The DAPL was built, leaked multiple times, and damaged indigenous land (including their water). The people organizing the protests were fined more than $660 million through the court systems and many indigenous individuals were arrested and some charged - again through the court systems. The arrests happened under Obama, who appeased the tribe upon leaving office after deafening silence, which was short-lived as this was subsequently very quickly overridden by Trump. The courts were silent to their pleas, from start to finish.
The democracy in Sweden, which you loosely tout as a gold standard, is similarly deaf to their local indigenous population and other concerned individuals, including other locals, and they are running out of legal options.
It’s the Sami’s land that they are constructing the mine on, but the Sami have to fight to stop the construction of a mine that could damage their livelihood and harm the environment, including their water? Make it make sense. Courts favor capitalists in capitalist economies - you need capital as input and legal action is very expensive.
This is an authoritarian move by Sweden and the only democratic process is for the Sami to go broke fighting this. When it’s inevitably approved, their only real option is to see their land be taken, have their sovereignty/land rights impacted, have their water contaminated, and see their food and financial livelihood affected significantly. The damage will be permanent, even if some time down the road, an appeal or other democratic process rules in their favor.
If they do anything outside of the law to respond to the mine, including enforcing their land rights themselves, their personal freedom will be impacted and their “strict obedience to authority” will be enforced and subsequently maintained.
But right, Sweden isn’t authoritarian - not even a little bit. I’m so convinced.
I’m not sourcing every single claim. I promise that I am not purposely misrepresenting any key facts or spinning anything in regards to indigenous land being impacted in so-called democracies. I have a libertarian socialist bias and I feel strongly in my belief that capitalism is incompatible with democracy - that’s my opinion and there is no source for that.
If there is anything specific that you would like sourced, because it is unbelievable or difficult for you to verify, feel free to ask. It’s my opinion and belief that if there is a spill, there is damage, too.
Otherwise, if you are interested, I strongly invite you to investigate not only my claims but these indigenous land disputes in a general sense.
We can sit here all day and night arguing political theory and definitions, but these are real issues with permanent consequences. Mines tend to have environmental effects on a greater scale than most are willing to admit.
It’s not working.
The DAPL was built, leaked multiple times, and damaged indigenous land (including their water). The people organizing the protests were fined more than $660 million through the court systems and many indigenous individuals were arrested and some charged - again through the court systems. The arrests happened under Obama, who appeased the tribe upon leaving office after deafening silence, which was short-lived as this was subsequently very quickly overridden by Trump. The courts were silent to their pleas, from start to finish.
The democracy in Sweden, which you loosely tout as a gold standard, is similarly deaf to their local indigenous population and other concerned individuals, including other locals, and they are running out of legal options.
It’s the Sami’s land that they are constructing the mine on, but the Sami have to fight to stop the construction of a mine that could damage their livelihood and harm the environment, including their water? Make it make sense. Courts favor capitalists in capitalist economies - you need capital as input and legal action is very expensive.
This is an authoritarian move by Sweden and the only democratic process is for the Sami to go broke fighting this. When it’s inevitably approved, their only real option is to see their land be taken, have their sovereignty/land rights impacted, have their water contaminated, and see their food and financial livelihood affected significantly. The damage will be permanent, even if some time down the road, an appeal or other democratic process rules in their favor.
If they do anything outside of the law to respond to the mine, including enforcing their land rights themselves, their personal freedom will be impacted and their “strict obedience to authority” will be enforced and subsequently maintained.
But right, Sweden isn’t authoritarian - not even a little bit. I’m so convinced.
Can I see your source?
I’m not sourcing every single claim. I promise that I am not purposely misrepresenting any key facts or spinning anything in regards to indigenous land being impacted in so-called democracies. I have a libertarian socialist bias and I feel strongly in my belief that capitalism is incompatible with democracy - that’s my opinion and there is no source for that.
If there is anything specific that you would like sourced, because it is unbelievable or difficult for you to verify, feel free to ask. It’s my opinion and belief that if there is a spill, there is damage, too.
Otherwise, if you are interested, I strongly invite you to investigate not only my claims but these indigenous land disputes in a general sense.
We can sit here all day and night arguing political theory and definitions, but these are real issues with permanent consequences. Mines tend to have environmental effects on a greater scale than most are willing to admit.