HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Date: 06 Jan 93 20:14 PST
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Nf-ID: #R:1hs8brEINNfle@uni-erlangen.de:-1634168734:cdp:1678600044:000:1249
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!dmcmillen    Jan  6 20:14:00 1993


> If the U.S. had its population increased by six, the country as a whole
> would be less crowded than New Jersey is today.
 
NO New Jersey jokes, please!  I have family in NJ and am very fond of its
culture.  But, still, wouldn't this be a good enough reason by itself to
get serious about the environment!
 
> One way of removing CO2 from the atmosphere is to cut down forests and
> dump the wood in swamps in a reducing atmosphere.
 
Interesting idea, but wouldn't it have been easier to avoid producing
the CO2 in the first place.   Besides, don't you think it's a little
arrogant of humans to wreck the ecosystems of other living things --
and perhaps ourselves included -- to fix an ecological mess we created
in the first place?
 
> If you then plant new forests, you get a net reduction of CO2.
 
Biodiversity is the product of many millions of years evolution.  It
has resulted in a wonderfully marvelous diversity of life, including
human life.  Experience has shown that humans are very very bad at
recreating that biodiversity when they replant forests.  In fact, even
if humans tried to recreate that biodiversity, which they very rarely
do, it would be impossible, due to complexities which we will never
be able to understand.
 
Dale
From: steinman@hslrswi.hasler.ascom.ch (Jan Steinman - Bytesmiths, 3946)
Subject: Re: LET'S DISCUSS NUCLEAR ENERGY!
Reply-To: steinman@hslrswi.hasler.ascom.ch
Organization: Ascom Hasler AG
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:54:33 GMT

In article 14283@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU, prs9k@brain.med.virginia.edu (Phil Scarr) writes:
>In article <1678600048@igc.apc.org> Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org> writes:
>>
>>> In order to get the energy required by all these people [the supposed 
>>> carrying capacity of the earth -- 30 Billion people], we would...

This number is someone's opinion. Others feel we may have already exceeded the
carrying capacity. (See "Beyond The Limits" the update of "Limits To Growth".)

>>Where do you suggest storing the radioctive waste?
>
>Breeder reactors don't produce waste, they consume it.

There is still waste. They use a blanket of enriched uranium which is
partially transmuted to plutonium. The irradiated blanket must be periodically
removed and processed, which produces more waste. Breeders still require source
fuel (the uranium blanket) and produce much more waste than regular reactors.

While it is true that the US nearly had a disaster (I was 16, and living less
than 5 miles from the melt-down site near Monroe, Michigan), France has
apparently had success with their Phoenix/SuperPhoenix breeders, which I
believe supplies a quarter of their electricity. I think they ship the waste
to the South Pacific.

>>Don't you think the government's real purpose for promoting nuclear
>>energy to convince us that there is a peaceful use for the nuclear bomb?
>
>The two are unrelated.

This is by law, but laws can be changed. I have no doubt that, should it look
like the generals needed the material, and certain districts needed the jobs,
Congress would gut the 1978 NPT which bans use of commercial nuclear waste
from military purposes.

: : Jan Steinman, Bytesmiths			   steinman@hasler.ascom.ch : :
: : 2002 Parkside Court, West Linn, OR 97068-2767 USA	    +1 503 657 7703 : :
: : Beundenfeldstrasse 35, CH-3013, Bern, Switzerland	    +41 31 999 3946 : :

Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens,sci.energy
From: mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt)
Subject: Re: LET'S DISCUSS NUCLEAR ENERGY!
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 08:41:20 GMT

In article <82344@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM> mwilson@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Mark Wilson) writes:
>In <1993Jan7.125817.14283@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> prs9k@brain.med.virginia.edu (Phil Scarr) writes:
>|Read _We Almost Lost Detroit_ for more details on the near fatal
>|runaway reaction at the Enrico Fermi reactor.

>I've never seen the book, but I will look for it.

_We Almost Lost Detroit_ is by John Fuller, whose investigative
reporting credits include _The Interrupted Journey_, about the
Betty and Barney Hill UFO abduction case.

It's hard to say which book is less credible.

-- 
Mike Van Pelt          | What happens if a big asteroid hits Earth?
mvp@netcom.com         | Judging from realistic simulations involving a
                       | sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog, we
                       | can assume it will be pretty bad. -- Dave Barry
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: beast@netcom.com (J. Kintscher)
Subject: Re: PLEASE SIGN IN!
Organization: Belle & Philippe, Pty. Ltd.
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 08:20:08 GMT


Hi.

My name is Jeffrey Kintscher.  I am a registered member of the Green Party
in California and live in San Jose.  I am currently working towards a B.S.
in Computer Science.

