doomvox at gmail.com
Wed Nov 23 20:03:14 UTC 2011
Brian Morris <cymraegish at gmail.com> wrote:
>Here it seems you are batting around with the terms "conservative" and "liberal". I very strongly disagree that conservatives are liberal on environmental issues.
One meaning of the term "conservative" is "reluctant to make changes".
(Though it's hard to get that meaning to line up with any existing
group that calls itself "conservative", which is the kind of thing I
was trying to get at. )
When a system is (a) important and (b) too complex to really
understand, you can make a case for not messing with it. People who
call themselves "liberal" tend to agree with that thought when you're
talking about the environment, they're less impressed with the idea
that economic systems should be left free to run unchecked.
But the issue gets murkier when you're talking about the economy,
because you could say that "regulation" is the normal state of
affairs, and repealing rules that have been around for half-a-century
is a reckless gamble.
But then, just to keep playing with this analogy, there are
people-who-call-themselves-conservative who like the idea that we're
due for a new Ice Age, and it's only being held at bay by the
greenhouse gases we're pumping into the air.
(By the way, I think I had it backwards: Adam Smith was an influence on Darwin.)
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss