A claim for justice: The gang-rape case in Rio de Janeiro and the Pakistani parliament

The planet earth was fortunate to host important spiritual leaders throughout its long journey of around 4,5 billion years. Detached from any religious standpoint, I would like to bring an opening remark with a saying of one of them as he is the “closest” to me in terms of upbringing and energetic connection. However, I’m sure I could easily use any other example coming from another sacred leader as it would have the very same intention. Anyway, it is reported that Jesus taught us that if someone hits us on one cheek, the ideal response is to offer the other one as a sign of goodness, forgiveness and as a way to stop the violence chain: if we respond violence with violence we perpetuate a web of aggressions and discord, which is true.

Being capable to genuinely act under this teaching is – perhaps – the ultimate stage of benevolence and spiritual evolution one can achieve and I must acknowledge how much road I still have to go in order to get a little close to that*. Not that I tend to respond violence with equally violent attitudes, but I become so outraged with injustice that it poisons and corrodes my soul as acid rain to the point that it suffocates me.

What happened in Rio de Janeiro – which unfortunately is an illustration of what happens in a daily basis in many corners of the world and we just don’t know about it, or know and don’t give much attention, such as the horrible cases in India and all the captive women under the control of ISIS and Boko Haram terrorists groups – represents the worst of human beings. This week, around 30 men doped up and gang-raped an adolescent of 16 years old in Rio de Janeiro. If the coward and barbarian act wasn’t enough, they also posted a video and images of the grotesque scene on the social media with comments that are peculiar to this type of human creature. What is equally horrifying, terrifying, paralyzing, tormenting and worrisome (sorry, I can’t find enough adjectives) is the fact that this post received many “likes”, support notes and some people even expressed amusement through smiling expressions at the images and comments. I am trying to make myself believe they didn’t understand this was a real thing as a way to “alleviate” my consternation.

I must admit that what I write here is mostly based on what the media and my friends reported after their own investigation because after reading a small news piece I refused to go in depth of it, most especially to see this infamous video and images (which I hope is already taken out of the internet).

Right after this utterly disturbing news, I hear that the Pakistani parliament is working to pass a bill that will allow men to beat their wives. They claim this “right” for women’s disobedience and refusal to have sex (!!).

I honestly ask myself what went wrong with mankind (with noble exceptions, of course). And the gender issue depicted here is just one fraction of all the problems human beings have been causing in all spheres. When I recall what Jesus said is because I simply can’t look at these evil perpetrators and offer my other cheek. I don’t respond aggression with violence (important to highlight that I speak from a passive standpoint to all the above mentioned examples), but I hope and claim for justice on behalf of this helpless teenager and of all women out there who are subjugated in a daily basis as a result of a sexist, patriarchal and phallocentric society. I have no doubt Jesus’ teachings are all about justice as well and not just goodness – a much better justice and one we can’t fully comprehend, for sure.

Enough of feeling that being born as a woman is a punishment. Punishment for what, exactly?

*It is highly important to clarify that my intention in this entry is definitely NOT to make an apology or incitement to violent reactions, but purely justice as the feeling and certainty of impunity is exactly what motivates gangs like these ones to act so fearless and boldness.

Recent Terrorist Attacks

We have been bombarded by the terrorism news since a long while, but every new episode seems to cause the very same dismay and powerless feeling. What I don’t understand is why some of them get more media’s – as well as world community’s – attention, importance and consternation than others.  I am not suggesting that those that get more audience should have less. I am just trying to figure out why we tend to “value” some in a higher extent. Would it be the city where it happens? Would it be the type of society hit by it? Would it be due to a personal connection? Would certain people suffer less than others? Would pain have different meaning for different people?

December 16^th, 2014: Peshawar school, in Pakistan, is a victim of a terrorist attack, leaving 141 dead, 132 of them children.

January 7^th, 2015: office of the Charlie Hebdo magazine, France, is attacked by 3 terrorists, leaving 12 dead.

Sympathies aside, it is possible that some people have not heard of the first happening in Pakistan, reinforcing my concerns.

Nothing justifies a terrorist attack, regardless its magnitude. What happened in these two episodes, as well as all the others that happen every single day around the globe, should be repudiated by all means. All the worldwide support Charlie Hebdo magazine has been receiving is touching and it shows that – perhaps – there are more people out there willing to defend a non-violent society than those who perpetrates violence.

