top 109 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 36 points 4 months ago (107 children)

petrostate stays winning until we value the people and the land they live on more than we value the resources they stand on

  • source
  • hideshow 107 child comments
  • [–] [S] 20 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    You say that as if ordinary people got a say in any of this

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    we won't so long as we don't band together!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    “Yes, we must, indeed, all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately.”

    Benjamin Franklin

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (86 children)

    What if one group says the land another group is standing on is actually theirs and they want to take it back? For example, what if native Americans invading aliens wanted to evict all non-natives non-aliens?

    Edit: the hypothetical seems to be pulling a lot of attention away from the point so I updated it with something hopefully less reactionary.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 86 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    generally speaking, that is not what landback advocates are calling for. landback means that it is the people who live in concert with the land who will lead its management, and it is the responsibility of others to listen and learn

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    the people who live in concert with the land

    What does that even mean? It sounds an awful lot like noble savage mythology.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I'm glad you brought this up, because it's something I want to make a distinguishment from. I do not want to fetishize or otherwise dehumanize indigenous people. I merely want to acknowledge that every culture has something they do better than anyone else. Us Europeans? We built pan-oceanic boats capable of traversing the Atlantic, Pacific, Indian, and Arctic Oceans. That's absolutely incredible! We are however, dogshit at land management. Hence the constant European desire to colonize more and more of the planet, taking up more and more land to meet the material needs of an aristocratic class that required closely shorn lawns for leisure activities such as polo and croquet.

    Meanwhile, I also do not think that indigenous north Americans were perfect. For example, the Cherokee committed a genocide against the Osage, the Inca, Aztek, and Mayans all had theocratic structures that were not great for a large number of people living in their territories, the various peoples of the Americas hunted mega-fauna they encountered to extinction. However, in order for any plan for a hopeful future, we must draw wisdom from many sources. We know this because the current European global hegemony is failing. So we need to start looking for wisdom from other sources. One of the things when we interrogate history is that prior to Europe leveraging military violence to place the global south into a perpetual state of underdevelopment is that the people of the Americas had INCREDIBLE land management strategies that were interwoven with their cultural heritages (food, language, social structures) and agricultural outputs leading to some extremely interesting crops that have become staples worldwide such as corn, potatoes, sunflowers, beans, and tomatoes.

    In conclusion: my point is to draw sources from subjugated knowledge

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (1 child)

    my point is to draw sources from subjugated knowledge

    Really not sure what "subjugated knowledge" is supposed to mean.

    In any case this is mostly irrelevant. It's been hundreds or thousands of years, depending on which culture you're talking about. The environmental conditions have changed, the land has changed, and the cultures are long gone. We have newer methods and better options for land and resource management, and for studying the current actual conditions, and for understanding local environments in the context of the global whole.

    the people of the Americas had INCREDIBLE land management strategies that were interwoven with their cultural heritages

    They also had a life expectancy of about 50 years and no methods for treating anything like cancer or sepsis or long-term debilitating conditions. My sister is Type 1 diabetic, she'd probably just be dead by 40.

    I agree that we should have more respect for those that came before and the work they did that we are still benefitting from today (such as the selective breeding for crops you mentioned), but we can't move forward by looking backward. The survival strategies of those past cultures don't scale up to sustain 8 billion people, we need new methods supported by new technologies, better information and system-wide analysis.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 8 points 4 months ago (43 children)
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (42 children)

    It's totally just a hypothetical. I guess I should have used aliens or something.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 42 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (41 children)

    It’s totally just a hypothetical.

    Even hypotheticals must be based on grounding assumptions... what was yours based on?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 41 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago* (40 children)

    I was originally thinking of Israel and the greater Israel project but didn't want to touch on that topic and somehow I'm still regretting it. We're getting away now from what the hypothetical was for aka scenarios where people in group X want people in group Y's land in any sense or scenario no longer specified by anything or any hypotheticals whatsoever.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 40 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (17 children)

    So I've actually known indigenous folks! They generally don't want me to leave the country and die until they date me.

