HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: aphrael@cats.ucsc.edu (Robert D West)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: LOCAL GREENS
Date: 13 Jan 1993 00:59:47 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
Distribution: ca
NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu


Question for local greens: As you know, Congressman Panetta
is resigning in order to serve as the new director of the Office
of Management and Budget. Assemblyman Farr has declared a candidacy
for Panetta's seat and is expected to win.
Given that one of the reasons for not running a local candidate in '92
was a desire to not undermine the localr epresentatives whose
records on environmental issues were considerably good, has the
party given any thought to running a candidate for Farr's open
seat? It would greatly increase the clout of the party, and
force the press to cover it, if it were able to win election to 
a state assembly seat - and if there is any district in the state
where this is remotely possible, the Santa Cruz/Monterey area district
is it.
From: tnguyen@shelley.u.washington.edu (Thang Nguyen)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Green Promise
Date: 6 Jan 1993 00:42:27 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
NNTP-Posting-Host: shelley.u.washington.edu



	Green Promise

If you cut down your rain forests
And give them to us,
We will reward you greatly,
As we feel it a must.
This we promise, promise said we.

For our econonmy is down,
Our pollution still around.
The soil was getting dry, the forest bare-
But we cutted them down, we didn't care.
And this we did, cutted them down did we.

Now we are clean,
With no forests to show.
We have never been any cleaner.
Look at us!
This is the way to go.
Because we are clean, clean said we.

And all we want are those trees,
Castle on your land.
Pay us a little fee
And we'll even give you a hand.
Just a fee, a little fee said we.

So if you cut down your rain forests,
We will reward you very greatly.
You will be a lot happier,
As we feel this has to be.
And this we promise, promise said we.
From: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Date: 09 Jan 93 08:08 PST
Subject: Re: Hawai'i Greens (was Re: Greens vs. 
Nf-ID: #R:1993Jan7.201920.3997@vexcel.com:158334094:cdp:1678600077:000:1213
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!dmcmillen    Jan  9 08:08:00 1993


Dean,
 
I appreciate your efforts to try to sort out the many different threads
that have been started on the "Greens vs. Property Rights" topic, but
just starting a new topic mid-way through the conversation can be
very confusing for new readers or for historical reference.  Would
you be willing to sort through the Property Rights topic and re-post
the discussions about Hawai'i over here?
 
Dale
 
P.S. I know will be a hassle for the readers to have to re-read all
this stuff again, but I think it may be worth it.
 
P.P.S  Karen, maybe you'd want to post the Green Party of Hawaii's platform
here.  (Folks, I would ask that you refrain from criticizing the platform in
this forum, if Karen decides to post it.  Platforms are developed through a
very long and tedious process and represent the best political, social and
ecological hopes that the party plans to put forward.  I think it is best to
refrain from criticism because these are not simply the opinions of one person
who would be able to fully respond in this forum.  Additionally, it should be
clear to all of us right now that there are very many different opinions on
this newsgroup and that the platform would certainly not please everyone.)
 

Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: mitra@pandora.sf.ca.us (Mitra)
Subject: San Diego Greens
Organization: Pandora Systems
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 03:11:02 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]


There is a San Diego Green Party chapter, I'm not sure of their number,
but the people at the Green Store in Ocean Beach are involved.

- Mitra
From: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Date: 07 Jan 93 16:26 PST
Subject: Re: LET'S DISCUSS NUCLEAR ENERGY!
Nf-ID: #R:cdp:1678600048:cdp:1678600059:000:1160
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!dmcmillen    Jan  7 16:26:00 1993


>Chernobyl was a long string of incredibly stupid moves.  Starting with a
>brain dead design, followed by an assinine decision not to build a
>containment vessel.  You can get more radiation from a couple of chest
>x-rays than was released at Three-Mile Island.
>
>Can we guarentee that there will never be another accident.  No of course
>not.  Can we demonstrate, that when the entire life cycle is taken into
>account, nuclear power is safer than the alternatives, Yes.

Safer than solar?  Corn ethanol?

>|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?
>
>I'm sorry Dale, but this question just doesn't make any sense.  What
>relationship is their between nuclear weapons and nuclear power?
>Do you think there are little bombs going off inside those plants or
>something?

That wasn't my point, but rather don't you think it's a more than a
coincidence that the by-product of nuclear reactors is used for
nuclear bombs and it's the same folks in government and industry
who promote both?  Oh, but maybe I am just too paranoid about
conspiracy theories.

