So I heard my friend call an invasive plant a displaced relative and when pressed on it they basically said that the plants didn’t choose to come here and they are victims of colonialism. Invasive implies they aren’t welcome, you wouldn’t say that the enslaved people brought over to the new world are invasive so why would you a plant? Then they said human agriculture was invasive because it’s monoculture and doesn’t allow other plants to grow, which you know fair point. So what’s the consensus is my friend an idiot or am I an idiot?

Edit: I just texted my friend, they said they got the concept from this book. Fresh Banana Leaves: Healing Indigenous Landscapes Through Indigenous Science

  • Bluegrass_Buddhist [none/use name]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Then they said human agriculture was invasive because it’s monoculture and doesn’t allow other plants to grow, which you know fair point.

    Don't get suckered in by AnPrim talking points, it's ecofascsim with an anarchist coat of paint. Like, sure, early agriculture was very bad for neolithic ecosystems and its development coincides with labor specialization, social stratification, the spread of communicable disease and other not good stuff.

    But in a world of 8 billion people, giving up agriculture is not an option. Unless you're cool with allowing billions of people to starve. Invasive species, however you want to call them, make crop failures and famines more likely. Even if you're vegan (I am), I'm still going to prioritize human death and suffering over that of like emerald ash borers and whatever fly it is that decimates fruit harvests.

    • chairmantau [none/use name]
      ·
      2 years ago

      The whole concept comes from Fresh Banana Leaves: Healing Indigenous Landscapes Through Indigenous Science

      • Bluegrass_Buddhist [none/use name]
        ·
        2 years ago

        What concept? That we shouldn't call introduced species "invasive?" I mean, sure, that's cool I guess but it's still aesthics fetishism.