Comments on: NYT’s Andy Revkin and E. O. Wilson get suckered by Newt Gingrich’s phony techno-optimism

By: Paul K

Paul K — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 01:21:42 +0000

Joe,
It is time to become a uniter, not a divider. Attacking Newt Gingrich or anyone who dares say anything complimentary about him is counterproductive to your cause. Consensus requires an allowance for differences. You have much in common with him. You both spend a lot of time thinking about the future. You both believe in efficiency and the widest use of the best technology. Whether you believe it or not, Newt Gingrich has long represented the environmentalist right wing. They have the radical view that environmental and climate issues are best resolved with minimum government spending and involvement. As a progressive, you surely have problems with this approach. To reach your goal, forget all your disagreements of the past. Then you may find there are actually many areas where you could work together.

By: Joe

Joe — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 01:39:39 +0000

Sorry, Paul K, to quote a famous writer, “been there, done that, wore out the t-shirt.”

Gingrich is most certainly part of the problem. He used to be a wolf in wolf’s clothing. Now he has on sheep’s clothing. Still a wolf, though.

I have a problem with embracing a strategy that can’t work, a strategy that Gingrich himself blocked 12 years ago when it might have made a difference.

By: Andy Revkin

Andy Revkin — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 12:09:49 +0000

I encourage your readers to look at the reasoned dialogue Dave Roberts and I had both on www.Grist.org and http://Dotearth.nytimes.com to get a bit more depth on these important issues.

By: Lou Grinzo

Lou Grinzo — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 16:32:54 +0000

Minor correction: Andy’s web site is here.

By: Ethan Arpi

Ethan Arpi — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 21:05:58 +0000

A colleague of mine, Dario Hidalgo, recently wrote a post about how the focus on technology has been a major distraction in the climate debate. You can check it out here.

By: A Siegel

A Siegel — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 03:53:56 +0000

Joe –

A wonderful discussion.

I wonder whether Revkin is really paying attention to the criticism that he is receiving. For example, you might be interested in No wonder people are confused.

By: Eric Sutherland

Eric Sutherland — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 05:00:21 +0000

Cornucopianism

This tactic is being used by bread crumb droppers like Gingrich as well as the pseustainability crowd.

Gingrich’s genius lies in crafting a series of talking points that leads the unthinking into the galley were they can be urged to propel the ship of state into peril. All to benefit his paymasters.

Unfortunately, he is only co-opting the success that the high priests of carbon neutrality have enjoyed by parading ineffectual solutions shrouded in the complex veils of tecnhology across the altar. The unknowing masses gasp in awe and delight at the promise of solutions delivered by the masters of science and policy.

All that false prophets need is the spectre of an omnipotent, smothering burden and a flashy, contrived sales pitch that demonstrates their reslove and character in the face of adversity. Last time around it was the unstoppable advancement of government intrusion and Newt’s most inspiring attribute was his willingness to gut even the most effective program in the name of conservatism.

This time, the horde on our heels is real. Real solutions are available, but it is not surprising that Gingrich cherry picks only those that don’t threaten pain for anybody except Hugo Chavez. It is also not surprising that he is able to entrain a few self-serving neoenvironmentalists in his entourage at the same time.

Your words Newt- Real change requires real change.

Fort Collins, CO