Tom, even if his characterization of "the left" is off-mark, has asked a good
question:
>We should at least entertain a discussion on the list as to why "we [fail]
>to make these facts the basis and guiding compass of [our] politics."
I can't help much here.
Our problem is so difficult to face and that denial or terminal pessimism are
tempting. I am not as convinced as Stan is that the cause is simply lack of
information (it's of course a factor). As I see it, the information has been around
for a
long time and has been ignored because these are not the issues "the left" is
generally interested in and also because the messengers could often be
characterized as right-wing elitists and such. I also fear that most of "the left"
believes or used to believe in the development of productive forces which is part of
the problem. (Most of you folks know "the left" better than I do so please correct
me.) Which brings me to one of the 10 points of Stan with which I disagree:
>4. The developing crisis is developing endogenously with the system, which is
>capitalism.
I fear we have a bigger problem than just capitalism (yes, I said *just* capitalism!).
Seizing power won't solve the bigger problem even if it's probably a necessary
step. The bigger problem is also made of a)the old cycle of pop. growth and
collapse, except this time it's much worse because of b)technological society and
depletion of the resources that support it (sadly, some of these resources don't
support only technological societies but also life).
I also disagree with point 8 but that's not important.
Tom, I'd be glad if you could explain how localism and bioregionalism could work
on a large scale without going through this annoying taking power business (or at
least this destroying power business).
Julien
_______________________________________________
CrashList website: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
