This proposal advocates for a significant paradigm change in how we perceive, understand, and manage the roots of global warming. That shift is essentially moving away from the present general basic beliefs of what is considered Sovereignty in our days, that is, “the supreme power or authority of each country within their official boundaries admitted by the rest of the countries of the world”.
We find very damaging the claim “within their official boundaries”. Why?, because it allows countries to do, environmentally speaking, whatever they want, whatever they choose, if it is “within their official boundaries “. It is a claim universally accepted in Constitutions of the world. That unlimited power is wrong. It challenges that the environment Is a shared global resource that transcends countries’ political boundaries and that is why we introduce and propose ENVIRONMENTAL SOVEREIGNTY which is totally divorced from the reigning notion of Sovereignty as far as the environment is concerned. ENVIRONMENTAL SOVEREIGNTY means that the environment is universal and not politically parceled or divided, proportionally or not amongst countries of the world. We find that the present division of the environment amongst countries of the world could well be the major cause of global warming.
However, countries do not accept the assertion that “the environment is a shared global resource that transcends national boundaries. On the contrary, countries take for granted that, within its borders, the environment is a rightfully earned and inherited property and therefore countries have an absolute free hand to do environmentally whatever they wish within those borders, which countries call “SOVEREIGNTY”. It is Sovereignty all right, but it is BAD SOVEREIGNTY.
In sum….
1) Countries policies cannot be a dominant factor reigning above the Environment. THE ENVIRONMENT is beyond not only of what countries presently call SOVEREIGNTY but also above their Judicial, Legislative and Administrative powers, a “Power above Powers”.
2) Political authoritarianism and lack of or improper enforcement of pro-environment laws is a very damaging factor that significantly impacts the environment.
3) Worldwide environmental degradation will continue until the present concept of SOVEREIGNTY is changed and the world accepts that there are two kinds of sovereignty in its place: GOOD SOVEREINTY or BAD SOVEREIGNTY. The first respects the environment as a power above all powers. The second, does not.
4) What does this all mean:
1) Human presence anywhere in the world should not be indifferent to the environment. When it is in a positive way, we call it GOOD SOVEREIGNTY. If it is in a negative way, we call it BAD SOVEREIGNTYY
2) Caring for the environment is not only an obligation but also an art.
3) The environment has been and will be considered always the backbone of any country, city of community and as such it most respected and cared for accordingly.
What do we propose?
Eradicate BAD SOVEREIGNTY from the world and replace it with GOOD SOVEREIGNTY, which prioritize global environmental interest above all other interest. Highlighting the interconnectedness of environmental health with global well-being is a thought-provoking argument. Quite easy to say, almost impossible to achieve, but it can be done, and must be done, the sooner the better. Constitution must therefore be changed accordingly. It will take time and resources, but we don’t see any other way out if we want a world for future generations. Big International Money will oppose it of course, just as political interests and arrogance, ignorance, fear, and indifference, but facts are facts: NATURE’S GENEROSITY IS NOT FOREVER.
So, being a published writer (in Spanish), I decided to change tactics to be heard, hopefully. A screen play idea came to my mind. To convey the message through a screenplay set in Australia is innovative and has the potential to reach a wide audience, especially when considering the power of storytelling in raising awareness and inspiring action. I prepared a screenplay on the matter based in Australia. I find a creative and engaging way to communicate my ideas to a wider audience. As a writer, I know that using storytelling to convey complex concepts can be incredibly effective, especially when addressing issues as urgent, complex, and manifold as environmental conservation. Hopefully, it may catch a producer’s eye or Leonardo Di Capri’s interest as the official UN representative for the environment, and we can take it to the screen for worldwide view and understanding. I will gladly send some chapters of the play, free, upon request to SOBERANIA.AMBIENTAL.GLOBAL@GMAIL.COM.
This is my way of reaching out directly and I do hope I will find followers in this journey. Please help me spread the word and share it. Thank you.
