Sounds like shrinking the population would solve the problem, as long as it's a very specific 10% that was shrunk.

I distinctly remember being taught in 2002 in upstate New York that humans were outside of the ecosystem and not bound by the same rules and things as animals were. The teacher said that’s what made us so special.

What a fucking crime.

Thanks for the good vibes, they'd also love this over on LeftyMemes@lemmy.dbzer0.com

amazon, many rainforests(both amazon and mega-biodiversity of indonesia, south eas asia) is being decimated and untold species both undiscovered and rares are fast disappearing.

This reeks of the “noble savage” stereotype. I would be willing to bet 80% of biodiversity being in native lands has more to do with how brutally they’ve been repressed than how “in tune” with the environment they are.

They’re people too, and I see little reason to believe they wouldn’t fall to the same human flaws as the rest of us if given the chance.

I'm tired of people pretending they are smart and problem solving by by mass murdering most humans on the planet and stopping procreation.

You don't solve a jigsaw puzzle by putting 10 pieces together and burning the rest so you dont have to deal with them.

Your meme has too many words and the four block structure makes no sense.

Nihilists should lead by example and remove themselves first.

I'm not sure this person is aware what indigenous means. Unless, of course this meme is a 100% America-centric meme and largely ignores the entire rest of the world.

Also pretty funny that "eco fascism" is placed underneath what I assume are native Americans.

I watched a documentary in New Zealand about fish stocks. It was talking about how the fish around New Zealand are overfished and numbers are low. Had experts talking about issues with boats and how they need no fishing areas. They had Maori on there talking about how much abundance of fish there was before the white people came. They talked about how in tune the Maori were with the land and had ways to manage stock.

The documentary finished saying the issue is still ongoing and not enough has been done. Didn't really go into why.

Well I looked it up after the majority of fishing companies are owned by the Maori and the reason the scientifically justified areas were not set as a sanctuary was because the Maori didnt agree and wanted to do things there own way that would allow them to fish at levels higher than what the science was saying is possible. On this matter New Zealand cared more about what Maori incorrectly believed over what the scientific evidence was saying to them.

People need to get off their high horse. People suck all over the world. Yea shock the people that live in mountains which remain untouched because it is shit farmland is going to have the most nature. But go to other countries and you see it's the same, well worse than white countries. Places like UK has had protected land for hundreds of years. They set up protected land in the new places they went. Areas they left like Malaysia and India are full of rubbish and monoculture. They didn't get better. Go to Indonesia and look at their beautiful islands. The tour guide said to us "look no littering sign. Only in Indonesian. Westerners don't litter but the locals do".

Ecofascism isn't a real ideology I don't know why people keep insisting it is. Almost seems like a deliberate psy-op to create divisions among environmentalists. But more likely people are just stupid and afraid and angry.

We aren’t saying that brown people are above tech and modernities and that’s why they don’t have them… are we? Surely not.

What are the population densities and technology levels among these magical indigenous peoples? This is the Magical Negro trope all over again.

Ima need yall to not crush a good imeperionstion that I do. I can do a great Hugo Weaving (as mr smith), and the main line that i start off with, or use in my head while saying other things, is the humans are cancer speech.

Also just.. Missssster Anderson

Are we counting the world's industry into "the world's richest 10%"? Because, last I checked, random dudes in mom-and-pop shops also ordered cheap items from China or India.

Carbon emissions are not the only problem. I really doubt the world's reaches 10% also produce half of the sewage and plastic or that most of the land is turned into farms to feed them. It's nice that indigenous people living in forest don't destroy it but you can't have 8 billion people living in forests. Cities and highways are not part of the ecosystem.

Indigenous people protecting the environment from what?

That's so racist

Saying stuff like humans are the virus isn't fascism it's just simply stupid/edgy. Sure you could say someone like that is a useful idiot to fascists but that's like saying everyone who drinks gasoline from the cars parked on the street is furthering the agenda of some solar panel manufacturing company. Both are inconsequential enough for me not to give a shit.

It's not wrong to say that population is the driving problem. Do you think indigenous people ever coexisted with their ecosystem at the population density we're at now?

