Capitalism is a system of private ownership of capital. That means in this system one can own a forest and do whatever they like to the forest.
Capitalism is also a system that requires self-interest to meet our needs because we all know if we aren't going to, then no-one else is, right?
Further, paired with our capitalism is the ability to have capital (often in the form of money) 'work for us'. A key benefit touted by wealthy capitalists!
So, now with the ground-rules set.
Sad Story Time:
Let's say there is a forest that could be sustainably harvested indefinitely for a monetary gain of 100k(post expenses) a year! This could be done using effective forest management techniques; keeping biodiversity at a peak; leaving habitat for all other beings that live in the forest; with the added benefit of the forest as a carbon sink to reduce our impact on the environment (and make this thing called oxygen).
Or, the forest could be clear-cut for a cool $2M profit. Well, today 'economically speaking' we chose the latter (over, and over again as we destroy all our forests). Because, we are able to take that 2M invest it, at let's say, a meager 6% interest; at 6% that would give us 120k. That is 20k more a year than sustainable harvesting would provide and we have direct access to 2M cash! Boom! We cut, drop, and laugh our way to the bank!
A much wiser (economic) decision.
This same theory applies to farmland where we have now lost 1/3 of our arable lands to this short-sighted economic approach.
This could be said of every degrading natural resource on the planet!
If that money were unable to earn interest or be held for immediate returns, then holding an asset that can guarantee 100k a year profit would be a much wiser decision. Economically as well as environmentally. This same process applies to all natural resources and is a root cause of our environmental destruction. Because of interest, it makes sense (economically) to clear-cut as "money today is ALWAYS more valuable than money tomorrow." (TVM)
If capitalism didn't give us a false sense of ownership to clear cut a forest because that forest had rights to life (just as any human), then we wouldn't be able to transform our natural world into money!
What?! Personhood to a forest, that's crazy?
New Zealand river granted same legal rights as human being.
"But, if all of Nature had personhood status, then we would have to be slave-owners to continue capitalism..."
I believe the notion of private property (opposed to personal property) is the sole contributor to the destruction and degradation of our natural world! If someone in our system can destroy our world for economic gain, then it has been demonstrated time and time again that they will do so.
So, what do you think?
An expansion of a thought from Why You Want to Have a Currency That is Taxed!
Rieki
Dedicated to Word-Smithing High-Quality, Detailed, Original Content
