The Treadmill of Destruction: National Sacrifice Areas and Native Americans

Abstract

When examining environmental justice and injustice, surprisingly few studies have examined the experiences of Native Americans. In filling this gap, we criticize and build on environmental and political sociology. We make the case and provide evidence that the U.S. military pursues a pattern of environmental “bads” that cannot be reduced to capitalism and that coercive state policies can mold the spatial distribution of people relative to environmental dangers. Our contribution, then, is both theoretical and substantive. First, we recast the environmental sociology literature by specifying the scope conditions under which a “treadmill of production” and a “treadmill of destruction” are applicable. Specifically, we argue that a “treadmill of destruction” is driven by a distinct logic of geopolitics that cannot be reduced to capitalism. Second, we provide empirical evidence of the “treadmill of destruction” by examining the environmental inequality endured by Native Americans at the hands of the U.S. military. We have collected data on a large number of military bases that have been closed but remain dangerous due to unexploded ordnance. We provide evidence that Native American lands tend to be located in the same county as such hazardous sites. In the twentieth century, the United States fought and won two global wars and prevailed in a sustained Cold War. The geopolitical demands of remaining the world's leading military power pushed the United States to produce, test, and deploy weapons of unprecedented toxicity. Native Americans have been left exposed to the dangers of this toxic legacy.

Environment, Development, and Ecologically Unequal Exchange

“…Treadmill of production theory, which is addressed in greater length in preceding sections of this article, focuses on how an economic system driven by endless growth, on an ever larger scale, generates widespread ecological degradation [35]. Treadmill of destruction theory suggests that the military has its own expansionary dynamics, which involve significant environmental and ecological costs [67,68]. Jorgenson and Clark [15] argue that the ecologically unequal exchange perspective intersects with both treadmill orientations.…”

Limitations of Nuclear Power as a Sustainable Energy Source

“…In this particular case, humanity was somewhat fortunate when compared to Chernobyl (Figure 1) [41,42]. Radioactive iodine from the Fukushima plant has been detected in the water supply of Tokyo, more than 130 miles (220 kilometers) to the south of the power plant [43], but did not result in levels high enough for evacuation and a new national sacrifice zone [44,45]. Risk factors with nuclear power include potential nuclear disasters due to: accidents, negligence, poor design, and natural disasters, terrorism [46] (both as a prime target, but also for theft and the creation of 'dirty bombs'), and the threat multiplication possible with nuclear energy in operation during both international wartime and domestic conflicts [47].…”

A Bridge to Challenging Environmental Inequality: Intersectionality, Environmental Justice, and Disaster Vulnerability

“…These historical arrangements and experiences of environmental injustices for Native communities continue to be woven into contemporary society. Yet it is only across the last two decades that we have seen them explored in a historical and contemporary context as accounts of environmental injustices (Hooks and Smith 2004;Hoover et al 2012;Leonard III 1997;Lynch and Stretesky 2011;Vickery and Hunter 2016), particularly as it relates to uranium milling and mining (Brugge and Goble 2002;Charley et al 2004;Dawson, Madsen, and Spykerman 1997;Johnston, Dawson, and Madsen 2010;Kuletz 1998;Pasternak 2011).…”