Comment on why not both?
AdlachGyfiawn@lemmygrad.ml 4 weeks agoThis is a super bad take. Most invasive species were brought over by Europeans, so yes, they did have an “immigration program”. The reason they’re outcompeting natives is not that they’re fitter but that they have no place in the ecological systems here: nothing eats them so they have no checks on their spread.
Hello_Kitty_enjoyer@hexbear.net 4 weeks ago
Nope. Big difference between bringing over a few hundred Kudzu and they suddenly go buck-wild because the conditions happen to be right, versus having a deliberate sustained immigration program for millions of whites. “Invasive” species never had an immigration program, nothing in the Americas did except for whites and arguably any organism that served them, including enslaved people.
The reason invasive non-human species outcompete is because they’re fitter. The reason humans outcompete each other (especially with colonialism) is because of reasons so convoluted that they rarely have anything to do with biological fitness or niche appropriateness, which is why there’s a bunch of people whiter than sour milk in Tallahassee
AdlachGyfiawn@lemmygrad.ml 4 weeks ago
They literally did, though? Europeans brought animals and plants over on their ships. Kudzu is an extremely recent example, but invasive species date back to the literal first colonists. The two issues are inextricable.
And it’s not that the plants are fitter, it’s that they have no predators as a result of human activity.
I’m sorry, but I really think this is a “no investigation, no right to speak” scenario.