Racism 2
In this current disenchanted world, there is no meaningful order of things or events outside the human domain. When the forests and the farms are no longer considered sacred and the spirits we tempted with food and sacrifice have no mysterious risks associated with the systematic rape of mother Earth. Then a disenchanted nature is no longer alive. The living Earth commands no respect, reverence or love. It is nothing but a giant machine, to be mastered to serve human purposes. The animists(1) took care of this planet on up to the last few hundred years. As man accidentally discovers the beginnings of commerce that opens the doors to an industrial nation, then an industrial world will soon discover industrial waste. Whether the notion that a mountain or a tree is to be regarded as a person is taken literally or not, the attempt to engage with the surrounding world as if it consists of other people might possibly provide the basis for a respectful attitude towards living things. If your disenchantment is over the environmental problems and destruction, then the environmental racism byproduct can be regarded as an attempt to reveal to you that we are part of the world collective and that we are in a sense, the world itself. Environmental racism(2) is one of the biggest problems the world faces today. Issues created by corporate polluters produce trouble in the form of economic, as well as, physical. For some individuals and cultures, it affects them every day. Either through direct contact with contaminates in their environment, which has been linked to prenatal births and then later, diseases that are associated with coming in contact with polluted land and water. It is then of my opinion that environmental racism has become an increased problem for the citizens of the world. As a collective member in the thing we call life, this issue needs to be a part of everyone’s environmental agenda. If you take notice of the things you see and read about in association to the environment, agriculture and water around the world, you will realize that Racism 3 environmental racism has become a larger issue for many, including you. It is also my opinion that the average citizen can change the way governments conduct their business with corporate polluters and given time, environmental racism will drastically improve for those most affected.
The focus on environmental racism has its blissful beginnings based on the Judeo-Christian thinking(3) which encouraged the overexploitation of nature by maintaining the superiority of humans over all other forms of life on earth, and by depicting all of nature as being created for the use of humans and that unlike most individuals, some feel with that, that even humans can be neglected and thrown on the rubbish pile, or at least just above it, even if the rubbish pile is discarded nuclear waste. The connection between one’s own morality and psychology is another core subject of investigation into environmental race issues. It is sometimes suggested that human virtues, which constitute an important aspect of a flourishing human life, must be compatible with human needs and desires, but whose needs and desires are best met? But just as Aristotle has argued that a flourishing human life requires friendships and one can have genuine friendships only if one genuinely values, loves, respects, and cares for one's friends for their own sake, not merely based on the benefits that they may or may not bring to oneself. Some have argued that a flourishing human life requires the moral capacities to value, love, respect, and care for the nonhuman natural world as an end in itself.(Barn, 1984) Does anyone who creates unearthly toxic waste sites or refuge incinerators deem themselves the bad guy, one who dawns a black hat every time they subjugate a particular area for environmental deterioration, knowing that the ever expanding human population will potentially occupy the infected lands? It is my intention to explore the beginnings of environmental racism, who contributes to the destruction of land and people. I want to know who or what is most Racism 4 affected by these actions and if there are measures being taken to stop these violators. It is my hope and desire that I can take myself and you on a journey of man’s eventual destruction, if the current path of progress for profit is the foremost concept to modern human existence in spite of the that fact that it is also competing for the destruction of modern man. So what is environmental racism and who is affected?
In the beginning of the manifest destiny of man, this is central to the rationale for man’s domination of the planet and the uncontested works of the Western Hemisphere Church Fathers and law of the land known as the Bible itself. The Bible supports the white creationist domination concept that humans are the only things that matter on Earth. It then sets the stage that those in power may utilize and consume everything else to their needs and advantage without any injustice for themselves. For example, Genesis 1:27-8 states: Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over fish of the sea, and over fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. (Alter) According to Alter, the Judeo-Christian idea that humans are created in the image of the transcendent supernatural God, who is radically separate from nature, also by extension, radically separates humans themselves from nature. This ideology further opened the way for unparalleled exploitation and destruction of nature. Without technology and science, the environmental racist extremes to which some humans are now exposed would probably not be realized. Judeo-Christianity itself provides the original deep-seated drive to unlimited exploitation of nature. Nevertheless, the main approaches in traditional western moral thinking were unable to allow the recognition that natural things have intrinsic value, and that the tradition requires overhaul of a significant kind. The focus on the value of wilderness and the importance of its preservation has Racism 5 overlooked another important problem, namely that lifestyles in which enthusiasms for profit surpasses the needs of the many and a new range of moral and political problems open up connections between environmental destruction, the unequal distribution and resource consumption, global poverty and the global economic order which have been discussed by political scientists, development theorists, geographers and economists as well as by philosophers. The link between economics and environmental destruction are particularly well established. The potentially misleading appeal to economic reasons used to justify the expansion of the corporate sector has also come under critical scrutiny by globalization theorists.( Lee, pp.126-136) These critiques do not aim to eliminate economics from environmental thinking, rather they resist the tendency to believe that all social and environmental problems are fundamentally or essentially economic based and therefore not their problem. Like many other important and interesting questions, no single entity could claim sole ownership of the origins of modern environmental racism and the aftermath we now face between the relationship of environmental problems and social injustice, raises the question of how human beings should relate to the exploitation of natural environments in their pursuit of happiness and well-being and still allow humans to occupy polluted lands?
As we start out this journey in our homeland, the United States, who are the victims of environmental racism? African Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, Asians, and Pacific Islanders are more likely than Whites to occupy environmentally hazardous conditions. Three out of five African Americans live in communities with uncontrolled toxic waste sites. Native American lands and sacred places are home to extensive mining operations and radioactive waste sites. Three of the five largest commercial hazardous waste landfills are located in pre- Racism 6 dominantly African American and Latino communities. As a consequence, the residents of these communities suffer shorter life spans, higher infant and adult mortality, poor health, poverty, diminished economic opportunities, substandard housing, and an overall degraded quality of life. (Griffin pp. 68-74) Therefore, policies are important aspect of our daily lives because policy implementation can affect people’s lives indirectly and or directly. By examining communities in the lower socioeconomic sector, it becomes clear that Blacks, Hispanics and other non-Whites suffer environmental racism from every corner of institutional racism, environmental racism and other forms of racism. Historically, we can now see how directly the government has been involved in creating inner city communities through segregation, redistricting, and after the 1950s, the federal government implemented redlining. This practice restricted people of color, other than white, from purchasing homes in redlined neighborhoods by being denied mortgages, despite being financially qualified. This practice severely restricts opportunities from building or even maintaining quality housing in the inner city, which in many ways set the stage for the urban dumps, incinerators and love canals(4).
In our beginning, we lived in small communities where every member of the tribe was important and we lived on nature and in nature as harmonious as possibly. But as this world progressed, consumption, exploitation and waste of our natural resources consumes every aspect of modern daily life. Somewhere along modern development we started to separate ourselves from our ancestral relatives where it was essential to give back to the Earth as much as we consumed. It is my belief that environmental racism started developing during the industrial revolution, where nature and humans were considered nothing more than resources to be used and exploited by those socioeconomically poised to do so. As the western world begins to Racism 7 prosper and grow exponentially and economically, the exploitation of underdeveloped areas for the working class begins to appear. Development of these slums barely meets the basics for the working class. (Pritchett pp.267-283) The focus during this time is on development and industrialization and the creation of mass consumption. Which starts to shape the mentality of those in power. This is the where we can see the beginnings of carelessness for the land and the people. As the United States continues to develop a lack of concern for the devastation it has created, it appears to envelop people and the Earth. The path unrealized by those then can be seen ever active in the careless procedures adopted by corporate polluters and government regulations. What it really means is a system of killing people with government assistance, creation and monetary support with legal backing to do so. Every increasingly, environmental racism has been expanding so that the concept and practice of this form of corporate racism is being exported around the world. So how is this being executed, with the ever increasing pressure on our society and the government to watch out for the systematic accuracy that has led people in redlined areas, as the apparent test model, for the expansion of what is tantamount to chemical terrorism?
Some years ago, Benjamin Chavis, then director of the Commission for Racial Justice of the United Church of Christ, coined the phrase "environmental racism." It took a long time for this to sink in. There was little effort to alert our people to the dangers of pollution and to the fact that our neighborhoods have been used as dumping grounds for everything from oil wastes to deadly chemical substances. That is now changing. Two startling discoveries have helped drive home the point that we have a direct and fundamental stake in the environmental issue. (Brown, 1-17) Racism 8
These polluted areas are referred to as "brownfields" and the federal government has taken a direct interest in them as part of the national Superfund Cleanup on which tens of billions of dollars is being spent. (Litt, pp. 183-193) The dialogue must remain centered on our community because minorities are the ones who have been suffering from the location of dump sites and pollution for decades. We all have a big stake in this, not only for the sake of the future but also for the immediate economic benefits which have been coming through environmental restoration.
What combined essential characteristics are needed to accomplish environmental racism for the underclass people affected by polluting? There are four essential areas, the availability of cheap abundant land. The inability of those who occupy the affected lands to be able to speak up for themselves, or know anyone who has the political power to voice their concerns. The lack of mobility because of their living conditions, where they live. And the final epic piece that puts it all together, poverty. When you put these four areas into a working status, then the combined make for the perfect combination of literally dumping environmental waste where they live, work, and sleep. Anyone of these four areas alone do not necessarily constitute an assault on a person and normally we all experience some of these things in our daily lives, but most of us do not experience them all together full force. (Bullard, pp.15-39)
Essentially environmental racism is a form of discrimination involving policy making, with laws and the enforcement of these laws one could consider that the ones who create these policies and enforce these laws are creating a racial divide and in doing so embody racism themselves. If we encounter in every major city across this nation, and in these cities we see Racism 9 large number of minorities sequestered, through the practice of redlining, which has created policies geared towards grouping specific people, minorities, through the practice of lending money for housing, but just enough so that they, the consignee, qualifies for low income housing only available in areas of the city or county that no government or individual of economic means would want to live or set up shop. No one really wants to live in an area where the local government has given up on the infrastructure. But if you are responsible for helping others acquire the American dream and they are not white then why not set them up with a dilapidated house in a part of the city where many services are unavailable for the occupant, mainly because those who lend the money know that there is no way they are investing in a part of the city where the lender, state and city government crap out our waste. Then there should be no illusion that this is an accident. The fact remains that race and industrial land use go hand in hand.
Each day there are millions of pounds a varying toxins, chemicals and pollutants deposited, stored, dumped and transported into these redlined areas. Because of a lack of testing and over site, many of these products remain untested as far as the hazards to health, mainly those living around these sites. It is the assumption that we are all exposed equally to these chemicals, therefore an illusion is formed where if we are all exposed to the environmental hazards, pollutions and toxins, and then there is unfounded belief that minorities should have nothing to complain about. But in reality, research proves that we do not face the same exposure to carcinogens equally. That those minorities and the poor, which usually is the pool of the non-white population, face these hazards at an elevated level mush more so than their elevated socioeconomic counter parts. Even the poor whites are able to live just about where ever they want based on two reasons, one being that they are white and the other is that they benefit from Racism 10 living in areas where other benefits come from living from within middle class societies.(Park p.234) In contrast, those other than white adversely benefit from their areas in that they are unequal to the whites as far as the housing benefits. So what are those benefits? Typically they are surrounded by drugs and gangs and a high unemployment rate. And as you might have gathered, their homes are either in poor air quality areas, have tainted water or combined, spells doom for the their health and can lead to premature death. Obviously poverty plays an essential role in the formation of environmental racism but plays out in four different forms. The first is that poverty prevents many things, it ensures that you can only qualify for low income housing, even if the state is not running the program, low income housing is located where other of better economic means would not want to live, for example. As I look around the treasure valley I know of several areas where low income housing keeps a large population. One area is called Garden City, and even though Garden City was originally settled by the Chinese, and that is where it gets it’s name, but that all of the trees help shelter others from seeing the ugly side of the city’s efforts to contain the poor in one large area. No matter how the city tries to upgrade its image, the economic status of the residence keeps the property level low and therefore without much effort, others in need of cheap housing unwillingly flock to this area. One other area that resembles the foundation of this paper and that is Caldwell. If you have ever been to Caldwell or even hear about it on the radio or television, you would soon learn that the second reason for many polluting factories to move to this area is because of cheap business and factory sites. The low level properties help reduce their overhead, combined with Caldwell’s cash strapped government and lose regulations concerning polluting the water and air, as they are still not a part of the Boise clean air act, and the dumping of the business waste. The constant roar of drug gangs
Racism 11 carving out spots for business and the lowest of the low for the city is a teaming brown and migrant working citizenship that reside in Caldwell because you may not like the area but when you have little money for much of anything, it becomes desirable for those low in the socio-economic main stream. The third reason why this takes place as far away from Boise as possible is that the large wealthy population in this state either resides here in Boise, Meridian or north in Ketchum. Having the economic means to push their, “not in my back yard mentality”, they are able to apply pressure to people like Governor Butch, got no spine, Otter, into granting permits for polluting to areas away from Boise. The final reason that this discrimination takes place and works so well for low income residence of this state is that they have little to no government representation. Since they do not have capital to buy influence and gain political representation, their needs are overlooked for those who wield the power through monetary donations or fear, as in, if I do not get what I want I will move my large business which employs thousands to another state ploy.
Many people in minority and poorer communities in Idaho do not realize the extent to which they are negatively and disproportionately affected by environmental issues. There has also been a lack of attention to the issue at the federal level, which is why the matter is all the more urgent today. In fact, statistics show that nationally, minorities are much more likely to live next to toxic dumps. A 1987 study done, by the United Church of Christ found that race, more than income or home values, was the main predictor for the location of hazardous waste facilities. According to that study, people of color were 47 percent more likely to live near a hazardous waste facility than White Americans. In 1994, President Bill Clinton attempted to address these problems by issuing an Environmental Justice Executive Order, directing the EPA Racism 12 to take issues of environmental justice into account in their rulemaking. However, a 2004 EPA report found that this had not happened. Minorities are also exposed to disproportionately higher levels of air pollution in the U.S. Young Black children are much more likely to live next to coal-burning plants which emit dangerous carbon emissions, negatively, affecting the health of infants and also resulting in higher prevalence of asthma and death rates from the disease. It is critical that the federal government focus on the environmental and human health conditions in minority and low-income communities in order to eliminate the very real and serious health disparities that minority communities face. The issue of environmental justice is one that must be highlighted and discussed on the national stage. Communities of color and low-income neighborhoods in our society should not disproportionately bear the burden of living next to toxic facilities and suffering more medical ailments as a result. (Bullard, pp. 53-61)
The worldwide struggle for environmental justice and equality continues today. While many advances have been made globally in defining, researching and confronting the realities of environmental racism, here inside the United States there are still far too many African Americans, Latino Americans, Pacific Islander and Asian Americans, First Nation People (Native Americans) and others who remain disproportionately exposed to environmental hazards, toxins, cancer-causing pollutions, and other life threatening environments. Of course, there are more than one contributing factor to these circumstances: Economic, social, political, and geographical. But, one of the most "determinative" factors is the issue of race. The whole history of denial when it comes to issues of racial discrimination in the United States remains true. Tragically, those who are the victims of these types of injustices are often denied the possibility for adequate redress and resolution. In other words, challenging "environmental
Racism 13 racism" in 2011 is not one of the top priorities for the U.S. government as well as for state and local governments. The effective governmental corrective action and meaningful public policy changes only happens when there is an effective and sustainability movement for freedom, justice, and equality around the specific issue at hand. Only when whites are being affected adversely and take a stand against this system will the Government take action for all. Thus, we must build a stronger environmental justice movement in the U.S, and establish strategic organizational alliances at the United Nations and with other grassroots environmental justice organizations internationally. It will take stronger movements for change to get all governmental bodies to seek greater environmental justice. (Bullard, pp. 53-61)
So does this mean that a family’s economic background has an influence on where they might reside? A recent study conducted show that one’s race is the most critical factor when determining how close and individual or family will live to a hazardous waste site and not their income as some would believe. A study authored by Clark Atlanta University, professor Robert Bullard (Washington) found that 56 percent of Americans who within two miles of a commercial hazardous waste and incinerator facilities are people of color. In 1987, that number was 33 percent. A different study, conducted in 2008 University of Colorado sociologist Liam Downey, showed how little a role income played in deciding just who lives in these unhealthy areas. According to the findings, a black household with an income ranging from $50,000 to $60,000 a year had higher levels of pollution near their home than a white household with an income of less than $10,000. (Markowitz, pp. 257-258) Every decade brings in new and groundbreaking environmental legislation. In the 1970s, it was the Clean Air Act. In the 1980s, the government mandated that abandoned waste sites be cleaned up. (Wynn 2007) The
Racism 14 government amended the Clean Air Act in the 1990s (Auffhammer) and moved to cut vehicle and equipment emissions in the 2000s. (Johnson) It is 2011, what will the next 'big' environmental law be? How about one that works to eliminate environmental racism by removing waste sites and improving air quality in black neighborhoods? Hopefully better laws that will ensure race is not a factor when determining how much pollution a neighborhood and its residents are exposed to.
So what does this tell us? First, that environmental problem such as factory pollution is a clear component of social exclusion, inequality and deprivation. Many believe that there is no place in a modern society for factories spewing out thousands of tons of carcinogenic chemicals, this additional burden on top of all the others poorer communities face is an additional reason to reduce this pollution. There is also a strong message here for politicians who still believe environmentalism is solely a middle-class concern. The grime of industrial pollution is as far from a middle-class issue as you can get. Environmentalism is not yet at the heart of the government's policy agenda, but it needs to be seen as more than a worthy cause for the middle classes. The deep inequality in exposure to environmental problems needs to be hammered home to a government not yet convinced that the environment is a core concern for everyone, rich and poor alike. Understanding that it is the least powerful people who are suffering the worst environmental problems should push environmental groups to work more with the people most directly affected. It is right that environmental groups negotiate with governments and powerful groups, but this will only lead to change on those groups' terms. Truly tackling environmental injustices means that environmental organizations also need to work more with, and understand the concerns of, relatively powerless people in a way that changes the priorities and messages of those organizations. These unequal environmental impacts can be perpetuated or made worse for
Racism 15 a variety of reasons. Powerless groups may be less able to fight off a potentially polluting development in their community. Or it may be easier for authorities to site a polluting factory in an already polluted area. There are many reforms which will be needed to reduce environmental injustices. At a national level a critical step is the need for policies to be assessed for their distributional impact. There is too little formal appraisal of who benefits and who loses out from different environmental policy options. Explicit and public discussion of the distribution of benefits, impacts and risks needs to become a central part of the policy making process. (Simon, pp. 56-57)
So who is out there looking after these injustices to people and the environment? It would seem an oxymoron to say that a government agency is looking out for our best concerns, but is it possible for a government who knowingly helps corporate polluters with grants and permits for toxic sights to counter that with an agency that says you cannot do what we just gave you permission to do? When the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issues guidelines in applying civil-rights laws to pollution permits, its aim, after all, is to assure that environmental hazards aren't concentrated in minority areas, a phenomenon sometimes called "environmental racism." The vaguely written but sweeping guidelines threaten cities with loss of jobs, as well as federal environmental funds. The rules require penalties whenever a permit is issued for a polluting facility that has a disproportionate impact on minorities. But just about any neighborhood in the predominately black city would suffer such an impact. As Archer told the EPA Friday, "Injustice of any kind can't be tolerated." And certainly residents of any disadvantaged community forced to bear a disproportionate environmental burden deserve help.

