TOPICS:
Idjit
HOPEFUL
I'm lost
FEB 17, 2005 08:24 AM
piracy said:
Idjiit said:
piracy said:
Idjiit said:
Why don't you just cut to the chase? Environmentalism that focuses on "Saving the Planet" or whatever is misguided, and it's no wonder it doesn't resonate with a larger audience. The issue is human survival and maintaining a certain quality of life - until Environmentalists correctly identify that as the real issue, they'll continue to fail on the whole.
People don't give a fuck about the planet, and they don't give a fuck about ecology when it comes down to it.
speak for yourself, asswipe.
saving the planet means saving life on the planet, for people who actually see intrinsic value in non-human life.
or for any life other than our own individual self - it sure sounds like you just wouldn't give a damn if your own mother was choking on the carbon monoxide coming out of your tailpipe, as long as it didn't affect your horsepower.
[Edited on Feb 16, 2005 by piracy]
Hah. Thanks for being an example why so many people think environmentalism is a bad word.
and what exactly do you consider your sorry-ass self a shining example of? the passivity of whitebread-fed american ironic malaise?
thanks for caring.
Attack ideas, not people. You need to familiarize yourself a bit more with the methods some people approach to discussion. Stop the kneejerk bullshit and consider what I've actually said. Study up a bit on hyperbole and sarcasm while you're at it, and you might start to realize you've made an unfortunate and hasty judgement of what I actually do care about.
[Edited on Feb 17, 2005 by Idjiit]
FEB 17, 2005 09:59 AM
FEB 17, 2005 10:30 AM
piracy said:
bones_708 said:
xer0yne said:
skankzor said:
As one hunter told me: "Who do you think cares more about the environment? Some hippy sitting around sipping lattes all day, or someone who is out in the countryside all the time trying to get something to eat?"
I'll go ahead and say the hippy, based on a few assumptions about both hippies and hunters.
The hippy probably went to, or is going to college, thus is generally more aware of what's going on in the world.
The hippy also probably doesn't drink lattes all day long. Lattes are, as the hunter ought to know, strictly for soccer moms.
The hippy also likely does not drive a car if he or she lives in a place with decent public transit. This is assuming that the hunter drove to their hunting spot, and likely drove something with poor MPG.
The hippy likely doesn't eat meat, and the hunter..well. You may think that meat is not a big environmental issue, and in America it may not be, yet, but give it time.
The hippy is likely a careful consumer, limiting his or her support of companies known for unfair labor practices. The hunter likely has no idea.
The hippy, if indeed the hippy has a job, probably works for some sort of non-profit, while the hunter likely works in either construction/manufacturing/or managing a gun store.
Finally, both the hippy and the hunter get out into nature, and both appreciate it, the difference being that one likes it because it's pretty and the other likes it because it's where he goes to kill things, and possibly because he thinks it's pretty, too.
You want to lay a bet on who has done more for the conservation of waterfowl and habitat, hunters or hippys? I'll lay down 20 on hunters.
yeah - assasination of the strongest and fittest individuals always works wonders for biodiversity...
i for one never heard any hunters in an uproar over the snail darter in tennessee - or is that ancient history?
or are all you compassionate killers gonna spearhead a letter writing campaign to stop the drilling in the alaska national wildlife refugee? somehow i just dont think so.
what hunter gives a shit about whales?
your personal view regarding hippys aside, do you really believe that hunters have the ecosystems welfare at heart? and that they're not just protecting their favorite sport?
And that matters more than saving the habitat? If you just want to hate go ahead, but you should always keep your eye on the goal.
edited to add: And fuck you and your asumptions. I don't know you, but some off my best friends are "hippys" and aside from not showwering enouh, I have great respect for them and the way they lead there lives.
[Edited on Feb 17, 2005 by bones_708]
FEB 17, 2005 11:11 AM
Idjiit said:
piracy said:
Idjiit said:
piracy said:
Idjiit said:
Why don't you just cut to the chase? Environmentalism that focuses on "Saving the Planet" or whatever is misguided, and it's no wonder it doesn't resonate with a larger audience. The issue is human survival and maintaining a certain quality of life - until Environmentalists correctly identify that as the real issue, they'll continue to fail on the whole.
People don't give a fuck about the planet, and they don't give a fuck about ecology when it comes down to it.
speak for yourself, asswipe.
saving the planet means saving life on the planet, for people who actually see intrinsic value in non-human life.
or for any life other than our own individual self - it sure sounds like you just wouldn't give a damn if your own mother was choking on the carbon monoxide coming out of your tailpipe, as long as it didn't affect your horsepower.
