Nice to hear that some legal levers are still working to challenge and address systemic ecological and global problems, although the power of nations and trans-national corporations to flout or weaponise the law for their more parochial ends seem to be increasing far more rapidly. Without strong institutions or binding agreements to enforce environment litigation, the entropic and game theoretic race to the bottom will continue to accelerate. The days of global success stories like the Montreal Protocol, which undoubtedly saved tens of millions of lives, seem a very long time ago indeed.
Good to hear that Switzerland has affirmed the link between climate action and human rights. Exxon challenging activists claims using the investor state dispute system or Hollanders taking on Shell ? Need a big legal fund and a long process. The beginnings of corporate power stem in part from corporate personhood (Santa Clara County v Southern Pacific Railroad - US Supreme Court 1886) and the case for shareholder primacy (Dodge v Ford Motor Co. - 1919) This means that a publicly listed company must make decisions for the majority shareholders. Resist social responsibilities, manufacture consent. The social and environmental considerations are secondary. Aaron Good - American Exception : Empire and the Deep State.
Well good luck with this... I doubt that some woke and wakey UN type court will get listened too by any nation or major Corporation that is trying to do its best for its citizens.. Its global multilateral virtue signaling at its best.. Another good reason to defund and leave the UN.
There are issues that effect the whole world and therefore require some sort of global governance and legal framework. Using 'woke and wakey' as a perjorative term sounds a bit childish don't you think?
Well ok… It may sound over the top, but I think many would agree that the last thing we need is global governance, especially involving lawyers and courts… We need to get back to running our nations far more than wasting time on multilateralism pushed by the UN that quite frankly has solved nothing and have made things a lot worse. I can go into details of those W&W initiatives if you want.
But there are times when running our nations has a knock on effect on other nations, and it seems reasonable to say there should be a legally binding framework to manage those instances. For example, overfishing the seas, destroying rainforests, building dams , geo-engineering (looking forward), genetic engineering, use of nuclear technology etc. Our technology and reach in the modern world is such that we can't just pretend to exist in isolation. The alternative is to let the most powerful exercise some sort of tyranny over the rest, which is where we are now.
Out of interest then, would you say then that the legally binding Montreal accord to ban HFCs in order to save the Ozone layer from further depletion was a bad idea?
I dont know if it was needed…. but it was a focused agreement… but not governance per say.. I tell you what it was a huge imposition for industry and I lived all through that.
"...by any nation or major corporation that is trying to do the best for its citizens" is a great line. Who paid you to write that? Honestly, the population that actually believes that the people in power, in public and private sectors, are focused on trying to do what is "best for citizens" rather than what serves their lust for power most, is a major win for those in power, and is the biggest obstacle for the rest of us to ever have a hope in living a life not based on subservience to a powerful controller.
My Beef is with international entities interfering with national decisions made within the framework of a national democracy… Its our national government that must control our public and private sectors.
I see no value in any multilateral activity that duplicate what my national government does.
We need to sever our relationships to the UN initiatives. most of them are not in our interest.
I would say that you suffer too much from a narrow-minded view of the world as a place in which to conduct battles between us and them, instead of realizing that we are all in the same boat. (And that it is sinking fast.)
As for international governance structures: What about the need for someone, somewhere, to intervene when nations go berserk? When there are several pit bulls living amongst a population of less formidable dogs, the wise choice is for those who are less powerful to form a group in order to protect themselves and stop the pit bulls from making a mess of things. The US is making a mess of things. As one example. They are not alone. And of course, your self-serving attitude is the very same as the Americans in power: we are happy to see an orderly world, as long as it conforms to our sense of order. The US has done a pretty good job of ruling the world by fooling people into believing that it is a good guy, a benign force. (And carrying a big stick.) It is not. This is not to say there are not nice American people. There are. You may be one of them. But that's as far as it goes. The US has proven to people who are informed that they are not to be trusted, and that they, just as many "rogue" states that Americans enjoy seeing as the Bad Guys, also present enormous problems for human civilization, peace and freedom. Arguably, it is the US that has played the largest role in the unleashing of global warming, and the resistance to doing anything real about it. And it is going to do us all in. Like it or not. Unless we can act responsibly, together, to end the foolish behavior that created and sustains it.
Most of the issue has been caused by the UN on many fronts… and If the US and other western nations are a problem.. well lets just make our borders stronger and go back to a cold war environment and the small guys can directly pay us for security.
We must go back to nation centric or local trade bloc policies as this world order stuff is a rip off and its been a huge wealth transfer from the west to the rest..
I was just listening to this, then saw the news that both Netanyahu and Hamas leader Mohammed Deif have had arrest warrants issued by the ICJ.
Wonderful answer to the opening question!
