[MD] Barbarians & Hippies

[Arlo J. Bensinger]

Hi Platt,

Having some mornin' coffee, waiting to hear if there's a snow delay, and your
post came through, so you get a quick response.

[Platt]
When one of the founders of Greenpeace resigned because it became too 
extreme, I'd say that group is properly pegged as radical. (See the 
story of Dr. Patrick Moore in Wikipedia.)

[Arlo]
As with anything else, I find some of the causes and messages of these groups to
have value. And I disagree with them over points too. To keep "balance", what
rightist groups do you "properly peg" as radical?

[Platt]
As for CND. a pressure group that rejects societal self-defense is not only
radical, it's wacko.

[Arlo]
I'm not sure I know much about the CND, but I'd be surprised if it rejected
"societal self-defense", only that enacting that self-defense through the
detonation of nuclear weapons amounts to the mass-destruction of civilian human
beings to achieve a military objective. It amounts to killing everyone in your
neighbor's family because your neighbor threatened you. "Society" has survived
for thousands and thousands of years without "needing" nuclear bombs, I think
it continue to do so. The trouble is, as long as they are made, our enemies
will seek them out. And these enemies won't be deterred by us using ours in
retaliation. Of course, the modern theatre is so ladden with "distrust" and
politically manipulated tensions that disarmament will not be possible. I sadly
believe that it will only be after a nuclear exchange that people will demand,
and ensure, that there will be "no nukes". Take a look at Japan's very
"staunch" stand against nuclear weapons. They know. We, on the otherhand...
well, we'll know too someday. And the Japanese (and the f&^king kangaroos) will
just shake their heads.

Don't get the kangaroo reference? Check out http://www.endofworld.net/

[Platt]
I don't oppose the formation of pressure groups on the left, right, or  anywhere
else. Those who join such groups, however, can hardly be held  out as models of
people who "think for themselves."

[Arlo]
As with anything else, it depends on whether your blindly accept or blindly
reject everything a group advocates. Since in this complex world people will
always vary to a degree, no "group" could ever be composed exclusively of those
who share all your opinions. Although many want you to think that, and this is
achieved through top-down pressure to conform (exerted mostly via propaganda).

So, to clarify, the people who join Greenpeace or the NRA, CND or American
Family Association are not models of people who think for themselves?

Arlo