Fwd: FW: Rights of Nature case now has a Scientist petition; please help to get signatures on it ASAP

[Jean Boucher]

May be of interest for signatures for Rights of Nature Case: Center for Biological Diversity now has a Scientist Petition - Jean

 

From: Bitty Roy <b...@uoregon.edu>

Subject: Rights of Nature case now has a Scientist petition; please help to get signatures on it ASAP

Date: July 7, 2020 at 6:49:57 PM EDT

To: STUART PIMM <stuar...@me.com>, "Harrison, Susan" <sphar...@ucdavis.edu>, John Harte <jha...@berkeley.edu>, Peter Raven <peter...@mobot.org>, <prg...@princeton.edu>, Roo Vandegrift <wer...@gmail.com>, Mika Peck <m.r....@sussex.ac.uk>

 

Dear All,

 

You all indicated a willingness to help publicize this cause.  With Stuart's urging and the help of  the Center for Biological Diversity, there is now a website for a petition aimed at gathering the signatures of scientists.  We will turn the results over to the Constitutional Court on Monday and to the mining companies, etc. a bit later.  Here is text and a link to the petition and a pdf of the press release to send around to your network of colleagues.  Please sign it and send it far and wide to your colleagues.  Big names could be very helpful. 

 

I am writing to you today about a very important conservation issue in one of the most biodiverse countries in the world: Ecuador. The Constitutional Court, their highest Court, has agreed to hear a Rights of Nature case brought by the Protected Forest Reserva Los Cedros, against mining concessions that were illegally placed by the government in 2017 on six millions acres (2.4 m hectares) of 186 protected forests. This is a precedent setting case that has implications for the climate emergency as well as for stunning biodiversity, including hundreds of endangered species. Please go to this website ASAP https://act.biologicaldiversity.org/aHmTNYj7lE-KFtsfUUy1SQ2   to sign the petition that will be delivered to the court on Monday July 13.  For more information, please see the attached Press Release, including links to videos.

 

Bitty

 

 

 

 

---

To unsubscribe from the IRES-INTERNAL list, please click here.

Further information about the UBC Mailing Lists service can be found on the UBC IT website.

--

Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed

until it is faced. – James Baldwin

[Richard Rosen]

Sorry, of course we humans should vigorously defend and rehabilitate nature, but Nature cannot have rights, just as it can't have responsibilities.  It is not a thinking being and a political actor! The idea that Nature can have rights is a "category mistake", a well-known concept in philosophy. --- Rich Rosen

--
- Subscribe to SCORAI: http://eepurl.com/dHXawz
- Too many emails? Send an email to rob...@orzanna.de and change to a digest mode.
- Submit an item to next newsletter: lizb....@gmail.com
- Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SCORAI" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CA%2BsiMmgefoq-_J_Co3gyuQgafMVpz%2Bqy78rsd4TjJ1qCg6dg7A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ashwani Vasishth]

If I can show you that Nature DOES, indeed, have responsibilities, will you concede the need, at least, to talk about rights?

-- 
     Ashwani
        Vasishth         vasi...@ramapo.edu          (201) 684-6616
                   http://phobos.ramapo.edu/~vasishth
          --------------------------------------------------------
                  Associate Professor of Sustainability
                  Convener, Sustainability Program (BA)
President, New Jersey Higher Education Partnership for Sustainability (NJHEPS)
                    Director, Center for Sustainability
                     http://ramapo.edu/sustainability

                       Ramapo College of New Jersey
              505 Ramapo Valley Road, SSHS, Mahwah, NJ 07430
         --------------------------------------------------------

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CABPEFekAfOrnp57NEfJmoBsJxjsTFP%2B%3DQRepDmBon9fzNeq-Cg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Harris, Craig]

my sense is that in philosophy there are at least several different views of rights . . .

my understanding is that in the current discussion,

rights are seen as a creation of the sociopolitical order . . .

rights can be guarantees of freedom from something,

or guarantees of access to something . . .

rights may be guaranteed to individual entities (e.g., species)

or to organized entities (e.g., ecosystems) . . .

cheers,

craig

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CABPEFekAfOrnp57NEfJmoBsJxjsTFP%2B%3DQRepDmBon9fzNeq-Cg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ashwani Vasishth]

As I wrote to Tom, in a sidebar...

