@Dara O’Brien: except for the rain forest Indians who are being shot.

@Dara O’Brien: Brazil was steadily alleviating poverty under the social democratic Lula government by stimulating the local economy and creating an internal market for goods.

Bolsonaro has increased poverty with his free market policies. Poverty increased by two million people in his first year alone. This deal will make some land owners very rich.

Irish people don’t understand that farming in most other countries means one massive landlord gets rich and does nothing all day while peasants slave away in the sun all day for next to no pay. This doesn’t stimulate the local economy because the workers have no money to spend. We fought for and won a more progressive distribution of land in Ireland.

@Dara O’Brien: And the best thing that ever happened to Ireland is we freed ourselves from being totally reliant on exporting food to England. The reason we are now “well off westerners” is because we resisted exactly the kind of policies you think are a good idea.

Also it is the poor who will suffer the most from climate change and the rich who will benefit the most from free trade.

Your comment is completely wrong. Every single point is incorrect. And you needed to use sarcasm which usually means someone is feeling hysterical and emotional or angry rather than informed.

@SC: I think you need to read up on your irish history mate..The Famine..

@Dara O’Brien: so you support the rаpe and murdеr of innocent indigenous people, the theft of their land and then burning it so they can’t come back and cattle can graze? Thing is, it’s not poor people doing this. It’s very wealthy Brazilian farmers and corporations that are doing this for even more money. And they’re not trying to feed themselves. They’re shipping that beef out of the country. So, we have determined that you are a) rаcist and b) a liаr.

@Dara O’Brien: Rent a mob? You couldn’t afford me Dara.

@Patrick Lavery: What?! The famine was caused by us being totally dependent on exporting food to GB. There was no local economy due to all of the profits from food production being owned by landlords who were all absentee, so they weren’t even spending money here.

Everyone knows that there was enough food in Ireland to feed us at the time of the famine and it was exported because it was foreign owned and we couldn’t even afford to eat the food we were producing with our own hands on our own land. Everyone knows there is enough mineral wealth in Brazil for them to all be comfortable but it is all foreign owned- same problem. That is part of why free trade mainly benefits the rich.

You are the one who needs to brush up on your Irish history mate. Start with the Land Acts.

@Brian Ó Dálaigh: a racist and a liar? Really? You are so quick to get your moral outrage out that you can’t see past the nose on your own face.

Brazil has been struggling with a massive poverty issue for generations. The lula government were ousted due to huge corruption issues. Bolsonaro, fascist that he is, was voted in by a large cohort of impoverished people who wrongly see him as a ticket out of the favelas.

The populism which has grown as a direct result of poverty is Brazil is the main reason that there isn’t a popular opposition to what is now happening to the rainforest. The promise of low paid jobs to people who will aid in the deforestation and work on the ranches is welcomed by people who may otherwise starve or have to rummage in tips for bits they can sell.

A heap of well heeled westerners mob the embassy and wag fingers without ever thinking that maybe we owe a debt to poorer nations if we want them to carry our burden.

Go away with your misplaced racism accusations and try reading something.

@Tuot tuot: I’m stating that if impoverished people weren’t so impoverished that all they think about is putting food on the table, they would be more like the people of western democracies and have the time and means to consider the greater picture rather than being tempted to do bad things for bad people and corporations in return for small amounts of money.

There is a bigger picture here.

@SC: You made my point for me. All the wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few who can then use money to ensure that desperate people support bad acts and sacrifice long term good for short term wages.

If you want the likes of Brazil to stop allowing this to happen then the west has to compensate them. We’ve made our riches destroying our own land and now we expect desperate people to resist a wage that feeds their family because we’re worried about climate change.

@Dara O’Brien: usual diatribe from you.

@Dermot Foley: excellent points. Well argued and meticulously researched as usual sir.

@Dara O’Brien: Dear o dear. Did your six year old write that? It ain’t the poor of Brazil at this. In fact this also ethnic cleansing of the poorest and most vulnerable in Brazil you headcase

@Brian Conway: dear o dear, did you just read the first comment and come here with your putdown (if, indeed, that’s what it was?)

Read again and then try some books and other sources, mix in some critical thought and come back to me. There’s a good lad.

@Dara O’Brien: you really should take your own advice and do a bit of reading. Keeping the rainforest intact would generate more money for locals but somehow I think you’re not overly concerned about facts and truth.
“Experts agree that by leaving the rainforests intact and harvesting it’s many nuts, fruits, oil-producing plants, and medicinal plants, the rainforest has more economic value than if they were cut down to make grazing land for cattle or for timber.
“The latest statistics show that rainforest land converted to cattle operations yields the land owner $60 per acre and if timber is harvested, the land is worth $400 per acre. However, if these renewable and sustainable resources are harvested, the land will yield the land owner $2,400 per acre.”

