Comments on: It Is My Gulf of Mexico, Not BP’s

By: lichen

lichen — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 05:00:24 +0000

Yes I agree Don, we should tax the carbon, and not in a casino capitalist way–tax the carbon and use the revenues to shut down fossil fuels and replace with renewables and low-energy lifestyles.

By: Don Hawkins

Don Hawkins — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 23:28:46 +0000

It’s a tuff one alright. The amazing part to me sometimes is because of media we get to watch all of this happen right before our eye’s sort of. I guess what I remember always’ is what am seeing is not real yes it’s real because it’s happening but filtered yes the big giant filter and when it come out the other side the foolishness of it all is mind boggling. The Gulf is already toxic soup and yet these silly human’s talk about drilling sorry not an oz of sense do I see. It does appear some are willing to try but must fight the ones that don’t. The money from the ones that don’t is the driving force of course and talk about spread the wealth. A real try is simple at least what must be done and miles and miles from home skates, golf clubs, dental care, private tutoring, musical instruments, vacations, and many of course will say what’s the sense of going on without all of our stuff. It’s the rate we use the stuff and I guess if it doesn’t shine don’t want it. The waste just in the States is nut’s. The best hope so far is tax carbon forget the trade part nonsense and no more golf until we get the CO 2 level back to 340 part’s per million to make a long story short. Oh how could we go on well to try and save what we can of the human race is a Noble effort at least in my mind, four.

By: lichen

lichen — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 21:57:11 +0000

BP are the ones responsible, are the target; the oil corporations should be targeted. People whose ideologies conveniently seek to excuse the rich and powerful and allow their criminal behavior (including ecocide and murder) to continue are clearly hiding something about their own views; as if, further, protecting BP and the like from prosecution wouldn’t leave them fully capable of using their vast resources to prevent systemic change from happening.

By: bozh

bozh — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 21:42:49 +0000

I say that “our-out-of control relationship with nature is not as much ours as it is THEIRS.
It is THEM which controls media, and thus all important info. THEY control all education, entertainment, advertising, etc.
It is THEY who teach kids to use too much and to be ashamed for not having things.

I still cling to notion that as tabula rasa all children are OK. But some become killers for money; others make more or much more money than others.
I know of no justifable cause for a child to have skates, golf clubs, dental care, private tutoring, musical instruments, etc., and another having none of that.

I am surprised that so many contributors dwell solely on symptoms, while eschewing the root cause: division into THEM and us!tnx

By: Max Shields

Max Shields — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:51:09 +0000

Mr. Keyes: “simply improving the incentive system and not finding the deeper forces driving our out-of-control relationship with biophysical reality is a ship already missed.”

Precisely!

(Highly recommend Confronting Consumption edited by Thomas Princen, et al. It turns the economy of growth on its head away from production to consumption and follow the supply chains.)

By: James Keye

James Keye — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:32:24 +0000

Mr. Deadbeat, While I broadly agree with your angst, and do see capitalism as destructive, simply improving the incentive system and not finding the deeper forces driving our out-of-control relationship with biophysical reality is a ship already missed. The magnitude of the dilemma is given by the, admittedly preliminary, ecological footprint work: if the US were to reduce consumption by half and equal consumption levels of the other developed countries we would still be using more of the earth’s productive capacity per year than is replenished in a year. And looking at what is possible without draconian force, well, there is no way that humanity will, or even a reasonably sized contingent, make such changes. In light of this, the replacement of capitalism, though worthy, would not address the major issues.
***
Our environmental assaults have escalated consistently. This one is on track to exceed the 11 million barrels of the Gulf war spill (sic). What will the next be? Part of what I was trying to illuminate in the essay is the disconnect between what we can comprehend directly and the magnitude of these planet-wide events. Ordinary people for ordinary reasons use powers that they do not understand to create incomprehensible catastrophes whether in war, human dislocations or environmental damage.

By: mary

mary — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 09:13:12 +0000

Read another perspective. Layla Anwar is a displaced Iraqi refugee and writes angrily and sometime savagely which is quite understandable in view of what Amerika did to her country.

http://arabwomanblues.blogspot.com/2010/06/spill-it.html

By: Maien

Maien — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 05:25:51 +0000

Thank-you for sharing your personal story of loss amidst the terrible destruction in the Gulf of Mexico. I cannot imagine how overwhelming this will become for those who live in the affected area. I know that this is just the beginning.

I truly hope that this disaster will finally wake up North America. Aside from the word ‘karma’ being bandied about the media, this may wake up America’s understanding of the rest of the world…earth. America is now joined with Nigeria, India and countless other countries where corporations have devastated the land and ended bountiful, healthy life. Hmmm. I guess everybody is pretty much a “useless eater” now, not just those third worlders.

