Terrestrial military ecology against an extra-terra invading force or Space Alien aggressor.

We suggest that the broader taxonomy of warfare includes (1) preparations for war, (2) war (violent conflict), and (3) postwar activities. Each stage includes several key elements (such as military, infrastructure, and governance) that influence both warfare outcomes and ecological impacts.Table 1 illustrates the elements and stages of warfare. Stages often overlap, as when war preparations continue during wartime, militaries engage in stability and support operations, or states engage in postwar recovery efforts while preparing for future wars. Histories of postwar Japan and Europe describe a transition from war to peace that was “slow and complex” (Laqueur 1993; see also Dower [1999] and Judt [2005]); postwar Iraq, where reconstruction efforts and insurgency actions are taking place simultaneously, is a contemporary example.

All three stages of warfare generate ecological consequences. Modern war preparations require significant resource consumption, stockpiling of strategic materials, weapons testing, training, and associated facilities. Active training often leads to residual unexploded ordnance (UXO), chemical contamination, landscape cratering, vegetation removal, soil erosion, and socioeconomic disruption. War preparations can also lead to habitat protection by creating ecologically significant buffer zones between hostile forces. War is largely distinguished by immense and concentrated energy flows, severe disturbances, habitat destruction, uncontrolled extraction of “lootable resources” (Collier 2000) to finance militias, deliberate death (including but not limited to human death), and disorganization of existing social and ethical systems. Post-war conditions include intense pollution, UXO, damaged and destroyed infrastructure, degraded landscapes and ecosystem services, socioeconomic disruption, refugee populations, and long-term illness.

Warfare ecology would apply ecological theory, methods, and empirical studies to such war-related conditions. With its emphasis on interactions among organisms, and between organisms and their environment at multiple scales (populations, communities, ecosystems, biomes), ecology is well suited to helping understand the complex relationships between warfare and natural systems. Just as the subfield restoration ecology was proposed to advance basic ecological theory while informing restoration efforts (Aber and Jordan 1985), so would warfare ecology bridge theory and practice to advance ecological science; inform policy; and reduce, mitigate, or prevent the environmental consequences of warfare. As a distinct subfield of ecology, it would be multiscaled (landscape, regional, and global), and its scope would encompass all three stages of warfare. The driving forces are anthropogenic; hence, warfare ecology must necessarily be interdisciplinary and treat biophysical and socioeconomic systems as highly coupled systems.

Warfare ecology would apply ecological theory, methods, and empirical studies to such war-related conditions. With its emphasis on interactions among organisms, and between organisms and their environment at multiple scales (populations, communities, ecosystems, biomes), ecology is well suited to helping understand the complex relationships between warfare and natural systems. Just as the subfield restoration ecology was proposed to advance basic ecological theory while informing restoration efforts (Aber and Jordan 1985), so would warfare ecology bridge theory and practice to advance ecological science; inform policy; and reduce, mitigate, or prevent the environmental consequences of warfare. As a distinct subfield of ecology, it would be multiscaled (landscape, regional, and global), and its scope would encompass all three stages of warfare. The driving forces are anthropogenic; hence, warfare ecology must necessarily be interdisciplinary and treat biophysical and socioeconomic systems as highly coupled systems.

Warfare ecology would apply ecological theory, methods, and empirical studies to such war-related conditions. With its emphasis on interactions among organisms, and between organisms and their environment at multiple scales (populations, communities, ecosystems, biomes), ecology is well suited to helping understand the complex relationships between warfare and natural systems. Just as the subfield restoration ecology was proposed to advance basic ecological theory while informing restoration efforts (Aber and Jordan 1985), so would warfare ecology bridge theory and practice to advance ecological science; inform policy; and reduce, mitigate, or prevent the environmental consequences of warfare. As a distinct subfield of ecology, it would be multiscaled (landscape, regional, and global), and its scope would encompass all three stages of warfare. The driving forces are anthropogenic; hence, warfare ecology must necessarily be interdisciplinary and treat biophysical and socioeconomic systems as highly coupled systems.

Definitions of ecological warfare

violence carried out to further the political or social objectives of the environmentalists

________

Now.

Will one focus on warfare against environmental degradation, (Tree hugger violence?) Or will warfare itself be ecologically safer made by a cleaner forms of lethality. (Non-radioactive, non-biological) weapons?

Perhaps chemical warfare that is not not destructive to the environment.

Or perhaps a socio-economic platform, that when war is committed the network that one would share between aggressors is divided upon initiation of conflict to minimize ecological catastrophe?

Yes.
All of the above and more.

Words can change according to context.

Grammar can help with this, although in post-modernism.

The narrative is not just split apart for going against the mainstream of semantics, but to rearrange the format for more insight and possibilities.

Obviously this site is not promoting liberal postmodernism.
In the sense of the “I am a unique individual who is oppressed and I am here to cross dress my identity with some form of inverted value system”

No.
Postmodern in the sense of a coder looking for the algorithm to the larger simulation.

