Yes, in a way, I am. This is something that’s been on my mind for quite a while now, and probably an opinion I have that I feel most outspoken about… To get to it, I guess I could generalize it as “the wealthy” of Orange County. Now, it’s not like everyone here are extremely wealthy. Although the costs of living in Orange County are obviously not low, not everyone who live in Orange County are “rich.” This entry, however, is about the so-called “rich” or “wealthy.”

Generally, there seems to be a negative stigma and perception people have of those from Orange County. And while some of those perceptions are ones that I agree with, there are others that I don’t. It’s actually more of a general perception people have of those who are wealthy/rich, that they are selfish, that they step on others to get to the top, etc. etc.

Yes, some of these perceptions are probably true. Let’s face it: who isn’t selfish nowadays, and we all step on someone to “get to the top,” whether or not we like to admit or realize it. But really, to get to the point, my problem is with people who believe that those who have the money can afford to spend it on extra things “because they are rich,” as if their money didn’t really matter to them.

I’d like to take a moment here and state that my own accusations (as some may take it) I’m making may be generalized, and even a bit harsh, but what I’m saying is the sentiment that I feel and get from many people I’ve been around who have made these comments.

What makes me angry about those who assume the above or those who believe that just because someone is rich/wealthy and therefore can spare the extra money is that those who make these assumptions don’t seem to really think about where that money came from. And I think that I have a skewed perspective, because I have seen first-hand people who build, literally, from the bottom up. From nothing to something. (Bear in mind that I’m talking about money-wise.) And, as we all know, that ain’t easy.

It’s so easy to assume for those who are labeled “rich” or “wealthy” that they are snobs, that they are “rich bitches,” and that they spend their money extravagantly etc. etc. And while that is true – and seems to be quite the case – especially for the “rich parents’” children, when we look at their family’s wealth from those who actually make the money, it’s unfair to hold these negative judgments.

It may be true that my family and I happen to live in some “premiere” community in Orange County. And, to be honest, when we first moved into my community and my parents started to be-friend many of the other Chinese/Taiwanese families in this community, I had the same negative judgments about them: that they were these conservative, close-minded Republicans. I, too, regarded them as snobby and wrote them off even before I met them. I made rude comments about how they all have too much money, and they aren’t contributing much to our society, blah blah blah.

However, after my parents got to know them, and after they told me, I found out that all of their new friends’ wealth was self-made. There is a family who came to America with no more than $1,000. There is another family that went from rags to riches, back to rags, and, once again, came to riches.

Our society nowadays reacts so quickly to the label “rich” and “wealthy” that I think sometimes we don’t give enough credit to those self-made men/women out there. For them, their workdays are nonstop. Their stress levels are constantly high, because not only did they have to and continue to have to worry about everyday life and all that comes with it, but they also have to worry about managing their small businesses, which can be anywhere from 5 employees to 50 employees. That’s a hell lot of people and weight on their shoulders.

And perhaps here is where my own personal conflict comes – when it comes to fiscal policy. Personally, I whole-heartedly and firmly support what we could say is “liberal Democratic fiscal policy”: distribution of wealth, increasing taxes for those with higher incomes, better welfare; however, I can’t say I could disagree with “conservative fiscal policy.” In my own opinion, no, I would not support conservative fiscal economic policy. But at the same time, I also see and (try to) understand the other side of the argument: that for those who took the risks and worked 15-hour work days, they should have the right to use their money as they please, because they earned it.

This is when another personal conflict comes in: that I also realize that our society and institutions were and still are “made for the rich,” whether or not people like to admit that. So, at the same time, can we continue to “reward” those who have become “successful” in an environment that was made for them, and can we continue to “punish” those who are disadvantaged to begin with?

But then I think: for those who “made it” in society – and in my point of view, more specifically my parents and their “Asian rich friends” – they, too, may not have been “advantaged” to start out with, either. In fact, most of them faced just as many barriers. Not only did they face financial difficulties, they also faced cultural barriers, language barriers, and social barriers (including the ever-present racism). Can we say that it’s mere luck that they “made it?” Or should I remind myself that these stories I’ve heard are those “cream-of-the-crop” stories? Perhaps they are, but regardless, they still serve as an example that while conditions in our society are “made for the rich,” it’s not impossible for those who are at a disadvantage to make it, too. So when they do, do they deserve the negative comments and the stigma that come along with it?

Quite a majority of the “rich people” in Orange County are small business owners. And okay, maybe the majority of them are “WASPs” and maybe we can label them as those who are “advantaged to begin with.” But still, being small business owners (it’s not like they are CEOs of corporations..) means that they are entrepreneurs. Most of the wealthy in Orange County is considered “new money”, meaning they made the money for themselves, that it’s not from their “rich families.” These small business owners took probably the biggest risks of their lives and started something new. And they made it. Is this something we should characterize negatively? Isn’t the entrepreneurial spirit, the mindset that we should and could set our own destinies, what America is supposedly about?

