Somewhere between the strident bullshit of bothextremes lies some sense.
What's good about that Caroline? It's idiotic. It's empty. It's a remark from somebody with nothing to say but having a need to say something.
And the "looney right wing branch of the GOP" is nowhere near any extreme. And neither is the other end.
maybe we can develop an environmental outlook thats built on sustainable development, good stewardship, ramping down sprawl and making environmental policy good economics.
Here again is the vacant noise. Sounding so responsible and patronising and tolerant like a bloke trying to calm down a fight in a pub but refusing to allocate the female the fight is over to one of the brawlers.
We can all agree. Even first year infants school classes. Not even daring to enjoin us to do these things. To insist we do. "Maybe we can" eh? This is a man who has boats. Who thinks nothing of a 40 mile round trip for a pizza. And no wonder with 40 miles of posing to himself at the wheel of his gas-guzzler as being totally in charge of his destiny.
And two "good"s in one sentence is a bit of a liberty especially when you consider it's what fm means by good. Ask the people who live in the suburban "sprawl" (implying out-of-control, degenerate, anarchic lacksadaisicalness--like mud when the mountainside gives way). See whether they think it "good" for it to be "damped down". Ramping it up is what they seem to want to me.
"Good" economics, according to the laws of synergy, will be as much at the cutting edge of economic science as whatever it is now that's at the cutting edge of modern physics. It will be as good as us clever little buggers have so far been able to make it. But fm only thinks in terms of inanimate matter and soulless organisms.
It is a statement only the desperate would give heed to. People with nothing but hope left and that sorely tried. A faint last chance. Armchair Oval Office stuff. Someone offering to lead us to the Promised Land when most of us know that we are already in it from any historical point of view let alone an evolutionary one.
Empty kettles make most noise it is often said, so imagine a tipper wagon full of empty kettles unloading into a steel chute and you have a neat metaphor for this debate.
What it is actually is a vaguely felt yearning for the lost Arcadia, which so many artists have conjured up wonderfully, and a reaching towards some mystical, perfected utopia which other artists have attempted to depict, usually through the eyes of a controlling type. He's read all the wrong books you see. He was reading self-improving stuff at the age I was reading for thrills. And self-improvers have a big problem. It is that they improve to a point where nobody wants any more improvement out of them. They are side-lined or put out to grass. So then they start trying to improve us lot with rhetorical flourishes which have no relation to, nor regard for, the reality. Which is where animate souls seek to work things out as best they can in all the circumstances, which are many, multiform, and look as near to irreducible complexity as makes no difference.
fm is not where the buck stops. And neither are you. He waits in ambush for those who are where the buck stops, and make what he considers a mistake, and jumps on them with what they should have done and where they went wrong, interlarded with not very discreet hints of his general all-round excellence. He once predicted the result of a football game the day after it was played.
But you have asked him the right question. I await his answer with anticipation.