🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <38510244@hpindda.cup.hp.com>, alanm@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Alan McGowen) writes:
> / hpindda:ca.environment / cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) /  2:19 pm  Feb 25, 1991 /
> In article <12717@darkstar.ucsc.edu>, de@helios.ucsc.edu (De Clarke) writes:
> 
> >Hungry people are quite willing
> >to accept mass murder of other humans -- you think they are going
> >to be stopped from wiping out species by an idea like "habitat"
> >vs. "property"?
> 
> You forget that modern democracy was also once just an idea. However, I 

Now it's a living hell of special interest power and ignorant
voting.  (How else to explain the absurd situation of California
voters overwhelmingly approving term limits for state legislators,
and the same voters overwhelmingly re-electing those same 
legislators?)

> never did mean to offer "habitat" as a political alternative to property.
> I'm just using the word as biologists do, and it's a politics-free concept. 
> But anything we humans do is going to be colored with politics. What
> I called for was thought about possible alternative ways of coloring habitat
> with politics -- alternative to the current property concept.
> 
> Alan McGowen

So why did you make such a big deal of the distinction between
"habitat" and "property"?  It certainly sounded like a Marxist
distinction to me.  (Except of course, that "habitat" belongs
to all the lifeforms of the planet, instead of "the workers".
We can presume that the same arrogant, elitist, well-educated
crowd that managed the state enterprises for "the workers",
regardless of their real desires, would do the same for the
benefit of the other species of the planet -- I don't expect
to see too many owls, chipmunks, or algae sitting in the commissar's
chair).

-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid,pixar,tekbspa}!optilink!cramer
"Well, maybe the Holocaust was right *for that culture*." -- a moral relativist
with whom I work.
You must be kidding!  No company would hold opinions like mine!