If you drop-in replace “x does not consent” with “x is being exploited” (making necessary grammatical adjustments), I feel like I’m still basically saying the same thing with the same takeaways
since a well or forest or ecosystem could be exploited, I feel like your perspective is being narrowed by something undisclosed. it seems obvious to me that if we were discussing groundwater or ecosystems, you would never raise consent as an objection.
since a well or forest or ecosystem could be exploited, I feel like your perspective is being narrowed by something undisclosed. it seems obvious to me that if we were discussing groundwater or ecosystems, you would never raise consent as an objection.