Gonna give my 2 cents, bear in mind I'm in Brazil and am involved in projects related to the Amazon forest.
My problem with all this are some things:
* One problem I have is that during the last years Amazon savagery was going uncontrollable, no one cared, especially BBC, now that a president was elected that is not aligned with their point of view was elected, this became a front news issue.
* Assuming this is all true (and bear in mind, it isn't always) that fire was in Brazil's frontier, not just Brazil, the article forgot that part.
* One more point is: the supposed German and Norway money to "help maintain the forest", if you need to learn anything from investigative journalism, is to follow the money. Norway had a mining operation in the middle of Amazon[0] - the thing they are supposed to prevent! Funny enough, that mining rig polluted all the area [1] and they settled down not paying the locals, that are still protesting. I really wonder if that Amazon fund was really to support and protect our forest or to pay off NGOs to ignore what they were doing over there. Bonus: this all happened in the previous "good" government administration.
I really worry about the forest and was in Sao Paulo when that happened two days ago, but I really suspect the politics around it.
One interesting point is made by Slavoj Zizek on our society[0] about the "good" billionaires that give with one hand what they destroyed with the other. This what it feels like about all of what is happening over there, 1st world countries give "aid" to cover the problem themselves did over there.
I can't speak for all nations, but certainly here in northern Europe, NGOs and others have worked for decades on preservation efforts, in concert with local organizations. Deforestation (especially the Amazon rainforest) has been a high priority for conservation and environmental efforts for decades.
So please don't think that we only started caring about Amazonia because a person with disagreeable politics was elected recently. Deforestation affects everyone, it's a global issue.
However, said person has made a number of statements that are directly threatening towards the future preservation of South American rainforests, and thus the awareness and conservation efforts have increased their visibility, in order to counteract the damage your governments politics will do to the rainforest.
That's the problem right now in Brazil. Any criticism to the current administration is because "ideology", like that's a valid argument to invalidate anything that's said. The current president thinks there are communists in every corner.
The fires are happening, any satellite can confirm that. Easily. The the head of the public institution doing very scientific work to track that got fired because he wasn't a true "Brazilian" since he was obviously trying to hurt his country by reporting the truth.
It seems we have imported the dualism in politics from the US/Argentina and everything now now is "us" vs "them". It's impossible to have a reasonable discussion about public policies without people resorting to hidden motives and conspiracy theories.
I've followed the international news about the Amazon fires and there's very little wrong facts in them. But unfortunately they don't help our current extreme right administration so.
I hope reasonable minds prevail in the next election and we're able to elect an administration that is rational. Unfortunately, due to the increasing duopoly in politics, we'll probably have a extreme left president. It's all very sad.
The sad part of reading news like this is the feeling of paralysis and helplessness of watching it all unfold.
There are no actionable calls to action or advice laid out in articles like these.
Awareness is good though. Perhaps it inspires people to work directly on solving nature's greatest problems. A friend of mine made a GitHub curated list about tech companies working in this space.
If the government is not comitted to the preservation of the Amazon, then there's really nothing that can be done. One could consider imposing international sanctions, but the chance of that backfiring would be quite high IMHO.
Individual action is very limited. Collective action is the only way forwards, which means you're going to have to get political, and convince other people that it's real, important, and deserving of action.
Brasil needs to be heavily sanctioned by the international community, I'm talking Cuba-level stuff if we want to even have a chance at stopping the rise above 2 degrees, we only have 12 years which means that it's already probably too late.
More worrying is the rise of populism in the world supported by fake news, ignorance and social media that led to this.
How did someone as ignorant as Bolsonaro ever managed to get elected as president of a democratic country, and get away with some of the things he says?
I consider such approach rather oppressive and reeking of colonialism attitudes. It sounds like: "Fuck Brasil, let's ban them from using their natural resources, while we happily keep using ours". There is literally no reason why other countries countries couldn't plant more forests to enhance their carbon depositions, now Brasil thanks to their rainforests does more of biosequestration than any other country on Earth and don't they dare doing less and not pick other nations' slack...
Also 12 years is just another arbitrary alarmist number, similarly to recently heard 18 months [1]. But in reality there is no upcoming end of the world [2].
I'm a Brazilian, and yes, our country needs to be heavily sanctioned until this president wakes up.
Yeah, first world countries made bad decisions in the past, but by 2019 everyone should know better. And he knows it, he just don't give a damn about it.
Would be all for the sanctions, but the EU just signed a free trade agreement with Brazil (Mercosur). That agreement put Brazil's farmers at an advantage, they can now sell to the EU, and produce cheaper than European farmers. If anything that accelerated the trend we see now in the Amazon.
Also, Trump's trade war with China led China to heavily invest in Brazil's soy. Another accelerator of Amazon burning.
