Anyone know this person?

That's pure nonsense.
by NNadir

I don't need Greenpeace or any other organisation of distracted middle class "look at me" brats to tell me what's going on with the environment. I've been figuring it out all by myself for years - which is why I know that Greenpeace is a cause of climate change.

If you want to know how Greenpeace is a cause of climate change, all you have to do is to count the number of huge coal facilities that have been announced since the nuclear phase out in Germany, representing the addition of hundreds of millions of tons of new carbon dioxide dumped in the atmosphere each year.

In fact, I don't need anyone to think for me, thank you. My brains are quite satifactory. I think most people would have noticed the Polar Bears situation without Greenpeace's commentary. Maybe you would have not noticed the situation with Polar Bears without Greenpeace, but I assure you I was aware of the matter all by my little self and so were many other people here.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... =115x77785 (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x77785)

Anyone know this person?


Looks like a very thoughtful advocate of nuclear power generation to me:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/12/22/202710/47 <-- most interesting historical information that frames the writers' positions on nuclear electric power.

"I don't need Greenpeace or any other organisation of distracted middle class 'look at me' brats to tell me what's going on..."

and this...

"They're on the side of praising themselves for their own nobility. It's the Louis XIV approach to marketing."

Look at the posts by the person who took offense to that first statement. I run into that buzz saw all the time.

"Do you own a car? Do you use air conditioning? Wondering how pure you are."

Someone then questions what purity has to do with anything, and we get...

"When I see comments like this 'I don't need Greenpeace or any other organisation of distracted middle class look at me brats to tell me what's going on with the environment,' my response is -- well just how pure are you then since you are lording yourself over what you call middle class look at me brats?"

Now that attitude always strikes me as very strange. I never could understand it. Poor picked on do-gooder middle class people? Is that the message? It isn't so much that I disagree with it, I can't even comprehend it. It strikes me as akin to "reverse racism" ideas.

If someone wants to defend Greenpeace, and argue that it is not a feel good organization for well off people, who participate for vanity, who personally identify with the organization in a cult like way, whose actions often are part of the problem rather than the solution, then why not do that? Responding as though your family had been attacked seems to me to support the assertion that Greenpeace is in fact a feel good organization for well off people, who participate for vanity, who personally identify with the organization in a cult like way, whose actions often are part of the problem rather than the solution, does it not?

Not a conservative, a rightwinger. A barely-crypto-freeper, as far as I could ever tell

Said poster is deeply involved in the nuclear industry. Not too long ago was talking about raising capital for start-up in that industry.

Point concerning nuclear vs coal is taken. Though I don't like nuclear as that poison virtually never goes away I cannot help but conclude that we'll need some of it for the interrum as fossil fuels are untennable and we will require some form of energy to provide basic services, particularly for urban areas. It is at least theoreticly possible to run those plants safely, though I strongly believe that the profit motive should be eliminated. It should definately not be considered a panacea and the goal should be it's elimination when more sustainable means become possible.

Yes, Greenpeace is another fob to the conciousness of the middle class. I have long been a critic of the boutique, check book environmentalism of the mainstream orgs, they really accomplish little considering the bucks involved and their apolitical stance is useless. Still, I cannot help but admire the work that they and the Sea Shepards do trying to preserve the great whales from the depravations of the whaling nations, which seems to be motivated by cheap jack greed and nationalism.

Said poster is also pro capitalist and rabidly antisocialist. In my last exchange with that poster I suggested that Gore's environmentalism was useless as it did not address the structural problems of capitalism and suggested that socialism would better address environmental needs. In reply I was treated to some of the most savage red baiting ever pointed in my direction. Fuck'um.

Said poster is also pro capitalist and rabidly antisocialist. In my last exchange with that poster I suggested that Gore's environmentalism was useless as it did not address the structural problems of capitalism and suggested that socialism would better address environmental needs. In reply I was treated to some of the most savage red baiting ever pointed in my direction. Fuck'um.
Interesting that liberalism is so vulnerable, isn't it? Destroying Greenpeace is child's play, and I couldn't defend Greenpeace. That means that the debate on that thread is between two points of view, both of which defend the ruling class.