Understanding the possibility of the dynamics that could happen.
Not a debate. A declaration of what is observed.

The platform at this NEWS SITE will be to explore the possibilities of a small localized over-humanist revolutionaries in a virtualized, but still physical fiefdom in the event of all out planetary wide invasion of a Space Alien Species.

Environmental damage during warfare is generally accepted as an unavoidable form of collateral damage. Military operations should be included in discussions of environmental conservation. The subdiscipline warfare ecology was recently proposed to integrate such discussion. However, environmental damage may also be caused by peacetime military operations, and, in such cases, relevant stakeholders may not realize that warfare ecology has relevance for peacetime environmental disaster. This comment proposes that the epithet warfare ecology does little to attract the participation of the groups affected by military operations, however the term ‘military ecology’ would also patently include peacetime military activities and may thus enhance engagement. Military ecology embraces all environmental conservation issues related to military activity during peacetime, preparation for war, warfare and post-war restoration operations. The established term warfare ecology could be subsumed within military ecology, by accurately constricting its application to ecological issues directly tied to armed conflict.

_________________

Cultural and Institutional Differences between Familial Polarities

Table 1. Contrasting Adaptations and Ecological Orientations

Patripolar: Matripolar:

Group Discipline to Survive: Yes, Militaristic No, Laissez faire

________________________________

Fiscal Libertarianism:

Fiscal libertarians (also referred to as laissez-faire capitalists) believe in free trade, low (or nonexistent) taxes, and minimal (or nonexistent) corporate regulation. Most traditional Republicans are moderate fiscal libertarians.

________________________________

Thinking about laissez-faire took me to the Index of Economic Freedom. Using their heat maps, for each of the following regions I have created a “top of thelaissez-faire list” in the order of each country’s “freedom score.”

With green indicating the economies least fettered by government, here is the Index’s color scale:

For Europe the “laissez-faire list” is led by Switzerland, Ireland, Denmark, Estonia and the UK. As you can see, the bottom of the list is Ukraine.

For Asia and the Pacific at the top are Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan while North Korea is last.

________________________

China

OVERALL SCORE

52.0

Russia

OVERALL SCORE

50.6

China

Economic Freedom Snapshot

  • 2016 Economic Freedom Score: 52.0 (down 0.7 point)
  • Economic Freedom Status: Mostly Unfree
  • Global Ranking: 144th
  • Regional Ranking: 31st in the Asia–Pacific Region
  • Notable Successes: Trade Freedom
  • Concerns: Property Rights, Corruption, and Labor Freedom
  • Overall Score Change Since 2012: +0.8

__________________________________________

Russia

Economic Freedom Snapshot

  • 2016 Economic Freedom Score: 50.6 (down 1.5 points)
  • Economic Freedom Status: Mostly Unfree
  • Global Ranking: 153rd
  • Regional Ranking: 42nd in Europe
  • Notable Successes: Fiscal Freedom
  • Concerns: Rule of Law, Labor Freedom, and Investment Freedom
  • Overall Score Change Since 2012: +0.1

__________________________________________

Russia is 9 ranks above China in the militaristic approach of its economic policy.

AIR POLLUTION CLAIMS 5.5 MILLION LIVES A YEAR, MAKING IT THE FOURTH-LEADING CAUSE OF DEATH WORLDWIDE

Stricter regulations on emissions haven’t led to fewer deaths by air pollution

BY CHRISTINA PROCOPIOU ON 2/12/16 AT 6:23 PM

You probably don’t think of air pollution as a factor that affects how long you will live. It’s actually the fourth greatest risk of death, though, right after high blood pressure, dietary risks and smoking. More people die from air pollution than die from alcohol and drug abuse, or unsafe sex. New research from the Global Burden of Disease Study shows that every year 5.5 million people across the world die from diseases — such as cardiovascular disease and stroke — related to air pollution, making it the leading environmental cause of disease by far.

Pollution now #1 cause of social unrest in China

March 8, 2013

This has been building up for years, as China rapidly industrialized and urbanized without much regard for the air, water, and land on which the life of its citizens depend. Chen Jiping, a former leading member of the party’s Committee of Political and Legislative Affairs, recently told the media that pollution has now replaced land disputes as the main cause of social unrest in the middle kingdom.

Bloomberg quotes him:

“The major reason for mass incidents is the environment, and everyone cares about it now,” Chen told reporters at a meeting of the Chinese People’s Political and Consultative Conference, where he’s a member. “If you want to build a plant, and if the plant may cause cancer, how can people remain calm?”

All this pressure has made the government open up a bit on environmental issues and start to make some of the right moves, but China has a lot of catching up to do on that front, as the never-ending smog proves (though China is not the only problem spot in Asia and in the Middle-East).

China’s heavy reliance on coal for electricity is one of the main sources of the problem, and by switching to cleaner sources, it could both alleviate air quality problems and step up its fight against global warming.

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Wotanisches’s story.