RE: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: uban Genetic Engineering(was Jesse Lemisch)

["Mark Jones" <jones118@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Doug Henwood wrote:

>
> Ok. You don't know how many people have to die off for earthly life
> to be sustainable, or if you do, you're too embarrassed to say.
>
> I'll now drop it.

Probably the 'when did you stop beating your wife?' way you ask your
question, doesn't help. You believe, and repeatedly say it, that there are
no problems with capitalist sustainability.  You make much of 'ingenuity'
and make light of or rather, completely ignore, any detailed analysis of
such things as ecological breakdown. Lots of people including me have
presented this kind of data. It's everywhere, even in mainstream media. You
somehow manage to ignore it all. There is no such thing as global warming.
The oil will never run out. Ingenuity will prevail. Pangloss was right. Full
stop, period. At least James Heartfield, not to speak of Julian Simon, used
to try to buttress such slogans with some attempt at addressing the
arguments. I don't see any sign of this in your case. What I do see is that
anyone who attempts to say that 'present policies, if continued, may lead to
much sufferring and many innocent lives being lost' is told they are a
misanthropist, a mass murderer in waiting etc. Doesn't this all strike you
as a little unbalanced, not to say tedious? Before WW2 people like Neville
Chamberlain were equally vicious and vitriolic about Winston Churchill,
blaming him for seeking the war with Hitler that he warned would inevitably
follow from appeasement. It is the same confusion of cause with effect, the
same desire to victimise the messenger and avoid the message.

Mark Jones