Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Thursday April 06 2017, @09:47PM   Printer-friendly
from the poor-countries-showing-grit dept.

Foreign Policy In Focus reports A Huge Mining Conglomerate Wanted to Poison This Country's Water. After a Long Fight, They've Finally Lost.

The people of El Salvador and their international allies against irresponsible mining are celebrating a historic victory. After a long battle against global mining companies that were determined to plunder the country's natural resources for short-term profits, El Salvador's Legislative Assembly has voted to ban all metal mining projects.

The new law is aimed at protecting the Central American nation's environment and natural resources. Approved on March 29 with the support of 69 lawmakers [(out of a total of 84) from multiple parties], the law blocks all exploration, extraction, and processing of metals, whether in open pits or underground. It also prohibits the use of toxic chemicals like cyanide and mercury.

[...] Despite the fact that there is a national consensus among communities, civil society organizations, government institutions, and political parties for a mining prohibition, the Australian-Canadian company OceanaGold and its subsidiaries in El Salvador have consistently attempted to slow the bill's progress and sought to gain support for their so-called "Responsible Mining" campaign.

The company launched the campaign at a fancy hotel in San Salvador after losing a $250 million lawsuit against El Salvador in October 2016. The company had filed a claim with the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), demanding compensation when the government declined to grant the firm a permit for a gold extraction project that threatened the nation's water supply. In the face of tremendous opposition from a wide range of groups inside and outside El Salvador, the ICSID tribunal ruled against the company.

[...] By voting in favor of the mining ban, these lawmakers in El Salvador have chosen water over gold, and people and the environment over corporate profits. And they showed that even a very poor country can stand up to powerful global mining firms.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by jmorris on Thursday April 06 2017, @10:37PM (21 children)

    by jmorris (4844) on Thursday April 06 2017, @10:37PM (#489897)

    Since they can spurn economic development like this, can we now declare the country a "total success" and cease all assistance from the 1st world to them? Obviously they have economic plenty, everybody has adequate food and shelter, everybody has a job, etc. since they can now afford to forgo all mining. We don't even need to be punitive and tell em that we ain't digging holes in our landscape for their benefit and bar any metal object from crossing their border. Nah, either let Darwin sort em out or who knows, maybe they can convince themselves they LIKE being poor.

    But why do we have to always get a story like this from the most insanely Progressive source possible? How much digging did somebody have to do to find an outlet reporting such a suicidal policy as a good thing?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Interesting=1, Overrated=1, Total=4
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday April 06 2017, @10:57PM (13 children)

    by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Thursday April 06 2017, @10:57PM (#489910) Homepage Journal

    But why do we have to always get a story like this from the most insanely Progressive source possible?

    That's gewg_ for you. And yet the same people shouting this biased story up scream like banshees when I link a Breitbart, Yiannopoulos, or otherwise biased the other direction link. Libs are simply more shrill and can't abide dissent of any kind.

    --
    My rights don't end where your fear begins.
    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by jmorris on Thursday April 06 2017, @11:20PM (11 children)

      by jmorris (4844) on Thursday April 06 2017, @11:20PM (#489925)

      But of course. The forbidden diversity, the one that none dare speak of, is diversity of thought and ideas. Because they know they would lose most arguments on the merits they seek to forbid the idea there is even an argument possible; their ideas are so self evidently true that disputing them would be like giving flat earthers a fair hearing.

      Milo is an expert at making their heads explode and went right into their most holy sanctums to do it. He would go right at their premise of being 'obviously correct.' So equally obviously all possible resources had to be expended to take him out. Why do I suspect he won't play nice and stay 'taken out' for long? His book will ship right on schedule, just under a different imprint, and he will launch a fresh bus tour in support.

      • (Score: 2) by jelizondo on Friday April 07 2017, @12:28AM

        by jelizondo (653) Subscriber Badge on Friday April 07 2017, @12:28AM (#489961) Journal

        Self-evident truths are an American thing, you know, the country was founded on “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”

        It’s a pity that Milo wasn’t around to serve his King (he’s British) and make Jefferson’s, Washington’s, Hancock’s and the others’ heads explode.

