A world outside the US? C'mon now, Lorraine, you don't expect us to
believe that do ya?
I think it quite nice that Lorraine was able to do that without ruffling
my feathers. Sorry Lorraine, but there was this election today, and all
the bad guys won almost, so we're a bit preoccupied. But keep reminding
us all, because once we get started, it is quite easy to think that our
problems are the world's problems, when it would be more correct to say
that we (or at least those bad guys that just got elected) are the
world's problems.
Referring to Z magazine, it's a sort of left-wing rag, that if it does
not have a foreign readership, would certainly like one. However, be
that as it may, I will still post some comments from the article I have
mentioned, and I would love to get some opinions from outside the US. I
will put enough info so it isn't parochial. I do think it has
international repercussions, and so is relevant.
And you fellow 'Merican citizens, SHAPE UP.
--
Jim
____________________________________________________________________
James J. Roper | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
University of Pennsylvania | Voice: (215)898-3100
Dept of Biology, Leidy Labs | FAX: (215)898-8780
Philadelphia, PA 19104-6018 |
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 10 00:38:11 MST 1994
Subject: Re: Post election distress
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Annica Young Kronsell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 08:42:10 +0100
>I agree completely. The electoral system is not
>where it's happening
>politically. The power struggle is between
>people, organizing in
>our communities at the grass-roots level, and
>corporations.
I do agree with this in the sense that all
politics do not take place within electoral
politics.
The
>function of the electoral system is primarily
>ideological, to present
>the false appearance that through voting people
>have a say in public
>decision-making.
>
>DON'T VOTE--it only encourages them.
>
I can understand that as an anarchist you would
take this position. I however, would like to point
out that the electoral system does make a
difference. I think that proportional electoral
systems, have this same problem of 'false
appearances' as you are alluding to, but there is
at least one important difference. It encourages
an ideological debate at a rather high political
level. You can actually have the green party in
the parliament debating from green ideology and
exposing the brownness of the right and the social
democrats. I think it makes people think about
ideology not in terms of their own specific
interests but (at times) about society in general
even expressing utopian visions of society.
Ofcourse it can also lead to ridgid and
unquestioned party loyalties.
Many Americans show their discontent by not
voting, what was the voting turnout anyway ?
somebody said that in Virginia it was 70 %, isn't
that unusually high ?
Annica Kronsell
Department of Political Science
P.O.Box 52
Lund University
S-221 00 Lund, Sweden
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 10 00:52:31 MST 1994
Subject: Re: Post election distress
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Annica Young Kronsell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 08:56:35 +0100
Jim wrote:
>Why is it that we fear the changes? Because it
>disturbs our safe little
>worlds? Those are illusions. I welcome the
>changes, because they are
>inevitable. I can only hope that in a world
beset >by changes that
>humanity will get the hang of changing, and not
be >so rectionary against
>it, and then realize that with a few minor
changes >in attitude we can
>make this place a better one.
What do you mean by this, are changes in
themselves good ? I strongly feel it has to be
related to the things we value in life. The
changes taking place in America, if they are
actually changes, do not leave room for social
justice or equaty. To me it stinks of selfish
individualism.
Besides, if you get >a kick out of being
>poor, then you realize that most of the changes
>won't make you any
>poorer... I better think about that one some
>more. But I do think that
>the "haves" worry more about these changes than
>the "have-nots."
Who gets a kick out of being poor ?
Annica Kronsell
Department of Political Science
P.O.Box 52
Lund University
S-221 00 Lund, Sweden
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 10 04:35:50 MST 1994
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 06:38:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Jayne S Docherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: analysis
To: Wainwright Joel David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wed, 9 Nov 1994, Wainwright Joel David wrote:
In response to Ani Mareck....
> The spirited exchange which snapped us all out of our collected
> torpor has sufficiently piqued my interest as to keep my head tuned to
> my email all day. In the process, I have been trying to answer Ani's
> legitimate question (tone problems aside) about the relevance of race and
> issues to ecofeminism. In my mind, the fundamental value which
> makes one sensitive to environmental destruction and also upset about
> "The Bell Curve" is *a deep appreciation for diversity.* To me,
> protecting the biological heritage of the Earth is important not because
> of utilitarian benefits (e. g. rainforest medicines) but because of a
> appreciation of the diversity of life. Similarly with
> respect for African-Americans, whose are misrepresented by the argument
> presented in "The Bell Curve" (warning: I haven't read the book...and
> I don't plan on doing so).
>
> All of which is to say that to me Ecofeminism offers a framework
> for dealing with complex Human/Environment issues for the very reason
> that it takes both intra-human (social) and Human/environment issues into
> account in its value system.
Good point! Could we talk more about this? How does ecofem perspective
achieve this integration of thought? Do we have any specific examples of
where ecofem differs from other enviro perspectives (or other feminist
perspectives) as a result of this integration of the social and the
environmental? This theme has been brought up a couple of times in
passing, but we haven't really pursued it.... I'm interested, is anyone
else?
Jayne