I originally registered as a Democrat in '88, but abandoned them for the
Greens last summer after getting fed up with the Democrats in the primaries. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey A. Kintscher	 | "Now, my suspicion is that the universe is not only
beast@netcom.com     	 |  queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can
			 |  suppose. . . . I suspect that there are more things
"No matter where you go, |  in heaven and earth than are dreamed of,  in any
 there you are."	 |  philosophy."
			 |				J. B. S.  Haldane
	Buckaroo Banzai	 |				Possible Worlds
From: wolfgang@cats.ucsc.edu (Robert Frank Dougherty)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: PLEASE SIGN IN!
Date: 4 Jan 1993 20:50:00 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu


In article <1678600010@igc.apc.org> Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org> writes:
I'm Bob Dougherty.  I'm currently pusuing a PhD in experimental psychology at
the University of California of Santa Cruz.  I've only recently become
acquainted with the Green Party of CA.  I'm not very active but hope to be
so when I have some more free time.  Presently, I'm just hanging back and
learning the issues.
From: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Date: 07 Jan 93 21:55 PST
Subject: Re: LET'S DISCUSS NUCLEAR ENERGY!
Nf-ID: #R:cdp:1678600048:cdp:1678600065:000:401
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!dmcmillen    Jan  7 21:55:00 1993


Peter Kocks,
 
Thanks for a thoughtful discussion about nuclear waste.  Perhaps
someone will also give contrasting view.  Clearly coal has been
known to be an environmental and health hazard for decades.
 
I think the priorities of an energy policy should first be on
conservation and then on clean renewables.  The slogan for solid
waste, "Reduce, Reuse and Recycle", can apply to energy too.
 
Dale

Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: ladasky@netcom.com (John J. Ladasky II)
Subject: Population (was Re: Greens vs. Property Rights)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 06:55:09 GMT

In article <JMC.93Jan4212425@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
>Why does Mr. Ausman thinks the world could not sustain 6 billion
>people at the U.S. standard?  This is merely a fashionable idea
>of the literary culture.  There is no resource limitation that
>prevents even 30 billion from living at the U.S. standard.  Beyond
>that, it might be hard.
>--
>John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
>*
>He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
>

	John, please substantiate your claim that "there is no resource
limitation that prevents even 30 billion from living at the U.S. standard."
This sounds like straight Heritage Foundation talk to me without any 
further support.  I need look no further than the roughly two billion
malnourished people in the world to realize that the world is well beyond
its sustainable carrying capacity.  And, lest you think that the high-tech,
near-zero-population-growth countries, like the U.S., are immune to food
crises, are you aware that the Midwestern water table is dropping an average
of twenty feet per year?  We'll exhaust it eventually.

	Now for another question: given that the Earth could support 
30 billion people "at the U.S. standard," would it be desirable to do so?
We're having trouble finding work for the people we have now.

-- 
== John J. Ladasky II ("ii") ========================= ladasky@netcom.COM ==
"Great composers do not borrow -	     "Talking about music is like
 they steal."  - John Ladasky	      ~ -     dancing about architecture."
(quote stolen from Stravinsky, who    o o     - Elvis Costello?  Laurie
 stole it from a statement made by     >        Anderson?  Frank Zappa?
 Pablo Picasso about painting, who    \_/    -------------------------------
 stole it from...)			     "Property is theft." - Groucho
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"A man w/o charity in his heart - what has he to do with music?" - Confucius
============================================================================
From: monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan )
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Date: 4 Jan 93 23:40:29 GMT
Organization: UW Computing
NNTP-Posting-Host: red2.cac.washington.edu

In article <1993Jan4.185148.6674@vexcel.com> dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
>In article <1993Jan04.075132.9679@microsoft.com> leecr@microsoft.com (Lee Crocker) writes:
>>>In article <1678600006@igc.apc.org> Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org> writes:
>>>>
>>
>>Food, shelter, defense, and all of the other things to which leftists
>>would "entitle" everyone do not fall from heaven; they are the products
>>of work.  Providing them means encouraging work, and history has shown
>>that the best way to encorage work is to guarantee to each worker his
>>or her exclusive right to the fruits of his/her labor.  That system is
>>called Capitalism, and any other system is heartless and immoral.
>>

Actually, it was the fact, during the late 1800's, that laborers were not
getting the fruits of their labor, that caused Marx to question the
internal contradictions of capitalism, and propose an alternative (which
was NOT Leninism/Stalinism/Maoism).
From: alaric@sti.com (Alaric Tekiahyn)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Date: 12 Jan 1993 01:20:55 GMT
Organization: Software Transformation, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: smurf.sti.com

Dale McMillen writes:
] >Interesting idea, but wouldn't it have been easier to avoid producing
] >the CO2 in the first place.   Besides, don't you think it's a little
] >arrogant of humans to wreck the ecosystems of other living things --
] >and perhaps ourselves included -- to fix an ecological mess we created
] >in the first place?


