[at-l] More Musings Sparked by Recent Digest Reading

[RoksnRoots at aol.com (RoksnRoots@aol.com)]

In a message dated 6/25/2005 3:40:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
optimyst@gmail.com writes:
Let me respectfully disagree on two counts:

 Can we really be effective without
knowing how to effectively and respectfully communicate our position
and our passion?


         ***  As far as I know the AT has been doing that for many decades. 
The result is we are now at the point where the federal government almost gets 
a kick watching the AT starve while being eaten to death by groups that pay it 
a kickback in the form of political patronage and tax revenue. The AT has 
gone from being a symbol of American conservation to being a political scapegoat 
designed to teach the lessons of what happens to you if you dare attempt a 
conservation corridor in front of the great freedom sprawl machine. So free that 
we can crunch nature in front of you and tell you how good it is for you.    




The heavy armament is just a facade tragically masking the fact that
we here have so much more in common than that which divides us.


             ***    As far as the AT goes it is fairly simple. The AT needs 
to preserve its critical buffers or it will lose both its quality and purpose. 
Forgive me for being un-agreeing but what was the other side offering that I 
needed to 'learn and absorb'? The AT is a healthy litmus test for American 
quality of nature and society. Society has burned up all open space outside the 
Trail's surroundings and is now marching towards the Trail unfazed and acting as 
if the Trail has somehow not understood something. Forgive me again, Solar 
Bear, but what exactly was I supposed to learn from that? What were THEY 
offering? As far as I last saw they are offering total development up to the sides 
unless we can somehow scrape the money together. There's a fair playing field. 
No wonder they like land rights so much! Now let me be more careful about my 
words.




Second, I do not accept the premise that there is more than a
powerless, insignificant minority here who could have any influence in
degrading the AT.  Rather, I see lovers of the Trail expressing their
love in varying ways and through differing political prisms.  The
threats to the AT are not to be found on the at-l.  I reject that
premise.


            ***   No, and I believe that. Very sincere! We'll just overlook 
calls for no more land acquisition, removing the Trail's founder from its 
books, impassioned calls for total windmill development "because it looks nice". 
OK, if you are saying we'll diplomatically collect those who don't know better 
into one warm and friendly group, fine. We'll just forget that the worst AT 
developer of late quoted something word for word that was said on this list (and 
then repeated). No prob...





  I see instead old grudges way past the point of diminishing
returns and exhaustion.  We increase the threat level, the insult
level, the disrespect level to DEF CON 5 and keep rattling our sabers.
What do we expect as a result?


      ***   There is a good result from this. It shows that persons who 
generally dislike a conservation based AT viewpoint don't really mount much in the 
way of substantial defense of their views. Some people think the announcement 
that you are "now on my filter" is some kind of condemnation. Truth is they 
can't answer more sophisticated AT viewpoints. That alone is worth the debate - 
but really, since a basic conservation view is basic to the AT we shouldn't be 
having that much of a problem and the blame shouldn't really go on those who 
present the AT well. There is no other word but stupid for some of the denial 
of the basic AT seen by some Trail members. If you want to call that 
"different political perspectives" OK.    

 


I absolutely agree that there are systemic forces that are degrading
the AT.   I'd like to ask my friends on both
sides of these issues to take a new look at your own communicating
style.  How about ditching the battering ram phrases, the 90% noise
level and adding the sweetness of respect for your adversary?


            ***    That's always a good aim. I'm sure it is harder to 
maintain a professional posture as a Trail insider than type to a list. But, I do 
have to point out that the post you are responding to pointed out that 95% of 
input concerning advocacy was mostly energy spent on talking about talking about 
advocacy rather than advocacy itself. Your post then proceeded to 95% talk 
about talking about advocacy. 

          What I'd like to have spoken about was the systemic forces 
degrading the AT and how the AT was designed from its onset to inspire that 
discussion. We've covered our problems, now I'd like to talk about individuals, 
corporations, and governments that are trying to forget what the AT is about. Those 
people "don't give a rat's ass" how you say it when they are ignoring you 
anyway. What the AT needs is people on picket lines. If you want a good example, 
"Walk In The Woods" brought great attention to the AT. It was generally 
everything you are calling for. What followed it were some of the worst threats to the 
Trail with little or no result for the AT followed by Plum Creek taking the 
Trail head-on and saying no. If we really are the progressive democracy we say 
we are a huge injustice has just happened. If the AT is a 2000 mile snake, as 
Weary writes, it's time it says "Don't Tread On Me". Or, it's time Gaia teaches 
some hard lessons to those who choose to ignore. It doesn't take a genius to 
figure the extended result of our government's current economic plans are 
total coverage in overpopulation-encouraging sprawl until it's all used up. If 
they were honest about it they would admit that's what they're aiming for. A 
giant nature-less chicken coop with the development wolves in charge and us as the 
chickens. In this case an AT buffer isn't really asking much. In fact, it 
should be offered by any fair and reasonable government. There are some who 
rationalize this by saying go up to Ontario where there's real wilderness, but all 
they are saying is don't defend what's worth saving on the AT. Some Trail 
stewards they are. No, we started this nation as an ambitious progressive new 
society that sought to do what was right in a big way. I'm afraid I'm not getting 
that impression right now from the way the Trail is treated. Same goes for the 
Trail and its origins. I think that's where we should be looking...






*