      • (Score: 2, Informative) by aristarchus on Friday April 07 2017, @12:36AM (2 children)

        by aristarchus (2645) on Friday April 07 2017, @12:36AM (#489967) Journal

        Wait a minute, "The love that dare not speak its name"? jmorris is an Oscar Wilde aficionado? Well, he is defending Milo. But not like Cicero, in Pro Milone http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/cicero/milo.shtml [thelatinlibrary.com]

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Friday April 07 2017, @06:23AM

          by aristarchus (2645) on Friday April 07 2017, @06:23AM (#490105) Journal

          Oh, dear irony! A reference to Oscar Wilde modded flamebait? Oh the Irony! Oh the Huge Manatees! Oh the complete and total ignorance of history and culture that is the right, and even more the alt-right. Did you know, for example, that most of the "white" races were once only considered useful as slaves? Yeah, all you Teutonic bastards, only good for menial work. Why? Lack of mental acumen! One or two, over the course of history, of course. But most of them? This is why we cannot have white supremacy. The "whites" are actually only slave material, and this is why now we emphasize STEM classes at Colleges and Universities, because these not too bright types need some sort of education to keep them off the streets and gainfully employed. Problem is, they just might be stupid enough to vote in some total illiterate braggart as President. Have you heard? Not so much the small hands problem, but Donald can't read. From a cast member that appeared with him on Saturday Night Live! No, seriously! Here, check it out for your self, unless you truly are slave and white supremacy material:

          https://www.indy100.com/article/donald-trump-theory-cant-read-illiterate-david-pakman-barely-7567481 [indy100.com]

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LFkN7QGp2c [youtube.com] "I forgot my glasses."

          https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughTrumpSpam/comments/5bg8vo/donald_trump_cant_read_says_snl_pete_davidson_to/ [reddit.com]

          http://www.rawstory.com/2017/04/revealed-former-snl-cast-member-says-moron-trump-struggled-to-read-script-during-rehearsal/ [rawstory.com]

          I am really starting to think that Donald Trump cannot read. And if he cannot, maybe Steve Bannon cannot, either? And what does that say about Peter Theil? OMG, we are being ruled but fracking illiterates! Explains a lot, though.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 07 2017, @08:44AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 07 2017, @08:44AM (#490136)

          Are you suggesting that jmorris and Milo, . . . OMG! I need TMB strength brainlbleach, stat!

      • (Score: 1) by butthurt on Friday April 07 2017, @02:03AM (5 children)

        by butthurt (6141) on Friday April 07 2017, @02:03AM (#489992) Journal

        The forbidden diversity, the one that none dare speak of, is diversity of thought and ideas.

        It sounds like you are in favour of a diversity of ideas.

        But why do we have to always get a story like this from the most insanely Progressive source possible?

        It sounds like you'd rather not hear progressive ideas on this site.

        I think I get it: you like diversity, so long as it happens somewhere else.

        • (Score: 1, Offtopic) by jmorris on Friday April 07 2017, @03:26AM (4 children)

          by jmorris (4844) on Friday April 07 2017, @03:26AM (#490025)

          It sounds like you'd rather not hear progressive ideas on this site.

          Read back up thread and try to keep up. The bitching is about the one sided nature of it here and in anywhere that isn't explicitly right-wing, the bias that the Proggie viewpoint isn't just the correct one, but that it is the only viewpoint. "Fair and Balanced" is railed against as horrible when FNC uses it as a tagline for exactly that reason, it implies there is more than one position that it is legit to hold. Some try to argue that they aren't in fact "fair" or "balanced" but that isn't what really pushes the proggie types to lose their shit, it is the heresy that there is a different point of view that isn't so "out there" it can and should be ignored.

          It sounds like you are in favour of a diversity of ideas.

          How else does the Truth get sifted out? You should visit the Alt-Right and NRx worlds sometime. Lots of loud arguments about all sorts of topics between factions the normies don't even know exist and Progs are terrified if they learn such things exist and are spoken of and try to shut it all down. But it is the only way to get anywhere, ya gotta argue it out.