    And until pretty recently, most Palestinians just wanted someplace to live and make a living. They didn't mind living alongside filthy Zionist rape monsters, new buildings put together a little taller and no new settlers imported. No idea what the general vibe is now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago (16 children)

    It's a random hypothetical, I guess I should have used aliens because everyone is kinda hyper fixating on the example hypothetical and not the actual point of the discussion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (15 children)

    No, I responded to that too.went with your extreme straw manned misunderstanding by pointing out that we have a shitty corporation that already does that. You asked if I owned any children. I think you just want excuses to be scared of others having agency.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (14 children)

    It's more so to point out that some may have a reason to hold onto what they have and the original point of group X taking from group Y would apply to your example as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (13 children)

    Sure but why the fuck do I care about boomers and black rock execs? Fuck what they have. I don't even know anybody on this continent who owns a home.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (12 children)

    I think we're still a little stuck in the specifics here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (11 children)

    Nah. I'm a millenial. I have a couple younger genx friends, but everyone else I know was born after 1980, most of us are queer. Too many of us went to college.

    We do not own things. We will not inherit things. You're trying to provoke me to racist bullshit with the loss of a privilege that someone else already took. Like a cop shooting me with a grenade launcher and saying "yeah but imagine if a criminal had shot you!".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago* (10 children)

    What's race got to do with this? Also your analogy really doesn't match the general argument. You have your health and your life, you have things that could be taken I imagine you wouldn't want taken. Happens to people all the time for different reasons. I imagine you have people you care about and you would want to see them well and wouldn't like to see someone preventing that. The list goes on and on.

    In short everything is cool until someone wants to take from you something you don't want to give.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (9 children)

    So a human life existing is worth the same as some dirt to you?

    I have in fact had a home taken from me for bullshit arbitrary reasons. No metaphor or analogy needed. I didn't fuck anything up. Everyone involved with the possible (tee-hee) exception of myself was white.

    You're just a shitty little hyper privileged racist who thinks human lives are literally worth less than dirt.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (8 children)

    Not what I was arguing but to get at the heart of the discussion aka someone wants to take something from someone else that they don't want taken I had to switch up the object to something you have a connection to.

    How did someone take your home?

    Also I never said anything about race and how do you know if I am or I am not privileged?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (7 children)

    how do you know if I am or am not privileged

    I a literally a wizard with an evil cursed scrying orb. Only possible way for me to know.

    how did

    That's as much of that story as I'm willing to tell.

    settlers rights! We must defend ourselves from this shit I just made up!

    Sorry I don't really care about your made up bullshit or hypothetical you make to justify it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (6 children)

    It's more of a general circumstance of reality than a hypothetical. It's just that the circumstance comes where someone wants something that another person doesn't want to give. The same thing happens in nature as well between non-human organisms.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (5 children)

    Except it doesn't belong to people, but corporations. Corporations don't have feelings and I care just as little about yours.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (4 children)

    I don't think a gazelle wanting to keep its life and a lion wanting to eat the gazelle has anything to do with corporations. Once again it's a general circumstance that occurs in reality and of course occurs for humans just the same.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (3 children)

    You're just saying shit to say shit. You do not have a point or understanding.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    I guess, I've just been repeating what I said originally kinda over and over and over again.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    Its not very sensible. You're just a privileged ass who's never had any genuine challenge in life and doesn't want to share his toys and won't stop thinking 12 year olds are hot even when hes far too old for that to be appropriate.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago*

    Born to drug addict and alcoholic parents, father was in jail, mother died of an OD, left home with nothing at 17, couch surfed, got a job, put myself through college, got a better job, improved my life. Don't hold any grudges against my parents, they had their own struggles. I wished someone was there to help them the same way people were there for me. Life now is just me chilling and doing my own thing. You're free to keep making up weird stuff or maybe those ideas are coming to your mind because that's where your head is at.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (21 children)

