Research Paper on Fracturing Invasion: Threat to Democracy and Freedom

Introduction

The "Fractured Country - An Unconventional Invasion" video depicts a shift from the conventional way of mining to a fracturing way that invades the land, plants, animals and human race. The construction of the factory has led to the cutting of the trees that covered the agricultural land, and this consequently leads to the destruction of the animal habitat. The threat and risk posed to the human race and ecosystem should worry everybody about their democracy and freedom. As a result, the worry should give rise to the formation of social aggregate and grouping through social inclusion and social cohesion to fight for the abandoned rights and freedom and hence restore the face of human dignity and respect to the ecosystem. The massive destruction of plants and animals is a violation of human rights since human beings depend on plants and animals for their survival (Taylor, 2007). Although citizens appear to have abandoned their fight for the destroyed land, they have power through social cohesion and inclusion to reclaim their land from the rogue individuals.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Unconventional Invasion of Queensland

The most productive farming Queensland has been transformed from being an agricultural land to a gas field of more than 18 thousand wells having approved and tenths of thousands or more awaiting approval (Shoebridge, 2014). The productive agricultural land has been invaded to create room for extraction of conventional/natural gas, tight gas, shale gas, and coal seam gas. However, unconventional gases such as tight gas, shale gas, and coal seam gas are more difficult to extract compared to conventional gas/natural gas (Shoebridge, 2014). They can, therefore, not be extracted using conventional methods due to the complexity of the involved process. The unconventional method and processes are, however, invasive and require drilling of many wells underground and the use of fracking hydraulic methods. As a result, the entire region has been turned into a manufacturing plant and a gas factory.

The fracking process is linked to incidences of earthquakes and extraction of masses of water hence the destruction of the water system. Besides the racking process involves the use of chemicals amount to about 7 tonnes (Shoebridge, 2014). Such chemicals like polyacrylamide acetaldehyde, ammonia persulfate, naphthalene, sodium thiosulphate among others some of which are carcinogens and toxins. Each well receives up to 18 tonnes of chemical additive (Shoebridge, 2014). Once the chemicals get into the water, they cannot be extracted and this causes huge if not permanent pollution of water. Another problem is the problem of handling chemical wastes, which are commonly thrown into water systems such as rivers. Water is consumed by human beings, plants and animals but the water they consume is contaminated water which predisposes them to health hazards and drought as stated by Gray, Stehlik, Lawrence, and Bulis (1998). Some of the related health problems include neurological impact, and skin irritation among others

Social Inclusion and Social Cohesion

In a community, social cohesion and inclusion encompass the entire members coming together and working as a group for the benefit of the community (Mulunga & Yazdanifard, 2014). The social inclusion concept of sociology is grounded on a sense of belonging, recognition, and acceptance. Social inclusion calls for the realization of the need to engage in full and equal participation in various aspects of cultural, ecological, political and social perspectives of the country. People possess a sense of belonging and as such participate in various activities that are geared towards making the country and society a better place to live (Mulunga & Yazdanifard, 2014). As a result, there is community participation in alleviating social equality and improving the lives of disadvantaged people (Shiffman, 2002).

Social inclusion is an identity mark that gathers people to identify with one another for a common goal (Oxoby, 2009). People possessing or share an identity are bided by connatural behavioral prescriptions and as such view each other as being included in a socially identifiable group. The identifiable group consists of individuals who identify with one another and hence can facilitate a strategic and cooperative interaction towards achieving a common target. Conversely, people who are not included in the group feel a sense of exclusiveness (Oxoby, 2009; Bruhn, 2011). Such a group of people lack a sense of identity and do not possess the bond of inclusiveness and act as a threat to social inclusiveness and associated identity. An inherent exclusive group of individuals cannot succeed in defining a strategic and cooperative interaction since they cannot obtain or access resources and institutions to fight for discriminatory practices (Oxoby, 2009). In this regard, a social inclusion approach aids in developing a common identity among the population and further foster a greater sense of inclusion among the entire population of citizens. Conversely, the social cohesion concept of sociology encompasses possessing a good social relationship that strengthens society and its various groups and communities.

In connection to the video, "Fractured Country: An Unconventional Invasion", the community has the responsibility to build a sustainable country by assisting citizens to fight for their right of nature and to the self-local government (Smailes, & Hugo, 2003). The video depicts a society that is experiencing an ecological crisis in which the community is being invaded by the gas fields. As further evident from the video, the ecological crisis emanates from the individualistic decisions made by a few members of the society and who run the government (Shoebridge, 2014). As a result of their rogue decision, there arose unconventional mining invasion that is taking over Australian communities. There is hence a threat to the way of life, nature and the future ecological system.

