From: asylvain@felix.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,ca.environment
Subject: Re: "Ecofascists" In Action
Keywords: Pollution, Volunteerism, Environment
Date: 25 Aug 92 19:46:35 GMT
Reply-To: asylvain@fritz.filenet.com (The Chipmunk)
Organization: Foundation for the Increased Wealth of Chipmunks

Written in article <8203.21956@stratus.SWDC.Stratus.COM>
 by bruce@godzilla.swdc.stratus.com (Bruce Overby):

: Some on these groups have derided the activities of what at
: least one has called "ecofascists," environmentalists who
: serve as watchdogs and hassle companies and individuals who
: harm the environment.

Well, if we're going to have a meaningful discussion, clearly we're
going to have to agree on the terms we use.

"Ecofacist," as probably invented by the infamous Rush Limbaugh, refers
to the word combinations of "ecology" and "facist."  Therefore, what
makes an "ecofacist" is not mere "serving as watchdog," but more along
the lines of attempting to use extremes of govt force to serve their 
ecological ends.

Ie, an ecofacist is perfectly happy to "steal" property from individuals,
so long as there are two qualifications:

One, said individual was performing, or might perform, "environmental 
harm," as defined by the ecofacist.  Two, said theft is done "legally."

Frequently, the second category is not required.  These people are not
technically "ecofacist," as "facism" is a form of govt control, but 
nevertheless they are "facists" in spirit.  Failing to attain legal theft, 
they resort to illegal theft.  For these people, the Holy Environmental 
Ends justifies whatever means are available.

There exist ecofacists who would be happy to kill to save the planet, 
their justification being the choice of the lesser evil.  The mere lack 
of necessity of such extremes sometimes doesn't soak into these skulls.

: As I understand it, the problem these
: naysayers have with environmental activists is that they
: seek to restrict what an individual does with his or her
: private property, thereby depriving that individual of his
: or her constitutional rights.

Yes, I think that about sums it up.

Remember, the true ecofacist cares nothing about personal property, and
in fact, "personal" property does not exist under facism.  Therefore,
whatever is done "for the Good of the People" is good and proper.  The
ecofacist substitutes "environment" for "people," but the principle is
essentially identical.

:- Responding to an anonymous tip, a volunteer found more than
: 100 drums of solvents, bilge oil and paint on San Francisco's
: Hyde Street Pier, where historic ships are berthed. Dead gulls
: were lying on the adjacent beach. Herz's reports to the city's
: health department and the district attorney led to removal and
: proper disposal of the wastes.

I have a question about this one.  What precisely was "proper disposal"
of these wastes?

Currently, "proper disposal" of wastes simply means you give it to the
govt to dispose of as they see fit.  Of course, that's not necessarily
good for the environment.

The Hyperion sewage treatment plant in El Segundo, run by the govt of
course, is very frequently accused of dumping with very minimal (or no)
treatment of sewage.  Most of the city of El Segundo smells horrible.  I
choke just thinking about it.

The joke among sailors is that it's illegal to use the head while in the
Marina (that's true).  You must be so many feet out to sea first.  Or, 
you can give it to Hyperion so they can dump it in the sea for you.

But I have a better question for env'lists, one that I've yet to hear 
any satisfactory answer to: why do you so implicitly trust the govt to 
do anything right?

-- 
The Chipmunk.
Opinions are mine, void where prohibited, taxed, licensed or regulated.
Hall's Third Law of Politics: Liberals defend military spending, and 
conservatives social spending, in their own districts.
Xref: sparky ca.politics:7057 ca.environment:822 ba.politics:4784