The COP21 Deal Will (Probably) Go Through Tomorrow, Leaving Tough Work for Activists - Pacific Standard

[Joseph Tracy]

Sounds like a somewhat exaggerated version of what is asked for. The primary concern is the massive losses due to fall on low island nations and low coastal regions. Where will these people go? Who will aid them to find housing. Shouldn’t those who continue to emit an unfair portion of greenhouse gases bear a financial responsibility to those who suffer as a result? I would be less on Naomi and these nation’s side if the US etc. were making serious credible effort to radically reduce Carbon emissions, but we just aren’t. Our current pledges are a sentence of destruction for many regions.  
  What makes this particularly ugly is that corporations, many in fossil fuel industries, are being given increasing power through international trade agreements to sue nations who try to protect their environment, safety laws and worker rights.  These trade agreements are favored by Obama, the mainstream democratic leadership  and the Republicans. As that is so, why shouldn’t nations screwed by global emissions be able to sue for damage? 
  The US taxpayer is standing by while public lands, the army, surveillance, the courts, the jails and public utilities are privatized and turned over to the profit motive. 

> On Dec,, 12, 2015, at 3:27 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Here's a tough policy question which Plisters might want to " talk" about, differ over.
> 
> Naomi Klein among others are considering it sabotage and a disgrace that the United States ( and some other rich countries) will not open itself to unrestricted liability suits re their role in causing climate change. should it? See link below. 
> 
> http://www.psmag.com/politics-and-law/weak-cop21-deal-set-to-go-through
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad-
> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list

-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l