[BNM] [OT] Brighton's nuclear power station?

[Nick Taylor]

Erm... I don't think the Greens are pro-car exactly - not 100% anti, but 
they're certainly more pro-public-transport than pro-car.


re Schism:

What I think is happening is that the blue greens are rebranding 
greeniness generally so the hairshirt/gaia greens are sidelined in 
favour of the bright greens.

I think the lovelockian greens aren't proper greens - they're just 
hiding behind green to essentially be (panicking) submissive 
authoritarians. They certainly haven't read any of Greenpeace's 
recommendations etc... they've just heard what Tony Blair has said, and 
for some reason have believed him.

So... I don't think it will schism because the bright greens will 
eclipse the hairshirt/gaia greens... who are relatively few in number 
and are counter-productive in my view in any case.

What I'm seeing here and everywhere else in the world is a groundswell 
of slippery slope strategic initiatives... people paying what might only 
be lip-service to ecological responsibility... but that's ok, because in 
so-doing, they're accepting the fundamental principles and frames, and 
these will become fundamental to the thinking behind policy generally 
for years to come.

For what it's worth, I don't the Green party will ever win more than a 
couple of seats (they'd have them already if there was PR), but its 
policies will be adopted by the other parties.




> Well, clearly the greens are anti-nuclear, and pro-car.
> So the evident tension in these two positions (lets call it
> doublethink) is a worthwhile consideration.
> 
> I think it will be interesting to see how the ongoing green
> groundswell deals with the fractured nature of the green vote.
> 
> To vastly oversimplify, there's the bright greens (technology must be
> used to save us and the planet), the hairshirt greens (think local,
> act local, back to human-scale technology), the gaian green (humanity
> is a problem, earth will fight back), the new lovelockian greens (the
> only solution to climate change in this urgent timescale is nuclear),
> the blue-greens (climate change and the environment is a great
> business opportunity), and the ethical greens (live simply so others
> may simply live).
> 
> Can the green vote hold, or will it schism?
> 
> Dave Ph