The PBS overview was rather extensive and provided an equal amount of information from both perspectives about this controversial issue. I thought it was beneficial how the article was separated into different sections to better describe the separate issues.
It is important for someone, like me, who knows little about the damming situation in India to read about its extensive history. To understand the importance of dams and the extraordinary engineering that has taken place in hopes of improving the consistent drought issues that are relevant all over the country. However, this article expresses not only are dams built for ecological concerns but in the Indian mind, the people see the “holy rivers [as] vital to India’s existence.” The rivers and water are considered scared due to the scarcity throughout the land.
While reading the history section of dam building in India I thought it was interesting to see that dams have been built for centuries, and still always face the same issues of displacing both people and land. However, these issues are continuously ignored and the dams almost always proceed over the needs of the people. For a problem that has been relevant for so many years it is surprising to see that no laws or provisions have been installed to decrease these damages. In addition to not installing laws to protect the local people from loosing their land, in “1995 Indian Environment Ministry report revealed that 87 percent of India’s river valley projects did not meet requires safeguards.” This proves that ministry officials were more than aware of the “various environmental regulations” that had been violated for the last 15 years. Yet, they still found a way to continue the projects even with problems like soil erosion and neglect of human health only to name a few.
The history section highlights the main issues of a power struggle that Arundhati Roy discusses in her interview. This interview introduces the contrasting voice to the history of the dams, expressing the voice and concerns of the people. Roy states the continuous situation is a “story of the powerful against the powerless and the whole world.” Even though the “dams are the temples of secular India and worshipped” by the people, their “faith has been shaken” due to its consequences. Roy presents alternative and more sustainable ways to collect local water that have been discovered in different parts of India, yet the government has refused to create funds for these types of projects. I believe that the lack of funds is a result of the alternative ways not being able to collect as much water as the dams. However, if they can prevent displacing 30,000 people and catastrophic environmental concerns, wouldn’t the alternative plans be worthwhile? This article demonstrates and example of how technology is a privilege but it without restrictions it can create more harmful situations than before.
With the lack of government push to increase the quality of life that the Indian population can have, it makes me question the importance of health and saving the cultural identity in India. I know that in many other countries, the political system has so many different ties that at times it ends freezing the government from making any decision because they are afraid to make one party or the other mad. I also understand in India there is a large discrepancy between the rich and the poor. The poor are those that are effected largely by the dam production in India. As we have seen in this class, the poorer populations tend to be those that do not have much of a voice in governmental decisions. Leaving individuals who congregated by the dam to voiceless and underrepresented. It is upsetting to me to see occasions such as these to happen, because I feel it is the government and political branches that should be standing up for the public, rather than making decisions that are once sided and only benefiting one group of people. In the movie that we watched for the reading, it was so uplifting to see that the dam was not built in the end. It shows that there is still room for growth when pertaining to making change in the government.
ReplyDelete