I was so shocked when I read the Tyee article, I spit out my coffee. A geologist in B.C. is arguing that minerals should be declared legal persons, and mineral deposits “should be recognized for their right to be mined and processed to provide sustenance to mankind.”
This is twisted, folks.
Granted, legal personhood has not been restricted to humans for over 125 years. In 1897, the House of Lords declared corporations to be legal persons—with certain rights and protections, including the right to sue. (Mind you, this was before settler women were declared legal persons in Canada. That happened in 1929, the famous Persons Case that’s celebrated on October 18th. First Nations women didn’t rate full personhood—i.e., the right to vote—until the 1960’s. Just saying, corporations were legal persons way before women were.)
But back to my point. In the last decade, rivers and even lagoons have been declared legal persons, with rights and privileges. Here in Canada, the Mutuhekau Shipu (Magpie) River obtained personhood in 2021, with the right to flow, to biodiversity, to be free from pollution, and to sue.
In most cases, the rights of rivers cases are instigated by indigenous communities. In New Zealand, the Whanganui River decision came after 140 years of advocacy by the local Maori tribe. In Canada, the Mutuhekau Shipu decision was driven by the Innui First Nation.
It’s not a stretch for people who experience rivers and trees and the land as ancestors to think of them as legal persons. For those of us who see the world as marketable commodity, this can be mystifying. We don’t get it because it’s not only a new thought, it’s also an inconvenient thought. Hence this bizarre argument about minerals.
When a river is declared a legal person, a team of guardians is appointed to represent that river. In some cases, the team sues in order to protect the life of the river. Nowhere has anyone said that a river has a right to be useful to humanity, because usefulness is not a right. It’s a choice.
Our rights and duties as natural and legal persons do not include making ourselves available for another’s “sustenance.” To call this a right is to pervert the notion of rights. The geologist’s proposal envisions minerals as things to be moved, bought, and sold, for another’s convenience. When we do this to people, it’s called slavery or sex trafficking. It’s illegal. To imply that commodification is the same as legal personhood is dangerous, disingenuous, and perverse.
We could look at Margaret Atwood’s book, The Handmaid’s Tale, for a story of human commodification. But oops, some of us can’t, at least if you’re a student living in Alberta, because that book is now banned. Along with 1984, and Brave New World, and The Color Purple. As a person with a predisposition to spiritual things, I remind myself that naming lies is a form of spiritual practice. Opposing that which is unjust—commodification, censorship, and the like—is a spiritual service to the greater community. Spirit, mind, body: married in service to the world. It’s a choice.