          Prog thoughts though, they won't last very long if they ever have to actually defend them without the massive advantage of control of the playfield and the Internet is quickly destroying Prog control of the media Narrative and will, Kek willing, wreck the Universities which are the source of the infection. Can you imagine the devastation one of the Alt-Right's mental stalwarts could unleash in a debate against the university types on Blue Team on a level debate stage? Only the really old Progs like Chomsky even remember when opposition was a threat to be avoided. For now that has to remain imaginary, but the times are changing. Hell, even some of the mainstream Right's top minds could send the best the left has to their safe space.

          To illustrate, imagine Al Gore (of the new crappy movie) vs Mark Steyn in a PPV throwdown over AGW. It would be epic, but it won't happen because Gore would never be stupid enough to show up. Just appearing would be an admission there IS another side to the argument worthy of debate plus he is just smart enough to realize he would destroy his reputation and set back his whole side if he somehow got into such a debate. Why do think such things -never- happen? If not that matchup, why no possible matchup anywhere but the shouting head sound bite nonsense of cable news? It isn't because people on my side are afraid to seriously debate that or any other topic.

          Debate doesn't happen because your side only has talking points and emotional button pushing and can't actually debate your positions. The few actual positions the Left has they fear to speak in public since they know widespread knowledge of them would get them all drowned in a river of their own blood. I have seen it myself for years, here, the "other" place and across the Internet.

          • (Score: 1, Offtopic) by butthurt on Friday April 07 2017, @05:08AM (2 children)

            by butthurt (6141) on Friday April 07 2017, @05:08AM (#490089) Journal

            > Read back up thread and try to keep up. The bitching is about the one sided nature of it here and in anywhere that isn't explicitly right-wing, the bias that the Proggie viewpoint isn't just the correct one, but that it is the only viewpoint.

            I did read it, and didn't see anyone commenting that his view-point is the only one that exists. I wonder where you saw that. You seem to be saying that many people have that belief. I'd be interested in seeing an example.

            > "Fair and Balanced" is railed against as horrible when FNC uses it as a tagline for exactly that reason, it implies there is more than one position that it is legit to hold.

            I've not heard Fox News criticised for being fair or balanced. I have heard it criticised for being biased. It's been suggested that the tag line is meant ironically.

            http://www.skeptical-science.com/politics/fox-news-fair-balanced/ [skeptical-science.com]

            > You should visit the Alt-Right and NRx worlds sometime.

            I had to look up NRx:

            The alt-right can be seen as a political movement; neoreaction, which adherents refer to as NRx, is a philosophy. At the core of that philosophy is a rejection of democracy and an embrace of autocratic rule.

            -- https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/behind-the-internets-dark-anti-democracy-movement/516243/ [theatlantic.com]

            If that's accurate, I don't think NRx is for me, but thanks for the tip.

            • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Friday April 07 2017, @05:47AM (1 child)

              by jmorris (4844) on Friday April 07 2017, @05:47AM (#490100)

              I wonder where you saw that.

              Articles cut/pasted form explicitly socialist organizations get posted without a raised eyebrow. A submission of a story from Breitbart would most likely simply be ignored and would attract flamage from a lot more users than a fringe like me. Please don't insult everyone's intelligence by disputing this.

              If that's accurate, I don't think NRx is for me, but thanks for the tip.

              The Atlantic. That is where you go to find out about it. Lemme guess, you would take Alex Jones as gospel on Progressivism, or Glenn Beck as the authority on Woodrow (I hate that guy) Wilson[1]. Riight. Kinda making my point aren't we that there is only one legitimate side to a Proggie?

              Anyway, NRx can be summed up with a few observations that aren't really debatable and the rest is debate about the logical consequences that fall from them:

              1. Democracy is a horrible thing, and all students of political philosophy agree on this point. It brings destruction to any society adopting it.

              2. The American Founding Fathers believed their idea for a Constitutional Republic would prevent Democracy from being possible, and thus it was deemed safe.

