Download (MP4 63MB)
Transcribe / Translate
Last week the supposed defenders of the environment, A.K.A. the Environmental Non Governmental Organizations or E.N.G.O.s, cut a “deal” with timber industries to protect a large chunk of the boreal forest. On the surface this agreement looks good, but the entire deal was not published, only an abridged version was made available online. Some of the groups that took part of this deal are Greenpeace, the David Suzuki Foundation and Forest Ethics.
The one aspect of this “accomplishment” that they are not publicizing is that they struck it without consulting with the First Nations, the original human inhabitants of those lands.
As we face increasingly catastrophic environmental destruction, it is imperative that we seek guidance from those who “managed” the environment sustainably for over 10,000 years.
This short piece from “END:CIV” is a visual interpretation of Derrick Jensen’s Second Premise from ENDGAME:
Traditional communities do not often voluntarily give up or sell the resources on which their communities are based until their communities have been destroyed. They also do not willingly allow their landbases to be damaged so that other resources—gold, oil, and so on—can be extracted. It follows that those who want the resources will do what they can to destroy traditional communities.
Music by stig inge oy. and CJ Boyd
Great vid. I do question the notion about whether or not the Europeans had superior “firepower” when they invaded. Their invasion was backed by the spread of their diseases (to which they had a relative immunity) and their shockingly aggressive and Machiavellian nature which must have completely caught the first peoples by utter surprise. Beyond that though… the quick-firing bow and arrow, the spear, and simply fit bodies were a vastly superior weapon to the single-shot musket. If the first peoples were more violently inclined, at the initial contact periods, the Europeans would have easily been done away with — due to the potential for guerrilla warfare and the aforementioned militaristic advantages. As it is, what actually happened, was that the least healthy people in the world (with the shortest life expectancies) invaded and brought their diseases to, quite arguably, the healthiest people on the planet.
Thank you Derrick for your 2nd premise, thank you Franklin for a great video.
You do realize that the natives on the east coast regularly burnt large tracks of forest in order to encourage the growth of forests they wanted, flattened the tops of hog’s back hills over generations to grow corn on them, and circled hunted large game within their own territory to increase the mast crop they could collect while keeping a living population of large game only a day or two away by foot travel. When 95% of the natives died due to small pox the forest grew back up and game increased in number.
Really just look at the middens in Pennsylvania.
1300=no passenger pigeons, no elk
1800=crapload of passenger pigeons, some elk
1900=no passenger pigeons, no elk
You are all holding on to this Noble Savage ideal that never existed, frankly its an insult to the natives. They had grand empires like the Sioux Confederation. Don’t read third had accounts of the natives written in the 1800s. Read the translations of the original Sioux documents or the accounts of the very first explorers who claimed that the eastern seaboard was densely populated and not one stream didn’t have a net strung across it.