I think the key right now to radicalizing the population is to go after modern liberalism ourselves from the Left. That takes all of the wind out of the sails of the right wingers, while clearing out the dead wood and ruling class apologists from the Left. It harnesses and focuses the average person's anger at the ruling class and puts it into a socialist rather than reactionary context.

The hesitation, hair-splitting, internecine feuding and mitigating and waffling that goes on all the time among Democrats is caused by the perceived need to defend the various liberal causes and organizations and personalities. But defending all that crap is not the same as defending the Left.

I think the key right now to radicalizing the population is to go after modern liberalism ourselves from the Left. That takes all of the wind out of the sails of the right wingers, while clearing out the dead wood and ruling class apologists from the Left. It harnesses and focuses the average person's anger at the ruling class and puts it into a socialist rather than reactionary context.

The hesitation, hair-splitting, internecine feuding and mitigating and waffling that goes on all the time among Democrats is caused by the perceived need to defend the various liberal causes and organizations and personalities. But defending all that crap is not the same as defending the Left.

Ding

We have a winner

My meeting with the local Greens last night to prepare for a public hearing this evening on raising public transit fares was an interesting experience - I met one of the co-chairs for the first time. She was gorgeous and clean skinned all organic all the time taking a course in consciousness raising and laughing at a man she met there who could not take his eyes off of her improbably too-big boobs. I make no bones about them being too weathly, too white, too lifestylish to ever be a political success. To a large extent, they agree and really want to expand their message.

But the premise that the people's consciousness is the problem is a non starter of course. I never hesitate to tell them that, but they are active in local issues so I do work with them and support them when things arise. It gives me a chance to remind them that political success emanates from the people who make 400 bucks a week, not those with that much and more disposable income...that people don't need their consiciousness lifted to become more compassionate, that they instead need their oppression lifted.

I make no bones about them being to wealthy, too white, to lifestylish to ever be a political success.
Whenever I try to express this, howls of indignation go up - you are persecuting white people, you are discriminating, you are a hypocrite, what do you have against rich people, anyway? I tried describing it as "suburban mentality" or "white privilege" but no success, since the point I am trying to make always gets buried as the discussion is sidetracked and becomes about defending rich white suburbanites - "hey all of them are not bad, and you are making blanket statements!!" Too bad the same people don't defend minority people and poor people and working people with the same zeal.

Of course none of the rich white lifestyle suburbanites are necessarily "bad" or "wrong." That isn't the point. Access to wealth and power is what suburbia and being white and going to college and taking corporate management jobs are all about (obviously) and that is associated with certain attitudes and assumptions (of course) and if left unchallenged and unexamined (and challenging and examining the attitudes and assumptions of white suburban privilege is exactly what people are resistant to, not some imagined persecution of whites or wealthy people) those attitudes and assumptions can sabotage working class politics (which is undeniably the what we can easily observe in all of the liberal organizations and in the Democratic party.)

But the premise that the people's consciousness is the problem is a non starter of course. I never hesitate to tell them that, but they are active in local issues so I do work with them and support them when things arise. It gives me a chance to remind them that political success eminates from the people who make 400 bucks a week, not those with that much and more disposable income...that people don't need their consciousness lifted to become more compassionate, that they instead need their oppression lifted.
That simple formula applies to all areas of politics and clears away all of the fog and confusion. Improving people is in the domain of religion, not politics. (I would also argue that it is not the proper domain for medicine, either.)

