AS.100.369: Hope for Wildlife in Afghanistan?

I thought in light of our not-so-uplifting final discussion on the future of the planet, I would offer you an interesting (and more hopeful) view of how some creatures continue to survive despite human warfare threatening their habitat.

A rare Persian Leopard caught on camera recently in Central Afghanistan.

AS.100.369: Fossil Fuels and Imperial Futures

Take a stand: Who do you find most convincing? Steinberg or Friedman? Or neither? Thoughts on the future of America's empire over the planet's natural resources--is the answer in green liberalism and green capitalism? Other thoughts for our final discussion (perhaps some other big issues that we haven't considered and you would like to address)?

AS.100.369: Wildlife Protection in the Era of Decolonization

So I guess I'll pigging back onto the subtitle of the Goldberg article: In the particular case of this American couple, the Owens, do you think these conservationists went too far? What social, cultural, or ideological factors might have motivated them? Was Russell Train's approach different? Does Train or the Owens have anything in common with Teddy Roosevelt generations earlier? Thoughts? (don't feel like you have to answer all of these questions, but maybe we can hit on all of them in discussion)

The Owens in Zambia, circa late 1970s.

AS.100.369: Ecocide in Vietnam?

Having read this week's texts and comparing them to texts from the Panama Canal Zone, Philippines occupation, and the early Cold War, how have attitudes changed among some American scientists towards the uses of military power, the imperative of technological solutions, and the relationship of human beings with nature? Let's speculate on what might have been driving these changes. Is the use of the term "ecocide" itself significant of a broader transformation in American environmental consciousness by the end of the 1960s and early 1970s?

AS.100.369: Unleashing the Insect War

Having read various views of the American war on insects from 1944 to 1962, what do you think ultimately was behind the war--i.e. what motivations or values propelled these relentless campaigns of extermination? Did Americans just flat out hate "bugs" during the period? Or was there something else going on here? Other thoughts? 

AS.100.369: Bodily Trophies and Hunting Metaphors

I thought you guys might find this recent Rolling Stone article about the ongoing investigation into a "rogue" platoon in Afghanistan useful for what we've been considering in class. It's a fascinating piece of reporting, although it does raise some important questions: 1) The author does not necessarily delve into the broader racial and cultural assumptions that might have guided the conduct of this particular unit, so I do wonder how deep-seated ideologies and social patterns at home before deployment influenced decision-making on the battlefield. 2) The first question might help us dissect what we think about the U.S. military's assertion that this was a "rogue" platoon and not symptomatic of a deeper problem among frontline troops in Afghanistan--thoughts?  3) What responsibility does the home front have when we learn about these types of atrocities?

AS.100.369: Roosevelt Invents the Big Game Safari

Teddy Roosevelt: After three days on safari, have yet to take quinine--real American men should go into the tropics without any anti-malarial protection. I firmly believe a sound immune system is the sign of sound physical rigor and moral character.   (May 1, 1909 at 7:43 a.m.)

Teddy Roosevelt: Feeling feverish. Probably just the heat. (May 2, 1909 at 1:37 p.m.)

Teddy Roosevelt: Laying down for just a moment to regain my strength. (May 2, 1909 at 6:12 p.m.)

Teddy Roosevelt: Vomited. (May 2, 1909 at 6:15 p.m.)

AS.100.369: Corporate Colonialism Over the Natural World

 To start this week's blogpost, let's go back to my "Aliens"(1986) reference. Considering that most of you looked at me like I was crazy when I mentioned the film, I thought I would provide a link to the trailer.

It's great. Sigourney Weaver as the heroine, caught between a vicious alien species and corporate lackeys only interested in harnessing and weaponizing this new organism. Bill Paxton's role as the paranoid Colonial Marine is also memorable. But I digress....

As I mentioned in class, the premise of the film is that "The Company" establishes a mining colony on a distant planet with the insidious goals of exposing their colonist-employees to a new, unknown organism. Once the Company loses contact with its colony, it requests help from the Colonial Marine Corps, with Weaver's character as a reluctant adviser (she had previous experiences with these creatures in the prequel). The Marines go in and hilarity ensues.....turns out the Company is just trying to obtain an alien for their own research and development purposes at the expense of hundreds of lives. Below is a quote that might be a good jumping off place for our readings this week:

Burke (corporate lackey): [Discussing the alien organisms] Look, those two specimens are worth millions to the bio-weapons division. Now, if you're smart, we can both come out of it as heroes and we'll be set up for life.
Ripley (Sigourney Weaver's character): You're crazy Burke, you know that? You really think that you can get a dangerous organism like that past ICC quarantine?
Burke: How can they impound it if they don't know about it?
Ripley: You know, Burke, I don't know which species is worse. You don't see them [screwing] each other over for a [damn] percentage.

