I'd rather go to the bar with this.
Because of the current hearing and because the topic has been raised here in our group over the last few days I would like to express here my personal opinion and view on this specific topic for the last time. After that I will leave it alone because I have often gone into it and don't want to tire you out. It's just that this topic became part of my special personally task for me and our community a few years ago. We asked ourselves where the problems could be. Then I started to drill down into the situation on the ground. And one part was/is:
Perhaps the Sami have overdone it a bit with their uncompromising attitude. These Swedes who are also Sami want an ecological Sweden, who doesn't?!
Nevertheless, they are part of the Swedish community and can use everything this country has to offer just like the other Swedes. Moreover, they have justified and perfectly understandable rights that the other Swedes do not have. My point is that no one wants to undermine their status, no one wants to take anything away from them, but they are also part of the ecological community of the Swedish nation, which is trying much harder to manage the green transition than other countries. This includes, for example, green energy and last year there was the remarkable news that in 2021 78% of all applications for wind power projects were rejected. No one wants them there, and no one wants power lines. So they are not alone. But they may have made a part of the rest of Swedish society a little tired of not understanding this with their argumentation. Hardliners argue that this green transformation is not necessary because they are fine with what they have and and with where the footprint is. They don't need new industry eco-projects like wind power on ~their land. These are only for the energy hunger of the others. But they are part of these others and use all the advantages that these others - at the same time their own community - offers them. To speak of eco-colonialism and genocide in relation to wind power is unfair and makes others tired of listening, I imagine. Everyone but lunatics understands their role in society and that is has to be protected. But perhaps less understands their uncompromising argumentation or stance.
Do they want to be part of the Swedish people or just be for themselves? Some may find cherry picking unfair. And it's not just about products that they use like everyone else in their country.
I think it's absolutely right to better protect the indigenous people of this world, everywhere. Above all, we Europeans owe this to the indigenous people. Canada is very advanced here. I heard from you Aussis that on the last holiday, Australia Day, there was no street parade out of respect for your problematic history and respect for the role of the indigenous people. And that some companies have offered their employees to go to work on the AD in exchange for another day off.
But here, how is the Swedish community going to get it right when one part isn't willing to compromise? Compromises are part of every community, including the own family. I think that might also blunt some people (in key positions).
_______________
I would also like to note that they represent the red marking of the area for the resource of national interest in such a way that it blocks the way to Vittangi like a bulwark that cannot be passed. I can imagine that they do this to better illustrate the drama of the situation for them. That may have its effect on like-minded people. But also in a rational court? They pretend that Talga would build a wall around their area from one river to the other. It's about trade-offs and compromises.
________________
But there is also another gap in the logic. All countries are just looking at how they can reduce their emissions figures, a simple calculation. Everything that takes place elsewhere is not included in your own account. I'm also thinking about compensatory payments. If I'm a buyer and the emissions from production are incurred elsewhere then I am a ~victim myself, although I'm a consumer. So far, this hasn't been taken into account in the debates.
So reducing global emissions with a project would not reduce emissions in the country itself because it has to be built. Every factory has a footprint and that is big. In this logic and calculation, it doesn't matter how much emissions this factory saves worldwide. First of all it is more. At least that's how some nature conservation organizations interpret it.
________________
I'm done and need spam and eggs first.
