"Good grief, does anyone honestly think the Green Party is really about being Green?"

Let's just sidestep your pathalogical crypto-commie nightmares for this discussion, shall we? Can you agree that as much as there are those out there just wanting to stick it to the man, there are devotees of Rush-n-clones that just want to feel some pride in foiling anything vaguely "enviro-weenie". I hope this is easy to accept.

There is a bigger issue, both conceptually and spatially, than the end of cheap fish sticks or no more pretty dive sites.

What I think, in a nutshell, is that as long as there is the opportunity and motive to make a profit polluting the crap out of an area, or developing the last substantial habitat of a unique species, it will continue to happen. It Darwinistic if you think about it, the developers with qualms about pushing such projects will end up not doing so, and with the least capital to do what developers do.

In the absence on any substantial legal authority to regulate this activity it's another robberbaron's playground.

It's interesting to note that in your posts on this issue, it is implicit that those pushing the developmentalist (or "pro-human") agenda apparently have no radicals in their ranks. Sure, it's entirely possible to push invasive developments by sitting behind the political, legal and fiscal machinery, while living quite comfortably in an unaffected region and never have a radical thought. One doesn't even have to be on the same continent, only the pressure of profit for the developers and their employees need to be in place. Money is accepted nearly everywhere these days....

The fact that the developer is pushing in an opposite direction with an equal amount of pressure (and usually considerably more total force to milk a physical metaphore) makes them just as radical as the environmental concerns working against them. The relative merit of a groups motivation isn't based solely on it's potential for profit.

"But a lot of other environmentalists would be marching in A.N.S.W.E.R. parades if they weren't in the environmental movement. Unfortunately, more of these are ending up in the leadership. Look at how the Sierra Club has changed over the years."

Who's leadership?

It's not a binary system, one or the other. I'm sure Act Now to Stop War and End Racism has a solid majority of members who consider themselves environmentalists. Big deal. I'm sure whatever anti-ANSWER groups you align yourself with are also pro-development with an equal intensity. Look at how the opposition to the Sierra Club has changed over the years. Look how the issues have changed.

The thing that bothers me about this place, and political dialogue in the U.S. in general, is that people will tend to argue from an absolute POV. Almost like a lawyer only arguing the merits of the case and steering clear of any issues that could reflect badly on their position.