From: spf@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (Steve Frysinger of Blue Feather Farm)
Newsgroups: misc.rural
Subject: Re: the threat from animal-rights and environmentalists
Date: 28 Jan 93 19:16:18 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories

From article <6594@balrog.ctron.com>, by smith@ctron.com (Lawrence C Smith):
> In article <1993Jan27.154026.9781@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>, spf@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (Steve Frysinger of Blue Feather Farm) writes:
> 
>>I think by now I've clearly staked my claim.  And I'll go a step further by
>>speculating that the vast majority of environmentalists join me in the
>>former of your two inadequate categories.
> 
> Ah, but the most vocal and most visible proponents of "environmentalism" are
> amongst the latter.  When people take on the environmentalist label, they
> are associating themselves with that extreme, and thereby become part of the
> problem, not of the solution.  

By this logic, Jesse Helms defines the term "Republican", right?  I prefer
to allow each individual to decide what they mean by a label they choose to
assume.  Since the vast majority (at least by that poll) of our citizens
adopted the label "environmentalist", and since I simply do not believe
that the vast majority of our citizens supports the blind ecocentrism
you describe, then I find your conclusion in error.  These people are NOT
associating themselves with the extreme (in fact, is it possible for a
majority to hold an extreme view and still call it extreme?).  They are
operationally defining the term, but a DIFFERENT extreme is not paying
attention.

> quality and protection of the environment, and to most of the electorate, it
> still is.  But to many of the "hippy-dippy" set, it has taken on many political
> overtones, most of them Marxist or derivative of Marxist.  As one "green"
> politico whose name I don't recall once said, "we should use the need to
> protect the environment to force changes that we should have made already."

Yes, and humanitarian aid is used by some as a tool for redefining
political boundaries.  This negates the worth of neither humanitarianism
nor environmentalism.

>>I respectfully submit that it is you who frequents the extreme.  And I
>>suggest that you won't carry your point in a society, three-quarters of
>>which regard themselves as environmentalists, by crucifying them for the
>>perceived sins of any extreme.
> 
> I suppose that makes me an extremist, then.  Well, perhaps I am.  I am
> very extreme in my belief that environmental problems need to be identified
> and prioritized and dealt with using effective solutions, not starry-eyed
> symbolic, or political ones.  Admittedly, I am very extreme in my belief that
> if we spend billions on air pollution, that I want to see less of it, not just

You sound like an environmentalist to me!

> different or elsewhere.  And I am very extreme in my belief that sophmoric
> insistance on a total dismantling of industrial culture is stupid and very
> counterproductive, not to mention unbelievably cruel in the number of human
> beings who would die if any gov't was swayed enough to try to implement the
> more Luddite visions of the environmentalists.
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Here's your error, IMHO.  Luddites have Luddite visions.  Please do not
ascribe to environmentalists the position of other quarters.  A person may
be both a Luddite and an environmentalist, and they may even get a lot of
press, but that doesn't mean that environmentalsm==Ludditism.  I'm an
environmentalist (I hope I've proved that) and a gun owner who supports the
second amendment.  Be assured, that doesn't mean environmentalist==pro-gun.

> Be very careful what label you take to yourself.  You may find it pinching.

I choose labels carefully.  I won't take on either conservative or liberal,
Republican or Democrat, and I'm not even sure whether I dress to the right
or the left (maybe I need a second opinion :-).

But I KNOW I'm an environmentalist, because I believe strongly in the
stewardship of the environment.  Whatever wild generalizations others choose
to make about the label is their problem, except I'll defend the term and
the sense in which I use it.

Pigeon-holing and generalization are, I think, the enemies of individualism,
and individualism is the cornerstone of democracy.  Let's hold the labels,
forget the generalizations, stop the name-calling, and discuss the issues.
 
> Larry Smith (smith@ctron.com)  

Thanks for your reasonable contribution to this thread.  It was a pleasant
response to read.

Steve
Newsgroups: misc.rural