Jan, I respect your position, and I did not characterize, or imply, that either yours or George's position was among the extreme. Your position is quite coherent and you practice it with integrity. George's position is coherent but with a more open-ended attitude toward the multiple issues and stakeholders who may disagree about the best course of action, and see multiple options, each with different risks. I understand the political process to involve making space for people to live well on their collective and individual terms, in a manner that reflects how they perceive their collective and individual risks. There are huge tensions here. What you wrote below can be interpreted in a couple of different ways. If what you wrote means that there should never be hydro-fracking, and only a search for other options, is only ONE correct way, then it would appear to become imperative to win. If what you wrote means that we should find safer ways, but we may in the meantime do some hydro-fracking, then your position recognizes that other calculations of risk may be as valid as yours, and we all need to be in a process of moving, by diverse means, in that same direction. Where there is an absolute imperative, there is no room for political process, except some process of proselytizing and conversion. In this vigorous dispute, I anticipate that we will have to live with people, and thrive with people, who hold very different values than our own. Who analyze and value things in very different ways. I can vigorously present my case, but I cannot do it in a way that presumes I could convince others that there IS a best answer, and we just need to do it. It makes it hard to work together when the rhetoric and competing analyses are presented so stridently, even without any hint of character assassination or insult. The questions that I believe would need to be addressed are these two: If hydro-fracking is permitted, what conditions will opponents need to see in place to live with such a decision and to thrive? (If it is permitted, and there are serious repercussions, friends of mine with severe chemical sensitivities will likely need to leave the area.) If hydro-fracking is prohibited, what conditions will proponents needs to see in place to live with such a decision and to thrive? (If it is prohibited, several friends may lose the margin of income that would buy them time to transition to a new economy.) Eric Eric Clay, M.Div., Ph.D. Community Coach Shared Journeys, Inc. 832 North Aurora Street Ithaca, NY 14850 607-592-6874 [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) sharedjourneys.net (under construction)
SHARED JOURNEYS That all may thrive and none be excluded In a message dated 11/20/2009 4:19:02 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [email protected] writes: Eric, I appreciate your compliment, and, at the same time, want to clarify where I'm coming from. You said, "...it does not seem that you read George's post." I not only read George's post, I read it twice. So it wasn't a lack of attention on my part. It was a conscious disagreement with his position. As I see it, there IS a "morally, environmentally sustainable justifiable position with respect to the issue." It's to protect the environment and find safer, more sustainable ways to source energy than violent and precarious hydrofracking. Likewise, I disagree with your assessment of this thread: "The debate seems to not be about a diverse community that governs itself (as impossible as that may be). The debate seems to be about winning control in a particular way, with parties on both extremes being willing to say almost anything to win." Neither George nor I have demonstrated that we are "willing to say almost anything to win." (Nor did I hear any of that from the protesters last night.) We are simply being frank, without slamming each other in a personal way. Democracy requires this kind of open engagement and willingness to disagree. The more we can tolerate conversations with those who differ from us, the better off we'll be. Unfortunately, the usual pattern is for humans to shy away from disagreement. I think it's more courageous to voice our differences as they arise, especially for something as important as this. Moreover, unlike you, I think this debate IS about how a diverse community governs itself. I'm not trying to control anybody, and I don't think it's "extreme" for any of us to try to defend our land against unprecedented pollution. Jan Quarles ----- Original Message ----- From: <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 11:25 AM Subject: Re: [SustainableTompkins] Marcellus NIABYism > Jan, > > I applaud all of your efforts, and the self-sacrifice you and your family > are making for the integrity of your position. > >>From reading your post, though, it does not seem that you read George's > post. What I take from his post is that there is no single morally, > environmentally sustainable justifiable position with respect to the > issue. > > I imagine other people will make different choices than you would or than > I > would that they believe, based on evidence that they find credible. > Those positions may and do differ dramatically from either of ours. > > We will all be neighbors, living with the consequences, for decades to > come, whether drilling does or does not proceed, whether lots or little. > > The debate seems to not be about a diverse community that governs itself > (as impossible as that may be). The debate seems to be about winning > control in a particular way, with parties on both extremes being willing > to say > almost anything to win. > > In the middle of such conflict, we lose sight of how to govern ourselves, > as a community. > > Eric > > Eric Clay, M.Div., Ph.D. > Community Coach > Shared Journeys, Inc. > 832 North Aurora Street > Ithaca, NY 14850 > 607-592-6874 > [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) > sharedjourneys.net (under construction) > > SHARED JOURNEYS > That all may thrive and none be excluded > > hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org _______________________________________________ For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: [email protected] http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins Questions about the list? ask [email protected] free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org _______________________________________________ For more information about sustainability in the Tompkins County area, please visit: http://www.sustainabletompkins.org/ RSS, archives, subscription & listserv information for: [email protected] http://lists.mutualaid.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainabletompkins Questions about the list? ask [email protected] free hosting by http://www.mutualaid.org
