Hello stemiaan's..

Why with nature and man? Is there an imbalance, or unequal consciousness only in the horizontal relationship of humans to humans, so that never gets that picture? There is a view that the appropriation of property rights and rights of management of nature (environment) just put into the discourse of experts of economists, agrarian, law and human rights.

There are some who let because they are considered a fairness in the dynamics of life-grab-seize, mutual jajah. Which eventually boils down to meet the needs of the entrails. Nature as seen just a means of fulfilling human needs. Or more often the object of exploitation of the fulfillment of economic capitalization system. In the end it is increasingly aging and never willing to realize the natural inefficiency of rape (exploitation) by humans.

Human unconscious of nature will eventually repeat itself and become a historical sin. As in Garret Gardin's term is mentioned as The Commons, the destruction of nature due to exploitation that surpasses its resilience, so that sooner nature will be destroyed, which is the commons or the common heritage of mankind. Indeed not all humans, become perpetrators of natural destruction, but also not a few who are aware in their daily actions have negated the improvements to nature.

The circulation of life in nature continues to be a human inspiration in renewing life. Science, social, technological and other branches of Science have solidified nature as an early and mainstream subject as an example of modernization. For example the law of gravity and relativity is often used in science. Likewise with the law of magnetic interpreted as social dynamics, where the attraction (motion) between the two poles finally create a balance due to the presence of more than one moving object. Of course, each of the many inspirations that lie around us if we ponder more deeply.

The inspiration that then bears fruit into goodness for today's higga, it would not be imagined what if humans were to live without it. Because humans realize that there is a special room for nature within them, as teachers and mother of life science. Nature as the mother of knowledge has given birth to the inventors and intellectuals of reliable names whose many names have denied them. And passed on to his grandchild's legacy. The sustainability of his names continues to stick in the frame of history as long as the impact of his thinking applies in the passages of time. However, is it the opposite of nature? Of course there are, but not as massively echoed. Sustainability and continuity cease depending on the moment or human interests facing- economic, political, legal.

Sustainability is only present above the negotiating table for the benefit of the stakeholders' economic interests. Just look at the writings of Rusydi Syahra (2012), Social and Cultural Dimensions in Environmental Destruction, and Climate Change, developed countries (America, China, ...) are reluctant to ratify the climate change convention since 1994, Kyoto Protocol 1997. it still does not implement the results of the mutual agreement. And again based on concerns will disrupt the stability of their economies. Even this repeat convention in Paris 2015. It is true that developed countries do not run the mission together. The power of money and politics can direct the right forefinger to developing countries as workers (see 3 points of agreement of the Kyoto Protocol). Developed countries with special status in the world's negotiations (UN), then can labor countries (developing countries).

Seen from the agreement with the lure of money, carbon trading (Carbon Trading), Certificate of Emission Reduction, and emission reduction units. In the case of this country, we can see from the results of court decisions that tend to win the private sector and the state. Just look at the G island case in the bay of Jakarta. When the appeal in PT TUN number 228 dated October 2016, the state (Provincial Government of DKI Jakarta) and PT. Muara Wisesa Samudra win and finally continue the reclamation license. As an environmental learner, the writer considers the decision unfortunate.

Administrative considerations and state indemnity (beyond sustainable environmental considerations) precisely negate the contribution of nature. And further opposed to the conception of the country on sustainable development.

In addition, nature not only has a positive impact by educating how to give the most benefit, and never asking what is received from the given. Nature also balances with its philosophical life cycle on who is strong who is in charge. As shown in the education room since elementary school, where there is a chain of food killing each other-kill.

In the human view, this consuming cycle is certainly rejected, as it is considered cruel and deprives the right to life. Nevertheless, that conception applies to nature. See you again..!!