This is the NWO we need

Sounds like Bolivia is on track

Boliv ia rules that nature has rights

Bolivia is set to pass the world’s first laws granting all nature equal rights to humans. The Law of Mother Earth, now agreed by politicians and grassroots social groups, redefines the country’s rich mineral deposits as “blessings” and is expected to lead to radical new conservation and social measures to reduce pollution and control industry.

Now if only the rest of the human race can recognize that this reality doesn't revolve around us as "individuals" then maybe we'll stand a chance.....

We are all one.


Peace

reply to post by Mike.Ockizard


This is a very slippery slope.

There was a map I saw a couple years ago that showed what the US would look like under these types of laws...the entire population condensed into a handful of mega-cities in very specific areas with something like 80-90% of the continent vacant.

Don't get me wrong, we have abused nature in every imaginable way and continue to do so at our peril. However this type of law will eventually lead to forced relocations 'to protect nature' at the cost of everyday people who have a legitimate claim on thier land and property.

It may sound good in it's current form, but read between the lines.

This leads to assigned housing, where your 'home' (read apartment) is alloted based on a formula that decides what type of residence is adequate for your needs. How much support will you have for this when your property is seized and you and your family are forced to move into a designated human habitat?

No say over where you live or what your home is like.

In theory, this looks like a good move.

In reality it is placing the entire populace into a regimented class system that is inescapable because you yourself have absolutely no say in the matter...the crown jewel in a totalitarian nightmare. Even worse, it completely shifts all the blame for the condition of our environment to the people and gives corporations a pass.

No thanks.

reply to post by [davinci]


Many people respond that way. We have been raised in a society where we are taught individualism from the moment we are born. Emphasis is made that we are separate. Many animal societies discourage individualism as it's not in the best interest of the pack or herd or whatever.

There are many alternatives or modifications to the societal structure you described. They attempt to make more of a reward out of a society that concentrates on the well being of the whole. They also seek to keep the joy and wonder in living in a giving, considerate society.

The media teaches everyday how being an individual means you can buy anything you want with no regard for where it came from or it's impact on the rest of the world. The truth is, if we all came together and tried, we could have all the same fun and adventure with no such thing as money or ownership.

The transition to any such form of society would be really hard to implement. People will fight it tooth and nail.

We should try anyway.

reply to post by Mike.Ockizard


I have no arguement with what you are saying, but this type of law is not the way to go about it.

What this is saying is that rampant pollution carried out by corporations is the fault of the consumers. If we didn't purchase thier goods they wouldn't have to destroy the environment to produce them.

Look at this another way... there is an immense push on to pass carbon taxes on the world's population.

OK, fine.

I don't drive a car.
I don't buy products with excessive packaging.
I use my own cloth grocery bags instead of paper or plastic ones
I recycle.
I buy most of my groceries/meat from local sources (reducing transportation emissions)
...etc...

I do everything I can already to minimze my personal impact. Does this mean I will get a rebate or responsible citizen bonus?

No, It just means that I won't pay additional taxes (other than the 'you're alive and breathing' tax)

This is not the NWO we need, it's just the NWO.

As always, the worst laws are worded in such a way that to argue against them means you are for something else.

Protect the enviroment? sure. Lets stop draining wetlands for shopping malls. Lets stop clear cutting old growth forests to make toothpicks. Lets stop oil drilling in fragile ecosystems...

THere are numerous ways to accomplish these goals, but none of them are in the interests of corporations.

It is easier to force us to change then risk a bad quarterly statement to the shareholders.

reply to post by [davinci]


If we can muster support for the understanding that nature has rights, we could also, abeit slowly, replace those in govt who don't get it with people who do. This type of change is good in that it starts the discussion. I choose not to draw conclusions based on how govt doesn't work now. That said, with our current form of govt and the way our leadership is funded, you are correct. Nothing will ever change before it's too late.

I'd also argue that looking for personal reward is part of the problem. With a new system based on the values built around the well being of the whole, the real reward would be peace and harmony. In that type of world there is no need to own anything or use money.

Some would term this as utopian thinking. It is. We have the power to do it tho. We choose not to every minute of every day not understanding the potential that real change could bring.

Double post... Oops