butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Yeah you
Green Party's 'unapologetic, socialist broadcast'
- Thread starter rosecore
- Start date
newbie
undisambiguated
phew
Yes PEOPLE
elbows
Well-Known Member
If I wanted to talk about tories and green stuff I would put it quite differently. I would look at the roots of one particular strand of early environmentalism and its advocates. There is a strand that gained early favour with a subsection of the elite, and found easy compatibility with their existing worldview as it pertained to the poor breeding like crazy and their own love for certain aspects of the animal kingdom and nature. They found it easy to drool about population control because they assume they have the luxury of not being the ones who are affected, and they could be heard because they have a voice and influence.
Some of the issues raised by that strand overlap with some green party politics, but should be careful not to conflate them too much.
Some of the issues raised by that strand overlap with some green party politics, but should be careful not to conflate them too much.
newbie
undisambiguated
so just a lazy slur you're not prepared to back up or retract?
The green party desire to sustain the environment and as everyone shares this resource it crosses class barriers and fulfils the desire of Marx where everyone would be motivated to work for the benefit of all and technology would exist to serve us rather than enslave. The environment is being destroyed and I'm sure had it been seen by Marx with contemporary eyes he would see its destruction as one of the primary evils of capitalism.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
PEOPLE was what the Green Party was originally called, some of the co-founders were posh ex-tory types
I got a picture, your feeling generous tonightGreat post
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
You are a genuine idiot. Do many things exist just as you think they should be?
Have you thought about joining I think they could do with someone with your people skills
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I'm sure they could given that they seem to attract people like you as their core vote.
who do you vote for?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Easton cowboys.
p
pah serves me right for trying to google past bedtime
#fml
Evil Green terrorist yes?
pah serves me right for trying to google past bedtime
#fml
elbows
Well-Known Member
I dont think its that simple. There are types of small c conservatives that find aspects of ecology and deindustrialisation appealing, but they've probably been driven away from the main green parties by virtue of the other causes other types of people attracted to green parties were up for, and some of the forms of protest and direct action the movements have employed over the decades.
And I would suggest that the suspicion green politics enjoys on u75 gives plenty of pointers as to why the left as a whole will not simply embrace this stuff. Its not just the history of some posh advocates being involved, or even the population control stuff even though that remains an inescapable aspect of ecology despite many attempts to obscure this hot potato. Nor is it just a dislike of hippies or of the perception that prominent members of the movement are more middle class than working class. No, we must add some other things to this mix that I seldom see explored to my satisfaction. Suspicions relating to standards of living in the face of zero-growth policies, And the strong historical connection between the working class and industrialisation.
free spirit
more tea vicar?
which is something that really pisses me off as a notion that seems to have been spreading via the likes of the transition towns and peak oil movement etc.
It's a nuts notion that has no grounding whatsoever in the reality of the situation, and nothing at all to do with sustainable development - it's pushed by people who basically haven't thought the idea through logically enough, although I've seen at least one pretty big hitter in the environmental movement pushing this notion recently on twitter... and challenged him on it, but got no response.
I do think that this is a notion that really needs tackling head on within the environmental movement before it does it real serious lasting damage.
In a nutshell, my objections to it are 3 fold:-
- It's impossible for us to make the massive generational switch to a low carbon, low energy intensity economy without the investment in the new infrastructure needed to make that a reality itself acting as a significant economic stimulus - if we really went for this in a big way we could basically have a full employment situation as a direct result of that investment. Virtually all forms of sustainable energy, food, resource use etc actually require more people to be employed per unit of output than the current methods, so how could that possibly not result in economic growth?
- It can not possibly be considered to be in anyway a sustainable long term situation to opt for zero growth now and leave millions on the dole or underemployed in this country as a result, never mind the rest of the world. Sustainability relies entirely on a balance between the environment, economics and society, it can not be achieved by focusing entirely on just the environmental aspect, and even if it could, how could it possibly be considered sustainable to effectively leave so many people behind in that way and just draw up the drawbridge behind us?
- Even if 1 & 2 weren't the case, then arguing for sustainable development via zero growth would be entirely counterproductive, as all those who stand to lose out from it would rightly oppose it tooth and nail, so it will never come to pass by democratic means - as such, it's an entirely counter-productive pipe dream notion that only serves to discredit the environmental movement and lead to it losing support among the very people who have the most to lose from environmental degradation and it's impacts on their lives through pollution, food prices, water scarcity, drought, famine etc.
What we need is a new form of growth, one that's sustainable in environmental, social and economic terms - sustainable development. It's not an oxymoron, it is possible - for example, growth in energy efficiency and renewable energy sectors that grow the economy, employ more people and at the same time reduce the overall energy / carbon consumption of society.
[/rant]
Meltingpot
Living in our pools we soon forget about the sea
It's occurred to me that Green consciousness might form a third dimension of the political compass, along with left vs. right and authoritarianism.
It probably correlates positively with left wing political views, but I recall there was a a Canadian political scientist (whose name I forget) who found a strong correlation in practice between right wing views and authoritarianism (so that most people's scores fell on or near a line from bottom left to top right), so strict independence needn't be assumed.
It probably correlates positively with left wing political views, but I recall there was a a Canadian political scientist (whose name I forget) who found a strong correlation in practice between right wing views and authoritarianism (so that most people's scores fell on or near a line from bottom left to top right), so strict independence needn't be assumed.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
If it can be left or right what is the fucking use of it?
8ball
Maximum Facepalm
Can you be a long way along the 'green' continuum without being at least a bit authoritarian?
thedockerslad
Never do what you are told
You do know there's people thinking the same about you.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Apart from that not making any sense , what?
Similar threads
