Common Sense Guerrylla Laws for a Sustainable Commons
Guerrylla Law -- or Yshmael CommonSism (Common Sense Guerrylla Laws for a Sustainable Commons) -- is inspired by -- among others -- the Taker vs. Leaver ideas of the gorrilla Ishmael, in Quinn's: Ishmael and My Ishmael; and the Tragedy of the Commons ideas, as expressed by Garrett Hardin.
CommonSism Guerrylla Laws regulate human procreation and resource utilization behaviour, by means of legally defining the procreation and consumption difference, and consequent related Sustainable Rights, between a Leaver and a Taker, to ensure sustainability; to implement an international CommonSism social contract, which requires all the worlds cultures, religions and races to procreate and consume below carrying capacity limits (be Leavers) and to exterminate those who refuse to breed and consume below carrying capacity limits (Takers) from the genepool.
CommonSism asserts that a majority of society's problems - crime, violence, unemployment, poverty, inflation, food shortages, political instability, vanishing species, garbage and pollution urban sprawl, traffic jams, toxic waste, energy and non-renewable resources (NNR) depletion and scarcity are symptoms of Ecological Overshoot, resulting from the Consumptionist Left and Right Wing's war against nature, and the failures of Anthropocentric Jurisprudence.
Ecological Overshoot is a consequence of all other ideologies and their adherents failure to legally (a) define the difference between sustainable and unsustainable procreation and consumption behaviour; and (b) provide legal rights to sustainable practices, and legal penalties to unsustainable individuals, corporations and organisations.
These Guerrylla Laws must (A) simply and very specifically clarify the difference between the consumption and procreation behaviour of a Sustainable Leaver (Eco-Innocent) vs an Unsustainable Taker (Scarcity Combatant); (B) be used in courts to (a) provide legal rights and socio-political rewards of recognition to Sustainable Leaver's for their Heroic lifestyle choices and practices; (b) confront Taker Scarcity Combatants of their Breeding / Consumption combatant behaviours aggravation of Scarcity induced socio-economic problems, by means of aggravated (to the point of genepool extermination) legal penalties, in accordance to their 'Taker Scarcity Combatant' status.
Ind:Civ:F(x) world war against nature: Clugston, C (2012): Scarcity: Humanity’s Final Chapter (Booklocker.com Inc); Jensen, Derrick: Endgame: The Problem of Civilization; Jensen, Derrick: End:Civ: Resist or Die (documentary); Jensen D, Keith L, McBay A: Deep Green Resistance: Decisive Ecological Warfare; Kaczynski Theodore: Technological Slavery: The Collected Writings of Theodore J. Kaczynski, a.k.a. "The Unabomber" (2010); Linkola, P (2009): Can Life Prevail? A Radical Approach to the Environmental Crisis (Integral Tradition Publishing); Unabomber: The Unabomber Manifesto: Industrial Society and its Future (2008); Zerzan, John: Against Civilization: Readings and Reflections (2005); Zerzan, John: Running on Emptiness: The Pathology of Civilization (2008); Zerzan, John: Twilight of the Machines (2008)
Sustainability: Carrying Capacity
Sustainability: I=PAT Equation
For activities to be genuinely sustainable it must be possible for them to continue indefinitely.
The impact of humanity on the environment and the demands that people place on the resources available on the planet can be summarised by what is known as the Ehrlich or IPAT equation, I=PAT. I = impact on the environment or demand for resources, P = population size, A = affluence and T = technology.
The two most important conclusions deriving from this relationship are that:
A Sustainable society practices Sustainable Procreation and Sustainable Natural Resource Utilization Behaviour; i.e. all of its citizens consume and procreate below carrying capacity.
Sustainable Natural Resource Utilization Behaviour: Sustainable natural resource utilization behaviour involves the utilization of renewable natural resources—water, cropland, pastureland, forests, and wildlife—exclusively, which can be depleted only at levels less than or equal to the levels at which they are replenished by Nature. The utilization of non-renewable natural resources (NNR's)—fossil fuels, metals, and minerals—at any level, is not sustainable. - Sustainability Defined, Chris Clugston, WakeUpAmerika
Sustainable (Leaver) v Unsustainable (Taker)
An individuals Sustainable (Leaver) or Unsustainable (Taker) Footprint is a result of: (A) Consumption Footprint multiplied by (B) Procreation Factor (Every child increases 20 Child Factor)
”The maximum number of individuals that can be supported sustainably by a given environment is known as its ‘carrying capacity’. For most non-human species, the concept is quite simple. If carrying capacity is exceeded, the population declines because its environment can no longer support the excess numbers. In many situations this can happen very rapidly because excessive demand degrades or even devastates the environment and there is a sudden and catastrophic feedback effect. Such a feedback effect can not only eradicate those numbers of population in excess of the carrying capacity of an environment but under certain circumstances it can cause the near extinction of an entire species.“ - Carrying Capacity, Population Matters
Ecological Footprint / Biocapacity
”The Ecological Footprint (EF) is a measure of the consumption of renewable natural resources by a human population. A country’s EF is the total area of productive land or sea required to produce all the crops, meat, seafood, wood and fibre it consumes, to sustain its energy consumption and to give space for its infrastructure. The EF can be compared with the biologically productive capacity of the land and sea available to that country’s population.“ - Global Footprint Network
The concepts of Ecological Footprint and Biocapacity were developed by the Global Footprint Network and are quantiﬁed as global hectares (gha). They provide a common basis on which to compare the biological capability of the environment to provide food and other essential needs versus the demands placed by human communities on these ecological services. If the ecological footprint of a human population exceeds the biocapacity of its environment,
the situation is unsustainable.