@EillieEs: http://www.rain-tree.com/facts.htm

@EillieEs: you too are taking the myopic view. My point is simple but I’ll spell it out in plain english. A huge portion on the Brazilian population live in abject poverty. Their desperation to escape it means they are easily manipulated into assisting large corporations, wealthy ranchers and Bolsonaro types. In return for the promise of a small and regular wage which will keep food on the table, they don’t protest against activities such as this and often provide the menial Labour behind such events.

I am not saying that poor people are evil, I am simply making the point that it is very difficult to make decisions for the long term benefit of the planet when all that occupies your mind is where your next meal is coming from.

In the west, we have benefitted already from generations of pillage of our lands and resources and have grown wealthy and well educated off the back of it. We are now happy to criticize poorer nations for allowing the same activities that we happily carried out on our pursuit of a ‘better’ lot in life.

For all our moaning, we’re not willing (on a global level) to offer to subsidize poor countries so they can improve their lot without having to do damage. Instead we just don our nice loafers, cycle on our paved roads to wag our fingers and then stop for a fair trade latte on the way home.

It’s hypocritical.

@Dara O’Brien: the idea behind these fires is a two-pronged attack: 1) the creation of new grazing ground for cattle and 2) the ethnic cleansing of indigenous people that Bolsonaro and his government often label as monkeys. You are here defending and supporting that ethnic cleansing of the Amazon. The only possible reason you could support that is because you also view those indigenous inhabitants as not worthy of the same right to life as other people. Therefore, either you are racist or support racism, which is itself racist. And you are a liar because your premise was that such activities will make ordinary Brazilians better off, when the reality is that only the wealthy will benefit from this.

@Brian Ó Dálaigh: indeed you are but a dim man. Could you please point out anywhere anything I have said that supports the burning of the rainforest? Anywhere at all?

It’s a new low for mankind, supported by a vile fascist.

Like I said, in such a rush to be offended that you can’t even read.

You can apologize for the racism slur whenever you’re ready.

@Dara O’Brien: no, you’re the one with the myopic view; indigenous tribes only live in poverty when the
forest is cleared from under them and their way of life is destroyed. You’re looking at it as if everyone wants a western-style existence, they don’t. The forest provides everything they need, they want to be left in peace to live as they’ve always lived.

@EillieEs: why are you obsessing on indigenous tribes? They don’t vote and don’t make up any of Bolsanaros support base – if you accept that his government is driving this then you need to look at his support base – the poor from the urban centers. Too occupied with poverty to object

@Dara O’Brien: obsessing? I’m talking about the people who are being burned out of their homes and way of life – to say nothing of entire eco systems.

@EillieEs: He’s saying that its the poor of Brazil who are manipulated into supporting these corporate activities with the promise of a regular wage, not specifically indigenous tribes who probably make up about 1% of the population. I dont agree with everything he is saying but at least try and take on board his points instead of trying to shout him down based on pure reactionism. I also didnt see any evidence of him being racist or supporting the burning of the rainforest, he is just trying to explain whats happening somewhat. Sometimes its good to read opinions you dont like or dont agree with and maybe give them sone thought before jumping to a response

@Dara O’Brien: your argument is weak at best. This country was still at least 65% pre Cromwell invasion. And like the native Americans we were pushed west (to connacht) or be killed. All that land was then cleared and this is what we were left with. Brazil is on a much larger scale with too many people, so to apply the attitude that we did it centuries ago in Europe so they should be allowed to aswell is stupid, come on Dara!!!

@Frank Scanlon: Thank you Frank, someone who has bothered to read my posts – much appreciated.

@EillieEs: you should go back and read his argument

@Valthebear: I have read it. He hasn’t supplied any evidence, apart from his opinion, that it’s people in poverty rather than well paid henchmen doing he dirty work.

@Dave O’Keeffe: indeed.

@J. Reid: stop with your propaganda J. It would help if you kept up with news and read lava jato leaks by Glenn Greenwald that expose the corruption of Moro and all involved in impeaching Dilma and putting Lula in jail on fabricated charges .

@Pete Lee: it’s not the inhabitants of the rainforest who are responsible for this, they want to live in peace as they’ve always done but they’re being burned out of their homes which then places them in poverty.