To avert the situation, social cohesion and inclusion hold the best solution. Through social cohesion and inclusion, citizens possess the power to avert the self-interest of the few people who ruthlessly run the government. According to Manzi, Lucas, Lloyd-Jones, and Allen, (2010), sustainability requires the inclusion of all the parties involved rather than a few individuals. The community members with experiencing the challenges and face the realities of everyday life should be included in the decision making the process about the land. Whenever the government make decisions and enact laws and regulations, it is the citizens who feel the resulting impact. In this regard, the citizens must be involved in the decision-making process and granted rights to reject the unsustainable environmental and economic policies and actions that the government intends to subject the community members (Smailes, & Hugo, 2003).

The set-up of the factory in Queensland is an unsustainable decision that denies and robs the community members their right to participate in the decision-making process and community participation. There is a need for the communities to challenge as well as overturn the decisions already made by the few individuals in the government. Community members have inseparable rights to fight for their interests. As stated by Skippington and Davis (2016) communities can work more proactively and collaboratively with various key and influential community stakeholders to both harness and integrate the capabilities and artistic skills in addressing the continuum of community interests. To achieve this, the community members must be joined together through a common identity to fight for their land and against its destruction. Social cohesion and inclusion concepts allow individuals in a community to jointly work towards a common goal. Hence through them, affected communities in Queensland can collectively fight against the destruction of the land. Anglin (2011) posited that communities need to place a priority on traditional local economic development practice and community economic development practices in their involvement with community members and other partners. Collective action is needed to initiate change (Ledwith, 2005).

Conclusion

In conclusion, although citizens appear to have abandoned their fight for the destroyed land, they have power through social cohesion and inclusion to reclaim their land from the rogue individuals. Social inclusion and cohesion bring communities members with common identities, behaviors, beliefs, and values to collectively address the challenges they experience and the realities they face. In the video, "Fractured Country - An Unconventional Invasion", the government as allowed few individuals to snatch the communities their productive agricultural land to mine unconventional gases using fracking methods and processes.

References

Anglin, R. V. (2011). Searching for sustainable community economic development. In Promoting sustainable local and community economic development (pp. 23-38 (chapter 2). CRC Press Taylor and Francis Group, eBook.

Bruhn, J. G. (2011). Communities of exclusion and excluded communities. Sociology of Community Connections (2nd ed.).

Gray, L., Stehlik, D., Lawrence, G., & Bulis, H. (1998). Community, communion, and drought in rural Australia. Journal of the Community Development Society, 29(1), 23-37.

Ledwith, M. (2005). "Collective action for change". In Community Development: a critical approach. The Policy Press, Portland. pp. 97-130.

Manzi, T., Lucas, K., Lloyd-Jones, T., & Allen, J. (2010). Understanding social sustainability: key concepts and developments in theory and practice (pp. 1-28). In K. Lucas, T. Manzi, T. Lloyd-Jones, & J. Allen (Eds.). Social sustainability in urban areas. London: Taylor and Francis, eBook.

Mulunga S. N., & Yazdanifard R., (2014) Review of Social Inclusion, Social Cohesion and Social Capital in Modern Organization. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 14(3)

Oxoby, R., (2009). "Understanding Social Inclusion, Social Cohesion, and Social Capital," Working Papers 2009-11, Department of Economics, University of Calgary, revised 22 Jan 2009.

Shiffman, J. (2002). "The construction of community participation: village family planning groups and the Indonesian state." Social Science & Medicine, 54(8), 1199-1214.

Shoebridge, B. (2014). Fractured Country - An Unconventional Invasion [Film]. Lock the Gate Alliance: Lock the Gate Alliance.

Skippington, P., & Davis, D. (2016). Arts-based community development: rural remote realities and challenges. Rural Society, 25(3), 222-239. DOI: 10.1080/10371656.2016.1255477

Smailes, P.J. & Hugo, G.J. (2003). The Gilbery Valley, South Australia. In Community sustainability in Rural Australian Communities: a question of capital (eds Cocklin, C. & Alston, M.). Centre for Rural Social Research, Wagga Wagga.

Taylor, M. (2007). Community participation in the real world: Opportunities and pitfalls in new governance spaces. Urban Studies, 44(2), 297-317.