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