Racism 16
But so far, the EPA's approach has done little more than give minority areas another hurdle to economic growth. (Mclean,USA Today)
Despite improvements in environmental protection in recent decades, millions of Americans continue to live, work, play and go to school in unhealthy environments. Dozens of studies show that those who live closest to toxic sites, with the worst air and water pollution, highest levels of lead and pesticide poisoning and least environmental enforcement, are people of color. Because of this discriminatory distribution of hazards and state agencies' failure to provide protections, community leaders have begun using civil-rights laws to fight environmental injustice. In response, the EPA recently issued guidelines to its staff on how to process civil-rights complaints. The guidance, while too narrow, is an important step in efforts to combat environmental discrimination. But a firestorm of criticism from industry and state governments has enveloped it. They argue the guidance will hurt economic development, particularly of brownfields contaminated, inner-city industrial sites. It's as if they are saying if we can't discriminate on the basis of race, there cannot be economic development. How can we accept that trade-off? Communities have redeveloped hundreds of brownfields, proving development without discrimination works. Only one complaint filed with the EPA has concerned brownfields redevelopment. All communities deserve environmental protection. Rather than criticizing the EPA's efforts, states and industry should work toward avoiding the devastating situations that give rise to environmental civil-rights complaints. ( Luke, USA Today) Industry and state criticism of civil-rights efforts has a long history. When civil-rights laws were proposed in the 1960s, many states opposed them as burdensome. In 1998, that position seems indefensible. Today's civil-rights opponents would do well to learn that lesson.
Racism 17
The EPA says that communities have to prove the health impact. Clearly it places a disproportionate burden on communities of color who are the victims of pollution, because they have to document that burden, document the health hazard and document the pollution. And if that data is not available, then the EPA will throw the complaint out. The problem is in the ability to garner the necessary resources to effectively document the complaint, but obtaining the financial resources and the technical expertise to compete with the corporate and industrial entities that are well financed. (Gilbert pp. 1645-1653)
Have there been favorable outcomes as a result of the pressure by environmental groups and affected neighborhoods preventing corporate polluters from dumping and polluting air and ground water, as well as, avoiding expensive lawsuits and penalties for their actions? Of course there are always ways around the law. Once public notice took affect and everyone developed a, not in my back yard mentality, and that included everyone and everything, corporations still had environmental waste that had to be dealt with for the products we consumed. So, if you are a corporation and you have been told by the American people that your products are needed but not your waste, what are you going to do? Discontinue doing business to placate the American masses. Hell no, you are going to find a solution to this problem and what better way than to find a suitable environment with little or no regulations concerning environmental dumping nor a strong emphasis for the health and safety of its people backed by a corrupt political system.
So this is how it is done. Between 1989 and 1994, it is estimated that the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries exported 2,611,677 metric tons of hazardous wastes to non-OECD countries. The illicit movement and dumping of toxic and Racism 18 dangerous substances and wastes constitute a serious threat to the life and health of individuals, particularly in developing countries that do not have the technologies to process the waste. Although the Basel Convention prohibits the transshipment of many forms of toxic waste products such as pesticides and other chemicals banned or severely restricted by the United States, Western Europe and Japan because of their acute toxicity. Environmental persistence or carcinogenic qualities are still regularly sent to the Third World.(5) (Murphy , p42) Many of these countries continue their economic expansion by accepting waste from the western countries in exchange money, unable to confirm reports but the bulk of the money goes to fund the military.
Unfortunately, the parties most responsible for industrial pollution are the ones with power and privilege, reaping the economic benefits while avoiding environmental burden because their communities are insulated by distance, designed by them, from direct sources of toxins. Ranging from the Amazon Basin to northern Saskatchewan, to tropical rain forests of the Amazon, sub-Saharan Africa, and Southeast Asia, exploitation of natural resources including energy, timber, minerals, and hydroelectric and other mega industrial projects by multinational corporations (MNCs)(15) and governments have devastated, dislocated, and decimated numerous indigenous tribal communities.(Gedicks p. 13) Within many developing countries, indigenous peoples and other vulnerable and impoverished communities including subsistence peasants, fishing communities, and nomadic groups generally bear the brunt of negative environmental change that is mostly caused by the resource extractive operations of MNCs. Human rights violations, environmental inequity, and ecological imperialism cut across national boundaries. What this means is that environmental injustices and environmental racism have no borders. The provisions of human rights are intended to protect individuals and collectivities against abuses
Racism 19 such as state-induced starvation, torture, violence and killings, and deprivation of people's means of sustenance. (Renner 1996) However, ecological imperialism, which implies wanton natural resource exploitation and inequitable distribution of environmental hazards (or externalization of costs of production) by MNCs or other powerful foreign interests, remains a serious threat to the "global commons." Because human rights involve the assurance of people's means of livelihood, any threats to environmental bases of livelihood could be considered a violation of basic human rights. (Donnelly, 1998) In fact, a global consciousness of environmental and human rights problems has broadened civil, political, and socioeconomic rights to encompass an environmental dimension. Nevertheless, the endorsement and adherence to socioeconomic and environmental rights vary considerably across nations indicates, equal civil rights and social and political justice are necessary for the attainment of environmental justice, and most underdeveloped nations are seriously deficient in the former. A lack of democracy has been linked directly to the subversion of social movements, including environmental and civil rights activism. ( Alario, 295–306)
In the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 in most countries of the world officially recognize civil rights, that is, freedom from slavery, servitude, torture or inhumane punishment, arbitrary arrest, and imprisonment; freedom of speech, faith, opinion, and expression; the right to life, security, justice, ownership; and freedom of assembly. (Donnelly, 1-23) Political rights involving the right to vote and nominate candidates for public office and the right to form and join political parties are also endorsed globally. ( Donnelly, 1998) Unfortunately, most of these principles are not adhered to in practice by most countries, especially in less developed countries. (Alario, 1998) In these societies, the worldview of human rights departs significantly from the Western liberal tradition that presumes egalitarianism and autonomy among individuals. It is Racism 20 also important to note that corporations who contribute to the toxic environment through exports of toxic waste, embrace the ideology of these global governments who turn a blind eye to their own doctrines of human important in order to sure up their political war chests.
There are a number of theoretical explanations of the North-to-South toxic waste trade. Prominent among these are the economic contingency and rational choice perspectives, the dependency and world-system perspective, and the environmental justice framework. Economic contingency theory suggests that needs and goals are prioritized by individuals; depending on how critical these needs and goals are at a particular point in time. (Adeola, 1998, p. 343)
Environmental injustice and environmental racism are reflected in the policy and practices of most core countries' institutions in regard to periphery nations. Institutionalized discrimination is apparent in the World Bank's policies and official behavior toward the noncore countries which usually indicates third world non-contributing countries to the economic viability of the World Bank. Basically, institutionalized discrimination refers to the policies of the dominant institutions in the core and the behavior of individuals who control these institutions and implement policies that are intentionally designed to have negative impacts on noncore nations(22) in the world system. Joe Feagin defined direct institutionalized discrimination as any organizationally prescribed or community prescribed action that by design or intention has a differential and negative impact on members of subordinate groups distinctively identified either by race, ethnicity, or nationality. (Feagin pp. 4-20)
Available evidence indicates that annually, millions of tons of hazardous wastes are channeled by MNCs based in core advanced industrial countries to the underdeveloped nations Racism 21 of Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean. During the 1989-1994 periods, more than 2.6 million metric tons of hazardous waste was exported from OECD countries to non-OECD countries mostly located in the third world. Hazardous waste export schemes originating from OECD to non-OECD countries in Africa, East and Southeast Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, and the Pacific have been reported for the period. (Hilz pp. 12-25)(6)
Over the past 5 years, there have been about 300 documented cases of hazardous waste dumping in Eastern Europe, 239 in Asia, 148 in Latin America, and 30 in Africa. (Sachs, 1996). Specific cases include dioxin-laden (7) industrial wastes exported from Philadelphia to Guinea and Haiti in 1987. More than 10,000 tons of radioactive waste known as polychlorinated biphenyls(8) and other toxic elements exported by an Italian firm to the village of Koko in Nigeria; and several other cases involving a systematic dumping of hazardous wastes to these regions. Within the past decade, several Third World nations including Brazil, Guinea, Haiti, Lebanon, Mexico, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Syria, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe have been targeted for toxic waste dumping. (Hilz, p. 17) The charges of toxic terrorism, garbage imperialism (10), and hazardous waste racism have been brought against the United States and other Western European nations involved in hazardous waste export schemes by many Third World countries.
Over the past two decades, environmentalists, the United Nations, and environmental organizations have emphasized the need for codification of the rights to a safe and clean environment in the local, national, and global arena. (Nickel, 1993) Increasingly, the right to a safe environment has gained currency in the United States and in other advanced industrial states due largely to the proliferation of grassroots activism to gain public awareness, efforts of
Racism 22 environmental organizations, media exposure of environmental disasters, and strong legislative responses. Paradoxically, these factors promoting the rights of citizens to a safe and sound environment in core nations are the same forces contributing to the violation of indigenous people's right to a safe and ecologically balanced environment in noncore nations. The flight of many MNC’s to the interior of Third World countries to avoid visibility, regulations, liability, and environmental pollution accountability directly contributes to human rights and ecological rights violation.
At the local, national, and cross-national levels, environmental burdens including locally undesirable land uses (LULUs)(12), toxic chemicals, hazardous waste dumping, contamination of water, and other forms of environmental degradation are disproportionately placed in the habitats of powerless minority entities. The environmental justice movement and organized resistance against toxic waste imperialism have leveled the charges of environmental racism, garbage imperialism, and toxic terrorism against MNCs and government agencies operating in core and noncore nations. (Adeola, 1996; Bullard, 1990; Hilz, 1992). Evidence suggests that core nations have not taken these charges seriously. Thus, the pattern of the North-to-South, or most resistance to least resistance, flow of hazardous waste continues.
Within the global environment, any deprivation of individual's or group's rights to clean air, water, land, and a healthy environment needs to be considered a serious human rights transgression. To achieve global environmental justice, we must understand that human life and the environment are closely linked. It is imperative to understand the butterfly effects of toxic waste dumping within the global commons. Even though the toxic waste trade appears Racism 23 unidirectional from the core to the periphery or from the paths of strong resistance to the paths of weak resistance, ecological wisdom dictates that the residues of PCBs, DDT, Asbestos (14), and other toxic chemicals dumped into various Third World markets often find their ways back to the core nations through agricultural and extractive commodities and crafts imported from the region. (see Moyers, 1990; Weir & Schapiro, 1981)
The protection of human rights is a necessary precondition to achieving global environmental justice and ecological protection. According to Amnesty International (1995-2001), human rights violations have increased substantially over the past decade in almost every category it monitors. In several parts of the world, minorities suffer various types of discrimination, injustice, and environmental and human rights abuses. The indigenous minorities such as the First Nation People(14) (Native Americans), and many communal groups around the world continue to bear disproportionate burdens of ecological withdrawals, pollution, and contamination of their environment and natural resources. They are disenfranchised and excluded from economic gains resulting from the activities that degrade their land, water, and other natural resources. The MNCs, other international business ventures, authoritarian governments, and corrupt local elites who benefit from ecologically disruptive activities are the critical elements promoting environmental injustice and human rights violation in the Third World.
Although grassroots environmental and civil rights organizations are not found wanting in remote areas of the Third World, the efficacy of grassroots social movements under a repressive regime is extremely low. In response to the first two major questions posed at the Racism 24 outset, it has been shown that the disproportionate exposure of powerless groups to environmental hazards and the deprivation of such groups of natural bases of livelihood constitute a violation of human rights. The poor nations are essentially the havens for dirty and hazardous waste industry. Evidence of environmental injustice across nations is mounting, and the health effects of exposure to xenobiotic (16) are critical. It is reasonable to conclude that global inequality of power and wealth, institutionalized discrimination and racism, neocolonialism(17) and internal colonialism(18), unethical international business practices, authoritarian governments, lack of democracy, and corrupt local elites are the bases of global environmental injustice and human rights transgression.
To prevent environmental injustice, ecocide(19), politicide (20), and violations of the human right to a safe and sound environment, the cooperation of the NGOs(21), international human rights and environmental groups, the United Nations, the World Bank, and national and local governments is needed. Also, there is a need to develop a system of close monitoring of environmental and human rights records of MNCs operating in underdeveloped societies, and companies with dismal records could be sanctioned through higher environmental taxes, fines, or prohibitions. To foster global environmental justice, the same environmental standards applicable in core industrialized countries should be extended to other nations, without bias. In fact, similar stringent environmental standards required of MNCs within the core nations should also apply to their operations in noncore nations. Because many less developed countries lack the resources and regulatory instruments to control MNCs' activities and environmental problems, the more developed countries with adequate capacity to regulate the impact of industrial operations should assume the responsibilities of monitoring MNCs and protecting the Racism 25 environment in noncore states.
In conclusion, the United States is in a unique position to take a leadership role in international environmental protection. It can assume this responsibility by declaring that United States citizens and United States owned businesses and business partners must comply with U.S. environmental protection laws in all of their foreign activities. Nevertheless, governments in less developed countries have the responsibility to protect the environment and the health of their citizens. Also, until the issues of unequal distribution of resources, power, and opportunities among the core and periphery, as well as sociopolitical integration, is important challenges to be confronted at both the domestic and world-system levels. Until we realize that Environmental racism comes back to us in many different forms, through litigation from importing countries as a result of polluting population genocide, the food we import from the sea and agriculture laced with toxins, and finally, the Greenhouse gases and polluted air roaming the air we all eventually get a taste of. We are systematically killing the Earth. It is one thing to kill of the infestation known as homosapiens, as the Earth will continue to support life. But if the Earth dies, then all things die.

