World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
This is fucking disgusting.
Why?
From the article:
Because 1) orangutans are only one of the hundreds of thousands species affected by deforestation, and 2) catching, transporting and confining animals in zoos is hardly an improvement to their life: apes are social animals who live in large groups in large habitats, they suffer in zoos. 3) this is the commodification of sentient beings, ironically the very species they pretend to wanting to help. Greenwashing at its finest.
Orangutans aren't social like most apes are, but your other points are right on.
That's a quote from Malaysia's commodities minister, so I don't know if you can trust it. The article also says
Any statement that boils down to "this extractive industry is environmentally sustainable" is massively suspicious. I don't trust that statement at all. I don't buy that you can produce palm oil on that scale while respecting nature.
Well IDK how it's done with Palm oil, but AFAIK what is meant by sustainable, is that the area is regrown, that's how we do with forestation here too. And that's been grown and harvested sustainably for many decades.
Basically you are putting forward what is called an argument from ignorance.
So let me get this straight: they cut down the forest, plant palm trees, harvest it for i guess a few years, and then... plant the forest back? How does that make sense just on any level?
I mean at least i happen to know it doesn't make sense on an ecological level as a new groth forest is massively different from an old growth forest, so the new forest is no replacement for the old one.
Also i'm not sure if you understand what an argument from ignorance is? It's not an ignorant argument, it's a specific type of logical fallacy. The observation that no extractive industry has proven sustainable is a predictor that they're unlikely to prove sustainable in the future.
Your argument from ignorance is that you don't understand how palm oil can be sustainable, and because you don't understand it, you think it must be unsustainable.
Without having read the article, I'm not sure I buy that it's as sustainable as they say.
Argument from ignorance is pretty worthless and nothing more than a baseless opinion, which you are of course free to have.
What, does it say something different, assuming you read it? Generally speaking, third world palm oil production is unsustainable, because how could it not be with weak rule of law.
If it pertains to capitalism it's unsustainable by default.
Bullshit, capitalism has nothing to do with it, it's all about the regulation. Communist Soviet Union polluted way more than their capitalist counterparts by every measure, because their regulation sucked.
Yes, totalitarianism also has endless growth problems...