Ecologists unmoved by 'green' wave in advertising

Most of the hard-core environmentalists are a buch of fruitcakes anyway. Unless we go and burn all the SUV's, they will not be happy.

These days, whatever you do will piss someone off, will not be good enough. Too much PC (politically correct, not PriusChat) crap going around. If you're not happy, tough. That's what I think. You'll never appease everyone. As long as the majority is happy, goo enough. The fringe will always be the fringe, and no matter what measures are taken, they will still be the fringe. Leave them to stew in their own juices. And if they take measures into their own hands (think E.L.F. and A.L.F.) then throw their sorry asses in jail to rot.

And that's all I have to say about that.

 

Catching the E.L.F. people seems to be the first clear 'success' of the Patriot act.

 

Define Hard Core.
Since you must have personal knowledge of the majority of these people, tell me how many there are, and how many you have met (or at least are very familiar with their opinions).

Or are you perhaps making blanket statements based on ignorance and prejudice ?

Wake up call:The environmental movement is a heterogenous spectrum, including the group you so easily label. No one benefits from your name calling, least of all you. I am not asking you to be politcally correct, only to not spew hate and FUD.

 

Get a life EricGo. Hard-core environmentalists are fruitcakes. Hard-core religious fundamentalists are fruitcakes. Hard-core pro-life/abortion rights people are fruitcakes. Prius drivers who swear that the Orius is the ultimate car and that all other cars are inferior are fruitcakes. Linux is the best. Mac is the best. Whites are best. The list is unfortunately infinite. Every belief has its fruitcakes. If this annoys/offends you then too bad.

Then again, what does it matter what I mean by hard-core, I'm ignorant anyway. You give me a hard time yet proceed to do it yourself. Of well, no ones perfect.

Anyhow, here's my qualifications: I've been to medical school and law school. I'm quite active in politics, including environmetnal issues. Maybe its that my exposure to these issues has made a bit more bitter than most peoples idealistic view of the world. Chances are I know more than most people.

Fact is that any cause can be taken too far, and then their efforts start to work against the cause. If you use solar panels, you are not hard-core. If you recycle, you are not hard-core. If you do any of a number of things for the environment you are not hard-core. Groupd like the ELF, they are hard-core (I'm using them as an example since they were just in the news). Making people more environmentally conscious through fear is not a good thing, nor is it constructive. Making people scared to buy an H2 is not how you should go about it if you want to change people.

Wake up call: My definition of hard-core is likely not the same as yours. It's called an opinoin. You'd disagree with what I'd say anyway. I know this though: Regardless of my level of ignorance, I do know that people like the ELF are not doing any good for the environment. They are TURNING PEOPLE OFF TO THE CAUSE. I consider myself an environmentalist, but I'm embarrased to be associated with people like that. Besides the fact that buring an H2 releases more pollution and toxic chemicals than it would ever have produced while driving. Since this is obviously about environmentalists, please tell me one good thing ELF has done. Just one.

Being an evironmentalist is a good thing. The members of ELF are giving them a black eye. Am I prejudiced against them? Hell yes. I'm also prejudiced against the people who picket abortion clinics and deny women the treatment they are allowed by law. I'm prejudiced against suicide bombers who think killing innocents somehow forwards their cause.

Wake up call #2: there are some in this world who deserve my prejudice, and yours too. There are some in this world who do not deserve anyones support, and those who do support them are as bad as they are. The hard-core, fruitcake extremists are not doing any good, only harm.

Maybe it's just a matter of semantics. I pehaps could have chosen a better word, but I believe that fruitcake works just fine. If you wish, you can substitute another word for it. As far as I'm concerned political correctness would be best if it just went away.

 

Your points are well taken, Tony.

However, Environmentalism cannot be encapsulated into revulsion of ELF, anymore than Republicanism can be encapsulated into revulsion of torture.

The article points out that corporations are trying to turn 'green' into a meaningless jingle, that blurs quantitative distinctions between companies ala malorn's arguments.

The group that criticized Toyota did so based on decreasing fleet CAFE and Toyota's joining the lawsuit against California, and ignored Toyota's factory improvements in GHG and emissions, HSD, and vehicle class leading FE almost across the board. So I disagree with their conclusions that Toyota is a GM is disguise, but at least their objections were set out clearly, so that thinking people could come to reasonable conclusions.

Which is more than I can say for people who would attempt to discredit environmentalism due to the existence of ELF.

 

vijay,

Read the OP, and the attached article. ELF has nothing to do with the topic, and your rant only makes connections where none exist.

Generalizations, prejudice, and ignorance only dilute whatever you have to say. Even in the case of ELF, it behooves you (as a thinking person ?) to notice that ELF activity has not resulted in *any* loss of life, let alone premeditated murder present in the other fringe groups you have mentioned. I am not a supporter of ELF, and am not defending them. I do object to FUD.

Since I could have been your professor in medical school, I have to disappoint you. Your credentials do not impress me. At all.