Racism 26
Foot Notes 1. A doctrine that the vital principle of organic development is immaterial spirit. Attribution of conscious life to objects in and phenomena of nature or to inanimate objects. Belief in the existence of spirits separable from bodies. 2. An internationally recognized sociological term referring to the enactment of any policy or regulation that negatively affects the living conditions of low-income or minority communities at a rate disproportionate from affluent communities. The phenomenon can be either intentional or unintentional, and the term is often used to describe specific events in which minority communities are targeted for the siting of polluting industries and factories. The term also describes the segregation of minority communities into regions where they are exposed to health hazards because property in polluted areas is inexpensive. It can also encompass the exclusion of minority groups from the decision-making process in their communities. 3. Man is a producing, consuming animal to be used and discarded was antithetical to all the Judeo-Christian understandings which are the foundations upon which the Republic stands 4. This dumpsite was in operation until 1953. During this time, 21,000 tons of chemicals such as "caustics, alkaline, fatty acids and chlorinated hydrocarbons from the manufacturing of dyes, perfumes, solvents for rubber and synthetic resins" were added. These chemicals were buried at a depth of twenty to twenty-five feet. In 1947, Hooker bought the canal and the 70-foot-wide (21 m) banks on either side of the canal. After 1953, the canal was covered with soil, and vegetation began to grow atop the dumpsite. Then affordable housing developed near the site where residence began consuming the toxins through the drinking water. 5. This term arose during the Cold War to define countries that remained non-aligned with either capitalism and NATO (which along with its allies represented the First World), or communism and the Soviet Union (which along with its allies represented the Second World). This definition provided a way of broadly categorizing the nations of the Earth into three groups based on social, political, and economic divisions. A number of Third World countries were former colonies and with the end of imperialism many of these countries, especially the smaller ones, were faced with the challenges of nation and institution-building on their own for the first time. Due to this common background many of these nations were for most of the 20th century, and are still today, "developing" in economic terms. This term when used today generally denotes countries that have not "developed" to the same levels as OECD countries, and which are thus in the process of "developing". In the 1980s, economist Peter Bauer offered a competing definition for the term Third World. He claimed that the attachment of Third World status to a particular country was not based on any stable economic or political criteria, and was a mostly arbitrary process. The large diversity of countries that were considered to be part of the Third World, from Indonesia to Afghanistan, ranged widely from economically primitive to economically advanced and from politically non-aligned to Soviet- or Western-leaning governments "demand and receive Western aid" (the giving of which he Racism 27