I come to this from a variety of places...Martin Krieger's What's Wrong With Plastic Trees, Chris Stone's Should Trees Have Standing, Niraj Verma's Similarities, Connections, and Systems: The Search for a New Rationality for Planning and Management, and of course, George Lakoff, Women, Fire and Dangerous Things.

But the point is, its less about "humanizing" nature and more about the use of metaphor and analogy as analytical tools--as method.

-- 
     Ashwani
        Vasishth         vasi...@ramapo.edu          (201) 684-6616 (Jabber-enabled)
                   

http://phobos.ramapo.edu/~vasishth
          --------------------------------------------------------
                  Associate Professor of Sustainability
                  Convener, Sustainability Program (BA)
President, New Jersey Higher Education Partnership for Sustainability (NJHEPS)
                    Director, Center for Sustainability
                     http://ramapo.edu/sustainability

                       Ramapo College of New Jersey
              505 Ramapo Valley Road, SSHS, Mahwah, NJ 07430
         --------------------------------------------------------

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CH2PR12MB424501CEB9134A9A960D39B7BB630%40CH2PR12MB4245.namprd12.prod.outlook.com.

[Ashwani Vasishth]

As I wrote to Tom, in a sidebar...

I come to this from a variety of places...Martin Krieger's What's Wrong With Plastic Trees, Chris Stone's Should Trees Have Standing, Niraj Verma's Similarities, Connections, and Systems: The Search for a New Rationality for Planning and Management, and of course, George Lakoff, Women, Fire and Dangerous Things.

But the point is, its less about "humanizing" nature and more about the use of metaphor and analogy as analytical tools--as method.

-- 
     Ashwani
        Vasishth         vasi...@ramapo.edu          (201) 684-6616

http://phobos.ramapo.edu/~vasishth
          --------------------------------------------------------
                  Associate Professor of Sustainability
                  Convener, Sustainability Program (BA)
President, New Jersey Higher Education Partnership for Sustainability (NJHEPS)
                    Director, Center for Sustainability
                     http://ramapo.edu/sustainability

                       Ramapo College of New Jersey
              505 Ramapo Valley Road, SSHS, Mahwah, NJ 07430
         --------------------------------------------------------

On 7/12/20 12:06 PM, Harris, Craig wrote:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CH2PR12MB424501CEB9134A9A960D39B7BB630%40CH2PR12MB4245.namprd12.prod.outlook.com.

[Harris, Craig]

further to the discussion . . .

cheers,

craig

 

From: Envirosoc <ENVI...@LISTSERV.NEU.EDU> On Behalf Of Ilan Kelman
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 1:04 PM
To: ENVI...@LISTSERV.NEU.EDU
Subject: Re: [ENVIROSOC] [SCORAI] Fwd: FW: Rights of Nature case now has a Scientist petition; please help to get signatures on it ASAP

 

The rights of nature have been legally enshrined in many places, e.g. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508060.2019.1643525  and http://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav5601

 

There might be disagreement regarding this decision, but nature's rights are a reality. The philosophical debate has been going on for a long time, e.g. https://uwpress.wisc.edu/books/0456.htm

 

Ilan

[Pradanos-Garcia, Luis]

Hi all,

To me the important aspect of the debate about the rights of nature is not to try to answer yes or not, but

to use the debate to start seriously questioning the legitimacy of the modern legal system as a whole. A legal system that allows 

some humans to "legally" appropriate and destroy the environmental conditions needed for all living systems 

(including humans) to thrive. This book goes to the core of issue: https://www.bkconnection.com/books/title/the-ecology-of-law

Best,

Iñaki

Luis I. Prádanos (Iñaki) Associate Professor Miami University Irvin Hall 237 400 East Spring Street Oxford, OH 45056 Book: Postgrowth Imaginaries Co-coordinator Environmental Humanities Research Cluster

CONFIDENTIALITY: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain 

confidential and/or privileged material.  Any review, transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance 

upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.  If you received this in error, please contact 

the sender and delete the material from any computer.  

