![]() | The Finance Round-Up: October 9th 2007 | The Oil Drum: Canada | The Energy and Environment Round-Up: October 14th 2007 | ![]() |
14 comments on The Energy and Environment Round-Up: October 10th 2007
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
14 comments on The Energy and Environment Round-Up: October 10th 2007
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Blogroll
- 321 Energy
- The Archdruid Report
- ASPO Canada
- Ali Samsam Bakhtiari
- The Sir Robert Bond Papers
- Briarpatch Magazine
- Chatham House
- Paul Chefurka
- The Council of Canadians
- The Daily Canuck
- The Daily Reckoning
- The Dominion
- Energy and Capital
- Energy Bulletin
- Feasta
- Financial Sense
- Global Public Media
- Graphoilogy
- The Garret Hardin Society
- Richard Heinberg
- Thomas Homer-Dixon
- The Housing Bubble Blog
- iTulip
- James Kunstler
- LATOC
- Darryl McMahon
- George Monbiot
- Murky View
- Dmitri Orlov
- Plants for a Future
- Raise the Hammer
- Ramsay House Project
- Rigzone Canada
- R-Squared
- Nouriel Roubini
- Safe Haven
- Shack in the Middle
- Michael Shedlock
- Treehugger
- The Tyee
- Jeff Vail
- Vive le Canada
- John Warnock
- Whiskey and Gunpowder
User login
Archives
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.




GAIA Host Collective
The quotes by PM Harper in the Arctic sovereignty story are unbelievable!
It is not that the government funded Arctic scientific research isn't needed (although I do think that at this point in the game it will only amount to a more refined Arctic region autopsy!), but Harper's statements about all this are astounding examples of politically corrupt doublespeak:
A "strong and sovereign Arctic"? In my mind any such type natural region is sovereign in and of itself, and if it weren't for human arrogance linked to technological prowress plundering all such sovereign natural regions across the globe the Arctic would still be a "healthy and prosperous Arctic."
But obviously he means the exact opposite which is human power in the form of Canadian government's supreme power and authority OVER the Arctic, as expressed by the notion of "Canada's defence of [and presence in] its North", all geared to introducing measures aimed at "unleashing the North's true potential."
What that means exactly Harper ably summarizes thusly: "Like I've said so many times before, use it or lose it is the first principle of sovereignty."
There you have it as plain as can be, the complete and utter catastrophic tragedy that all this nonsense truly is. The first principle of human government sovereignty is to rape, pillage and kill the natural host!
As if this wasn't bad enough we're going to paper over the crime with a dazzling array of government funded scientific studies of exactly how the Arctic life blood falls and splatters. Just don't ask: Who done it?
I agree completely with what you said. I was surprised to see Harper actually come out with the 'use it or lose it' comment, but that's exactly what it boils down to.
Canada's record in the arctic is not something to be proud of IMO. Indigenous people often live in squalid conditions, some having been originally forced into fixed settlements, as opposed to their traditional nomadic existence, by the deliberate slaughter of their dog teams. Many were relocated long ago to places far north of their original land - and far north of their traditional food supply (animal herds etc). They now depend on long and tenuous supply lines from the far south, making them highly fossil fuel dependent.
The native leaders who buy into 'arctic development' schemes may now preside over the destruction of their ancestral lands for the sake of 20 years worth of gas or minerals, institutionalizing a whole new level of dependency in the process (see for instance A Mackenzie Valley Pipe-Dream? from TOD:canada's December 2006 archive).