Indigenous people get first priority to stay. Basically everyone else has to go. Phoenix must be obliterated. The desert should be a desert, not a golf course and alfalfa farm.
Living in a balloon framed house in the desert is an afront to god and anything good in this world.
Some of my relatives used to live near Tuscon, AZ, which is a microcosm of settler-colonialism and water mismanagement. The Santa Cruz river used to flow year-round through the valley, but today it’s a trickle during the dry season:
Most of the Santa Cruz River is usually a dry riverbed, unless the area receives significant rainfall. This was not always the case, but a combination of human errors and natural catastrophes in the late nineteenth century led to the decline of the Santa Cruz.[4] Prior to this, water flowed perennially in a number of places, including along nine stretches in the Tucson area, and the river’s banks were lined with cottonwood and mesquite bosques.[5][6] Although there is some disagreement among historians and hydrologists as to what the biggest causes of the river’s decline was, contributing human factors included overgrazing, excessive pumping of groundwater for agricultural irrigation and industry, and the construction of dams and ditches.[6] In the mid-20th century, the river’s stretch through Tucson dried up completely.
A huge quantity of water is used by a nearby copper mine and the almond farms in Green Valley. Meanwhile, the Tohono O’odham Nation, which used to be self-sustaining with Three Sisters agriculture, now most of their income comes from casinos and tourists visiting the San Xavier Mission (built by native slave labor under Spanish colonial rule).
Also: read The Water Knife
Yea, we’ll let the natives have the desert while we keep occupying all the rest of the land. They are so in touch with nature and don’t need dumb materialistic stuff like “arable farmland” or “a stable water supply” or "somewhere to evacuate when there are heatstrokes our economic system keeps producing "
-
The number of people in Arizona is unsustainable by any measure
-
Anglos live by the far most unsustainable lives in Arizona (and everywhere else)
-
It would be morally correct to remove destructive settlers
-
It would be completely unjustifiable to remove native people
-
20% of the current population of Arizona could live sustainable, water rich lives in Arizona
-
Native people of Arizona want agency over the land of Arizona, the land of their people - they aren’t asking for northern forests
Unless your suggestion is that we also remove the native people, what do you suggest?
i’m just scraeming “problematic” and gesturing vaguely at everything but yeah those things would be good but it’s not going to happen and even if it did, being surrounded by settlers on all sides poisoning the entire biome makes even that a dead end
https://apnews.com/article/politics-toronto-arizona-environment-f4b4ad6a0d4dc233fc931c59917c00a6
The sovereignty rights of Arizona tribes are constantly under attack: environmentally, politically, economically. Given the other issues caused by Arizona’s climate, it’s the place where literal mass-removal of settlers makes the most sense of anywhere in the US and is certainly the most justifiable.
Is that likely to happen? No, but in the mean time, what I’m arguing for is more Indian sovereignty in Arizona as the best solution to the climate disaster of the state and the only way to right the wrongs of settlement and displacement.
Also Utah. Scatter the Mormons.