Virus-free. www.avg.com

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CH2PR12MB424542134B06A55AF3BDB7ABBB630%40CH2PR12MB4245.namprd12.prod.outlook.com.

Virus-free. www.avg.com

[Jean Boucher]

Rich,
    Interesting comment. I suspect that philosophically, you may be right, but sociologically, humans invent constructs and concepts when and as they like and apply them.

As others have alluded, I see that rights came into existence for political reasons to protect people/stuff from abuse (as defined).

We know that globally many people dont have what we might think are basic rights, but rights on paper is a start.

Theologically, the recent encyclical by the Pope, "Laudato Si: On Care for our Common Home '' represents an historical shift for the Catholi Church: ascribing autonomy, purpose and meaning to non-human beings apart from humanity. Thus taking a shot of this idea of "ecological services."  (to serve humanity?)

Finally, there are arguments that "nature does actually think." see link/talk below by anthropologist, Jeremy Narby.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKwzYQm-OuY&t=4s  

Jean

 

On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 11:39 AM Pradanos-Garcia, Luis <prad...@miamioh.edu> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> To me the important aspect of the debate about the rights of nature is not to try to answer yes or not, but
> to use the debate to start seriously questioning the legitimacy of the modern legal system as a whole. A legal system that allows
> some humans to "legally" appropriate and destroy the environmental conditions needed for all living systems
> (including humans) to thrive. This book goes to the core of issue: https://www.bkconnection.com/books/title/the-ecology-of-law
>
> Best,
>
> Iñaki
>
>
>

> Luis I. Prádanos (Iñaki)
> Associate Professor
> Miami University
> Irvin Hall 237
> 400 East Spring Street
> Oxford, OH 45056
>
> Book: Postgrowth Imaginaries
> Co-coordinator Environmental Humanities Research Cluster
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
>
> confidential and/or privileged material.  Any review, transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance
>
> upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited.  If you received this in error, please contact
>
> the sender and delete the material from any computer.  
>
>
>
>
>

> Virus-free. www.avg.com

>
> --
> - Subscribe to SCORAI: http://eepurl.com/dHXawz
> - Too many emails? Send an email to rob...@orzanna.de and change to a digest mode.
> - Submit an item to next newsletter: lizb....@gmail.com
> - Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SCORAI" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com.

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CAC7Ff_UJca2JAM%3D%2BOnVdwUZN2YfHotUYP-dmsDmAYtudVu-WPw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Thomas Love]

Though I'm with Rich on this one, there is the fascinating 2013 book How Forests Think by Eduardo Kohn:

https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520276116/how-forests-think

How Forests Think by Eduardo Kohn - Paperback - University of California Press Can forests think? Do dogs dream? In this astonishing book, Eduardo Kohn challenges the very foundations of anthropology, calling into question our central assumptions about what it means to be human--and thus distinct from all other life forms. Based on four years of fieldwork among the Runa of Ecuador's Upper Amazon, Eduardo Kohn draws on his rich ethnography to explore how Amazonians ... www.ucpress.edu

Tom

****************************************

Thomas Love, PhD  | Professor Emeritus of Anthropology

900 SE Baker St. | McMinnville, Oregon  97128

http://www.linfield.edu/soan/faculty-detail.html?id=83

tl...@linfield.edu 

---

From: sco...@googlegroups.com <sco...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Jean Boucher <jlb...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 11:59
Cc: SCORAI Group <sco...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: FW: [ENVIROSOC] [SCORAI] Fwd: FW: Rights of Nature case now has a Scientist petition; please help to get signatures on it ASAP

 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CA%2BsiMmi0TJLF-RBsr4FU-HHZoww_dk6Q3Yg6TjNFHds6JFoe0g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Rahul Goswami]

The idea that Nature can have rights is a "category mistake", a well-known concept in philosophy.

