And what could we do with the world's military budget if we used it to
fight climate change not war?
Chris
John Scull wrote:
> Maybe we should worry less about so-called eco-fascists and do first
> things first by going after the real fascists who mostly seem to be in
> charge of the world.
>
> What is the ecological impact of the world's military? What is the
> carbon footprint of an armoured vehicle, a leopard tank, an attack
> helicopter, or a fighter bomber? What is the carbon footprint of
> military flights between NATO countries and Afghanistan? What is the
> political imperative for militarism?
>
> What is the carbon footprint of the massive security arrangements
> required for a G8 summit, WTO meeting, etc? Is most of this security
> concerned with terrorism, or is it about intimidating people like us?
>
> "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
> merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
>
> Keep in mind that the term "eco-facist" is a favourite of
> ultra-right-wing American radio commentator Rush Limbaugh. Do we
> really want to use this epithet with each other?
>
> I suggest that we reserve our strong words, name-calling, and sense of
> outrage for the the folks on the other side of this struggle and try
> to treat each other and our differences with courtesy, understanding,
> respect, and kindness. We may differ about many things, but we need
> to remember that we're all on the same team.
>
>
> John
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> John Scull
> "There are always two parties; the establishment and the movement."
> --Ralph Waldo Emerson
|