Dear all, I won't apologize for my recent absence from the fiber optic channels that bring you my random musings on life out here. I wasn't here. I was on my (long delayed) honeymoon. But now I'm back and an article on the BBC caught my attention (you can find it here).
Let me summarize the article for you: UK scientists suggest that urban green spaces significantly improve the quality of peoples' lives. Now just because a group of scientists got something published doesn't mean that I put any weight in it. Scientific publishing is a joke. Science, in our 'modern' world is held up on a pedestal, but I'm sure you can find a published, peer-reviewed, scientific study that can contradict or disagree with any other scientific study. It's ridiculous. If you set the right parameters, you can find what you want. Regardless, this topic seemed to stick out to me, because the C seems to be waging a war on green spaces. I think I have mentioned before--and Emily Yeh recently has in her new book--that modern "green living" (as defined and ubiquitously advocated in propaganda) usually means living in concrete buildings in the absence of anything that actually naturally is the color green. It's amazing how they've been cramming ever larger numbers of people into smaller spaces, building ever upward, and destroying the environment at rapid rates while still trumpeting green living and crowing about their own greatness (for this last issue, just notice how many C leaders send their kids to school in the US, that's pretty telling… I know for a fact that the last two leaders of the country and several other high leaders sent their children to pursue post-secondary degrees in the states). Let's use Xining as an example. There are parks, but only a handful of them haven't been completely paved over. People aren't even allowed to walk on the green spaces that remain. I know middle schoolers who have never (let me repeat that, never) walked on grass. This is sad. Modernity doesn't have to mean the absence of green spaces, but it seems that modernity and nature are viewed as opposites in C's development framework. Nature is something to be conquered rather than something that can co-exist profitably with humans. More recently, C's newer whole-hearted (though poorly implemented and under-planned) ecological conservation projects has meant further exerting control. I'm digressing from the original topic, but it's worth mentioning: pastoralists have been removed from their land in the name of grassland conservation, but removing herders and their livestock from the land actually hurts the grassland quality. Herds eat grass, but that only prepares the land for new grass, their manure fertilizes re-growth; without these, grasslands are actually deteriorating further necessitating state and scientific intervention. Vicious cycle. Urbanization is not inherently bad, but C's version of it, with its utter obliteration of natural green spaces just depresses me, as the BBC predicts.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
About TimAs you can see elsewhere on this webpage, I conduct research on ethnic minorities in western China. This blog offers semi-academic musings on the minutiae of daily life out here--the sort of information otherwise destined for footnotes. Categories |