WTF? 7

Comments View as Flat

1. 

   jmcstras Posted 9:04 am
   16 Dec 2004

   RE: WTF?OK, Dave, I'm all ears (or eyes in this case) -- why the different take?
   Jeff
   
   Sustainablog: http://sustainablog.blogspot.com

   Permalink

2. 

   birdboy Posted 9:41 am
   16 Dec 2004

   here comes the swat team...This guy is saying what most of us are thinking but are too scared (or smart?) to say. I fully agree with his analysis of the situation; the world is a long way down the path to self-destruction and refuses to change direction or even slow down. He correctly assesses human nature- drastic change only occurs when there is no other choice. The entire system IS controlled by people for whom a quick profit is the major (or the only) concern. While I wish I could believe that there is time to save the world by 'reframing' our case, I have only seen evidence to the contrary. Drastic, radical action is the only hope.
   But there are some obvious problems with his prescription; people would suffer from drastic, forced change; people would give in to violence, and as always, the poor would suffer first and most from any drastic change. His entire plan relies on vast numbers of people taking part in the 'revolution', but good luck recruiting in my red state. The other side would fight back to keep things as they are; the government would label any suspected participant a terrorist and make an example of the person, pass new laws, and enforce them with a vengence.
   However, I for one would love to see huge protests that draw media attention to the message- and the way to draw attention is to interrupt the normal flow of dirty goods to blissful consumers.
   But, dude, you lose me with the forced sterilization of the population... I'm thinkin' that could be bad for survival of our species (which would probably be good for the planet but bad for the collective conscience).
   
   a liberal in redsville

   Permalink

3. 

   jmcstras Posted 10:57 am
   16 Dec 2004

   Hmmmm...Well, I'll admit that my response came from not reading as closely as I should have -- I believe by the time I got towards the end, I read the first line of the point on population control and assumed I knew where it was going... I didn't see "involuntary sterilization" coming... My mistake.
   As far as earlier statements on destruction, I read these metaphorically originally (though now that I read it again, and especially after I take note of the "I'm sure the government is watching me" bit, I'm willing to back away from that...).  I suppose I was thinking more in consumer protest/boycott terms rather than, you know, actual destruction (which does seem to be his argument).
   Ultimately, I suppose I read this piece in the context of Pollard's other writings on his blog, which seem pretty moderate (i.e., his Natural Enterprise project).  And, I focused more on the initial list (which seems perfectly reasonable).  Finally, I think the biggest mistake I made was equating Pollard's "Plan B" with the program/book of Lester Brown's that shares that title -- clearly, they're on different wavelengths.
   So, while I was prepared for a debate, I suppose I should thank you, Dave.  An English professor should be a much better close reader -- I plead the fatigue of a long semester and too many student essays ;-)
   Best,
   Jeff
   
   Sustainablog: http://sustainablog.blogspot.com

   Permalink

4. 

   Dave Pollard Posted 12:38 pm
   19 Dec 2004

   Pollard repliesIn the first place, I'm not supporting forced sterilization -- merely research to see whether a mechanism can be developed that will reduce human fertility in a genetically unbiased way, so that the rate at which women become pregnant in this horrendously overpopulated world is reduced proportionally.
   Yes, I am advocating sabotage of the military industrial complex that underlies the relentless and massive destruction of our world. I have specifically stated that such sabotage must be done thoughtfully, without causing physical harm or suffering to anyone, yet I have been bombarded with messages from people who have totally misrepresented my position. To those who think we can really save the world simply by persuasion and innovation, I challenge you to produce an agenda and a timeline for action that will lead to sustainable levels of consumption by such means.
   If you're an optimist, just read about the horrendous failure of last week's Argentina talks on climate change -- an utter disaster and huge step backward. It's time to wake up and smell the coffee -- if you're committed to a sustainable society, and you're not willing to acknowledge that pacifism won't get us there, you're deluding yourself and by your passivity actually contributing to the perpetuation of the current unsustainable culture. C'mon Grist readers, you should know this!
   To birdboy, thanks for your thoughtful comments.

   Permalink

5. 

   birdboy Posted 1:25 am
   20 Dec 2004

   neo conservationismDave, you may want to touch-up the section on sterilizing the population, just to prevent losing people who would otherwise be inspired or at least sympathetic. There are lots of ways to convince people to slow down... free access to birth control and day-after pills would help... I suspect the dramatic slow-down in the economy that would result from drastic change just might be enough to discourage the reckless reproduction that goes on today.
   In the meantime, we enviro's should all visit True Majority and vote for more emphasis on the environment- there is an engaging blog or two going on at their site- they want input and we should give them an ear-full.
    http://truemajority.infopop.cc/eve/
   It's a chance to get our message of urgency across to like-minded people who may finally be getting some attention from the mostly deafened-by-consumption-and-profit-motive popular media.
   
   a liberal in redsville

   Permalink

6. 

   Dave Pollard Posted 5:51 am
   20 Dec 2004

   True MajorityWow, birdboy, True Majority is a goldmine of good ideas. What's urgently needed there is some kind of 'idea management' system to parse the ideas and get teams of people focused on bringing them to fruition.

   Permalink

7. 

   David Roberts Posted 8:15 am
   20 Dec 2004

   historyDave, I'm sure you mean well.  I'm sure the individuals at the roots of every 20th century leftist totalitarian movement meant well.
   If you muster up a network of one million people, tell them the world's on the brink of destruction and that the only way to save it is to sterilize women and destroy pipelines, do you think all one million of them will share your thoughtfulness?  Your good will? Your aversion to human suffering? Do you think your movement, unlike all the other leftist authoritarian movements of the last century, will not slowly be taken over by the most extreme and ruthless elements? That those involved will not develop a messianic belief in their own virtue and the utter evil of outsiders? That the movement will not eventually start to seek its own success and power at the expense of its originally stated goals?  Read a little history.
   I dare say I'm as concerned about the fate of humanity and its environment as anyone, but the minute you start slipping sterilization drugs in the water, you better watch your back, because I will be among your many, many sworn enemies.
   
   www.grist.org

   Permalink