We were going to see Cuernavaca’s new landfill. We had left the edge of the city and now saw cows grazing. Then we hit what could only be described as a homemade checkpoint. A barb wire fence stretched across the street. After a few residents serving as guards opened the gate and our van passed, I had no clue what to expect.
The farmer who owned the land was happy to show us around. He opened yet another fence and let us walk through.
So, without setting foot in the landfill itself, we saw it.
(All photos above courtesy of Kimberly Griffin)
The gate had not been meant to stop us from entering government property. It had been built to stop the government or its allies from coming in and coercing the residents out of their land.
I had not intended for this entry to be about politics primarily. Our partners, the bloggers in Thailand, had been writing about human rights and government accountability rather than environmental concerns. Politics here though is tricky as is politics everywhere. It may involve bribery, alliances, networks, and (if I am to believe what some people have told me with regards to the landfill) physical threats. In short it is like politics everywhere else. I would hate for what I write here to be misinterpreted as an insult to Mexican politics particularly. However, one can broadly say that the “perfect dictatorship” described during the years of one-party domination continues in some ways in today’s multi-party Mexico.
The landfill was itself an improvement on the previous open-air dump near an indigenous community. Not everyone has access to the services of the privatized, new garbage collection company, PASA (the privatization of garbage collection was a controversial move on the part of the government in recent years). The rivers in some ravines, already a place for dumping sewage, hold a great deal of garbage put there by the residents whose houses cannot be reached by garbage trucks. Studies say that the soil is too porous to protect the below-ground aquifers from possible leaching. Thus, the project deprives neighboring communities of the right to clean water as their water is now contaminated. The local government representatives that we met with countered by saying the lands do not contain very much fertile soil. They may not be very fertile although that does not stop people from raising corn, cattle, chickens, and (as I found out the hard way) bees. Despite the vocal opposition all the political parties are in favor of the landfill, including the “Ecological Green Party.” When they proposed other sites, government officials said “go research them yourselves.” Perhaps the greatest motivation for the current site is that the contamination that results from the landfill flows into smaller, poorer communities and doesn’t directly affect the city of Cuernavaca.
Some local citizens have found their own solution in setting up recycling centers and small-scale water-treatment plants. Despite, or possibly because of, their general distrust of the city government, these people have received some government support, including the filming of a public service announcement. Yet they remain cynical. When asked about the sewage treatment plants in Cuernavaca created directly by the government, the creator of a small scale plant at a local school was quick to point out that they did not work.
As I watch the local citizens in the Cuernavaca area so actively engaged in their communities, I remain aware of my role here as a foreigner. The last thing I want to be is another invader in this country, so my own involvement has limits. However, in learning about the struggles of this place and of the people here working for a more just world, I am convinced that my involvement back in the U.S. will always be affected and inspired by the activists of Mexico.
Ben,
ResponderEliminarWe have seen some similar concerns about water contamination and such when we visited the Khon Kaen landfill in Thailand. What really struck me about your post, though, was this idea of how the interests of poor and marginalized groups of people often don’t fit within the plans and vision of the government. I think that what you said about politics involving alliances, bribery, and threats is probably true pretty much everywhere. We’ve seen it here in Thailand and there’s also definitely evidence in the US as well. For me, the situation was most clearly articulated by a group of villagers whose land the government wanted to use to build powerlines to provide electricity for the larger area. The government said that this small group of villagers should sacrifice a small bit of their land for the greater good of so many people but, as the people we spoke with pointed out, they were not the ones who were going to benefit from this project. Why do governments constantly ask the people with the least to sacrifice the most while its policies generally benefit those who already have power within the system? I see a lot of similar concepts in the situation you’re describing in Mexico.
Meghan Ragany – CIEE Spring 2009
You're right Meghan, there are a lot of similar situations within Mexico. You, of course, already heard the landfill example, but last week, us students participating in the Migration and Globalization program experienced another example of government coercion first hand, in the town of Atenco.
