Reflections on TEDxUofM

I want to follow the footsteps of Jameson Toole and talk about a fantastic event that we were at recently. Last Friday (a week ago, already!), I was invited to speak at TEDxUofM, an independently organised TED event. TEDxUofM was completely student organised and executed. They did an absolutely amazing job. I want to thank Tom Crawford, Alex O'Dell, Kelsey Rhodes, Poonam Dagli, Alyssa Ackerman, Jane van Velden, Lia Wolock, Peter Kovits, and especially Victoria Johnson for all of the help and encouragement that they gave me leading up to and during the conference. I wouldn't have been able to do it without them. It turns out that it was the largest TEDx conference, ever. I am grateful for the opportunity they gave me; it was a wonderful experience, and the biggest honour I could imagine. The theme for this year's conference, staged at the Michigan Theater, was "Encouraging Crazy Ideas." Here is a beautiful video speaking about the event.

 

 Also check out the amazing intro video, all hand drawn, that was played at the beginning of the conference.

Michigan Theatre (from tedxuofm2011.posterous.com)

The speakers were absolutely amazing - doctors and musicians and illustrators and humans rights advocates. Donia Jarrar was one of the speakers. She's a musical composition student here, and she talked about her efforts in translating voicemail messages of people in Egypt during the recent revolution there. 

Donia Jarrar

Chris Van Allsberg talked about the story of the woman who decided to go over the Niagara Falls in a barrel.

Chris Van Allsburg

Jared Genser talked about his efforts to free prisoners of political dissent, all over the world. All of the speakers were current or former University of Michigan students or professors. Everyone had a connection to this incredible town, Ann Arbor.

I personally spoke about the power of individual action in combating large problems. Here is a picture that was put in The Michigan Daily. The "crazy idea" that I tried to communicate was that we don't need crazy ideas. We know all that we need to know to make huge strides towards treading lightly on this planet. (I will post the video as soon as it comes online.)

me

What was interesting about the topic of the conference, "Encouraging Crazy Ideas," is that each and everyone one of us is empowered to make the choice of truly committing to changing the status quo. This was reflected by all of the other speakers that spoke at the conference. Hopefully, such sentiments are the seeds that will grow into meaningful change in our world. As Erik Torenberg reflected in The Michigan Daily today,

"A completely student run event [like TEDx] is a crazy idea. Their phenomenal performances show what can happen when you put talented students from diverse backgrounds together for a common goal. There are more people who would like to make amazing things happen. Some were in the audience, some weren’t. 

At the reception following the lectures, I realized I wasn’t the only one who was inspired. Some friends and I talked about exciting things we could do within our organizations and on our own. We kept building off each other’s ideas, offering enthusiastic support and feedback. The energy was palpable. 

But what will happen next week when exams and papers consume our minds? What will happen when people tell us to be practical, and play it safe? Will this rekindled belief in our abilities to make something great happen fade? 

My friends and I spoke about this with some of the speakers and organizers of the event for more than an hour. How can we maintain this community of students, professors and alumni who want to make a big difference? Should it be organized formally or should it continue organically? How will we look back at TEDx in a few months? Will we see it as a genuine, perhaps revolutionary, call to action? Or merely a one-day performance?"


All I can say is that if you are willing to live the change, you will always find support, especially in a place like Ann Arbor.

Language

This post is about words, meaning and language. Yesterday, I received an email from someone whose thoughts I value. He raised a couple of issues about my article in The Michigan Daily from the 10th of November, 2010. This post is in no way intended to be an attack on him or anyone who feels the same way he does, absolutely not; the points he raises are legitimate, and I want to address them and provide clarification and context to the article. Hopefully we can have conversations about this.

First, he raises the issue of my usage of words. If you've read the blog, you might have noticed that I have a tendency to use quotation marks around some words, for example words like "developing country." I would like to explain why. In talking to many professors, students and others about concepts and issues "sustainability," people's perceptions about what that word means, or even at a lower level, what the word "environmentalism" means, changes from person to person. Many of the words used do not have set  meanings, leaving them ripe for, for lack of a better word, kidnapping to mean whatever people want the word to mean. It really bugs me how people use the word "sustainable" or "green" in whatever way they choose to use it. But what this means is that definitions are fuzzy, and are constantly evolving. In fact, many of the conversations I've had with various people, from urban planning to natural resources, have revolved around developing a common language that we all can relate to and understand.