strongly opposed). Thus, the aggregate term "Third World" was challenged as misleading even during the Cold War period. (Basil) Recently the term Majority World has started to be used since most people of the world live in poorer and less developed countries. 6. A list of the OECD countries. Australia June 1971, Austria September 1961, Belgium September 1961,Canada April 1961, Chile May 2010, Czech Republic December 1995, Denmark May 1961, Estonia December 2010, Finland January 1969, France August 1961, Germany September 1961, Greece September 1961, Hungary May 1996, Iceland June 1961, Ireland August 1961, Israel September 2010, Italy March 1962, Japan April 1964, Korea December 1996, Luxembourg December 1961, Mexico May 1994, Netherlands November 1961, New Zealand May 1973, Norway July 1961, Poland November 1996, Portugal August 1961, Slovak Republic December 2000, Slovenia July 2010, Spain August 1961, Sweden September 1961, Switzerland September 1961, Turkey August 1961, United Kingdom May 1961, United States April 1961 7. The chlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins are a class of compounds that are loosely referred to as dioxins. There are 75 possible dioxins. The one with four chlorine atoms at positions 2, 3, 7 and 8 of the dibenzo-p-dioxin chemical structure is called 2,3,7,8- tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD). It is a colorless solid with no known odor. 2,3,7,8-TCDD does not occur naturally nor is it intentionally manufactured by any industry, except as a reference standard. It can be inadvertently produced in very small amounts as an impurity during the manufacture of certain herbicides and germicides and has been detected in products of incineration of municipal and industrial wastes. At the present time, 2,3,7,8-TCDD is not used for any purpose than scientific research. 8. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs; CAS number 1336-36-3) are a class of organic compounds (specifically organochlorides) with 2 to 10 chlorine atoms attached to biphenyl, which is a molecule composed of two benzene rings. The chemical formula for PCBs is C12H10-xClx. 9. PCBs were widely used as dielectric and coolant fluids, for example in transformers, capacitors, and electric motors. Due to PCBs' toxicity and classification as a persistent organic pollutant, PCB production was banned by the United States Congress in 1979 and by the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants in 2001.[1] Concerns about the toxicity of PCBs are largely based on compounds within this group that share a structural similarity and toxic mode of action with dioxin. Toxic effects such as endocrine disruption and neurotoxicity are also associated with other compounds within the group. 10. Third World countries where industrial nations are increasingly dumping their unwanted waste materials. The United States produces enormous quantities of hazardous waste each year, and approximately 1,200 "priority hazardous waste sites" presently threaten the nation's health. Because of environmental regulations, landfill closings, and citizen opposition to local waste facilities, industrialized countries are increasingly disposing of their problematic materials by shipping them to the Third World, where they pose substantial threats to human health and the environment. Racism 28

