🚀 go-pugleaf

Jym Dyer wrote:

> =v= I and others got some junk mail from Californians for
> Population Stabilization.  It's not clear where they got my
> name, since I don't give magazines or organizations permission
> to sell this info.  (My friends and I suspect _E_magazine_ was
> involved, based on the spellings of our names and addresses.)

A couple of years ago, I dropped my subscription to E after they
ignored my LTE's about their anti-immigrant bigotry.  Oddly enough,
I stopped hearing from the anti-immigration folks about the same time.


>
>
> =v= It follows the usual junk mail scare tactic of mentioning
> CRIME! CRIME! CRIME! first of all (and just never you mind the
> declining crime rate), followed by "population," "traffic jams,"
> and "energy costs." (Apparently Enron and PG&E's greed had
> nothing to do with our energy costs.  Who knew?)
>
> =v= Here's how their "very different, very *positive* vision
> of the future" starts off:
>
>     Imagine whizzing to work on uncongested roads ...
>
> You got it, you (the "Californian" reader, who of course doesn't
> qualify as unwanted population) will be rewarded by living the
> life of a Beach Boys song, and never mind the environmental
> impact of that.  (They do go on to mention mass transit, but
> that is of course just perfunctory, both in terms of the junk
> mail's rhetoric and in the group's participation in transit
> issues, which is generally limited to casting aspersions on
> transit-oriented planning.)
>
> =v= The rest of the junk mail follows the usual pattern of scare
> tactics, taking credit for this and that, pointing fingers, and
> begging for money.
>
> =v= Here's the CAPper:  they announce something called project
> Spotlight.  _Spotlight_, of course, was a virulently racist
> right-wing magazine put out by Lyndon LaRouchies.  Can CAPs be
> any more dense if they tried?
>     <_Jym_>

Probably not.  The funny things is, these guys are even more right wing
that I suspected!  (or scary thing).

Charles Lynch