this post was submitted on 03 Apr 2026
64 points (98.5% liked)

Earth

13222 readers
48 users here now

The world’s #1 planet!

A community for the discussion of the environment, climate change, ecology, sustainability, nature, and pictures of cute wild animals.

Socialism is the only path out of the global ecological crisis.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
all 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Arahnya@hexbear.net 56 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (2 children)

Theodore Roosevelt created the national forests to protect them from exactly the kind of industrial plunder this administration is enabling

ah yes. Lets not forget what actually happened :

Roosevelt continued his predecessors’ push to remove Native Americans from their ancestral territories. According to environmental historian Theodore Catton, some 86 million acres of tribal land transferred to the national forest system, much of it during Roosevelt's tenure. America’s 423 national parks, meanwhile, comprise about 85 million acres—also once largely the province of Native peoples. “The rise of conservation dovetailed with a national closeout sale on the Indians’ landed heritage,” wrote Catton.

speaking to the article itself here praising roosevelt and saying that his desecration "would make my blood boil"

[–] came_apart_at_Kmart@hexbear.net 31 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I remember where I was when I learned about "Fortress Conservation" as a phenomenon of political economy (political ecology). as a formal ecologist, the histories (some quite recent/current) were eye opening. i have tried to bring my colleagues attention to it, but aside from younger scientists and conservation workers, older faculty and non profit leaders (with limited exception) were extremely recalcitrant about learning from its lessons, generally.

these people really don't want to acknowledge that many of their exalted heroes fucking hated indigenous people and held extremely racist opinions about traditional ecological knowledge and land management. or just how fascist it is to insist that only a certain socioeconomic cohort of generally urban elites with political power can understand natural resources and they should make decisions unanswerable to the people who live and build their lives in these places.

[–] Johnny_Arson@hexbear.net 17 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] context@hexbear.net 11 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

now i'm thinking back to an old colleague, a german ex-pat living in the u.s. who loved the national park system, and realizing i have yet another overdue henry morgenthau apology form to fill out

[–] Arahnya@hexbear.net 14 points 4 weeks ago

like no actually, he was one link in the chain that led to where we are now.

[–] jack@hexbear.net 34 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I hate these motherfuckers with all my heart

[–] MemesAreTheory@hexbear.net 20 points 4 weeks ago (3 children)

Where your heart fails to hold all the hatred they deserve, mine picks up where yours left off. Our combined communist human waves of hatred will liberate Stalingrad.

[–] SuperZutsuki@hexbear.net 11 points 4 weeks ago

My heart grew 300 sizes to make room for all the hatred

[–] Infamousblt@hexbear.net 6 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

In communist Hexbear, when one soldier goes down the soldier behind them picks up their heart and resumes the fight. They don't issue enough hearts for every Hexbear

[–] peeonyou@hexbear.net 8 points 4 weeks ago

heart collecting is far more noble than semen collecting

[–] DogThatWentGorp@hexbear.net 4 points 4 weeks ago

I didn't want a heart and I'm honored I was able to ask it reassigned to someone else, actually.

[–] CommunistBear@hexbear.net 4 points 4 weeks ago

You gotta distill that hatred down until it's fully pure, 190 proof hate.

[–] SuperZutsuki@hexbear.net 29 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

Looks like it's eco-terrorism time! an-tifa ecoterrorism

[–] FALGSConaut@hexbear.net 21 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

illegal-to-say Definitely do not look up Ecodefense: A Field Guide to Monkeywrenching

[–] SuperZutsuki@hexbear.net 8 points 4 weeks ago

Edward Abbey was definitely not a real person, his FICTIONAL ideas are purely for entertainment

[–] sourquincelog@hexbear.net 28 points 4 weeks ago (2 children)

I feel like a guy who was elected by like 22% of the population shouldn't get to make decisions like this, but what do I know?

[–] comrade_pibb@hexbear.net 17 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

sorry sweaty this is democracy

[–] SuperZutsuki@hexbear.net 13 points 4 weeks ago

Literally the point of liberal democracy.

[–] Lussy@hexbear.net 7 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

You can say 20 percent but lets be honest, at least 40 percent of Americans are hogs, another 20 percent dgaf either ways

[–] MoonMelon@lemmy.ml 26 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

I live adjacent to national forest and the forest itself is pretty much the same on public and private land. When people around here clear their land they basically break even or have to pay to get rid of the trees because, shocker, saw mills for lumber aren't setup to process oak/maple/hickory. So it's either pulpwood, or truly prize specimens (which are rare) get sold to smaller processors as like "bespoke" trees for making furniture.

Our softwood stands come nowhere close to competing with Canada and the southern states in terms of tree size and number, so even if you do have loblolly (or whatever) it's not economic to harvest. I mean, you make a little bit, but it's laughable. It's only worth it if you are going to clear the land anyway for development.

So cutting a national forest to compete with Canada wouldn't even work in the most bare naked capitalist, Looten Plunder-ass sense.

[–] TheoryofChange@hexbear.net 10 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

So I'm guessing you are either in the north east or parts of the Midwest based on what you wrote. There are three things I'd point out with that being said. Firstly, there are some areas where there are genuinely valuable trees on forest service land, as they allow logging at a minorly limited rate. This is especially true out west. Secondly, evonomies of scale. Much of the lumber industry is set up to clearcut even aged plantations at scale, and as a result it can be hard to find sawmills to buy small and diverse loads of logs from clearing smaller private parcels. Thirdly, there is an increasing demand for wood based biofuel, mainly for export to Europe or japan. This industry is only established in the southeast and Pacific Northwest thus far, but the companies involved in that do seem to be attempting to expand (drax, a British company was denied permits to build two large biofuel pellet plants in California).

Tldr, your observations of the timber industry are accurate but I think there are specific intelligent profiteers behind this type of move

[–] MoonMelon@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 weeks ago

Thanks for the insight.

[–] an_engel_on_earth@hexbear.net 14 points 4 weeks ago

Blood for the blood god

[–] DragonBallZinn@hexbear.net 11 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

Must….resist….Zamasuposting….

[–] LaughingLion@hexbear.net 3 points 4 weeks ago

It falls, one pillar at a time. With any luck, I'll live to see the end of America.