At the risk of veering off on a tangent about human rights in South America (after all, this is a blog about the environment), I decided to follow up my last post with an additional one on the disturbing phenomena that seems to be immerging in the region; this time in Argentina.
To refresh your memory (or for those too lazy to scroll down), I recently reported on the plight of the poor citizens in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil who are being walled in, somewhat against there will. According to a spokesperson from the Rio government, this is a necessary measure to stop individuals from entering the Amazon rainforest in an effort to clear land for home building or to illegally harvest trees for trade on the black market. While saving the environment is a noble cause to undertake, I would argue that garnishing the human rights of the citizenry to do so is not a fair trade. 
While debate on this issue simmers, Brazil’s neighbor to the far south, Argentina, is facing a similar yet far more grave situation. A similar plan spearheaded by Gustavo Posse, mayor of San Isidro, a wealthy region of the capital Buenos Aires, is causing massive amounts of controversy due to the fact that he is way more shameless in the fact that the goal of the project is to separate the rich and the poor regions with a physical barrier. Additionally, unlike in Brazil, outraged citizens have taken to the streets in protest and have gone as far as to physically damage and graffiti the wall, which is now being guarded by the armed forces of the state. The wall has been dubbed “The Wall of Discord” and is being compared to the Berlin wall for its class driven, discriminatory connotations.
The official story from state government officials on the matter is that the reason behind the decision to erect this wall is to, like Brazil, halt the destruction of the Amazon rainforest. Luckily, the people of Argentina are less willing to swallow that farce and are helping to shed some light on this unfortunate situation. The mayor of San Isidro has also been quoted as saying that the wall is necessary to for the protection of the citizens and will result in decreased crime because criminals from San Fernando, the poor region of Buenos Aires, will not be able to get in to San Isidro. If that isn’t blatant discrimination than I don’t know what is. Posse is generalizing the people of an entire area as vagrants and criminals when that is certainly not the case and frankly, the people of San Fernando are right for not lying down and taking it.
My main criticism of the Argentinean government, who has vehemently spoke out against the actions being taken in the capital, is that they have failed to protect the rights of the citizens and have allowed the state, which is inherently under the jurisdiction of the national government, to act against its judgment. What type of political system would allow individual entities under the all-encompassing to just act with out any uniformity or checks? (cough, cough) While the Argentinean government has pledged to halt further construction of the wall, it’s the principle of the matter. But then again, everything is always about the principle. I just don’t get how the mayor thought he could pull something so egregious and get away with it. But then again, they managed to do it in Brazil so anything is possible.
And it Spreads... Where do the Walls End?
Posted by Britney Baker at 12:47 AM
Labels: Argentina, Brazil, public square
5 Comments:
I would also like to point out that the rain forest is barely touching Argentina. LOL
Well just as we have neighborhoods to the East and West of the LA river, land borders are often implemented as a way to differentiate class levels. Zoning and planning is subjective in many places, and under a corrupt or less-democratic government, any fixture that can draw clear social division is welcomed. And besides, there have been so many attempts at protecting the Amazon, what's to say this wall would have stopped peddlers from entering? When there's a will, there is a way.
Unfortunately South American governments have been doing what they want when they want with no regard for human rights and exhibiting only concern for maximizing their power. It is interesting how the governments are trying to pretend like the actions are to protect the environment when the rain forest isn't barely even touching Argentina. I don't think physical borders are ever the way to go and I totally agree with WB who says that where there is a will, there is way... Just look at the success, or lack there-of, of the US-Mexico border.
I would agree with WB. Zoning and natural barriers (rivers, mountains, etc.) do exist that often separate classes form each other. There is no doubt that a lot of crime originates from poorer areas of any city, but is shows a strong desire not to help the lower class to simply board them in and let them struggle alone. Governments are there to help people, especially those most in need of help. I think this mayor in Argentina is going to find himself with a ghetto soon and then with even more serious crime and poverty problems.
Creating physical boarders between people and the environment seems so outrageous considering the rain forest is barely touching Argentina. The are acting as if the people need to be controlled and set back from their environment when this is obviously not the case.
Post a Comment