Now yes, "Aliens" might be a stretch for our purposes (and yes, don't worry, "Aliens" will not be on the exam), but the idea of the "Company" and its cold, calculating logic that Ripley refers to does relate to the problems of corporate colonialism over the natural world. With the last two week's of readings in mind, do American corporate interests utilize "percentage" logic to rationalize their operations or do they try to conceive of their operations in higher, moral terms? Of course, please share any other thoughts or questions you might have. Thanks everyone.

AS.100.369: Bananas, United Fruit, and "Negro Management"

Hey guys, a couple of items here just to help you with the shortened lecture from this week.

First of all, I am posting a link to a "New Yorker" article that Julia Nick found and is a great example of some of the contemporary implications of the material we have been considering. If you have problems with the link, I have also posted the article by Mike Peed, entitled "We Have No Bananas," on blackboard. Thanks Julia!
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/01/10/110110fa_fact_peed


Per Amy's question in class about the pathology of Panama disease, I thought it would be useful if I offered a better explanation for how the disease spreads through banana crops. Below is historian John Soluri's summary of how the disease operates:


"The soil-borne fusaria fungi associated with Panama disease entered banana plants via root structures and traveled up vascular tissues to the leaves. Infected foliage turned yellow-brown before wilting. Severely diseases plants seldom produced healthy fruit, if they produced any at all. Spores released into the soil from decaying plant tissues germinated when they came into contact with the roots of neighboring plants, thereby spreading the disease in a radical pattern throughout fields. The expansion of continuously cropped Gros Michel monocultures accelerated the pathogen's advance by sharply increasing host density on a microlevel. In addition, the movements of irrigation and drainage waters, trains, migrant workers, and roving animals all facilitated the farm-to-farm spread of the fungi." 

As Erin brought up the issue of flooding and Australian agriculture, I would probably add flooding as another lethal ingredient in the spread of the disease.

 (These two cross sections of healthy and disease banana rootstocks offer a good sense of how the disease infects the plant)

Now, just to provide a few examples of how United Fruit utilized Jim Crow "Negro Management" on its banana biofactories:

• Many of United Fruit's managers, who hailed from New England, held their own firm convictions about race, labor, and the tropical world: They assumed that West Indian black workers had the physical attributes and constitutions to withstand the diseases and climate of the tropics
• There was strict labor segmentation—whites held managerial positions while blacks were pressed into heavy plantation and stevedore labor
• Whites received monthly salaries while workers of color were paid by the task--a point of constant tension about the laborers
•  Medical attention and mosquito control was uneven, as ailments plaguing black workers were rarely addressed by United Fruit medical staff—diseases such as pneumonia and tuberculosis were common, but were not attributed to poor housing or nutrition, but the misguided belief that blacks were more racially susceptible to respiratory diseases
• All social and working spaces were constructed along the color line, which was reflective of racial segregation patterns that were becoming common in the American public sphere
• Many observers feared that Jim Crow labor actually encouraged racial violence, as murders and reprisals were common across the color line--the occasional lynching was favored by United Fruit managers (which they incited through economically dislocated "Ladinos") to keep West Indian laborers in line  

AS.100.369: Colonial Public Health and the Diseases of Venus

If we consider the age-old cliche that prostitution is "the oldest profession in the world" and that prostitution evolved alongside American urban spaces and social institutions during the nineteenth century, what do we think is behind all of the concern about prostitution in the colonies during the early twentieth century? Thinking about the readings and the lectures, consider the role of the tropical environment in shaping American understandings of prostitution. Did the moral crusaders and the public health experts reinforce veneral diseases as unique products of the colonial environment or did they advocate that these were diseases that transcend geography and cross the great reaches of the American empire? Of course, any other thoughts or questions you might have are appreciated.