To which philosophical school are you referring, Mr Rosen?

Rahul Goswami

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CABPEFekAfOrnp57NEfJmoBsJxjsTFP%2B%3DQRepDmBon9fzNeq-Cg%40mail.gmail.com.

-- 
_________________________
rahul....@pobox.com
+91 8600043381/9833471884

[Harris, Craig]

hi adam,
like you, i always found bromley's work on property rights to be very insightful . . .
but i think the discussion of rights of nature needs to move beyond property rights,
to include rights of access to certain goods (e.g., food, water)
and rights of freedom from certain bads (e.g., insecurity, want) . . .
cheers,
craig


-----Original Message-----
From: Pesoemails <pesoemail...@listserv.utep.edu> On Behalf Of Adam Novick
Sent: Monday, July 13, 2020 6:09 PM
To: Prakash Kashwan <kas...@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Rosen <rrose...@gmail.com>; Ecopolitics <ecopo...@lists.opn.org>; CRIT-GE...@jiscmail.ac.uk; SCORAI Group <sco...@googlegroups.com>; EANTHDI...@lists.ufl.edu; ENVI...@LISTSERV.NEU.EDU; pesoe...@listserv.utep.edu; vasi...@ramapo.edu; degr...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Pesoemails] [SCORAI] Fwd: FW: Rights of Nature case now has a Scientist petition; please help to get signatures on it ASAP

Dear All,

In case anyone finds it useful in clarifying this discussion, and consistent with Prakash's comment (immediately below), I offer Bromley's (1991) definition of "property right", in the context of a working glossary entry I included in my master's thesis (2013, appendix B). I found Bromley's definition invaluable in navigating through broad discourse related to nature, land, and property rights.

Best regards,

--Adam

Adam Novick, MS
Courtesy Faculty Research Assistant
Environmental Studies Program
University of Oregon
v: 541-345-0467 (land line)
e: ano...@uoregon.edu

PS. Said glossary entry:

property right: 1. (Legal property right) The ability to call upon government to defend one’s access to a stream of benefits from land or other property (Bromley 1991). 2. (Economic property right) The practical ability to receive a benefit stream from land or other property, such as a squatter receives through unlawful habitation (Barzel 1997). USAGE NOTES: 1. Both definitions allow for conceiving of property as a bundle of separable and negotiable rights (Carroll et al. 2007). Thus, for a given parcel of land, one might own rights to some land uses but not others. 2. Definition 1 implies that one can view land-use regulation as collective public (i.e., state) ownership of interests in private property, through which individuals can benefit from the property of others. 3. Definition 1 also implies that the boundaries of legal ownership tend to follow the boundaries of public opinion (Bromley 1991; Freyfogle 2003a). As one economist put it: "[I]f the collective fails to admit the social usefulness of a particular property claim, then it is delegitimized..." (Bromley 1991, 5) HISTORICAL NOTES: 1. Locke (1988 [1689]) offered a theory to rationalize private ownership of property based on its benefit to society, insofar as an owner’s power to receive benefits from property creates incentives that coincidentally benefit society. In this theory, for example, private ownership of an orchard encourages individuals to produce fruit, by ensuring they can keep it or sell it. However, Locke’s theory implies an understanding of what constitutes private and social benefits, and how tenure security can affect those benefits. 2. The US Supreme Court cited a re- articulation of Locke’s theory in a landmark ruling that established the present constitutional boundary between private ownership of land and regulation of its use (Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City, 438 US 104 [1978], citing Michelman 1967). 3. Illustrating the relation of belief to land ownership, Bromley (1991) and Rose (1990) noted that Locke’s theory serves to rationalize unequal distribution of wealth through land ownership. Apparently implying that this may have been Locke’s intent, Bromley notes that Locke’s work was subsidized by a sinecure from a wealthy noble. Also see perfect property right.

* * *

Selected works cited:

Bromley, Daniel W. 1991. Environment and Economy: Property Rights and Public Policy. Cambridge, UK: Blackwell.

Novick, Adam P. 2013. "Risk to maintenance-dependent species from orthodoxy in species-based land-use regulation." Master's thesis. University of Oregon. https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://hdl.handle.net/1794/13343__;!!HXCxUKc!h2MkiK8RDrRVA3n4hApyRlBXHJH-1DDgHswpkkh2tgl1mNSOXetS3g22_kI9CQ$




> On Jul 13, 2020, at 12:24 PM, Prakash Kashwan <kas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> This is an important discussion. The point that Richard makes is not easy to dismiss, especially if one is interested in the "realization" of rights in practice. There are different ways to think about rights, but if the goal is to protect nature, remember it is not the abstract humanity against which nature needs protection. Nature needs protection against some sets of human actors, and that task of protection can be executed via another sets of human actors and institutions. So, there is no way to avoid human agency and some form of "anthropocentricism" in this discussion.
>
> In this context, I would love to hear more about the differences Ashwani mentions -- deployment of metaphors as analytical tools. If you won't mind indulging us, Ashwani, how would you respond to Paivi's arguments?
>
> All best,
> Prakash
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Prakash Kashwan, Ph.D.
> Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Connecticut
> Co-Director, Research Program on Economic and Social Rights, Human Rights Institute
>
> Senior Research Fellow, Earth System Governance Project Associate
> Editor, Progress in Development Studies Editorial Board, Earth Systems
> Governance Editorial Board, Humanities & Social Sciences
> Communications (Palgrave)
>
> University of Connecticut
> 365 Fairfield Way, Storrs, CT 06269
> Phone: 860-486-7951
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://prakash-kashwan.uconn.edu/__;!!HXCx
> UKc!h2MkiK8RDrRVA3n4hApyRlBXHJH-1DDgHswpkkh2tgl1mNSOXetS3g1sGH_ctQ$
>
> Book: Democracy in the Woods (Oxford University Press, 2017).
> Disentangling the rhetoric of public goods from their externalities: The case of climate engineering (Global Transitions).
> Rethinking power and institutions in the shadows of neoliberalism (World Development).
> Inequality, Democracy, and the Environment: A Cross-National Analysis (Ecological Economics).
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 12:46 PM Paivi Abernethy <pkab...@uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>
> Respectfully, I fundamentally disagree with you Rich: Your entire statement to me represents the 20th century colonial hierarchic worldview, primarily driven by heterosexual white men, that artificially separates and raises homo sapiens from other living species and that fundamentally disrespects other worldviews such as the those of various First Nations (Canada) and Native Americans (USA) - presumably also Sami, and definitely older beliefs of Finns. It has been heavily strengthened in the patriarchal interpretations of Christianity in Europe - albeit it is by no means limited to Christianity. Luckily for the survival of the human race and other larger species, tides are shifting and framing e.g. of the management of natural resources is shifting to the stewardship of the land (the current interpretation of e.g. the Swedish Lutheran Church and the Pope) as well as equity of people with different skin colours ( other than white - e.g. black lives matter) or gender (other than male - e.g. me too movement).
>
> As a biochemist by my first training/career, I can assure you that endocrine disruptors (pollution) that reduce the IQ of our children and are associated with a significant range of chronic conditions from reduced fertility and neurodevelopmental disorders (ADHD, Autism, etc.) to cancers, diabetes and Parkinson’s disease (DOHaD), equally impact all the other species with development government by hormones (which includes plants).
>
> Re the argument of a certain stated fact in philosophy, it is a much more stated fact that complex social-ecological systems, such as nature, cannot be managed, it can only be governed (stewardship) - and as several IPCC reports highlighted, lands governed by Indigenous peoples are significantly healthier and less damaged than those governed by non-Indigenous peoples. IPCC also stated (September 2019) that in order to get out of this mess (climate change and other nature related problems) Indigenous values might help guide us.
>
> So my humble message to all of us academics is to maybe get off our high horses with our artificially self-imposed entitlement and utter ignorance re other ways of knowing and seeing the world (myself included). Maybe the current interpretation of Western engineering science and the enlightenment that guides our actions is outdated or plain wrong. According to biochemistry it is. Maybe we are framing our societal issues all wrong and asking all the wrong questions in our futile and fumbling attempts to find solutions to complex social-ecological challenges, such as climate change and pollution.
>
> Just a little brain teaser here: if instead of feeling defensive and superior in our own ways of knowing, let’s try to understand how fundamentally a different worldview can change the way people conduct their lives (I am not disputing the great things that science is doing but doing good science requires a constant testing and questioning of hypotheses):
>
> "Can you imagine a world where nature is understood as full of
> relatives, not resources, where inalienable rights are balanced with
> inalienable responsibilities, and where wealth itself is measured not
> by resource ownership and control, but by the number of good
> relationships we maintain in the complex and diverse life-systems of
> this blue green planet?” (Wildcat, D. R. (2013). Introduction: Climate
> Change and Indigenous Peoples of the USA. In Climate Change and
> Indigenous Peoples in the United States (pp. 1-7). Springer, Cham.)
>
> Happy Monday to you all!
> Paivi
>
> ===================================
> Paivi Abernethy, PhD MRes MSc
> Senior Researcher/ Research Fellow & Adjunct Professor (University of
> Victoria)/ Adjunct Professor (University of Waterloo) Victoria, BC,
> Canada - Coast Salish Territories | WSÁNEĆ (Saanich), Lekwungen
> (Songhees), Wyomilth (Esquimalt)
>
> Cell: +1-250-886-4473
> e-mail: paber...@uvic.ca & pkab...@uwaterloo.ca
>
> “Don’t ask yourself what the world needs. Ask yourself what makes you
> come alive, and go do that, because what the world needs is people who
> have come alive” – Harold Thurman

>
>> On Jul 12, 2020, at 08:00, Richard Rosen <rrose...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, of course we humans should vigorously defend and rehabilitate
>> nature, but Nature cannot have rights, just as it can't have
>> responsibilities. It is not a thinking being and a political actor!
>> The idea that Nature can have rights is a "category mistake", a
>> well-known concept in philosophy. --- Rich Rosen
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 11:41 PM Jean Boucher <jlb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> May be of interest for signatures for Rights of Nature Case: Center
>> for Biological Diversity now has a Scientist Petition - Jean
>>
>>
>> From: Bitty Roy <b...@uoregon.edu>
>>
>> Subject: Rights of Nature case now has a Scientist petition; please
>> help to get signatures on it ASAP
>>
>> Date: July 7, 2020 at 6:49:57 PM EDT
>>
>> To: STUART PIMM <stuar...@me.com>, "Harrison, Susan"
>> <sphar...@ucdavis.edu>, John Harte <jha...@berkeley.edu>, Peter
>> Raven <peter...@mobot.org>, <prg...@princeton.edu>, Roo
>> Vandegrift <wer...@gmail.com>, Mika Peck <m.r....@sussex.ac.uk>
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear All,
>>
>>
>>
>> You all indicated a willingness to help publicize this cause. With Stuart's urging and the help of the Center for Biological Diversity, there is now a website for a petition aimed at gathering the signatures of scientists. We will turn the results over to the Constitutional Court on Monday and to the mining companies, etc. a bit later. Here is text and a link to the petition and a pdf of the press release to send around to your network of colleagues. Please sign it and send it far and wide to your colleagues. Big names could be very helpful.
>>
>>
>>

