90 likes | 109 Views
Changes in the Land , Chapter 5. ISS 310: People and Environment Spring 2002 Prof. Alan Rudy 1/24/02 1. What is the common relation between population and environmental damage? 2. What do you have usufruct rights to and what do you have property rights to?. Commodities of the Hunt:. Trade
E N D
Changes in the Land,Chapter 5 ISS 310: People and Environment Spring 2002 Prof. Alan Rudy 1/24/02 1. What is the common relation between population and environmental damage? 2. What do you have usufruct rights to and what do you have property rights to?
Commodities of the Hunt: • Trade • Diseases • Property • Ecological Change • Hunting • Commodification • Exchange • Use/Status -- Wampumeag • Accumulation/Abstraction -- Price • Sedentarism
Early Trade and Diseases: • Indians eager by 1525 -- 33 years after ?? • Diseases • Historical-Geographic isolation • Low population densities • No domesticated animals • Neither genetic, nor acquired resistance • 80-90% Mortality Rates • Endemic and Acute • Hunter-gatherer North less than Ag South • Smallpox, TB, Influenza, Pneumonia, Measles, Typhus, Dysentery, Syphilis
Consequences of Diseases: • Powerfully disrupts kinship patterns, inter- and intra-group politics, healing/religion. • Facilitates colonial property take-over • if Indians had “improved” and thereby “owned” ag lands, but died, then those lands could be taken • indication of “God’s will” behind Colonist take-over • Second nature reverts to first nature? • SMALL GROUPS -- explain (90-91)
Hunting: • Colonists were too ineffective a hunters to obtain furs by themselves, needed Indian men. • But Indian men were lazy and had inferior technology! • How could Indians be more efficient and skillful?
SEE Cronon’s ARGUMENT??? • Cronon is BUILDING an argument with the structure of the book, • ECOLOGY • Northern and Southern NE • SOCIAL ECOLOGIES • Indians (N and S) and Colonists (English) • POLITICAL ECOLOGY • Sovereignty and Property • ECONOMIC ECOLOGY • Population, Hunting, Trade • Each point adds a layer and refers back • Why THAT order? N-S-P-E?
Commodification: • For Indians, from exchange of equivalents (use) to accumulation of abstractions (price). • 1) Use Euro-goods for Indian purposes • 2) Trade for Indian purposes • Indian-Colonist trade grew not due to Indian demand but because of Colonists’ need to pay debts (not supply-demand). • Trade + Disease worked against old political and status hierarchies. • Declining population worked against social sanctions against accumulation.
Summary (of sorts): • Trade + Pop = • Eco Deregulation (Indians) • Eco Damage (for Colonists) • Game populations • Fur (Indian need for cloth) • Rich land from beaver dams • Sedentarism • Indians • Domesticated animals • Disease • Colonists • Normal Env’tal Accounts • Pop = Eco Damage
Conclusion: • Nature (ecology) + • Social Relations (gender, culture, etc.) + • Political Organization (status, state, etc.) + • Economic Structure (tech., class, etc.) + • Population (numbers, trends) + • Health (diseases, lifespan, etc.) = • All must be understood in changing relation to one another in order to coherently explore environmental change and respond to crises. • None alone will do (not holism, philosophy, democracy, biotech, consumption, birth control, or medicine) alone.