One thing that I would like to bring here regarding the whole Charlie Hebdo happening is the following: as heinous as the events are (and there is no shadow of doubts they really are), it bothers me to see the interpretation society gives to freedom of speech and freedom of expression. Freedom implies responsibility and – in my point of view – the respect for differences should come first than my right to say or do whatever I feel like. Let me explain:

i)               Brazil recently witnessed some of its Southern people posting deeply offensive things in their facebook pages regarding their Northern countrymen, either because a Southern soccer team lost a match for a Northern one, or because the elected president had a higher support from people in the Northeast. These people were legally tracked and some of them were formally prosecuted;

ii)             Saying that a person is not welcomed due to the color of their skin is a crime and will, most certainly, be punished. This is officially called racism;

iii)            Homophobia and Anti-Semite expressions are hatred crimes, which are not tolerated by society nowadays

Would one have the right to advocate that these people are just exercising their right of free speech or freedom of expression? Satire can indeed be funny, but to whom? I love satire too, but the problem is when it becomes offensive and disrespectful. The main point is that most of the times we don’t know/realize when it becomes offensive if we are not emotionally involved in the addressed theme. When it comes to people’s creeds, beliefs and faiths this may lead to inflammatory resentment levels. Among other published things by Charlie Hebdo and taking just one cartoon as an example, using the word “shit” while referring to the Quran may sound funny for just a few.

Respecting differences (no matter where they come from) is a way to look for peace in a world so thirsty for wars.

Palm Oil

Half the world is discussing palm oil related problems, while the other half is asking themselves what’s with this palm tree that is so important and creates so much negative buzz worldwide.

The fact is that this ingredient (either palm oil or palm kernel oil) is present in about 50% of what you buy/use in a daily basis: it is in your food, in your cosmetics, fuels, in your toiletries and so on. You might not see it on the labels, because it is often “hidden” behind synonyms or it comes inside another described raw material, but it is there.

Why is it so loved? It is said that palm oil is a very productive crop compared to similar ones, meaning that it produces more oil per hectare than any other substitute (RSPO* states that this palm tree needs less than half the land required by other crop to produce the same amount of oil); it excels in cooking characteristics, because it maintains its properties even under high temperatures; its special texture and absence of smell make it a perfect ingredient for several products; and it has a natural preservative effect, extending the life of products on the shelves;

Why then is there so much buzz?

It all begins in the rainforest, but let’s go through a few facts before exploring the answer:

-       In 2013, 59.6m metric tones of palm oil were produced;

-       Global production has doubled in the last decade and it is supposed to double again by 2020;

-       Expansion of emerging markets (especially in the most populous ones) is the driving force behind the increasing demand;

-       The largest producers of palm oil nowadays are in Asia. The main one is Indonesia (33.5m metric tones a year), the second largest is Malaysia (20.35m metric tones), the third one is Thailand (2.25m MT a year). Then it comes Colombia (1.02m MT a year) and Nigeria (0.93m MT a year), followed by others;

-       The largest consumers are: India (8.80m MT a year), China (6.60m MT a year), European Union (6.30m MT a year), Pakistan (2.65m MT a year), United States (1.41m MT a year), Bangladesh/Egypt (1.30m MT a year) followed by several others;

-       From 59.6m MT produced in 2013, only 5.4m MT were sold as certified sustainable palm oil.

Having said that, the following are the problems associated to the oil production:

-       Palm tree plantations in Southeast Asia have tripled in the last decade causing a high rate of deforestation in the main producers countries. The real numbers vary, but the World Resources Institute estimates that Indonesia alone has lost 6m hectares of primary forest (an area half the size of England) from 2000 to 2012;

-       GHG emission – clearing down the forest releases a high level of carbon dioxide and methane, which contributes to the global warming;

-       It has been causing habitat and biodiversity loss in the region, putting certain species in high extinction risk (local orangutans have become the flagship for sustainable palm oil campaigns);

-       Communities destruction and displacement along Indonesia and Malaysia to open space for plantation;

-       Destruction of other crop yields.

Several companies, from different business sectors, have been looking for certified palm oil production and some even claim to have their entire supply covered by responsible sourcing. The main question is if our insatiable appetite for products will allow a truly sustainable value chain, meaning: can 59.6m MT of palm oil be provided within the best practices? Besides, would exchanging crop be the solution considering that the very same problems could be applied to the next (equally) demanded oil production?

This is something to think about every time we buy toothpastes, ice creams, margarines, fried foods, soaps, body lotions, shampoos, lipsticks, etc. The main point is not necessarily to stop buying them, but to make better shopping decisions (if possible) and being knowledgeable about our consumption habits impacts.