Sometimes I think that it’s all the TV shows and the media that talk about the kids of those who are rich in Orange County who spend like no there’s no tomorrow, who are snobby, who are “rich bitches” that give Orange County the bad rap. But it’s important to make the distinction between those who are making the money – the small business owners, the entrepreneurs – and those who just spend money they don’t earn on their own.

At the end of the day, yes, I realize that all of these negative perceptions and judgments will still exist. Stigma, prejudice, and preconceived notions will always exist as long as we are human. So, perhaps this was a pointless rant afterall.

Related posts:

• Excess, wealth, and materialism and how that fits into a career in social enterprise
• Berkeley Hunger & Homelessness Conference 2009
• The Distinct American Identity

Amazon Watch is an organization that came to speak at one of my club BEACN‘s events and showed us a documentary a few months ago about the Chevron-Texaco mess in Ecuador and the Amazon, and I’ve been meaning to write about it for some time now.It’s an issue that I think is overlooked, if not even unknown, primarily in the U.S. (I’m not sure about other countries, but at least here, it’s definitely an issue that I had not been aware was going on.)

First, I’d like to give a brief introduction about Amazon Watch and what they do. Amazon Watch‘s mission statement is:

Amazon Watch works to protect the rainforest and advance the rights of indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with indigenous and environmental organizations in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability and the preservation of the Amazon’s ecological systems.

More specifically, Amazon Watch came to my club’s event to speak about the much-too-long ongoing court case between Amazon communities in Ecuador and Chevron-Texaco. So what exactly is the court case about?

The lawsuit, being held in Ecuador at Chevron’s request, will determine if Chevron will be forced to pay for a clean-up of the more than 18 billion gallons of toxic waste dumped by Texaco (now Chevron) when it operated an oil concession in the Amazon from 1964 to 1990. A team of court-appointed experts has assessed damages at up to $27.3 billion and a decision is expected later this year. — from a press release 5/29

The fact of the matter is, Texaco drilled for oil in the Ecuadorian Amazon from 1964-1990, and because Texaco chose profits over people (and in this case, the Ecuadorian communities), Texaco used the cheapest (and OBSOLETE) environmental methods to do so. Furthermore, Texaco “dumped more than 18 billion gallons of toxic wastewater, spilled roughly 17 million gallons of crude oil, and left hazardous waste in hundreds of open pits dug out of the forest floor” (from ChevronToxico).

What really shocked and infuriated (maybe I shouldn’t even be shocked, who knows nowadays..) me was when watching the documentary, I remember that one of the Texaco officials, when questioned about the health implications to the 30,000 campesinos of the Ecuadorian communities that Texaco’s waste has caused (not only including loss of biodiversity but also diseases including cancer, birth defects, miscarriages, and diseases that kill humans over time due to the toxic waste present in the Ecuadorian’s waters and streams), the official claimed something to the effect that it was the Ecuadorian communities’ lack of hygeine and their own ‘unsanitary’ practices, such as not washing their hands, that led to their current health problems.

Furthermore, as you’ll hear when you watch the documentary, there has been over 80,000 specimen tested and proven as evidence of the environmental and health damage the oil has caused to the natural surrounding.

And because Chevron (obviously) does not want this to be covered much in the media and does not want to lose this case, they have tried to drag out the case as long as possible and even requested the court case to be held in Ecuador (in hopes of being able to bribe judges/law officials more easily). They thought this was something that could be quelled down, quashed…But they were wrong.

What this truly is, as one of the activists from the documentary says, is a timed-release genocide. The 30,000 people living off the Amazon river are being killed, slowly. Some have no access to proper medical care, others are already suffering from cancer, miscarriages, and other health problem due to Texaco’s doing.

From the documentary, you will also see a woman who found out she has cancer, managed to get enough money for the treatment, only to find out that her daughter also has cancer and thus is forfeiting treatment for her own cancer to her daughter, thereby condemning herself to death because she has no other choice.

The Ecuadorian communities, the citizens, the people have spoken. And they are taking action. But them taking action is not always enough. We need more people to know about this issue, to hear the injusticies and not be okay with it. I’m personally going to keep an eye on any new progress Amazon Watch and ChevronToxico make.

This is not just an environmental issue; it is a social justice and human rights issue. The Ecuadorian people should not have to pay for and suffer from the irresponsibility and atrocities that Chevron/Texaco made.

What can you do? I highly recommend watching this short documentary on the Texaco disaster in Ecuador. It’s online and available for everyone to see. It definitely explains the issue much better than I can in this entry. And it’s compelling. So please, tell your friends about it. Watch it; be informed. That, I believe, is always the first step.

So, to sum it up:

• Watch the short online documentary Justicia Ya on the Texaco environmental disaster in Ecuadorian Amazon
• Visit Amazon Watch to read more about all their projects (they also run many other campaigns in countries such as Peru, Brazil, and other Amazonian countries)
• Go to the ChevronToxico website, which is a campaign with the collaboration of the Amazon Defense Coalition and Amazon Watch and more information about what’s going on in Ecuador in regards to this court case and ways to get involved.

