|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 8:33 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
On the other hand wrote:
But is it neccessarily anti-capitalist? Do we even know if the smokestack is owned by the private sector?
I think this is drawing distinctions without differences -- that is, from the left's perspective. I think it is clear that the left conflates private business interests and governments all the way back to Marx and Lenin.
|
Okay, maybe that's true. But then, can you think of a way to portray the source of the relevant emissions in a way that doesn't depict industry? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Location: Nearly in NK
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| My theory of global warming. Chicken Little - the sky is falling! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Satori wrote: |
| Who's talking specifically about "leftist" environmentalism? This is one of the classic distortions of conservatives, painting thier opposition as "leftists". It's a very clever distortion... |
On this thread? Who created the binary?
I agree with you on environmentalism, Sartori. There is a crisis and we do need to deal with it. And "Clintonianism" certainly sounds like something I could agree with as well. So far, then, we are three for three...
| Satori wrote: |
| As for environmentalists not standing FOR something, what a joke... |
I mostly agree with this paragraph as well. However, again, this thread presents a "(implicitly leftist) environmentalists = good guys" vs. explicitly-stated "right-wingers (but implicitly anti-environmentalists) = bad guys" dichotomy.
Do you have anything to say about that?
And what are your thoughts on Jared Diamond's suggestion in Collapse...?
| Jared Diamond wrote: |
| My view is that if environmentalists aren't willing to engage with big businesses, which are among the most powerful forces in the modern world, it won't be possible to solve the world's environmental problems. |
If you agree, then do you not also agree with me that painting business interests in simplistic, mocking, indeed "black-hat" tones is counterproductive? |
I agree with the statement from Jared. Where did I mock big business? The real "lefties" do mock big business and paint it in cheap characatures, that's why centrist liberals need to distance ourselves from them. They are not realists and the fact that they are semi attached to us ( although peripherally ) makes us easier for the conservatives to attack as flaky.
But don't you agree that big business has strongly resisted debate on environmental issues for some time, for obvious reasons?
Look, anyone who wants to make big business go away is just an idiot. But we need to get business to change some priorities. If we could start to make it less profitable to pollute and more profitable to not pollute that would be a start. Business seems to respond best to ideas that involve the bottom line... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| ...can you think of a way to portray the source of the relevant emissions in a way that doesn't depict industry? |
We should be talking about "we" and "us" rather than "they" and "them," for starters. Reorients everything.
"We are apparently going in the wrong direction environmentally," for example, "and we should find the best solution for all of us."
Why need it be a war between heroes and villains? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Octavius Hite
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Househunting, looking for a new bunker from which to convert the world to homosexuality.
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Why need it be a war between heroes and villains? |
Because there are people (many on this board) that are acting like villians. For every Richard Branson in buisness there is a Dick Cheney who thinks its his right to destroy the environment so that he can be rich. The lefties didn't make the villians, the villians are just villians. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 12:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Satori wrote: |
| Where did I mock big business...? |
I never meant to charge that you, personally, had mocked big business, Satori. But, on the other hand, your first post buys into Ya-ta Boy's overly-simplistic binary. I would disagree with the assumptions that underlie it.
| Satori wrote: |
| But don't you agree that big business has strongly resisted debate on environmental issues for some time, for obvious reasons? |
And here is the assumption I most strongly disagree with.
"Big business" is not monolithic. Too simplistic.
Diamond again on this...
| Jared Diamond wrote: |
I have much experience, interest, and ongoing involvement with big businesses and other forces in our society that exploit environmental resources and are often viewed as anti-environmentalist...I have often been a guest of extractive businesses on their properties, I've talked a lot with their directors and employees, and I've come to understand their own perspectives and problems...
I describe frankly what I see happening on their properties even though I am visiting as their guest. One some properties I have seen oil companies and logging companies being destructive, and I have said so; on other properties, I have seen them being careful, and that was what I said. My view is that, if environmentalists aren't willing to engage with big businesses...it won't be possible to solve the world's environmental problems. Thus, I am writing this book from a middle-of-the-road perspective, with experience of both environmental problems and of business realities. |
I am a moderate: moderately liberal on some issues and moderately conservative on many other issues. But a moderate nonetheless.
And I think that liberal environmentalists have not only undermined their position by exaggerating their case (not merely "the evil corporation" myth but "the Ecological Indian" myth as well, for instance). But they have also alienated moderates and, with their simplistic, monolithic worldview of "big business," they potentially alienate the progressive business interests who are already on their side, if not way ahead of the game.
So, again, I ask why must it be all or nothing? Why must we who lean to the right and at the same time find at least some of the environmentalists' arguments overly hysteria-driven and exaggerated for partisan, leftist motives (anticapitalism, etc.)...why must we who generally support the idea of corporations and business and responsible, sustainable business patterns...why must we be branded "dirty-air lovers," "stupid" and "short-sighted," or "antiscientific" -- to cite only a few of the labels hurled on this thread...?
