The hard science classes were so difficult for me, only proving that I'm not a biologist/chemist/physicist/programmer/mathematician. My only scientific skillset is what made me good with medicine or the humanities. I can apply a bunch of analytical angles to a messy subject that I understand contextually and spot the contradictions as part of dynamic processes. Geography seems like it'd be such an amazing field for that. David Harvey's work was huge for me refining those skills.
That's what kept me from going into it. The separation of town and country is important to me from either side of it, but rural communities here are extremely reactionary and the businesses are mostly wealthy landowners. I don't want them to stay in business and I want their land to be public, so sustaining what exists just feels like repainting hell. In urban ecology what I want just makes the city more pleasant to live in and my customer base is every taxpayer. It's a lot easier to feel good about most of my work and advocate against the greenspace I don't like.
That's what it would be. The Okie dialect alone is a hard thing to read through and I assume everyone is going to be cheating with AI summaries now. I'd want to highlight the broad themes of land use, population displacement, commodification, and the demographic dimensions to apply them as the leading question in a discussion elective where the only real grade is participation/a brief presentation.
This year I want to start organising formal ones between municipal greenspace workers having a union drive, the local DSA's environmental justice committee, and regulars in the parks who have a daily personal connection to those landscapes. It seems like a really powerful tool for achieving something like Pedagogy of the Oppressed's model and normalising holistic radical conversations.
I'm really glad that I didn't start driving until my mid-20s. Before I found Debord and knew the word for it, walking everywhere was a constant dérive for me. I'm only an urbanist because walking and public transit turned cities into slow-motion exploration of whatever stood out to me until I saw the relationships behind it. The psychogeography stood out so much more than I could safely observe while driving. I love micromobility because it takes that same feeling, makes it much more accessible with better infrastructure, and increases the speed/carrying capacity just enough to make it on par with urban driving. Now every grocery run is a chance to explore something new in parks and wilderness areas, with a much broader spectrum of my neighbours safely maintaining their independence with whatever kind of vehicle works best for their body.
I'm going the ecology route because it's just getting paid to be a Marxist. Nature is the proof of dialectics and the most interdisciplinary field I could find in urban ecology is the most intersectional political project at the root of eco-Marxism. Agroecology consulting is one career track I considered because it's turning dialectical materialism into a fun little puzzle with tractors.
I like it as a graphic social history that centres on otherwise invisible workers. We were discussing the JBS slaughterhouse strike where almost nothing has changed except for the nationalities of the workers. Across all of my agriculture classes, the labour conditions only ever got a passing mention without ever being connected to that larger primary contradiction. They never draw the links between commodification, industrialisation and market consolidation, and the externalities of production as one unified feedback loop resulting in those students becoming the most wretched of commodities. The Jungle really explicitly links everything together and shows it in prose as horrifying as a Chuck Palahniuk novel.
Grapes of Wrath didn't make a dent in public consciousness either, but it's a socioecological history linking dysfunctional food systems to graphic human suffering. If the eponymous quote doesn't enrage someone they're ontologically stupid. One of my course plans is just using that quote as a foundation for a critical geography study of one of our regional commodities, tracking all of the alienation involved in its production and consumption/waste. Learning the cost of a 10 cent banana should make someone a communist.
I'm in the same boat of taking jobs I can safely bike to and only considering moves to cities I can't afford with better bike infrastructure. Once I saw what micromobility represented as a liberatory technology, my ebike became the thing that defines me living in the 21st century. That bike infrastructure is collapse insurance and the literal road to degrowth that rehumanises people toward our value system. I can't think of another individual consumer technology that acts as a reeducation camp for American brainworms.
I'd much rather they have to use manual penny farthings to punish themselves for existing. To me it's just the same logic as giving them military-grade weapons or batons. They're still the same horrible people with the baton but they're more limited in their collateral damage. The most dangerous traffic hazards here are their cars.
With ebikes taking off, at least the local police have adapted using electric mountain bikes. I'd prefer they not exist at all but if they exist it's nice that they aren't driving illegally in a heavy vehicle reinforced to ram other ones. Right now high speed chases are the American equivalent of gladiator fights and the cop cars do whatever they want on the road and across greenspace. My ambient safety goes up if they're just crashing bicycles.
However they don't care at all about bike theft or crime against cyclists. We have organised chop shops sending the parts out of state, but even the open ones are ignored for weeks. It's our local boomers who lose their shit over ebikes and cyclists more generally. Nextdoor is just a million Martin Luthers listing 95 reasons why they're mad and why they should get to kill cyclists for making them mad.
Someday we'll be judged for cars like we can laugh at the 1920s stupids irradiating themselves for pep. The box that poisons me is my most expensive possession and the single fail point for my entire life. I must tie my sense of personal freedom and masculinity to my poison box. If I poison myself more, it's very loud like a bird's mating call and all my neighbours know I am the big man. I'm willing to sacrifice all of my neighbours to the box that poisons me, including myself if it means they can buy a louder and more masculine car that they park next to mine.
My only good professor.

wake up, look at the sports score, my team lost 0:2