So, after all it isn't just Bolsonaro, it is also our (the western world) fault. The officials we elected allow for this in the first place.
> How did someone as ignorant as Bolsonaro ever managed to get elected as president of a democratic country, and get away with some of the things he says?
This has to be sarcasm right ?
You ask that question when Duterte, Erdogan, Trump, Brexit, LePen and the like have occurred in the last 5 years preceding him.
Bolsonaro was democratically elected. We may not like it (I absolutely despise him), but that is the will of the people. Naive, easily misled and disheartened people. But, democrated elected nevertheless.
> How did someone as ignorant as Bolsonaro ever managed to get elected as president of a democratic country, and get away with some of the things he says?
If we truly care about nature then Brazil should be made one of the most politically and economically stable countries in the world by the powers of the world.
If that seems like too much effort to give up our own resources to protect the environment then leading world powers should re-evaluate whether its in humanities best interest to have few stable places of living that don't come at the cost of the environment to deal with poverty and suffering.
If you or your country is not stable, the last thing you will be concerned about is the environmental impact on the world.
Your point implies that we need to deflorestate in order to be economically stable. No, our economy is not bad because of the environment, it's bad because of bad decisions of politicians of the past.
It took me a few good seconds to realize that the title is not about Amazon burning cash or something, shows how entrenched in our lives Amazon (the company) is.
If environmental disasters are enough pretext for questioning sovereignty, shall we compile a list, together with the territory to be subtracted? I suggest with start with North America. I'll go first:
- Deepwater Horizon platform; Gulf of Mexico, 2010.
This is downvoted, but it is a fair point, that is being used as politics weapon. The Amazon forest was savaged before, but the previous administration was seen as "good".
And more than that, those supposed good funds from Germany and Norway that were basically a form of bribe for the previous administration look to the other side on the mining atrocities these countries did in the forest.
This hits at one ideological conundrum that I have been grappling with for a while.
All major developed nations did so on the back of dirty energy, exploiting resources and with huge climate change implications.
Now that the smaller developing nations are finally capable of doing so themselves, they are being discouraged by the same developed powers.
The developed powers did the same, but got away with it because there was no oversight. I don't see why these underdeveloped nations are now being expected to take the moral high ground.
We wouldn't need the Amazon as much, if we weren't pumping as many pollutants into our air and water supplies.
Plenty of species went extinct when the now developed powers expanded with reckless abandon. Now that Brazil is doing the same, the outrage seems hypocritical.
Some may say that the Amazon is special and not a resource that Brazil can singularly exploit, when it has global implications. But, the same has been true of fossil rich nations that have pumped cheap gas into the market indiscriminately, while they all individually became billionaires.
This whole argument extended to new developing economies like India and Central Africa at large.
Just to be clear I am not advocating for the deforestation of the Amazon. It can be seen as a right wing talking point, but I myself am completely at my wits end and do not have a retort to the argument.
Is anyone surprised? It's easy to be upset over this but most readers here live relatively privileged lives. The poor farmer lighting a fire is doing his best to improve his life by clearing more land.
I don't know to improve the situation but I feel like we also need to have empathy and understanding.
I can be proven wrong, but I don't think it's poor farmers who are responsible for the deforestation of the Amazon. It's mostly big latifund owners with lots of lobbying power.
AFAICT this is not a matter of small farmers clearing a bit of land in order to survive. It's a matter of huge cattle producers and industrial soy farms burning clear vast swathes of the Amazon jungle, for profit.
It is not the fault of the current government. Burning happens every year in the Amazon, and everywhere across the world.
The leftist party is using international media to alarm against the current government.
There are also investigations being carried out on these burnings, as there are indications that several are criminals and were executed by NGOs in this region. Those are the same who have lost benefits (money) in recent weeks.
Yes, it is the responsibility of the current government to intervene, hold responsible and take steps to prevent this from occurring or diminishing its impact in the future. It is worth remembering that this government is only 8 months old.
People behave as if previous governments were constantly extinguishing fire and that in the last 16 days, "by the current government", the water has run out and started to set fire to everything.
The problem of Amazonian care comes from decades of neglect, and this government is only 8 months old. There should be no external intervention. Other countries (first world or not, there are no excuses) should reforest as much as they can for the global good and not just point the finger at this region (important, of course).
NGOs in Brazil are almost totally corrupt, they are cancer here in Brazil. As well as much of politics.
Many forget or do not know that former President Lula [1] assumed in interviews that his government lied about important statistical data, such as hunger and misery in Brazil to impact abroad and then present the true numbers as the savior of this country. Pure manipulation.
The current government is revisiting all research departments through a thorough process to check all numbers that were presented as true and many are questionable.
What you wrote is the government narrative, it lacks sources.
