Sentences with phrase «post-anthropocene ecocide»

We Homo sapiens are witnessing the greatest annihilation of species in the last 65 million years, and our children may live to witness ecocide with their own eyes.

In a three - page statement, the «criminal» history of America since 1492 is recounted in terms of theft, «ecocide,» rape (two times), colonization (five times), racism (four times), slavery (seven times), exploitation (eight times), and genocide (nine times).

I noticed an article first published in Socialist Lawyer that envisions putting the head of the current Olympics into the dock because he gave committers of ecocide awards for being green.

On December 3, 2015, international organizations such as the Organic Consumers Association, IFOAM International Organics, Navdanya, Regenration International, Millions Against Monsanto and dozens of other organizations announced that they will sue Monsanto for its crimes against nature and humanity, and ecocide in The Hague, Netherlands on World Food Day next year.

We are particularly concerned about ecocide and the pollution of rivers and river beds from mining which has rendered a lot of drinking water unsafe.

Greenwashing by the public relations industry has all but camouflaged the unprecedented historical outcomes of planetary genocide, ecocide, zoocide and epistemicide.

Economics of War and Peace — Land and resource wars; financial domination; US foreign policy; ecocide; shifting from «full spectrum dominance» to full spectrum sharing; the money question; religious conflicts; resource rent for public revenue; geo - confederation for conflictzones; earth rights democracy.

The second exhibition in Alembic brings together a newly commissioned video work by Maggie Roberts and new sculptural works by Ayesha Tan Jones, to form a post-anthropocene ecocide narrative.

asks how do humans, and their creations, adapt to uncontrollable environmental changes after centuries of ecocide?

Find out about the campaign to prosecuton ecocide under the mandate of the International Criminal Court at http://www.eradicatingecocide.com

If unwilling to do so, then you must understand you are possibly choosing suicide and genocide and ecocide.

How extensive must the damage to the web of life on our planet be before we recognized it as criminal, as ecocide and pursue criminal prosecution.

Actually, genocide and ecocide have both proven effective in population control, and are more cost - effective.

Some person needs to organize a discussion of saving the Earth from ecocide and extinction by 1.

Then, the key line of that speech appeared: «Si nosotros mandamos a la basura el Protocol de Kyoto, seriamos responsables de econocidio, ecocidio, y genocidio» (If we toss the Kyoto Protocol in the garbage, we would be responsible for econocide, ecocide, and genocide).

Is «ascertainable ecocide» (deforestation, oil spills, fossil fuel extraction, pollution - dumping) a problem for «the inhabitants of [a] territory», if it is not the case that «peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants of that territory have been severely diminished»?

So in order to cope with this problem, Higgins makes a distinction between «ascertainable ecocide»: deforestation, oil spills, fossil fuel extraction, pollution - dumping; and non-ascertainable ecocide: tsunami, earthquake, typhoon, Act of God.

The line of interest here is that ecocide is caused «by human agency or by other causes», but it's only ecocide that is»cause d by human agency» which is pertinent.

«We allow the same companies that continue to commit ecocide to sit at the table that decides what climate justice means to us,» Nyambura said.

«We allow the same companies that continue to commit ecocide to sit at the table that decides what climate justice means to us.»

Supporters of a new ecocide law also believe it could be used to prosecute «climate deniers» who distort science and facts to discourage voters and politicians from taking action to tackle global warming and climate change.

The proposal for the United Nations to accept «ecocide» as a fifth «crime against peace», which could be tried at the International Criminal Court (ICC), is the brainchild of British lawyer - turned - campaigner Polly Higgins.

As former Bolivian Ambassadar to the UN, Pablo Solon said at last week's Wolpe Memorial Lecture, «The COP17 will be remembered as a place of premeditated genocide and ecocide.»

Cap and trade, taxing CO2, direct subsidies or combinations of all three might work; prohibiting «ecocide» isn't likely to make a positive difference.

Likewise, prohibiting «ecocide» would most likely be enforced only in the EU and US (and some others), further enhancing the competitive advantage of China and India.

Couldn't such wholesale environmental destruction be called ecocide?

Considering that we can't get the two biggest nations and greenhouse gas emitters in the world to agree on actually doing anything about climate change, getting the crime of ecocide enshrined into international law, let alone actually enforcing it, may seem far - fetched.

I admit that going into Eradicating Ecocide I was inclined to agree with Higgins — part out of personal inclination and part because nearly a year ago Polly and I sat down in Copenhagen for coffee to discuss the topic and she made a compelling case then — but just in the 200 pages presented here she does a great job examining both the historical situation which gave rise to corporate personhood and early attempts to stop pollution, more modern examples (many of which have been be well documented on TreeHugger, they being so current), and makes a good moral and logical argument that the only way we are going to truly stop ecocide is to make it a serious crime.

To get to the point where the majority of people think ecocide is wrong is going to take a transition, which is where Higgins stands out, advocating several steps towards legal abolition of the sort of pollution we now see as commonplace.

Higgins suggests the following definition for ecocide: The extensive destruction, damage to or loss of ecosystem (s) of a given territory, whether by human agency or by other causes, to such an extent that peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants of the that territory has been severely diminished.

The movement to make ecocide a crime against peace under international law, led by UK - based lawyer Polly Higgins, as well as efforts to grant legal rights to Mother Earth, such as Bolivia has done, is exactly where we need to be going in terms of the highest level of environmental thinking: Recognizing that destroying whole swaths of the planet, with little to no concern for the effect on all the creatures that live upon it, is not just unethical, unacceptable behavior, but is also a crime, a crime against humanity, a crime against life itself.

Does anyone really believe for a second that Shell isn't responsible for committing ecocide and human rights violations?