5 ms·
Greenland's mineral resources are valued in the trillions. They can be exploited for the benefit of the residents, why on earth would they sell that for the un
by rswail 2y ago
Greenland's mineral resources are valued in the trillions.
They can be exploited for the benefit of the residents, why on earth would they sell that for the undefined "benefits" of being an exploited territory of either the US or China?
- troad 2y agoGood news, they get to keep all of them. In the US, natural resources belong to whoever owns the land, which would be the state government and the people of Greenland. Y'all can fear-monger about 'neo-colonialism', but the only nation that has ever exploited Greenland has been Denmark, what with its actual colonialism.
- runarberg 2y ago> the only nation that has ever exploited Greenland has been Denmark While Denmark is by far the biggest colonial exploiter of Greenland (including genocidal ethnodemographic policies as late as the 1970s), it is by no means the only one. Other exploiters include Norway, who tried to annex East Greenland, Faroe Islands, who set up a failed factory in South Greenland, Iceland, who has been exploiting the fisheries around Greenland, and—the second worse offender—USA who set up an illegal military base in Pituffik, North Greenland, including forcefully relocating its residents to Qaanaaq, crash landing a bomber armed with a nuclear bomb, illegally using Greenland to transport nuclear bombs, polluting their surroundings, etc. PS. what you are describing as neo-colonialism, is just plain old fashion colonialism. Neo-colonialism is already a defined term which does not involve annexing territories. In fact its defining feature is exploitation without direct territorial control. In my opinion I wish it wasn’t called neo-colonialism, as it sort of diminishes the true horrors of European colonialism, and is not offering any meaningful distinction from the standard exploitation of global capitalism and neo-liberalism. PPS. It can be argued that Iceland’s and the Faroes’ exploitation of Greenland are neo-colonial in nature, as opposed to pure colonial, like Denmark’s, Norway’s and the USA’s.
- troad 2y agoSure, that arch exploitative act of "trying to set up a factory" in an impoverished area. God forbid the locals get wages and a chance at better living conditions, when they can instead be forced to remain a living museum of impoverished hunter-gatherer cultures for the benefit of haughty Western scholars of neo-colonialism. /s "Illegally" using Greenland to transport nuclear bombs? Illegal under whose law? The illegitimate dictates of the occupying Danish government? You can point fingers and "what about?" all day long, but there's only state that colonised Greenland, and that is Denmark. Whereas the United States - while far from perfect - played a pivotal role in pressuring Europe to dismantle its rapacious colonial empires. Ultimately, the only people who have the right to decide the future and laws of Greenland are the people of Greenland. Whether that is independence, joining the Union as an equal, or continued colony status under Denmark is a matter for them and them alone. Unlike Denmark, the US isn't going to invade and annex Greenland.
- runarberg 2y agoIllegal under Danish law. > In a Danish Supreme Court judgment of 28 November 2003 the move [forceful relocation from Pituffik to Qaanaaq to make way for the Thule airbase] was considered an expropriative intervention. During the proceedings it was recognized by the Danish government that the movement was a serious interference and an unlawful act against the local population.[1] > In 1995, a political scandal arose in Denmark after a report revealed the government had given tacit permission for nuclear weapons to be located in Greenland, in contravention of Denmark's 1957 nuclear-free zone policy.[2] 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qaanaaq https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qaanaaq 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Thule_Air_Base_B-52_crash https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Thule_Air_Base_B-52_crash Both of these cases were Denmark breaking their own laws to fulfill American requests of US imperialism on their territory. This is very similar to how the UK broke their own laws to hand over Diego Garzia illegally from the Chagocean Islanders to build a USA military base. The colonialism in those instances, even though the responsibility is ultimately on their colonizers (Denmark), the USA very much participates, and is the main perpetrator of these events.
- 2y ago
- rswail 2y agoYou're assuming that Greenland would be given statehood which is extremely unlikely, they would be entitled to two Senate seats and one House seat with an even lower population than Wyoming.
- Yeul 2y agoYep I read an article about the people in Texas who live next to the refineries and LNG terminals. Lots of cancer and nobody cares. Great for Europe and corporations though.
- troad 2y agoA very typical European understanding of the US - "I read an article about... ", "I saw on Reddit that... ", "I saw an Onion video that said... " <obviously reductionist caricature follows>. You're watching the reflections on the wall of Plato's cave and think you have any understanding of the society that cast them. Edit: I also see in your other comments that you praise Xi Jinping's China. Enough said.
- rswail 2y agoThere have been numerous examples of the lack of industry regulation in TX leading to bad health outcomes to local residents with no recourse.