is it ok to be luddite

[Jedrzej Polak]

Well, I can see a difference between a guy who uses his body as a shield for
trees, whales, seals and white bears (and I really don't remember Greenpeace
action against property more costly than a dragnet) and Osama bin Laden or
even Kropotkin. You are very right about genes (and Greenpeace IS against
gene cured food, so I can imagine it is also very gene aware as far as human
beings are concerned), but I hope you don't mean to say that a Greenpeace
activist is no better than an average GI.  IMHO there's a hell of a
difference between them. Radical thinking and/or radical action does not
necessarily mean violent thinking and violence.  You wouldn't say that MLK
was a terrorist, but his thinking (and some of his action) was certainly
radical (at least from the point of view of his opponents). The same applies
to Greenpeace. The same does not apply to the so called professional
defenders of democracy nor to any other gun brandishing nitwit on this
planet.

JP


> From: "Paranoid" <paranoid at attcanada.ca>
> Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 13:02:26 -0400
> To: "Jedrzej Polak" <jedpolak at mac.com>, <pynchon-l at waste.org>,
> <jbor at bigpond.com>
> Subject: Re: is it ok to be luddite
> 
> What about Earth First? Some of their tactics could be granted as terrorism.
> yet their goal is far from that. There was an interesting scientist on the
> CBC last night (radio) Steven Pinker. I have read some of his works on
> genes. Here he was speaking of how violent genes cannot be found.  There is
> no gene that makes a man shoot someone. And, at the same time, if this gene
> was found it would be necessary to have it in each and every soldier who
> goes to war. There is no difference in gene structure between those who
> shoot people in the name of their country and those who shoot people in the
> name of a drug trade on the street.
> Yet, there is a difference between those who use terrorism to save the world
> around us, the natural world which we should not be screwing with anyway,
> and those who shoot one another in the name of demorcacy or.....who is
> better.
> Child games.
> 
> 
> 
> Jeffrey Ross: editor, www.subterran.com  -- making the world a little
> smaller.
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jedrzej Polak" <jedpolak at mac.com>
> To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>; <jbor at bigpond.com>
> Sent: Friday, June 09, 2000 12:44 PM
> Subject: re: is it ok to be luddite
> 
> 
>> jbor writes:
>> 
>>> Of course, with Greenpeace some of the activities in which its members
>>> engage verge uncomfortably on terrorism at times
>> 
>> If we agree that terrorism is violence toward private citizens, public
>> property, and political enemies promoted by a political group to achieve
> or
>> maintain supremacy, the good folks from Greenpeace cannot be regarded as
>> terrorists because 1. their goals are far from political; 2; they do not
>> strive to achieve or maintain supremacy. If you think otherwise, I would
>> gladly see the examples of Greenpeace political terrorism (or any kind of
>> terrorism at that!). Let us not try to overgeneralize, or soon we'll call
>> Gandhi a moral terrorist!
>> 
>> Best
>> 
>> JP
>> 
>