They won

>m-muh diversity!

Oh, you like diversity do you?

The fuck? Why does it suck ass?

Go ahead. I'm actualy curious now. What could you possibly have against the concept of many plants and animals existing.

>People so triggered by the word diversity they're fine with inbred retards killing everything for more money when they're already millionaires anyway

Based retards.

>biodiversity sucks ass

Attached: IMG_0898.jpg (500x285, 26K)

It's one of the most beneficial and least tapped regions on the entire planet for scientific research, it's done more for modern medicine than you could even imagine. And we don't even know what's fucking IN over half of the Amazon rainforest, it's a gold mine of biodiversity. So the idea of stupid farmers trying to destroy it for grazing land is frustrating to say the least.

What

It's worse than that, Bolsonaro is accusing NGOs of starting the fires. This is even stupider than "climate science is all about grants".

Isnt the fucking smoke from the rainforest burning leading to health issues in the surrounding areas?

This is your brain on /pol/, kids.

Attached: 1559663627209.jpg (355x500, 24K)

Believe it or not even beneficial things can become harmful if you fucking set it on fire and let it bellow a hundred thousand tons of smoke and ash into the air.

You can't be this retarded. I refuse to believe it

Attached: DsRq685U4AEmOaj.jpg (1200x1064, 220K)

>People think this unironically
Wish you all counted as a different species

>biodiversity sucks ass
Congratulations. I love this post.

Attached: 55C9FDBB-D176-46BC-A3AB-57F4FFCD8899.jpg (638x965, 92K)

I saw that shit. Unbelievable, we have people that have lost their fucking lives to shitty corrupt companies paying people to kill them,, being a NGO in that area has always been flat out dangerous.

Voting Bolsonaro has been one of my biggest political regrets, and that's saying something because I voted fucking Dilma too.

Surely some thought could have gone into wiping out an ecosystem, why burn it chopping down some trees while not at all a good thing to do would have been better than just lighting the forest ablaze

>>Also all of the oxygen

Should had then agreed to pay for the Amazonian oxygen then, after all it isn't fair that whole world basically steals Brazilian oxygen and then bitch when Brazilians decide that they would rather use those areas for profitable industries instead.

Gee you fucking retard, maybe if you'd paid attention you'd have noticed that it's stupid fucking Brazilian farmers doing this, and they're burning it specifically so they can hide their involvement and pretend it was just convenience that cleared all this land for them to develop, and the Brazilian government is complicit in the crimes by letting the fire continue unabated.

>20% of all oxygen is produced by the rainforest
>99% percent is produced by the ocean
Those numbers sure do add up.

>biodiversity is bad

Monocultures lead to mass die-offs and famines. Literally Ecological Economics 001. See the potato famine or death of Amerindians to European diseases.

Then how about they stop fucking burning it?

>See the potato famine or death of Amerindians to European diseases.

Both of those were objectively good things though.

>dude more species is better lmao so we need to artificially preserve lifeforms that are no longer suited to survive nature

Fags like you are why millions get wasted trying to prompt pandas to stop being lazy NEET cunts long enough to get their dicks up and make more useless finance draining pandas

I'm a borderline white nationalist and this level of retardation is embarrassing. Biodiversity /= multiculturalism, you absolute mongoloids. Does your body thrive if all you feed it is Mountain Dew or do you need a diversity of nutrients?

Where's the rain when you need it the most

Brazil has gotten shittons of foreign aid over the years specifically for the purpose of protecting the Amazonian rainforest.
Also ecotourism is viable, see Costa Rica.

Would they have been good if they happened to whatever ethnicity/identity group you belong to? I'm making a point about the danger of monocultures re: resistance to disease. Look at Apple orchards: apples are all clones of a few cultivars and are as a result the most heavily pesticide reliant crop on the planet.

Oh hey, since you're here, mind answering me a question?

Why did you decide to become a white nationalist, mister white nationalist?

Picking the panda as the symbol of endangered species worth saving was really a bad idea that looked good. Sure they're cute but that's hardly the point.

Main issue is the soil becomes unusable within a few years. Its destroying massive tracts of land (as in millions of acres), permanently, for only a few years of value per acre.

>Would they have been good if they happened to whatever ethnicity/identity group you belong to?

Yes, both of them would had been major improvements to what was going on around here back then,

Borderline, my man. I don't advocate it here in the United States because, unlike Spencerites, I acknowledge the reality of the violence necessarily involved and I don't want it, because I'm not a bloodthirsty LARPer. I have no issues with ethnonationalism in general, re: states like Poland and Japan, because I think it's demonstrable that homogeneity of population in terms of background, belief, and identity makes for a more co-prosperous and harmonious society.

And to head anyone off, I already said cultural diversity /= biodiversity, so don't hit me with a bullshit "homogeneity" point like I mean a society of inbred morons.

Because every other race is openly nationalist and not following suit so you can sit on a moral high horse is retarded

No worries, not trying to judge or 'pwn' your or whatever, just genuinely curious about what would make someone take a stance that is culturally seen as racist.

But I also think Civic Nationalism, a la the US, is possible (albeit rarer and more difficult). The human being is more than just a dumb animal and world religions prove that an idea can transcend simple biology. So I do think a concept like "we are all Americans" can support a country, as long as the new arrivals come at a clip that provides for assimilation and there is a cultural bent towards individual responsibility/non-reliance on a central government. So, things that aren't happening now.

But if I had a button to push that would teleport me to a reality where I'd "belong" to the nation, I'd definitely push "Ethnically Homogenous" over "Ethnically Diverse".

I also think the biggest issue with America today is the size and pervasiveness of the Federal government and the assumption that a benevolent nanny state can better provide for each individual citizen than any other institution (over family, charity, etc). It only erodes interpersonal cooperation, disincentizes philanthropy from the wealthy, and creates legions of administrators/bureaucrats that leech ever increasing amounts of public money.

Didn't mean that first response for your post.

I'm not trying to engage in a discussion about natural disasters having a positive culling effect on humans in the particular case of maintaining a society. That's a political/philosophical tack that is separate from the ecological point of biodiversity in nature (meaning a plethora of species) being a net positive for any given environment.

I been watching South Park a lot lately and I now have a strong urge to wanting to molest Kyle, Stan, and Butters

I don’t even like shota

But, on your tack, I think Bill the Butcher is justified in Gangs of New York.

Also, in case I get pruned, the do-it-for-feers: you're hypocrites to leave this post (but I think we should both be left).

Jesus stop replying to yourself you colossal faggot, find something better to do with your drunk time.

I'm on a nine hour train ride, I've got loads of time.

Fucking moron