ETS! encourages comments, feedback, tips, corrections, and info! Please keep them as concise as possible so we can print as many different voices as possible: ETS!, P.O. Box 85541, Seattle WA 98145, or e-mail editorial@eatthestate.org.

Soon We'll All Be In The Same Post-Industrial Boat

Setting aside their differences in transportation ideologies temporarily, one thing "carless" letter writer Johanna, and Geov, in his response to her (BackTalk, ETS!, Nov. 9), have in common is a hostile, self-righteous communication style. If we're trying to get the Puget Sound community to help slow down or reverse global warming, insulting some people and alienating others isn't a good place to start, especially since in the future getting along with those we encounter--in print or in person--will influence our quality of life more than it ever has in our lifetimes.

Since the Industrial Revolution, technology and a culture that favors relationships with things over those with other people have given us the luxury of living increasingly insular lives. If we're to survive even a tamer version of what James Kunstler describes in The Long Emergency, however, it will be because we will have learned to depend on those in our immediate geographic vicinity for much of what we now, for convenience and habit's sake, depend on faraway strangers to provide for us: food and material goods, sure, but also intangibles such as entertainment, inspiration, a sense of community, and personal validation.

While waiting for city and county officials to make traveling within the metropolitan area so easy it feels like a village, why not begin finding ways to meet your daily needs in the village outside your door? Even the suburbs have untapped resources: yards (garden and reduce grocery shopping) and neighbors (cook for each other instead of eating out, share tools instead of going to Home Depot, etc).

Finally, I agree with both Johanna and Geov. People do need to drive less, but it's going to take imposed inconvenience, enticements, and social pressure to get most people to do so, all of which should be part of a broad, concerted campaign that doesn't currently exist. Why wait until you hear of it in the news to support it, though? Put down some grass roots now by showing those around you that a less transitory lifestyle is possible and reach out a hand to help them transition to one, too.

--Jim Burlingame, Olympia

G.P. replies: My tone was intentional, and not because I was in a lot of pain and irritable at the time (though that was true, too). My point in responding that way was that when people who need or rely on cars to survive in the world as it now exists are lectured in a patronizing, sanctimonious way--let alone called names, as Johanna did--they're not going to get a response of "Oh. Yeah. You're right." They're going to get anger--in some cases, quite a bit more than I expressed--and they're going to get people tuning out. A version of Johanna's letter, sent to someone who wasn't ideologically predisposed to agreeing with her (as I acknowledged I was), would have done far more to hurt than help her cause. It wasn't one of my more Gandhian moments, but when trying to create change among folks in the real world, there aren't many Gandhis out there. So I thought it was more realistic, and appropriate, to go with my gut. Or, in that case, the pain a bit farther south.

More Capital Letters = More Authority

After reading your Oct. 26 pre-election issue I have one suggestion: PLEASE REMOVE THE WORD ANTI-AUTHORITARIAN from your masthead. Suggested replacements might include leftist or liberal or White and Educated--but no way are you anti-authoritarian. Not even close. Your Lancet-based editorial makes no mention of the 500,000 Iraqis who died during the sanctions and weekly bombings of Iraq by the Clinton administration. That you can find editorial fuel-for-the-anti-Republican fire only shows that you'll OK anti-authoritarianism just as long as it's coming from Democrats or liberals. Eat the State!, my ass! What a waste of recycled newsprint and soy-based inks!

--Virgil Parker, Seattle

G.P. replies: Sigh. This sort of more-anarchist-than-thou letter pops up about once per election season. So, one more time: "authoritarian (n): 1. of, relating to, or favoring blind submission to authority." "anti- (prefix): 1. b. one that is opposite in kind to."

For the record: the purpose of this election was not to endorse Democrats; it was to repudiate Republicans, and to teach all office holders that abuses of the sort seen in recent years will cost them their jobs. At that, the 2006 election was about as successful as can be hoped for in our pale imitation of democracy. Doesn't mean we think Democrats are great, or even good, or even better. They won't be unless we force them to be.

Virgil, ETS! started in 1996, and a quick Google search would have told you that we were relentlessly critical of Clinton and his goons for the next four years, including (especially including) the sanctions. (Which killed well over a million Iraqis, not 500,000-that was a UNICEF estimate in, I believe, 1996, seven years before the sanctions actually "ended" with the US invasion.) If Dems fuck up Congress, as they've already started to, we'll be just as critical of them as we have been of the Bush cabal, and we'll continue to be just as supportive of building alternative institutions. Meantime, our annual election issues are by far our most popular and widely read issues. We'll keep doing those, too.