OSLO (Reuters) - Saying the planet is at risk from human activity, Kenyan environmentalist Wangari Maathai urged democratic reforms and an end to corporate greed when she collected the Nobel Peace Prize on Friday.

Maathai, Kenya's deputy environment minister and the first African woman to win the Peace Prize, said sweeping changes were needed to restore a "world of beauty and wonder" by overcoming challenges ranging from AIDS to climate instability.

"Activities that devastate the environment and societies continue unabated," Maathai, founder of a campaign to plant 30 million trees across Africa to slow deforestation, said in an acceptance speech at the ceremony in Oslo City Hall.

"Today we are faced with a challenge that calls for a shift in our thinking, so that humanity stops threatening its life-support system," Maathai, 64, told an audience of about 1,000 people including Norway's King Harald and Queen Sonja.

"I call on leaders, especially in Africa, to expand democratic space and build fair and just societies," she said.

"Further, industry and global institutions must appreciate that ensuring economic justice, equity and ecological integrity are of greater value than profits at any cost," she said.

:lol:
Imagine there's no incentives

UNICEF: More than One Billion Children Affected by Poverty, War and AIDS

Dec 10, 2004 Washington

The United Nations children's fund says that more than half the world's children are suffering the effects of poverty, war and HIV/AIDS, denying them a healthy and safe childhood. In its annual report on The State of the World's Children released Thursday, the United Nations International Children's Fund (UNICEF) says more than 1 billion children growing up hungry and unhealthy and that governments are failing to protect them.

In the report, entitled 'Children Under Threat', UNICEF said that governments are not living up to the principles outlined in the 1989 Convention of the Rights of the Child.

"Ladies and Gentlemen, childhood is under threat. Not for mysterious reasons that strain our imaginations, but because of deliberate choices made by governments and others in power. Poverty doesn't persist because of nothing. War doesn't emerge from nowhere. HIV/AIDS doesn't spread by choice of its own. These are our choices," said executive director, Carol Bellamy.

Incentives to do what? The right thing?

I thought virtue was supposed to be its own reward.

No?

We can't be totally motivated by self-interest.... CAN we?

And how does THIS grab you?

The results of the study show:

* One child of every three lives in a dwelling with more than five people per room, or with a mud floor.

* Nearly 20% of the world’s children do not have safe water sources or have more than a 15-minute walk to water.

* Over 15% of children under five in the developing world are severely malnourished. In South Asia alone, more than 90 million children go hungry every day.

* 134 million children between the ages of 7 to 18 have never been to school.

* Girls are more likely to go without schooling than boys. In the Middle East and North Africa, in particular, girls are three times more likely than boys to have never attended to school.

http://www.unicef.org/media/media_15082.html




Think about that while you're stuffing your face at lunch today.

Its an issue I've had with people ... communism is made to look bad in order to make other systems look good. It doesn't focus on the problems that exist in the other system at all, just shows where one system is better than the other. Thats why I never liked the song 'Imagine' to begin with.

Its an issue I've had with people ... communism is made to look bad in order to make other systems look good. It doesn't focus on the problems that exist in the other system at all, just shows where one system is better than the other. Thats why I never liked the song 'Imagine' to begin with.

I'll do that, while you're thinking about what it was that caused these conditions in those countries in the first place.

No, baba, communism is bad in and of itself. It completely ignores the individual for the sake of the elusive public good.

I have a pretty good idea what's caused them. After about a century of capitalism, the world clearly isn't even one step closer to sharing the wealth.

Malthus pretty much proved the capitalism was doomed to failure a very long time ago. What you are seeing now, I think, are the final stages.

So much for "trickle-down" economics. That old chestnut NEVER works.

And another thing: Why the hell should wealth be inherited? That may have worked during the age of feudalism... but not any more. In this age of rapidly-dwindling resources, all things should be held in common, in the interests of fairness.

What other choice is there?

No, baba, communism is bad in and of itself. It completely ignores the individual for the sake of the elusive public good.

Well, my friend... you must admit that organized religion has been responsible for a LOT of death and destruction in this wonderful world of ours... not to mention arbitrary boundaries that define countries.

Besides, as any scientist can tell you, no one country can claim ownership of the global water supply. That WOULD be a crime against humanity. And believe it or not, if the film THE CORPORATION is to be believed, the world's water supply is most definitely being "bought up" by corporate interests. This will lead, I suspect, to the ultimate revolution.... when the people WILL be stringing up the CEOs along Wall St with piano wire.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few... or the one.

Take the Ukrainian elections, for example.

The public good is not always so "elusive."

Did i say it wasn't?? I just said that trying to make one thing look good by focusing on the bad of another system is a flawed way of looking at things .. I said no more.

What I'm saying is that there is nothing wrong with criticizing communism. Defending other systems by pointing out "communism is worse" is not valid, of course, but communism is not "made to look bad". It's just bad, no matter how you slice it.

Yeah but Krem, I think you're saying that coming from that angle that government policy shouldn't regulate it in the first place. Since I think it should (frankly, I don't necessarily trust some CEO of a lumber company or a tennery to do the right thing) be regulated, then yes, their should be input from envirnmentalists in building policy. Their should be input in from both sides as to how to go about creating sustainable industry both enrinmentally and fiscally. So, while I agree with you that Capitalism and Envirnmentalism aren't necessarily anagonistic tendencies, I agree with Archie that it needs to be a process that draws on "we" or, federal guidance. I'm not leaving it up to industrial and manufacturing giants. They can provide themselves with top quality medical treatment when we all develop cancer from their exploits.

Here's a hint for you: the countries that are faced with these conditions have never seen capitalism.

If you can attribute the damage done to your lungs to a company/companies, you can sue them for the damages. There is no need for the government to involve itself in the regulating process.

Besides, the government is not likely to act in your interests in the first place. How many times have we heard the excuse that somethinng is "vital to the national interests" to shield the corporations from the potentially damaging regulations?

Virtually the entire African continent is in serious jeopardy. Many of the these countries have been in ruins since the days of The Great White Father. Colonialism was one of the many malevolent manifestations of Capitalism. It is clearly the intention of Dubya and the Bush League to revive the age of Colonialism and impose THEIR will upon the rest of the world.

All systems of government are inherently evil, and as Karl Marx explained, MUST eventually "wither away," as a fully co-operative society evolves. When YOUR survival depends on the prosperity of your community, then you will willingly and enthusiastically support the community in all possible ways.

Oh, and BTW: What do you think Uncle Sam does when he needs young men to fight his wars. He pretty much REQUIRES that they enlist, so you see, there really isn't any difference between East and West in that respect.

And another thing: ironically, China has become a Capitalist's dream come true, as it supplies the cheapest labour of the world with the fullest blessing and strongest support of the State. (And like the USA, China has a gov't that can never be voted out of office.)