[Edited on Feb 16, 2005 by piracy]
Hah. Thanks for being an example why so many people think environmentalism is a bad word.
and what exactly do you consider your sorry-ass self a shining example of? the passivity of whitebread-fed american ironic malaise?
thanks for caring.
Attack ideas, not people. You need to familiarize yourself a bit more with the methods some people approach to discussion. Stop the kneejerk bullshit and consider what I've actually said. Study up a bit on hyperbole and sarcasm while you're at it, and you might start to realize you've made an unfortunate and hasty judgement of what I actually do care about.
[Edited on Feb 17, 2005 by Idjiit]
you think i'm an example of what's bad about environmentalism: i think you're an example of whats bad about america.
FEB 17, 2005 11:22 AM
piracy said:
you think i'm an example of what's bad about environmentalism: i think you're an example of whats bad about america.
You don't agree with me so you're a bad American...............does that sound familiar?
[Edited on Feb 17, 2005 by bones_708]
FEB 17, 2005 11:22 AM
bones_708 said:
piracy said:
bones_708 said:
You want to lay a bet on who has done more for the conservation of waterfowl and habitat, hunters or hippys? I'll lay down 20 on hunters.
yeah - assasination of the strongest and fittest individuals always works wonders for biodiversity...
i for one never heard any hunters in an uproar over the snail darter in tennessee - or is that ancient history?
or are all you compassionate killers gonna spearhead a letter writing campaign to stop the drilling in the alaska national wildlife refugee? somehow i just dont think so.
what hunter gives a shit about whales?
your personal view regarding hippys aside, do you really believe that hunters have the ecosystems welfare at heart? and that they're not just protecting their favorite sport?
And that matters more than saving the habitat? If you just want to hate go ahead, but you should always keep your eye on the goal.
edited to add: And fuck you and your asumptions. I don't know you, but some off my best friends are "hippys" and aside from not showwering enouh, I have great respect for them and the way they lead there lives.
[Edited on Feb 17, 2005 by bones_708]
protecting habitat for huntable wildlife while undermining the endangered species act makes about as much sense as blocking the kyoto accord while weatherpatterns destabilize...
and sorry to make assumptions - but if you think they're so ineffectual, you must know some lame-ass hippies.
granted - they're mostly as lame as everyone else. but they're also the only SOLID bastion of environmentalism and idealism that i know of... even if they're usually weak-minded and PC.
FEB 17, 2005 11:27 AM
piracy said:
protecting habitat for huntable wildlife while undermining the endangered species act makes about as much sense as blocking the kyoto accord while weatherpatterns destabilize...
and sorry to make assumptions - but if you think they're so ineffectual, you must know some lame-ass hippies.
granted - they're mostly as lame as everyone else. but they're also the only SOLID bastion of environmentalism and idealism that i know of... even if they're usually weak-minded and PC.
Don't take this the wrong way, but have you checked out the Ducks Unlimited site? How many hippys would it take to come up with that much money? That doesn't make them inefectual, but everone can't do everything and the "dropout" nature of the whole hippy thing makes it even harder.
Idjit
HOPEFUL
I'm lost
FEB 17, 2005 02:19 PM
Idjit
HOPEFUL
I'm lost
FEB 17, 2005 02:21 PM
piracy said:
Idjiit said:
Attack ideas, not people. You need to familiarize yourself a bit more with the methods some people approach to discussion. Stop the kneejerk bullshit and consider what I've actually said. Study up a bit on hyperbole and sarcasm while you're at it, and you might start to realize you've made an unfortunate and hasty judgement of what I actually do care about.
[Edited on Feb 17, 2005 by Idjiit]
you think i'm an example of what's bad about environmentalism: i think you're an example of whats bad about america.
You couldn't have missed my points worse with a Red Ryder from 1000 yards, dude. I hope you're wearing earplugs in your own little echo chamber. 
FEB 18, 2005 08:50 AM
Idjiit said:
Racer_X said:
DrStinkypants said:
skankzor said:
We shouldn't be so arrogant as to think we can destroy the environment.
The Earth will kill us off before allowing such a thing.
Thats this thing that irks me about all the save the earth bullshit. the earth is gonna be just fine.
Think about it a little bit more and show me where he just shot him self in the ass.
Why don't you just cut to the chase? Environmentalism that focuses on "Saving the Planet" or whatever is misguided, and it's no wonder it doesn't resonate with a larger audience. The issue is human survival and maintaining a certain quality of life - until Environmentalists correctly identify that as the real issue, they'll continue to fail on the whole.