ENVIRONMENTAL SOVEREIGNTY
GOOD and BAD SOVEREIGNTY
This proposal advocates for a significant paradigm change in how we perceive, understand, and manage the roots of global warming. That shift is essentially moving away from the present general basic beliefs of what is considered Sovereignty in our days, that is, “the supreme power or authority of each country within their official boundaries admitted by the rest of the countries of the world”.
We find very damaging the claim “within their official boundaries”. Why?, because it allows countries to do, environmentally speaking, whatever they want, whatever they choose, if it is “within their official boundaries “. It is a claim universally accepted in Constitutions of the world. That unlimited power is wrong. It challenges that the environment Is a shared global resource that transcends countries’ political boundaries and that is why we introduce and propose ENVIRONMENTAL SOVEREIGNTY which is totally divorced from the reigning notion of Sovereignty as far as the environment is concerned. ENVIRONMENTAL SOVEREIGNTY means that the environment is universal and not politically parceled or divided, proportionally or not amongst countries of the world. We find that the present division of the environment amongst countries of the world could well be the major cause of global warming.
However, countries do not accept the assertion that “the environment is a shared global resource that transcends national boundaries. On the contrary, countries take for granted that, within its borders, the environment is a rightfully earned and inherited property and therefore countries have an absolute free hand to do environmentally whatever they wish within those borders, which countries call “SOVEREIGNTY”. It is Sovereignty all right, but it is BAD SOVEREIGNTY.
In sum….
1) Countries policies cannot be a dominant factor reigning above the Environment. THE ENVIRONMENT is beyond not only of what countries presently call SOVEREIGNTY but also above their Judicial, Legislative and Administrative powers, a “Power above Powers”.
2) Political authoritarianism and lack of or improper enforcement of pro-environment laws is a very damaging factor that significantly impacts the environment.
3) Worldwide environmental degradation will continue until the present concept of SOVEREIGNTY is changed and the world accepts that there are two kinds of sovereignty in its place: GOOD SOVEREINTY or BAD SOVEREIGNTY. The first respects the environment as a power above all powers. The second, does not.
4) What does this all mean:
1) Human presence anywhere in the world should not be indifferent to the environment. When it is in a positive way, we call it GOOD SOVEREIGNTY. If it is in a negative way, we call it BAD SOVEREIGNTYY
2) Caring for the environment is not only an obligation but also an art.
3) The environment has been and will be considered always the backbone of any country, city of community and as such it most respected and cared for accordingly.
What do we propose?
Eradicate BAD SOVEREIGNTY from the world and replace it with GOOD SOVEREIGNTY, which prioritize global environmental interest above all other interest. Highlighting the interconnectedness of environmental health with global well-being is a thought-provoking argument. Quite easy to say, almost impossible to achieve, but it can be done, and must be done, the sooner the better. Constitution must therefore be changed accordingly. It will take time and resources, but we don’t see any other way out if we want a world for future generations. Big International Money will oppose it of course, just as political interests and arrogance, ignorance, fear, and indifference, but facts are facts: NATURE’S GENEROSITY IS NOT FOREVER.
So, being a published writer (in Spanish), I decided to change tactics to be heard, hopefully. A screen play idea came to my mind. To convey the message through a screenplay set in Australia is innovative and has the potential to reach a wide audience, especially when considering the power of storytelling in raising awareness and inspiring action. I prepared a screenplay on the matter based in Australia. I find a creative and engaging way to communicate my ideas to a wider audience. As a writer, I know that using storytelling to convey complex concepts can be incredibly effective, especially when addressing issues as urgent, complex, and manifold as environmental conservation. Hopefully, it may catch a producer’s eye or Leonardo Di Capri’s interest as the official UN representative for the environment, and we can take it to the screen for worldwide view and understanding. I will gladly send some chapters of the play, free, upon request to SOBERANIA.AMBIENTAL.GLOBAL@GMAIL.COM.
This is my way of reaching out directly and I do hope I will find followers in this journey. Please help me spread the word and share it. Thank you.
Jorge Partidas A
jorgepartidas@gmail.com
Venezuela