There is such an ingrained elitist attitude among political activists. It corrupts all of our thinking, in my opinion. The talk around the Kucinich campaign illustrates this. People see the challenge as somehow marketing Kucinich – slipping him past an unsuspecting electorate through tricks of salesmanship (or visualization or vibrations) and lots of bucks (I have already gotten 3 unsolicited appeals for funds form the Kucinich campaign in the week since I signed up at the board there) – and then installing him as ruler so he can fix everyone for their own good.

There is an unspoken assumption that the mass of people are ignorant, apathetic and stupid. It is so evident. An hour cannot go by without someone expressing this one way or another. There is an unspoken assumption that “we” know what is good for them. Since converting people to the new belief system is slow and problematic – impossible, I would say, since we are 30 years into it and it is still a marginal belief system – yet Kucinich supporters still are fervent and zealous – the only possible path to success is based on aristocratic and ant-democratic political models. Success may not be the goal, however. The goal may be to polarize people and dramatize the differences between the enlightened ones and the unwashed masses. After all, if everyone was as enlightened as “we” are, what would make us special anymore?

I make no bones about them being to wealthy, too white, to lifestylish to ever be a political success.
Whenever I try to express this, howls of indignation go up ...

There is an unspoken assumption that the mass of people are ignorant, apathetic and stupid.

It occurs to me that the priviledged white suburbans are the ignorant ones. It occurs to me that the red herring tossed out about pulling potatoes in the throes of a dispute at PI is truer than I might have realized at the time. How many of these people have pulled some potatoes, or the like, in their life? And I mean because it is their WORK. Or better, because it is their HUNGER. How many?

Hardly any.

Anyway I had to drop in for a short rant in response to a good post from the ever well-meaning Megan:
http://www.progressiveindependent.com/d ... g_id=56617 (http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=56604&mesg_id=56617)

Doctors make one another stay up for hours on end - mind you, at the greatest risk to patient care - because it has become a rite of passage for admission to the club. In the interest of bedside manner and medical safety, I have long said Do Away with the barbarity of 36 hour residency shifts. Instead, how about a few 90-120 minute bus commutes. Some grocery shopping and bill paying and laundry doing with only the bus and some cash - no e-payments and drive throughs and appliances in the laundry room. SO MANY people live every day in a state that the SUVers would think is absolute deprivation. Well, I am not sold that it is outright torture for those who have never seen the lush trucks' interiors and GPS maps to high end retailers. But it probably is for anyone who has. My mother certainly took a while to bounce back after losing a life of affluence that I am convinced meant as much to her as the husband who left with it.

People are too insulated, too able to be ignorant of what the Folk face day in and day out. Merely sympathizing don't cut it, either.

I make no bones about them being to wealthy, too white, to lifestylish to ever be a political success.
Whenever I try to express this, howls of indignation go up ...

There is an unspoken assumption that the mass of people are ignorant, apathetic and stupid.

It occurs to me that the priviledged white suburbans are the ignorant ones. It occurs to me that the red herring tossed out about pulling potatoes in the throes of a dispute at PI is truer than I might have realized at the time. How many of these people have pulled some potatoes, or the like, in their life? And I mean because it is their WORK. Or better, because it is their HUNGER. How many?

Hardly any.

Anyway I had to drop in for a short rant in response to a good post from the ever well-meaning Megan:
http://www.progressiveindependent.com/d ... g_id=56617 (http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=56604&mesg_id=56617)

Doctors make one another stay up for hours on end - mind you, at the greatest risk to patient care - because it has become a rite of passage for admission to the club. In the interest of bedside manner and medical safety, I have long said Do Away with the barbarity of 36 hour residency shifts. Instead, how about a few 90-120 minute bus commutes. Some grocery shopping and bill paying and laundry doing with only the bus and some cash - no e-payments and drive throughs and appliances in the laundry room. SO MANY people live every day in a state that the SUVers would think is absolute deprivation. Well, I am not sold that it is outright torture for those who have never seen the lush trucks' interiors and GPS maps to high end retailers. But it probably is for anyone who has. My mother certainly took a while to bounce back after losing a life of affluence that I am convinced meant as much to her as the husband who left with it.