*Roundtable Sustainable Palm Oil

Sources:

The Guardian – EU labelling changes force industry action on palm oil

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2014/dec/12/eu-labelling-changes-palm-oil-consumer-change

The Guardian – From rainforest to your cupboard: the real story of palm oil – interactive

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/ng-interactive/2014/nov/10/palm-oil-rainforest-cupboard-interactive?CMP=new_1194

RSPO – About Sustainable palm oil

http://www.rspo.org/consumers/about-sustainable-palm-oil

Photo credits: The Guardian website

Malaysia airlines accidents

A flying airplane is something that has always puzzled and amazed me since I was a child. I remember staring them in the skies and asking myself how on earth something so huge and heavy was capable to fly. Since then, I look at it with profound admiration and devote my sincere respect for aviation engineering.

In my opinion, airplanes are some of the few things that best represent connectivity, cutting edge technology and evolution. Thus, as stressful as airports can be, as uncomfortable as a long flight can be, I’ve always faced them as a symbol of new discoveries, connection, a borderless world, unforgivable vacations… hence: happiness.

Needless to say that when I hear about airplane crashes, it devastates me in ways words can’t explain. Mostly, of course, due to the commotion of losing so many lives at once, but also because it represents a flaw of what I consider an impeccable advanced and sophisticated engineering system.

The recent tragedies of the Malaysian airlines have been resonating non-stop in my mind. Both cases are tremendously worrisome: one for still being a complete conundrum and the other for being the direct result of mankind’s stupidity. Shooting down an aircraft passenger (even if mistook by a military one) is so repulsive that causes the deepest dismay even in insensitive hearts. Not checking what type of plane was crossing the air space before activating a missile makes it intentional. Seeing the greatest symbol of a world without borders being shot down due to primitive borders conflict does really consternate me.

I wonder if we humans have learned anything from history. Sometimes I doubt it because I keep seeing us repeating the same mistakes again and again. And considering the amount of information we have on hands nowadays, as well as the stage of human development we should have reached on the year 2014of the 21^st century, attitudes like this are too pre-historical to be accepted (to say the least).

Acknowledging the human being ignorance that still reigns, I express my sincere condolences and sentiments to the families and friends who lost their loved ones.

May these souls rest in peace.

Food

It is expected that by the time we reach the year 2050, the world population will increase about 35% based on current numbers. The huge concern when it comes to food supply is that to feed a population of 9 billion people, crop production will need to double. One of the main reasons for that is associated to the economic prosperity the developing world has been experiencing, which led them to eat more, especially more meat. According to the National Geographic magazine, the increase in the per capita daily protein demand will be revolving 15.3% in the developed countries, while in the emerging ones it is supposed to be around 103.6%.

Agriculture poses several challenges to the environment: it is among the greatest greenhouse gases emitters (due to the release of methane gas by cattle and forest clearing to grow crops/livestock, to name a few reasons); it is – by far – the industry that requires more water supply to operate; it is associated to the acceleration of biodiversity loss; and the constant use of fertilizers and pesticides may cause irreparable damages to nearby groundwater, rivers and community.

The pressuring demand for meat will require not only more livestock availability (including more land for it), but also an increase in crops (mostly corn and soybeans) to feed the cattle, pigs and chickens the planet will be requiring. Here lies one of the main reasons why we will need to double the amount of crop by 2050. This also fuels another debate about organic versus conventional agriculture. The former argues that small (organic) farmers are capable to increase yields in ways that would help meet the world demand, while the latter advocates that only modern agriculture techniques such as mechanization, irrigation, chemicals and improved genetics will be the answer to fill the demand blanks.

I don’t intend to point fingers to the right or wrong here. My intention is to raise the awareness for the fact that achieving sustainable agriculture may become increasingly harder and also to ask my fellows a few important questions: do we really need that much food (especially meat) on our plates everyday? Do we need food portions as big as the ones offered by restaurants nowadays? Should the increase in income lead people to eat more or eat better? Does better mean more? I personally think it is absurd that an increase in 35% of population will require 100% more food. Another absurd is to accept the huge food portions we are getting lately as a normal thing. I would go for a campaign of charging me half the price for a half the size meal.

Let’s think about that for a while and try not to be part of those who will demand 100% more food. Maybe by doing so, in 2050 we will prove wrong the statistics we foresee now.

Source: National Geographic Magazine, May edition 2014.

Historical Personality - Socrates

Socrates

Only a few personalities in history enchant me as much as Socrates. He had some of the character traits I value the most: lightness of soul, bravery, simplicity, humility and the assumption that “all I know is I know nothing”.

Philosophical writings report that Socrates, since very little, tirelessly dedicated himself to what he considered his mission: to dialog with people. But they were dialogues in which he asked more about things he heard than provided elucidation. The rationale behind it was that the questions would lead the interlocutor to analyze their own convictions. By doing so, he put into question several alleged “talents” and unfounded sapience reputations. For those who accepted to submit themselves to the socratic dialogues, acknowledging their own ignorance regarding something could mean a “conscience renaissance”.