On the other hand, you have words that the world has for some reason come to accept, which I have not. In the article from yesterday, in the third to last paragraph, I used quotation marks around "modernization." This may give off the impression that other people use the word incorrectly, that the word doesn't or shouldn't mean what it is generally accepted to mean. Other examples, again, are words and concepts like "developed country," and "developing country." These words are loaded with value judgements, and have been defined by people who wish to place their values on others not like them, particularly in the context of imperialism of all sorts - cultural, economic, etc. I used quotation marks because I don't like how "modernization" is used. I want to point out that if you use "modernization," the average person will say that this means increase in income, owning a TV, car, and computer (necessarily involving trash in the case of the article in the Daily). What some people might also say is that it also relates to changes in social structure. But modernization to the world is absolutely a Western-style modernization. I think there can be other sorts of modernization, like living harmoniously with nature, place and people, without necessarily violently extracting resources from the Earth and leaving degradation behind. That is the modernization I wish to see. This is at some level why I do use quotation marks - to point out that there can be alternate definitions to those widely accepted.

The second issue he raised was about my explanation of sacrifice. I mention that when we sacrifice, we choose to make something sacred. With my no-trash project, I have sacrificed new clothes, and an iPhone. But I would like to think that what I have made sacred are the Earth, people, and natural resources sacred. In her mind, what I am doing is not sacred, and that talking about sacrifice could make people think that I think I am a martyr. I absolutely don't consider myself a martyr, and I hope those reading this blog don't, either. Here is why I talk about sacrifice. An example is worthwhile.If someone has been smoking and realises that it is bad for them, they quit smoking. What they have chosen to do is consider their body sacred, directly, and the bodies of others around them sacred, directly or indirectly. I have absolutely sacrificed things and experiences with trying to live trash-free. Any choice we make involves some sacrifice, what economists would like to call "opportunity costs." I don't like the use of technical jargon for stuff like the Michigan Daily, so I choose to use the word "sacrifice," because at least in this case, it fully encapsulates what I'm trying to get at. Further, it is something we all can relate to. We all, well many people, sacrifice, all the time. I am not insisting that everyone go trash-free, although that would be nice. What I am indirectly saying is that if there is to be any change in our society, sacrifice of all kinds will be a must - sacrifice of coal, sacrifice of rare Earth metals, sacrifice of "convenience," etc.

Lastly, he questions why I chose to talk about philosophy, rather than provide concrete examples of how people can themselves reduce their trash. I think that for any sort of durable change, change which people internalise and think constantly about, there has to be more of a connection than saying, "Don't use plastic bags." Therefore, I chose to explain why I am doing what I am doing. I know everyone doesn't share my philosophy, but I think it is important to explain myself before people make their judgments about what I'm doing.

Why trash? A personal statement for today's Michigan Daily

Sorry I haven't posted in a couple of days; a dear friend of mine is visiting from Germany and I haven't really sat down to think much. Anyway, I was contacted by The Michigan Daily to write a piece for their "Green Issue." It was published today, and I wanted to post that. It is a synthesis of many of my thoughts from the past year. (But here is a sneak preview of what I'm thinking about for the next few posts - purchasing vs. consumption, durable change, strategies of action - what do you do when you are faced with a conundrum?, ethics in research design, Pareto optimality...)

---------

Why trash?

Look around you — on the street corner, in the Fishbowl, in your kitchen. Waste is all around us. It can be viewed as involuntary and unconscious, as Adrianna Bojrab described in her article “Commit to reducing waste” in the October 21 edition of The Michigan Daily.  But at the same time, I would also argue that waste is entirely voluntary. The mere existence of waste and trash points to a choice that we as a society are making. Since it's easy to buy into the status quo, we trick ourselves into thinking there is no choice.

Since March 29, 2010, I have been trying to live a trash-free life. I consider everything except toilet paper and food scraps as trash — that means recyclables are trash, too. I use bags and containers that I owned on March 29 as my only transporting and packaging materials. If I do “need” something, I only buy it from a second-hand store. I refuse before reducing, reusing or recycling.

I realized quickly that most of our trash on a daily basis comes from food packaging, and that buying groceries, flour, fruit and beans in bulk will save much trash from ending up in landfills. I shop at the Farmer's Market and the People's Food Co-op almost exclusively. I carry around a set of silverware and ask the server at BTB not to wrap my burritos in foil. Since March 29, I have accumulated around three pounds of trash, mostly receipts, the tops off of reusable milk jars and stickers off of fruit.

There are, however, other things that I failed to anticipate, such as a broken Pyrex pie dish, and a sparkler from my friend’s graduation party. Each piece of trash I now have has a story for me. Each piece embodies an experience and many lives. Not only mine, but also those of the human and natural resources that went into making them.

I grew up in Mumbai, India, a bustling, multicultural, multilingual city of close to 20 million people. Just like any mega city, the grime there is visible, tangible and never more than a few feet away from you. Yet, I grew up there during a time in which over-consumption hadn't really made its way into the mainstream Indian culture. I am proud to say my parents afforded my sister and me a simple but incredibly happy life, without the truly unnecessary trinkets and gadgets that seem to clutter homes and trash cans nowadays.

After moving to Ann Arbor in 2003 to start an undergraduate degree, nothing much changed for me in the way I chose to live. Living within means and constraints  — personal, financial, social and environmental  — is something I value. I believe this is the responsible way to live. My first laptop from 2003 is still the same one I use today; it gets the job done. The clothes I wear, as old as they may be, keep me covered, warm and comfortable. New things always come with their tags, bubble wrap and fancy bags — things we will “trash” within days.

When I go to a second-hand store, I choose not to see "old" forks, "refused" t-shirts and "outdated" furniture. Instead, I choose to see all the material, energy, water, time and other resources we have invested in perfectly functional and working objects, objects of our humanity. I don't mean to say that there isn't merit in novelty and fashion. What I am saying is that we should make full use of what we have already, before going out and purchasing something new, untouched and virgin.

Trash is visceral — we feel trash, we smell it, touch it and hear it. When we go out to dinner, we use napkins to wipe our hands. When we crack open a bottle of wine, we rip off the wrapping, hiding the cork and throwing it out. On game day, the yard of a college fraternity house is littered with plastic cups. We hear the early trash collectors with their huge trucks at the crack of dawn, crushing pounds of trash. A trash bin filled to the brim releases a putrid smell that just makes us want to walk away.

Indeed, trash makes its presence felt far more than do our other foes, like greenhouse gases. Take carbon dioxide, for example: When we flip on the light switch, the room is illuminated here, but the odorless, colorless carbon dioxide is emitted elsewhere. How many of us can visualize such an invisible threat?

What does 385 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere mean? That means that out of a million, there are 999,615 parts of other gases. Greenhouse gases suffer from a lack of perception. But that doesn't mean trash and greenhouse gases aren't related.

The social, economic and philosophical structures in place that cause the formation of trash and greenhouse gases are the same. Trash is just a different manifestation of the same problem — consumption without limits, carelessness about the future and disrespect for the ecosystems of the present. Trash stems from the choices we make about what to buy and how to live. Trash is about greenhouse gas emissions, toxins in water and heavy metals and dioxins released from incinerators. We have structured our societies and interactions around trash and waste, and have accepted their existence.

No one wants to be around trash, and that’s why places in Canada and the entire city of Toronto ship their trash and waste, more than 400 truckloads per day, to Michigan for dumping. I like to think of trash as water: It flows like streams and rivers along the path of least resistance (those willing to deal with it for the least amount of money) and ends up in puddles, lakes and oceans (landfills). New York City ships most of its waste to New Jersey, Virginia, South Carolina and Ohio — far away places. Many of the semi trucks you see on the highway are actually just full of trash.

Trash is big business, upwards of a $50 billion per year industry, and people have a vested interest in the generation of trash. Yes, in some ways, my project to stop making trash “negatively” affects someone's family and someone's job, in these "tough economic times." But inherently, any activism or choice changes the fabric of what is acceptable and what isn't, which inherently affects our communities and economies.

Many people have asked me about my social life: am I able to go out and be with friends? Where do I go to eat? Am I just a sore thumb when I am with a group of people? In the end, it's about sacrifice. My friend told me the other day that the act of sacrificing is to make something sacred. What have I sacrificed? Not much, to me at least — fast food, packaged pasta and a new iPhone. But what have I made sacred? I have made my Earth, my surroundings and people that deal with the consequences of our behavior more sacred to me.

What does a world without trash look like, and how do our interactions need to change to move toward that vision? Is trash a natural outcome of “modernization?” What would happen if we had to carry around the trash we produced rather than throw it “away?”

Ann Arbor, as many of your friends and family have probably noted to you, is a unique environment that is set up for each one of us to live experimentally and experientially. We have all of the social resources set up in a way that we can choose a project and live it. I would encourage you to think about those things you take for granted, those things that are unconscious to you, raise them into consciousness and act on them. Maybe you can try living trash-free for a week, or maybe even a day. I am waiting to hear your story.