[permaculture] on an ethics of Mr Pittman (and the US military)
Lee Flier
leeflier at comcast.net
Sat Aug 14 14:45:48 EDT 2010
I'm not sure where in my post I implied that we should NOT be looking
at these situations from the point of view of those being occupied.
Permaculture by definition involves observance of the land and people
and acting on that, not on imposing any top-down preconceived idea. Any
permaculture training administered to the US military, certainly by
Scott, would be grounded in that ethic. Permaculture's whole strength
is in relationship building and assuming that the inhabitants of any
ecosystem know best about that ecosystem.
So I'm not sure where your comment is coming from.
On 8/13/2010 5:49 PM, LBUZZELL at aol.com wrote:
> Thanks, Lee. I think this is an important discussion.
>
> I wonder how this might be viewed not just from the viewpoint of "we
> Americans" but by the people being occupied? When we approach a new
> permaculture design, don't we look at the land not only from our own point of view but
> also consider how our possible actions might be received by or impact
> other living beings who may have lived here long before we arrived?
>
> It seems clear from this ongoing dialogue that there are a wide variety of
> opinions on whether or not permaculturists should or should not work for
> the US military. All worth considering. Perhaps some kind of consensus will
> emerge...
>
> Linda
>
>
> In a message dated 8/13/2010 12:48:22 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> leeflier at comcast.net writes:
>
> Wow. I go out of town and come back to find this discussion going on.
>
> If there's one thing I know about permaculture, it's that it requires us
> to begin where we are. Zone 1 starts outside our front door. It
> doesn't require that we wait until conditions are ideal before we act -
> in fact, it seems to require exactly the opposite.
>
> Where we are now is that we have troops deployed in places where the
> land and people are extremely fragile. While we Americans can certainly
> do other things at the ballot box and elsewhere to try to change that,
> right now this is where we are. And if there's a chance of any lives
> being saved because our troops have some knowledge of permaculture, then
> it should absolutely be taught. Would you advocate denying a soldier
> first aid training, which could save lives, because you disapprove of
> what that soldier is doing otherwise? Because permaculture is first and
> foremost first aid for the earth. We as permaculturists may be
> powerless for the time being to stop the damage of war entirely, but if
> there's any damage committed through ignorance that we can minimize, or
> any healing of the land or people that can be done if our troops just
> had a little knowledge, then I think it's imperative to teach our
> soldiers if we have the opportunity, as Scott does. I think it's
> imperative in fact to teach anyone willing to learn, regardless of the
> compromised circumstances under which we all have to work. Working to
> change the system from the inside is just as valid a pursuit as any
> other - and maybe more thankless since we often get flack from within
> our own ranks.
>
More information about the permaculture
mailing list