- 16 May 2021 10:49
#15172766
This thread is being written from a Canadian angle and my concerns center around environmentalism.
I have often noticed that you will find elected politicians trying to take a stand against environmental concerns. In Victoria, the mayor Lisa Helps banned all plastic bags and was taken to court by the producers of plastic bags and was told that she could not ban all plastic bags because it interfered with the livelihood of the plastic bag producers.
Many people have often tried to stop things like clear-cutting and have been told that they cannot interfere with the clear-cutters right to be industrious.
And now you see some big court cases emerging in the United States surrounding pipelines, where, we can presume, the courts will always be forced to favour the industrial nature of corporations over anybody's environmental concern. (Many justices are even apologetic when they have to read their deliberations, stating that they must do as the law states, even if its against their own consciousness)
Even if a President or a Prime Minister were to attempt a drastic shift in eco-consciousness they would likely be shut down by the courts; and it is clear to me that the laws do not reflect the times swift enough to prevent or preserve something requiring immediate attention. Yet on the other hand, the courts exist as well to prevent any one leader from becoming too tyrannical and democracy acts to stabilize progress gradually.
Are we enchained by the systems we have created, or do you believe that everything will balance itself out and everything will be bright and sunny in the future?
I have often noticed that you will find elected politicians trying to take a stand against environmental concerns. In Victoria, the mayor Lisa Helps banned all plastic bags and was taken to court by the producers of plastic bags and was told that she could not ban all plastic bags because it interfered with the livelihood of the plastic bag producers.
Many people have often tried to stop things like clear-cutting and have been told that they cannot interfere with the clear-cutters right to be industrious.
And now you see some big court cases emerging in the United States surrounding pipelines, where, we can presume, the courts will always be forced to favour the industrial nature of corporations over anybody's environmental concern. (Many justices are even apologetic when they have to read their deliberations, stating that they must do as the law states, even if its against their own consciousness)
Even if a President or a Prime Minister were to attempt a drastic shift in eco-consciousness they would likely be shut down by the courts; and it is clear to me that the laws do not reflect the times swift enough to prevent or preserve something requiring immediate attention. Yet on the other hand, the courts exist as well to prevent any one leader from becoming too tyrannical and democracy acts to stabilize progress gradually.
Are we enchained by the systems we have created, or do you believe that everything will balance itself out and everything will be bright and sunny in the future?