    I was originally thinking of Israel and the greater Israel project

    Israel is a white supremacist settler-colonialist project that acts like a white supremacist settler-colonialist project... it's a pretty cut-and-dried situation.

    but didn’t want to touch on that topic

    Why not? It's a very easy topic to touch.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (19 children)

    Once again it's just a hypothetical about any scenario where group X may want group Y's land regardless of the details. Maybe group X is good maybe they are bad maybe this maybe that, I think we can step away from the specifics because we're moving away from the original point. Now you're kinda proving why, it's because I thought it would guide the conversation into being about the hypothetical more than the original point which is why I said I guess I should have used aliens.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    Once again it’s just a hypothetical about any scenario where group X may want group Y’s land regardless of the details.

    Those details are important.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (9 children)

    Yes, in specific circumstances from an outside observer Z. From the perspective of X and Y obviously they feel justified regardless of circumstances.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    in specific circumstances

    No, in all circumstances. For instance, the justifications of the coloniser can be dismissed out of hand - in all circumstances.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago* (7 children)

    I said to themselves, that doesn't mean others can't disagree and easily. While I don't agree with Zionist reasoning they seem to feel justified through the argument that greater Israel is promised to them by their God. Always a fun one when people use their religion, it's ultimately infallible to themselves through their faith albeit clearly misguided to those not faithful.

    It's human nature at its core. Someone wants something, they craft a reasoning to get it and honestly it's rare that the reasoning is actually any good, but all the same they believe it and they are internally justified to themselves. That doesn't mean the justification is good or accurate or right or not easily dismissible by others, it just means they're justified to themselves as I originally stated.

    A mind typically can't or at least doesn't do what it itself has not justified and unfortunately for us all human minds aren't logically consistent, they are storytellers and you can bend logic two ways to Sunday with the right story at least for those who want to hear it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    It’s human nature at its core.

    Bullcrap. It's perfectly obvious where right-wing ideology comes from and who it benefits... stop pretending that all justifications are in any way equal and simply "human nature."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (5 children)

    Have you spent time with people like outside of politics or like spent time with children? Person wants X, they justify why they will or should get X. Man I know I'm on a diet but I worked out really hard today so yeah I'ma get that tub of ice cream.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    like spent time with children?

    How many children do you know that that perpetrates colonialist slaughter?

    I’ma get that tub of ice cream.

    Your attempt to de-politicise this discussion is not working - I wonder why.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

    For reference we're not just talking about a singular occurrence or at least I'm not, I never was.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    For reference we’re not just talking about a singular occurrence

    Sooo... you're saying children perpetrating colonialist slaughter is not a singular occurence?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    Not what I meant but to entertain your continual attempts to alter the topic of discussion, in the history of humanity I suspect that's not unique.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (7 children)

    There's literally no way anyone can live alongside a Zionist. They'll rape them murder them and post it on twitter, then piss on the corpse and feed it to the dogs they use torape prisoners when they get tired.

    I've had indigenous roommates, and there was hardly any murder or rape involved at all. Nobody had a dog, and nobody pissed on anyone but themselves, and even that only when they had done lots of drugs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Now we're definitely getting away from the general argument I started with (⁠┛⁠◉⁠Д⁠◉⁠)⁠┛⁠彡⁠┻⁠━⁠┻

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Yeah because you're kind of an inchoate dipshit who was trying to compare anyone else to Zionists to defend acting like a Zionist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Not really, the original point I keep trying to focus back to is the general situation in which a group X wants to take group Y's land in really any context not specific to any circumstance. Also I don't appreciate the way you're talking so I'm going to stop talking to you. We can have civil discussion if you want. To be civil..

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    You seem like you're not presenting very civil ideas. A civil tone in which you threaten to grind my pets into a fine paste and spray that through some kind of high pressure water cutter thing in such a way as to bisect me is not civility; its an uncanny dissonance

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    Ummm, what? Quote me saying that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (29 children)

    Worse than every landlord I've had since 2010 how?

    Fuck it, let em. I don't own shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago (28 children)

    Do you have kids or any dependents by chance?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (27 children)

    I don't own any children.

    I think I'd prefer to be evicted by the indigenous ous people William Mulholland fucked out of water for kind of no reason a century ago than blackrock capital. Again.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (26 children)

    I mean dependents could also be a grandparent you're caring for or a disabled sibling and so on and I'm not sure I would say people own their dependents.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (25 children)

    Still. Fuck off with your racist bullshit. I've had a community before. I've cared about people. Some of them were the people you're fucking talking about. You know they're just, like, around? I could even be one of them! You would never know! Sorry if that complicates your shittyattempts to justify racism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (24 children)

    I'm not sure I said anything about race, much less racist. I gave a total hypothetical everyone seems to want to focus on more so than the point it was representing, guess I should have used something like aliens for the hypothetical. At any stretch you seem bothered and I hope you're alright and if you're not alright I hope you find peace.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (23 children)

    What are you even excited about? What do you really oppose here?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (22 children)

    I didn't say I was or was not excited. People have things and generally they try and prevent others who may want those things from taking them. That was kinda the core of the original point. I didn't think it was going to be such a controversial take.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (21 children)

    people generally have things

    No, I live under capitalism. I generally don't.

    and prevent others from taking them

    And I tend to share when I do. There's a name for it, I think.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (20 children)

    You have your life and current health. What if someone wanted to take that from you? Trust me you have things.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (19 children)

    My health is something I buy on the black market. My life is something cops would I'm sure very much like to take.

    How are either comparable to real estate? Are there a bunch of little holes in the nearest dirt to you the size of your dick, or is life just worth basically nothing to you?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (18 children)

    I had to switch the object to keep with the sentiment of the argument aka someone wants to take something from someone else they don't want taken. The argument isn't that a life is equivalent to land. Group X wants to take from group Y something they don't want taken.

    How does someone buy their health illegally? That's something I haven't heard before.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (17 children)

    Yeah you've never known anyone marginalized. Doesn't shock me. Lmk when you're old enough you wouldn't fuck you, like 16 or so.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (16 children)

    Why do you keep adding things I've never said. It's a really interesting behavior. It's a bit like talking to an overly aggressive hallucinating AI.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (15 children)

    You didn't say explicitly but strongly implied. I understand what you're trying to say, I've thought about it more than you, and I'm not a raging bigot, so I'm rejecting the idea you're having trouble articulating because you can't make it sound not-evil even in your straw man that in no way resembles the actual thing.

    Except that last part. That was me calling you a 14 year old who thinks Ayn rand was smart.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (14 children)

    I mean I explicitly and strongly disagree with that synopsis for whatever it's worth. In its most general sense it's just an aspect of reality. A gazelle wanting to keep its life and a lion wanting to eat the gazelle. Group X wants something group Y doesn't want to give. In a lot of circumstances it is evil but not all. Like conceptually this shouldn't be a highly contested thing, it's about as everyday as the sum rising and setting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (13 children)

    And you think these two concerns are equal or equivalent to a property transaction? Do you not understand how death works?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (12 children)

    I'll repeat what I've said. I brought up land and you said land doesn't matter so to get the point across I moved on to something I think does matter to you personally. Of course to others their land is like their life and they are willing to kill and die for it, since you're not currently in that circumstance I had to equate it to something.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (11 children)

    I don't think an ownership change of land is the same as the end of a life, no. The land remains.

    No person I know owns land. My landlord is a corporation. Has always been a corporation.

    I don't think the feelings of colonizers count, matter, or are genuine. They're all theatrical liars making shit up yo justify their racial supremacist and theocratic genocides. They would in nearly every case defile and destroy the thing rather than give it up, and that doesn't sound like the thing is what's important to them, but their fetishization and dominance of the thing.

    I don't think you could comprehend my value system if you tried, and I don't think you have, or respect you enough to explain.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (10 children)

    The world is big, just because you're personally experiencing something doesn't mean everyone else is having the same experience, that everyone lives in the same country, and so on. For instance Palestinians are willing to fight and die for their land even though the individuals don't own all of the land, same for Ukrainians in Ukraine. It's not like every last soldier owns all the land they are defending.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (9 children)

    palestine, Ukraine

    Those are both extermination wars where they previously ceded land and it didn't stop the aggression.

    They fight or they die. The Ukrainians could also run. You don't know what you're talking about, and are trying to fit real world situations to your bullshit. Call me when you're old enough that the fact you still 'date' twelve year olds is creepy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (8 children)

    They could just run. I doubt Russia would kill all 39M Ukrainians, Israel on the other hand most definitely is trying to kill all Palestinians. Russia just wants a buffer zone between them and NATO as well as those very valuable natural gas deposits and of course a port that doesn't freeze shut every winter. Also to boot the Kievan Rus originate in that area so it's kinda like taking back their ancestral land.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (7 children)

    You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (6 children)

    It's fine we have a difference of opinion.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (5 children)

    No, I have a world view that occasionally flirts with bare-metal reality. Yours has never been in a room with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (4 children)

    Once again I disagree. The general circumstance that someone or a group wants something that another individual or group does not want to give is just an aspect of being alive. It can be as simple as simple as a predator and prey to someone getting mugged to a genocide, X wants something Y doesn't want to give. Now how is that not an aspect of reality?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (3 children)

    But there are no people in one if those groups. Its just corporations.

    And ownership is kind of nonsense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    In which specific instance are you referring to? All land on earth isn't owned by corporations. As for ownership, there's always an owner, even in communism the state is the owner.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Honestly? If we had an actual plan in place for where everyone would go i'd play along. I've never been to europe but it seems very nice.

    I'm not exactly keen on the idea but I can't deny that it would be pretty fair.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    Man I really should have used a different hypothetical.. people are really fixated on it specifically. Also I doubt most nations would be willing to take 10 to 100 million people and how do we pick apart the nationality of individuals who are mixed or don't have records and so on.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago* (12 children)

    OK.

    What happens when particular resources become necessary for public good?

    That is, does the world in general have the right to extract the resources necessary to manufacture solar panels and grid-scale batteries &etc even if the local people object, because replacing fossil fuel power is a necessity for the survival of the human race entire?

    What happens when acquiring and using a resource becomes a requirement for treating human life with value?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    the mining of these resources must be done with respect and in cooperation with the people who would be harmed by doing so without respect and care. we must also take an approach of being considerate in our consumption habits, otherwise we're just participating in eco-colonialism

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (6 children)

    That sounds great... on paper. A very Disney ending to the long story of international resource conflict.

    It also doesn't really address my question, which is:

    What happens when the extraction of a resource is necessary, but the local people object? What if they refuse to cooperate?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    What kind of resource is that, what makes it necessary, and to whom?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

    OK.

    Copper. The answers to necessary and to whom should be self-evident.

    Other examples would be the rare earths which China has done so much work to acquire control over, and also sand for concrete which is such a high-value commodity that it has developed a global black market worth hundreds of billions of dollars, complete with international organized crime groups, and has caused a lot of environmental damage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Ah, well that makes it easy then. You leave the people the fuck alone, and let them go on with their lives.

    Why? Because the necessity is to some rich cunt who needs to exploit the natural resources of an area they have no larger claim to than anyone else, as well as the labour of whoever they can coerce into working there, to extract further riches for themselves. It is not about life or death. t is not about the betterment of a particular community, or society at large. It's about profit.

    This is only a necessity from a capitalistic lens. We have already extracted these materials, and they are out there ready to be reclaimed and reused. It just so happens that it's more profitable to trample communities and destroy the earth to get more of it, rather than use what we already have.

