’s no poison, there’s no pollution. It turns out that another species has figured out a long time ago how to create many of the things we need using biological processes that nature knows how to use well. That insight of biomimicry, that insight of our scientists finally realizing that we have as much to learn from other species – I don’t mean, you know, taking a mouse and sticking it with stuff, you know, I don’t mean learning from them that way, abusing the little species, you know, actually respecting them, respecting what they’ve achieved. That’s called biomimicry, and that opens the door to zero waste production, zero pollution production, that we could actually enjoy a high quality of life, a high standard of living without trashing the planet. Well, that idea of biomimicry, of respecting the wisdom of all species, combined with the idea of democracy, of social justice, respecting the wisdom and the worth of all people, would give us a different society. We would have a different economy. We would have a green society that Dr. King would be proud of.
That should be the goal. And the way that we get there is to first of all recognize that the idea of disposability not only hurts the species we’ve talked about but it even corrupts our own society. We’re so proud to live here in California. We just had this vote and everyone’s like, ‘Well, not in our state. I don’t know what those other states were doing but….’ You know, just so proud. And you know, I’m proud too. But California, even though we lead the world in some of the green stuff, we lead the world in some of the gulag stuff. California has one of the highest incarceration rates of all the 50 states, so we have a moral challenge in all this movement. We’re passionate about rescuing some dead materials from the landfill but sometimes not as passionate about rescuing living beings, living people. And I would say that, we live in a country, 5% of the world’s population, 25% of the world’s greenhouse gasses, but also 25% of the world’s prisoners. One out of every 4 people locked up anywhere in the world is locked up right here in the United States. That is consistent with this idea that disposability is something that we believe in.
And yet, as a movement that has to broaden its constituency, that has to grow, that has to reach out beyond our natural comfort zone, one of the challenges to the success of this movement, to getting rid of things like plastic and helping the economy shift is that people look at our movement with some suspicion. They ask a question and the question is, how can these people be so passionate, a poor person, a low-income person, somebody in Cancer Alley, somebody in Watts, somebody in Harlem, somebody on an Indian reservation might say to themselves – and rightfully so – how can these people be so passionate about making sure that a plastic bottle has a second chance in life, an aluminum can has a second chance, and yet when my child gets in trouble and goes to prison, he doesn’t get a second chance. How can this movement be so passionate about saying we don’t have throw-away stuff, you don’t throw away dead materials, and yet accept throw-away lives and throw-away communities like Cancer Alley.
And so we now get a chance to be truly proud of this movement. When we take on topics like this, it gives us that extra call to reach out to other movements and to become more inclusive and to grow. And we can finally get out of this crazy dilemma that we’ve been in.
Most of you are good soft-hearted people. When you’re younger, you cared about the whole world and at some point, somebody said you had to pick an issue, right? You had to boil your love down to an issue. Can’t love the whole world, you ‘ve got to work on trees or you’ve got to work on immigration, you’ve got to shrink it down to be about one issue. And really, they fundamentally told you, are you going to hug a tree, or are you going to hug a child? Pick! Are you going to hug a tree, or are you going to hug a child? Pick! Well, when you start working issues like plastic, you realize that the whole thing is connected, and luckily most of us are blessed to have 2 arms. We can hug both. Thank you very much.
Comments 25
Amelie — January 22, 2011
Very interesting, and great charisma. Damn, i love TED !
Stephanie — January 22, 2011
That. Was. Awesome!
Stephanie — January 22, 2011
And also: http://bit.ly/gtaZ28
thewhatifgirl — January 22, 2011
Full transcript:
: I am honored to be here and I am honored to talk about this topic, which I think is of great importance. We've been talking a lot about the horrific impacts of plastic on the planet and on other species, but plastic hurts people too, especially poor people. Both in the production of plastic, the use of plastic, and the disposal of plastic, people who have the bulls eye on their foreheads are poor people.
People got very upset when the BP oil spill happened, for very good reason. People thought about, 'Oh my god, this is terrible, this is oil, it's in the water, it's going to destroy the living systems there, people are going to be hurt. This is a terrible thing, this oil is going to hurt the people in the Gulf.'
