In the book, “The Hungry Tide,” Ghosh portrays an extreme dynamic between Nature and Humans. In the Chapters, Ghosh complicates the problem of perceiving wildlife versus the cost of human lives. The chapter “Crimes” reveals the livelihood of humans stripped to protect wildlife. The cost of human lives and blood is hidden under the cover of saving another species. In this chapter, Kusum cries out “This island has to be saved for its trees, it has to be saved for its animals, it is a part of a reserve forest, it belongs to a project to save tigers, which is paid for by people from all around the world… Who are these people, I wondered, who love animals so much that they are willing to kill us for them? Do they know what is being done in their name?” (Ghosh 217). This brings into question the so-called “kindness” to protest for animal rights where human rights are violated behind the curtain. The chapter “A Killing” represents Piya’s perspective on protecting and preserving animals. Piya argues “You can’t take revenge on an animal.” (Ghosh 242). Piya’s desire to protect animals is admirable because her education and studies taught her to protect them, however, it is also her limitation to only see the animals in danger, not the struggles of livelihood of humans. In my view, Ghosh seems to force the reader to pick a side over providing possible solutions to the conflict like Butler’s work of teaching ways and knowledge to survive.

I want to share some of my insights on this conflict. In the tiger instance, I understand the need to kill the tiger to save the village. Although it’s cruel based on Piya, it is understandable from a survival perspective. However, I disagree with the notion of prioritizing the animal’s life over a group of villagers. It’s not logical to save a life to endanger others. In this situation, there is no win-win solution. There is a report that the tiger has killed numerous people and broken into the boundary of the village to set up for its death. Protecting wildlife is crucial but what are the boundary lines of protection where it endangers lives? Kanai has pointed out, “If there were killings on that scale anywhere else on earth it would be called a genocide, and yet here it goes almost unremarked…And the reason is just that these people are too poor to matter. We all know it, but we choose not to see it. Isn’t that a horror too – that we can feel the suffering of an animal, but not of human beings? (Ghosh 248). Rebuttal to Piya’s argument, if this case was present in advanced countries I could imagine the lines between protecting animals would be blurred when it endangers human lives. The settlers of tide country are poor people and their rights are not granted to them. Why are their lives dismissed when they are killed by the tiger? Furthermore, this conflict has revealed the complications with the kinship between humans and the ecosystem. How does one choose to help when both sides of the argument cannot be blamed for their actions? 

For years, the Anthropocene was believed to be the primary cause of climate change. Haraway argues otherwise; in the “Anthropocene, Capitalocene, Plantationocene, Chthulucene: Making Kin.” she presents the idea that the Anthropocene is not the center cause of climate change but the contribution of organisms and systems. The influence of historical, ecological, economic, and Plantationocene context behind human activities. History is unchangeable, however, issuing climate change with current issues could change future history. Haraway proposes that it is crucial to form a kinship with the environment to make changes.

Current problems that are not directly caused by the Anthropocene have been catastrophic to all the organisms on the earth. Current problems such as wars, nuclear weapons, and food waste contribute to climate change. Haraway stated, “No species, not even our arrogant one pretending to be good individuals in so-called modern Western scripts, acts alone, assemblages of organic species and abiotic make history, the evolutionary kind and the other kinds too.” (Haraway 159). Haraway argues climate change is shaped by other organisms and systems not solely based on the Anthropocene. The conflict and the historical background between countries have resulted in multiple wars. As the wars intensified, nuclear weapons were possibly used are high. If nuclear weapons were used, it could cause catastrophic destruction to our climate. According to ICAN, “smoke and dust from firestorms would block sunlight from reaching the Earth’s surface and cause an abrupt drop in global temperatures and rainfall, leading to shorter growing seasons and decreasing overall agricultural production”. (Climate change, famine and nuclear weapons). The lack of sun radiation could result in a reduction in agricultural production that would lead to human extinction from starvation. Even the process of creating nuclear weapons has contaminated the earth with nuclear dumps and testing. Another current issue is food waste. Food waste is also proven to impact climate change. As overconsumption controls the economy, food is often wasted and ends up at the landfill left to decompose leading to the release of methane that is deadly to climate change. If the waste is not completely decomposed it will lead to soil degradation releasing more carbon. Furthermore, the damage to the landmass makes the production of the food unrecoverable. The existing issues should be altered to reduce the effect of climate change.

We are living through the effects of climate change. Natural catastrophes are striving to be harder to predict. Wildfires, floods, droughts, and other natural disasters appear more frequently. Animals are forced out of their habitats making it hard to find refuge on the planet. Humans are also affected by harming the respiratory system from the increased air pollution. It would be devastating if we continue to feel indifferent and don’t take action. Hence, Haraway introduces kinship with the environment. Haraway stated, “we have a mammalian job to do, with our biotic and abiotic sym-poietic collaborators, co-laborers. We need to make kin sym-chthonically, sym-poetically. Who and whatever we are, we need to make-with—become-with, compose-with—the earth bound” (Haraway 161). According to Haraway, making Kin is beyond reproduction, it’s the relation with humans between animals, plants, and living organisms that coexist like lifecycles on earth. Through kinships with the environment, humans would prioritize addressing the cause of climate change and advocate practices to reduce pollution.

Citation:

Climate Disruption and Famine – ICAN, www.icanw.org/climate_disruption_and_famine. Accessed 16 Sept. 2024.