home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.environment
- Path: sparky!uunet!charon.amdahl.com!amdahl!rtech!decwrl!ames!agate!boulder!ucsu!cubldr.colorado.edu!parson_r
- From: parson_r@cubldr.colorado.edu (Robert Parson)
- Subject: Re: Greenpeace Press Releases
- Message-ID: <1993Jan26.123118.1@cubldr.colorado.edu>
- Lines: 31
- Sender: news@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (USENET News System)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: gold.colorado.edu
- Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
- References: <1993Jan25.192627.1@cubldr.colorado.edu> <1993Jan26.045005.23404@gn.ecn.purdue.edu>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 19:31:18 GMT
- Lines: 31
-
- In article <1993Jan26.045005.23404@gn.ecn.purdue.edu>, constant@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Tino) writes:
- > In article <1993Jan25.192627.1@cubldr.colorado.edu>
- parson_r@cubldr.colorado.edu (Robert Parson) writes:
- >> GP was more interested in bashing DuPont than in doing anything constructive
- >> about ozone depletion.
- >
- > It appears as though DuPont and Greenpeace are finally on the same side of the
- > table now -- when CFCs are phased out and the ultra-expensive "replacements"
- > are phased in, the chemical companies will stand to make *billions*.
- >
-
- Nevertheless Greenpeace is still bashing DuPont, by declaring war on HCFC's
- and other substitutes.
-
- DuPont looks after its own interests.
-
- As does Greenpeace.
-
- Here's my hypothesis:
- GP needs to have an "enemy", that is their historic role. They thrive on
- confrontation. I don't think they sit in their offices and say, "subscriptions
- are down, let's bash evil corporation #35 today so we can make money by
- exploiting people's chemophobia", although that is the effect. I think that
- they naturally approach problems by looking for evil, profit-making
- perpetrators. Organizations with these kinds of attitudes can be found all
- along the political spectrum.
-
- That's my reaction, after reading a number of Jym's press releases (as well
- as reports in the popular media.)
-
- Robert
-