>I think a better approach is the one we are currently >taking: a stealth approach. Metric is creeping into all >aspects of American life, mostly unnoticed, and therefore >unopposed. To make a big deal of metrication is guaranteed >to bring out the anti-metric activists. We are already >making headway � why trumpet our success to >our enemies?
Jim, your observations are (unfortunately for some of us) correct. There are lots of pro-metric people who would love to see an Australian style, government mandated, switch to metric, implemented in the US over a period of time (and lots , like yourself who would not). We want the US to be fully metric and we want it that way within our lifetimes. I doubt that any of us here will see a 100% switch. But , as you point out, that's not the American way of doing things (be it right or wrong). In actuality, there is probably a small group that is pro-metric, a small group of anti-metric and the majority of the population is somewhere in the middle. The American system of govenment is a very stable one and doesn't lend itself to implementing changes easily. It's much easier to not change something in the US, than it is to change something. The American people have to see a need or a benefit for adopting metric before it will be accepted. Obviously, metrication of highway signs and the related changes (odometers, speed limits, etc) will have to be a government mandate. However, the government will only mandate it once the rest of metric is so much in use among the US population that the average person's attitude is that since metric is used everywhere else, we might as well use it for highway related measurements. The BIG changes (highway speeds, metric scales, metric weather reports) will be the last things to change, not the first things. Stephen Gallagher