ResponderEliminarAtenco is a small town located a half an hour north of Mexico City. Being a small indigenous farming community, Atenco has little political bargaining power, which is why they shocked the region so much with their adamant refusal of a government plan to build a new airport to service the wealthy in Mexico City. The people have taken a stand and held to their few remaining rights--the rights that the government hasn't infringed upon with extreme violence, imprisonment, and political and economic alienation. But the thing that gives me hope amidst all of this government coercion and unnecessary force, is that there are still towns like Atenco that are willing to stand up for what is theirs.
Josiah,
ResponderEliminarThere are so many parallels in our trips it is crazy, but then maybe it makes sense we are both on globalization and development programs. However, the issue at the landfill is such and issue throughout Thailand, particularly with the mining industry. On this trip I have been to two mines, a goldmine in Loei that is in operation and a potash mine in Udon Thanni that is still in development. Each of these communities as the one in Atenco has formed resistance against the possible and current development. I have become conflicted with the government’s inability to protect its people’s rights from these big corporations that not only change laws to their benefit, but continually lie to the people, stating that their land will not be affected and the villagers will be provided jobs. When, in actuality, the land will no longer be safe to live on and the villagers will get no compensation, forced to move away from land they have farmed for over 100 years.
I used to think a lot about littering. My friends and I would go do highway cleanups, and I would always rail against people who threw their garbage on the ground. Now, I think about the creation of that trash in the first place more than where I will put it. More and more, it doesn’t matter whether you throw your candy wrapper out the window or into the garbage can. That trash is going somewhere. Our landfills are getting bigger and more numerous. As we’ve seen in Thailand and Mexico, the refuse of our daily lives is dumped in someone’s community. It might not be our community, but its going somewhere. The out of sight out of mind mentality that we’ve developed isn’t going to hold for much longer. Recycling is fine, but we really need to think about limiting our consumption and waste in the first place. It’s a crazy thing about the global economic system—we reward system failures. In order for a transaction to be counted into money something needs to be used up—wasted. GNP is based on the destruction of natural resources. Waste dumps, environmental hazard cleanups, even the treatment of health effects from pollution are counted as a part of GNP, contribute to economic growth. And as we’ve seen in Thailand, the costs of these system failures are born primarily by those who don’t have the money or political power to influence political decision making. The world is a closed place, though, we all need to rethink this pathologic waste soon.
ResponderEliminarYour description of the dirty politics used against local people, including physical threats reminds me of the gold mine community we visited in Loei, Thailand. The community that lives near the site has been organizing in the hopes of shutting down the mine which is contaminating their water source, thereby poisoning their crops that they are dependent on for food and income. Also, from the contaminated water villagers have developed health problems.
ResponderEliminarThe company’s response has been to defame the village leaders and one of the heads of the company, an ex-general who has investments in the company, has consistently made threats. He has not only threatened the lives of villagers, but NGOs working with the community and reporters. From what we’ve heard from villagers and our teachers, assassinations are not just a threat, but an actuality which happens to leaders who are too loud.
-Lukas Winfield
Trash has been something that has been on my mind since I came to Thailand. Within the first few weeks it became clear that trashcans were few and far between, and that empty bottles and wrappers found their way onto the streets more often than not. But like Hannah mentioned in a previous comment, it's tough to say whether it makes a difference or not if trash is condensed in a landfill or spread out on the streets.
ResponderEliminarThat a landfill is an improvement on an open air dump though did put the issue into perspective. It seems like all problems revolving around trash are difficult to come to terms with. Waste reduction seems like the only way out. I'd like to leave you with a quote said by one of the community leaders in the landfill I stayed in.
"If everyone uses banana leave [instead of plastic bags or packaging] we would be out of business. Then how can we survive? It might be good for the environment but then we will not have a job to do." -Paw Kahm.
I find it difficult to reconcile.
