By the way, what do people think of "Gross National Schadenfreude" as a
counterweight to the nauseatingly coy Gross National Happiness panacea with
their fairytale Bhutanese king? Where could OUR Bhutan be? Iceland?

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 8:09 AM, Tom Walker <[email protected]> wrote:

> Just to be absolutely unambiguous, I'm as cynical as anyone about the
> sincerity of the greenwashing industry -- "if you can fake sincerity,
> you've got it made". My stuck-in-the-head quote these days is Orwell's "All
> left-wing parties in the highly industrialized countries are at bottom a
> sham, because they make it their business to fight against something which
> they do not really wish to destroy." But it doesn't follow that all
> right-wing parties are therefore NOT a sham.
>
> I think one of the functions of schadenfreude is to reward and reinforce
> cognitive dissonance. The ironic chuckle of "Being green then and now" is
> at bottom a schadenfreude experience, which, in true cognitive dissonance
> style, "absolves" the chuckler of his or her peccadilloes.
>
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Tom Walker <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Would you have in mind something along the lines of the aptly-named
>> "Titanic Eco-Spa"? Green buildings, spring water and towels and a "spa
>> traveler award". I kid you not.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Arthur Cordell <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> Would also add to the cute message that oh so many greenies are recycling
>>> this and that and then without a thought jump on a jet to go off to this
>>> or
>>> that conference or vacation spot without a thought as to what these and a
>>> host of other personal activities are doing that run counter to the
>>> religion
>>> of being green.
>>>
>>> arthur
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [email protected]
>>> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Spencer
>>> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 10:49 PM
>>> To: [email protected]
>>> Subject: [Futurework] Re: Being Green Then and Now
>>>
>>>
>>> Tom Walker wrote:
>>>
>>> > Cute but false and misleading.
>>> > [snip]
>>> > "Cute" bullshit is still bullshit.
>>>
>>> Well, yeah.  But not any greater or more tedious bullshit than many of
>>> the
>>> putatively "green" odds & sods that we're expected (or forced) to embrace
>>> today, many of which (IMHO) are ways of externalizing some large entity's
>>> cost onto the consumer or create a profit ex novo.
>>>
>>> Yes, the vast volumes of toxics and particulates fired up smokestacks,
>>> down
>>> drains and off tailings dumps before regulation outweigh, in global
>>> effect,
>>> plastic bags or gas lawn mowers.  The point of the "cute" piece was to
>>> ridicule self-righteous Greenness among those who adopt and evangelize
>>> the
>>> Green Consumer Catechism without critical thought or meaningful
>>> knowledge.
>>>
>>> Or so I understood it.
>>>
>>>
>>> - Mike
>>>
>>> --
>>> Michael Spencer                  Nova Scotia, Canada       .~.
>>>                                                           /V\
>>> [email protected]                                     /( )\
>>> http://home.tallships.ca/mspencer/                        ^^-^^
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Futurework mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Futurework mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
>



-- 
Cheers,

Tom Walker (Sandwichman)
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to