Beekeepers have reported the loss of over 500 million honey bees in the short time span of three months at the beginning of the year. The speed and scale of the loss is reminiscent of colony collapse disorder, which affected the bees of North America and Europe. However, where colony collapse disorder caused worker bees to leave the colony and never return, the bees in Brazil simply dropped dead, a symptom indicative of poisoning by pesticide (Hanson 2019).  It has been argued that “the main cause of death for these bees has been the use of pesticides containing products that are banned in Europe, such as neonicotinoids and fipronil” (“Why 500 Million Bees Have Died in Brazil” 2019). The EU has imposed bans on neonicotinoids due to the harm they can cause bees; however, much like how the “relaxation of forestry rules has led to more fires, so have loosened pesticide restrictions exposed more bees to lethal doses” (Hanson 2019). Brazil relies on pesticides as their economy is almost entirely dependent on agriculture.

The massive bee die off is problematic not only with regards to the economy of Brazil but also to global food availability. Bee pollinated crops account for nearly a third of the food in the human diet, and “yields of everything from canola to soybeans drop in their absence, while fruits and nuts like blueberries and almonds depend upon them entirely” (Hanson 2019). Additionally, while people may only think of the typical honeybee when the word bee is mentioned, the same threats that affect honeybees also affect native wild bees which are also essential pollinators for many crops. Thus, “whenever domestic hives start failing, it signals a much broader problem in nature” (Hanson 2019). 

The article concludes by arguing that many of the challenges affecting Brazil, with both its bees and forest, is poor policy. It also argues that in a democracy “government policy amounts to an expression of collective will” and that people should demand more from their leaders as well as themselves (Hanson 2019). In Brazil, there has been an increase in demand for organic food, which is reflected in a global trend for the same. Hanson argues that “it’s a reminder that how we buy food directly impacts the way that we grow it, and organic methods…support a far greater diversity of pollinators” (2019). Hanson ends with a call to arms to plant flowers as “pesticide-free sources of nectar and pollen can increase bee abundance in any habitat..and since well-fed bees are more resilient to other threats, flowers can even be a hedge against pesticides” (2019). He concludes that the first step to solving the crisis is noticing that it exists, and the second step is taking action to solve and prevent the problem. 

While the title of the article makes it seem like Brazil will be the main focus of the article, the actual body of the article focuses more on the problem of bee population drop globally. The article mentions why Brazil specifically has seen such massive losses in bee population; however, it does not specifically mention how that has directly affected Brazil and its people or economy. It is interesting that the article mentions how global food availability and trade is affected by the drop in bee population, but it does not state how Brazil specifically contributes to the trade. It would have been more interesting if the article had gone into detail on how the drop in bee population has affected Brazil’s agriculture and from there how that may affect the food that is exported to other parts of the globe. It is also interesting to note that the author of the article, Thor Hanson, is also the author of Buzz: The Nature and Necessity of Bees. This may have affected how he wrote the article as he is more likely focused on the global issue of bee population depletion rather than how it affects a specific area. 

This connects to the themes we have discussed in class regarding the economic structure of Latin America. Both readings and class discussions have discussed how many Latin American countries rely on agriculture as their main source of income. Thus, this article is important as it addresses a major threat to what may be the only source of income for some countries. This also connects to some of the themes we have discussed regarding government systems of Latin American countries. The article mentions how most of the bee loss is due to bad policy on behalf of the government. This connects to the themes of the class with regards to how these governments have been put into place and what factors have affected the way they are run in modern times.    

References

Hanson, Thor. 2019. “Why Have 500 Million Bees Died in Brazil in the Past Three Months? | Thor Hanson.” The Guardian, August 29, 2019, sec. Opinion. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/29/500-million-bees-brazil-three-months.

“Why 500 Million Bees Have Died in Brazil.” 2019. BBC News. August 20, 2019. https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-49406369.

FARC Announces a Call To Arms Against the Columbian Government

In 2016, Columbian President Juan Manuel Santos created an accord that was supposed to see the end of a half century long bloodbath, a plan that earned him a Nobel Peace Award. With the entry of new President, Ivan Duque, elected on June 17th, his ability to hold up the accord, or correctly implement the mechanisms detailed within is contested, aggravated by his platform for the election being the complete overhaul of the deal. On Thursday, August 29th The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia, from here on out referred to as FARC, publicly announced their condemnation of the centrist president and vowed to take up arms against the government. Much of the outrage stems from the murders of hundreds of leftist activists and rebels following their demobilization in accordance with the peace deal. The perspective of the FARC is shown in the video posted below which features Luciano Marin and several armed guerrilla warriors declaring their dismay with the current political climate, citing that they signed the “accord in Havana we did so with the conviction that it was possible to change the life of the most humble and dispossessed,” (Marin, 0:00:19-0:00:24).

