Environment and freedom defined by outsiders is wrong.
Deforestation or nuclear proliferation decisions lie in the hands of those citizens.
Many environmental activism does more to it's cause than that the country itself.
The major push to per-serve lands i.e. So. America etc. are outsiders need for paradise after their own lands were lost.
I'm no enviromentist. I'm individualist and seeing successful clothing manufacturers controlling lands at bargain prices bothers Me.
Eric,
I see your point. It's kind of like the people who oppose development to stop loss of "open space" in an area, after they've already got their homes with views of the rolling countryside. But does the Amazon rain forest "belong" to someone living in Rio de Janeiro any more than to someone living in Miami? Should "insider" or "outsider" status be based on the accidental circumstances of one's birth? Where's the justice in that?
Love & liberty,
<<< starchild >>>