What does environmental "justice" actually mean? Global warming is caused by the burning of fossil fuel. Global warming is responsible for climate change which poses an existential threat to humans and all living species. To address this threat is not a matter of "justice", but a matter of survival. As for " social justice", the question is "justice" on what basis? Group identity ? - which does nothing at all to challenge our oil based global financial capitalism - or class ?
Keep in mind that habitat destruction from human development and industrial agriculture is currently responsible for far more loss of species, wildlife numbers, etc. than climate change. Climate change is not THE problem; it is just one of many symptoms of the actual problem which is ecological overshoot.
I agree that ecological overshoot is a matter of survival, for humans and non-human species, as well as ecosystems. We humans have been incredibly unjust to the many other species with whom we share this planet--taking almost all the resources on the Earth for ourselves and leaving hardly any for them, destroying many species entirely, at an extinction rate of about 1000x the normal rate of extinction. We've managed to pollute the entire planet with poisons that are killing not only ourselves but all wildlife on the planet and affecting even how soil works.
In my view, the greatest injustice is to all non-human life and ecosystems on Earth. We have a lot to answer for. None of this would be addressed by a panel on "queer liberation."
Agreed, Elisabeth. I find it noteworthy that many in the social justice movement speak of supremacists - White supremacists, male supremacists, etc - but the term for what you are describing, I think, might be 'human supremacist'.
It's hard for me to see our species as anything other than human supremacists given that we account for roughly one third of the entire planetary mammalian biomass while our domestic cattle, pets and other such animals account for nearly another two thirds of it, leaving all the lions and tigers and elephants and giraffes in our children's books at about five per cent. Shocking!
But the term 'human supremacist' is probably too controversial for mainstream Green policy discussions. It might put people in mind of people like Peter Singer, the animal ethics philosopher who is often condemned as a eugenicist.
I'm sure Derrick Jensen prefers the term 'biocentric' as shorthand for his point of view.
The obvious is usually true...the agenda is that Derrick Jensen is a voice that must be cancelled not spread.
We live in post-modern times. Nowdays it's all about the monopolisation of the narrative. In her book ‘Macht en Onmacht’* the philosopher Tinneke Beeckman paints a painfully clear picture of how this weaponisation of victimhood is being used. Domination of the public discours has replaced all sense of dialogue. Gatherings are for cheerleading carefuly curated topics to mold a media impression of mass conformity and unity. Your Green Party Policy Fest is unfortunately no different.
Those playing this power game here are clearly scared of Mr Jensen. They know that they will loses any intellectual discussion they engage him with. Hence they have nothing to gain by giving him a platform and far too much to lose. Welcome to the reality of our new world. The only dialogue still left is to vote with ones feet and the alternative is to engage with equal agression in their dirty game for power.
What does environmental "justice" actually mean? Global warming is caused by the burning of fossil fuel. Global warming is responsible for climate change which poses an existential threat to humans and all living species. To address this threat is not a matter of "justice", but a matter of survival. As for " social justice", the question is "justice" on what basis? Group identity ? - which does nothing at all to challenge our oil based global financial capitalism - or class ?
Keep in mind that habitat destruction from human development and industrial agriculture is currently responsible for far more loss of species, wildlife numbers, etc. than climate change. Climate change is not THE problem; it is just one of many symptoms of the actual problem which is ecological overshoot.
I agree that ecological overshoot is a matter of survival, for humans and non-human species, as well as ecosystems. We humans have been incredibly unjust to the many other species with whom we share this planet--taking almost all the resources on the Earth for ourselves and leaving hardly any for them, destroying many species entirely, at an extinction rate of about 1000x the normal rate of extinction. We've managed to pollute the entire planet with poisons that are killing not only ourselves but all wildlife on the planet and affecting even how soil works.
In my view, the greatest injustice is to all non-human life and ecosystems on Earth. We have a lot to answer for. None of this would be addressed by a panel on "queer liberation."
Agreed, Elisabeth. I find it noteworthy that many in the social justice movement speak of supremacists - White supremacists, male supremacists, etc - but the term for what you are describing, I think, might be 'human supremacist'.
It's hard for me to see our species as anything other than human supremacists given that we account for roughly one third of the entire planetary mammalian biomass while our domestic cattle, pets and other such animals account for nearly another two thirds of it, leaving all the lions and tigers and elephants and giraffes in our children's books at about five per cent. Shocking!
But the term 'human supremacist' is probably too controversial for mainstream Green policy discussions. It might put people in mind of people like Peter Singer, the animal ethics philosopher who is often condemned as a eugenicist.
I'm sure Derrick Jensen prefers the term 'biocentric' as shorthand for his point of view.
The obvious is usually true...the agenda is that Derrick Jensen is a voice that must be cancelled not spread.
We live in post-modern times. Nowdays it's all about the monopolisation of the narrative. In her book ‘Macht en Onmacht’* the philosopher Tinneke Beeckman paints a painfully clear picture of how this weaponisation of victimhood is being used. Domination of the public discours has replaced all sense of dialogue. Gatherings are for cheerleading carefuly curated topics to mold a media impression of mass conformity and unity. Your Green Party Policy Fest is unfortunately no different.
Those playing this power game here are clearly scared of Mr Jensen. They know that they will loses any intellectual discussion they engage him with. Hence they have nothing to gain by giving him a platform and far too much to lose. Welcome to the reality of our new world. The only dialogue still left is to vote with ones feet and the alternative is to engage with equal agression in their dirty game for power.
*https://tinnekebeeckman.com/boek-macht-en-onmacht/