What people don't think about is, what if the oil had made it safely to shore? What if the oil had actually got where it was trying to go? Not only would it have been burned in engines and added to global warming, but there's a place called Cancer Alley, and the reason it's called Cancer Alley is because the petrochemical industry takes that oil and turns it into plastic. The process kills people and shortens the lives of people who live there in the Gulf. So oil and petrochemicals are not just a problem when there's a spill, there're a problem when there's not. What we don't often appreciate is the price that poor people pay for us to have these disposable products. The other thing we don't often appreciate is that it's not just at the point of production that poor people suffer, poor people also suffer at the point of use.
Those of us who are of a certain income level, we have something called 'choice'. The reason you want to work hard, and have a job, and not be poor, and broke, is so you can have choices, economic choices. We actually get to choose not to use products that have dangerous and poisonous products in them. Other people, who are poor, don't have those choices. So low-income people are often the ones buying those products that have the dangerous chemicals in them, their children are using [them]. Those people wind up ingesting a disproportionate amount of this poisonous (plastic?). People say they should just buy a different product. The problem with being poor is you don't have those choices, you often have to buy the cheapest products, the cheapest products are often the most dangerous.
If that weren't bad enough, if it weren't just the production of plastic that's giving people cancer in places like Cancer Alley and shortening people's lives and hurting poor kids at the point of use, at the point of disposal once again its poor people who bear the burden. Often, we think we're doing a good thing. You know, you're in your office, you're drinking your bottle of water, whatever it is, you say to yourself, 'Hey, I'm going to throw this away. No, I'm going to be virtuous, I'm going to put it in the blue bin. I put mine in the blue bin.' And then you look at your colleagues, you know, 'You cretin, you put yours in the white bin. You know, you feel a moral tickle, you feel so good about yourself.' But if we - maybe (??) not you, but I feel this way often. You know, and we kind of have this sort of moral, feel-good moment but if we were able to follow that little bottle on its journey, we would be shocked to discover that all too often, that bottle is going to be put on a boat, it's going to go all the way across the ocean at some expense and it's going to wind up in a developing country off of China.
I think in our minds we think that someone's going to take the little bottle. 'Oh little bottle,' you know, 'we're so happy to see you, little bottle. You've served so well.' They give it a little bottle massage, a little bottle medal, you know, and 'what would you like to do next?' The little bottle is all, 'I just don't know', you know. But that's not actually what happens. That bottle winds up getting burnt. Recycling of plastic in many developing countries means the incineration of plastic, the burning of the plastic, which releases incredible toxic chemicals and once again kills people.
And so poor people who are making these products in petrochemical centers like Cancer Alley, poor people who are consuming these products disprportionately, and then even poor people who are at the tail end of the recycling are having their lives shortened, are all being harmed greatly by this addiction we have to disposability.
You think to yourself, because I know how you are, you say, 'That sure is terrible. For those poor people. It's just awful, those poor people. I hope someone does something to help them.' But what we don't understand is, here we are in Los Angeles, we've worked very hard to get the smog reduction happening in Los Angeles, but guess what? Since they're doing so much dirty production in Asian [countries], because environmental laws don't protect the people in Asian [countries], almost all of the clean air gains, the toxic air gains that we've achieved here in California have been wiped out by dirty air coming over from Asia.
So we all are being hit, we all are being impacted, it's just the poor people get it first and worst. The dirty production, the burning of toxins, the lack of environmental standards in Asia is actually creating so much dirty air pollution, it is coming across the ocean and it has erased our gains here in California. We're back where we were in the 1970s. And so we're on one planet, and we have to be able to get to the root of these problems.
The root of this problem in my view is the idea of disposability itself. If you understand the link between what we're doing to poison and pollute the planet, and what we're doing to poor people, you arrive at a very troubling but also very helpful insight: in order to trash the planet, you have to trash people. But if you create a world where you don't trash people, you don't trash the planet. So it's really, we're at a moment now where the coming together of social justice as an idea and ecology as an idea, we can finally see that they are really at the end of the day the same idea, and it's the idea that we don't have disposable anything. We don't have disposable resources, we don't have disposable species, and we don't have disposable people either. We don't have a throw-away planet and we don't have throw-away children, it's all precious. And as we all begin to come back to that basic understanding, new opportunities for action begin to emerge.