Once, after a prolonged conversation with a local personality, who considered himself a wisdom model, Socrates told him that he (the interlocutor) presumed to be wise, but he was not. Socrates then became hated by most of those present in the occasion. His conclusion about that is the following: “I am wiser than this man; it is highly probable that none of us knows anything, but he supposes to know something and he does not; while I, if I don’t know, I don’t suppose to know either. It seems, then, that I am a little bit wiser than him for not assuming to know what I don’t know”.
 
Accused for not accepting the State’s gods, for introducing new ones and for subverting the young, Socrates is judged and convicted. He never denied his words and attitudes in order to change the opinion of the tribunal. On the opposite, he proclaimed to those who were suppose to judge him: “I have no occupation, other than trying to persuade you all, old and young, to focus less on your bodies and goods and more on the perfection of your souls. Also, in telling you that virtue does not come from wealth or from what you consider useful, either in the public or the private life. If, by doing so, I am subverting the young, there is not much I can do; but if someone states that I say otherwise, they’re lying”.

Socrates refused to make any kind of concession, even to pay the fine for his freedom, because that would be endorsing the guilt that was denied by his own consciousness. About the death penalty Socrates said: “If death is the extinction of all sorts of feelings and if it resembles one of those sleep mode where we see nothing, not even while dreaming, then dying is a wonderful gain (…) On the other hand, if death is like a passage from here to somewhere else and if it is true, as some advocate, that it is there where the dead get together, can we, dear judges, imagine anything better?”

When he declined the support of his friends to escape the prison, he said: “The only thing that matter is to live honestly and without committing injustices, not even in retaliation for a perpetrated injustice”. 

When the jailer brought him the hemlock (a highly poisonous plant), he took it in a single swig, telling your friends afterwards: “Everything must end with words of good augury. Remain, then, serene and strong”

*Born in Athens in 470 (or 469) B.C. and died in 399 B.C.
Source: The Thinkers Collection – Nova Cultural (Socrates)

Clean Energy - Coal

The recent tragedy in a coal mine in Turkey, causing the death of more than 300 workers, put – one more time – the problems associated with the mining activity under the spotlight.

Large scale energy generation will always be inevitably linked to social and environmental impacts. Even the so-called “cleaner” power production, like the hydropower, takes its toll over adjacent communities and the overall ecosystem. A few alternatives of energy generation, like coal, are so detrimental that it deserves our deepest concern and consternation. The problem, however, is that the current insatiable appetite for energy doesn’t leave much room for improvement.

Among all the fossil fuels, coal is – by far – the dirtiest and – by all means – the cheapest. The planet burns eight billion tons of this resource a year and 40 percent of the world’s electricity comes from it.

Coal is responsible for 39 to 44 percent of the global CO₂ emissions (in 2012, the world emitted 34.5 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide from fossil fuels). The most worrisome information, though, is that the world coal consumption keeps stubbornly moving up, mostly in emerging industrialized countries, such as India and China. China alone increased its consumption from 1.5 billion tons in 2000 to 3.8 billion tons in 2011.

Coal business causes enormous negative externalities, but no one pays the monetary price for that: neither consumers, nor emitters. The intangible price, however, is borne by the planet as a whole. Thousands of people die a year in coal mines and various more perish due to polluted air. Only in China, it is reported that the filthy air is linked to 1.2 million deaths a year.

Mitigation alternatives, such as carbon capture and storage (literally injecting it underground under conditions that deter leaks), can be such a complex and costly process that no one expects it to be mandatory unless it becomes financially viable.

Another serious issue is that work conditions on any regular underground mine are extremely unsound and insalubrious per se. To make things worse, there are several mines around the world that are not even regulated by local governments, subjecting workers to all sorts of irregularities, including child labor, which causes profound distress if we consider that work in such mines may diminish one’s life expectancy. The ordinary work ambience in the underground is confined, arduous, highly flammable and after a few years of exposure, workers are commonly affected by a disease called pneumoconiosis, which derives from the inhalation of poisonous gases and dust, that can be lethal.

Knowledge, technology and resources that could help making the power generation business cleaner and safer abound. The only thing missing seems to be good will to make them financially viable. Considering that the consequences of persisting on the bad practices are global, it seems reasonable to address the problem in a collective/global standpoint. The planet and their people ask for help.

Sources:

- National Geographic Magazine, April 2014

- A Segurança em Minas de Carvão Agindo na Prevenção da Pneumoconiose – Região Carbonífera de Santa Catarina http://www.bib.unesc.net/biblioteca/sumario/000028/000028C9.pdf