The reality is that the current government has been loosening its controls a lot by dismantling the Ministry of Environment's supervisory bodies, using the narrative that climate change is alarmism.
This veiled incentive to deforestation promoted by the government is being reflected in satellite data and increased burns.
Just so you know guys, this sounds like a typical Bolsonaro voter. Even implying that the multi-hundred-percent increase in deforestation just this year was fabricated by the communist scientists and that Lula somehow has anything to do with it. Or that it's good that Bolsonaro is "reorganizing" the research departments to get rid of the commies that dare to present evidence against his corrupt children or about his family's relationships with Rio militias. Or just plain firing scientists and managers from organs like INPE (National Institute of Space Research) and IBAMA (Brazilian Institute of the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources) that dared to speak out against his anti-environment speech, policies or even environmental infractions.
[+] [-] jeanlucas|6 years ago|reply
My problem with all this are some things:
* One problem I have is that during the last years Amazon savagery was going uncontrollable, no one cared, especially BBC, now that a president was elected that is not aligned with their point of view was elected, this became a front news issue.
* Assuming this is all true (and bear in mind, it isn't always) that fire was in Brazil's frontier, not just Brazil, the article forgot that part.
* One more point is: the supposed German and Norway money to "help maintain the forest", if you need to learn anything from investigative journalism, is to follow the money. Norway had a mining operation in the middle of Amazon[0] - the thing they are supposed to prevent! Funny enough, that mining rig polluted all the area [1] and they settled down not paying the locals, that are still protesting. I really wonder if that Amazon fund was really to support and protect our forest or to pay off NGOs to ignore what they were doing over there. Bonus: this all happened in the previous "good" government administration.
I really worry about the forest and was in Sao Paulo when that happened two days ago, but I really suspect the politics around it.
[0] - http://theconversation.com/the-world-protests-as-amazon-fore...
[1] - https://www.tnp.no/norway/panorama/toxic-waste-from-norwegia...
[+] [-] jeanlucas|6 years ago|reply
[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpAMbpQ8J7g
[+] [-] hjrnunes|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] KozmoNau7|6 years ago|reply
So please don't think that we only started caring about Amazonia because a person with disagreeable politics was elected recently. Deforestation affects everyone, it's a global issue.
However, said person has made a number of statements that are directly threatening towards the future preservation of South American rainforests, and thus the awareness and conservation efforts have increased their visibility, in order to counteract the damage your governments politics will do to the rainforest.
[+] [-] gtirloni|6 years ago|reply
The fires are happening, any satellite can confirm that. Easily. The the head of the public institution doing very scientific work to track that got fired because he wasn't a true "Brazilian" since he was obviously trying to hurt his country by reporting the truth.
It seems we have imported the dualism in politics from the US/Argentina and everything now now is "us" vs "them". It's impossible to have a reasonable discussion about public policies without people resorting to hidden motives and conspiracy theories.
I've followed the international news about the Amazon fires and there's very little wrong facts in them. But unfortunately they don't help our current extreme right administration so.
I hope reasonable minds prevail in the next election and we're able to elect an administration that is rational. Unfortunately, due to the increasing duopoly in politics, we'll probably have a extreme left president. It's all very sad.
[+] [-] nikivi|6 years ago|reply
There are no actionable calls to action or advice laid out in articles like these.
Awareness is good though. Perhaps it inspires people to work directly on solving nature's greatest problems. A friend of mine made a GitHub curated list about tech companies working in this space.
https://github.com/nglgzz/awesome-clean-tech
[+] [-] enibundo|6 years ago|reply
I remember asking this question some time ago and it got ignored by people here (of course): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12864591
If it doesn't include the words: dividend, stock, option, etc. it doesn't work here.
[+] [-] emblaegh|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pjc50|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] antocv|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] vfc1|6 years ago|reply
More worrying is the rise of populism in the world supported by fake news, ignorance and social media that led to this.
How did someone as ignorant as Bolsonaro ever managed to get elected as president of a democratic country, and get away with some of the things he says?
[+] [-] Hitton|6 years ago|reply
Also 12 years is just another arbitrary alarmist number, similarly to recently heard 18 months [1]. But in reality there is no upcoming end of the world [2].
[1]: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-48964736
[2]: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/no-climate...
[+] [-] Scarblac|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] KnightOfWords|6 years ago|reply
Along with the US, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Australia. And probably a bunch of others.
[+] [-] ptah|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sprafa|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PauloManrique|6 years ago|reply
Yeah, first world countries made bad decisions in the past, but by 2019 everyone should know better. And he knows it, he just don't give a damn about it.
[+] [-] dna_polymerase|6 years ago|reply
Also, Trump's trade war with China led China to heavily invest in Brazil's soy. Another accelerator of Amazon burning.
