[PEN-L:29932] Re: Re: From Julian Simon-ites-To Iraqi Stalingrads-More Hyperbole

["ken hanly" <khanly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Why is the distinction lost on you? Surely it is likely that the planet will
survive. The idea of a vulnerable planet is a bit weird in itself except
that a meteorite or MAD atomic blast might destroy it. What is vulnerable
are some species and perhaps humans are one of them. I really dont know. But
surely not all species are likely to be destroyed and even some members of
the human species will probably survive a considerable amount of
environmental degradation but not with a "standard of living" such as we now
have. So what is it you mean when you claim not to understand Harvey's
distinction? Or does he mean something different that what I described
above?

Cheers, Ken Hanly
>
>)
>
> Neither of these characters have anything to do with Marxism, but they
> both figure in debates between Marxists over the ecological crisis. For
> example, David Harvey argued that MR editor John Bellamy Foster was
> veering in the same direction as people like Erlich because he titled
> his book "The Vulnerable Planet." Harvey argued that we might despoil
> the planet, but it will survive. This was a distinction lost on both
> John and me.
>