other, so that I am sure of what I am talking about when presenting Marxian
truth, and you when presenting ecological concepts."
Although I like your fence-mending drift, the whole assumptive
framework of your suggestion, Tom, makes me think you'd better try
separation from your "choir" first, IMHO. Your formulation of "choirs,"
"Marxian [sic] truth," and your division of labor over who is entitled
to criticize what, indicates to me that you just don't get the difference
between philosophical idealism and materialism.
No philosophical materialist who cares about the environment
is going to concede to you that what you say to the Sierra Club or any
other environmentalist group is the "truth" about that group on the basis
of your having prioritized their issues or your sharing their professed
religious devotion to the biosphere, ecosphere, or any other enveloping
or contiguous sphere you wish to designate.
"Reciprocity" is not the counterpart of "necessity."
Malthus is not the counterpart of Marx. And I can't figure out what could
have given you the notion that Stan doesn't know what a neo-Malthusian
is.
I'd like to know what you know about the environment, or of the chemical
processes or effects or relative scarcity of any elements, resources, etc.,
therein, that a "marxie" doesn't know or would find it difficulty
to comprehend.
embarkadero wrote:
Thanks, very much, Stan, for your latest two postsI was not long ago at a meeting between the HSUS (Humane Society of the US)
and a group of hunters, both sides there to see if common ground could be
found. While both seemed vehemently committed to their own viewpoints, at
the end of a surprisingly gentle meeting it was concluded that both groups
should seek to work on "overpopulation." A small victory, but progress,
nonetheless.In a perfect world, we eco-doomers and you marxies could construct some
over-riding leadership that would arbitrate our differences and keep both
movements headed in the same direction, mutually supporting each other.
Unfortunately it ain't a perfect world and we don't have much time. That
means we have to do those things for ourselves. It means we have to develop
knowledge of and respect for each other's positions. It means we have to
VOLUNTARILY support each others goals and actions, as you suggested Stan.It means that we must educate ourselves to the knowledge each of us brings
to the table, . to the issue of survival. I must read and understand Marx's
criticism of mechanistic science. The Philosophy of Right, [and] Lenin's
critique of the metaphysics of positivism"; and you must read Naess and
Sessions, Quinn and Hardin. YOU, Stan need to know what a "neo-malthusian"
is, and I gotta decipher what an SWP type is. I have a long reading list of
what you should know, and I have received more than one longggggggg reading
list about Marxism since I have been on crashlist. Offlist Julien and Tony
and others have patiently chipped away at my ignorance. (Do you find that
admission obsequious, Hal?) This is what Mark Jones envisioned, I think,
when he set up this list. Mostly he has been the only consistent
practitioner of that attitude.It means that when one of your own rolls his eyes at some deep ecology
concept and mutters "malthusian" as if he was muttering "Jesuit", you need
to set him straight; just as much as when one of my clan mutters "marxist" I
must explain that indeed "solidarity takes dialogue and work and more
dialogue and more work... These are the realities of organizing."We must each spend some time away from the choir, learning the wisdom of the
other, so that I am sure of what I am talking about when presenting Marxian
truth, and you when presenting ecological concepts.(BTW, the Sierra Club sell-out and treachery is ours to deal with, and is
being confronted across the country even as we write. You could perhaps
persuade the Marxist camp that to admit some priority to habitat issues is
crucial.)It means you call Carrol down when he calls us "religionists", etc., and I
call Hallyx down when he likens the lot of you to fundamentalists. -- I
will kick it off right now in a show of good faith:.Hallyx, I hereby invoke the Thumper Rule. SHUT THE FUCK UP. The marxies have
a point when they say there is a fundamental component to survival in their
theories of political struggle.One thing I think we can begin to agree upon, Stan, comes straight out of
Einstein. In addition to "necessity", one basic concept that is required in
confronting the crash is summed up in a single word as well.Reciprocity.
Thanks for listening.
Tom
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
4
