RE: CTHD: Truth in Labelling Campaign

From: Dickey, Michael F (michael_f_dickey@groton.pfizer.com)
Date: Mon May 06 2002 - 08:32:57 MDT


On Sun, 2002-05-05 at 03:43, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 12:06, Mikko Rauhala wrote:
> > > On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 15:27, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > > > Furthermore, while the luddites have already stooped to bombing
> > > > and murder (The Unabomber Ted Kazinski), the CTHD will not engage in
> > > > such practices unless we are specifically targeted by such tactics.
> > >
> > > Is it just me, or does this strike anyone else as not very comforting?
[snip]
> WHile I understand that there are many in europe who don't recognise
> that the individual human has a right to defend themselves with
> appropriate force, we in the US do, and we'd appreciate it if
> know-it-all europeans stopped shoulding all over us.

"This was the actual impression I got from your mail, as "murder"
generally implies premeditation and being the aggressor within a
specific confrontation, as does "bombing".

I could have of course given you the benefit of the doubt and
interpreted the comment in a less aggressive manner, but frankly, you
have painted a rather fanatical picture of yourself in your mails, "

<snip>

I disagree, I have been following through this thread and have been watching
the arguments on both sides. It seems everyone arguing against Mike Lorrey
is trying to think of every excuse they can for it to not work. (e.g.
"Europe doesnt call it 'organic' you will increase anti american sentiment
by europeans not having european friendly lables") Why is that? If a
product is labelled as 'organic' and has the direct implication that it is
healthier for you, what, exactly, is wrong with putting labels that clarify
'what' organic actually means on them and that it actually is not any
healthier for you? I seriously dont think mike will be smashing store
windows and running around spray painting people who are buying organic
food. The general public seems to take organic as usually meaning 'not
messed with by mad scientists' and lump everything obviously scientifically
modified in there, which is why your joe schmo average shopper would not
consider GMO 'organic' even though they could be under the normal
definitions. I think Mike is more concerned about the perception that
people have and hopefully making an effort to alter those perceptions. Most
people who buy organic dont even know that pesticides are used on them
(albiet, 'organic' pesticides)

The first impression I got from Mike above comments were merely a reference
to self defense, I didnt take it to actually mean he was setting out to
murder opponents (were all on the Extropy list here, after all, how really
likely is something like that as an explanation??) I do not feel Mike has
painted himself as a radical in any way, he has countered every argument
quite rationally, IMHO, and it seems everyone here *wants* to jump on every
little thing he has said as extremist or radical. lets try to not make up
our minds before the argument even starts.

Mike Lorrey, maybe you should just be a 'conformist' extropian and just sit
around waiting for the singularity to occur, then everyone will like you...

Michael Dickey

LEGAL NOTICE
Unless expressly stated otherwise, this message is confidential and may be privileged. It is intended for the addressee(s) only. Access to this E-mail by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not an addressee, any disclosure or copying of the contents of this E-mail or any action taken (or not taken) in reliance on it is unauthorized and may be unlawful. If you are not an addressee, please inform the sender immediately.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:51 MST