People are too insulated, too able to be ignorant of what the Folk face day in and day out. Merely sympathizing don't cut it, either.

You rant well. You should do it more often.

Downward mobility among the "middle class" is real. It is even beginning to show up statistically...

After decades of rivalry, the Athenians finally cracked the secret of the Spartans. They cut off the supply of Spartan slaves. The Spartans could have farmed their own lands but they wouldn't. You see, Spartans don't work. Slaves work.

Spartans, though, fight and starve like no others...

http://www.legion-fourteen.com/spartans.jpg

Umm, Rusty is still on the same kick here. You called it ascetism and asked what it lead to other than nihilism and carpe diem. What am I missing here?

No one bought the "give away all your earthly possesions" line of that self-important Jew 2000 years, I doubt they will now, either.


Other than the fact the article talks about the ***MYTHOLOGICAL*** so-called 'middle' class, it's dead on.

And the title of this post is also the most important phrase in your OP.

YOU - Yes, YOU reading this right now - DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT to all the shit you already own. It is planet killing theft. EVERY TIME You log on to your PC, EVERY TIME You turn the ignition key in your car, EVERYTIME your lights come on when you flick the switch be aware it is THEFT and DESTRUCTION. YOU - and I - may be unwitting, trapped thieves, but we are thieves nonetheless.

I have dropped off posting here lately. Mostly, that can be ascribed to aftermath. But also, it can be ascribed to the fact that we have a whole bunch of very well off folks here whose sense of entitlement to thievery makes me uncomfortable in the extreme. It takes more wishing everyone would wake up. It takes daily decisions. A lot of you lefties would do well to try budgeting your food and transport on the same $150 for a month that low wage earners have left over after paying the bills. How many of you have hiked to the laundry mat carrying 30 pounds of wash lately?

You oughtta.

Then you might feel like the people who will have to be mobilized if we are to see any improvement in the DIRE situation we are in.

It is far more important to feel like them than it is to feel like a yoga instructor or political guru.

Go buy your groceries on the bus.

Get Real.

If you have a couple hundred thousand dollar house and a couple of newish cars, you are NOT THE NORM nor are you the FUTURE. NOr are you a member of some figmentary middle class. You are Working Class and have been lucky enough not to be summarily squyished by the system like all the people who carry your restaurant food and press your clothes and mow your yard.

Wake up. Buy a bus pass and give yourself an allowance for a month. Get a taste of how it really is when you cannot buy your way into an insulated, 'consciousness-raising' planet-killing so-called middle-class lifestyle.

Umm, Rusty is still on the same kick here. You called it ascetism and asked what it lead to other than nihilism and carpe diem. What am I missing here?

No one bought the "give away all your earthly possesions" line of that self-important Jew 2000 years, I doubt they will now, either.



Different enough to get Hoplite points from me... I'm a fan of some kinds of ascetism. It matters which side your monk is buttered on.

Umm, Rusty is still on the same kick here. You called it ascetism and asked what it lead to other than nihilism and carpe diem. What am I missing here?

No one bought the "give away all your earthly possesions" line of that self-important Jew 2000 years, I doubt they will now, either.

Ban Me.

All roads lead to the same place whether we like it or not. Ideologically, we oughtta. You let me know how the SUV with a ribbon socialist party makes out. Most people ARE living ascetically. They are just invisible from within the consumerist fishbowl. They cannot afford to be next to you at a stop light or a restaurant.

Umm, Rusty is still on the same kick here. You called it ascetism and asked what it lead to other than nihilism and carpe diem. What am I missing here?

No one bought the "give away all your earthly possesions" line of that self-important Jew 2000 years, I doubt they will now, either.

Ban Me.

All roads lead to the same place whether we like it or not. Ideologically, we oughtta. You let me know how the SUV with a ribbon socialist party makes out. Most people ARE living ascetically. They are just invisible from within the consumerist fishbowl. They cannot afford to be next to you at a stop light or a restaurant.

