3 ms·

Environmental concerns are important, human rights are important too, and they are not comparable. You can't compensate for the lack of human and civil rights b

by oytis 5y ago

Environmental concerns are important, human rights are important too, and they are not comparable. You can't compensate for the lack of human and civil rights by polluting less or buying carbon credits. Putting everything in the "human rights" bucket create an impression that you can.

wizzwizz4 5y ago
> You can't compensate for the lack of human and civil rights by polluting less or buying carbon credits. To an extent, you can – obviously not by buying carbon credits, though. Doing things that actually improve (or, reduce less slowly) the living conditions of humans is comparable to poor living conditions of humans.
- oytis 5y ago
  I think I have to disagree with that. Human and civil rights are not just about living conditions, it's more about such hard to define thing as respect for human dignity which can be preserved in various conditions.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - wizzwizz4 5y ago
    The iron fist is distant, its motivations hazy. If it stops mixing radioactive-contaminated materials in with the entire country's meat supply, does it matter why?
Barrin92 5y ago
I think you can to be honest. Or at least, the same accusation works the reverse way, you can't compensate for ecological transgressions by appealing to some other liberty. "our firms pour lead into the river, but we have freedom of speech" is less of a sound argument than it seems to people steeped in that culture. At least with ecological concerns you can make the case that it is the base layer for all organic life on earth, you can live unfree but you can't live without a biosphere, I actually think it would make some sense for universal human rights to reflect that order of priorities. Recognizing our shared biological reality might be an easier sell for a universal rights framework than some liberal political rights not even shared by a majority of people on the planet.

by oytis 5y ago

wizzwizz4 5y ago

> You can't compensate for the lack of human and civil rights by polluting less or buying carbon credits. To an extent, you can – obviously not by buying carbon credits, though. Doing things that actually improve (or, reduce less slowly) the living conditions of humans is comparable to poor living conditions of humans.

oytis 5y ago
I think I have to disagree with that. Human and civil rights are not just about living conditions, it's more about such hard to define thing as respect for human dignity which can be preserved in various conditions.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- wizzwizz4 5y ago
  The iron fist is distant, its motivations hazy. If it stops mixing radioactive-contaminated materials in with the entire country's meat supply, does it matter why?

Barrin92 5y ago

I think you can to be honest. Or at least, the same accusation works the reverse way, you can't compensate for ecological transgressions by appealing to some other liberty. "our firms pour lead into the river, but we have freedom of speech" is less of a sound argument than it seems to people steeped in that culture. At least with ecological concerns you can make the case that it is the base layer for all organic life on earth, you can live unfree but you can't live without a biosphere, I actually think it would make some sense for universal human rights to reflect that order of priorities. Recognizing our shared biological reality might be an easier sell for a universal rights framework than some liberal political rights not even shared by a majority of people on the planet.