One Year On From Brumadinho

                 This post is a summary of two articles. The first with the incomplete title above was published at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/01/24/one-year-brumadinho-miners-must-step-efforts-tackle-deadly-dams/. The second was published at   https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/one-year-on-brazilian-city-haunted-by-deadly-dam-collapse/2020/01/25/2cbd87c4-3f30-11ea-afe2-090eb37b60b1_story.html

                Four years ago, investors and companies were warned of a fundamental problem with the way waste from mining was being stored in tailing dams. Despite the death of 19 people in Mariana, and huge environmental damage, the issue was not properly addressed. Tragically an even larger disaster would occur just over three years later on January 25, 2019 in the same region of brazil resulting in the deaths of 270 people at Brumadinho. The response this time has been very different. today local community members will continue a solemn procession to the site of the disaster, and reflect on the news earlier this week that the former CEO of the company, Brazilian mining giant Vale. has been charged with murder. Tailings dams are some of the largest human-made structures on earth and supposed to last in perpetuity but some are not and more will colapse. Major interventions since the Brumadinho disaster by investors have included the demand for a new independent global standard of tailings management that is based upon the consequences of failure. This has resulted in an independent global Tailings Review led by former Swiss environment minister, Bruno Oberle and jointly convened through the International Council on Mining and Metals, U.N. Environment programme and Principles for Responsible Investment. Once the review was established, investors then wrote to over 700 companies and requested detailed disclosures for the first time on each individual tailings facility they had responsibility. As a result of these disclosures today we launch a new  public global database of the 1,800 tailings dams that have been identified to date. This is very much a first step and will integrate satellite imagery of each dam into the site as well as details of the safety classifications. Investors will also look to commit to reinforcing a new global standard and being prepared to consider denying finance to companies that do not comply. The first intervention is the need to create an international monitoring centre that provides objective monitoring of dams every minute all year round. We have systems like this for shipping and aviation and it is clear we need this for tailings dams. Second, we must remove the most dangerous tailings dams. A funding mechanism needs to be established, but one that can move at pace. This should not remove the responsibility of the company but enable immediate action. Lastly, industry with the support of investors needs to charge the application of new tech to remove the need for tailings dams. There are examples of companies that operate to the highest standards and these CEOs have been partners with investors in driving the kind of change that needs to happen. The urgency of this action is underlined by new data released today showing that the volume of tailings stored in disclosed facilities is set to increase 25% in the next five years. If we are to be honest these two disasters are the inevitable consequence of a mining system that has been pushed to maximise returns and reduce costs, with the treatment of waste in many respects as an externality. It is too soon to say if the interventions that investors are driving will be sufficient, but what is clear  is that the response this time is genuinely trying  to deal with the root of the problem. It will undoubtedly be difficult but this will eventually result in a safer mining sector that can provide the minerals and metals we need without the tragic consequences.

                 Like she has so many other nights, Ana Maria Gomes is awakened by the cries of her husband and tries to calm him as he shouts for help from his mine coworkers. She convinces him the dam collapse that devastated their city of Brumadinho and killed at least 270 people happened a year ago. Sebastião Gomes, recounted the episode and said he is learning to live with the nightmares. He is also undergoing psychiatric treatment. And he is not alone. Brumadinho is a city of 40,000 residents tortured by its past, and struggling to find a future, with doctors reporting spikes in the use of anti-anxiety medications and anti-depressants. The rupture of mining company Vale's dam created a wave of mud and debris. Some bodies still haven't been found, and perhaps never will be. For survivors and family members of victims, the dam's collapse was only the beginning. Use of anti-depressants jumped 56% in 2019 from the prior year, while anxiety medication rose 79% in the same period. "The impact on the population's mental health is similar to that caused by a huge disater. like Fukushima, or September 11 in the U.S." said Maila de Castro Neves, a professor of psychiatric at UFMG. De Castro will evaluate the impact of the dam's collapse on the local population over the coming years. She said local residents are in a "vulnerable state" at risk of anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, substance abuse and even suicidal behavior. The human toll from the disaster is not even fully clear; the search for corpses continues. Rescuers are digging in the mud, trying to locate the bodies of 11 missing victims. The eve of the disaster's anniversary brought some hope to victims' families that their loved ones may find justice. Public prosecutors charged Vale, German auditing firm TUV SUD and 16 employees for intentional homicide and environmental crimes. Among the accused is Vale's former CEO, Fabio Schvartsman. Prosecutors say there is evidence the companies knew the mine was operating with "unacceptable" safety conditions, putting at risk the lives of its employees. Vale and TUV SUD executives face up to 30 years jail time. In a statement, Vale expressed that "the accusations of fraud are perplexing" and said it is collaborating with authorities. Schvartsman denied the charges against him and TUV SUD has said the cause of the dam failure still has not been conclusively clarified, adding that the company continues to cooperate with the investigation. The paralysis of mining activity, which generated about 60% of town revenue before the tragedy, has left Brumadinho's economic future unknown. Paradoxically, the economic impact was initially positive, as the city received an infusion of emergency funds from Vale and carried out recovery works. The company paid out more than $6 billion in compensation, heating up local activity. "We are aware that the increase in economic activity is temporary, and we are greatly concerned about the future in the medium- and long-term," said Brumadinho's mayor, Avismar Barcelos. The punishment was worse for riverside communities and farmers who relied on the Paraopeba River. For Gomes, the ex-Vale worker, everything changed. That day he suffered only scratches on his arms and knees, but mental damage endures: he has to undergo various psychological treatments. The money he received from Vale has afforded him financial stability, though he remains in litigation with the company and he is writing a book for catharsis. He also gives paid talks about mining to raise awareness about its risks.