They earn just enough... enough to be back in exactly the same position tomorrow, next week, next year, and next generation. It's called the price of labor and it is, like every other commodity, the cost of it's reproduction. And if some segments of labor improve that condition, temporarily or permanently... they are still a few lost paychecks away from being sucked back into it. The fragility of the "privilage" is what is stunning. The attitudes of those of the "middle class" have as little to do with their own fate as that of bees in the middle of the hive. In truth, they live perpetually in a reverse lottery - a sickness to self or family, divorce, the loss of one of two incomes, a tiny shift in the global economy or the division of labor - and they are hurled back down through generations of "individual effort" and "accomplishment". In truth, the only thing that distinguishes them is their droning battle cry of "Me... Me... Me...", proving that they lack even the inner courage to shut the fuck up...

I don't buy into your contradiction of SUV lifestyle with politics. Most people don't choose their "lifestyles" and do nothing whatsoever by "changing" them, to the extent that they even can. An invitation to the harmonious life is a bad joke to most people. On the other hand, I do buy into your invitation to "activists", the politically "aware", and the "concerned" to take a good look at how the other nine-tenths live... that is if they don't already do so by simply looking in the mirror.

It isn't really about morality, either. It's closer to "wise up or starve".

It isn't really about morality, either. It's closer to "wise up or starve".
The convergence of the practical with the ideal.

On another board they were snidely dismissing socialists, saying derisively "some of us prefer to live in the real world" and "see how far that idealism gets you."

I wrote:

Setting our sights lower because it is "more practical" or "more realistic" is common among Democrats. "More electable" and "better than Bush" and "anything with a D after their name" are variations on this theme.

Certainly, strategic voting on a practical basis is completely legitimate, and judgments must be made as to where to spend time and energy. Perhaps it is true that we can never have "what we want" although I never thought of the Left as being about what any individual wants - rather it is about what the people need.

The problem comes not from acting in a practical and realistic way, but rather from advocating compromise right from the start in the name of practicality and for the sake of "being realistic." These compromises always involve moving to the Right, and the problem with that is that it is a moving target. When we react to what is "real" today to be practical, the entire spectrum shifts again to the Right, and what is "real" tomorrow is further yet from the ideal.

Continuing to strongly advocate the ideal - and never dismissing or invalidating that - while acting in a practical and realistic manner is the time-honored path to social progress.

Too many of us have this backwards - we advocate strongly for the practical and realistic, yet act in a romantic and idealistic way. We set a "realistic" goal and dismiss idealism, and then when it comes to action rely on faith and belief.

Fortunately, Dean set an "unrealistic" goal - competing in 50 states - and then tackled the nuts and bolts rather than running around trying to create "belief" in people's minds or convert them to something. I say "fortunately" not because I celebrate the success of the Democratic party, but rather because I see value and opportunity in anything that draws more people into politics.

The Kucinich campaign, if early indications are any measure, is way off into the "believe it and it will be true" campaign strategy, more so than last time, while at the same time his followers are telling people that he is the best we can do so don't be a dreamer or an idealist, and get on the bandwagon now. If we all vibrate at the same frequency and visualize Dennis in the White House, we are doing our part, apparently.

So long as one is visualizing the right things, mouthing the right new age platitudes, and vibrating at the right frequency, one is fully accepted in the Kucinich community, regardless of what one may be doing in a practical sense that would actually help his candidacy succeed. If one refuses to visualize the right things, mouth the right new age platitudes, and vibrate at the right frequency, one is drummed out of the community, regardless at how effective one is in actually helping his candidacy.

In any case, in traditional Leftist politics, the ideal and the practical are one and the same, are they not? We don't merely say that society would "be" better with socialism, we say that it would work better as well, as measured by the greatest good for the greatest number for the longest time, and we see that as a contingent and self-evident fact of human history.