Though the footprinting approach explicitly accounts for different levels of per capita consumption, it doesn’t factor in the biocapacity needed for the preservation of other species -- a clear moral problem that would concern many people and one with signiﬁcant economic consequences for humanity. If capacity for other species is allowed for, we are in a situation of greater overshoot than the ﬁgures suggest.
Every Child increases EcoFootprint by a factor of 20 - Oregon Univ. Study
Family Planning: A Major Environmental Emphasis
7-31-09 | Oregon University | Paul Murtaugh
7-31-09 | Oregon University | Paul Murtaugh
The carbon legacy and greenhouse gas impact of an extra child is almost 20 times more important than some of the other environmentally sensitive practices people might employ their entire lives – things like driving a high mileage car, recycling, or using energy-efficient appliances and light bulbs.
CORVALLIS, Ore. – Some people who are serious about wanting to reduce their “carbon footprint” on the Earth have one choice available to them that may yield a large long-term benefit – have one less child.
A study by statisticians at Oregon State University concluded that in the United States, the carbon legacy and greenhouse gas impact of an extra child is almost 20 times more important than some of the other environmentally sensitive practices people might employ their entire lives – things like driving a high mileage car, recycling, or using energy-efficient appliances and light bulbs.
Guerrylla Law: Taker vs Leaver
Guerrylla Laws define the procreation and consumption behaviour of an individual as an Sustainable Leaver (aka Eco-Innocent) or Unsustainable Taker (aka Scarcity-Combatant), based upon a sustainable consumption bio-capacity of 1 global hectare (gha) (60 % of 1.8 gha) in accordance with the proactive conservation policies of Bhutan; multiplied by an individuals Breeding footprint factor of 20 per child.
Sustainable Footprint Biocapacity: A biocapacity of 1 gha assumes that 40% of land is set aside for other species. 1 gha is 60 % of 1.8 gha, therefore .8 hectares is set aside for other species.
International Biocapacity: In 2006, the average biologically productive area (biocapacity) per person worldwide was approximately 1.8 global hectares (gha) per capita. In 2008, there were ~ 12 billion hectares of biologically productive land and water on Earth. Dividing by the number of people alive in that year (6.7 billion) gives 1.79 global hectares per person. This assumes that no land is set aside for other species that consume the same biological material as humans.
EcoFootprint: The difference between the biocapacity and Ecological Footprint of a region or country. A biocapacity deficit occurs when the Footprint of a population exceeds the biocapacity of the area available to that population. If there is a regional or national biocapacity deficit, it means that the region is importing biocapacity through trade or liquidating regional ecological assets. Global biocapacity deficit cannot be compensated through trade, and is overshoot.
(i) Footprint Network: World Footprint, National Footprints, Finance Footprint, Cities Footprint,Business Footprint, Personal Footprint; (ii) Center for Sustainable Economy: Ecological Footprint quiz, (ii) Earthlab: Carbon Footprint; (iv) Conservation Intn'l: Ecofootprint Quiz.
Bhutan Proactive Conservation: Bhutan is seen as a model for proactive conservation initiatives. The Kingdom has received international acclaim for its commitment to the maintenance of its biodiversity. This is reflected in the decision to maintain at least sixty percent of the land area under forest cover, to designate more than 40% of its territory as national parks, reserves and other protected areas, and most recently to identify a further nine percent of land area as biodiversity corridors linking the protected areas. Environmental conservation has been placed at the core of the nation's development strategy, the middle path. It is not treated as a sector but rather as a set of concerns that must be mainstreamed in Bhutan's overall approach to development planning and to be buttressed by the force of law. - "Parks of Bhutan". Bhutan Trust Fund for Environmental Conservation online. Bhutan Trust Fund.
Sustainable Leaver / Eco-Innocent:
* 0 children, consumption < 20 gha (Intn'l Biocapacity (1 gha) x 20)
* 1 child, consumption < 1 gha (Intn'l biocapacity (1 gha (2007))
Unsustainable Taker / Scarcity-Combatant:
* 0 children, consumption > 20 gha (Intn'l biocapacity (1 gha) x 20)
* 1 child, consumption > 1 gha (Intn'l biocapacity (1 gha (2007))
Child Footprint Factor: Every child increases footprint by a factor of 20 - Oregon Univ. Study