Why can we not talk about this in a discourse where people with views like mine can get on board and where we can tap into all the good things that progressive business interests can offer as well?
And is our invitation to sit at the table with you and someone like Ya-ta Boy on this conditional upon our willingness to denounce "big business" as the villain? Because if so, I do not see how we can sit at the same table. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sundubuman
Joined: 04 Feb 2003
Location: seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 1:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Octavius Hite wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Why need it be a war between heroes and villains? |
Because there are people (many on this board) that are acting like villians. For every Richard Branson in buisness there is a *beep* Cheney who thinks its his right to destroy the environment so that he can be rich. The lefties didn't make the villians, the villians are just villians. |
So...you are saying that Branson's Virgin Airlines has somehow managed to avoid the use of hydrocarbons?
It's amazing how he became a billionaire with airplanes that manage to fly without oil. He's soooo much cooooooler than Cheney. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 6:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Satori wrote: |
| Where did I mock big business...? |
I never meant to charge that you, personally, had mocked big business, Satori. But, on the other hand, your first post buys into Ya-ta Boy's overly-simplistic binary. I would disagree with the assumptions that underlie it.
| Satori wrote: |
| But don't you agree that big business has strongly resisted debate on environmental issues for some time, for obvious reasons? |
And here is the assumption I most strongly disagree with.
"Big business" is not monolithic. Too simplistic.
Diamond again on this...
| Jared Diamond wrote: |
I have much experience, interest, and ongoing involvement with big businesses and other forces in our society that exploit environmental resources and are often viewed as anti-environmentalist...I have often been a guest of extractive businesses on their properties, I've talked a lot with their directors and employees, and I've come to understand their own perspectives and problems...
I describe frankly what I see happening on their properties even though I am visiting as their guest. One some properties I have seen oil companies and logging companies being destructive, and I have said so; on other properties, I have seen them being careful, and that was what I said. My view is that, if environmentalists aren't willing to engage with big businesses...it won't be possible to solve the world's environmental problems. Thus, I am writing this book from a middle-of-the-road perspective, with experience of both environmental problems and of business realities. |
I am a moderate: moderately liberal on some issues and moderately conservative on many other issues. But a moderate nonetheless.
And I think that liberal environmentalists have not only undermined their position by exaggerating their case (not merely "the evil corporation" myth but "the Ecological Indian" myth as well, for instance). But they have also alienated moderates and, with their simplistic, monolithic worldview of "big business," they potentially alienate the progressive business interests who are already on their side, if not way ahead of the game.
So, again, I ask why must it be all or nothing? Why must we who lean to the right and at the same time find at least some of the environmentalists' arguments overly hysteria-driven and exaggerated for partisan, leftist motives (anticapitalism, etc.)...why must we who generally support the idea of corporations and business and responsible, sustainable business patterns...why must we be branded "dirty-air lovers," "stupid" and "short-sighted," or "antiscientific" -- to cite only a few of the labels hurled on this thread...?
Why can we not talk about this in a discourse where people with views like mine can get on board and where we can tap into all the good things that progressive business interests can offer as well?
And is our invitation to sit at the table with you and someone like Ya-ta Boy on this conditional upon our willingness to denounce "big business" as the villain? Because if so, I do not see how we can sit at the same table. |
You're right that big business is not monolithic. Nothing that involves so many people and different organisations could be truly monolithic. I guess what I mean though is that big business in it's capacity as a lobbyist, an entity that influences politics, has never come out with a strong clear environmental message or agenda. Of course we don't see into the mind of every corporate exec, we can only go on what we see as outward manifectations of thier beliefs. I have not seen any evidence of big business, and I mean really big business, the type that counts, the type that has clout, coming out in favour of environmentally sustainable business solutions. And why would they? Any way you cut it it's going to involve cutbacks in profit-taking. I don't see this happening voluntarily. I think it will only happen when government makes it too expensive to be a major polluter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2007 11:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Satori wrote: |
| lobbyist, an entity that influences politics... |
If you mean to point out that some business interests passively refuse to cooperate for selfish motives, and that, indeed, these very same business interests also actively obstruct and impede some environmentalist proposals, I can easily agree with that because I do see the same thing you do here.
But should our objective be to persuade them and get them on board or to denounce and criticize them so that they remain on the defensive and unwilling to cede anything...? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cochise
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Location: Namyangju
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Los Angeles --> LIBERAL --> smog
NYC : SAME
USSR : COMMUNISTS --> ENVIRONMENTAL DEVASTATION
CHINA : DITTO
Liberals are all talk. Just looking for something to whine about.
Whaaaa!!! Conservatives are making me breathe dirty air!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
