▲ 1223 ▼ Imagine denying other living and breathing lifeforms agency to thrive and change lol lol lol (mander.xyz) submitted 2 years ago* by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz 68 comments fedilink hide all child comments Fun facts: the UK has crazy laws protecting trees and hedgerows. There's a national tree registry for old boys.
[+] fossilesque@mander.xyz [S] 33 points 2 years ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (4 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's called environmental protection groups, animal rights groups, etc. Plenty don't want to listen, though permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] fossilesque@mander.xyz [S] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Who is going to keep them accountable? Trees have a record high abstention rate, and if these representatives are elected by humans that's just proportional voting with veneer on top. Democracy is about balancing levers, and that's why there is more than one branch of government. Special interest groups do have power, and so does the judiciary (who may sue the government for unlawful cutting down of trees) and the executive (who may have power to declare certain government-owned land to be Protected). The real ecologist move would be to write a duty to protect the environment into the constitution, so that the judiciary can strike down any law that does anything to the contrary. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child) I believe at least one state—Wyoming, maybe—has a guarantee in its constitution that citizens will have a clean and healthy environment, or something along those lines. It effectively creates a duty to protect the environment. Edit: it's Montana. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Almrond@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I was going to say, definitely not Wyoming. Too many oil and gas companies absolutely destroy the areas they are in. I lived in Edgerton for a bit, there is literally no potable water in town, you will make yourself incredibly sick drinking out of the tap because of the drilling in the area. That's just one of very many examples. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago I would argue most things in government should be ran in the black or red. There's just a certain type of person who wants to turn everything Into a for profit. permalink fedilink source parent [–] flora_explora@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) You may like Bruno Latour and his rather philosophical book Politics of Nature. I read it in a philosophy seminar and it seemed fascinating how the author tries to completely overthrow the view we have on "nature" and give it agency. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] fossilesque@mander.xyz [S] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 years ago Can I just get Danny DeVito? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Natanael@slrpnk.net 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's called environmental protection groups, animal rights groups, etc. Plenty don't want to listen, though permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] fossilesque@mander.xyz [S] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Who is going to keep them accountable? Trees have a record high abstention rate, and if these representatives are elected by humans that's just proportional voting with veneer on top. Democracy is about balancing levers, and that's why there is more than one branch of government. Special interest groups do have power, and so does the judiciary (who may sue the government for unlawful cutting down of trees) and the executive (who may have power to declare certain government-owned land to be Protected). The real ecologist move would be to write a duty to protect the environment into the constitution, so that the judiciary can strike down any law that does anything to the contrary. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child) I believe at least one state—Wyoming, maybe—has a guarantee in its constitution that citizens will have a clean and healthy environment, or something along those lines. It effectively creates a duty to protect the environment. Edit: it's Montana. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Almrond@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I was going to say, definitely not Wyoming. Too many oil and gas companies absolutely destroy the areas they are in. I lived in Edgerton for a bit, there is literally no potable water in town, you will make yourself incredibly sick drinking out of the tap because of the drilling in the area. That's just one of very many examples. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] fossilesque@mander.xyz [S] 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Who is going to keep them accountable? Trees have a record high abstention rate, and if these representatives are elected by humans that's just proportional voting with veneer on top. Democracy is about balancing levers, and that's why there is more than one branch of government. Special interest groups do have power, and so does the judiciary (who may sue the government for unlawful cutting down of trees) and the executive (who may have power to declare certain government-owned land to be Protected). The real ecologist move would be to write a duty to protect the environment into the constitution, so that the judiciary can strike down any law that does anything to the contrary. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child) I believe at least one state—Wyoming, maybe—has a guarantee in its constitution that citizens will have a clean and healthy environment, or something along those lines. It effectively creates a duty to protect the environment. Edit: it's Montana. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Almrond@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I was going to say, definitely not Wyoming. Too many oil and gas companies absolutely destroy the areas they are in. I lived in Edgerton for a bit, there is literally no potable water in town, you will make yourself incredibly sick drinking out of the tap because of the drilling in the area. That's just one of very many examples. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] azertyfun@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) Who is going to keep them accountable? Trees have a record high abstention rate, and if these representatives are elected by humans that's just proportional voting with veneer on top. Democracy is about balancing levers, and that's why there is more than one branch of government. Special interest groups do have power, and so does the judiciary (who may sue the government for unlawful cutting down of trees) and the executive (who may have power to declare certain government-owned land to be Protected). The real ecologist move would be to write a duty to protect the environment into the constitution, so that the judiciary can strike down any law that does anything to the contrary. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child) I believe at least one state—Wyoming, maybe—has a guarantee in its constitution that citizens will have a clean and healthy environment, or something along those lines. It effectively creates a duty to protect the environment. Edit: it's Montana. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Almrond@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I was going to say, definitely not Wyoming. Too many oil and gas companies absolutely destroy the areas they are in. I lived in Edgerton for a bit, there is literally no potable water in town, you will make yourself incredibly sick drinking out of the tap because of the drilling in the area. That's just one of very many examples. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lolcatnip@reddthat.com -1 points 2 years ago* (1 child) I believe at least one state—Wyoming, maybe—has a guarantee in its constitution that citizens will have a clean and healthy environment, or something along those lines. It effectively creates a duty to protect the environment. Edit: it's Montana. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Almrond@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I was going to say, definitely not Wyoming. Too many oil and gas companies absolutely destroy the areas they are in. I lived in Edgerton for a bit, there is literally no potable water in town, you will make yourself incredibly sick drinking out of the tap because of the drilling in the area. That's just one of very many examples. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Almrond@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I was going to say, definitely not Wyoming. Too many oil and gas companies absolutely destroy the areas they are in. I lived in Edgerton for a bit, there is literally no potable water in town, you will make yourself incredibly sick drinking out of the tap because of the drilling in the area. That's just one of very many examples. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 years ago I would argue most things in government should be ran in the black or red. There's just a certain type of person who wants to turn everything Into a for profit. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] flora_explora@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) You may like Bruno Latour and his rather philosophical book Politics of Nature. I read it in a philosophy seminar and it seemed fascinating how the author tries to completely overthrow the view we have on "nature" and give it agency. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] fossilesque@mander.xyz [S] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] fossilesque@mander.xyz [S] 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 years ago Can I just get Danny DeVito? permalink fedilink source parent