From a political economy perspective, the global health would be better served by reducing hazardous waste production, encouraging reusing and recycling, and restricting or banning international shipment of toxic wastes. 11. Locally unwanted land use is a planning term. It is a land use that is useful to society, but objectionable to its neighbors. The acronym is LULU.
LULUs can include power plants, dumps, prisons, roads, factories, hospitals and many other developments. Planning seeks to distribute and reduce the harm of LULUs by zoning, environmental laws, community participation, buffer areas, clustering, dispersing and other such devices. Thus planning tries to protect property and environmental values by finding sites and operating procedures that minimize the LULU’s effects. LULUs always provide services a community needs, but few people want to live near them because of their externalities, real or perceived. 12. Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane; a colorless organic crystalline compound, (ClC6H4)2CH(CCl3), made by the reaction of trichloromethanal with chlorobenzene. DDT is the best known of a number of chlorine-containing pesticides used extensively in agriculture in the 1940s and 1950s. The compound is stable, accumulates in the soil, and concentrates in fatty tissue, reaching dangerous levels in carnivores high in the food chain. Restrictions are now placed on the use of DDT and similar pesticides. 13. Either of two incombustible, chemical-resistant, fibrous mineral forms of impure magnesium silicate, used for fireproofing, electrical insulation, building materials, brake linings, or chemical filters. 14. First Nation people has gained wide acceptance in Canada since the early 1980s. Like Native American (which has little currency in Canada), First Nation name provides a respectful alternative to Indian, a term that is more likely to be taken as directly offensive in Canada than it is in the United States. However, there are several differences between the Canadian and American expressions. First Nation is essentially a political term, promoted from within the indigenous community as a substitute for band in referring to any of the numerous aboriginal groups formally recognized by the Canadian government under the federal Indian Act of 1876. Unlike Native American, it is not a comprehensive term for all indigenous peoples of the Americas or even of Canada, and while it is often used loosely in referring to Indian groups or communities other than those specified in the 1876 Act, it specifically does not include non-Indian peoples such as the Inuit or the Métis. Although each recognized band or community is a First Nation, the term is more commonly used in the plural with a general collective sense, as in a history of the First Nations people in eastern Canada or a program designed for First Nations youth. There is no related form for an individual who is a member of a First Nation; officially, such a person is known as a status Indian. 15. The rapid rise of multinational corporations has been a topic of concern among intellectuals, activists and laymen who have seen it as a threat of such basic civil rights as privacy. They have pointed out that multinationals create false needs in consumers and have had a long history of interference in the policies of sovereign nation states. Evidence supporting this belief includes invasive advertising (such as Racism 29

billboards, television ads, adware, spam, telemarketing, child-targeted advertising, guerrilla marketing), massive corporate campaign contributions in democratic elections, and endless global news stories about corporate corruption (Martha Stewart and Enron, for example). Anti-corporate protesters suggest that corporations answer only to shareholders, giving human rights and other issues almost no consideration. 16. A xenobiotic is a chemical which is found in an organism but which is not normally produced or expected to be present in it. It can also cover substances which are present in much higher concentrations than are usual. Specifically, drugs such as antibiotics are xenobiotic in humans because the human body does not produce them itself, nor are they part of a normal diet. Natural compounds can also become xenobiotic if they are taken up by another organism, such as the uptake of natural human hormones by fish found downstream of sewage treatment plant outfalls, or the chemical defenses produced by some organisms as protection against predators.
However, the term xenobiotic is very often used in the context of pollutants such as dioxins and polychlorinated biphenyls and their effect on the biota, because xenobiotic are understood as substances foreign to an entire biological system, i.e. artificial substances, which did not exist in nature before their synthesis by humans. Biota is the total collection of organisms of a geographic region or a time period, from local geographic scales and instantaneous temporal scales all the way up to whole-planet and whole-timescale spatiotemporal scales. The biota of the Earth lives in the biosphere. Commonly, humans are not categorized as biota. 17. Neocolonialism is a term used by post-colonial critics of developed countries' involvement in the developing world. Writings within the theoretical framework of neocolonialism argue that existing or past international economic arrangements created by former colonial powers were or are used to maintain control of their former colonies and dependencies after the colonial independence movements of the post–World War II period. The term neocolonialism can combine a critique of current actual colonialism (where some states continue administrating foreign territories and their populations in violation of United Nations resolutions) and a critique of the involvement of modern capitalist businesses in nations which were former colonies. Critics adherent to neocolonialism contend that multinational corporations continue to exploit the resources of post-colonial states, and that this economic control inherent to neocolonialism is akin to the classical, European colonialism practiced from the 16th to the 20th centuries. In broader usage, neocolonialism may simply refer to the involvement of powerful countries in the affairs of less powerful countries; this is especially relevant in modern Latin America. In this sense, neocolonialism implies a form of contemporary, economic imperialism, that powerful nations behave like colonial powers of imperialism, and that this behavior is likened to colonialism in a post-colonial world. 18. Internal colonialism is a notion of structural political and economic inequalities between regions within a nation state. The term is used to describe the uneven effects of economic development on a regional basis, otherwise known as "uneven development", and to describe the exploitation of minority groups within a wider

