Enslaving and impoverishing nature is no more tolerable than enslaving humans

Evidence

If this nation has a long way to go before all of our people are truly created equally without regard to race, religion, or national origin, it has even farther to go before achieving anything that remotely resembles equal treatment for other creatures who called this land home before humans ever set foot upon it… While the species themselves—fish, fowl, game, and the habitat they live in—have given us unparalleled wealth, they live crippled in their ability to persist and in conditions of captive squalor… This enslavement and impoverishment of nature is no more tolerable or sensible than enslavement and impoverishment of other human beings. — Winona LaDuke, All Our Relations, 72

Categorization

  • XREF: Ted Strong’s framing of species impoverishment as enslavement parallels settler-colonial and ecofeminist critiques of nature commodification — a direct bridge to the Eco-Justice and Reading the Landscape courses. — connects to: Who controls land destiny is a live question about wealth versus prayer throughout society — Winona LaDuke, All Our Relations: Native Struggles for…, 68; Animist vitalism functioned as an ethic restraining exploitation of nature — Carolyn Merchant, The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology,…, 158; Mechanism stripped away the organic view’s ethical restraints on nature exploitation — Carolyn Merchant, The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology,…, 480 (+3 more)
  • SEED: Strong’s extension of the word ‘enslavement’ from human to other-than-human life is a strong rhetorical scaffold for an essay on why environmental harm is a justice issue on the same moral register as human rights.

Broader Connections