                 

Compensation and Reparations

              This post is a summary of the article with the title above published at   https://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/compensation

              There is a growing awareness that addressing past injustice is a crucial part of the process of healing and reconciliation. In order to move towards a peaceful future, governments must acknowledge and respond to the wrongs and injuries of the past, especially human rights violations. Doing so takes various forms. One way is through compensation programs and reparations for the victims of injustice. To commit injustice is to violate or suppress people's rights or fundamental freedoms as recognized by international law. Unfortunately, many instances of injustice can be tied to policies either condoned or consciously chosen by governments. These state-sponsored human rights violations cause serious damage to the physical and moral integrity of individuals. Although these harms are often irreparable, international and national courts have required states to pay victims compensation for both material and psychological injury sustained as a direct result of their actions or policies. This serves both to acknowledge the violation and to sanction the state in question. A society that once tolerated human rights abuses must come to terms with the past, accept responsibilty, and try to make amends. Customary international law provides the legal foundation for victims' right to compensation. Various international treaties have recognized that victims of human rights violations have a right to restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. And the obligation to provide compensation for victims of injustice has become part of international humanitarian law. Such law stress the importance of publicly recognizing the damages caused by injustice and of addressing the needs of victims. Compensation serves a variety of important functions. First, it helps victims to manage the material aspect of their loss. In many cases, monetary reparations in the form of monthly payments are essential to ensure victims' survival. Monetary compensation programs may also deter the state from future abuses by imposing a financial cost on such misdeeds. However, many note that such reparations are not primarily about money, but rather about making crucial repairs to individuals' psyches, and to social and political institutions. Compensation programs serve to acknowledge wrongdoing, restore survivors' dignity, and raise public awareness about the harms victims have suffered. For this reason, reparations for former victims or/and their family members are often a psychologically necessary component of the healing process. This can help victims to come to terms with the traumatic events that have occurred. Indeed, compensation programs are a crucial part of restorative justice and serve as focal points in the healing process. They can help victims move beyond the desire for revenge and make it possible to repair relationships that have been damaged by acts of injustice. Restitution paid to the victims can serve as a symbolic apology and signify a move to make amends. Lastly, compensation programs serve to promote and protect human rights. They aim to recognize the harms victims have suffered, correct these abuses, and prevent the reoccurrence of such acts. Customary international law suggests that the victims of human rights violations must receive a remedy for the injuries they have suffered. But what counts as an appropriate remedy? Apologies are not enough to satisfy victims's demands for justice and allay their fears that the same atrocities might be repeated. Victims should receive compensation for all damages that result from the wrongful act, including any profits that would have been possible if had those unjust acts not occurred. This includes lost educational opportunities, wages, business profits, etc. It also encompasses physical, psychological, and material damages, as well as medical and legal costs associated with the violations. Measures should also be taken to ensure that relatives of missing persons receive adequate financial assistance to carry out investigations. Family members of those killed should receive pensions for lost wages. However, compensation need not be strivtly monetary. It should also include necessary psychological and social assistance and support. This includes the establishment of local treatment centers for the victims and rehabilitation systems. Compensation can also be provided through the restitution of property that was wrongfully seized and the reallocation of economic resources. And in cases where victims have lost their employment or their employability was harmed. Program to return employment or property that was wrongfully removed aim to re-establish the situation that would have existed if the wrongful act had not taken place. In addition, states must carry out various initiatives to ensure that justice is served and guarantee that abuses will not be repeated. This includes both formal apologies and the prosecution and punishment of those responsible for the violations. In order to ensure that violations will not reoccur, states must also provide human rights training to military forces and law enforcement officials, protect human rights workers, and strengthen the judiciary. While monetary compensation is indeed integral to addressing injustice, many have noted that such programs are often limited. Regimes that have tolerated human rights abuses may be unwilling to recognize the injustices. In fact, individuals responsible for violations may retain their positions and oppose such programs. While many victims will initially be satisfied with monetary compensation, they may grow increasingly dissatisfied as time passes. If victims do not feel that justice has been served, they will find difficult to put the past behind them. In addition to suffering, victims of violations typically suffer psychological injury and emotional distress. Compensation programs that simply pay out financial grants are not sufficient to help individuals overcome their trauma. This is because the amount of distress, injustice, and anger that victims typically struggle with is immeasurable. Ultimate responsibility for ensuring the victims receive compensation should reside with the state. Victims often do not know the identities of those who perpetrated abuses against them. Also, because the state has obligations under international law to uphold human rights, it has a duty to afford remedies to victims. State responsibility results from actions directly attributable to state agents, from those that only indirectly involve the state, and from a state's failure to prevent human rights abuses. Even if governments actors do not perpetrate violations, the state bears responsibility for reparations. In addition, if the old government that committed or tolerated the abuses does not provide compensation, the obligation carries over to the successor government. Third parties often play a crucial role in ensuring that all victims receive assistance. Agencies and mechanisms that deal with human rights can make recommendations to governments about compensation for those who have suffered from human rights abuses. Outside actors can also insist that victims receive reparations and pressure governments to implement such programs. In many cases, countries need help to establish mechanisms to make effective remedies available. Outside governments often offer assistance to refugees who have been victims of violations, and NGOs often assist with compensation efforts. This includes upholding victims' right to reparation, working to expose violations, and helping victims to pursue their claims. In addition, more and more intergovernmental organizations are helping to fund projects that assist former victims.

How Social Media Has Changed Politics

                   This post is a summary of two articles. The first with the title above published in August 2019 at   houghtco.com/how-social-media-has-changed-politics-3367534. The second was published at   https://sysomos.com/2016/10/05/social-media-affects-politics/

                  The use of social media has dramatically changed the way campaigns are run and how citizens interact with their elected officials. The prevalence of social media in politics has made elected officials and candidates more accountable and accessible to voters. And the ability to publish content and broadcast it to millions of people instantaneously allows campaigns to manage their candidates's images based on rich sets of analytics in real time and at almost no cost. Social media tools allow politicians to speak directly to voters without spending a dime. It has become fairly common for political campaigns to rpoduce commercials and publish them for free on YouTube instead of, or in addition to, paying for time on TV or the radio. Often, journalists covering campaigns will write about those YouTube ads, broadcasting their message to a wider audicence at no cost to the politicians. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube have become instrumental in organizing campaigns. They allow like-minded voters and activists to easily share news and information such as campaign events with each other. Political campaigns can tap into a wealth of information or analytics about the people who are following them on social media and customize their messages based on selected demographics. A campaign may find one message appropriate for voters under 30 years old will not be as effective with those over 60 years old. Some campaigns have used so-called "money bombs" to raise large amounts of cash in a short time. Money bombs are typically 24-hour periods in which candidates press their supporters to donate money. They use social media to get the word out and often tie these money bombs to specific controversies that emerge during campaigns. Direct access to voters also has its downside. Politicians to send out unfiltered posts has landed many candidates in hot water or embarrassing situations. A good example is Anthony Weiner, who lost his seat in Congress after exchanging sexually explicit  messages and photos with women on his Facebook account. Asking for feedback from voters or constituents can be a good thing. Many campagns hire staffers to monitor their social media channels for a negative response and scrub anything unflattering. But such a bunker-like mentality can make a campaign appear defensive and closed off from public. Well-run modern-day campaign will engage the public regardless of whether their feedback is negative or positive. The value of social media is in its immediacy. Politicians and campaign do absolutely nothing without first knowing how their policy statements or moves will play among the electorate. Twitter and Facebook both allow them to instantaneously gauge how the public is responding to an issue or controversy. Politicians can then adjust their campaigns accordingly, in real time, without the use of high-priced consultants or expensive polling. Social media tools have allowed citizens to easily join together to petition the government and their elected officials, leveraging their numbers against the influence of powerful lobbyists and monied special interests. make no mistake, lobbyists and special interest still have the upper hand, but the day will come when the power of social media allows like-minded citizens to join together in ways that will be just as powerful.

