Re: Ecology

[Russell Grinker <grinker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Lou Proyect wrote:

>This is so _un-specific_

I think I made some telling points about state housing. I could go on about
rural water supply in this province where 25l/person/day (if it is even
available) is regarded as a sustainable level of consumption, or growing
pressure to cut even water-born sewerage and replace it with pit latrines.
You didn't respond to what I said about housing but chose instead to attack
my (tenuous as it happens) LM connections.

>Why don't you give listers an exact idea of what
>you are talking about. LM campaigned for the Narmada Dam in India, which
>favored the capitalist landowner against the small peasantry.

I'm no expert on Narmada but as I understand it:

The elected Indian government made a decision to go ahead with the
Narmada Valley project, with the support of all of the state governments
involved. An American NGO, EDF, played a divisive role in the campaign for
resettlement and was instrumental in lobbying the World Bank to sabotage the
dam project. I think I would rather support the right of the Indian
government to decide what technology it has at its disposal than an American
NGO's deployment of the West's monopoly over credit to sabotage that
decision. Why should the Indian government be prevented from doing something
about the power cuts and electricity shortages that regularly black out its
major cities?

As you raised the issue, I suggest you read the detailed articles on Narmada
in LM124, October 1999 www.informinc.co.uk

Russell