By: Deadbeat

Deadbeat — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 04:06:53 +0000

Here is another “shortcut”

’ Both are certifiable mental states of illness: [the wife beater] breaks bones and the other now has the power to break the earth.

Does that really describe a “mental state of illness” (of the system) or is it really an extremely bad apples vs oranges comparison? Why is it so difficult for Liberals to HONESTLY articulate what the root cause is? In a Capitalist system is someone who is reward money (access to the means of survival and comforts) for gaming the system and profits, etc, mentally illness for acting in their personal self-interest or are they rational individuals?

I would argue that they are rational for how the system is constructed as that is how the system of rewards are established and maintained. To label them “mentally ill” is merely name calling and once again tends to say that we just have a barrel of “bad apples” rather than a system of propaganda, indoctrination and repression.

This is why I’m being critical because the better part of the past 40 years, especially the WELL-PAID Liberal-Left have been for using this kind of “physiological” rhetoric in order to obscure how the Capitalist system functions. Liberals have constantly deployed this “bad apple” rhetoric — either “corporate”, “industrial”, “big business”, etc. Damn with all of the bad apples reported by Liberals over the decades perhaps it is the Liberals who are mentally ill as they seem to miss the most obvious.

Hey I’m not against “creative writing” but for some reason there seem to be this real avoidance to bring up the “old man” (Marx).

By: James Keye

James Keye — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 01:46:29 +0000

Deadbeat, I agree with you generally. Naming BP is a shortcut of language.

By: James Keye

James Keye — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 01:42:15 +0000

There are a couple of curiousities in these comments. One is the directions that they take compared to the content of the essay; the other is the relevence of psychology — physiological psychology and statistics was my area. Now is there anything about the essay that interested anyone?

By: Deadbeat

Deadbeat — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 01:38:58 +0000

James Keye writes …

If the Gulf of Mexico is seriously harmed, that is, if the ecosystems are damaged by the carelessness and overreaching of an oil company, then that company must become an enemy. How could this be seen as anything other than an assault of an invading force?

Should the oil company (BP) be the “enemy” or is the system that gives rise to oil companies and keep them in power the enemy? BP can be replaced by other companies and industries that harm the Gulf — like chemical companies, big pharma, the military, or even over-fishing. So what? Isn’t the main problem capitalist production? Why not address the root of the problem rather than the same old “bad apple”?

By: xpek8r

xpek8r — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 00:09:21 +0000

well not all psychologists are shrinks. Jas K does not strike me as the shrink type. But my experience jibes with that woman’s, shrinks in general tend to make psychological problems worse. Similar to calling the cops about disorderly conduct in the neighborhood:)

By: Don Hawkins

Don Hawkins — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 17:55:10 +0000

In an institution of higher learning when studying psychology is there a course on grand illusion pros, cons maybe it’s effects in society, civilization in general. Of course it just might start from a norm like if you do all the right things maybe you can grow up to be a CEO of a company or the leader of the free World.

By: bozh

bozh — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 16:35:21 +0000

Corporations comprise of people: shareholders and management. Are these the people who spread lobbies among pols and also donate money to them?
If they do, then, i do not see all that much difference bwtn a congressperson, judge, collumnist, prez, or an ‘educator’.
In short, all of them appear to me as one skein of wool. Does one really think that judiciary, congress, and WH are not one entity, but for the purposes of deception portrayed as separate branches of one whole.

And one can include in that one entity also ?all shareholders; of the MSM media also. Socalled checks and balances of the three branches of one tree= all three think exactly the same.
What balances out is cheques! tnx

By: Don Hawkins

Don Hawkins — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 16:28:25 +0000

James this article was different I must say you opened a few can’s of worms so to speak. First yes you are a psychologist and second a charmed life comes to mind. I don’t happen to be one of those that lived a charmed life and anybody that say’s they did is probably lying. In a mad world only the mad are sane oh really well as we all gain knowledge I guess we embrace the system or just live with it you know as the one’s who did live a charmed life keep us in slavery so to speak oh how charming. I’d better stop before I get myself in trouble but here’s a story a women told me when I was much younger. Don yes I’ve been married six times and I think I found my seventh and life sometimes is not what it seems. Some of my best advice is never go see a psychologist. Why I asked. Well I had a boy friend who was a psychologist and I would sit in his outside office until the last patent would leave and then I would go in and after a few minutes he would chase me around the desk saying among other things why doesn’t anybody love me. What do you think James maybe Thorazine or would Lithium be a better choice. Embrace the system I think not.