Dale
From: alaric@sti.com (Alaric Tekiahyn)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Date: 5 Jan 1993 03:15:27 GMT
Organization: Software Transformation, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: smurf.sti.com

In article <1iahtdINN6uj@shelley.u.washington.edu>, monaghan@cac.washington.edu (Tracy Monaghan ) writes:
] >In article <1993Jan04.075132.9679@microsoft.com> leecr@microsoft.com (Lee Crocker) 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).

Absolutely correct.

As a matter of fact, given the distribution of wealth in America, the
world's leading capitalist nation, it becomes awfully difficult to
argue convincingly that capitalism "guarantee[s] to each worker his or
her exclusive right to the fruits of his/her labor".  On the contrary,
capitalism seems to concentrate most of the fruits of everyone's labor
in the pockets of the relative few at the top of the pile (or in its
upper tiers).

But then, so does just about every other system, so what else is new?


-- 
      "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
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Date: 11 Jan 93 15:53:11 GMT
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO

In article <1678600074@igc.apc.org> dmcmillen@igc.apc.org (Dale McMillen) writes:
>
>>The fact is (IMHO) that pure laissez faire is lethal to itself.
>>When some accumulate a large amount of wealth, they use that wealth
>>to distort the market conditions to perpetuate their wealth and to
>>prevent others from obtaining similar wealth.  
>>
>>Lee Daniel Crocker
> 
>Lee, you are starting to make sense.  I knew there was common ground
>between Libertarians and Greens.  (Just don't want to overstate it.)
> 
>Dale

Unfortunately, this statement is mine.  My apologies if the
misattribution is mt fault.
-- 
==============================================================================
	Dean Myerson     (aka dingo in boulder)     dean@vexcel.com
==============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 05:17:42 GMT

In article <1678600031@igc.apc.org> Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org> writes:
> 1. Land fill space

No problem. Pick any midwestern state. Move the people out and you have all
the landfill you can want.

> 2. Energy

Energy is getting *more* abundant (cheaper).

> 3. Clean Water

Now THIS is a big problem. To solve this, you need to increase the rate of
depletion of #1 and #2.

> 4. Clean Air

See #3.

> 5. Forest Products (oh, how I hate to use those words together!)

A big problem in the US, where forestry "management" is a joke. Close the
national forests, and the price of forest products would go up for a while
until they started to actually *farm* them (rather than cover up what
amounts to slash-and-burn agriculture).

Better in some parts of the world, a lot worse in others. Can be helped
by spending more of #2 in poorer nations.

The biggest problem is unoccupied land. We're RAPIDLY running out.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
 `-_-'   Oletko halannut suttasi tnn?
  'U`    
Tarjoilija, tm ateria el viel.
From: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Date: 08 Jan 93 22:02 PST
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Nf-ID: #R:1hs8brEINNfle@uni-erlangen.de:-1634168734:cdp:1678600071:000:1882
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!dmcmillen    Jan  8 22:02:00 1993


From: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen>
Subject: Greens vs. Property Rights

From alaric@sti.com Fri Jan  8 19:26:16 1993
Received: from sti.com by igc.apc.org (4.1/Revision: 1.53 )
	id AA07245; Fri, 8 Jan 93 19:26:13 PST
Received: by sti.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
      id AA26197; Fri, 8 Jan 93 19:22:59 PST
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 19:22:59 PST
From: alaric@sti.com (Phil Stracchino)
Message-Id: <9301090322.AA26197@sti.com>
To: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Status: R


In article <1678600045@igc.apc.org>, you write:
] 
] > Actually, the biggest problem this planet has right now is people.
] > Get rid of all the people and things'll straighten out just fine on
] > their own, in fifty thousand years or so.
]  
] I know that many from the deep ecology movement have entertained
] misanthropic (human hating) notions.  It should be stated very
] clearly that The Greens are not among those.  While many of us
] (myself included) feel very inspired by deep ecology, we are very
] clearly a movement for social justice as well as ecology.
]  
] Dale

Not intending to put the suggestion forward as part of anyone's
platform...  I just get real disgusted with the human race sometimes.
As has been said before, "There is no evidence that intelligence is
a survival factor."  I'd say the huamn race is pretty good evidence
that it isn't.
But then, most people never use the brains that were born with if
they can get away without, so...

	Hey, life's a bitch, and then you die.	:-)


-- 
      "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
From: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Date: 07 Jan 93 16:27 PST
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Nf-ID: #R:1hs8brEINNfle@uni-erlangen.de:-1634168734:cdp:1678600060:000:2043
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!dmcmillen    Jan  7 16:27:00 1993


>|> We are exploiting Chinese labor, because they are paid much less.
>|> It is nevertheless to their advantage to be exploited for now.
>| 
>|Says who?
>
>If their only alternative is not working and therefore starving to
>death, then I would say they are better off.  Dale, how do you propose
>to help these people.
> .....
> If the alternative is for them and their families to starve to death, I
> am sure these children are glad that someone buys the products they make.

Apparently you haven't read my postings about the failures of the
Green [sic] Revolution, the results of which have thrown people
off their lands, concentrated wealth, and have execerbated hunger.
Traditional agrarian societies were much more socially just and
provided people with many more of their needs than the city
squalor in which they currently must live.  Please read these
these articles, especially the UNCED documents.  If you still
disagree, then please know that you are not only disagreeing with me.

>|> In a free market relations of exploitation are not likely to persist
>|> indefinitely.
>| 
>|Is this a statement of faith?  An assumption of theoretical possibility?
>|Or, an actual historical event which you have witnessed?
>
>All of the above.

Please provide an example of the historical event.

>>|It's understandable Marx was so down on capitalism since history only
>>|showed him how it produced slavery.  Do you see anything different
>>|in capitalism today?  What steps would you suggest to make it freer?

>You seem to have missed Lee's entire point.  Or are you ignoring it.
>Lee argued that what Marx and you have labeled capitalism is not in
>fact capitalism.  The era in reference was at best Mercantalist with a
>few Feudalistic tendencies thrown in.

Isn't there a difference between the "free market" and "capitalism"?

>All other methods of organizing society have proven to be quite crappy
>at creating wealth.  If there is no wealth, then it is irrelevant how
>well spread around it is.

Please describe wealth.

Thanks,

Dale

Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: leecr@microsoft.com (Lee Crocker)
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Date: 04 Jan 93 07:51:32 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

>In article <1678600006@igc.apc.org> Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org> writes:
>>
>>1. In this world where the vast majority of people live in abject poverty,
>>wealth beyond what one needs to take care of one's self and family is
>>immoral.

In this world where the education, health, and infrastructure to create
economic prosperity are given only to a few, and where scientific
progress and economic growth benefit all, _not_ producing as much
wealth as one is capable of is immoral.

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.

-- 
Lee Daniel Crocker    | Free minds; free bodies; free trade.
leecr@microsoft.com   | Libertarian Party  1-800-682-1776
From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Date: 8 Jan 93 00:01:48 GMT
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO

In article <1993Jan07.032857.5332@microsoft.com> leecr@microsoft.com (Lee Crocker) writes:
>In article <C0EBCw.11E@techbook.com> gummitch@techbook.com (Jeff Frane) writes:
>>
>>The idea that Capitalism is the system that guarantees workers the
>>"exclusive right to the fruits of his/her labor" is astonishing, and
>>certainly would be a revelation to all the workers in this country that
>>struggled to feed their families on starvation wages and were beaten,
>>shot and thrown out of work by the goon squads hired by the companies
>>that actually owned the fruits of their labor.  Even the simplest
>>American history course should reveal the idiocy of suggesting that
>>capitalism -- at least as it is actually _practiced_ -- is anything but
>>heartless and immoral.  Whatever benefits/kindnesses are practiced by
>>corporations today were forced on them by the collective action of
>>workers, NOT by any inherent virtue in capitalism.
>
>You miss the point entirely--those terrible conditions were anything
>but capitalism; they were state-supported criminal enterprises with
>no respect for individual rights.  The fact that no one in human
>history has ever practiced true capitalism should be all the more
>argument in favor of it.  All governments in human history have been
>opressive of the working class, because none of them respected the
>absolute inviolable human right of each individual to his own life,
>liberty and property.

