[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]

Re: E-M:/ Re: the bogus "May 25 Black Day for the Environment"



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enviro-Mich message from Roger Kuhlman <rokuhlman@yahoo.com>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

So now you are accusing me and others who are opposed
to high immigration and fast American population
growth of facism? That's too much. Demonize those who
don't agree with you. That sounds like rational
argumentation to me.

Your argument that the key to saving the environment
is voluntary reduction in consumption in America and
redistribution of wealth is fatally flawed. That
approach works very nicely in imaginary,
wish-fulfilling worlds but unfortunately there is no
instance in real world history that I am aware of
where a rich nation voluntarily reduced its level of
consumption for any extended period of time. See what
success you have telling the American rich that they
have to significantly reduce their consumption and
share a lot of their wealth with the poor of the
World. Good Luck!

Roger Kuhlman
Ann Arbor, Michigan 

--- Dusty Myers <dustymec@voyager.net> wrote:

> You're right - racism isn't the best umbrella term.
> Fascism is a much better
> one, and while racism and fascism have been used
> interchangeably, it's
> important to remember that Italy was fascist without
> being racist.
> 
> 
> 
> Fascism comes from a gut feeling. It denies
> rationality. Obviously, Hitler
> capitalized on gut feelings quite well. What escapes
> me is how Malthusian
> obsessions with population growth are maintained in
> light of a tremendous
> amount of research showing how resource distribution
> is a much bigger
> problem facing humanity. The argument for limiting
> immigration comes from
> the lifeboat effect - the feeling that the ship is
> going down, so the best
> thing to do is hoard as much as possible. If that
> doesn't come from the gut
> then tell me what does? Why not redistribute
> resources? That seems much more
> rational in my mind.
> 
> 
> 
> High rates of consumption is not a given. It doesn't
> derive from our genes.
> To make this link is to support social Darwinism,
> which does bring the race
> card back into play. One only has to read the Bell
> Curve to know that the
> survival of the fittest is alive and well.
> 
> 
> 
> Dusty Myers
> 
> Lansing, MI
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Roger Kuhlman" <rokuhlman@yahoo.com>
> To: "enviro Mich" <enviro-mich@great-lakes.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 11:31 AM
> Subject: Re: E-M:/ Re: the bogus "May 25 Black Day
> for the Environment"
> 
> 
> >
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Enviro-Mich message from Roger Kuhlman
> <rokuhlman@yahoo.com>
> >
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > I need to point out that a little less than one
> half
> > of each American's lifestyle is gained at the
> expense
> > of other nation's environments and habitats.
> Americans
> > are not living exclusively off their own country's
> > resources. If it was, Americans would be so much
> less
> > wealthy. America lives very confortably and
> > excessively because it exploits the rest of the
> world.
> >
> > People have been promising major new technological
> > advances to solve our environmental problems for
> > decades now. They won't come true unless we limit
> our
> > population growth and reduce our consumption of
> > natural resources and habitats. There are no signs
> > that this process is even starting.
> >
> > Roger Kuhlman
> > Ann Arbor, Michigan
> >
> >
> > --- David Holtz <dholtz@cleanwater.org> wrote:
> >
> > > The points made against immigration are not
> > > necessarily made by bad
> > > people who have contempt for immigrants or poor
> > > people. But it can
> > > certainly sound that way, and the
> anti-immigration
> > > crowd is unconvincing
> > > (at least to me) when making the case that the
> net
> > > effect of immigration
> > > to the U.S. is increased environmental
> degradation
> > > on a global scale.
> > > While the United States has a long way to go it
> is,
> > > arguably, at least
> > > as environmentally protective as source
> countries
> > > for immigration to the
> > > U.S.  The environmental footprint of an American
> may
> > > be greater in terms
> > > of output as a result of affluence, but is it
> the
> > > argument of the
> > > anti-immigration crowd that the solution is to
> keep
> > > poor people poor?
> > >
> > > I would argue that with technological advances,
> it
> > > is possible for
> > > populations to grow, live decently and not
> destroy
> > > the planet.
> > > Moreover, it is the more affluent societies
> where
> > > family planning takes
> > > root.  That is why despite immigration, growth
> rates
> > > in the United
> > > States are more stable than in less affluent
> > > countries.
> > >
> > > Rather that rip each other apart over
> immigration, I
> > > would rather see
> > > environmentalists focus on improving economic
> > > conditions for all the
> > > world's peoples. That won't happen if
> > > environmentalists, acting out of
> > > fear, find themselves in spiritual kinship with
> an
> > > ugly right-wing
> > > political faction whose crusade against
> foreigners
> > > seems only to have
> > > surfaced with such passion as immigrants became
> more
> > > brown, yellow, or
> > > black than Irish, Lituanian, German or English.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Kim Hunter wrote:
> > >
> > > > Gilbert is right on many counts.  I was
> actually
> > > hoping that by
> > > > ignoring the rather amazing argument that
> Kuhlman
> > > puts forward that it
> > > > would fade.  It is illogical and absurd to
> fault
> > > immigrants for taking
> > > > on what the decadent US life style, while
> ignoring
> > > the lifestyle itself.
> > > >
> > > > But I am afraid we are in for yet another
> round of
> > > Kuhlman telling us
> > > > we can do nothing about the root of problem of
> a
> > > wasteful lifestyle so
> > > > we have to stop people from coming here, even
> > > though those folks life
> > > > far lower on the socio-economic chain.  Once
> you
> > > realize how bad that
> > > > argument is you can only begin speculating
> what is
> > > behind it.  That's
> > > > when the outrage sets in.
> > > >
> > > > Kim Hunter
> > > >
> > > > */Reg Gilbert <reg@glu.org>/* wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >     Enviro-Mich message from Reg Gilbert
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > >     Dear list,
> > > >
> > > >     This message from Mr. Kuhlman is an
> outrage.
> 
=== message truncated ===



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

==============================================================
ENVIRO-MICH:  Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action.   Archives at
http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/

Postings to:  enviro-mich@great-lakes.net      For info, send email to
majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info enviro-mich"
==============================================================