>> I am writing to you today about a very important conservation issue in one of the most biodiverse countries in the world: Ecuador. The Constitutional Court, their highest Court, has agreed to hear a Rights of Nature case brought by the Protected Forest Reserva Los Cedros, against mining concessions that were illegally placed by the government in 2017 on six millions acres (2.4 m hectares) of 186 protected forests. This is a precedent setting case that has implications for the climate emergency as well as for stunning biodiversity, including hundreds of endangered species. Please go to this website ASAP https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://act.biologicaldiversity.org/aHmTNYj7lE-KFtsfUUy1SQ2__;!!HXCxUKc!h2MkiK8RDrRVA3n4hApyRlBXHJH-1DDgHswpkkh2tgl1mNSOXetS3g1ucdwUWg$ to sign the petition that will be delivered to the court on Monday July 13. For more information, please see the attached Press Release, including links to videos.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bitty
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

>> To unsubscribe from the IRES-INTERNAL list, please click here.
>>
>> Further information about the UBC Mailing Lists service can be found on the UBC IT website.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be
>> changed
>>
>> until it is faced. – James Baldwin
>>
>>
>> --
>> - Subscribe to SCORAI:

>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://eepurl.com/dHXawz__;!!HXCxUKc!h2Mk
>> iK8RDrRVA3n4hApyRlBXHJH-1DDgHswpkkh2tgl1mNSOXetS3g0wIojeCA$

>> - Too many emails? Send an email to rob...@orzanna.de and change to a digest mode.
>> - Submit an item to next newsletter: lizb....@gmail.com
>> - Submit a new blog post: hbr...@clarku.edu
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SCORAI" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scorai+un...@googlegroups.com.

>> To view this discussion on the web visit https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/scorai/CA*2BsiMmgefoq-_J_Co3gyuQgafMVpz*2Bqy78rsd4TjJ1qCg6dg7A*40mail.gmail.com__;JSUl!!HXCxUKc!h2MkiK8RDrRVA3n4hApyRlBXHJH-1DDgHswpkkh2tgl1mNSOXetS3g1jug166Q$ .
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pesoemails mailing list
>> Pesoe...@listserv.utep.edu
>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://listserv.utep.edu/mailman/listinf
>> o/pesoemails__;!!HXCxUKc!h2MkiK8RDrRVA3n4hApyRlBXHJH-1DDgHswpkkh2tgl1
>> mNSOXetS3g2ch4G8hw$
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pesoemails mailing list
> Pesoe...@listserv.utep.edu
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://listserv.utep.edu/mailman/listinfo
> /pesoemails__;!!HXCxUKc!h2MkiK8RDrRVA3n4hApyRlBXHJH-1DDgHswpkkh2tgl1mN
> SOXetS3g2ch4G8hw$ _______________________________________________
> Pesoemails mailing list
> Pesoe...@listserv.utep.edu
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://listserv.utep.edu/mailman/listinfo
> /pesoemails__;!!C5qS4YX3!XZdjf803DcvU3U0wPFsCsk4zUcdMlkcEehWqBS04shwi2
> fedHDuaeNkyQwzG-yfKcA$


_______________________________________________
Pesoemails mailing list
Pesoe...@listserv.utep.edu
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://listserv.utep.edu/mailman/listinfo/pesoemails__;!!HXCxUKc!h2MkiK8RDrRVA3n4hApyRlBXHJH-1DDgHswpkkh2tgl1mNSOXetS3g2ch4G8hw$

[Joe Zammit-Lucia]

Dear Deane 

This is a bit of a circular argument. 

The idea that it is up to humans to give nature ‘rights’ and that it is humans that will decide the shape and limits of those rights implicitly acknowledges human ‘superiority’ in that it is in our power to do that or not. 

Framing natures ‘rights’ in human terms and then pretending there is no human ‘superiority’ makes no sense. Just like the idea of ‘intrinsic value’ makes no sense (I throw that in to be provocative ;-) )

Best

Joe

Dr Joe Zammit-Lucia

+31 646 86 21 76

jo...@me.com

radix.org.uk                                   amazon.co.uk    amazon.com

       

On Jul 14, 2020, at 11:31 PM, <de...@efn.org> wrote:

Richard,

Your argument is similar to why the confederacy argued that dark skinned people must always remain enslaved. Your argument is similar to the electoral college unequally counting votes so as not to give black people too much influence. Your argument is similar to why women were seen as not worthy of having the right to vote or to this day not being worthy enough to hold the most powerful positions in society. 

Be it racism, misogyny, or in your case species-ism, the lesson of finding right vs. wrong relationship with life on earth is inescapable and it's a fools-errand for short short-lived humans to think they're superior to and separate from billions of years of intelligent DNA coding on this planet, which gave them their thinking and reasoning ability in the first place.

Do you really think that humans are superior because they're so good at wiping out the evolving DNA biodiversity on the planet and remaking the world in their own dead lifeless image? Is that your proof of superiority? Because the root of all genocide, land stealing, enslavement and oppression is based on that same kind of false sense of entitled superiority.

Do you really think humans are separate from and superior to the planet that made their life possible and therefore they're the only one's deserving of basic rights and legal standing and they're not going to be serious consequences for constantly destroying the living systems we depend on the brink when it comes to earth's ability to provide clean air, clean water, fertile topsoil and a fecund food chain? How long would humans survive without these essential responsibilities/services our living planet provides us? 

And when it comes to legal standing in a court of law, the same requirements that gives a human legal standing, is no different than the requirements that should give nature legal standing. However, in the minds of selfish humans at this stage, we still haven't become intelligent enough to understand we are alive and exist entirely intertwined in relationship with nature and our rights only exist if her rights exist. All the basic natural science we know shows again and again that there are far more superior ways to smell than humans, more superior ways to see, to taste, to touch and even to to think, as there are mammals with way larger brains than us. And how much is happening on earth that humans are not even aware of yet, such as the longleaf pine, which has been here way, way longer than humans and their DNA is 20 times more complex than human DNA. This is true of many trees... Yet humans ability to know what all this DNA does... We're like little babies when it comes to learning this stuff. 

In short, the sophistication of your corrupt capitalist ideology isn't much different than a 5 year old who refuses the basic lessons, of sharing, being nice, not hurting others and telling the truth. As in what you want for yourself you deny for everyone else, which is always unsustainable in the long run.

But in seeking right relationship with all our relations we can turn this planet back into the paradise our species first came from and giving legal standing to rivers mountains oceans and ecosystems is essential to that process of rewilding our minds and our planet in liberating ways.

Be well, Deane 

---

From: "Richard Rosen" <rrose...@gmail.com>
To: "Jean Boucher" <jlb...@gmail.com>
Cc: "ENVI...@LISTSERV.NEU.EDU" <ENVI...@listserv.neu.edu>, "Ecopolitics" <ecopo...@lists.opn.org>, pesoe...@listserv.utep.edu, degr...@googlegroups.com, "SCORAI Group" <sco...@googlegroups.com>, CRIT-GE...@jiscmail.ac.uk, EANTHDI...@lists.ufl.edu
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 8:00:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Ecopolitics] [SCORAI] Fwd: FW: Rights of Nature case now has a Scientist petition; please help to get signatures on it ASAP

_______________________________________________
Ecopolitics mailing list
Ecopo...@lists.opn.org
http://lists.opn.org/mailman/listinfo/ecopolitics_lists.opn.org