People don't give a fuck about the planet, and they don't give a fuck about ecology when it comes down to it. They do care whether gas is $5 vs. $1 a gallon, and they care about whether they can go outside without a gas mask on or not. But the Earth? Whales? Who gives a shit?
defending unsustainable ideologies is itself unsustainable.
it can be the heart of the american way - that doesn't make it right, that doesn't mean that it'll all work itself out, that doesn't mean that we all have to play by the rules of the most selfish idiot.
your point is unsustainable - in the sense that it leads absolutely nowhere, it leads to no change, it leads directly to unsupported compromise policiies like kyoto.
saying that's just the way it is doesn't excuse it. not at all. (for one thing, it's predominately america that is "that way" - we certainly lead the pack)
this is about change - not claiming the right to be stubborn assholes who'll wait for armageddon before admitting they're wrong.
Idjit
HOPEFUL
I'm lost
FEB 18, 2005 08:59 AM
Fuck, I'm so glad I left California.
FEB 18, 2005 08:59 AM
piracy said:
Idjiit said:
Racer_X said:
DrStinkypants said:
skankzor said:
We shouldn't be so arrogant as to think we can destroy the environment.
The Earth will kill us off before allowing such a thing.
Thats this thing that irks me about all the save the earth bullshit. the earth is gonna be just fine.
Think about it a little bit more and show me where he just shot him self in the ass.
Why don't you just cut to the chase? Environmentalism that focuses on "Saving the Planet" or whatever is misguided, and it's no wonder it doesn't resonate with a larger audience. The issue is human survival and maintaining a certain quality of life - until Environmentalists correctly identify that as the real issue, they'll continue to fail on the whole.
People don't give a fuck about the planet, and they don't give a fuck about ecology when it comes down to it. They do care whether gas is $5 vs. $1 a gallon, and they care about whether they can go outside without a gas mask on or not. But the Earth? Whales? Who gives a shit?
defending unsustainable ideologies is itself unsustainable.
it can be the heart of the american way - that doesn't make it right, that doesn't mean that it'll all work itself out, that doesn't mean that we all have to play by the rules of the most selfish idiot.
your point is unsustainable - in the sense that it leads absolutely nowhere, it leads to no change, it leads directly to unsupported compromise policiies like kyoto.
saying that's just the way it is doesn't excuse it. not at all. (for one thing, it's predominately america that is "that way" - we certainly lead the pack)
this is about change - not claiming the right to be stubborn assholes who'll wait for armageddon before admitting they're wrong.
I think he made a good point. "Help pass the clean air act or your kids wont be able to play outside" is going to work better "we need to save the enviorment".
FEB 18, 2005 09:04 AM
bones_708 said:
piracy said:
protecting habitat for huntable wildlife while undermining the endangered species act makes about as much sense as blocking the kyoto accord while weatherpatterns destabilize...
and sorry to make assumptions - but if you think they're so ineffectual, you must know some lame-ass hippies.
granted - they're mostly as lame as everyone else. but they're also the only SOLID bastion of environmentalism and idealism that i know of... even if they're usually weak-minded and PC.
Don't take this the wrong way, but have you checked out the Ducks Unlimited site? How many hippys would it take to come up with that much money? That doesn't make them inefectual, but everone can't do everything and the "dropout" nature of the whole hippy thing makes it even harder.
and most of the money in our legislators offshore bank accounts come from big buisness. how many consitutents do you think it would take to come up with that sort of money?
i think, and this is being generous to many hippies, that what you might mistakenly call the "dropout" tendancy is actually a serious attempt to invent something new.
you must be the change, and all that.
FEB 18, 2005 09:41 AM
FEB 18, 2005 10:50 AM
piracy said:
and most of the money in our legislators offshore bank accounts come from big buisness. how many consitutents do you think it would take to come up with that sort of money?
i think, and this is being generous to many hippies, that what you might mistakenly call the "dropout" tendancy is actually a serious attempt to invent something new.
you must be the change, and all that.
Can you stick with one train of thought and say things on point.
Here is a shock, I didn't coin the phrase "dropout" and it has been used by hippys and other for a lot of years so "I am not tacking the blame"
FEB 18, 2005 05:16 PM
bones_708 said
Can you stick with one train of thought and say things on point.
no
Here is a shock, I didn't coin the phrase "dropout" and it has been used by hippys and other for a lot of years so "I am not tacking the blame"
dont think i said you were - i was offering an alternate hypothesis regarding the flakiness of hippies.
piracy
Whitwell, TN
January 2004
FEB 17, 2005 08:13 AM