Although it is really difficult for someone like me -  and probably someone like you – to know how we can help, there are a few ways (as outlined by ChevronToxico) -

1. Send a message to Chevron
2. Tell a friend, share the website links on your Facebook, tweet it.
3. Contact your city council (if you are in the U.S.) and encourage them to pass a resolution to ban purchasing of Chevron products (which, proudly, Berkeley was the first city to do so!)

Of course there are many other things we could do, but these are some actions that we can do, right now, as you’re sitting in front of your computer or holding your phone. So don’t make an excuse. Don’t turn your head the other way. From here is where we can start to make change.

Related posts:

• Berkeley Hunger & Homelessness Conference 2009

The Berkeley Hunger & Homelessness Conference 2009 is an event that I’ve been working to put on, along with other student organizations on campus, for a while now. It seems like (or I hope that) there will be quite a few attendees, and we have a pretty good variety and range of speakers.

A group of students on campus have also made a short student documentary on homelessness in Berkeley. We previewed the documentary yesterday at our meeting, and I must say – it looks fantastic, and I hope that those attending our event will enjoy it as well. The short documentary can be viewed here: it includes interviews with UC Berkeley students, a UC Berkeley professor, formerly and currently homeless individuals, and volunteers at homeless shelters.

My hope is that this conference will encourage dialogue and discussion about just what “homelessness” means, and hopefully address and dispel stereotypes and the stigma around homelessness. Furthermore, I hope that the conference will increase awareness about the food insecurity that exists in West Oakland (53 liquor stores, 0 grocery stores), discuss the inextricable linkage between hunger and homelessness, and address “sustainability” also as an overarching topic –

1. How does the lack of grocery stores in West Oakland affect our local food distribution?
2. Why is “homelessness” as an issue in Berkeley unsustainable?
3. How do we address these issues on a local level so as to become a more sustainable city?

And, most importantly, discuss what students and the community could do to alleviate hunger and homelessness. Although I feel that there are larger issues and steps that must be taken to truly address hunger and homelessness, the first step is awareness and education about these issues, and hopefully this conference will do just that.

As Obama said himself from The Huffington Post article,

“Part of the change in attitudes that I want to see here in Washington and all across the country,” [he said], “is a belief that it is not acceptable for children and families to be without a roof over their heads in a country as wealthy as ours.”

I will update here after the actual conference with (hopefully) positive thoughts and reactions. Until then!

The conference definitely exceeded my expectations. We had over 120 participants, and a diverse crowd. I really enjoyed hearing Osha Neumann speak about the stigma that surrounds “homelessness”: the way people refer to those who do not have houses “the homeless”, even though we don’t refer to people who do have houses “the housed.” I noticed that there was a lot of discussion about being “politically correct”, if you may call it that – otherwise, I guess we can just say our sensitivity, in referring to those without houses “homeless” or categorizing the “problem” as “homelessness.” I can now say that I do feel self-conscious whenever I say “the homess”, and yet I don’t know whether saying “those who are homeless” is any better. I’ve never really been good at being PC…regardless of the term.

One example that Osha Neumann gave that was just so telling of how unequal, corrupt, and fundamentally messed up about our society: someone who was chased, arrested, and jailed for stealing $6.50 worth of food/etc. from a store, versus those on Wall Street that stole millions and billions of dollars and there was so much debate over how to “punish” these people. This is what we call a double standard, and in this case, it should NOT exist! When he put it that way, it was just so dumbfounding and absurd to me…

I also enjoyed hearing Robert Ratner, Housing Administrator of Behavioral Health Care Services in Alameda County, speak about EveryOne Home. I’m not going to lie – I don’t know much about housing policy and legislative policies both regionally and nationally over the years, so I don’t have much commentary about this. However, I do have a description of EveryOne Home’s mission:

EveryOne Home envisions a system of care in Alameda County that by 2020, ensures all extremely low-income residents have a safe, supportive and permanent place to call home with services available to help them stay housed and improve the quality of their lives.

I think that the conference overall was a success: it brought together many different student groups (even more than the three – Cal Habitat for Humanity, The Suitcase Clinic, and CalPIRG - that had planned the conference), people from the community – both “the housed” and “the homeless” (trying to avoid having to be PC when mentioning these “two groups”..blah I don’t know how), and people of all ages. I hope it was helpful, informational, and maybe even inspirational for those who attended… This conference could become an annual event. But we’ll have to see about that.

Until then, please enjoy the new theme I installed, NOT (obviously) made by me. I like what they call a “Life Stream” — it’s like a newsfeed of (almost) everything in my social media life!

Related posts:

• School..and hunger & homelessness!
• School..and hunger & homelessness!
• Starting a revolution, in my own way

Prop 8 needs to NOT pass…

No related posts.

I hope everyone in the U.S. goes and VOTE!

For those in California.. NO on 4 and 8!

On a sadder note..RIP to Madelyn Dunham, Barack Obama’s grandmother. It’s so tragic she died..the day before the election :\ Life is unfair.

It makes his victory ever more important.

No related posts.