3 ms·
> "Deliberate arsonism should be reclassified worldwide as crime against (the future of) humanity" You mean that, what the western countries did throughout the
by bad_user 6y ago
> "Deliberate arsonism should be reclassified worldwide as crime against (the future of) humanity"
You mean that, what the western countries did throughout the 19th and the 20th century, the developing countries aren't allowed to do now?
Why? Because some forests are burning near one of the richest cities in the world?
- pvaldes 6y agoPeople in western countries had to bloody fight each mm, for those laws. Laws that are always eroding. Is a sisyphean task, even here. Developing countries are sovereign and have governments and armies. Prominent environmentalists are assassinated each year in those countries and the cases remain inexplicably unsolved. All the time. So, no more excuses and "come here and solve my environmental problems so I don't need to". No more "donate to save the rainforest for 40 years, so we can sell later the logs to the first company that knocks at my door". People can always choose not to vote for the mentally damaged candidate.
- bad_user 6y agoThis is not an excuse. The western countries burned most of the fossil fuels, and are responsible for most of the world's deforestation. You're effectively saying that other countries shouldn't be allowed to lift their population from poverty in the same way that the western countries did. If so, then the west should pay up, or otherwise stfu.
- pvaldes 6y agoThis is a rotten old red herring and a false dichotomy that assumes that the way to get rich is selling the roof of your house. They will not got rich if they destroy their nature. How they will pay for the services that it provides?