So, after all it isn't just Bolsonaro, it is also our (the western world) fault. The officials we elected allow for this in the first place.
[+] [-] screye|6 years ago|reply
This has to be sarcasm right ?
You ask that question when Duterte, Erdogan, Trump, Brexit, LePen and the like have occurred in the last 5 years preceding him.
Bolsonaro was democratically elected. We may not like it (I absolutely despise him), but that is the will of the people. Naive, easily misled and disheartened people. But, democrated elected nevertheless.
[+] [-] unknown|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] unknown|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] sarcasmOrTears|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] darkwater|6 years ago|reply
Just like Trump, probably.
[+] [-] isostatic|6 years ago|reply
Same applies with say the DRC and other rainforest areas.
[+] [-] newsgremlin|6 years ago|reply
If that seems like too much effort to give up our own resources to protect the environment then leading world powers should re-evaluate whether its in humanities best interest to have few stable places of living that don't come at the cost of the environment to deal with poverty and suffering.
If you or your country is not stable, the last thing you will be concerned about is the environmental impact on the world.
[+] [-] PauloManrique|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AlexDragusin|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bromuro|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hjrnunes|6 years ago|reply
- Deepwater Horizon platform; Gulf of Mexico, 2010.
[+] [-] jeanlucas|6 years ago|reply
And more than that, those supposed good funds from Germany and Norway that were basically a form of bribe for the previous administration look to the other side on the mining atrocities these countries did in the forest.
[+] [-] higherkinded|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] screye|6 years ago|reply
All major developed nations did so on the back of dirty energy, exploiting resources and with huge climate change implications.
Now that the smaller developing nations are finally capable of doing so themselves, they are being discouraged by the same developed powers. The developed powers did the same, but got away with it because there was no oversight. I don't see why these underdeveloped nations are now being expected to take the moral high ground.
We wouldn't need the Amazon as much, if we weren't pumping as many pollutants into our air and water supplies.
Plenty of species went extinct when the now developed powers expanded with reckless abandon. Now that Brazil is doing the same, the outrage seems hypocritical.
Some may say that the Amazon is special and not a resource that Brazil can singularly exploit, when it has global implications. But, the same has been true of fossil rich nations that have pumped cheap gas into the market indiscriminately, while they all individually became billionaires.
This whole argument extended to new developing economies like India and Central Africa at large.
Just to be clear I am not advocating for the deforestation of the Amazon. It can be seen as a right wing talking point, but I myself am completely at my wits end and do not have a retort to the argument.
[+] [-] MaximumYComb|6 years ago|reply
I don't know to improve the situation but I feel like we also need to have empathy and understanding.
[+] [-] emblaegh|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tremon|6 years ago|reply
Ah yes, the "think of the poor" argument. Deforestation at this scale isn't done by individual poor, it's done by wealthy organizations.
[+] [-] KozmoNau7|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] FranzFerdiNaN|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] honestoHeminway|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stevespang|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] justanegg|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] enibundo|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] kebman|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] isostatic|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] onevu|6 years ago|reply
Eh, no. The part of the Amazon that is in Brazil belongs to Brazil.
[+] [-] lucasfcosta|6 years ago|reply
Unfortunately, people chose to elect an awful president and there's nothing we can do about it other than protest.
Bolsonaro is the worst leader this country has ever had since the military dictatorship.
[+] [-] unknown|6 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] turrini|6 years ago|reply
It is not the fault of the current government. Burning happens every year in the Amazon, and everywhere across the world.
The leftist party is using international media to alarm against the current government.
There are also investigations being carried out on these burnings, as there are indications that several are criminals and were executed by NGOs in this region. Those are the same who have lost benefits (money) in recent weeks.
Yes, it is the responsibility of the current government to intervene, hold responsible and take steps to prevent this from occurring or diminishing its impact in the future. It is worth remembering that this government is only 8 months old.
People behave as if previous governments were constantly extinguishing fire and that in the last 16 days, "by the current government", the water has run out and started to set fire to everything.
The problem of Amazonian care comes from decades of neglect, and this government is only 8 months old. There should be no external intervention. Other countries (first world or not, there are no excuses) should reforest as much as they can for the global good and not just point the finger at this region (important, of course).
NGOs in Brazil are almost totally corrupt, they are cancer here in Brazil. As well as much of politics.
Many forget or do not know that former President Lula [1] assumed in interviews that his government lied about important statistical data, such as hunger and misery in Brazil to impact abroad and then present the true numbers as the savior of this country. Pure manipulation.
The current government is revisiting all research departments through a thorough process to check all numbers that were presented as true and many are questionable.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5bOtqmvJHE (in Portuguese only, sorry)
[+] [-] anodari|6 years ago|reply
[+] [-] doliveira|6 years ago|reply