Why Ecocide would be BAD LAW

Calls from campaigners are getting louder for a crime of Ecocide. An international law like the one against genocide that would criminalise the mass damage and destruction of ecosystems. Sounds like it must be a good thing. But would it be? Let’s have a look.

The Mallen Baker Show is aimed at all people who see themselves as change makers, with commentary on issues and change movements with a particular focus on climate change and environment, social issues, free speech and corporate social responsibility.

[truthseeker]

"There are no effective safeguards preventing a few powerful people, companies or states from wreaking havoc for the sake of profit or power. Though their actions may lead to the death of millions, they know they can't be touched." This should also be applied to Vaccine Manufacturers/WHO/WEF/Bill Gates etc get the priorities right.

[markhutton]

Building a house would be considered ecocide. What about wild fires? Who would you prosecute?

[jyutzler]

Perhaps if the existing international laws were enforced I would have some interest in this. China's crimes against humanity are pretty clear-cut (and they are not alone) but no one is stopping them. Meh.

[simpol-thesimultaneouspoli]

Apart from being far too broad, the problem with Ecocide is that it doesn't deal with the driver of the problem - the need for corporations and especially nations to stay competitive in today's global market. Nations need to keep environmental regulations relatively loose in order not to deter inward investment and jobs. And all nations are in competition for that investment. THAT is why pollution continues. A well-defined law might be helpful but only if the problem of competitiveness is dealt with first. How do we do that? One option: www.simpol.org

[cheshirered]

Beware the law of unintended consequences. Disaster beckons, so it's a big fat NO from me.

[robertaspindale]

So we're going to get rid of all those ecocidal wind turbines, are we?

[teodoras]

This is the first time I hear about this concept so I'll state the obvious but, well... Aren't the corporations committing all of those crimes indeed untouchable?
If there is a way, they should be sanctioned for polluting, overfishing, deforestation and so on. But in deed, crime is only crime if it's committed against property or life. The thing is, all of those things have impact on our lives. It is hard to calculate how big, but we have already seen plenty of examples. If ecosystems suffer, people suffer too.

So I think we desperately need something, something that works. I'm reading the comments, people say it wouldn't work or that it's just a tool for controlling... I don't even know.

But actually what is the danger here? That a CEO would go to jail for something minor? Or that we will have to reshape many of our industries?
I am sure that if this law gets accepted, it will be made clear what is considered an offence.
Nobody will agree of course on what is significant. But I still think that getting to some kind of consensus about that is worth it.

We need this law, we need to reshape our industries and our way of living. We need this to be genuine and to work.

[kkhodgkinson]

The very proposal and forward movement of “Ecocide” law is causing this debate. That in itself, is good. Let’s keep this conversation going as we move toward realistic, effective solutions. We must protect and preserve the environment (and it’s limited resources) for ourselves and future generations.

[stewarth]

The desertification of the Sahara was ecocide, but who was responsible?

[robinbeckford]

This smells to me like an attempt at control hiding behind a 'save the planet' mask.

[MallenBaker]

My rules for comments in this forum.

You can post your opinion freely in the comments to any of my videos. I like to engage with people on arguments and issues. I will, time permitting, happily engage with comments that are polite and broadly on topic for the video in question. You can still post what you want but if you want a response from me, those are the criteria. If you want to preface your biting critique with an observation of what a total idiot I am, knock yourself out, but I won't respond to those comments any more than I would if someone said that stuff in real life.

Out and out obscenities and personal abuse will be removed. Posts that are just links to other videos you want to promote will be removed. People who engage in bullying other commenters will be asked to stop if I think they are making commenting here unpleasant for others. If they refuse to stop then they'll be removed from the channel.

[gracc]

Don't agree on everything you say but have to agree totally on this one

[Argrouk]

So HS2 or a new motorway becomes Ecocide?

[tonylovering]

The problem that needs addressing is institutionalised liberalism that fosters an acceptance of this sort of madness

[kkhodgkinson]

Yes, ecocide is a broad legal concept. Obviously, specific crimes and detailed legislation would be defined within it.

[ronsummers]

Nicely analyzed. Another rabbit hole sidestepped IMO

[mabelheinzle]

Global authority- where have we heard this before?

[adamwatson]

The law would never be used against large corporations or states . It would be used against average people like farmers and small to medium sized businesses . The world's elites would never allow for the world's largest polluters to be punished

[DestroyerMariko]

"Ecocide" strikes me as such an emotionally laden term too, and manipulative in the context of All The Things. Not unlike the slogans adopted by certain other movements. I'm not surprised they've tried to expand it's meaning, fear in the form of hyperbolic climate emergency/talk of extinction wasn't enough, now anyone not sufficiently enthusiastic about their world-controlling ideas is implied to be the equivalent of a mass murdering criminal :|

Great word to chuck into a metal track though lol, but they've made me cringe and it's been done anyway so I think I'll steer clear for now hahaha... XD

[colinmcewen]

anything could destroy the eco system.