If you're at all worried by damage to the environment...

(55 Posts)
PuzzledBear Sun 29-Sep-13 23:09:52

You might be interested in this campaign I've come across. They're trying to make the destruction of ecosystems a crime - ecocide - like genocide. If the proposal gets enough votes, it gets to be considered by the European Parliament. Have a look: [http://www.endecocide.eu/]

PuzzledBear Mon 30-Sep-13 21:48:06

How can you change the law without lawyers? confused

pitterpaterfamilias Mon 30-Sep-13 21:49:56

Remember that many businesses operating globally are based in the EU or are listed on investment exchanges in the EU. Member states will therefore be able to enforce against, for example, the holding company of a trading company operating in the Amazon or Southern Ocean.

ScrewtapesOppositeNumber Mon 30-Sep-13 21:56:19

Never going to happen.

Governments don't run the world, businesses do. Businesses will bring all possible pressure to bear to make sure it doesn't happen, because it would decimate their profit.

Even if it did happen, it's only Europe. China, India and America are simply not going to give a flying fuck what Europe thinks. Imagine telling India 'Oh, we're all developed thanks so now we can afford to be green, but you've got to cut your emissions (i.e. cut your economic growth).' Don't see it going over too well...

If the hypotheses re climate change are true, then I do think we're fucked.

PuzzledBear Mon 30-Sep-13 21:59:40

I'm depressed at the idea that we should feel so defeated that it isn't even worth signing a petition so that more optimistic and energetic people can have a crack at protecting the world.

PuzzledBear Mon 30-Sep-13 22:00:45

Urgh, clearly I am so depressed by it that I can't even form sensible sentences.

Talkinpeace Mon 30-Sep-13 22:01:31

Petitions and marches have no impact.
Spending choices and direct complaints to companies DO work.

And actually places like India and China are cutting their emissions VVV quick as they want to reduce their smog levels

pitterpaterfamilias Mon 30-Sep-13 22:02:36

And on the tombstone of the earth, the words "killed by apathy" were carved.

I too am sceptical of the chances of this initiative ever getting anywhere, although I agree with the principle. Clearly very big changes are needed very soon if we're going to save the planet, and everyone is onboard until it becomes a NIMBY issue. But I think ultimately we're going to have to downsize or seriously re-invent our lifestyles.

So, despite my scepticism, I'm not going to let it be me who causes this initiative to fail before it even gets off the ground and I have signed.

And I have shared on Facebook.

PuzzledBear Mon 30-Sep-13 22:13:42

Annie I think I love you. My faith is a little restored.

grin

ScrewtapesOppositeNumber Mon 30-Sep-13 22:20:37

The only way you will ever get big companies/countries to change is if it results in a direct benefit to them (and sadly I don't think saving the planet in 50 years time is direct enough). So smog emissions, yes, for some governments. But this particular initiative is about protecting eco-systems rather than just dealing with emissions. I think there are a lot of powerful people who simple don't give a shit if forests are destroyed or species made extinct, and they never will. Profit is more important.

But surely, ultimately the population is just going to get bigger and bigger, and therefore more and more energy will be used. Unless greener forms of energy can be substituted almost entirely (and, really, unless they are cheaper than traditional forms) it's only a matter of time before the inevitable occurs.

PuzzledBear Mon 30-Sep-13 22:27:41

Screwtapes, yes exactly. That's why you should vote for this. To curb the activities of the people who don't care. Maybe this act won't get through. But the odds against it increase with every person who knows the earth is being irrevocably damaged and doesn't believe there is anything to be done.

pitterpaterfamilias Mon 30-Sep-13 22:39:36

Screwtapes, remember that while legislation usually reflects public opinion, occasionally the lawmakers can lead it. Much of the discrimination legislation, for instance, was met with scepticism but now most people understand that it's not "political correctness gone mad".