                The political landscape has changed quite a bit in the last couple of decades. The internet has played a large role in this transformation. Social media, in particular, is now a serious factor in political campaigns and in the way people think about issues. Candidates and their supporters constantly post their views on social media. One of the ways that social media has transformed politics is the sheer speed at which news, polls results and rumors are shared. While you can access news on many websites at any hour, most people spend more time on social media than they do on news or political websites. This mean that you get all of the latest trending news stories and opinions shared by your friends whenever you log in. One of the positive effects that social media has on politics is the opportunity for voters to interact more easily with candidates and elected officials. Targeting is used throughout the advertising industry to make sure that ads and messages reach the right audience. In the age of social media, politicians and people running for office are able to target their campaigns. Political campaigns are now influenced by every story, whether true or not, that gets spread around social media. It's getting more and more difficult to separate actual news from fake news online. Social media makes this distinction especially confusing. The constant stream of memes, links and rumors about political leaders and candidates is a mixture of truth, lies, satire and speculation. There are now quite a few fake or satirical "news" sites that often post stories that sound authentic. There are also sites with political biases or those peddling various unsubstantiated conspiracy theories. It's therefore necessary to use a great deal of discernment before believing anything.  One of the hidden forces that operates on social media is confirmation bias. The majority of your friends and followers on social media probably share your outlook. This means that the vast majority of posts, pins or other content you read on  social media tend to express the same point of view, one that you already hold. It's natural for people to surround themselves with others of like mind. This is true both online and offline. On social media, this can create the illusion that "everybody" thinks the same way. People will post links to stories that confirm your existing bias. They will repeat opinions you already hold. For this reason, social media may reinforce our opinion and make it more difficult to understand alternative points of view. In politics, it can help to make people more opinionated and less tolerant of others. On the other hand, if you connect with an assortment of people with diverse viewpoints, you can overcome confirmation bias and use social media to make you more open-minded. There are sure to be many political changes that come about due to social media. There are now proposals for internet voting, which could lead to more people participating in elections. As social media becomes ever more popular, its impact on politics will only increase over time, it will be interesting to observe how this plays out. 

Fourteen Reasons Privacy Matters

                This post is a summary of the article published in  October 2013 with the incomplete title above at   https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1004&context=libfacpub