Nice to hear that some legal levers are still working to challenge and address systemic ecological and global problems, although the power of nations and trans-national corporations to flout or weaponise the law for their more parochial ends seem to be increasing far more rapidly. Without strong institutions or binding agreements to enforce environment litigation, the entropic and game theoretic race to the bottom will continue to accelerate. The days of global success stories like the Montreal Protocol, which undoubtedly saved tens of millions of lives, seem a very long time ago indeed.
Good to hear that Switzerland has affirmed the link between climate action and human rights. Exxon challenging activists claims using the investor state dispute system or Hollanders taking on Shell ? Need a big legal fund and a long process. The beginnings of corporate power stem in part from corporate personhood (Santa Clara County v Southern Pacific Railroad - US Supreme Court 1886) and the case for shareholder primacy (Dodge v Ford Motor Co. - 1919) This means that a publicly listed company must make decisions for the majority shareholders. Resist social responsibilities, manufacture consent. The social and environmental considerations are secondary. Aaron Good - American Exception : Empire and the Deep State.
Hey Rachel and Tim, hope everything is ok in your world after storm Bert.
Well good luck with this... I doubt that some woke and wakey UN type court will get listened too by any nation or major Corporation that is trying to do its best for its citizens.. Its global multilateral virtue signaling at its best.. Another good reason to defund and leave the UN.
There are issues that effect the whole world and therefore require some sort of global governance and legal framework. Using 'woke and wakey' as a perjorative term sounds a bit childish don't you think?
Well ok… It may sound over the top, but I think many would agree that the last thing we need is global governance, especially involving lawyers and courts… We need to get back to running our nations far more than wasting time on multilateralism pushed by the UN that quite frankly has solved nothing and have made things a lot worse. I can go into details of those W&W initiatives if you want.
But there are times when running our nations has a knock on effect on other nations, and it seems reasonable to say there should be a legally binding framework to manage those instances. For example, overfishing the seas, destroying rainforests, building dams , geo-engineering (looking forward), genetic engineering, use of nuclear technology etc. Our technology and reach in the modern world is such that we can't just pretend to exist in isolation. The alternative is to let the most powerful exercise some sort of tyranny over the rest, which is where we are now.
Yes.. Ok… but this must a signup for very specific common goals not subversive over-arching governance.
Some examples to avoid are Climate change, trade, and financing… And in some cases defence and security.
Out of interest then, would you say then that the legally binding Montreal accord to ban HFCs in order to save the Ozone layer from further depletion was a bad idea?
I dont know if it was needed…. but it was a focused agreement… but not governance per say.. I tell you what it was a huge imposition for industry and I lived all through that.
If it was not for woke and wakey we would still have slavery, apartheid, etc, etc.
(bus sadly we still have them...)
"...by any nation or major corporation that is trying to do the best for its citizens" is a great line. Who paid you to write that? Honestly, the population that actually believes that the people in power, in public and private sectors, are focused on trying to do what is "best for citizens" rather than what serves their lust for power most, is a major win for those in power, and is the biggest obstacle for the rest of us to ever have a hope in living a life not based on subservience to a powerful controller.
My Beef is with international entities interfering with national decisions made within the framework of a national democracy… Its our national government that must control our public and private sectors.
I see no value in any multilateral activity that duplicate what my national government does.
We need to sever our relationships to the UN initiatives. most of them are not in our interest.
I would say that you suffer too much from a narrow-minded view of the world as a place in which to conduct battles between us and them, instead of realizing that we are all in the same boat. (And that it is sinking fast.)
As for international governance structures: What about the need for someone, somewhere, to intervene when nations go berserk? When there are several pit bulls living amongst a population of less formidable dogs, the wise choice is for those who are less powerful to form a group in order to protect themselves and stop the pit bulls from making a mess of things. The US is making a mess of things. As one example. They are not alone. And of course, your self-serving attitude is the very same as the Americans in power: we are happy to see an orderly world, as long as it conforms to our sense of order. The US has done a pretty good job of ruling the world by fooling people into believing that it is a good guy, a benign force. (And carrying a big stick.) It is not. This is not to say there are not nice American people. There are. You may be one of them. But that's as far as it goes. The US has proven to people who are informed that they are not to be trusted, and that they, just as many "rogue" states that Americans enjoy seeing as the Bad Guys, also present enormous problems for human civilization, peace and freedom. Arguably, it is the US that has played the largest role in the unleashing of global warming, and the resistance to doing anything real about it. And it is going to do us all in. Like it or not. Unless we can act responsibly, together, to end the foolish behavior that created and sustains it.
I guess I just don’t share your world view ….
Most of the issue has been caused by the UN on many fronts… and If the US and other western nations are a problem.. well lets just make our borders stronger and go back to a cold war environment and the small guys can directly pay us for security.
We must go back to nation centric or local trade bloc policies as this world order stuff is a rip off and its been a huge wealth transfer from the west to the rest..
anything else?