              3. It failed, as did every other variation that has been attempted since.

              NRx is taking those facts and going further, asking whether the whole Enlightement was a bad idea (the Dark Enlightenment fork) or at minimum needs a rethink from first principles (NRx in general). From there the joke goes that our problem is being in a state of Kinglessness. Most understand the maxim that a good king is about the best government possible but the problem is picking good kings with better odds than blind chance. From there the debate goes in various directions. A LOT of directions.

              Then there are the proposed solutions, and again they are legion. Moldbug's Neocameralism, for example, is in my humble opinion a hot load of crap. At least it is better than just waiting for the Singularity to solve all our problems. But they are at least willing to ask the right questions, which is why it is interesting. So I'd like to challenge you to read a bit of it and decide for yourself whether there is more intellectual activity there vs the latest vile swill about Intersectionality your side currently finds to be the most pressing issue facing the world.

              [1] You probably don't get the joke there. Beck can't speak President Wilson's name without the "I hate that guy" in the name or right after. Which is of course a perfectly reasonable thing to say if you know anything of Wilson's evil.

              • (Score: 3, Insightful) by butthurt on Friday April 07 2017, @07:28AM

                by butthurt (6141) on Friday April 07 2017, @07:28AM (#490114) Journal

                > Articles cut/pasted form explicitly socialist organizations get posted without a raised eyebrow. A submission of a story from Breitbart would most likely simply be ignored and would attract flamage from a lot more users than a fringe like me. Please don't insult everyone's intelligence by disputing this.

                I searched for "world socialist web site":

                /search.pl?tid=&query=world+socialist+web+site&author=&sort=1&op=stories [soylentnews.org]

                ...and at the first result there's someone complaining about the source.

                And a minor bitch: Can we stop with the shoutouts to the World Socialist? Get the same damned story off AP.com and raise the level of class around here, makes it look like a skeevy kostard site full of loons.

                -- /comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=11713&cid=291252#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]

                I searched for "breitbart":

                /search.pl?tid=&query=breitbart&author=&sort=1&op=stories [soylentnews.org]

                At the first result that's sourced only from Breitbart News, someone's complaining about the source:

                Hovers over link. Sees Breit Bart. *facepalms*

                That's as laughable as linking to The Daily Mail.

                -- /comments.pl?noupdate=1&sid=9402&cid=233858#commentwrap [soylentnews.org]

                > The Atlantic. That is where you go to find out about it. Lemme guess, you would take Alex Jones as gospel on Progressivism [...]

                I went to a search engine, and that was the first pertinent result. You're implying that The Atlantic cannot be trusted on the topic.

                https://duckduckgo.com/html/?q=NRx [duckduckgo.com]

                Had I taken it as gospel, I wouldn't have written "if that's accurate."

                > [According to neoreactionaries] Democracy is a horrible thing [...] a good king is about the best government possible [...]

                I see a congruence, at least at a simplistic level, between what you wrote and what was written in The Atlantic. Thanks for trying to teach me about this.

                > Kinda making my point aren't we that there is only one legitimate side to a Proggie?

                I invited you to give me an example of where you'd seen that; you've chosen to use me as your example. You're telling me I'm closed-minded. Of course, you're entitled to your opinion, and of course I don't prefer to think of myself in that way. I should think that if the closed-minded people you speak of were commonplace, you might have offered a less awkward example.

                > [...] if you know anything of Wilson's evil.

                I had heard he had a stroke while he was president, after which his wife performed many of the tasks of the office. But I just looked it up, and found something saying that he had a series of strokes, the first in 1896. I would hesitate to describe as "evil" someone who had so much damage to his brain. Such a judgment about Ms. Wilson's actions might be more suitable.

                http://ahsl.arizona.edu/about/exhibits/presidents/wilson [arizona.edu]

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 07 2017, @07:17AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 07 2017, @07:17AM (#490112)

            [begin yet another coded message] Special SJW Task Force, jmorris Division, interim update. jmorris has gone off the deep end. We have no idea how to moderate.

            The few actual positions the Left has they fear to speak in public since they know widespread knowledge of them would get them all drowned in a river of their own blood.

