3 ms·

There is a bit of hypocrisy in the discussion about cutting out rain forests. Western nations paid no mind to destroying their local ecosystems when they were g

There is a bit of hypocrisy in the discussion about cutting out rain forests. Western nations paid no mind to destroying their local ecosystems when they were getting rich over a span of the last couple of centuries, and only started to care about the environment when they reached comfy living for their citizens. It's unfair to demand something else from developing countries now.

misja111 10y ago
Did you read the article? For the most part the deforestation is driven by companies and large land owners. Their shareholders have nothing to complain about when it comes to their comfy living. See also: http://rainforests.mongabay.com/20brazil.htm http://rainforests.mongabay.com/20brazil.htm
- taway_1212 10y ago
  Was it different in Europe in between say X and XX century? The land was largely owned by either aristocracy/the king or the church. The common folks were barely above starvation for a lot of the time.
laxd 10y ago
The fact that so much rainforest is gone just makes it more important to save what's left. "They must be allowed because we did it" is a short sighted argument with these stakes.
- taway_1212 10y ago
  I agree that, on a planetary scale, it's short-sighted. I think it would be fair for the nations who profited from destroying their natural environment to pay some cash equivalent to those haven't yet. Otherwise it's pulling the ladder after you already got in.
cooper12 10y ago
Not only that, we just off-shore all that environmental damage elsewhere. All the electronics we consume are disassembled releasing toxic gases in Pakistan, China is full of ridiculous amounts of pollution because we use it as a major manufacturing hub, demand for animal parts causes overhunting all over the world, etc. All we've done in the West is push things under the rug and outsource our pollution. (meanwhile, the US Department of Defense is one of the biggest polluters in the world and doesn't have to follow any of the regulations set)
- taway_1212 10y ago
  > the US Department of Defense is one of the biggest polluters in the world That's interesting, do you have source on that?
  - cooper12 10y ago
    Sure, here's one: http://www.newsweek.com/2014/07/25/us-department-defence-one-worlds-biggest-polluters-259456.html http://www.newsweek.com/2014/07/25/us-department-defence-one... This one claims that its the third largest polluter of American waterways: http://www.environews.tv/world-news/analysis-dept-of-defense-third-largest-polluter-of-waterways-in-america/ http://www.environews.tv/world-news/analysis-dept-of-defense...

misja111 10y ago

Did you read the article? For the most part the deforestation is driven by companies and large land owners. Their shareholders have nothing to complain about when it comes to their comfy living. See also: http://rainforests.mongabay.com/20brazil.htm http://rainforests.mongabay.com/20brazil.htm

taway_1212 10y ago
Was it different in Europe in between say X and XX century? The land was largely owned by either aristocracy/the king or the church. The common folks were barely above starvation for a lot of the time.

laxd 10y ago

The fact that so much rainforest is gone just makes it more important to save what's left. "They must be allowed because we did it" is a short sighted argument with these stakes.

taway_1212 10y ago
I agree that, on a planetary scale, it's short-sighted. I think it would be fair for the nations who profited from destroying their natural environment to pay some cash equivalent to those haven't yet. Otherwise it's pulling the ladder after you already got in.

cooper12 10y ago

Not only that, we just off-shore all that environmental damage elsewhere. All the electronics we consume are disassembled releasing toxic gases in Pakistan, China is full of ridiculous amounts of pollution because we use it as a major manufacturing hub, demand for animal parts causes overhunting all over the world, etc. All we've done in the West is push things under the rug and outsource our pollution. (meanwhile, the US Department of Defense is one of the biggest polluters in the world and doesn't have to follow any of the regulations set)

taway_1212 10y ago
> the US Department of Defense is one of the biggest polluters in the world That's interesting, do you have source on that?
- cooper12 10y ago
  Sure, here's one: http://www.newsweek.com/2014/07/25/us-department-defence-one-worlds-biggest-polluters-259456.html http://www.newsweek.com/2014/07/25/us-department-defence-one... This one claims that its the third largest polluter of American waterways: http://www.environews.tv/world-news/analysis-dept-of-defense-third-largest-polluter-of-waterways-in-america/ http://www.environews.tv/world-news/analysis-dept-of-defense...