Although, as Stewart Lee said, if there's one thing political correctness has achieved, it's to make the Tories hide their inherent racism behind more creative language. wink

ScrewtapesOppositeNumber Mon 30-Sep-13 22:57:58

Yes but often the lawmakers are influenced or controlled by big business. That's my point.

specialsubject Tue 01-Oct-13 10:14:35

this is the same EU that hugely subsidises the useless on-shore windfarms?

yeah, right. That'll go well.

flatpackhamster Tue 01-Oct-13 10:41:04

pitterpaterfamilias

Flatpack - the rate at which the world's resources are being destroyed is wicked.

It would be if there weren't more resources to consume. There's no shortage, it's just down to the cost of getting it out of the ground. What're we supposed to do, just leave it in there to placate Gaia?

The complete disregard of many multinationals to any environmental responsibility is wicked.

That why we have laws to manage them. This law you propose would stop any kind of development. It would destroy the very basis of human progress. That's wicked.

The wilful ignorance of those who support the unfettered free market that allows or condones this behaviour is wicked.

You believe it's all down to evil big business that pollution happens, don't you? Have you ever been to Eastern Europe? Have you read about the pollution of the Danube under Communism? If you had seen the damage done by state-controlled markets, you wouldn't be so quick to condemn the free market. Talk about wilful ignorance. Take a jaunt to Russia and see what happens when the state has total control, why don't you? Why don't you go and look at the destruction of the environment in China, then come back and lecture me on the 'wicked' free market.

This proposal seeks to curtail this behaviour. The objections you have are absurd. You should be ashamed of yourself.

I'm ashamed to think that we share chromosomes. What's absurd is the self-loathing, the pathetic flagellation of the green movement, which so hates and despises the human race that it will do anything to curtail its progress,

We need aspirational proposals at this time, not self serving vested interests looking to block measures designed to safeguard our future and our children's future.

What does it aspire to, this proposal? It aspires to stagnation. No nuclear power. No mining. Where are you going to get your blessed wind turbines from without acid leaching for rare earths, without strip mining for steel, without quarrying for gravel for concrete, without deep mining for copper for the wires?

flatpackhamster Tue 01-Oct-13 10:49:11

Could those who think this law is a good idea answer a question for me.

Given that the law would forbid any kind of industry which might 'degrade the environment', please could you tell me which kinds of power generation and agriculture would be permitted under this law?

Slipshodsibyl Tue 01-Oct-13 12:47:15

Well I think at the very least we would all have to give up our cars...

flatpackhamster Fri 04-Oct-13 12:51:08

Isn't it amazing. Not a single reply from any of the supporters of the law, three days after I asked the question.

It's almost as though they were paid shills for the group pushing the law...

PuzzledBear Fri 04-Oct-13 13:49:08

Oh FGS. No actually I just thought I would share something I think is a positive initiative. Then you became aggressive and rude. I tried to discuss it and justify it a little but actually I can't be bothered to debate with you because you irritate me. So it's not that I am somehow corrupt, I just don't want to discuss with you. I don't have to and I'm not going to, and I am fed up with your attitude.

SilverOldie Fri 04-Oct-13 16:26:32

Interesting reply OP, were you stamping your foot and saying 'so there'! when you were typing your last post? Why start a thread when you have no desire to debate it with someone who has an opposing view?

Flatpackhamster's posts are eminently sensible IMO.

PuzzledBear Fri 04-Oct-13 17:03:17

Pretty much, oldie

flatpackhamster Mon 07-Oct-13 07:12:19

It isn't a positive initiative and I have outlined why. Perhaps before you leap on the next ecomentalist bandwagon you ought to try some critical thinking.

And don't debate me if you wish, but think on this - which kinds of power generation and agriculture would be permitted? Try to think of one, because I couldn't. No need to reply here, just mull over the consequences of a law that resets the human race to hunter-gatherers when there are 7 billion of us on the planet.

CoteDAzur Mon 07-Oct-13 07:23:27

"Remember that many businesses operating globally are based in the EU or are listed on investment exchanges in the EU."

You can't prosecute a company because it is listed in a European stock exchange.

And all legislation such as this would do is to make EU companies move out to other countries. Nonbrainer when the alternative is to close up shop.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now