Biomimicry, which is somethiing that is an emerging science, winds up being a very important social justic idea. To the people who are just learning about this, biomimicry is respecting the wisdom of all species. Democracy, by tthe way, means respecting the wisdom of all people, and we'll get to that, but biomimicry means respecting the wisdom of all species. It turns out, you know, we're a pretty clever species, there's this big cortex or whatever, we're pretty proud of ourselves, but if we want to make something hard, you know, 'I know, I'm going to make a hard substance. I know, I'm going to get vacuums and furnaces and drag stuff out of the ground, get stuff hot and poison and pollute, but I've got this hard thing! I'm so clever!' You look behind you and there's distruction all around you. But guess what. You're so clever but you're not as clever as a clam. A clamshell's hard. There's no vacuums, there's no big furnaces, there's no poison, there's no pollution. It turns out that another species has figured out a long time ago how to create many of the things we need using biological processes that nature knows how to use well. That insight of biomimicry, that insight of our scientists finally realizing that we have as much to learn from other species - I don't mean, you know, taking a mouse and sticking it with stuff, you know, I don't mean learning from them that way, abusing the little species, you know, actually respecting them, respecting what they've achieved. That's called biomimicry, and that opens the door to zero waste production, zero pollution production, that we could actually enjoy a high quality of life, a high standard of living without trashing the planet. Well, that idea of biomimicry, of respecting the wisdom of all species, combined with the idea of democracy, of social justice, respecting the wisdom and the worth of all people, would give us a different society. We would have a different economy. We would have a green society that Dr. King would be proud of.
That should be the goal. And the way that we get there is to first of all recognize that the idea of disposability not only hurts the species we've talked about but it even corrupts our own society. We're so proud to live here in California. We just had this vote and everyone's like, 'Well, not in our state. I don't know what those other states were doing but....' You know, just so proud. And you know, I'm proud too. But California, even though we lead the world in some of the green stuff, we lead the world in some of the gulag stuff. California has one of the highest incarceration rates of all the 50 states, so we have a moral challenge in all this movement. We're passionate about rescuing some dead materials from the landfill but sometimes not as passionate about rescuing living beings, living people. And I would say that, we live in a country, 5% of the world's population, 25% of the world's greenhouse gasses, but also 25% of the world's prisoners. One out of every 4 people locked up anywhere in the world is locked up right here in the United States. That is consistent with this idea that disposability is something that we believe in.
And yet, as a movement that has to broaden its constituency, that has to grow, that has to reach out beyond our natural comfort zone, one of the challenges to the success of this movement, to getting rid of things like plastic and helping the economy shift is that people look at our movement with some suspicion. They ask a question and the question is, how can these people be so passionate, a poor person, a low-income person, somebody in Cancer Alley, somebody in Watts, somebody in Harlem, somebody on an Indian reservation might say to themselves - and rightfully so - how can these people be so passionate about making sure that a plastic bottle has a second chance in life, an aluminum can has a second chance, and yet when my child gets in trouble and goes to prison, he doesn't get a second chance. How can this movement be so passionate about saying we don't have throw-away stuff, you don't throw away dead materials, and yet accept throw-away lives and throw-away communities like Cancer Alley.
And so we now get a chance to be truly proud of this movement. When we take on topics like this, it gives us that extra call to reach out to other movements and to become more inclusive and to grow. And we can finally get out of this crazy dilemma that we've been in.
Most of you are good soft-hearted people. When you're younger, you cared about the whole world and at some point, somebody said you had to pick an issue, right? You had to boil your love down to an issue. Can't love the whole world, you 've got to work on trees or you've got to work on immigration, you've got to shrink it down to be about one issue. And really, they fundamentally told you, are you going to hug a tree, or are you going to hug a child? Pick! Are you going to hug a tree, or are you going to hug a child? Pick! Well, when you start working issues like plastic, you realize that the whole thing is connected, and luckily most of us are blessed to have 2 arms. We can hug both. Thank you very much.
Anon — January 22, 2011
The idea of not living in a disposable culture is a great one, but I am not sure if it is possible at this point. As an ultimate goal, it is great- but I still have to eat and most of my food comes in disposable wrappings, even the stuff I buy in bulk. I could grow so stuff, but I live in a city, where my career and future are, so I have limited land to grow grain. I would love to do more, but I don't think it is possible without top-down change. From the bottom, there is little I can do besides bring my own bags to the grocery, recycle and reuse.
