I do not feel that we should set up PEOPLE as "models"; rather actions, thoughts, principles.

Human needs are served by a sustainable lifestyle, almost by definition, if humans include coming generations. And a shift to such technologies as high-speed rail instead of maximizing fossil fuel use, and solar energy, is not "relentless resource extraction."

If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged.

Radical activists can't ignore the fact that we live in this world, like it or not, and have to make difficult decisions about which paths are the best - or sometimes, the least harmful. There are no abstract formulas. Have to think through each case on its own.

On abortion: We are talking about ambiguous issues of a complicated kind where you have to balance conflicting interests and concerns.

Before the 1970s, banks were banks. They did what banks were supposed to do in a state capitalist economy: they took unused funds from your bank account, for example, and transferred them to some potentially useful purpose like helping a family buy a home or send a kid to college.

Capitalism denies the right to live. You have only the right to remain on the labour market.