 

Quality environmental ethics are long-term and sustainable, not short-term and impulsive. Sustainability requires we follow precautionary principles and make long-term investments. Fossil fuels (coal, oil) permeate modern culture to the extent that we find it hard to imagine constructive alternatives nor do we see the big picture. Our political system thrives on short-term thinking and crises, not long-term solutions. Time is overdue to unhook from our hydrocarbon addictions.

 

They can diss Toyota all they want but Toyota has created the Prius and made it available in such numbers that those that want to go that way can. That's why I bought it.

As for the total mileage dropping because of increased SUV and truck production....it's a company and they have to make money to survive which means they have to provide a product that is in demand. If Toyota only sold the Prius, they wouldn't be in business very long and then no one would own one. It's a trade off. People still want SUVs and trucks so to compete and stay in business (so they can provide the Prius) then Toyota has to sell SUVs and trucks. And it's those same SUVs and truck sales that subsidized the developement and sales of the Prius.

At least Toyota has long term plans to swing it's production more and more to the hybrid side. They are influencing the public to go that way as well. People who might not have bought a hybrid may when enough used Prii hit the market in a few years, when they see them more and more, when they know people who get great mileage (that they want too), when they've experience the smooth ride as a passenger or even a driver, when it's not so new and innovative any more, there's a track record, when price doesn't matter between a hybrid and a conventional car so you might as well get the hybrid. If the car isn't out there and available, that isn't going to happen. The more Prii out there, the more influential they are.

No, I don't think it's a fad. And Toyota isn't making long-range plans like it's a fad.

Now if Toyota has to advertise the HSD drive for its other assets, it doesn't matter. Because if you get a person to drive a car because it gets better mileage and a side benefit is cleaner air, who cares why they bought it? That's one more car with less pollution.

 

When I first read his rant I too was not only NOT impressed with his credentials, but for reasons I will not go into here for fear of starting a flaming war, found his post to be laughable even the more so BECAUSE of his self-professed credientials, tho the content itself was also very telling of the personality. The only thing which could possibly make it even less credible would be if he were to come back and say "just kidding". I can respect him for stating his honest opinion, even if it differs from mine. What I percieve as the latest trend of defending one's rants with some variation of 'just kidding' after being taken to the woodshed is about as offensive as using the excuse 'every one else is doing it' or 'it's my predecessor's fault'. Luckily he hasn't gone down that road, so I can value his opinion even if I don't agree with it.

 

I'm not impressed by DocVijay's rant either, though I generally agree that extremism is a bad thing...

Touting his qualifications to put himself on a pedestal doesn't help his case... just makes him look WAY arrogant, and not an authority.

What I find absolutely ironic about Doc's rant is that though he's trying very hard to make himself seem like a middle of the road reasonable commentator on extremism... he very quickly groups the entire world into two overly simplistic camps... those that are "mainstream" vs. "fruitcake extremists."

He groups Prius enthusiasts, linux enthusiasts, mac enthusiasts in with... neo-nazis white power types and religious fundamestalists?!? I find that extremely offensive on a number of levels...

My point is... Doc's worldview is not that different from the extremists he despises. Black vs. White, Right Vs. Wrong... good vs. evil... wholesome mainstream america vs. extremists who want to destroy everything....

 

Just because there was no loss of life does not make it OK. There has been no loss of life in the extremes of the Mac vs. PC dispute either. They are still fanatical though.

I wasn't including my credentials to impress you, merely to show I'm far from ignorant. I am way beyond caring if I impressed you or not. You suggested I was ignorant, I present evidence to say otherwise. I was demonstarting that I am both educated and informed, not at all ignorant. I referenced my political experience to show that I am indeed familiar with their opinions,maybe more so than you. These are all things you brought up. Anyway, being a professor you should have seen past the narrow points in my post and gotten the broader points I was making. Whether you chose not to see them, simply missed them, or couldn't understand them I don't know.

I included my reference to the ELF in my first post as an example. I'm sure you use examples when teaching. I read the original post and the article. The article was about the controversy over the "green" ads. I know it made no reference to ELF. In my "OP" I stated that you can never please everyone. As this is an environmental issue, I used them as an example because they were the easiest to use and they were in the news recently. The ELF will never be pleased. It won't matter what steps are taken to improve the Earth, there will always be something that is making them unhappy. That is the point I was trying to make, not to generalize environmentalists as a whole. Maybe you missed it, but I referred to myself as an environmentalist as well.

FUD? I'm not sure how I'm spreading any of those. I spoke out against a terrorist group (yes, I agree with the government on that label). How am I spreading fear? ELF is doing a damn fine job of that already. I really don't see how I am doing any of the UD either.

You keep saying generalization, ignorance, predjudice, and I can't understand where it's coming from.

I never generalized. Period.

Ignorance? Fine professor, whatever you say. I may never know as much as you, but I'm far from ignorant.

Prejudice? Are you telling me you are completely free from prejudice? Yeah right. Not a single person on this planet is that good. Everyone has some level of prejudice. To claim otherwise is just silly. You never said it outright, but the way you attacked me makes the implication.

Regardless, I stand firmly by everything I said. Everyone is free to interpret my opinions any way they please. Just don't make stupid accusations based on those interpretations.

