X-Message-Number: 23065
From:
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 14:33:08 EST
Subject: Re: CryoNet #23038 - #23048
Mike Perry does exactly what I suggest when he links concerns about our own
fragility to these other political and social storms that rage about us. I
think many of us long hoped that a big name celebrity going publicly into
cryonic suspension would give a big boost to the movement and from a lot of
angles
TW was about as big as you could get, a sports and hence popular culture icon
of the first magnitude. Obviously, the results have been mixed. We are above
the public radar screen as never before [featured in two mock commercials on
Saturday Night LIve, the latest last Saturday] That has to be considered
progress of a sort and an inevitable forward step toward wider acceptance and
ultimately long term viability. But it has come at a great cost as well because
it
has aroused the hostility that almost always attends major new changes in the
way humanity deals with fundamental issues. At the moment our still-fragile
institutions are under threat, at least in Florida and Michigan and probably
elsewhere, and, although I can't prove it, my suspicion is that the threat
emanates directly of indirectly from the TW affair.
Thus it seems that we need to be concerned for our very survival
institutionally at the same time as we want to expand our memberships to
increase our
power and long term viability. If survival depends on maintaining a very low
profile and expansion requires a higher public profile, then we are stuck in a
conundrum. Libertarianism in its purest form would be good for us because it
implies a live-and-let live philosophy: you can do whatever you want as long
as it doesn't impinge on my freedom to do whatever I want. To some extent the
US is a libertarian country and that is probably why we cryonauts are by far
the strongest and most viable here in the US. However, pure libertarians are
themselves a fringe minority and the extremists on both the left and the right
are not at all libertarian. In fact the dominance of either in political
life represents a serious threat to us. The left would regulate us out of
existence because of their exaggerated fears of environmental degradation and
population growth as well as their muddled view of and ambivalence about
scientific
progress. The right, seemingly coming from an opposite direction, would
regulate if not stop altogether advances in stem cell research,
biologically-oriented nanotechnology, cloning, and so forth, along with a
woman's right to chose.
Their credentials as "libertarians" are hopelessly suspect, however much
they wail about taxes. They really want us to be a "Christian Nation," a
society
guided by religious principles which they think or imagine are embodied in
the Constitution. The right is on top right now as perhaps never before,
certainly in our lifetimes. They control the White House, both houses of
Congress
and increasingly the courts. After the next presidential election they will
probably change the complexion of the Supreme Court, itself. In theory, this
might be OK if they were really "strict constructionists" as many on the right
would like to say, but the court conservatives have proven over and over again
that they will willingly interpret the constitution in ways to regulate
anything they feel like regulating to suit their personal beliefs and
preferences.
So what do we do or where should we stand as cryonicists? I think we are
way too small a group to get even smaller by excluding anyone from our
numbers who happens to be of a particular religion or political party or
personal
preference of any kind, however much we as individuals find thes "other" groups
discomforting or wrong-headed. To the extent that we should be champining any
ideology or political/religious preference beyond our cryonic-connected
beliefs I think it should be to defend the live-and-let-live ideal which is
incorporated in the first ten amendments to the constitution and is implied in
pure
libertarianism as well. The American Civil Liberties Union might be a
candidate for alliance for some of us because they single-mindedly support
individual
rights, including, for example the rights of neo-Nazis and KluKlux Clanners to
assemble and march and publcly parade their views so noxious to the majority.
Sorry folks, our views are noxious to the majority, too, probably the vast
majority, and so even though the ACLU has been disparaged by Bush, sr and
various other on the right, it may be the ACLU lawyers who will save us in the
end.
What say you all?
Another thought: some time or other, and maybe sooner than later, the
social scientists among us should take a hard look at the TW affair and its
consequences within the movement, among its enemies and in the wider culture.
We
should be armed with as much accurate information about this earth-shaking
phenomenon as we can to turn it to our ultimate advantage, whether this means
new
expansion efforts, reframing the message, making better legal preparations, or
maybe, even [I hope not] going underground or off-shore to secure our futures.
Ron Havelock, CI member, and President (2003-04), Life Extension Society (a
cryonic suspension interest and support group centered in the general region of
Washington, D.C.)
Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=23065