by mos6507 » Sat 19 Mar 2011, 18:33:27
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ibon', '
')He was just demonstrating the inherent moral dilemma in times of overshoot.
The reason Montequest annoyed people is that he had nothing else to offer besides restating this dilemma ad nauseum.
What I come here for, and rarely receive, btw, is some semblance that there is a living breathing person on the other keyboard, someone who has their own hopes, dreams, fears, inspiration, and most important, empathy. I see a huge void of empathy in doomers, which is covered over with reference to "ecological paradigms" and what not. It's the whole Georgia Guidestones bean-counter mentality of clinical detachment in the numbers-game of carrying capacity. This is also why I let 'er rip with RangerOne a while back. Whenever I hear a lot of flippant "let's kill this group or that", it sets me off.
It's one thing to understand it's a dilemma, but give me some sense that you're actually
conflicted about it, that you're
griefing over it. Montequest never came across as conflicted, other than the fact that he was making raised beds for people. He came across as borderline psychotic.
The psychosis was the way he rarely if ever wrote in the 1st person or was willing to personally advocate anything. It was constantly quoting Catton and Al Bartlett, and he even mis-interpreted Al Bartlett to make his case for cutting cords, when the last major writing Bartlett did on the issue (for the Oil Drum) made it clear that he is NOT a cord-cutter, but believes in family-planning only.
Monte clearly didn't want to own up to his own ideology by hiding himself behind numbers and other people. I think if you support something, be a man and take credit for it. Don't try to shrink back behind a rock and pontificate in the 3rd person.