 

There is a difference between an enthusiast and someone being fanatical. I'm a Prius enthusiast. There are, however, in ALL the groups I mentioned and more, certain individuals who take it to extreme levels. These are the fruitcakes I refer to.

If you are equating enthusiast to equal fanatic, that is your failing, not mine. I never said enthusiast, I said in all things there are fanatical elements (i.e. fruitcakes).

For example, true Linux enthusiast is usually complete computer buff, and likely has several OS's. A Linux fanatic takes it to an extreme level and not only espouse the total superiority of Linux, but denounces every other OS. While I am not equating this to being a white supremacist, they are equal in that they are on the fringes with their respective beliefs.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for being arrogant, perhaps I am somewhat arrogant. Anyway, in response to the personal attack of being ignorant I felt I needed to display my educational background as a defense to show otherwise. While it is possible to get an extensive education and still be ignorant, it is highly unlikely. Funnny thing though, he retorted by touting his educational level also.

My political experience response was a DIRECT reply to his statement, "or at least are very familiar with their opinions." I was demonstarting that yes I was. If I had just said,

Right now, anyone can post whatever they want on the internet, but it does not make the information credible. By presenting my educational background and experience with the environmental causes, I was adding some level of credibility to them. However, this apparently backfired. I guess people just don't care about that any more. Then again, the number of times I've had someone tell me, "but I read it on the internet," should have made it obvious.

 

I still think that your worldview is dangerously close to being extremist yourself...

Yes. Your tactic to present your educational background sure did backfire. EricGo's mention of his own was not as bad as yours, as it was in response to your quite arrogant statement to try to deflate your ego.

I hope you learn in the future to refrain from tooting your own horn.

 

Really? What is my world view then?

Just curious what you think, because the point I was making in my posts was that there are always fruitcakes on the fringe of whatever the topic, and you can't go and cater to them. That's it.

 

You seem to have a crystal clear distinction between what is "fruitcake" and what is not... and are quick to throw a lot of different "types" into that bin.

I find a thinking that labels and bins such as that are an end all a step toward extremism myself.

Think about muslim extremists. They have labels like "infidel" just the same as you have "fruitcake."

 

So now I'm a Muslim extemist, huh?

"He groups Prius enthusiasts, linux enthusiasts, mac enthusiasts in with... neo-nazis white power types and religious fundamestalists?!? I find that extremely offensive on a number of levels..."

No, just kidding. I don't read that much into the statement, as I know you are merely making an example.

From my experiencees in life I think it is pretty easy to figure out who is a "fruitcake" and who is not. Sure there are some who are not so easily defined, but I'm sure I could present many examples and anyone could easily differentiate into "good" and "bad." I'm ready to throw lots of "types" into that bin because every type has it's "fruitcakes."

As for labels, I agree that labels and bins are not a good thing, but that is how our world works. Like it or not, people assign each other labels, consciously or not. They do it to you, and I'm sure even you do it to them. While I admire you for committing to alife without labels, I wish it were just that simple. By being born a particular race, you are ssigned a label. By growing up in aparticular neighborhood you are assigned a label. By gettign your respective level of education, you are assigned a label. Everything action you commit assigns you some label. Whether the label is assigned to you by yourself or someone else, or society as a whole, you have those labels. I guarantee that most of the readers of this thread have assigned a particular label to me. If you have a business card, you have labeled yourself. If you work in a particluar field you have labeled yourself. If you are in a wheelchair, you may not see yourself as diabled, but the ADA has done so whether you like it or not. Society would probably cease to function without labels.

Labels, for better or worse (more likely worse) are a fact of life. For me, labeling the extreme fringes of, for this thread environmetalists, as fruitcakes is acceptable.

I can understand the arguments of the great majority of environmentalists or anti-environmentalists (I guess that's the label for the other side). For example I understand both sides of the ANWR dispute. I agree with one side and not the other though. I understand what their goals may accomplish, and usually just disagree with the methodology. With the "fruitcake" groups (I just like that word), I neither understand their goals nor their methodology. With ELF, how is torching a lot of SUV's going to benefit anyone? They neither accomplish anything, nor do they forward their set of beliefs. Insurance pays for the damaged cars. The manufacturer builds more to replace the damaged ones. More pollution is released by burning them than driving them. Net result? Nothing good has been accomplished. When they get to that level, I consider them "fruitcakes."

This method of labeling has so far worked quite well for my labeling of the fringes. It usually aplies to most things that have sides. Sometimes there are more factors that prevent it from being that simple, but all that is required then is alittle thought. Anyway, the world would be a nice place without labels. Well, a world without fruitcakes too (the people or the food, take your pick).

 

There is a difference between not understanding and choosing not to understand. I hope you know the difference.

It seems to me that you've tried up to an extent to understand these "fruitcakes" but instead of taking that extra step of understanding where they're coming from, you've chosen to label them instead of opening your mind any further because you find something about what they are doing or thinking repulsive to you.

I think that that says more about you, your ability to understand, (or your choice not to understand) than about the "fruitcakes." It's very easy to label people crazy... it's much harder to try to understand them.