Like Melissa, I too have difficulty reconciling issues surrounding the landfill. I use to put a lot of effort into recycling and it never occurred to me that there could be negative effects of this practice. After visiting the landfill, however, I got a new perspective on the benefits of recycling. In the eyes of the villagers living next to the landfill and scavenging for bottles daily, they would prefer no one recycle. The way they think about it is if everyone recycled there would be little for them to scavenge for and they would be out of work.
ResponderEliminarNow I am always confused about how to go about recycling in Thailand. As a group we thought about saving all of our bottle and bringing them to the landfill, but then we realized would be putting the street scavengers out of work.
I also have trouble reconciling their lifestyle because i can't agree with promoting more trash generation. I would hope that in the future we could produce less waste and the communities who rely on bottle collection would be able to find more sustainable jobs.
Something that stood out to me in your blog, Ben, was the government officials' response of “go research them yourselves.” Those kinds of statements sound awfully familiar, mostly from exchanges we have with mayors or higher up government-affiliated agencies. There is definitely a disconnect between what the villagers say and what the higher-ups decide they need, if they choose to listen.
ResponderEliminarOne thing that strikes me at these government exchanges is how responsibility is unclear, or seems to be someone else's most of the time. We might say, "the villagers say 'x,' have you heard that already? What might you do about that?" and the response we often get is, "Yes I know, but that's not under our jurisdiction" or "since we promote community strength, it's up to them to start up what they want." It makes me question our role here as students, or (to be cheesy) anyone's role in the world. How human rights are not our rights or their rights, but everyone's rights. Fighting for "us" is fighting for "them." So how do we act as responsible, "global" citizens (to use a category we hear a lot) who seek to empower each other instead of put the blame or weight on anyone else?
Lisa Bruckner - CIEE Thailand
Many of my fellow Thailand students have already addressed much of what I wanted to say in their previous posts. The landfill community is one that stands out in all our minds probably because of the visual impact of the site, and also because we were able to partake in scavengingwith our families. It has also been a community that has subconciously affected me the most of any we have visited because it is the issue I feel most responsible for. While on the one side I see the importance of their work in providing villagers with income, I also see the landfill as a huge island of consumerism, the remants of everything I have consumed and used. While digging through it with my pitchfork, I saw yoghurt containers of yoghurts I eat, 7-11 bags and my favorite chips. When I asked my Mae "Ow, mai?" to each one of these things, she turned them down. It was then that it occurred to me that many of the things I consume cannot be recycled. They are not used by the gep-kong-gow. Instead they sit in a huge pile of trash, and will exist there for years and years leaking leachate into the soil. After my experience in the landfill, I stopped eating the chips. It wasnt even that I thought consciously about the chip bags in the landfill, it was almost like a subconcious decision. I started denying plastic bags at 7-11. I started buying yoghurt containers that looked like the ones my Mae had wanted in the landfill. The landfill didnt help me become more consious of what I consumed, it MADE me more conscious. I had to be. I think it was an experience that will continue to affect anyone afterwards. Its hard to forget that pile of trash because its so easy to see how you caused it. Sorry that wasnt really a response to what people said, but everyone's comments (particularly Katja's) just got me thinking our role.
ResponderEliminar-Melissa M
When it comes right down to it, I have accepted that it is highly unlikely that I can ever stop creating trash, because its a part of the system that we've grown up with. In our generation, trash is and always has been a constant part of our life, and its not something we were allowed to have a choice about. What I got out of our trip to the landfill was that communities like the ones we visited were just another aspect of our way of life.
ResponderEliminarWhat I found really important in our trip to the landfill was along the lines of what Ben concluded with; ensuring that the rights of everyone are respected regardless of where their education, location, or occupation. Ben, you said that the community you saw was disregarded because of their size and lack of wealth. Similarly, the landfill community we stayed in was marginalized because the government obviously had a lack of respect for their occupation. Scavenging was their main source of livelihood, with which these families were able to eke out a living, however, the Thai government does not recognize scavenging as a legitimate career. This community was given sub-standard healthcare and access to education. In the end, all any of these workers are trying to do is to provide for their families; why should these workers not be given the same considerations and health precautions provided to other occupations?