To which Mike Arras <arras@forwiss.uni-erlangen.de> replies:
] 	Screw the little bunny rabbits.  If human life is at stake
] the animals shall die (period).


And then, when you've trashed the entire environment beyond all possible
repair, and when all the 'little bunny rabbits' and little bambis and
little fishies and birdies and flowers and trees are all extinct, and when
there's no clean air and no clean water, and when the seas and rivers are
running raw sewage and the ground is so full of chemicals nothing will
grow any more, then just what are you going to live on, bozo?


I'll give you a little clue:  You'd better develop a *REAL GOOD* taste
for toasted cockroaches.



-- 
      "Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom."  --  Thomas Jefferson
    ......................................................................
    Phil Stracchino : phils@sti.com : alaric@sti.com : The Renaissance Man
      PGP 2.0 - Freeware public-key data encryption.  Get it and use it!
           Finger alaric@sti.com for PGP 2.0 info and my public key
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: LET'S DISCUSS NUCLEAR ENERGY!
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: 8 Jan 93 20:52:19

There were continued big releases of radiation in the Ural areas
from the 50s until well into the 70s, some worse than others.
The damage was compounded by secrecy which prevented even telling
the people who were exposed.  Chelyabinsk was a closed city,
because of military industry.  I was once on an airplane from
Novosibirsk to Moscow that had to land at Chelyabinsk for refuelling
because of headwinds.  Soviet safety rules required that passengers
leave the aircraft during refuelling.  An exception was made for me
and the other foreigner, a Pole.  We stayed on the airplane so that
we couldn't wander around the terminal stealing secrets from people
we might meet there.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: alaric@sti.com (Alaric Tekiahyn)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Date: 9 Jan 1993 03:18:22 GMT
Organization: Software Transformation, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: smurf.sti.com

In article <JMC.93Jan6223505@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>, jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy) writes:
] Here are some actual statistics taken from _The Statistical Abstract
] of the United States_ 1986 edition, p. 833.
] 
] World production
] of agricultural
] commodities
] 		1970		1978		1984
] corn		278		390		449
] rice		316		385		470
] wheat		318		449		522
] 
] all figures in millions of metric tons.


Very good.  Now quote the world population figures for the same years.



-- 
      "Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom."  --  Thomas Jefferson
    ......................................................................
    Phil Stracchino : phils@sti.com : alaric@sti.com : The Renaissance Man
      PGP 2.0 - Freeware public-key data encryption.  Get it and use it!
           Finger alaric@sti.com for PGP 2.0 info and my public key
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: amck@rowdy.mcc.com (Alan McKendree)
Subject: Re: PLEASE SIGN IN!
Organization: MCC, Austin, Texas
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 21:49:42 GMT


I subscribed to get a horse's-mouth sample of just what's going on in
the movement.  As a rational capitalist, it's good to know what the
other side's up to.  It's sort of like an atheist (which I am)
watching televangelists for entertainment (which I do).

$ and kisses,

-- 
Alan McKendree          Opinions posted by me are mine, only.
amck@rowdy.mcc.com         Who/Little Feat/racquetball/Rand
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<1993Jan05.032449.17620@microsoft.com>
	<1993Jan5.174654.8285@vexcel.com>
Date: 5 Jan 93 16:29:25

In article <1993Jan5.174654.8285@vexcel.com> dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:

   In article <1993Jan05.032449.17620@microsoft.com> leecr@microsoft.com (Lee Crocker) writes:
   >In article <JMC.93Jan4081611@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU writes:
   >>
   >> Now, while workers are still exploited...
   >
   >It is unsubstantiated empty rhetoric like this that gives leftists
   >a bad reputation.  In a free capitalist society, where a worker is
   >free to choose whether or not to accept the conditions of employment
   >offered to him, no working man can be said to be "exploited" by
   >his employers.  No man in history has ever gotten rich without making
   >everyone around him rich as well, except by slavery; and slavery
   >must be maintained by force of law to work.
   >
   It is rhetoric like this that gives Libertarians a bad name.  When a
   person must choose between bad and worse to survive, that person may
   very well feel exploited.  To say that noone has gotten rich without
   making others around rich (except slavery) is an incredible statement
   that hardly deserves refutation.  It does show why most Green
   candidates outpolled Libertarians in their first election.
   >-- 
   >Lee Daniel Crocker    | Free minds; free bodies; free trade.
   >leecr@microsoft.com   | Libertarian Party  1-800-682-1776


