From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Newsgroups: alt.individualism,alt.activism.d
Subject: Re: Environmentalism is not Anti-Individualism
Date: 9 Oct 92 17:00:25 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO

In article <BvuszK.184@quake.sylmar.ca.us> brian@quake.sylmar.ca.us (Brian K. Yoder) writes:
>In article <1992Oct7.190415.5180@vexcel.com> dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct7.000452.4784@mtek.com> brew@mtek.com writes:
>>>jym@remarque.berkeley.edu (Jym Dyer) writes:
>>>>In article <1992Sep29.154153.27836@athena.cs.uga.edu> brown@pollux
>>>>(Daniel Brown) writes:
>
>>I think you are confusing green with Green.  The traditional environmental
>>movement (essentially synonomous with green) does look to government
>>solutions, which is traditional among liberals.  The _G_reen movement,
>>at least in the US, is for a radical decentralization of government powers
>>to local jurisdictions.  
>
>But never to the individual to control HIS OWN life, right?  It's just as 
>wrong for a mayor to run your life as it is for the President to do so.

Its not so easy for a mayor to run your life in a direct democratic
town.  Individuals can control their lives within a direct democracy.
In a laissez faire system, people are controlled by the few who have
great economic power.
>
>>The central concept to the Green Party USA is
>>not environment, it is community.  
>
>The collective over the individual again.

And how is the individual to control ones life in a society with many
people contesting for power?  How does the individual protect ones
self from larger non-governmental institutions?  Through voluntary
collective association.  The government may be a source of coercive
power, but it is by no means the only one.  Anyone who thinks the
limitation of the market will more effectively control coercive
behavior have lost the lessons of the late 1800's.
>
>>I believe that there are _some_ areas
>>where state activity is needed.  I also think that many of the things the
>>state is trying to do today could be done better at a local level.
>>I don't claim that this view dominates environmental thinking.  Its obvious
>>that the lobbying of the mainstream organizations fits your complaints
>>fairly well.  The debate then becomes whether ineffective government
>>regulation is better than the blind trust in the market exhibited by
>>Libertarians.  
>
>What is so "blind" about allowing people to run their own affairs?  Individual
>people are far less "blind" the the facts of the economic affairs than 
>any government agency...even a "local" one.  By the way, I'm NOT a Libertarian
>and I am a radical capitalist.  The two are not identical.

What is blind is assuming that laissez faire will permit each individual
to run their own affairs.  Local government that limits executive power
provides the individual with a strong say.  I'm not sure what the
difference is between a Lib and a radical capitalist.  Does that mean
you are an anarchist?  Do you support laissez faire economic structures?
If not, then what?
>
>>While the Green solution is complex, the exercise of
>>gevernment power locally gives the individual a much greater voice and
>>makes the impacts of those decisions more personal, both of which should
>>help to limit government coercion.
>
>I suppose that's why the "local government" of Salem Mass. what such 
>an exemplar of limted coercion, tolerance, and good judgement, right?
>What matters isn't the size of the area covered, heck, there are a lot of
>simple pairs of people who have abusive relationships, and that doesn't
>stop them!  On the other hand, the US government did a pretty good job
>of staying out of people's way until the "New Deal", and most of the 
>worst abuses of the early 20th century were by the smaller units of
>government (say, with racial segregation laws) not with the feds.
>What matters is the philosophy of the government, not it's size.

Salem witch burnings were not so different than non-governmental lynchings
in the old west.  No system will ever be better than the people who
populate it.  There is no magic structure such as no government or
no private property.  The abuses that we suffer under today must be
compared with abuses under other systems we have experience with.
Were the abuses of the Robber Barons less than those of today?  Of
course I am not a supporter of what we have today, but the
idolization of times when the national government was smaller ignore
the fact that people demanded such government because of the terrible
conditions of the day.  That choice may not have been optimal, but it
was better than what they had.

>
>--Brian


-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
Xref: sparky alt.individualism:5688 alt.activism.d:3592 talk.environment:4098