Propaganda is only an adjunct to power. Those in power seem to be less and less interested in depending on persuasion and more attracted to more tangible methods of social control. As many have pointed out, we are living under a regime of political repression. While I am a persistent defender of our human natures, it is unreasonable to expect that people will take personal risks in the face of a repressive political climate. So many repressive tools are available to the regime, so much detailed information on individuals is at their fingertips, that it is illusory to expect that organized resistance on a national level will be effective. This is in no way to demean the courageous acts of principled people. However, we are very, very bad at supporting people amongst us who suffer for conscience. Until we come to understand solidarity, our real champions will be attacked when seen, silent while in hiding. We are an occupied country folks. We live under a clever version of martial law.
Calm reflection seems to be in order. We need to regroup to forge a clear understanding of our predicament. This will not require money. It will require intellectual and moral honesty. We will need to act locally once we find ourselves on the same page. I would like to be wrong about this. Sorry.
herb
is my friend!!!! There are those is the size acceptance movement who lament that the Center for Consumer Freedom is getting involved in this issue. While my opinion of the later is hardly favorable, I say it is high time someone takes on the pharmaceutical companies. For years there have been health professionals who have questioned the
automatic association between obesity and poor health. Their voices were stifled by both the pharmaceuticals who pay off journalists and a popular prejudice. No grass roots group has the power to stand up to a behemoth like the Robert Woods Johnson foundation who makes megabucks off antiobesity hysteria. I am glad both sides of the issue are coming out, let this debate at least be examined critically and fairly. And let the corporations go at it against each other and use up all their resources. Since all the benefits of moderate fatness have been suppressed, this may be one war which benefits a more balanced exhange of information.
As a passionate environmentalist myself, and an engineer who happens to dabble in psychology, I firmly believe that the only way OUT of an environmental catastrophe is to develop nuclear power. Nuclear power is scary because it's big, but if you were to do a full analysis of safety considerations, it's probably the best option between fossil fuels, "natural" renewables, and nuclear.
Fossil fuels I probably don't have to argue with this crowd. Renewables are a terrible land usage, and to generate enough energy we'd have to use far more land dedicated to these renewables than we would to nuclear disposal. It's scary, but true. Wind farms in enough quantity to alleviate the energy load use up enough land to cause birds significant problems, though they make excellent supplemental power. Solar power is absolutely terrible land usage, as it effectively turns its installation into a desert of sorts. Appropriate for some deserts, of course, but not enough to alleviate the problem.
I think the reason nuclear power is so scary is simply because it's so concentrated. With solar power, the huge land loss required is less scary to most people, but has a far larger implication to the natural world. Rolling back human power use just ain't gonna happen.
I would encourage anyone skeptical of this view to post some numbers about land usage, environmental impact, and power generated. I'm planning on doing that myself, because this is just my intuition - even though I hope I'm wrong! I'm barking mad about environmentalists who use their emotion before their heads...
-Gary
Sheldon, I wasn't able to create a trackback with the given URL,
https://www.prwatch.org/trackback/3629
...
I posted your request at
<a href="http://www.boomantribune.com/?op=displaystory;sid=2005/4/27/205140/606">BoomanTribune.com</a>, in a diary.
The problem is any agenda which might inconvenience powerful corporate interests will never see the light of day in main stream media. Here's why:
http://bsalert.com/artsearch.php?fn=2&as=354&dt=1
Pages