AS.100.369: The Panama Canal Zone and the Conquest of the Tropics

Let's talk hypotheticals. Let's say, hypothetically speaking, it's the year 1915, the Panama Canal has just been completed, and I'm a self-identified white Anglo-Saxon from a middle-class background. I have some disposable income and would like to go on holiday for both therapeutic reasons and as an expression of my new found affluence. I've heard some interesting stories about the tropics, and having read one article by Blakeslee and a book by Woodruff, I'm thoroughly confused. The tropics seem both terrifying for white men, but also full of potential with the successful completion of the canal. As my travel agent and having also read both works, what would you recommend?

[N.B. This is a student exercise. The views and opinions expressed by the students are not their own, but based off their interpretations of primary sources from the early twentieth century and how they imagine certain individuals from that period would express their own ideology in certain historical contexts.] 

AS.100.369: Managing the Philippine Environment

The image below of Governor-General of the Philippines (and later U.S. President), William Howard Taft, sitting on top of a water buffalo actually served an important ideological project--visualizing the American subjugation of its newest colonial possessions (or it could just be Taft sitting on top of an unfortunate water buffalo--we could debate that). Often, economic exploitation and management of natural resources requires ideological imperatives that sustain this colonial extraction process. After reading the B.I.A.'s "Official Handbook of the Philippines" can you locate certain American ideological imperatives in rationalizing the study and extraction of Philippine nature? What purposes might these rationales serve? Of course, any other questions and thoughts are welcome as well.

Welcome to AS.100.369: "The American Earth"

Welcome everyone! Please post to let me know that you were able to access the blog with no problems. And if you wouldn't mind, please share why you signed up for this course, any of your particular areas of interests that may be related to the course, and perhaps what you hope to gain by taking this course.

HIST300A: Protecting Elephants in the Age of Eco-Tourism

So, I guess I will jump off the subtitle of the article: Did American conservationists in Africa go too far? Thoughts on this question or any other issues this article raises?

While on the topic of humans, who feel personal connections with wildlife, an email that was circulated to me a few years back should help lighten the mood on this topic. The email was entitled, "An Incredible Story":

In 1986, Peter Davies was on holiday in Kenya after graduating from Illinois Wesleyan University.

On a hike through the bush, he came across a young bull elephant standing with one leg raised in the air.  The elephant seemed distressed, so Peter approached it very carefully.

 He got down on one knee, inspected the elephant's foot, and found a large piece of wood deeply embedded in it.  As carefully and as gently as he could, Peter worked the wood out with his knife, after which the elephant gingerly put down its foot.  The elephant turned to face the man, and with a rather curious look on its face, stared at him for several tense moments.  Peter stood frozen, thinking of nothing else but being trampled.  Eventually the elephant trumpeted loudly, turned, and walked away.  Peter never forgot that elephant or the events of that day.

 Twenty years later, Peter was walking through the Chicago Zoo with his teenaged son.  As they approached the elephant enclosure, one of the creatures turned and walked over to near where Peter and his son Cameron were standing.  The large bull elephant stared at Peter, lifted its front foot off the ground, then put it down. The elephant did that several times then trumpeted loudly, all the while staring at the man.

Remembering the encounter in 1986, Peter could not help wondering if this was the same elephant.  Peter summoned up his courage, climbed over the railing, and made his way into the enclosure.  He walked right up to the elephant and stared back in wonder.  The elephant trumpeted again, wrapped its trunk around one of Peter legs and slammed him against the railing, killing him instantly.

 Probably wasn't the same elephant.

HIST300F: In the Nam

Does the American war in Vietnam offer us historical continuity when we think about the other imperialisms we've considered (i.e. what patterns appear similar)? Or is it a moment of rupture in American imperial history?

HIST300A: Making a War on Nature

After reading the various articles, what might be behind this "war on nature"? What social and cultural transformations in the postwar period enable this seemingly reckless use of pesticides and defoliants? Frankly speaking, why are 1950s Americans obsessed with pest control?

HIST300F: Visualizing American Power in the Pacific

By 1943, the U.S. military went on the offensive against Japanese forces in the Pacific and in doing so, began the process of amassing the most powerful military force in human history. Never before in history had a single nation been able to project so much combined sea, air, and land power. 

Beginning in 1944 and through 1945, the American Museum of Modern Art in New York City hosted a photographic exhibition entitled,  “Power in the Pacific.” 

