Re: Eco hypocrites - as suspected

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:05:56 -0800 (PST), Doug <jagmad@riseup.net>
wrote:

>On 14 Jan, 09:04, "Brimstone" <brimstone520-n...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> "Doug" <jag...@riseup.net> wrote in message
>>
>> news:1a4c5e0a-8cdf-471a-95cc-c3329da5c3a6@i3g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 14 Jan, 07:18, Mark Goodge <use...@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk>
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 18:49:09 -0000, Brimstone put finger to keyboard
>> >> and typed:
>>
>> >> >PeterT wrote:
>> >> >>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml;jsessionid=4ALNZWHPP121TQ...
>>
>> >> >It's the classic, "do as I say not as I do", a typical anarcho-stalinist
>> >> >standpoint.
>>
>> >> To be fair, the report doesn't say that these people are the ones
>> >> telling others not to use their cars. There's a sizeable proportion of
>> >> the population who are aware of environmental issues and willing to
>> >> make changes to their activities and purchasing habits where
>> >> practical, but who are nevertheless not prepared to be bullied into
>> >> giving up essentails such their cars just because a few eco-extremists
>> >> love acting as prophets of doom.
>>
>> >> It isn't hypocritical to say "I think we need to take the environment
>> >> into account, but that's not all that matters and sometimes there are
>> >> other priorities", and then go on to use things like cars and planes
>> >> where you feel the benefit outweighs the downside. It is hypocritical
>> >> to say "people should stop polluting, in every area" and then continue
>> >> to buy airfreighted food or use the Internet (which is a huge
>> >> contributor to electricity consumption) even though it's against your
>> >> own stated principles.
>>
>> > Erm! Anarcho-Stalinist is an oxymoron.
>>
>> In most cases yes. In a very few cases, no.
>>
>> > You and others here seem to be confusing greenwashers with true eco
>> > activists.
>>
>> No Doug, it's us who know the difference.
>>
>Not apparent in our posts thus far. Care to elaborate?
>>
>> > BTW, some people, like me for example and unlike you and the other
>> > hypocrities here, have reformed their old ways and adapted to modern
>> > conditions.
>>
>> > The internet, used intelligently, can minimise travel and even render
>> > cars even more non-essential than they are at present, thus
>> > drastically reducing overall energy consumption and pollution. Next
>> > time you take a drive just to visit someone consider video
>> > conferencing instead.
>>
>> Thus increasing the use of electricity, adding to the consumption of
>> non-renewables and the pollution that comes from building additional and
>> replacement power stations and running them.
>>
>More than offset by the the bigger savings in personal travel.
>Obviously moving heavy bodies physically around is far more energy
>intensive than sending electrical packets of information.


But why do you still hold a drivers licence?

-- 
Only some ghastly, dehumanised moron would want to get rid of the Routemaster.
Ken Livingstone 2001.

PeterT - "Reply to" address is a spam trap - all replies to the group please