Search

The political process is also always a learning process, a process of attunement. And becoming attuned to relations of power also means becoming compromised, to a certain degree, despite whether this attunement takes the form of compliance or resistance. For instance, the oil and gas industry has had a large influence on the structure and character of renewable energy advocacy in Austin, Texas, even as it was being developed as a strategy of resistance to petroculture. In particular, there was the purposeful move to imitate the mineral rights contracts that the oil and gas industry had developed in order to drill on private land, creating similarly structured leasing agreements for what would come to be known as “wind farms” in many of the same locations as former drilling sites. The idea here was to create a wealthy landowning class that could help lobby for renewable energy, much like previous land owners had for the oil and gas industry. Secondly, the Texas Renewable Energy Industry Association (TREIA) collectively decided to invite the utility industry to join their ranks in order to pursue renewable energy at the utility scale through the use of Renewable Portfolio Standards. And while Austin’s early energy advocates still speak of this as a winning strategy (and indeed it was), it also reproduced the utility as a center of power and promoted a top-down style of environmental advocacy that had long shut Austin's minoritized and marginalized communities out of its environmental benefits. Building support in this way, by appealing to those who are not only likely to share your perspective and its blindspots, but that have also already shaped the political landscape in their interest, this creates the perfect conditions for injustices to transpire, persist, and even intensify. Thus, part of the struggle for just transition entails keeping the question of what counts as environmental justice or injustice held open at the same time that the former is being pursued and/or the latter resisted. 

Adam, James. 2023. "Petro-ghosts." In 4S Paraconference X EiJ: Building a Global Record, curated by Misria Shaik Ali, Kim Fortun, Phillip Baum and Prerna Srigyan. Annual Meeting of the Society of Social Studies of Science. Honolulu, Hawai'i, Nov 8-11.

This film is meant to show the struggles of an ER waiting room from all sides. It shows the frustrations of patients waiting to be seen for hours, financial workers, social workers, and doctors struggling to see everyone in a timely manner. It also shows organizers tryign to sort everyone and move the patients around in ways that benefit all parties. Essentially, this documentary is highlighting the issues that exist in the ER because of lack of staff, beds, and overall means to take care of the large influx of patients. 

This film shows live footage of interactions in the hospital as well as voice over narrations that highlight the mood and stress of the situation. They give some statistics, but the main point of this film is to show the stories of some patients and the doctors and staff to highlight their message. It has an emotional appeal in the sense that viewers can sympathize with and feel frustrated for all parties involved - not just the patients.

There are many people portrayed and mentioned in the film. They discuss issues within governments and insurance companies. They show patients without insurance struggling to get medication and care. As a result, they express issues with access to care and paying for hte care that they receive. They show doctors and the struggles they have with handling patients and those that come in with the ambulance. Nurses and other ER staff are shown as well. They show narratives of several patients in the waiting room and their experience once they do finally make it to a bed. All of these players have a lot of decisions to make, starting with the decision of the patient ot come to this public hospital (possibly because being turned away from others), and ending with a doctor's care and decision whether or not to release patients. 

They are shown for a moment in which they bring in trauma patients, but are not a main player in this documentary.

I found the most compelling part of the film a portion where an elderly man needing dialysis swears and screams at one of the doctors that he's sick and tired of having to wait for dialysis. He says how annoying it is to come to this hospital and expresses frustrations with having to get dialysis at this particular hospital. He is frustrated to such an extent that he even asks the doctor to remove the catheter and let him die, stating that eveyrone dies so he doesn't care anymore if it's sooner rather than later. He's tired of waiting.

I thought every aspect of the film served a purpose and helped shape the documentary.

Policy makers, mostly. People who are privileged and can go to private doctors or hospitals don't often see the issues that public hospitals face. Policy makers who don't see this as a problem would benefit from seeing this documentary. But I think that everyone can learn smething from this documentary. For future doctors it can show patient care and bed-side manners. For a regular person it can show the need for insurance so that they can push local policy makers to make a change.

Maybe having government workers would have helped create a more wholesome argument.

More statistics and research studies would have helped. Havng national information and numbers could have helped people take away more of an understanding and have an educational aspect.