Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/12/03/rights-nature-debate-reaches-new-heights
I can see why indigenous people don’t have confidence in this “Rights of Nature” path forward. Not because nature shouldn’t be understood and respected at a verbal or even a legal level, but because this is conceptually flawed. It misses the point that 11 millions people living in an urban environment have any real experience to contribute. That having an emotional regard for what once was is not the same as respecting it in the first place.
Sorry, if the Green New Deal is suppose to be the answer, then we need to start asking different questions.
Rights for Nature would apply instantly pretty much everywhere, to corporations of all sizes, to individuals and governments ~
It is why it is being vehemently fought as outlined in this article.
The Achilles Hell, as it were, of unregulated predatory capitalism !
I’m all for it - have been since I read Christopher Stone’s groundbreaking legal argument “Should Trees Have Standing” (1972).
“…we support a paradigm shift in law toward recognizing the inherent rights of ecosystems and complimentary human rights.”
Shouldn’t it say complementary?
Fighting Rights of Nature is like fighting for Rights of Arson in one’s own home. The stupid, the greed, they burn.
Ultimately, it is a suicidal “crime,” rooted in arrogant ignorance, impatience and selfish greed.
Why just “human” rights? What about the rights of other-than-human beings?