Timeline for (Why) are policies aimed at sustainability often associated with progressive/left-wing politics?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 9:20 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Feb 6, 2013 at 22:47 | comment | added | user4012 | To all downvoters: the question asked why eco sustainability is associated with Progressive side. I answered, with proof. Stop downvoting on the basis of "Well, that association is incorrect". That has nothing to do EITHER with the question or the answer. | |
| Feb 6, 2013 at 22:37 | comment | added | user4012 | @gerrit - for the source, please re-read the answer. I quoted the Morales intro very explicitly. And read the whole Belem. | |
| Feb 6, 2013 at 22:36 | comment | added | user4012 | @gerrit - you asked "why are they associated with progressives". I explained why they are. The fact that USSR is no more is irrelevant with the fact that when it existed, it WAS given a pass. | |
| Feb 6, 2013 at 19:57 | comment | added | gerrit | Source for they don't see pollution/non-sustainability as bad intrinsically. They see it as proof of badness of free market/capitalism, please. Historically, both unregulated multinationals and "communist" dictatorships have polluted severely. As the second one has quite disappeared (the communist/capitalist nature of China is debatable) the fact that environmentalists target the first one does not support your claim that they only care if pollution is done by capitalists. And no, the — otherwise excellent — Belem declaration does not justify this. | |
| Feb 6, 2013 at 19:34 | history | edited | user4012 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Feb 6, 2013 at 19:09 | comment | added | DJClayworth | 1) No, I did not read a relatively unimportant declaration adhered to by only a minority of green movements. 2) Yes. | |
| Feb 6, 2013 at 19:02 | history | edited | user4012 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 565 characters in body
|
| Feb 6, 2013 at 18:46 | comment | added | user4012 | @DJClayworth - did you bother reading the Belem declaration before downvoting? Did you bother reviewing environmental situation in socialist countries before your " because capitalists frequently pollute" quip? | |
| Feb 6, 2013 at 18:45 | comment | added | DJClayworth | Green movements do not advocate green policies because they are anti capitalist, they are (frequently but not always) anti-capitalist because capitalists frequently pollute. Green movements are equally anti-government when government pollutes. | |
| Feb 6, 2013 at 18:38 | history | edited | user4012 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 971 characters in body
|
| Feb 6, 2013 at 18:32 | comment | added | user4012 | @MichaelKingsmill - do some well known things really need to be cited? Here's a random example: [1] | |
| Feb 6, 2013 at 18:28 | comment | added | Michael Kingsmill | Per your note, please provide some citations supporting your statement rather than asking the questioner to "believe" and "reflect" on your statements. | |
| Feb 6, 2013 at 18:24 | history | edited | user4012 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 77 characters in body
|
| Feb 6, 2013 at 18:16 | history | edited | user4012 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 96 characters in body
|
| Feb 6, 2013 at 18:04 | history | answered | user4012 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |