HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jafoust@cco.caltech.edu (Jeffrey Alan Foust)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: save the earth - ridiculous!
Date: 22 Jan 1993 08:37:12 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu

In article <1993Jan21.024932.18367@netcom.com> ladasky@netcom.com (John J. Ladasky II) writes:
>	I haven't seen anything in the California Green Party Platform
>concerning space exploration at all.  This is probably an omission that 
>should be corrected in the 1994 document.  We probably ought to say some-
>thing about the use of liquid oxygen/liquid hydrogen rocket motors vs.
>aluminum perchlorate solid rocket boosters - the former are far less 
>polluting.  We should also push for the recovery of all launch components.
>A lot of multi-stage rocket launches just drop their used stages into the
>ocean.

	Instead of pushing for recovery of all launch components (which would
drive up the cost of each launch and probably necessitate considerable 
redesign of all existing boosters), the Calif. Green Party should consider
supporting the development of single stage to orbit (SSTO) technology
currently in the works.  Everything that lifts off the pad ends up in
orbit.  Such boosters promise to lower the cost of lifting payloads into
orbit considerably.  (It also uses LOX/LH2-fueled motors, so it burns clean, 
too).

>	Speaking for myself, I think that there are great opportunities for
>humans in space - LATER.

Careful... "later is 40% of the way to never."

>The extraction of any meaningful quantity of re-
>sources from space would involve a higher initial capital cost than any
>project yet undertaken by humans, and the return on our investment might take
>a century to come in. 

Not necessarily.  It may very well be possible to do something, with a cost
on the scale of Project Apollo (a few tens of billions of dollars).  I've
heard of proposals to establish small-scale mining facilities on the Moon
at around this range, and also missions to near-Earth asteroids where a 
mass-driver is slapped on the asteroid, slowly bringing it to the vicinity of
Earth, where it can be mined for anything and everything useful (just
about any metallic element you can think of, including silver, gold and
platinum, assuming you select an iron-nickel asteroid).  

> I don't foresee humans being able to use any meaning-
>ful quantity of space resources until we have a cohesive social order on
>Earth - which, incidentally, is a big part of what the Green Party is about.

"A cohesive social order" -- sounds like an awfully fuzzy goal to me...
what does that mean?  


(Note: I'm not a Green: my political views are moderate.  I *strongly*
believe, though, that continued exploration and development of space is
essential to the future of humankind, which is how I found my way into
this newsgroup (a friend of a friend told me about the discussion).)

-- 
Jeff Foust                        Senior, Geophysics/Planetary Science, Caltech
jafoust@cco.caltech.edu   			   	 jeff@scn1.jpl.nasa.gov
 	  Final score of the Interstellar Space		Deep Space 9
	  Station Championship Softball Game:		Babylon    5
From: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Date: 25 Jan 93 12:09 PST
Subject: Re: THE MONEY SUPPLY AND CURRENCIES
Nf-ID: #R:cdp:1678600108:cdp:1678600169:000:595
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!dmcmillen    Jan 25 12:09:00 1993


> This is vague beyond comprehension unless vestigial marxist claptrap.

Please define "vestigial marxist claptrap".

Dale

PS It has been a very interesting experience following this thread with
   three, apparently irreconcilable, viewpoints:  A libertarian, a
   defender of the status quo, and myself who is promoting something
   like small scale businesses and decentralized socialism.  My guess
   is that all of us are sharing in the demagoguery of which you accuse
   William Jennings Bryan.  BTW, you should know that very many folks
   don't hold the same opinion of Bryan as you do.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: moore@kiowa.santafe.edu (Cris Moore)
Subject: Re: Perception of Greens as IDIOTS
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 02:35:00 GMT
Organization: Santa Fe Institute

What Greens need to do if they want average people to believe in them
is to...

ORGANIZE!  And prove our values through ACTIONS that people can understand.

For us here, this has meant fighting for justice in the property tax system,
helping a nearby village fend off a golf course, and a bunch of other things.
Others Greens have improved people's lives by organizing food coops,
fighting racism, and so on.

At a recent meeting, 150 senior citizens were told by a woman they respect
that the Green Party has been doing good for the community.  This is
worth its weight in gold.  We earned it by doing WORK.

To get rid of stereotypes, we have to show people that we mean business,
and that our ideas have real implications in the world that they can 
appreciate.  Working on our "image" isn't enough!  Adopting a good platform
isn't enough!  Only getting in the trenches with people and making their
lives better will convince people that the Greens deserve their
trust.

Cris Moore, NM Greens
From: spencer@cats.ucsc.edu (Michael Spencer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: THE MONEY SUPPLY AND CURRENCIES
Date: 26 Jan 1993 18:14:53 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: si.ucsc.edu


Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org> writes:

>PS It has been a very interesting experience following this thread with
>   three, apparently irreconcilable, viewpoints:  A libertarian, a
>   defender of the status quo, and myself who is promoting something
>   like small scale businesses and decentralized socialism. 

Assume you are referring to me as the defender of the status quo.
Not true. Just prefer reformation to transformation.

20th century socialism has a horrible record of breeding political
thugs: Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao.  Not too slight the lesser
hoods like Honecker, Cseausescu etc.

The populists have done better, or at least Huey Long, Herman Talmadge,
Jim Folsom, and George Wallace did not act nearly as badly.
But I do not think that many people today view them as sterling
role models for aspiring politicians.

Every socialist I have ever met always says: "Well, they were
aberrations, but with my system ...". Hmmm. Sure. 

Note for those who would take issue with the above:
Don't waste time saying Hitler & Mussolini weren't socialists.
	Nazi is short for National Socialist. Mussolini started his
	political career as the editor of a socialist newspaper.
	They both politically hijacked socialist movements -
	but socialist movements have proven highly susceptible 
	to such hijacking - which is exactly my point.
Don't bother pointing to the sins of free-market capitalism advocates
	- unless you can point to thugs of the caliber of
	Hitler, Stalin, et al.



===========================================================================
Michael Spencer            |      2640 Borregas
spencer@cats.ucsc.edu      |      Aptos, CA   95003
===========================================================================


-- 

===========================================================================
Michael Spencer            |      2640 Borregas
spencer@cats.ucsc.edu      |      Aptos, CA   95003
===========================================================================

Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens,ba.transportation,sci.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Gas Tax?
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: 22 Jan 93 15:17:12

In article <jyc.727737475@Leland> jyc@leo.Stanford.EDU (Jon Corelis) writes:

   Xref: CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU alt.politics.greens:582 ba.transportation:6505 sci.environment:27653
   Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens,ba.transportation,sci.environment
Path: CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU!stanford.edu!nntp.Stanford.EDU!Leland!jyc
   From: jyc@leo.Stanford.EDU (Jon Corelis)
   Sender: news@leland.Stanford.EDU (Mr News)
   Organization: DSO, Stanford University
   References: <2936816145.1.p00004@psilink.com>
   Date: 22 Jan 93 21:17:55 GMT
   Lines: 16

      There was a very interesting article on European gas taxes this
   morning (1/22) in the San Francisco Chronicle.  I don't have it with me
   as I type this, but my memory is that its main points were:

      *  The pump price of gas in Western European countries is $2.00 to
	 $5.00 a gallon due to high gas taxes.

      *  Most people, including most people who choose to drive their    
	 personal automobiles, either accept or actually support these 
	 gas taxes because they are used to support public transit and
	 other government programs which benefit the community.

      *  The high gas taxes have greatly encouraged the development
	 of public transit in these countries not only by providing
	 funds to subsidize it but by providing a disincentive to drive
	 a personal auto.

I don't consider any of the above a good reason, especially after
having recently spent time in a snowstorm with a (justifiably)
impatient child waiting for a bus.  It was a very good bus system,
and the bus was only 15 minutes late.

--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis)
Subject: Re: COMMUNITY SUPPORTED AGRICULTURE
Organization: Precipitating Pendulums Postal Party Poopers
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 17:34:04 GMT

In article <1678600150@igc.apc.org> Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org> writes:
>
>One of the concerns that have been raised about self-sufficient and
>sustainable communities is that it is unreasonable to expect that
>everyone would want to spend their days wrestling a plow behind a
>mule.
>
>I think this is an over-simplification or a characture of what these
>communities might look like.
>
>Related to sustainable communities is another phenomenon called
>"Community Supported Agriculture" or "CSA".  The basic idea of
>a CSA is that a single or small group of people do the farming
>for the rest of the community, and the rest of the community supports
>them through either investing in the CSA or with "in kind" services.
>I am not aware of a CSA which is also linked to Time Dollars or
>LETS, but I am sure that it would be a natural outgrowth.

[ ... more description elided ... ]

Once again, I have to ask Dale why he thinks that such a system is so
different from the current one, and more specifically, why he thinks
that a CSA-type system would not just evolve (as ours has) into
something like the present one. 

Dale says: 

  "a single or small group of people do the farming
   for the rest of the community, and the rest of the community supports
   them through either investing in the CSA or with "in kind" services."

All you have to do is introduce money as medium for the support of the
farmers, and presto, its the present day. No difference, except that
perhaps the proportions of farmers to non-farmers is not quite what
one might hope for. (1)

What's different about CSA's *today* is that they help support farms
that operate differently to the majority of those supplying major
produce wholesalers (and thus most retail food oeprations).

What would be different in the (utopian) future, when all farms were
small scale, intensive, sustainable, socially just, world conscious,
ecocentric operations ?

You tell me.

-- paul

(1) and yes, I do mean to imply that there is a spiritual side to
    human existence, and yes, I do mean to imply that the production
    of food, its preparation and its consumption have always been
    a part of satisfying that spiritual existence.
-- 
hybrid rather than pure; compromising rather than clean;    | Militant Agnostic
distorted rather than straightforward; ambiguous rather than| I Don't Know
articulated; both-and rather than either-or; the difficult  |   and You Don't
unity of inclusion rather than the easy unity of exclusion. |   Know Either
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: jek@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (James E. Kittock)
Subject: Re: Perception of Greens as IDIOTS
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 01:04:02 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.184023.2634@vexcel.com> dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska) writes:
>>
>>	If we are to be effective as a party, or even as an advocacy group,`		we have to work on ways to convince people that this stereotype
>>	is not reflective of reality.
>>
>>	Any ideas?
>
>We're working on it here.  Community activists are working on it.  It is
>a problem, but considering the percentages Green candicates got in their
>first election round, I think we are making progress.

I think one thing that would help, in general, is for
activist-types to shave their faces more often and get
haircuts.  Before you attack me, please understand that
I don't say this snidely at all (indeed, I've been seen
with a face covered in scruff and a mop on my head, and
I don't even qualify as an activist).  I am merely
pointing out that most "average amerikins" don't trust
what they don't understand, and frankly, they just
don't understand people in tie-dye shirts and
birkenstocks, no matter how well-mannered those people
might be.

Dealing with the phobia of the masses is not a small
problem.  But for people with "alternative viewpoints"
to get those points across, they may have to give up
"alternative appearance."

Sad but true.

-- 
 james kittock :: stanford cs grad student :: duke '92 :: go blue devils!!
 "Adaptation is a recursive process in living systems." -- Alex. M. Andrew
From: chu@pit.bear.com (Arnold Chu)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: Outer space exploration
Date: 27 Jan 93 16:11:28 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

My feelings are largely in tune with Mr. Ladasky.  In fact, I started to 
support the efforts to eliminate hunger in the world some years ago.
That appears to be something people generally support when they realize that
is is a possibility.  World wide projects with clear, specific goals have
succeeded in that past.  It is very much a pity that projects such as the 
virtual elimination of small pox is not more widely appreciated.
I do think a world wide viscerally exciting project with clear goals and 
benefits which would involve a major portion of humanity can have a great 
impact on how we relate to each other and the planet.

What might US greens propose for world wide or nation wide projects with 
characteristics ?
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: Money systems (was Re: THE MONEY SUPPLY AND CURRENCIES)
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 10:07:47 GMT

In article <5k#svhk@SantaFe.edu> moore@kiowa.santafe.edu (Cris Moore) writes:
}p.s. Here in Santa Fe the Greens may soon start a Tenants' Rights group...

Marvelous!  Then this group can pass self-serving city ordinances putting
ceilings on the prices of rents, ban evictions, etc, and kill off the
rental housing industry there, causing homelessness.  Then you can rival
NYC, Santa Monica, and Berkeley, for the highest homelessness rates in the
country. Glory Be!

Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire
From: spencer@cats.ucsc.edu (Michael Spencer)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: LAW SUITS, REMEDIES AND TOXICS
Date: 24 Jan 1993 19:37:44 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu


Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org> writes:


>>I don't think the Greens should be promoting political systems.
>>They should be promoting toxic cleanups, pollution prevention,
>>etc.
>>
>>Michael Spencer
> 
>Don't you think these are problems caused by the political system?
>It sure is the political system which makes it difficult to find
>solutions!
> 
>Dale

No. 

The following countries have created much worse pollution problems
than the West:
	Communist Russia
	Communist China
	Semi-socialist India
Please note that a lot of China's pollution problems were caused
by Mao's attempts at local community self-sufficiency, eg
back-yard iron furnaces. 

Also note that India is being catastrophically de-forested by
land hungry peasants.

===========================================================================
Michael Spencer            |      2640 Borregas
spencer@cats.ucsc.edu      |      Aptos, CA   95003
===========================================================================

-- 

===========================================================================
Michael Spencer            |      2640 Borregas
spencer@cats.ucsc.edu      |      Aptos, CA   95003
===========================================================================
From: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Date: 24 Jan 93 20:55 PST
Subject: Re: save the earth - ridiculous!
Nf-ID: #R:1993Jan6.194324.13459@beaver.cs.:1812685772:cdp:1678600166:000:264
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!dmcmillen    Jan 24 20:55:00 1993


>Define "cohesive social order" buddy. That is seen by some as a euphemism
>for a totalitarian state's control over everything. The Greens should remember
>this and the old saying about what paves the road to hell.
 
Thanks for the very appropriate advice!
 
Dale

Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: aphrael@cats.ucsc.edu (Robert D West)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: IDIOTS
Date: 22 Jan 1993 02:28:28 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: as215-ws-2.ucsc.edu


In article <1jnie9INNk80@gap.caltech.edu> () writes:
>YOUR ALL A BUNCH OF TREELUVERS WHO CARE MORE ABOUT ANIMULS THAN PEOPLE.
>WHY DONT YOU ALL GO LIVE OUT IN NATURE AND LET THE REST OF US TAKE CARE
>OF BIZNESS.

	As ridiculous as this post is - particularly since it has no
	origin and is obviously an attempt to stir up angry responses - 
	it nevertheless makes an interesting point.

	There are a lot of people who view the Green Party just this
	way. The common perception, at first, among people whom I talk
	to about the party is that we are all a bunch of environmental
	extremists out to destroy mankind in order to save a snail
	darter.

	If we are to be effective as a party, or even as an advocacy group,`		we have to work on ways to convince people that this stereotype
	is not reflective of reality.

	Any ideas?
-- 
"I don't know a soul who's not been battered	|	The American Dream?
I don't have a friend who feels at ease		|	The California Dream?
I don't know a dream that's not been shattered	|  In 1993, dreams these aren't.
Or driven to its knees.				|  Rather, they're nightmares.
But it's all right, it's all right"		|______________________________
	---Paul Simon, "American Tune" (1973)	|	aphrael@cats.ucsc.edu
________________________________________________|  1991-1995; Politics/History
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: THE MONEY SUPPLY AND CURRENCIES
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 08:57:29 GMT

In article <1678600143@igc.apc.org> Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org> writes:
}
}> Inflation is a political decision, it is not a per se consequence
}> of a monetary economy - you can also have deflation.
}> Historically, it has usually been farmers (as opposed to rentiers)
}> who have pushed for inflationary policies (eg the Free Silver
}> movement in US in 1890's; cf Bryan's "Cross of Gold" speech).
} 
}Presumably you are referring to farmers who were trying to have
}a liveable lifestyle while trading with a centralized currency
}over which they had little control.

Centralized?  There was competitive issue of bank notes that circulated as
currency at the time.

Naturally, this would lead
}to inflationary tendencies.

Naturally, this is false.  During the period between 1873 and 1893, the
monetary standard was stable, real wages rose, and prices (including interest
rates) fell.  The agrarian followers of the demogogue Bryan supported
inflation, rather than opposing it.

The suggestion is that these farmers
}would be better off if they traded in a currency which was directly
}tied to their labor and ability to feed and house themselves, rather
}than a currency that was tied to the interests of the wealthy
}industrialists on the east or the federal government whose interest
}was westward and world expansion.

This is vague beyond comprehension unless vestigial marxist claptrap.

Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Francois Marie Arouet Voltaire
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
From: cls@truffula.sj.ca.us (Cameron L. Spitzer)
Subject: Outer space resources, was Re: save the earth - ridiculous!
Organization: Save the Humans!
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 07:08:15 GMT
Summary:  Outer space resources - ridiculous!

In article <1678600128@igc.apc.org> Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
 writes:
>
>This whole discussion about extracting resources from outer space has
>been interesting, ...  Are there Greens out there who 
>think this is a good idea?

I'd open this question to non-Greens too!  Are there any non-Greens
who think outer space resources should be counted on in deciding how
to address the issues Greens address?
(Let's except earth insolation and "resources" like orbits for
satellites.)

Here's an opinion: resources extracted in outer space will eventually
provide untold riches to all, but they won't be available in time to
get us out of our current jam.  Nor will any political system capable
of fairly distributing untold riches to all.  To propose solutions to
today's threats-to-human-habitat which require outer space resources
is escapist fantasy, fun but not useful.

--
Cameron
Repeat after me: "THERE'S NO QUICK FIX."  Techno- or otherwise.
From: Sean.P.Donahue@dartmouth.edu (Sean P. Donahue)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: Perception of Greens as IDIOTS
Date: 28 Jan 93 19:00:01 GMT
 <1993Jan22.184023.2634@vexcel.com> 
 <1993Jan25.010402.6714@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU>  
 <svbs-7l@SantaFe.edu>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

The key thing for us to do to improve our perception is to keep our
activism community based and relavent to people's reality.  Back home,
our local greens got startrd by working with people in the community on
stopping the re-opening of a sludge incinerator, and then we introduced
green theory to the people we were working with in a way which made its
relavence to their situation clear.   Another thing we did was to try
to portray the Green philosophy of grassroots democracy as part of the
old New England traditions of Thoreau and town meetings - if you want
to talk about really traditional values - going back to the neolithic -
we Greens have a monopoly on them.  So, basicly to me the key is in
presenting our philosophy in a way that the people who we're talking to
can relate to.  It's important for us to read Bookchin and Tokar and
Sale, but we need to learn to get their ideas across to people without
requiring that they first research history, politicical science,
ecology, anarchist philosophy, and so on before they can understand
what we're saying to them.
From: Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Date: 23 Jan 93 10:53 PST
Subject: Re: LAW SUITS, REMEDIES AND TOXICS
Nf-ID: #R:cdp:1678600109:cdp:1678600160:000:306
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!dmcmillen    Jan 23 10:53:00 1993


>I don't think the Greens should be promoting political systems.
>They should be promoting toxic cleanups, pollution prevention,
>etc.
>
>Michael Spencer
 
Don't you think these are problems caused by the political system?
It sure is the political system which makes it difficult to find
solutions!
 
Dale