I just finished your discussion with Robert Bryce: What’s so bad about “peace, love, and understanding” when it comes to conversation with two articulate energy mavens. In other words, fabulous.
Roger, one of the things that I have found to be a bit of a turnoff is your penchant for usually including a disclaimer that you are, and have always been, a card carrying Democrat/Progressive. I hope as you work through this process of liberation from academia that you consider more flexibility in your political views as have Michael Shellenberger and Leighton Woodhouse.
First, thanks for being a subscriber, appreciated. I am actually not a Democrat, never have been. I registered as unaffiliated when I turned 18 in Colorado and have never changed that. Anyone is free to AMA here about my politics, including how I vote. Happy to share.
Also, FYI, this is what I had up on my old blog about this (from 2009, yowza!):
Q: You often comment on policy issues, so what is your political orientation?
By some combination of nature and nurture I am an unreformed pragmatist, an unabashed policy wonk, and trained as a policy scientist. On issues that I gained some expertise in, I've seen them become far less black-and-white in my own mind than I had once thought they were when I knew less about them. Thus, I am very cautious about issues that I know little about where solutions or positions seem totally obvious. The world is a complicated place. The most ironic thing about learning is the realization of how little you actually know. On the traditional left-right spectrum of American politics my views are probably most consonant with those of the “Blue Dog” Democrats who argue that “the stale extreme left vs. right approach requires a breath of fresh air.” If you want to know what I think about things that I have some expertise in, just have a look at the blog and my publications and you'll get a pretty good sense of my views on particular subjects. If you have questions, just ask me.
I just finished your discussion with Robert Bryce: What’s so bad about “peace, love, and understanding” when it comes to conversation with two articulate energy mavens. In other words, fabulous.
Roger, one of the things that I have found to be a bit of a turnoff is your penchant for usually including a disclaimer that you are, and have always been, a card carrying Democrat/Progressive. I hope as you work through this process of liberation from academia that you consider more flexibility in your political views as have Michael Shellenberger and Leighton Woodhouse.
Mark,
First, thanks for being a subscriber, appreciated. I am actually not a Democrat, never have been. I registered as unaffiliated when I turned 18 in Colorado and have never changed that. Anyone is free to AMA here about my politics, including how I vote. Happy to share.
Also, FYI, this is what I had up on my old blog about this (from 2009, yowza!):
Q: You often comment on policy issues, so what is your political orientation?
By some combination of nature and nurture I am an unreformed pragmatist, an unabashed policy wonk, and trained as a policy scientist. On issues that I gained some expertise in, I've seen them become far less black-and-white in my own mind than I had once thought they were when I knew less about them. Thus, I am very cautious about issues that I know little about where solutions or positions seem totally obvious. The world is a complicated place. The most ironic thing about learning is the realization of how little you actually know. On the traditional left-right spectrum of American politics my views are probably most consonant with those of the “Blue Dog” Democrats who argue that “the stale extreme left vs. right approach requires a breath of fresh air.” If you want to know what I think about things that I have some expertise in, just have a look at the blog and my publications and you'll get a pretty good sense of my views on particular subjects. If you have questions, just ask me.
http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2009/06/occasionally-asked-questions-about.html