Managing Coastal Image in La Paz

I took this photo while I was down in La Paz, Baja California Sur, earlier this summer. I was walking along the boardwalk when I saw this big tractor drive across the sand. "What the hell could they be doing with that," I wondered. Really, I did wonder. So I walked over and I saw these guys scooping up green moss from the sand and putting it into the tractor to be carted away--who knows where. It was apparently* an effort to clean up the beaches and provide the white sand that tourists, whether national or international,** expect. Ok, so I understand WHY they're doing this. This is something that is pretty common in coastal tourism areas--they're always trying to make the beaches look just like the magazine and TV ads, which all feature luxurious white sand beaches (preferably with no footprints). But I was wondering about the biological results of this practice. What does the moss do? Is it common for moss to accumulate on the beaches, or is this something that has come about because of all the harbors? How does the moss fit in with the larger ecosystem? Sounds silly to some, but these are the kinds of questions that go through my mind. Sometimes these little details matter.

*Ya, I really should have walked over and asked these guys what they were doing and why. That would have made sense. But for some reason I really didn't feel like getting in the way at that moment. Maybe there is a way to find out a little more about this.
**La Paz, unlike Cabo San Lucas, has a large percentage of domestic tourists in Mexico. I have not checked the official numbers, however.

A List of 1300 in Utah

Apparently someone or some group circulated a list in Utah that contains the social security numbers and other highly personal information of 1300 suspected undocumented immigrants. State officials in Utah are now investigating the origin of that list. From TPM:

State agencies are investigating whether any of their employees leaked Social Security numbers and other personal information after a list of 1,300 people who an anonymous group claims are illegal immigrants was circulated around Utah.

The anonymous group mailed the list to several media outlets, law enforcement agencies and others this week, frightening the state's Hispanic community. A letter accompanying the list demanded that those on it be deported immediately.

The list also contains highly detailed personal information such as Social Security numbers, birth dates, workplaces, addresses and phone numbers. Names of children are included, along with due dates of pregnant women on the list.

This is not the way that things should be handled. There is a reason why we have a law enforcement system, and a reason why even suspected criminals have rights. The same laws that protect suspects also protects everyone else. Hopefully more information about this comes out soon.

*I found this via Jay Tea's post over at Wizbang.

Putting Billboards to (another) Use

Billboard by Kerry Tribe. Photograph from the MAK Center website, by Gerard Smulevich.

Jim Johnson has yet another interesting post about the social uses of imagery. This one is about billboards, and how some artists are using them in some completely different ways. Here is the basic idea behind the project:

"The philosophical proposition of the exhibition is simple: art should occupy a visible position in the cacophony of mediated images in the city, and it should do so without merely adding to the visual noise. How Many Billboards? Art In Stead proposes that art periodically displace advertisement in the urban environment."

And Jim writes:

"I think it is important to displace commercial uses for aesthetic and political ones in public spaces and so find this project appealing."

This project IS appealing. Especially when I think about all of the billboards in the LA area. If you drive along the 5 or the 101 there are tons of billboards advertising everything from morning talk shows to strip clubs to the latest Coca-Cola products. I have driven through LA for years wondering why public space isn't (or can't be) used for other reasons as well--why is it that we are always looking at commercial imagery, day after day? Don't we have something else to think about? Isn't there something else to consider? What about politics? What about local histories? What about art? Are we only concerned with losing weight and going to Disneyland? What about just putting something up in those spaces that isn't trying to sell something? I think billboards are good places to get some messages or ideas across...messages that might contribute to something more than just blatant consumerism.

The exhibition is called How Many Billboards. The MAK Center for Art and Architecture in LA is the sponsor. If you're in the area, check it out. I know that many of the billboards have already come down, but I think some might still be up.

David Coates on Immigration Politics

Debates about immigration seem to crop up during times of financial and political crisis. This is not a new trend here in the United States--just take a look back into history for your answer. Often, when the economy takes a turn for the disastrous, people turn the blame toward migrants, whether or not there is actually any valid reason for doing so. This is also known, simply, as scapegoating.

The political economist David Coates writes:

Immigration by foreign-born workers, and unemployment among native-born ones, may go together in modern America, but the relationship between them is neither simple nor directly causal. On the contrary, three things at least are very clear in the data on contemporary trends in employment and wages – at least very clear to those not subsumed in Arizona-type hysteria. (1) Immigration, legal or otherwise, is not the main cause of the current recession. (2) The overall impact of immigration on employment, productivity and income in the contemporary US economy is broadly positive; and (3) the very forces triggering migration from the global “south” are the same ones creating unemployment and falling wages in the global “north”.

There are some interesting points to be made here, especially since many pundits and politicians are hanging on to the idea that immigration is one of the main problems of the US economy. Is it really? One of the most interesting points that Coates brings up is the idea that the same "forces" that are pushing people to migrate away from places like Mexico are also creating unemployment in places like the United States.

Coates' post is absolutely worth a read. The rest is here.

*I found Coates via Maxine Udall, who writes that he is on of her "favorite political economists."

A Reaction to THE MARXISTS

Not too long ago I posted this animated video which features David Harvey's explanation of "The Crisis of Capitalism." It's well done, and does a good job of summing up some incredibly complex issues in a really interesting way.

Anyway, economist Maxine Udall has posted her reaction to this video on her site. Here is my favorite part:

"I pretty much hate it when Marxists make sense. All those years growing up among the bourgeoisie have ruined me, I fear. But I tend to pay attention to them because they're very good at noticing that there is a problem. This video is an excellent description of the problem. I was relieved that no (Marxist) solution was offered so that I could entirely agree that more informed, broader, more open discourse is needed as well as new perspectives."