Image 1. Opening of the "Power in the Pacific" Exhibition at MOMA, 1944.

Edward Steichen, a renowned American modernist photographer, had been placed in command of all naval combat photography--called the Naval Aviation Photographic Unit-- during the Pacific War, the result being this very popular exhibition. Steichen was in command of dozens of photographers who were stationed on board naval vessels, with naval aviators, and with Marines engaging in amphibious warfare. The photographs, some as large as six feet tall,  were brought together to demonstrate how American technology empowered ideology, the conviction of U.S. power and victory, the grit and determination of the individual, and the male body at war on the ocean.

Image 2. Steichen at work, on board the U.S.S. Lexington, 1943.

The introduction to the exhibition read as follows:

            “Here is the war in the western seas, and here are the men who fight it…Yesterday these men were boys; today they are seasoned warriors. Yesterday the airplanes were but lines on a thousand blueprints, today they sting the air with death, and shake the earth with blastings. Yesterday the ships lay stacked in piles of shapeless metal; today they cleave the trackless sea, belching steel and brimstone against the slimy swamps, the mountain caves, the jungle.”  

Below are select photographs that resulted from this project. 

I. Power.

From the images below, how might technology empower ideology? To what extent can we locate a technological fanaticism through wartime images such as these? (Along the lines of Adas' formulations) 

Image 3. Amassing the Fleet at Ulithi Atoll, 1945.

Image 4. Aircraft operations on board the U.S.S. Lexington, 1943.

Image 5. Divebombers circling over the U.S.S. Hornet, 1945.

Image 6. Nighttime action, date unknown.

II. Heterosocial behavior and the visualization of the male body at war. 

How might these images showcase "proper" masculinity in the context of 1940s wartime?

Image 7. Exercise on board an aircraft carrier, date unknown.

Image 8. Servicemen Gerald Ford playing basketball on board the U.S.S. Monterey, 1944.

Image 9. Sailors enjoy downtime, date unknown.

Image 10. Celebrating after successful mission, date unknown.

III. Agony. 

Why did Steichen's unit also amass and display images that revealed the unsavory aspects of combat, such as the violence, the pain, the isolation, and the potential loss of hope?

Image 11. Crewmen lift wounded aviator, 1943.

Image 12. Crewmen tend to wounded comrade, date unknown.

Image 13. Coffee break for Eniwetok Marine survivors, 1944.

Image 14. Marines post sign after capturing Tarawa, 1943.

HIST300A: The Horrible Wonder of the Bomb

I want to get the discussion started off with a quote that Fiege uses from one of the nuclear scientists. Isidor Rabi explained, "Physicists are the Peter Pans of the human race. They never grow up, and they keep their curiosity."

What is your reaction to this formulation of scientists? Is Rabi's view of the imaginative power of scientists and their inherent innocence simply trivializing the deeper moral implications of the work of the Manhattan Project? For instance, Rachel Carson normally got lost in the wonder of nature as a child, yet her imagination took her on a very different path, shaped by her sense of morality and protecting humanity.

Or is it not so black and white? By shedding light on this overlooked side of the atomic scientists, what is Fiege trying to do?

HIST300F: Exposing the Occupation of Haiti

Exposes of American imperialism for the purposes of undermining it preceded the Marines' occupation of Haiti in 1915. Still, when we read the "Nation" articles on the occupation, what techniques are used to shed light on the brutality and corruption of the occupation? How might the anti-imperial messages of the articles  differ from the dominant anti-imperialist tropes of those who argued against the post-1898 colonies? How do we account for such differences?

In case you're interested, you may remember my references to the ongoing U.S. military investigation of the "rogue" platoon in Afghanistan, with numerous members being charged with war crimes. These criminal accusations include the premeditated murder of civilians, the planting of weapons on bodies to make them appear to be insurgents, the photographing of "trophy" kills, and the actual taking of body parts as trophies. "Rolling Stone" magazine finally published their investigative article on the war crimes and the cover-up. It's definitely worth reading, especially as we consider these wide-ranging issues of colonial violence, the notion of empire corrupting the morality of Americans overseas, and the public reaction to such revelations. Be advised though, the article, its images, and video are incredibly graphic.

