I think Barry mistakes stalinism for socialism in his denial of the dialectical nature of our relationship with nature.

When Marx and Engels talk about control over the envrionment they are talking about its enrichment, not its destruction.

Environmental destruction is an example of our alienation from our own humanity, an alienation stemming from the exploitative nature of capitalism and the fetishism of commodities.

The orkers' revolution, with its overthrow of the material bases for exploitation, and its democratic organs of rule, gives us the opportunity to re-engage as humans with our environment and not, as Barry in common with the capitalists and their apologists seems to suggest, to propogate its destruction.

Liz Ross from Socialist Alternative (www.sa.org.au) wrote a phamplet on this called Capitalism: It's costing us the earth. Have a read.

I enjoyed this article and think it makes an important contribution to the debate, even though I do not share the author’s ideology. The fragmentation of the European communists in the 1970s and 1980s into identity/issue politics (race, feminism, environmentalism) and the moral bankruptcy of Marxist-inspired regimes revealed with the collapse of the Soviet empire did indeed create a vacuum that has been filled by the green “left”.

I’d disagree that this is a new phenomenon, however. Reactionary/romantic anti-progressive ideas have long been part of the left – the modern green left stands in the tradition of Robert Owen, Charles Kingsley, John Ruskin et al. The author is correct, however, that these ideas also have a natural home on the right. It is interesting to see how supposedly opposite political poles now merge on many political issues – that the far right and far left are united in opposing GM food, attending anti-globalisation rallies, calling for population controls and reduced immigration, opposing uranium mining, etc

I do miss an intelligent and plausible authentically progressive left voice in current discourse, if only for the sake of a good argument. By “progressive left” I mean believing material progress is good, technology is beneficial, and human welfare and freedom, not the environment, is the central progressive value.

As a farmer, my first experience with greenies was when my wife and other young females were able to prevent us males pushing the Buntine railway 1000 acre dam catchment for farming when diesel rail power came in.

It is since that time that I have always had respect for Greenies even some of the so-called Raggedy Arsed male camp followers.

And finally one must point out, that it is our so-called money-minded progressives who must take the blame for our present global financial predicament, much much more than the Greenies.

The simple difference between countries which chose a nuclear energy solution, and Australia, is that we have the uranium, and we also have the experience of the nuclear testing at Maralinga.

We are who knows best that it is stuff which is too dangerous to touch.

Re Stoifan,

If the rapid artic melts of 07 and 08 are the "canary in the coal mine" of climate change, wouldnt that make the rapid artic freeze of winter 08 (back to average levels since records began) the elephant in the coffee shop?

I look forward to the day that your sort (activist red-green) are cast back into the pits of irrelevancy. Should the climate continue to plateau that day may not be so far away as you might think.

These simplistic classifications of these ones are "Left" and those ones are "Right" do seem somewhat pathetic to me.

Most often I hear them spawned by those who seek 2 invoke prejudice in difference and use this in turn to garner votes, themselves most often being rooted in either one or the other of 2 opposing triangles when debating.

To me, *Greenies* embrace life, embrace diversity and the magnificense of the our collective inheritance, this our planet earth, knowing full well, that Life evolves, ever adapting and ever changing to overcome and thrive in our environment.

So, to suggest that *Greenies* are striving to take us bak to solely cottage industry in the village is a nonsense that seeks to pidgeon hole them and invoke fear in others who think that they will somehow have to be "downgraded" in life.

And *Greenies* want access to energy all right, as they are also healers, who will with clean, sustainable green tek terra form and heal the wounded land that like the Original people has been selfishly used and abused by the transplanted genocidal poms and give the cockies, the base of our economy, something to really look 4ward to.

Once we have rooves shingled with solar panels and adorned with wind harvesters, pooskinerus recycled from our waste to produce lots of yum yums and refoliage the place to depollute, cool us down and giv us fresh O2 in abundance, sucking up excess CO2 in the process, with battery storage bakup banks for emergencies and the surplus energy being sold bak to science & industry, in this great southern land with so few relatively people to look after it both could and should only get better for everyone.

My interpretation of recent comments by G.Soros - !REGULATE!

1. Cap salaries
2. Cap profits
3. Pump wages up
4. Keep families in their homes
5. Keep property values stable

[6.] Unburden us all and the planet from the polluters.

7. Up the Green <-> GREEN BROWNY for Prez.

...Adam...