Possible Actions to Fight Against Environmental Toxins and Racism

By Camryn, Julia, and Shelby

Each quarter, a group of students, faculty, and staff at WWU join together to read and discuss recent environmental justice texts. In Spring 2021, the group is reading Harriet A. Washington’s A Terrible Thing to Waste. This post reflects and extends our discussion.

To finish off the book, our group facilitated a discussion on chapter 7. This chapter aimed to address what communities can do to stop these polluters and try to save future brainpower. In our discussions, we noted there is power in unifying your community to fight against environmental racism.

The chapter describes an overview of continuous uprisings against discharging PCBs in the landfill that affect nearby African American neighborhoods in Afton, NC. PCBs were “…then known to cause birth defects and liver and skin disorders were strongly suspected of causing cancer,” (Washington 2019, p. 275). In previous blog posts, Afton was emphasized for their work against the EPA’s harmful actions, but the health of these neighborhoods are still yet to be determined.

According to the study conducted by the Clean Air Task Force, “Fumes Across the Fence Line,” African American communities are 75% more likely to live in neighborhoods that are next to industrial sites. These communities are hit with unhealthy toxins from the ground up. PCBs have never been the start nor the end, since the toxins still live in the soil today.

However, Washington indicated notable steps to organize for the environmental health of our communities: look beyond just your friends and neighbors, learn where and how to report environmental violations, hold community meetings, write a description of the problem, align with other environmental organizations, seek legal council, make your concerns known to your congressional lawmakers, take advantage of free training, apply for grant funding and devise a media strategy.

In groups we discussed the effectiveness of these suggested steps and solutions. Steps including reaching out to lawyers, focusing on social media outreach or applying for grants require funds and or resources that many people in heavily impacted communities lack access to. This brings up the question of: who is Washington’s intended audience? Although we were unable to answer this question, it was interesting to ponder and think about access to information including access to this book. Many of her suggested solutions felt the most inaccessible to the same people that are directly affected by these toxins and needed it most.

Overall, Washington’s book brought up important information regarding toxic hazards and the impacts it has on health and how race is the major locator to these hazardous sites. It revealed astonishing facts and horrifying statistics that were often unknown to most. This book also brought up many emotions such as sadness, helplessness, and anger. These emotions can be translated into action, whether that is locally or globally.

While Washington’s suggested solutions may not have exhausted all options, they did provide hope and encouragement to suggest coming together to bring a positive change. Finishing this book doesn’t end the discussion on environmental racism, instead it inspires those who read it to continue the fight to justice.