    That is the problem with capitalism. It is inimical to life and humanity, and cares only for profit. Capitalism is the paperclip maximiser.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    It is not about life or death. t is not about the betterment of a particular community, or society at large. It's about profit.

    This is a nonsensical point of view. If we're going to get out of our current climate problems we need to replace fossil fuel infrastructure with renewable energy sources as much and as quickly as possible. That's going to mean more electrical infrastructure, more solar panels, more grid-scale battery systems, more wind turbines, more hydroelectric stations, etc., which in turn means more copper, steel, aluminum, silicon, and concrete.

    Sure there's profit motivation involved. It's going to be a lot of fucking hard work and people gotta eat. But framing resource extraction for industrial use as only motivated by profit is so narrow-minded that this conversation can't really continue until you take a few steps down from your high horse and adjust your extreme point of view to something more rational.

    We have already extracted these materials, and they are out there ready to be reclaimed and reused. It just so happens that it's more profitable to trample communities and destroy the earth to get more of it, rather than use what we already have.

    There are already massive recycling industries in place for aluminum, steel, copper, and even lithium recovery from old batteries. Aluminum in particular is cheaper (more cost effective in terms of time and labor) to recycle than to mine and refine new ore. That's great, but it still doesn't produce enough volume of material, we still need more new material also.

    There are also quarries that grind rock and old concrete down to make fine particles, but... it's not the same as sand, it can't be used in all of the same production processes. The result is more like very fine gravel than it is sand. There's also an issue with a lot of concrete being reinforced with steel cables or rebar, which you can't just throw into a rock grinder.

    I don't know why you're talking about this as if it were all-or-nothing, that's not a practical approach in the real world. It seems like you're more interested in scoring holier-than-thou points than discussing actual solutions.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    Refusing to manufacture solar panels because the people living over the whatever refuse to let us mine the whatever would lead to us burning more fossil fuels and killing the planet sooner, and it would even be worse for the people living above the whatever.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    There are also other places you could get those materials from. Let's not pretend that it's not about a particular company wanting to extract those materials from that spot for their own profit.

    Capitalism isn't altruistic. It'll never be about things getting better for people.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

    Sorry, what biological change in humans made it such that humans as a species require electricity to survive? Or that made it a prerequisite to "treating human life with value"?

    Methinks you are conflating maintenance of the human species and maintenance of your desired quality of life.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Sorry, what biological change in humans made it such that humans as a species require electricity to survive? Or that made it a prerequisite to "treating human life with value"?

    Medical technology, for one thing. You can't have modern medicine without electricity. Give up electricity and you drop life expectancy back to what it was in the early 1900s:

    https://ourworldindata.org/data-insights/global-average-life-expectancy-has-more-than-doubled-since-1900

    That's an awful lot of human life.

    Methinks you are conflating maintenance of the human species and maintenance of your desired quality of life.

    Methinks you have no real concept of what life was like 100 years ago.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    It is an awful lot of human life, but it's certainly not all human life, by any measure.

    My tongue-in-cheek quip about human evolution was in response to your hyperbole about human existence being threatened.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    Human existence is threatened. Just browse some of the articles at /c/climate@slrpnk.net :

    France’s June heatwave caused more than 2,700 heat-related deaths

    Warming Could Ravage a Third of Plants Used by Amazon Communities | Hotter temperatures and harsher droughts could cause Indigenous societies to lose many of the species they have used for medicine, r

    The world's oceans are warming at a record-breaking pace

    Climate change causing more species to go extinct in temperate regions, UA study shows

    It's hardly hyperbole. The environment we live in is actively disintegrating. The effects of the damage are accelerating, right now.

    The most effective thing we can do to address the problem is increase renewable energy sources: What actually works — right here, right now — to address climate change

    That means more copper, steel, aluminum and concrete, for the whole world, as quickly as we possibly can.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›