            Once the right-wing nut-jobs start talking "rivers of blood", the only solution is to call in the Wet Squad. We have the geo-co-ordinates. So long, jmorris. It was good to track you. [end encoded message: Wet Squad request initiated]

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 07 2017, @03:49AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 07 2017, @03:49AM (#490048)

        [begin coded message] Special SJW Attack Squad, jmorris division, tactical report. The subject seems to be experiencing a period of contraction. Retreating into core beliefs, regardless of the evidence of reality. Exampla gratia:

        Because they know they would lose most arguments on the merits they seek to forbid the idea there is even an argument possible;

        jmorris's understanding of arguments is receding; the loss of rational function can only mean one thing. We suggest attempts be made to get jmorris to shut the f*** up, until this episode has passed. Await confirmation of such action. Long live Bernie!! [end coded message]

    • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday April 07 2017, @06:17PM

      by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday April 07 2017, @06:17PM (#490409) Journal

      And yet the same people shouting this biased story up scream like banshees when I link a Breitbart, Yiannopoulos, or otherwise biased the other direction link.

      Are we?

      one [soylentnews.org]
      two [soylentnews.org]

      (Note the timestamps)

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 06 2017, @11:16PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 06 2017, @11:16PM (#489921)

    How much digging did somebody have to do to find an outlet reporting such a suicidal policy as a good thing?

    I guess the Easter Island Ancestry Society website hasn't gotten around to writing their take on it yet.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 06 2017, @11:57PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 06 2017, @11:57PM (#489951)

      It isn't news until Trump tweets about reading it on Brietbart.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 07 2017, @03:52AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 07 2017, @03:52AM (#490054)

        If there is fake news on Brietburt, and Trumpf does not Tweet it, does it make a sound? A philosophical question.

  • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Friday April 07 2017, @12:36AM

    by Gaaark (41) on Friday April 07 2017, @12:36AM (#489968) Journal

    Your page at beau.org led me down the path to having to read about and watch again.... BABYLON 5!

    Urgh... Now i have to finish Doctor Who (up to Tom Baker), watch The Godfather 3, and now THIS!!!

    Shit... Just thought about Red Dwarf. Sigh... Too little time!

    --
    --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
  • (Score: 1) by Gault.Drakkor on Friday April 07 2017, @01:53AM (2 children)

    by Gault.Drakkor (1079) on Friday April 07 2017, @01:53AM (#489990)

    It is a success El Salvador can determine this project will cost them more then they will gain. Shutting down all projects seems a bit short sighted. If It will cost them more then they will gain do you believe they should go ahead? All development is good?

    Mines are capital intensive. Most of that capital is not owned locally so most of the return on investment won't be going to locals. The local infrastructure for most mines is single purpose, difficult to re-purpose. Generally concentrate is shipped elsewhere for processing. So there is minimal long run increase in industrial capital. There will be jobs, but likely mostly lower skilled for the locals, unlikely to be upper management.

    So the most benefit they will see is some taxes and some jobs for a short(10-20 years). Cost: bad water and one less ore deposit. El Salvador seems to believe they won't get their monies worth. I certainly don't have all the numbers, but I don't believe it is clearly a good project for El Salvador.

    • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Friday April 07 2017, @02:23AM (1 child)

      by jmorris (4844) on Friday April 07 2017, @02:23AM (#489999)

      They banned ALL metal mining. If it is a good idea for them to do that it is a good idea for everyone else, right? Logically that follows, doesn't it? If everybody did it we would have 90% population losses (or a reversal of the policy, much more likely) in a decade or so, hence my use of the word suicidal.

      Note that _gewg and his Commie friends are applauding this action. Which confirms something I say fairly often, that the Proggies are insane (in the strict technical sense of the word) and hate Humanity and all our works, starting with themselves.

      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Friday April 07 2017, @05:02AM

        by Scruffy Beard 2 (6030) on Friday April 07 2017, @05:02AM (#490087)

        If they ban all mining the multinational corporations can't sue them in the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes over discriminatory practices.

        If a local company puts forward a viable business plan, the law can be changed again.