Racism 30

society. This is held to be similar to the relationship between metro pole and colony, in colonialism proper. 19. The neologism ecocide can be used to refer to any large-scale destruction of the natural environment or over-consumption of critical non-renewable resources.[1] An early reference in 1969 described it as "Ecocide - the murder of the environment - is everybody's business."[2] The term was also used in relation to environmental damage due to war such as the use of defoliants in the Vietnam War,[3] and the use of glyphosate in the Colombian civil war.Ecocide is also a term for a substance that kills enough species in an ecosystem to disrupt its structure and function. 20. It can mean a gradual but systematic attempt to cause the annihilation of an independent political and social entity. Others have used the term to mean the deliberate physical destruction of a group who share the main characteristic of belonging to a political movement, this definition has been used because the systematic destruction of such groups are not covered as genocide under the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG). CPPCG only covers the deliberate physical destruction of national, ethnic, racial and religious groups. A third use is noted by the Oxford English Dictionary and describes political suicide by an action which irreparably damages a person's political career. 21. Non-governmental organization is a legally constituted organization created by natural or legal persons that operates independently from any government. The term originated from the United Nations (UN), and is normally used to refer to organizations that do not form part of the government and are not conventional for-profit business. In the cases in which NGOs are funded totally or partially by governments, the NGO maintains its non-governmental status by excluding government representatives from membership in the organization. The term is usually applied only to organizations that pursue some wider social aim that has political aspects, but that are not overtly political organizations such as political parties. Unlike the term "intergovernmental organization", the term "non-governmental organization" has no generally agreed legal definition. In many jurisdictions, these types of organization are called "civil society organizations" or referred to by other names. 22. In World Systems Theory, the core countries are the industrialized capitalist countries on which periphery countries and semi-periphery countries depend. Core countries control and benefit from the global market. They are usually recognized as wealthy nations with a wide variety of resources and are in a favorable location compared to other states. They have strong state institutions, powerful military and powerful global political alliances.

Racism 31

Adeola, Francis O. 2000. Cross-National Environmental Injustice and Human Rights Issues. American Behavioral Scientist. 43 (4).
Alario, Maggie. 1998. Global environmental risks: between political hazards and policy decisions. Journal of Risk Research. 1 (4): 295-306.
Alter, Robert, and Frank Kermode. 1987. The literary guide to the Bible. Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
American Sociological Review Vol. 66, No. 1 (Feb., 2001), pp. 1-20 Published by: American Sociological Association Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2657391
Amnesty International. 1995-2001. Amnesty International news. London: Amnesty International.
Andrew Holmes, Barrett A Slade, and Lary Cowart. 2000. Are minority neighborhoods exposed to more environmental hazards? Allegations of environmental racism. Real Estate Review, July 1, 50-57.
Answers.com,http://www.answers.com/topic/ddt
Auffhammer, Maximilian, Antonio M. Bento, and Scott E. Lowe. 2011. The City-Level Effects of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. Land Economics 87, no. 1: 1-18. EconLit with Full Text
Basil Yamey. 2005. Peter Bauer: An unusual applied economist. Cato Journal 25, no. 3, (October 1): 449-453.
Brown, Tim, and Rita Rahoi-Gilchrest. 1999. Postmodern Personas in Combat: The NAACP and the Reverend Benjamin Chavis. Howard Journal of Communications. 10 (1): 1-17.
Bull, David, David Weir, and Mark Schapiro. 1981. Review of Circle of Poison: Pesticides and People in a Hungry World. Third World Quarterly. 3 (4): 723-724.
Bullard, Robert D. 1993. Confronting environmental racism: voices from the grassroots. Boston, Mass: South End Press.
Bullard, Robert D., Paul Mohai, Robin Saha, and Beverly Wright. 2008. Toxic Wastes and Race at Twenty: Why Race Still Matters After All These Years. Environmental Law (00462276) 38, no. 2: 371-411. Environment Complete,
Chavis, B. End Environmental Racism. 1998. Miami Times, April 23
Chavis, B. Environmental racism 2011. The Louisiana Weekly, January 10,
Donnelly, Jack. 1998. Human Rights: A New Standard of Civilization? International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944-). 74 (1): 1-23.