HIST300A: Post-Discussion Thoughts on the Dust Bowl

The notable African-American intellectual, James Baldwin, wrote frequently during the middle of the twentieth century about the social processes by which the "new" immigrants gradually became American. In his estimation, the new immigrants were seduced by the allure of white supremacy as they increasingly loss contact with land and with community. Regimented into the disciplines of industrial work, and having loss previous forms of independence and intimate relationships with land and soil, the new immigrants found white supremacy as the ideal method to gain back the illusion of control in their lives. As Baldwin sees it, white supremacy itself became a confining "factory" for the new immigrants without them even knowing it.

I point to Baldwin's work because it offers us an interesting angle for understanding the social transformations that helped lead to the Dust Bowl in the Southern Plains. Notably, many observers have pointed to this late-nineteenth-century development of American laborers and farmers gradually losing their sense of independence and connections to the land as they were incorporated into industrial and wage-labor sectors. Karita had noted the "suitcase farmers"--who came to the Great Plains to exploit the land but not make a home there-- in her previous post and I want to expand on it here.

Did the farmers of the Southern Plains lose a connection with the land? If they did, as Baldwin suggests about the new immigrants, what did the farmers embrace in order to gain some measure of control over their lives? In the drive to overproduce in excess and overuse the land, did farmers lose a sense of having something more than just capital invested in the landscape? What happens when we, as human beings, only see the land as potential capital?

HIST300A: America's Dustbowl

Question: After reading Worster, to what extent do you believe the Dust bowl was an unnatural disaster? Was it inevitable or could it have been avoided?

HIST300F: On Safari with Teddy

Teddy Roosevelt: Now this is "roughing it." (link)

HIST300F: Visiting the Philippine Exposition

Stereotypical turn-of-the-century white newsman: This Philippine exposition is the bee's knees, the cat's meow of the whole fair I tells ya!!!  (June 1, 1904 at 2:34 p.m.)

Stereotypical turn-of-the-century white newsman (following race riot between U.S. marines and Filipino scouts): This is not fun. (July 7, 1904 at 3:33 p.m.)

HIST300A: Hornaday's Zoological Nativism

Stereotypical Italian Laborer: Nothing like taking a break from bricklaying by going to the Bronx Zoo. (Sept. 5, 1905 at 3:32 p.m.)

WT Hornaday: Go away. (Sept. 5, 1905 at 3:35 p.m.)

HIST300F: Degenerating in the Tropics

After reading the first half of Hoganson and Adas's chapter on the Philippines, both authors offered us examples of how war and empire offered opportunity to American men. After considering those examples, how does Hoganson reveal the rising domestic fears that empire corrupts and causes American men to degenerate? How does Huntington's work on the tropics further reinforce this early-twentieth-century view that the tropics were a corrupting force?

HIST300A: Roosevelt Invents the Big Game Safari

Teddy Roosevelt: After three days on safari, have yet to take quinine--real American men should go into the tropics without any anti-malarial protection. I firmly believe a sound immune system is the sign of sound physical rigor and moral character.   (May 1, 1909 at 7:43 a.m.)

Teddy Roosevelt: Feeling feverish. Probably just the heat. (May 2, 1909 at 1:37 p.m.)

Teddy Roosevelt: Laying down for just a moment to regain my strength. (May 2, 1909 at 6:12 p.m.)

Teddy Roosevelt: Annnnd I vomited. (May 2, 1909 at 6:15 p.m.)

HIST300F: Engineers for Empire

Free for all: Thoughts, comments, criticisms on Adas's chapter on the Philippines?

HIST300A: Pacifying the West

Free for all: Thoughts, questions, criticisms of Turner's ideas about the west and Jacoby's piece on Amerindian extermination?

HIST300A: Post-Lecture Thoughts on Bison Extinction

Hey guys-- If you have any other thoughts or issues that we didn't get to in discussion, please share.

One problem I did want to get to is the seeming contradiction of wildlife preservationism and its connections to tourism and business during the early twentieth century. Nicole brought this issue up per her blogpost and raised the question of how wildlife preservation could maintain its moral and ethical goals while also being profit-driven. We're going to talk more about this in the coming weeks, but it might be worth exploring now. Thoughts?

Additionally, Brian also raised the interesting issue of the desensitized nature to the killing of wildlife during the late nineteenth century. We talked a bit about this in class, but I'd like to hear more of your thoughts--how do individual perpetrators of bison destruction not feel remorse or some type of emotional impulse that troubles them? When and why do you think this begins to change?