https://time.com/5664323/farc-rebels-colombia-government/

Later on in the long video, filmed as a call to arms to the Columbian people, he argues that “the state hasn’t fulfilled its most important obligation, which is to guarantee the life of its citizens and especially avoid assassinations for political reasons” (Goodman, Marin) referencing the frustration over politically based killings. While President Duque is a self-proclaimed centrist, Marin describes him as a conservative, displaying the subjectiveness of political leanings, as well as demonstrating just how far left the FARC considers themselves to be. Joining the fray is the ELN, the National Liberation Army, an even more radical organization who began to emerge as the FARC demobilized for a time. “They expressed their support of the declaration by releasing their own video filmed along a river in Colombia’s western jungles” (Goodman). Such proclamations have not gone unnoticed, and the Columbian government has insisted upon the arrest of the rebel leaders, as well as calling for an investigation into the rebel groups in an attempt to delegitimize their claims and burden them with war crime allegations. These actions are to be taken in order to maintain some semblance of peace within the country as Duque continues on his ambitious efforts to reform a peace deal.

President-elect Duque photographed in Bogotá on July 11. Stefan Ruiz for TIME

Written primarily on the proclamation of the rebel groups, the article by Time lacks details on political policy, while missing key concepts necessary for context. The governmental perspective is thrown in at the end as if it were an afterthought and makes for a very biased and skewed description of the recent occurrences in Columbia. The revolutionary voices are very strong in this article, and their message is well articulated, but again lacks context beyond the unfortunate assassins of rebel leaders. There is nothing describing the nature of these assassinations, or the actions of the FARC preceding their release of the message. By eliminating key contextualizing facts, the groups are reduced to two-dimensional organizations that seem to exist solely in this instance and for that reason alone. This gives the impression that the complex conflict in Columbia is simply another case of government versus unhappy heavily armed rebels.

Link to article discussed: https://time.com/5664323/farc-rebels-colombia-government/

References:

Goodman, Joshua. “FARC Rebels Say They Are Taking Up Arms Against Colombia Government Again.” Time, Time, 29 Aug. 2019, time.com/5664323/farc-rebels-colombia-government/.

Tomaselli, Wes. “Ivan Duque’s Plan to Fix Colombia’s Divide.” Time, Time, 19 July 2018, time.com/5342766/ivan-duque-colombia/.

After more than a century, the body of an ancient mummified Incan girl has been returned to her native land of modern-day Bolivia. It is estimated through carbon dating of maize located with her that she died roughly around the year 1470 at the age of eight.

She was discovered in 1890 in a stone tomb in the Andean highlands, along with various beads, sandals, and feathers, and immediately after was donated to the Michigan State University Museum by the US consul to Chile. She has since been known as Ñusta, or ‘princess’ in Quechua. After much deliberation on the part of the university, Dr. William A. Lovis, curator of anthropology for the museum, spearheaded and accomplished an effort to repatriate the girl to the government of Bolivia, the first of its kind in the anthropological field according to the article.

I felt the Latin America in this short article was portrayed as an object being affected by the actions of outside influences (i.e., the USA) as opposed to an actor with agency. It gives the impression that the mummy was taken from a hapless/disinterested government in 1890 that now, thanks to the altruism of these American museum curators, is content to have her back.

In regards to its relevance to the themes of our class, I felt that it rejects a lot of opportunity to speak on a few very questionable actions mentioned throughout, namely the inciting incident of the entire article. The language used lacks the kind of nuance and critique that I would expect when speaking on the removal of an indigenous mummified body from Latin America in the 19th century by American anthropologists with the goal to donate it to an American university; instead, this is done away with in one sentence at the beginning of the piece. Another example is the fact that in that sentence, it’s said it was the US consul to Chile that donated the body to the MSU Museum, but it was the country of Bolivia that it was returned to in the past months. Researching maps of the late 1800’s of both Chile and Bolivia only increased my confusion. I felt this was carelessly glossed over as if the audience would not notice the discrepancy in countries, and while I acknowledge it’s a stretch, I can’t help but think that it’s an extension of the perception that all of Latin America might as well be under the same name to many of the potential audience members of this article.

Lastly were the comments quoted from Lovis on the efforts for repatriation of the eight-year-old girl. He made a blog post explaining that Ñusta was removed from public display in the 1970’s once curators recognized the “changing societal sentiments toward the display of human remains” (Lovis 2019). It is then that the article says that Lovis tried in vain to garner interest in further research and testing on the body and its artifacts, and after failing he “came to the conclusion that, if nobody was going to be doing any work with either the artifacts or the humans remains and if we were not going to display the human remains, it would be better served to return them to Bolivia” (Solly 2019). Although reading through the entire blog post from Lovis, I gathered a sense that he understood the ethical implications of this entire ordeal, the article quotes him in such a way that gave me the impression of a cold and self-interested curator who has only changed his actions regarding the girl according to societal influences and disinterest from him peers in pursuing further investigation into the mummy’s background. In casual terms, that he thought “Well, if I can’t get any more out of the indigenous body I have, it might as well go back to where it came from, I guess.” Again, the entirety of the blog post gives a different impression from the article written about it.

Overall, the article treats the possession of (indigenous peoples’) human remains by non-indigenous people and the structures that have allowed that to happen with far less nuance and care that I would hope for and expect.

Here are links to the article and Lovis’ blog post.

References

Lovis, William A. “William Lovis: A Mummy Returns Home.” 360 Perspective, February 13, 2019. https://msutoday.msu.edu/360/2019/william-lovis-a-mummy-returns-home/.

Solly, Meilan. “500-Year-Old Inca Mummy Repatriated to Bolivia.” Smithsonian SmartNews, August 22, 2019. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/500-year-old-inca-mummy-repatriated-bolivia-180972966/

The Brazilian government has deployed military planes equipped with firefighting equipment and 44,000 troops in an effort to put out the fires currently destroying large portions of the Amazon rainforest. These fires had been allowed to burn unhindered until international backlash forced President Jair Bolsonaro to make a genuine effort at mitigating the damage to both the rainforest and to his reputation. Despite claiming to have “zero tolerance” for those accused of environmental crimes, Bolsonaro has himself been fined for fishing in a protected area (Londoño 2019). In addition, Bolsonaro has actually called for the abolition of environmental protections, and has expressed the desire to allow industries to more freely access protected areas. Under his regime, those in the mining, logging, and farming industries have felt free to destroy portions of the Amazon to further their own interests.

Pictured: One small portion of the expansive rainforest fire (Londoño 2019)

President Bolsonaro’s lack of regard for the preservation of the rainforest is only tempered by his concern for the economic status of Brazil. He had initially dismissed concerns about the forest fires, but announced the military intervention plan when threatened with cancelled European trade deals and boycotts of Brazilian products. Many Brazilians are still unimpressed with his evidently self-serving efforts to put out the fires; they can see that his motivations are not sincere, and they want a more concrete plan for rainforest preservation. Despite constant backlash and concrete evidence to the contrary, President Bolsonaro claims that the rainforest is not burning, but that the areas on fire are those that have already been deforested (Londoño 2019).

Pictured: São Paulo engulfed in smoke from the Amazon fire (Adams 2019)

Every part of this article is based on facts, from the accurate if somewhat cartoonish depiction of Bolsonaro as a semi-despotic leader intent on destroying the rainforest to the discussion of European impact on Brazil’s fate. But it is also important to examine what facts are not included in the article; the author is an American who has written a news article meant to be read by Americans, which means that everything is shown from a Western point of view. The impact of the Amazon fires on the tribes that depend on the rainforest for their survival is glossed over in favor of a statement from a Greenpeace representative (“Amazon rainforest fires: Ten readers’ questions answered” 2019). Nor is there any direct exploration of the accusation that the fires were started by smaller businesses emboldened by Bolsonaro’s lax enforcement of environmental protection laws (“Amazon rainforest fires: Ten readers’ questions answered” 2019). Western intervention’s effect on Bolsonaro’s actions is the focus of the article, not the actions or struggles of Brazilian citizens.

The intentionally set fires in the Amazon are a perfect example of Western ideals negatively impacting a formerly colonized country. Smaller farming and mining corporations, doubtlessly run by those of European descent given their lack of regard for Amazonian tribes, feel the need to destroy swathes of rainforest in order to compete with larger businesses. Ruthless, environmentally blind capitalism is an inherently Western idea, as is evidenced by continued conflict over and use of fossil fuels, and increased use of cheap, single-use plastics in manufacturing in Western countries like the United States and the United Kingdom. Brazil follows the unfortunate path of many decolonized countries by imitating the often harmful policies of Western countries in order to make a profit and attempt to establish itself as a major world power.

Link to Article Discussed

References

Adams, Char. “Amazon Rainforest, Known as ‘The Planet’s Lungs,’ Has Been Burning at a Record Rate for Weeks.” People, August 21, 2019. https://people.com/human-interest/amazon-rainforest-fire-burning-record-rate-brazil/.

“Amazon Rainforest Fires: Ten Readers’ Questions Answered.” BBC News, August 23, 2019. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-49450925.

Londoño, Ernesto. “Brazil Marshals Forces to Fight Amazon Fires (and Restore ‘Positive Perception’).” The New York Times, August 24, 2019.   https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/24/world/americas/amazon-rainforest-fires-military.html.