Lexi — January 22, 2011
I agree, this is a great idea for a new movement. Ted is a great speaker, I think, because he is not pointing the finger; he includes himself and everyone else in this dilemma. I have always felt what he talked about in the end; all these great groups have these grand ideals, but they end up arguing with eachother (i.e. animal activists fighting with humanitarians) over what is more important. "Hug a tree, or hug a child; PICK!" I think he is right. We can accomplish both. It will take time, but I believe it can happen.
underbelly — January 23, 2011
This was my favorite TED talk that focused on plastics. Because he's right: you can't care about the environment without caring about people.
P.O. — January 23, 2011
How do I know he is honest now that he has been identified as a 9/11 Truther nut?
Seems like he is just throwing a bunch of "progressive" ideas together and wrapping them up in an environmental package. Seems like more of a re-branding effort to get environmentalist to care more about what he calls "social justice" issues.
Interesting re-branding attempt, but terrible spokesman because of his Trutherism.
Estella — January 23, 2011
For a more profound analysis of the need for a link between ideas of social justice and environmentalism, see the works of Hervé Kempf (originally published in French, but at least his first book has been translated into English).
Kate — January 23, 2011
I live opposite a plastic granulating plant. I'm pretty middle class (and, full disclosure, white), although this was the only house I could afford to buy. But every other family on my street (I mean EVERYONE) are African Immigrants in public housing. The rest of the suburb is the same general SES. Everyone has at least a cough or some other respiratory thing. The plastic dust gets in everywhere - even my cat is snuffly.
And the plant is pretty good. I've talked to them about noise and they do everything they can to make sure they don't pollute the neighbourhood in any way. But it's a chemical, industrial process. That's just the way it is. You want recyclable plastic? That means you want gross factories.
Marc — January 24, 2011
The substance of what he has to say is admirable, but reading this transcript, it sounds like an 8-yr-old talking to other 8-yr-olds. Unfortunately, without at least some modicum of technical expertise, dropping buzzy-buzzwords like "Cancer Alley" without, ya'know, actually mentioning where you're talking about drives this engineer nuts. It sounds like he heard about it on the playground from this other kid.
One of the great things about being rich is that you have the ability to buy environmental cleanliness. Clean energy, clean stuff are more expensive than dirty, pure and simple. Look at the Soviet Union and their historic environmental crimes if you want to know what poor industrialization looks like, and look at Sudan or Nigeria or the Congo if you want to know what social justice looks like in the absence of wealth. I have a problem with people who take western levels of wealth as a given without any understanding about how we got there.
sara — January 24, 2011
I am quite perplexed by the comments on here.
I know at least 10 people under 30 who have gotten sick with cancer in the past 5 years. One of them did not make it. That speaks volumes to me. Volumes. We are continually looking for a "cure" for cancer, but are not looking at fixing the causes. Baffles.
I myself have experience weight gain and hormone imbalances because of the endocrine disruptors in the plastic. Only once I cut out the plastic did I see the results of my clean eating and running.
I think we really need to question industry. Perhaps it is true that it is at the bottom of the pyramid, but maybe we have to restructure the pyramid. The industry and gov't is corrupt as hell and does not have our (99.9% of socio economic brackets) best interest at mind. His line: "So we all are being hit, we all are being impacted, it’s just the poor people get it first and worst." is spot on. We should all be really questioning what they do.
and, P.O: "9/11 truther nut"??? If you still think 9/11 was "Islamic fundamentalists", you are believing a lie, my friend. Get your head out of the sand.
FTY: Internet Video « Chaos is Normal — January 28, 2011
[...] TED: intersection of economics and ecology @ plastics aka Don’t feel all that good about recycling plastic. [...]
Suggestion Saturday: January 29, 2011 | On The Other Hand — January 29, 2011
[...] The Economic Injustice of Plastic. A video about the link between environmental toxins and social justice. [...]
K — February 1, 2011
If everyone saw this video, it would make a difference in the way we view what we buy. I actually care now that its more about people who are dying!! Thank you so much for posting this!!! I posted it on facebook to spread it around.
Basheba Hayes — October 8, 2011
I am not for sure when this article came out, but it is very interesting to know these things. I know that a lot of people are in the dark about this, because we are to focus on ourselves as people. I am a student and I am pursuing my degree in Social Work and sometimes when you think that you are trying to do good you realize that you could be doing bad. I like this article and will share this with other students who do not know what we are doing when it comes to plastic.