insert_namehere
05-27-2007, 12:47 PM
...what's wrong with global governance?
I am really curious as to why things such as the Kyoto Accords get under anyone's skin. Global issues require global solutions. It's not as if what one country may or may no do in regards to emissions standards, industrial toxins, chemical/biohazard waste, etc. doesn't have an effect on other countries. If people are pissing in the water upstream, doesn't anyone DOWNSTREAM have the right to protect themselves?
I'm not a Giaist or a big fan of anthropomorphizing the planet, but at the same time, I'm a huge believer in the old adage that your rights END where mine begin. Having worked in some of the most noisome and toxic environments you can imagine, I can tell you, that we're only looking at the thin edge of the wedge globally, without some sort of universal controls put in place regarding environmental impact, global warming is the least of the issues we have to worry about.
Consider the rapid industrialization of India and China in the last ten years. Right now, they're dancing on the cusp of that whole economic/environment conundrum. Politicizing environmental issues, assuming that they're merely some sort of smoke and mirrors ploy to slip a secret "one world government" into place strikes me as paranoid. At the same time, assuming that the issues regarding environmental impact by industry and existing technology are vastly overstated to push through a political agenda strikes me as burying one's head in the sand for the sake of ideological convenience.
Granted, the above statements paint a big red target on my forehead for a few posters on here to shoot at, but honestly, I would like to hear your arguments against the validity of global co-operation regarding environmental standards.
I am really curious as to why things such as the Kyoto Accords get under anyone's skin. Global issues require global solutions. It's not as if what one country may or may no do in regards to emissions standards, industrial toxins, chemical/biohazard waste, etc. doesn't have an effect on other countries. If people are pissing in the water upstream, doesn't anyone DOWNSTREAM have the right to protect themselves?
I'm not a Giaist or a big fan of anthropomorphizing the planet, but at the same time, I'm a huge believer in the old adage that your rights END where mine begin. Having worked in some of the most noisome and toxic environments you can imagine, I can tell you, that we're only looking at the thin edge of the wedge globally, without some sort of universal controls put in place regarding environmental impact, global warming is the least of the issues we have to worry about.
Consider the rapid industrialization of India and China in the last ten years. Right now, they're dancing on the cusp of that whole economic/environment conundrum. Politicizing environmental issues, assuming that they're merely some sort of smoke and mirrors ploy to slip a secret "one world government" into place strikes me as paranoid. At the same time, assuming that the issues regarding environmental impact by industry and existing technology are vastly overstated to push through a political agenda strikes me as burying one's head in the sand for the sake of ideological convenience.
Granted, the above statements paint a big red target on my forehead for a few posters on here to shoot at, but honestly, I would like to hear your arguments against the validity of global co-operation regarding environmental standards.