Austin Rhetoric Field Team
This essay will serve as the workspace for the Austin Anthropocene Campus Rhetoric Field Team.
This essay will serve as the workspace for the Austin Anthropocene Campus Rhetoric Field Team.
As a researcher, I’m interested in the political, ecological, and cultural debates around mosquito-borne diseases and the solutions proposed to mitigate them.
When we received the task, my first impulse was to investigate about the contemporary effects of anthropogenic climate change in mosquito-borne diseases in New Orleans. But I was afraid to make the same mistake that I did in my PhD research. I wrote my PhD proposal while based in the US, more specifically in New England, during the Zika epidemic, and proposed to understand how scientists were studying ecological climate change and mosquitoes in Brazil. However, once I arrived in the country the political climate was a much more pressing issue, with the dismantling of health and scientific institutions.
Thus, after our meeting yesterday, and Jason Ludwig’s reminder that the theme of our Field Campus is the plantation, I decided to focus on how it related to mosquitoes in New Orleans.
The Aedes aegypti mosquito and the yellow fever virus it can transmit are imbricated in the violent histories of settler-colonialism and slavery that define the plantation economy. The mosquito and the virus arrived in the Americas in the same ships that brought enslaved peoples from Africa. The city of New Orleans had its first yellow fever epidemic in 1796, with frequent epidemics happening between 1817 and 1905. What caused New Orleans to be the “City of the Dead,” as Kristin Gupta has indicated, was yellow fever. However, as historian Urmi Engineer Willoughby points out, the slave trade cannot explain alone the spread and persistance of the disease in the region: "Alterations to the landscape, combined with demographic changes resulting from the rise of sugar production, slavery, and urban growth all contributed to the region’s development as a yellow fever zone." For example, sugar cultivation created ideal conditions for mosquito proliferation because of the extensive landscape alteration and ecological instabilities, including heavy deforestation and the construction of drainage ditches and canals.
Historian Kathryn Olivarius examines how for whites "acclimatization" to the disease played a role in hierarchies with “acclimated” (immune) people at the top and a great mass of “unacclimated” (non-immune) people and how for black enslaved people "who were embodied capital, immunity enhanced the value and safety of that capital for their white owners, strengthening the set of racialized assumptions about the black body bolstering racial slavery."
As I continue to think through these topics, I wonder how both the historical materialities of the plantation and the contemporary anthropogenic changes might be influencing mosquito-borne diseases in New Orleans nowadays? And more, how the regions’ histories of race and class might still be shaping the effects of these diseases and how debates about them are framed?
The data/reports they have collected to support their approach to help disaster include annual reports and newsletters that define the issues they are currently focusing on: what it includes, how one person can help. Their website also includes resources that describe the issue they are tackling their position and what is going on to prevent/cure the problem. Their website has experts, a university that specializes on 'empowering global communities' in order to be able to recoginze their lack of human rights. They also have a blog and first hand video accounts.
Three ways the article is supported is through first hand accounts of diverse residents that have lived in New Orleans- their opinions of how the rebuild process is progressing as well as the lack of a connection between need and aid from the government. The interviews also provide an emotional perspective into the lives of those who experienced the disaster. The article includes direct quotes from federal disaster efforts such as FEMA and HOME, who provided statistics into how many people received trailer homes and money to rebuild their lives. Another way this article was supported was using records of mail, who had lived in New Orleans before the hurricane and after. This evidence provides an insight into how many people were actually homeless because they had no way of getting federal aid.
The system was built to serve those who cannot afford mental health care and to those who are not educated on mental health disorders. This system was built was reduce problems such as: senseless violence, broken families, lost productivity, and costly physical illness from mental disorders- the app can help these issues over time. To ultimately build healthier communities, workplaces, homes, personal relationships, preventing these in future generations.
The methods/data used to produce the arguments in the report include general statements about mental health disorders followed by stats and explanations that support the stat and/or deny the increase of mental health illness (those that have been reported). The paper is chunked into portions that explain an illness, a coping mechanism and factors that produce higher rates of mental illness.
Three ways the arguemtn is supported is through interviews of current citizens in Ukraine who needed disability funds, the history of CHernobyl and the aftermath on the country as a whole, and field research about radiation and the 'new population' in the country that is made up of those who are radiation affected or are lying about it. (Numbers and figures are also included).
Emergency response was portrayed in the film through the team of engineers who tried to contain the problem, those who laid pipes to attempt to pump water into the reactors, the team of firefighters who sprayed water into the reactors, and the miltary crew who dropped water over the exposed fuel pools.
Ian Ferris describes the methods and focus of the Rhetoric Field Team of the Austin Anthropocene Field Campus.