Human Geography Too
Follow
Find tag "indigenous"
1.4K views | +0 today
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Scarpaci Human Geography from Geography Education
Scoop.it!

Bolivia: A Country With No McDonald’s

Bolivia: A Country With No McDonald’s | Human Geography Too | Scoop.it
What America can learn from one of the most sustainable food nations on Earth.

Via Seth Dixon
more...
Lena Minassian's curator insight, February 13, 11:29 AM

I absolutely love this! Here is a country that takes a lot of pride in eating fresh foods. They do not have any fast food chains because Bolivians prefer their traditional foods just the way they are. They still eat hamburgers but prefer to buy them from women who make them instead of a McDonald's. Bolivians value that interaction and relationship with the people surrounding them and that genuinely makes food more enjoyable. Their food relationships do not involve money but the effects of what these fresh foods can do for them. 

Felix Ramos Jr.'s curator insight, February 28, 5:50 PM

This is a fine example of people looking out for one another.  It might be easier to industrialize their food market but it's more admirable to preserve tradition, help small indigenous business, and try your best at making the country more healthy.  I applaud them for doing this.

Brian Wilk's curator insight, March 22, 3:33 PM

I think I might want to move to Bolivia one day! Reciprocity is often a term used for corporate culture; you but from me and I'll buy from you type of relationship. This is still true in Bolivia only they do it on a much more personal level. Farmers share equipment, they share crops, seeds and develop a rapport not easily undone by corporations such as McDonald's. Bolivia's multiple micro-climates allow it to grow a wide variety of foods for their citizens, thus making it easier to trade within their circle of neighborhood farmers. "I'll trade you ten pounds of potatoes for five pounds of Quinoa."

The article goes on to state that Bolivians do indeed love their hamburgers, a handful of Subway's and Burger King's still do business there, but the heritage of picking a burger from a street vendor has been passed down by generations. These cholitas, as they are called, sell their fare in the streets of Bolivia and this type of transaction is not easily duplicated by large corporations. I have added Bolivia to my bucket list...

Rescooped by Scarpaci Human Geography from Geography Education
Scoop.it!

Aborigines threaten to shut Uluru

Aborigines threaten to shut Uluru | Human Geography Too | Scoop.it
Aboriginal leaders threaten to ban tourists from a top Australian landmark in protest at "racist" government policies.

Via Seth Dixon
more...
Elizabeth Bitgood's curator insight, April 24, 2014 8:15 PM

This article points out the political and cultural geography of Australia.  The legislation that the indigenous people sees as raciest and painting a picture of them as bad people may lead to their closing off on of Australia’s tourist attractions.

Kendra King's curator insight, April 13, 9:22 PM

I have an issue with the fact this legislation isn’t directly targeting the issue of child sex abuse. Rather the legislation focuses on farther off underlying factor like alcohol (I say this because the article never made a clear link to the use of such substance and the abuse). In a way, I can see why the Aboriginal leader could say it is a racial issue seeing as how their whole peoples style of living is being targeted. Now I am not sure if I would feel differently if the legislation was actually working, but as the article mentioned the legislation isn’t actually having a great enough impact. To me it feels the legislation was really about trying to improve their countries standard of living in regards to life expectancy, etc. Maybe that is because of the way the article read, but really given how indirectly the legislation acts I think there was an ulterior motive.  As such, I am of the opinion that trying to change someone’s way of life (even if it is at their own peril) isn’t right. Inform them if you want, but don’t have such bans because I think the people should be able to choose how they live their life. Unless I see more evidence to the impact of abuse, I say this is just an overreach of power by a modern area.

 

It seems that even though colonialism ended, the aboriginal way of life is still looked down upon. Under colonial times we learned how most of the colonist went to Africa because it was the "white man's burden" to "civilize". Australia wasn't too different. By looking down on these people, the colonist had no qualm about exterminating entire populations. At least the current leaders judgement of the Abortionist's way of life doesn't put the Abortionists entire life at risk. So it is better than the past, but no by much since the people's way of life is still in subject to constraint constrains that don't match how the society operates. I also think they were looked at in a hypocritical manner here too because alcohol and pron are all commodities sold throughout Australia without the same kind of restriction. 


I do think the life expectancy statistic and issue of child abuse is troubling. If a more supported cause of the problem were demonstrated, I would have to think pretty hard about regulating the society because I am not a huge fan of telling a local population how to live, yet there is clearly something going on that is harming the population.  

Bob Beaven's curator insight, April 26, 4:18 PM

The battle going on in this article is interesting because it is between the Australians of European ancestry and those of native ancestry.  The Aborigine community doesn't appreciate the fact that the Australian government is becoming paternalistic and setting up "racist" laws to fix a problem plaguing their community, child abuse.  It is also interesting to consider that as a response the Aborigines would shut down Uluru (Ayer's Rock) in protest.  The fact that tension exists between the two groups is not surprising however, due to the fact that the whites drove the Aborigines off their land and then put them in reservations (much like the United State's treatment of its Native American Population).  It is a shame that the Aborigines would shut down the tourist site just to teach the government a lesson, in a tourist sense of view.  However, it is also a great threat because it would hurt the pocketbook of the country so to speak and it could make the government change its policies that it is using to fix the problem in the Aboriginal communities.  The whole situation is complicated in my point of view because the problem should be fixed, but it needs to be handled in a way that the Aborigines do not feel discriminated against.