As for the question of recycling, I have concluded that, at least in Thailand, there is no right answer. Anything I do with my recyclable trash will benefit someone, right?
Ben,
ResponderEliminarYour blog post has definitely left me with a lot of questions. Like other CIEE Thailand students who have posted here, I cannot help but reflect on my own personal experiences with the landfill community in Khon Kaen, Thailand. You began your entry by describing the barbed wire which one assumed was constructed by government officials to keep out outsiders when in reality it was constructed by local villagers to keep out intruders (including government officials) from intruding upon their space. This issue also appears to bring up problems with visibility, especially as the landfill’s location is strategically placed far enough from the main city, thus concentrating its environmental impacts upon the local village. And yes, I agree that dirty politics are almost always behind these decisions. I believe the problem is beyond corruption but rather, a reinforcement of systemic oppression that is complicated by products of rolling excess (what our growing trash collection has become a physical manifestation of). I believe the same to be so in Thailand.
I do think there is a lot of value in your cautionary practice towards criticizing Mexico’s State politics, and I find your evaluation of your role as a foreigner and activist in Mexico very similar to a lot of the internal struggles students in Thailand are going through. Perhaps the answer will become a lot clearer for the lot of us once we have time to process this when we go back to the States. I hope this path of consciousness continues to evolve for you!
- Muriel Leung, Sarah Lawrence College '10
Ben,
ResponderEliminarWhat I found most interesting about you post was that you found local citizens to be very engaged with their relationship to the trash circulating within their own communities...actively and independently pursuing projects to address issues of consumption and water contamination.
In Thailand this doesn’t really seem to be the case. While scavenging has become a growing source of income as more people rely on the informal work sector for their livelihoods or as a supplemental income, there is little talk about consumption, recycling, and the environmental impact. Most people are not aware that there are people living in the landfill. The municipality denies any jurisdiction over the landfill (therefore forgoing any responsibility to protect the rights of those living there). Nobody seems to be concerned with overseeing issues of water contamination (as a result of leachite) either. Case in point: A 2003 report warned of the potential for future water contamination. It recommended that groundwater be tested 3 times a year. Since that point, no tests have been conducted.
The landfill community doesn’t seem to have a place on anyone’s agenda. They are out of the jurisdiction of the municipality, and out of the heads of everyday consumers. Before my own stay with that community, I too was unaware. It’s hard to conceptualize how to deal with issues surrounding the landfill, as I find myself facing similar contradictions that have been mentioned previously on this blog. How can I reconcile wanting to see these communities and their profession recognized, respected and protected and my desire to also support waste reduction and environmental preservation?
-Rebecca Haverson, CIEE Thailand
Rebecca, although it may seem that people who live in Mexico are more/very educated about environmental issues, it is neither the case here. The lack of education is why it is so difficult for the very few to face against the government to protect their lands. There is a system in place that makes the uneducaed less educated or stagnant in their education, so that justifies the government to step in and do what it pleases with the citizens. If the people are uneducated about the issue, then they don't know any better than to support the government who already has a plan that they claim will benefit the greater good, like Meghan said. In addition to the globalization of neoliberalist policies that support economic gain, it makes the government look like they are in the right in creating that landfill--I mean, at least the trash isn't going into Cuernavaca, right?--yes, but it thus widens the gap between rich and poor. Aall of the trash goes to the poorer communities that aren't as educated about the environmental issues enough to defend themselves, while Cuernavaca and the rich continue succeeding. That one farmer has to fight and fight and fight because he does know exactly what is and can happen to his land and is trying to prevent it, but all of the farmers around him are selling their ejido land to the government, so that they can get their nice trucks, but then have no land, and that land will be used to spread more trash. So, if no one around the farmer is sticking in the struggle with him, he might soon be outnumbered. So, maybe protecting his land isn't enough. Maybe he needs to work on teaching his neighbors the cultural and environmental effects of selling their land.
ResponderEliminar