• Light/Dark
  • Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

The G7 "saving the amazon" is colonialist bullshit

Do you believe in G7 good intentions on Amazon

  • Of course, Europe is bad in some things but they still can help the Amazon

  • No, of course they are lying and only want a part of the piece

  • G7 should be dropped down on the amazon fire

  • I dont know this is too political for me

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Galactor

Galactor

Banned
Nov 11, 2017
619
G7 leaders agree plan to help Amazon countries fight wildfires

#notyourlung: Amazon is NOT the "lungs of the planet" All the CO2 produced by industries can't be taken out only by the trees just focus on reducing CO2 from industries and dont use the jungle to cover doing nothing. Of course G7 uses the "lung is in danger" narrative over the "we need to kill coal" narrative.

#wetlandsdontburn: Wetlands cant burn that easily because they are wet. What can burn are deforested parts of the amazon, which are nothing but dry sticks = fuel. Is G7 fighting human activity on amazon?

#notyouramazon: Amazon is part of eight countries: Bolivia, Brasil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Perú, Surinam and Venezuela, which form the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization - OTCA. Once again, Europe is trying to "solve" third world problems. Please respect the countries involved and dont try to sell your "good samaritan" propaganda though the media.
 
Fevaweva

Fevaweva

Member
Oct 30, 2017
6,534
Sure, reducing Carbon emissions from companies is a more effective way of combating Global Warming but also saving the Amazon whilst reducing emissions is even better.
 
Heromanz

Heromanz

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
20,202
So if I had this guess what happen was thid
Hogan_tweet.png
 
OP
OP
Galactor

Galactor

Banned
Nov 11, 2017
619
Fevaweva said:
Sure, reducing Carbon emissions from companies is a more effective way of combating Global Warming but also saving the Amazon whilst reducing emissions is even better.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yes, but the media is only focusing on them "saving the amazon" look how the NY times treated the issue:

"The fires accelerate depletion of one of the world's largest forests, a crucial sink for the atmospheric carbon dioxide that contributes to global warming. They also threaten Indigenous peoples and shrinking wildlife habitat"

Because of the "pressing issue" of the Amazon, they forgot to talk about drastic measures to reduce CO2.
 
Wamb0wneD

Wamb0wneD

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
18,735
You think they want to stay there after they helped putting out the fires? The fuck is this logic even. You don't make any sense.
 
Bedlam

Bedlam

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
4,536
Galactor said:
Because of the "pressing issue" of the Amazon, they forgot to talk about drastic measures to reduce CO2.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They are talking about that as well, just not in this article.

Leave it, OP. All I sense is a bunch of Bolsonaro-like butthurt coming from your direction which won't get anything done.
 
phonicjoy

phonicjoy

Banned
Jun 19, 2018
4,305
Galactor said:
What was the ideology that treated nature and indigenous people like shit to accumulate gold and create industries in the first place?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So the fuck what.

That doesn't in any way preempt anyone from doing anything about this disaster.

If anything it is a ridiculously small amount of money they offered.
 
gofreak

gofreak

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,819
Would the G7 have said anything if Bolsonaro appeared to be on top of the problem? You're right that the problem isn't exclusive to Brazil, but then you have to wonder why criticism was pointed at Bolsonaro and not other countries also dealing with fires, like Bolivia. Is it because of politics, and because they dislike Bolsonaro, or because Bolsonaro was making foolish statements about the causes of the fires? I don't know. Maybe it was both. I don't think Bolsonaro did himself any favours though.

I do agree there's plenty of scope for hypocrisy here, and for selective picking on certain leaders. It's easier to pick on Bolsonaro than China, for example - and I'd like to see the same 'bravery' applied with certain other major industrial contributors to the problem. But to be completely fair, I don't think European governments pointing at the Amazon are doing so as a distraction for dealing with industrial outputs... at least not all of them. I see plenty of talk out of European politicians about the need to move away from dirty fuels.
 
TSM

TSM

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,843
I don't see how the west will be able to take on global warming without being hypocrites. We got to live it up during a period where it wasn't obvious just how quickly things were going to go wrong on a global level. Now we are going to be in a position where we will need to ask third world countries take one for the team and limit their economic potential for the greater good.
 
Last edited:

Snack12367

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,191
Hot damn this a spicy take from OP. Might as well pack up all the aid money to war torn countries, apparently it's colonialist.
 
kadotsu

kadotsu

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,508
I feel like putting the leader of the left in prison so the reactionary candidate wins with the help of the CIA is way more colonialist.
 

Deleted member 24149

Oct 29, 2017
2,150
I'm liking the poll options OP. Very non partisan of you /s
 
Fatoy

Fatoy

Member
Mar 13, 2019
7,267
Seems like "respecting the countries involved" might extend to helping them stop burning.
 
MilesQ

MilesQ

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,490
There is something pretty shitty about other countries, which have been polluting on an insane level for decades telling Brazil to leave the Amazon alone because it's the lungs of the world.

I don't agree that it's colonialist bullshit though, it's just other countries refusing to take responsibility for their actions and Brazil with its current leader is a nice scapegoat to rally people around.
 
fanboi

fanboi

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,702
Sweden
MilesQ said:
There is something pretty shitty about other countries, which have been polluting on an insane level for decades telling Brazil to leave the Amazon alone because it's the lungs of the world.

I don't agree that it's colonialist bullshit though, it's just other countries refusing to take responsibility for their actions and Brazil with its current leader is a nice scapegoat to rally people around.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

This is next level whataboutism.
 
Geoff

Geoff

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
7,115
The amazon is not really the lungs of the world but it does hold a fuck load of carbon and using money to stop a huge fire seems like a good idea, even if it is the felled wood that is burning.

Why wouldn't you want to stop the fire?
 
klonere

klonere

Banned
Nov 1, 2017
3,439
the logical conclusion to this line of thinking is giving the entirety of the Amazon back to the indigenous tribes who live there, and would undoubtedly do a better job of looking after it than the G7 or Brazil or anyone else.

I agree with OP!
 

Deleted member 32018

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 8, 2017
7,628
Nearly half of the G7 isn't European. Using hashtags on a forum is dumb. It seems like your viewpoint on this aligns with the Brazilian president, it would be interesting what other views you have in common.
 
MilesQ

MilesQ

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,490
fanboi said:
This is next level whataboutism.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Sure, but why ignore the elephant in the room?

Decades of unchecked pollution and abuse of our planet is why we're in this situation. It'd be great if Brazil didn't chop down the Amazon and were proactive in stopping the fires, but to pretend that's the main reason the world's climate will go to shit is ignoring everything that's come before it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.