Completely ignoring the fact that humans just existing on islands killed thousands of bird populations. https://www.creaf.cat/en/articles/humans-may-have-caused-extinction-1430-species-birds

This is pretty well documented for Hawaii, where yes the fish population did fine, but the bird population did not.

https://magazine.hms.harvard.edu/articles/good-viruses-do

Not all viruses are evil, so it might hold up?

Sure, if you all want to live like it's 1750 again humans are not a problem. We both know you don't want to do that so stop acting like the modern lifestyle is sustainable if the rich just polluted less. It's not that simple, they pollute that much because they own the facilities that support our lifestyle

By lacking accessibility, this image of text sustains a pattern of systemic discriminatory exclusion.

Images of text break much that text alternatives do not. Losses due to image of text lacking alternative such as link:

• usability
  • we can't quote the text without pointless bullshit like retyping it or OCR
  • text search is unavailable
  • the system can't
    • reflow text to varied screen sizes
    • vary presentation (size, contrast)
    • vary modality (audio, braille)
• accessibility
  • lacks semantic structure (tags for titles, heading levels, sections, paragraphs, lists, emphasis, code, links, accessibility features, etc)
  • some users can't read the image due to lack of alt text (markdown image description)
  • users can't adapt the text for dyslexia or vision impairments
  • systems can't read the text to them or send it to braille devices
• web connectivity
  • we have to do failure-prone bullshit to find the original source
  • we can't explore wider context of the original message
• authenticity: we don't know the image hasn't been tampered
• searchability: the "text" isn't indexable by search engine in a meaningful way
• fault tolerance: no text fallback if
  • image breaks
  • image host is geoblocked due to insane regulations.

Contrary to age & humble appearance, text is an advanced technology that provides all these capabilities absent from images.

Viral infections are cured by eradicating them entirely or to undetectable levels. "Humanity is a virus" is not a condemnation of overpopulation but of humanity. Genocide would be inadequate to "cure" the planet of a "human infection": only speciescide would suffice.

Lemmy has an odd fixation on ecofascism when that's not implied. No form of government is suggested with the eradication of all humanity, only the absence of any. Any anti-anthropocentrism such as ecocentrism or a morality generalized beyond human welfare is capable of accounting for such thought.

People here tend to fixate on their pet theories that scapegoat capitalism for everything including that humanity's drain on ecological resources exceeds Earth's rate of regeneration without acknowledging that their alternatives don't address the problem, either.

Although governments are far more able than individuals and firms acting singly to take action to protect the environment, they often fail to do so. The centrally planned economies of Eastern Europe, where governments controlled production, had a particularly poor record on pollution control. Per capita mortality from air pollution in Eastern Europe (outside the EU) and China remains high relative to the EU and North America.

In particular, the Soviet economy—with constitutional guarantees to continuously improve living standards & steadily grow productive forces—caused disproportionately worse ecological damage than the US's. All economic systems have the same capacity to degrade the environment & deplete stocks of natural resources. Without adequate policies to protect the environment, improving & maintaining living standards with the continuous economic growth necessary to do that threatens the environment.

Moreover, human activity before capitalism has led to extinctions of megafauna, plants, & animals dependent on those plants. The quaternary megafauna extinction was likely driven by overhunting by humans. Those extinctions & increased fires coinciding with the arrival of humanity to Australia transformed the ecosystem from mixed rainforest to drier landscapes. Aboriginal landscape burning

may have caused the extinction of some fire-sensitive species of plants and animals dependent upon infrequently burnt habitats

More recently, they killed off the elephant bird likely due to major environmental alterations & overconsumption of their eggs.

As long as people prioritize anthropocentric concerns without considering the environment, I find it an expedient starting point to remind them that exterminating all of humanity will end humanity's concerns, too, while saving the planet from them. It's a rhetorical move to stimulate more practical discussion. Around here, though, they never seem to get past that starting point, but instead protract in their useless debates over economic/political systems.

When you buy a house you're "one of the world's richest". The "world's richest" aren't just millionaires and billionaires. They include the middle classes.