Absolutely, I couldn't agree more. Consumption is out of control many times over. China's struggling to get out of extreme poverty for most of its huge population, and they're willing do it by hook or by crook. That's why they're not worried about the environment for now. Globalism will have to grow a tree to the sky to get everyone into the middle class except we can't grow a tree to the sky.
So what did you think of my little game? Did you do it? A free drink (Mike's buying) for those who got the worst poet in the world (at least in my opinion). Another clue is 1979. But if you didn't do the matching, my feelings aren't hurt. Much. So it's okay.
--- On Wed, 5/21/08, David Wright <wright@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: David Wright <wright@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: The continuation of Realpolitik -- a counterfactual
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wednesday, May 21, 2008, 2:58 AM
Irene wrote:"...the thing we desperately need to do is find energy, real quick. The ole King isn't coming up with it, and jet fighters don't fly without it and Humvees don't run without it, not to mention your car or mine. We also need to husband water like crazy and we're wasting the same as ever."
I agree with your sentiment, Irene, with one exception. Finding energy might make a country strong, but then I favour (new) humanism (a la Silo) over nationalism. Instead of finding more energy, we must curb our enthusiasm for consumption and, of course, rethink the global economy. This, of
course, will never happen. I know this hearkens back to the tired rhetoric we've been hearing from angry young men and hoary old curmudgeons for several thousand years, but -- perhaps they've always been right.
a little angry, a little hoary
d.--
|