	   Dean Myerson			dean@vexcel.com

I should explain what I mean by "exploited".  It is not usually
unjust to be exploited.  When A depends for meeting some
of his needs on B's work, and B is at least as skillful as
A and is paid much less, then A is exploiting B.  We are exploiting
Chinese labor, because they are paid much less.  It is nevertheless
to their advantage to be exploited for now.  Note that the exploiter
is the person who benefits from the work and not merely the employer.
In a free market relations of exploitation are not likely to persist
indefinitely.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Date: 5 Jan 93 18:16:47 GMT
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO

In article <1678600024@igc.apc.org> dmcmillen@igc.apc.org (Dale McMillen) writes:
>
>
>Dale
>
>P.S. I am not denying there is a population problem, but rather think
>     that the social justice problem is more severe, and that solving
>     the social justice problem may, in fact, bring us very far towards
>     solving the population problem.
>
>P.P.S.  Do you think we need to start a new topic called
>        "SUSTAINABILITY AND CARRYING CAPACITY" or something like that?
>        I will try to hunt up some factoids and articles which relate
>        to that topic.

I would like to suggest, that in addition to social justice, cultural
sensitivity is critical.  Remember that non-industrialized societies
had stable populations until their culture was pushed out of the way
by western society.  Many people claim that the resulting population
jump was due to medical advances but there is no proof of this.  It
may just be a coincidence.  There is some proof that populations
are stable when people are secure in their society, and that
populations explode when that security is removed.  Fertility rates
may have been high enough to create ZPG in such societies and,
given a continually stable culture, may have declined in step with
better care had not the new industrialized society destroyed the
community-based lifestyles that gave these people security.  I think
that it is the loss of the supportive community structures inherent
in stuffing millions in crowded urban slums that is the biggest
part of population growth.  Although I fully support birth control
campaigns and so on, I think the fundamental issue will remain
until a stable society develops.  This doesn't necessarily
contradict Dale's social justice claim, but I think it puts into
the perspective the idea that it is the so-called development
process that created the problem, not antibiotics, and that the
cultural superiority complex of many westerners that contributes
greatly to the problem by denying and denigrating the ancient
wisdom that exists in many societies that don't have fancy
technology.
-- 
==============================================================================
	Dean Myerson			dean@vexcel.com
==============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: moore@kiowa.santafe.edu (Cris Moore)
Subject: Libertarians and Greens
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 17:46:51 GMT
Organization: Santa Fe Institute

There _is_ some common ground between Libertarians and Greens.
People might find it ironic that a Left Green would bring this up,
but Left Greens (or Green Leftists) come from the strongly
anti-authoritarian tradition of the Left.
(We're the ones that didn't get a big country to experiment with -
totalitarian socialism, which I would say _has_ been tried in the
former Soviet Union, is as different from democratic socialism
as capitalism is.)

Some examples:

. I share with Libertarians (and most Americans) a sense that the
  Federal government is mainly a dangerous self-seeking institution.
  This makes me different from many main-stream environmentalists and
  "liberals", especially those who are part of the D.C. establishment.

. For instance, here in New Mexico the idea that "public" ownership
  of land, namely ownership by the Feds, is protecting the environment
  is clearly a farce.  The Federal government's land management programs,
  such as in our National Forests, mostly subsidize industry by selling
  our "collective" property to industry at below-market values.
  Both Libertarians and I deploe this.  However, instead of private
  ownership, I prefer _local_ public ownership; at the community level,
  where officials can be held directly accountable to the people,
  and people can participate meaningfully in decision-making,
  instead of a distant bureaucracy.

. I agree that a good society _must_ uphold the rights of the individual,
  and must celebrate individuality and initiative.  However, I think
  capitalism upholds property rights to the point that it infringes on
  other rights or other individuals (such as the right to clean air, etc.)
  and that capitalism actually _denigrates_ the individual by reducing us
  to the roles of worker and consumer.  In capitalism, only a few people
  get to creatively determine the direction of their own lives; 
  the rest of us work for them.

. I _certainly_ share with Libertarians a commitment to civil liberties,
  freedom of speech, sexual freedom, and an end to the War On Inner-City People
  oops I mean Drugs.

Just some thoughts.  But please let's restrict the traffic on this list
to discussion of Greens and our philosophies, positions and strategies.
A good guideline is: If your message doesn't even mention the Greens,
post it somewhere else!  Thanks.

- Cris Moore
NM Greens
moore@santafe.edu