Racism 32

Feagin, Joe .R Social Justice and Sociology: Agendas for the Twenty-First Century: Presidential Address
Feagin, Joe R. and Douglas Lee Eckberg. Discrimination: Motivation, Action, Effects, and Context Annual Review of Sociology Vol. 6, (1980), pp. 1-20 Published by: Annual Review
First Nation People, http://www.answers.com/topic/first-nations-of-canada
Gedicks, Al. 1993. The new resource wars: native and environmental struggles against multinational corporations. Boston: South End Press.
Gedicks, Al. 2001. Resource rebels: native challenges to mining and oil corporations. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.
Greenpeace Communications. 1992. Wasting the world. London: Greenpeace Communications.
Griffith J, R.C. Duncan, W.B. Riggan, and A.C. Pellom. 1989. Cancer mortality in U.S. counties with hazardous waste sites and ground water pollution. Archives of Environmental Health. 44 (2). P. 68-74
Habeck, Michael 1996-2010 Eco-USA http://www.eco-usa.net/eu/menubars/bottom.png
Hilz, Christoph. 1992. The international toxic waste trade. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Johnson, Janet, B. An Airing of the Clean Air Act; The Journal of Politics Vol. 47, No. 1 (Feb., 1985), pp. 292-304
Kabasakal Arat, Zehra F. 1991. Democracy and human rights in developing countries. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Lee, Kwangkun. 2009. Towards a Reformulation of Core/Periphery Relationship: A Critical Reappraisal of the Trimodality of the Capitalist World-Economy in the Early 21st Century. Perspectives on Global Development and Technology. 8 (2/3): 263-294.
Litt, J. S, Tran,N. L., Thomas A. Examining Urban Brownfields through the Public Health "Macroscope"Author(s): Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 110, Supplement 2: Community, Research,and Environmental Justice (Apr., 2002), pp. 183-193 http://www.jstor.org/stable/3455052 .
Journal of Business & Economic Statistics Vol. 2, No. 2 (Apr., 1984), pp. 105-109 Published by: American Statistical Association Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1391250
Luke W. C. and Richard M. Attacks on EPA unfair: USA TODAY, July 20, 1998
Markowitz, G. 2007. "Robert D. Bullard (ed): The Quest for Environmental Justice: Human Rights and the Politics of Pollution." Human Ecology: An Interdisciplinary Journal 35, no. 2: 257-258. Environment Complete
Mathis, G. 2010. Seeking Environmental Justice. The Tennessee Tribune,
McLean, Va. EPA bungling leaves 'environmental justice' elusive USA TODAY, July 20, 1998
Moyers, Bill D. 1990. Global dumping ground: the international traffic in hazardous waste. Washington: Seven Locks Press.
Murphy, Sean D. The Basel convention on hazardous wastes; Mar1993, Vol. 35 Issue 2, p42, 3p,
Nickel, J. W. How Human Rights Generate Duties to Protect and Provide Human Rights Quarterly Vol. 15, No. 1 (Feb., 1993), pp. 77-86
Ostry, S. 1984. OECD Economic Outlook: How We Got Here and Where We're Headed. Journal of Business &Amp; Economic Statistics. 2 (2): 105-109. Pritchett, Wendell. 2008. Which Urban Crisis? Journal of Urban History. 34 (2): 266-286.
Ostry, S. Carl P., Judyth A. S. and Hudson R. OECD Economic Outlook: How We Got Here and Where We're Headed The Role of the OECD and EU Conventions in Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials Journal of Business Ethics Vol. 37, No. 4 (Jun., 2002), pp. 385-405 Published by: Springer Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25074765
Pubmed, Garbage Imperialism. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1300412
Renner, Michael. 1996. Fighting for survival: environmental decline, social conflict, and the new age of insecurity. New York: Norton. Ch. 4 and 5
Robinson, Deborah M. 2000. Environmental Racism: Old Wine in a New Bottle. Women in Action, June 30, 75.
Sachs, Aaron. 1996. Upholding human rights and environmental justice. The Humanist 56, no. 2, (March 1): 5.
Sachs, Aaron. 1996. Upholding Human Rights and Environmental Justice. State of the World : a Worldwatch Institute Report on Progress Toward a Sustainable Society. 133.
Schweickart, David. 2009 Is Sustainable Capitalism an Oxymoron? Loyola University Chicago pp. 561-579
Simon Bullock. 2001. Polluting the poor. The Ecologist, April 1, 56-57.
Sullivan, J.B. Toxic Terrorism. http://www.docstoc.com/docs/34111824/TOXIC-TERRORISM
Washington, Sylvia Hood. 2010. "Interview with Robert D. Bullard, Ph.D. and Kenneth Olden, Ph.D., Sc.D., L.H.D." Environmental Justice (19394071) 3, no. 1: 1-6.
Weir, David, and Mark Schapiro. 1981. "Pesticide Pollution Goes Multinational". Business & Society Review (00453609). (37).
Wikipedia, Animist http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animists
Wikipedia, DDT. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane
Wikipedia, Dioxin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dioxin
Wikipedia, Environmental Racism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_racism
Wikipedia, Judeo- Christian http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judeo-Christian
Wikipedia, Love Canal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Love_Canal
Wikipedia, LULU’s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Locally_unwanted_land_use
Wikipedia, MNC’s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-National_Corporation
Wikipedia, OECD Countries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organisation_for_Economic_Co-operation_and_Development
Wikipedia, Polychlorinated biphenyl. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polychlorinated_biphenyl
Wikipedia, Third World. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World
Wynn, A. 2007. Environmental racism is a killer. "The Cost of Clean Air and Water: U.S. EPA Report to the Congress". 1980. Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association. 30 (1)... Afro - American Red Star, November 10.

The Love Canal Tragedy by Eckardt C. Beck
[EPA Journal - January 1979] http://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/history/topics/lovecanal/01.html

USA Today http://blog.energytomorrow.org/2010/11/epas overreach.html? gclid=CMXxoeme9aoCFWw0QgodSjOQLw Gilbert C. Gee and Devon C. Payne-Sturges Environmental Health Disparities: A Framework Integrating Psychosocial and Environmental Concepts
Environmental Health Perspectives
Vol. 112, No. 17 (Dec., 2004), pp. 1645-1653
Published by: Brogan & Partners
Article Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3435896

Adam, B. (1990) Time and Social Theory. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Alario, M. (1993) Environmental risks, social asymmetry, and late modernity, Social Theory and
Practice 19, 275–88.
Alario, M. (1995) Environmental Destruction, Risk Exposure and Social A symmetry, Lanham,
MD: University Press of America.
Alario, M. (1997) Democratic theory, environmental policy and the equity card, International
Journal of Contemporary Sociology 34, 235–54.
.
Habermas, J. (1984) Theory of Communicative Action, Boston: Beacon Press.
Held, D. (1995) Democracy and the Global Order, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Lash, S. and Urry, J. (1994) Economics of Signs and Space, London: Sage Pu blications.
Luhmann, N. (1982) The Differentiation of Society, New York: Columbia University Press.
Vig, N. and Kraft, M. (1992) Environmental Policy in the 1990s, Washington, DC:

List of OECD Member countries - Ratification of the Convention on the OECD http://www.oecd.org/document/58/0,3343,en_2649_201185_1889402_1_1_1_1,00.html
Stebbins K.R. Garbage imperialism: health implications of dumping hazardous wastes in Third World countries. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1300412