Search

The documentary is missing because the documentary is as safe as the fence it mocks in its title.
In the beginning we are asked to bear witness to the construction and use of the most devastation weapon of indiscriminate death the world has ever seen, and all the harm the construction of such a tool, yet its construction and its use is justified near instantaneously by repeating the same old propaganda.
In continuation, we are asked to bear witness to the continuous production of similar weapons and the devastation caused by the mishandling of the waste that accumulated in their production, yet why such a production took place is not only left unquestioned, but simple hints of cold war propaganda is left in their places for safekeeping.
In the end, we are asked to bear witness to a sombre victory, same spectres of patriotism and nation-of-God watching over our shoulder, yet how the pitiful situation of being forced to celebrate even such a small victory is never explored.
To sum up, we are shown people, good people, who struggle against the symptoms of a disease, yet this disease itself never named, nor challenged. It could not have been challenged, as it would force a complete change in their discourse.

If we sincerely would like to critique how the bodies of these workers were made disposable; used, harmed, dislocated and discharged as deemed necessary; if we wish to explore this topic as the necropolitical issue it is, we cannot stop halfway through. This inability to stop chasing connections, relationalities wherever it fits our ideology, is not a call for “objectivism”, it’s a call to respect the term of Anthropocene with all its rhizomatic connections.

An investigation of nuclear waste, that does not factor the use of its product, the socio-political effects of said product, and the historical conditions that even led to the possibility of producing it in such ways and such quantities, are of no use for us.  It cannot penetrate the barrier of capitalist realism. If it could, at least a single mention of workers unions would have existed. Instead, it has confessionals by atomic weapons lawyers whose heart goes out to these workers.
An America that refuse to face up to the fact that it is what it is by the great necropolitical project it led for hundreds of years, I struggle to accumulate sympathy for, what I can easily accumulate is rage however, which this documentary is missing..
Wish the documentary would have at least attempted to say something radical, instead of praising these disposable bodies for being patriotic about it. There are lives who never had false fences built as idols for safety, the collective idols of old America, the patriotic nation under God were built upon their broken bodies, what would you ask of them?

The bibliography for this report is extensive, with 5 of Galea's work used as a citation. Most of the citations are scholarly journal articles, showing that these authors did in depth research to form their discussion and arguments. 

Through her field work, the author is able to create a concise argument by using interviews and anecdotes by those affected by the disaster in Chernobyl. She also highlights aspects of the disaster itself, highlight pre, peri, and post events that had an impact on the area and populations exposed. She also provides some data regarding an increase in clinical registration of illnesses that have occurred under the title "symptoms and other indequately known states", that show a sharp increase after the event. 

This study was funded by Grants-in-aid for the Cancer Control Policy from the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, Japan. 

1. "..."that is the perceptual world in which we find outselves and to which we are oriented, is organized through language and symbolic forms, as well as through social and institutional relations and practical activities in that world."
2. "His illness had a powerful and meaningful beginning, which gave shape and coherence to the larger narrative."
3. "It is tempting for a medical social scientist to enumerate the cultural beliefs concerning the cause and workings of epilepsy, then compare these with beliefs in other societies. People of course reason about illness, and culture provides the logic of that rationality."