by bart » Tue 04 Apr 2006, 19:29:04
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', 'T')he irony is that categories of political thinking are murkier than ever and it isn't exactly clear what the fuss is about... If you aren't inside this antagonism, you scratch your head and wonder what the hell they are talking about.
LOL! That's exactly it. I haven't been visiting many of the peakoil.com forums lately, so I haven't run into the polarization you're talking about.
There's something about online discussions that pushes us into flamewars and extreme positions. I'm on a sustainability maillist, where all the participants agree on 99% of the issues, and yet we have outbreaks of viturpation every few months as if we were sworn enemies. Weird.
As to whether people from different political groups can work together, I think the POSSIBILITY is there. It isn't a certainty by any means. What we can do is look at the trends and support the ones that are favorable.
For example, there are the recent reports from the military and national security people about the importance of an enlightened energy policy. (e.g.,
http://energybulletin.net/13737.html ). Politicians are beginning to speak out on energy (Obama and Bush recently), and the US public is concerned about energy, according to polls.
Does this mean that we have solved the problem? Of course not - we're just in the beginning stages. Mainstream thinking about energy is unsophisticated and prone to manipulation. And as Matt S. points out, very little money is actually being spent to turn the situation around.
But this is the way that history operates. Trends are contradictory and slow to get started.
We can look back to the past for positive examples, such as the Blitz mentality in the UK that rogerhb mentioned. As individuals we can't control history, but we can choose how to live our own lives.