No totally pure form of anything is likely to ever exist.  Conditions
in the US in the latter half of the 1800's were much closer to
laissez faire than todays conditions.  While the railroad monopolies
were government creations, Standard Oil (and others) weren't; and it
was much more resilient than the RR monopolies.  The fact is (IMHO)
that pure laissez faire is lethal to itself.  When some accumulate
a large amount of wealth, they use that wealth to distort the
market conditions to perpetuate their wealth and to prevent others
from obtaining similar wealth.  
>
>-- 
>Lee Daniel Crocker    | Free minds; free bodies; free trade.
>leecr@microsoft.com   | Libertarian Party  1-800-682-1776


-- 
==============================================================================
	Dean Myerson     (aka dingo in boulder)     dean@vexcel.com
==============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: leecr@microsoft.com (Lee Crocker)
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Date: 05 Jan 93 21:41:12 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

>I am, however, suggesting that not everyone in society is getting
>a fair chance.  If you grow up in a wealthy family, have good nutrition,
>go to the best schools, and inherit a vast fortune (more than the amount
>which could reasonably be claimed as neccessary to take care of yourself,
>your family and community) you certainly are more capable of providing
>for yourself than someone from a poor working background.  In fact, if
>you find you are able to maintain your privilege by keeping the poor
>worker impoverished (union busting, low pay, regressive taxation, etc.),
>history has shown you will do that.

Union busting can only be done with force.  Taxation is an act of
government, not an act of commerce.  Low pay can only exist in the
absence of competition, and only force of government can keep
competitors out of the market.  All the evils you list do indeed
exist, but they are the result of the cancer of government, not the
healthy body of free enterprise.
-- 
Lee Daniel Crocker    | Free minds; free bodies; free trade.
leecr@microsoft.com   | Libertarian Party  1-800-682-1776
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: ladasky@netcom.com (John J. Ladasky II)
Subject: Re: PLEASE SIGN IN!
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 07:54:32 GMT

Greetings, fellow Greens!

	My name is John Ladasky.  I have been an active member of the 
Green Party of California for one year.  I am from the San Jose local, and
I'm a member of the County Council of the Green Party of Santa Clara County.

	I graduated from U.C. Berkeley in 1989 with a Bachelors' in 
Biochemistry, and a minor in Music.  I'm currently employed in the Research
department of a biotech company that makes medical diagnostic equipment and
reagents (i.e., one of those evil transnationals :^).

	To be sure, I probably should never have gotten involved with the
Green Party - my life already was too full of activity before I signed up.
I'm trying to return to grad school for my Ph.D., I purchased a fixer-
upper condo (within biking distance of work!) which remains only about half-
fixed, I moonlight as a computer programmer for a small start-up, and I
still try to pursue my hobby, music composition, in my spare time.  If I
should get accepted to graduate school, I'll be dropping the Green Party
for a while, but perhaps I can continue to participate now and again through
a forum such as this.


-- 
== 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: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Date: 07 Jan 93 09:58 PST
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Nf-ID: #R:1hs8brEINNfle@uni-erlangen.de:-1634168734:cdp:1678600055:000:1265
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!dmcmillen    Jan  7 09:58:00 1993


From: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen>
Subject: Greens vs. Property Rights

From casspa@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU Thu Jan  7 08:58:17 1993
Received: from atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU by igc.apc.org (4.1/Revision: 1.53 )
	id AA00918; Thu, 7 Jan 93 08:58:11 PST
Received: by atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (5.61/1.34)
	id AA24530; Thu, 7 Jan 93 08:59:42 -0800
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 08:59:42 -0800
From: Paul Cass <casspa@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU>
Message-Id: <9301071659.AA24530@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU>
To: dmcmillen@igc.apc.org
Subject: Re: Greens vs. Property Rights
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University
Cc: 
Status: RO

In article <1678600046@igc.apc.org> you write:
>Please explain why the capitalists and the government always seem
>to be in collusion with each other.
> 
>Dale
>

 Because the one (government) is bought and paid for by the other 
 (capitalists).  I am not as cynical as that sounds - but close.

 Paul


-- 
                          * * * * * * *
"It is possible to join forces, to identify common goals, and to agree on
 common action." - U.N. World Commission on Development and Environment
		       casspa@jacobs.cs.orst.edu
From: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Date: 09 Jan 93 15:54 PST
Subject: Re: LET'S DISCUSS NUCLEAR ENERGY!
Nf-ID: #R:cdp:1678600048:cdp:1678600079:000:137
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!dmcmillen    Jan  9 15:54:00 1993


Please see the topic "INDIGENOUS ENVIRO PERSPECTIVE" for
a discussion of the harmful effects of uranium and coal mining
on Indian lands.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens