From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Thu May 02 2002 - 07:23:47 MDT
Alex Ramonsky wrote:
>
> Just one or two bits & pieces...
>
> If anybody is doing anything 'on behalf' of a group, IMHO, several things
> should happen...First, the entire group should be told about the proposed
> action and discuss it long before it is taken. Democratically if anyone in
> the group doesn't like what's being suggested, they can leave, or a vote can
> be taken on whether such action should go ahead.
Any voting should be taking place on the CTHD list at yahoogroups, not
on the extropians list. This isn't an ExI event or action, nor is it
Pro-Act.
>
> Although there is some good healthy discussion going on, it looks like the
> labelling campaign is set to go ahead 'on behalf' of the group without any
> such group decision or vote. (Correct me if I'm wrong; I may have missed
> something here)...But tell me if I'm right...Is this going to happen?
Any vote that may take place assumes that members of the group have a
right to force others to not act. I prefer that it be a voluntary
compliance thing: Projects get launched, and members can participate or
not as they see fit. The Projects are intended to be structured so that
they are distributed: one to three person groups in different locations
can take the ball and run with it to whatever extent they see fit.
The label graphics do not identify the CTHD or any other group as being
responsible.
>
> Secondly, the repercussions of the proposed action have been discussed
> regarding US law, but this group is international. What is going to be done
> when some lone labeller in Manchester England gets arrested in Sainsbury's
> supermarket; does s/he say "You can't touch me I've got an American lawyer".
> ?
In that case, I'd suggest contacting whatever passes for the ACLU in
your country ahead of time.
>
> Thirdly, if the proposed actions of a group affect another group (as is the
> case here) a plan of strategy as to how those groups relate to each other in
> public (in the press) should be clear before any action is taken. Has this
> happened?
How does it affect another group?
>
> Finally, when discussing issues this potentially volatile, if surprise is an
> important part of strategy, shouldn't people be using PGP ?
Only if you intend to engage in labelling activities would I recommend
using PGP. I personally would not want anyone to admit that they are
actually doing labelling. It is more effective if the activists are
mysterious. Increases FUD in the luddite community.
>
> ..And personally, I'm still wary of the fact that this particular idea
> looks like (to the general public) all that is being said is "GM is bad; don
> t buy it". I think this more than anything could backfire, and I still feel
> that pointing out other dodgy aspects of organic foods would be a more
> cautious approach...if that is what you want to do. If in actual fact the
> idea is just to cause a stir at any cost, then I think all the group members
> should know that, and have the opportunity to stay or withdraw.
No, the luddites have already established in the public's mind that "GM
is bad, don't buy it". Our campaign produces a backfire onto the
Luddite's own sources of revinue and support. If this triggers a public
debate about what is and is not GM, it will expose the hypocrisy and
thus damage the credibility of the luddite cause and agenda.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:46 MST