I like Udall's site. She has all kinds of greats posts with tons of insight into contemporary economics. But I think her reaction to Harvey's ideas (he's the marxist, you know) is a little odd. I am not quite sure why it matters where explanations or critiques come from. Does it matter? Should it matter? In the comments section, The Barefoot Bum writes:

"I'm a revolutionary communist, and I don't ever "hate it" when liberal capitalists such as yourself make sense, even concerning the flaws of revolutionary communism. I'm grateful for the insight, and if you really are correct, it's dumb to spend a single instant getting over some "hatred" and incorporating and responding to legitimate criticism."

I agree, even though I don't place myself in any particular ideological camp. From my perspective there is no need for everyone to retreat to their respective political or ideological corners in order to address and critique contemporary problems. Should we only listen to views from "our" own camp? Or should we be open to different perspectives? Should "capitalists" be irritated when "marxists" are on point? Should "marxists" cringe when "liberal economists" have something to add to a discussion? Is this about political ideologies, or about finding ways to address some of these issues? Sometimes it seems that we will never get past the starting gate, and what holds us all back the most is nothing more than an ideological blind spot.

Travel: From My Flight Back Home Yesterday

Valladolid 3/2010 #2

Valladolid 3/2010 #1

Chichen Equinox 3/2010 #1

Conspicuous Dogs

"Joey Chestnut is declared the winner in an overtime 5 hot dog tie-breaking chow down. first time since 1919. His total for the day was 64 hot dogs." From Flickr user dietrich.

Sometimes with a little creativity and a certain perspective, many things that humans do on a day to day basis can look pretty strange and fascinating. Sometimes the things humans do are just plain bizarre, and it doesn't take a lot of effort to make that realization. The annual Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Contest, which was on TV this past weekend, is a case in point. In fact, I saw highlights from this year's competition on ESPN. Is this a sport? For some people, it is. I understand the basic point of the competition, but what are the deeper meanings? Are there any deeper meanings? Why would it be appealing to consume massive amounts of cheap food in front of a crowd--what kind of status or social prestige is gained from this?

If this isn't a perfect example of conspicuous consumption, I don't know what is. Eating food can only be categorized as competitive entertainment in a society that has a surplus of accessible food. Right? It would actually be interesting to look further into this and find out why people participate in this event, why spectators watch it, and why it has become associated with the Fourth of July, of all things.

For a little more about competitive eating, check out Horsemen of the Esophagus: Competitive Eating and the Big Fat American Dream by Jason Fagone.

Human Landscapes

This photograph was taken in late May of this year, over near La Brea avenue in Los Angeles. I took it after stopping by to visit the Fahey/Klein gallery right around the corner. For some reason I really like taking pictures of landscapes that have been heavily shaped by humans. Maybe this comes from my archaeological background...who knows. But the whole idea that there can be such as a thing as a "natural" and an "unnatural" landscape is absolutely fascinating. What makes something unnatural or fake? It seems the general idea is that human-altered landscapes are somehow unnatural, but there is really no reason why this actually makes any sense, especially since plenty of species alter their habits/environments. I tend to agree with David Harvey when he writes that there is nothing unnatural about urban environments such as New York City: "The circulation of money and of capital have to be construed as ecological variables every bit as important as the circulation of air and water" (in Spaces of Global Capitalism, 2005: 88).

This moves beyond mere architecture and creative hedge trimmings (although these are of course elements of human socio-ecological systems). The human environment includes practices, ideas, buildings, habits, and tendencies that cannot simply be seen as unnatural intrusions upon some idealized natural human state.

Apolitical War?

This one is going to be short and sweet. Check out this post over at Savage Minds. Now, I have two questions (and I wrote this in the comments section over there):

How is the military in any way apolitical? How is going to war apolitical?

Joe Deal, 1947-2010

The photographer Joe Deal recently passed away. I had never heard of him or his work until I came across this post over on Jim Johnson's blog. Deal took part in a project called "The New Topographics: Photographs of a Man-Altered Landscape." This was in the 1970s (read more about this project/show here). I had heard of some of the photographers who were also part of the whole New Topographics exhibit, such as Stephen Shore and Robert Adams. Here is the photograph that Johnson posted:

Here is a little more about Deal. I am especially interested in some of the subtle images that investigate the ways in which humans have changed the landscapes they live in, and the traces those changes leave in our everyday lives. Pretty anthropological stuff if you ask me.

Maxine Udall: Rethinking Economics

Another great post over at Maxine Udall's site. There are some pretty good discussions around the blogosphere about the direction(s) of the discipline of economics...and part of this discussion revolves around methodology. This is something that I admittedly do not know much about; I really do not have a solid grasp of the actual methods of economists, although I am reasonably well-versed in their general theoretical tendencies.* Here's the ending of Udall's post:

"New eyes, untrained and unbiased by indoctrination into the hard core of economic theory and its accompanying heuristics and corollaries, may well be exactly what economics needs to become a true and more useful science."

Now go read the beginning and the middle.

*From what I have read, it seems pretty clear that economics and anthropology are quite opposed in many senses. These differences often revolve around ideas about human nature--is there such a thing as a universal human nature? Do certain economic principles apply in all times and all places? Or is human behavior highly contextual and historical? Do humans make "economic" decisions that have to be understood and analyzed within particular situations?

I have written about this subject a few times on some earlier posts. What I am not sure about is to what extent economics are even interested in what anthropologists are doing. Who knows? So yes, I tend to disagree with many ideas that I see presented by economists, but I also realize that not all economists think alike. While there are some pretty strong differences between anthropology and economics, I still think that there is something to be gained from a little conversation between the two.

David Harvey + Animation

I found this via Rortybomb.

Enjoy.