                This article attempts to expand understanding by reviewing scholarly literature on privacy from a wide variety of disciplines, including anthropology, law, philosophy, psychology and sociology. Addressing the question of whether privacy is a value that spans cultures, the article traces a number of major themes, enumerating a host of individual, interpersonal, and societal goods that are made possible by privacy. The volume of literature on privacy is immense. This review does not claim to be comprehensive or evaluative, and it naturally struggle with the difficulty of summarizing deep and complex arguments in mere sentences  and paragraphs. Privacy is a fundamental, moral right ro which people are entitled, rather than simply a legal right or a right that can be explicated in terms of other rights such as property, or life. The Professor of law Daniel Solove identifies six general types of definition of privacy: 1) the right to be alone.  2) the ability to limit access to the self by others.  3) secrecy or concealment of certain mattera.  4) the ability to control information about oneself.  5) the protection of one's ´personhood, individuality and dignity. 6) control over one' intimate relationship. Alan Westin claims that needs for individual and group privacy and resulting norms are present in virtually every society, and he cites a host of anthropological studies documenting the various ways societies  achieve privacy. Westin also cites studies of animal behavior and social organization that suggest that human and animals share basic mechanisms for claiming privacy. He says "the animal's struggle to achieve privacy and participation provides one of the basic processes of animal life. In this sense, the quest for privacy is not restricted to man alone, but arises in the biological and social processes of all life." Barry Scwartz makes the case that even small children have the privacy impulse. In his exploration of the basis for human rights concepts such as the individual self, autonomy, and privacy. Larry Nucci examines a number of recent studies and finds that "areas of personal choice and discretion are maintained by individuals across a range of cultures, personal is not an invemtion of Western culture, but a psychological necessity for the establishment of the social self." Following are fourteen reasons privacy matters, drawn from a multidisciplinary reading of scholarly literature and organized into three broad sections: I ) benefits to the individual, II ) benefits to personal relationships, III ) benefits to society.  Benefits to the Individual. 1) Privacy protects from overreach of social interactions and provides opportunity for relaxation and concentration. - privacy protect us from "social overreaching" and gives individuals social freedom by limiting the control that others have over their lives. 2) Privacy affirms self-ownership - Privacy is a fundamental right that enables people to think of their existence as their own and protect the individual's interest in becoming, being, and remaining a person." Stanley Benn says the reason we allow people privacy is not to give them a better chance to be autonomous; rather, autonomous persons are worthy of respect and entitled to be unobserved. He argues that even "secret waching", is wrong, because it deliberately deceives a person about his world. Charles Fried describes that privacy serves not to protect things we will share only with friends but to protect certain thoughts from the whole world.  3) Privacy prevents intrinsic loss of freedom of choice - Privacy is not just a means of protecting freedom, it is itself constitutive of freedom in a number of important ways. The wrong is in replacing personal anonymity by notoriety, in turning a private life into a public spectable.  4) Privacy allows freedom from self-censorship and anticipatory conformity and allows people to explore. Jeffrey Reiman talks about the chilling effect on speech and action that occurs when people believe they are or may be under scrutiny and may be subject to punishment or denial of benefits and opportunities. In addition of lost liberty, many of the above writers express concern about the resulting diminishemnt of people as unique, autonomous individuals with human dignity.  5) Privacy helps prevent sorting of people into categories that can lead to lost opportunities and deeper inequalities. many scholars are concerned that the gathering of data about individuals and the sorting of people into categories can lead to a discriminatory process that sorts individuals on the basis of their estimated value or worth and reaches into every aspect of individuals' lives. Social scientists identifies several problems related to this data collection and sorting. And when used as a basic tool in decison making, mistakes and misidentification can lead to injustices.  6) Privacy prevents being misjudged out of context - Jeffrey Rosen writes about gossip and suggest that "the privacy of the backstage protect us from the unfairness of being misjudged by strangers who do not have time to put our informal speech and conduct into a broader context."  7) Privacy provides a physical space in which an individual can control the artifacts that support the narrative of her/his life - Iris Young observes that much of the theoretical discussion of privacy focuses on the mental aspects, and failing to notice sufficiently the material bases of privacy.  8) Privacy preserves the chance to make a fresh start - Viktor Schonberger note that the commitment of vast amounts of information to digital memory, along with the end of the need to dispose of older data for reasons of space, have made it less likely that people will forget past bahavior. This significant societal shift concerns Schonberger because digital memory create a temporal rather than a spatial version of the panopticon and transfer power from the surveilled to the surveyors.  Benefits to Personal Relationships.  9) Privacy allows individuals to be authentic and to play appropriate roles in various contexts - Rosen responds to the view by claiming that those who defend transparency are confusing secrecy with privacy, when secrecy is a small dimension of privacy. He says, "even those who claim that society would be better if people were less embarrassed about discussing their sexual activites in public, still manage to feel annoyed and invaded when they are solicited by telemarketers during the dinner. Rosen also observes that defenders of transparency seem to hold a simplistic view of human personality as unitary and integrated. James Rachels arguing that varying behavior with different people is not accidental; it is in part what defines different social relationships. This is why privacy is valuable in ordinary situations. 10) Privacy support intimacy and the building of relationships - a number of writers have examined the value of privacy in building and managing intimate relationships. Relationships shielded by privacy give people the opportunity to share confidences. Charles Fried claims that respect, love, friendship, and trust require privacy for their existence. According to him, intimacy is the sharing of information selectively, in a context in which one has the right not to share with everyone or with anyone. It is privacy that confers this right and creates "the moral capital we spend in friendship and love." Monitoring of people is problematic because it deprives people of the exclusivity of their sharing and makes it impossible to give the gift of intimacy.  Benefits to Society.  11) Privacy supports the common good - Solove recognizes the work of other scholars who have noted that privacy problems extend beyond harms to particular individuals, can affect the nature of society, and can impede individual activites that contribute to the social good. Privacy has a social value, because while it protects the individual, it does so for the sake of society. Solove also observes the breeches of confidentiality involve violations of trust, not only individual emotional distress, and he claims that "there is a strong value in ensuring that promises are kept."  12) Privacy protects from power imbalance between individuals and government/organizations - civil rights, freedom of expression, the possibility of taking part in political discussions free from fear of negative reactiobs, are some of the fields where a changed information balance may produce adverse impacts. Information tech will contribute not only to the centralization of social control but also to its intensification. Solove discuss concerns about due process and power imbalances related to surveillance and data gathering. He emphasize that the issue is not whether individuals have something to hide, rather the issue is about the way people are treated by the government and organizations. They affect the power relationship between people and institutions and create a sense of helplessness and powerlessness.  13) Privacy supports democracy, political activity, and service - As discussed earlier, surveillance and lack of privacy can have a chilling effect on free speech, free associations and other rights that are essential for democracy. This chilling effects also harm by reducing the number and variety of viewpoints expressed and the degree of freedom people have to engage in political activity.  14) Privacy provides space in society for disagreement - privacy protects a space for legitimately different views from the constant burden of justifying  their differences.