Menu Menu
[gtranslate]

LA celebrity activism is clashing with environmental justice

As stars in one of California’s wealthiest areas protest against toxic waste disposal following devastating fires, the mass destruction of LA’s poorer communities highlights the inherent elitism of environmental discourse. 

Los Angeles is still recovering from some of the most devastating fires in its history, which burnt through the Pacific Palisades community at the beginning of January and continued for a number of weeks.

By the time the fires were contained, over 10,000 structures had been decimated, leaving thousands of residents homeless, more than 35,000 acres of land destroyed and unfathomable personal, cultural, and economic losses.

Fingers of blame have been pointed at the Los Angeles fire department and local government in the aftermath, with many questioning how prepared local authorities were for the disaster. News outlets have reported that just under a year ago in May 2024, the LAFD’s budget saw a $17.5 million budget cut.

Department chief Kirstin Crowley has also faced criticism after documents revealed she’d decided not to keep some 1,000 firefighters on extra duty as their shift ended hours before the fires broke out.

The culmination of this hostility has been a swathe of heated debates about how best to move forward in repairing the damage to LA communities, both physically and emotionally.

Reports have shown that the fires have disproportionately impacted Latino and other underserved LA communities, where around 17% of residents work in outdoor occupations like construction, and are therefore more vulnerable to respiratory illness from smoke inhalation, and income loss due to work disruption.

And yet one of the biggest talking points amongst LA’s rich and famous has been the disposal of wildfire debris during clean-up efforts. As it stands, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors has approved an income of daily dumping limits at three landfills, including one site in Calabasas – one of the wealthiest neighbourhoods in the county.

The debris includes ash, soil, and the remnants of destroyed homes, and is expected to be dumped in the Calabasas landfill in order to aid in the expansive clean-up efforts within Palisades and Eaton Fire burn zones.

But Calabasas residents have been protesting the plans, which they believe poses a threat to the health and safety of their children and local wildlife. Said residents are largely made up by celebrities who reside in the affluent neighbourhood, and are using their social media platforms to push back against local government.

‘We’re here to make it known we’re not okay with this. Toxic chemicals and ash do not belong here in a community where there’s kids and families – and people work here,’ said Kourtney Kardashian, who has been vocal about the issue on Instagram.

Dressed in sweatpants, Kardashian had joined fellow Calabasas residents to voice concerns over potential health risks associated with the landfill’s expanded use. She shared photos to social media displaying signs that read ‘Protect Calabasas, no toxic fire waste!’, with a lengthy caption detailing the environmental efforts within the community and concerns over the health threats any debris may pose to locals.

Despite Kardashian’s concerns, Michael Chee, a spokesperson for the LA County Sanitation Districts, has assured multiple agencies, including the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers, that any certified waste is ‘non-toxic, non-hazardous’ and that any landfill is legally prohibited from accepting hazardous materials.

It’s difficult to ignore the ‘Not in My Backyard’ sentiment raised by Kardashian’s very public protest. Given the immense loss many families across LA are currently facing, an outcry to protect the ‘healthy, thriving’ community of Calabasas by some of the most privileged individuals in America feels a touch tone deaf.

And as many have asked beneath Kardashian’s social media posts, if wildfire debris isn’t to be disposed of in Calabasas, where is it supposed to go?

While some have accused Kardashian of wanting to dump the waste on ‘poorer communities’, the reality star has suggested debris be placed in the desert where there are ‘no people in harm’s way’.

Still, reeling off a list of Calabasas’ incredible environmental achievements, including a ‘no smoking rule, plastic bag ban, and bright sky ordinance’ in order to elevate the quality of life for locals highlights how out of touch many of the world’s 1% can be.

These are certainly things for a community to cherish and strive for, but they’re also near impossible in areas where poverty is rife. And at a time when many have lost their homes, kicking off – very publicly – about potential impacts on a ‘picture perfect’ community feels… ill timed.

Others have pointed out that the Kardashian’s environmental track record isn’t exactly aligned with Kourtney’s environmental warrior narrative.

‘Wasn’t her water usage like 300% during a drought lol’ said one comment beneath her Instagram post.

Indeed, during a brutal drought in 2022, Kim and Kourtney Kardashian were both caught disregarding LA’s strict water conservation measures at their homes in Calabasas, with both sisters regularly exceeding their monthly water allotment by more that 150%.

The family is also known to regularly fly via private jet, a mode of transport that emits at least 10 times more carbon dioxide per passenger than a commercial airline.

It’s not the wealthy and powerful who feel the environmental impacts of these decisions, either. It’s those in poor neighbourhoods and countries worldwide. Ironically, it’s the same disregard for the planet that causes devastating natural disasters like the very wildfires Kardashian is now up in arms about.

And no surprise, it’s not the homes of Calabasas residents that sit in ash and rubble. But god forbid any clean up efforts tamper with the picturesque biome of LA’s elite.

The Calabasas protest also brings to light the influence celebrities wield in shaping public discourse. While their platforms can amplify critical issues, there’s a fine line between advocacy and inadvertently perpetuating systemic injustices. By opposing the landfill expansion without proposing equitable solutions, high-profile figures risk reinforcing the very disparities they aim to challenge.

The tendency for affluent communities to deflect environmental burdens onto less privileged areas is a recurring theme in environmental justice.

Historically, low-income neighbourhoods and communities of colour have disproportionately shouldered the placement of landfills, industrial plants, and other polluting infrastructures. The National Academy of Sciences has documented that such communities face higher exposure to environmental hazards, leading to adverse health outcomes.

While local activism is vital in holding authorities accountable and safeguarding community health, it must be coupled with an awareness of broader systemic issues.

Only through inclusive and informed discourse can we hope to achieve environmental policies that are both effective and just.

Accessibility