On Jun 30, 4:30 am, "Alastair McDonald"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps the reason is that the truth would be unpopular.
>
> "The president believes . . . that it should be the goal of policymakers to
> protect the American way of life. The American way of life is a blessed
> one."
>
> It is the American way of life which is destroying the planet.  Are there
> any Americans, Australians, or Europeans who are willing to admit that their
> way of life will have to change for the worse?
>

There are a few of us.  However, Bush's position is a lot easier to
sell - and not just because of the greed and carelessness of
individuals.

To begin with, the "American way of life" that needs changing is an
important prop to the sales of the oil, coal, natural gas, electric
utility, automobile and airline industries -- which together account
for a whopping big share of the US gross domestic product.

Add in all of the subsidiary industries that sell raw materials and
semifinished products to the above industries -- for example, consider
the American steel, chemical and rubber industries, all of which look
to the automakers as a major market -- and the "economic footprint" of
the climate-threatening industries is even larger.

Then consider the advertising industry in the USA, and the major
television networks that are partly or largely supported by
advertising.  What are some of the major products advertised on
television -- what re the products that help to keep network revenues
healthy?

Answer:  (a) Automobile advertising, for Detroit's cars and their
Japanese, Korean and European rivals.

(b) Airline advertising -- advertising for airline travel, and the
selling of luxurious and not-so-luxurious holiday destinations ranging
from Disney World to the Bahamas, England, Europe, the Far East, etc.

(c) petroleum company advertising ... "Green" and otherwise.

So if the "American way of life" is destroying important global
ecosystems and imperiling climate stablility, as some Americans
believe it is -- what communications medium can we rely on to get the
message to the public?

And with a big fraction of the GNP and large numbers of American
industrial jobs depending on the most environmentally destructive
industries, how many Americans are going to be eager to hear a message
about environmental destruction, assuming that the TV stations and the
advertising-dependendent newspapers and magazines can be persuaded to
carry it?


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Roger Coppock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "globalchange" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 3:33 AM
> Subject: [Global Change: 1815] Re: The Secret Campaign of President Bush's
>
> Administration To Deny Global Warming
>
> > On Jun 29, 10:24 am, Tom Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Ever wonder what happened to Bush's 2000 campaign promise to limit
> >> GHG?
>
> >>http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/15148655/the_secret_campai...
>
> >> (This article seems to be getting way to little attention, according
> >> to google news anyway.  The story has broke on the blogs but not in
> >> the press, apparently.)
>
> > Maybe it gets little attention because it's not news.
> > Its a history, an anthology of several already reported
> > stories about the Bush administration suppressing global
> > warming science.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated 
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of 
global environmental change. 

Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the 
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not 
gratuitously rude. 

To post to this group, send email to [email protected]

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to