Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - Re: [permaculture] official certification

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Cory <cory8570@yahoo.com>
  • To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [permaculture] official certification
  • Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 15:32:48 -0700 (PDT)

I've had similar experience with mainstream and to me, time is so short we
have no choice but to focus on policy makers and those in power. We must
bring them to understanding, and I've met a number of them who really get it.
They have been advised about the water and soils situations and they know we
are screwed and they are downright panicky about the situation. They would
like nothing better than a solution that is cheap and doable and will
actually work.

Slow and small solutions would include getting a CEO to agree to implement
water catchment and reuse and other sustainable water use methods in all his
100 facilities world wide. Yes, he still uses toxic chemicals- that's the
next project. But he is now saving 1 million gallons of water per week. I
appreciate those veterans who are addressing the mainstream. I also
appreciate the radical "edge" that is pushing the rest- tthey both have their
place in a diverse system and to the degree we cam find beneficial connection
amonsgt ourselves and other elements of the system, we will sustain, grow and
regenerate.

Cory




On Oct 24, 2010, at 5:39 PM, Toby Hemenway <toby@patternliteracy.com> wrote:

Okay, this is one of my lengthy screeds. The more meaty stuff is toward the
end.

On Oct 23, 2010, at 4:23 PM, Killian O'Brien wrote:


Oh, Toby, do be careful when putting words in other's mouths. . . . Read
again, more carefully, or ask for clarification, please.

Well, here's what you wrote-

By making permaculture about money and formal certificates, you are
preventing/slowing its spread . . .
. . . makes it the playground of the (relatively) elite. And I guess the
assessors are chosen by acclaim or are self-appointed...? . . . engage in
cannibalistic behaviors . . . Unless this more rigorous certification process
is going to be offered essentially for free, and that seems unlikely, it will
do more harm than good.

It's impossible for me to take this in any other way than as condemnation of
the Gaia U program and certification; if you meant it as support for multiple
options, those words don't convey that. I don't think I've failed to read
carefully. Whatever you were meaning, when we lead off with negative,
emotionally loaded language, it gets people's hackles up from the start, and
makes it likely that any calmer, constructive points made later--as you did
make--will be lost. It's the same thing that happened with Kevin's original
post about the Army PDC; he started with condemnations and complaints, and
then wondered why the thoughtful questions he asked later were ignored.


Money is just a proxy for all the various reasons people can't make it to
courses. Got course fees covered? What about air fare? Lost work hours? Child
care? And on and on. Your point is moot, imo.

No, it's not moot; it's at the heart of what you wrote: How do we spread this
stuff? What I see from you is a list of perceived impediments that have been
easily overcome. People offer courses on the weekends, on a string of
Saturdays, we offer child-care done by spouses (teachers or participants) who
trade off, we offer local courses so there's no airfare, we offer parallel
courses for their kids. There are people out there getting 30, 40, 70
students, because they are creating those solutions. And those who hold cheap
PDCs in crowded living rooms and advertise on the co-op bulletin board--maybe
not you, but lots of teachers--complain that they can't fill their courses.
They ignore useful tools that work, see only impediments, and then complain.

Certification, far from being an impediment, is what attracts people to these
courses. You have to give people a tangible take home. The certificate is
exactly that for most people, much more so than making a compost pile or a
general grasp of systems thinking. Non-certificate courses tend not to
attract as many people, and I hear that from all the teachers I talk
to--which is quite a few. The answer is not to give it away and lower
standards, not in this culture.

See, here's where I think we differ, and I'm going to say something very
politically incorrect: I don't think that an effective way to spread
permaculture is to target the poor or the radicals (although I won't
discourage someone from doing that). You only change one person at a time
that way. I think it is far more effective to offer it to policy makers,
universities, planners, CEOs, developers--the elite, if you will. One CEO who
pushes permaculture through to all employees, one Hollywood star who gets on
Oprah, will make far more difference than a blockfull of anarchists or
impoverished. It is still a top-down world; I don't like it but I will use it
to my advantage. I know I will be pilloried for that, but I'm looking for
leverage points, and that's where I see them. I've done the other--I've done
PDCs for $40, and almost nothing came of them, maybe a keyhole bed in a
backyard. My PDCs to professionals result in amazing projects that go on to be
implemented in schools, go
vernments, neighborhoods, and businesses.


I said the solution proposed maintains structures of the past that are
unlikely to apply in the future, as well as limiting access, so why not do it
differently?

Okay, this next is triggered by, but not a direct reply to, the above. On one
hand, the way many current management and decision-making processes are used
is indeed dysfunctional, overly hierarchical, based on continual growth, and
all those other points. On the other hand, most of the replacements for them,
like consensus, NVC, etc., are either little-tried, not well understood or
understood in conflicting ways, easily mis-applied or stonewalled, and have
other serious problems. There is, indeed, huge urgency in moving forward. But
if we wait for these new tools to come on line, for everyone to agree how to
use them, it will be too late. So it's a mistake to throw out the old tools
right now, and that's why I think certification, clear rules, and common
decision-making processes still have plenty of value. I doubt that the future
will be so radical that certificates, degrees, committees, voting, listening
to leaders, and other familiar ways of getting
things done are going t
o disappear. There's the short version of the problem. Here's the long
version, if that's not clear or you want more:

Having survived the sixties, I watched over and over as communities and
groups would form, unhappy with the old ways, and they'd throw the rules out
completely, and try to design a new way to be together. Almost none of them
lasted more than months; a fraction of 1% survive today. The impetus was
honorable: end the patriarchy, etc, etc, but they had no functional tools to
replace what they threw out, and in most cases, their efforts devolved into
the ancient pattern of a few people under a charismatic leader, and everyone
who disagreed with the boss left. We've learned a lot since then, and there
are formal processes such as consensus that show promise. But hardly anyone
really understands those new tools. They are counter-intuitive, and I would
argue that in many cases, egalitarian methods like consensus go against our
essential tribal nature as social pack animals who inherently look to strong,
competent leaders. And I see us in a similar position to
where we were in 1970.
I hang around a lot of communities, and the complaint I hear over and over
is that they love the community but consensus and related tools
suck--"Nothing ever gets done, so why can't we just appoint committees and
managers and move forward? I trust my peers to make good decisions without
me."

Years ago, I ran a business, and had a crew of really gifted employees. I
went to them with a profit-sharing, co-management plan where they would have
equal power in the business, and they said, "We just want to come to work,
then go home and forget about the job. We see all the work you do, and we
don't want to share it." If we wait until everyone is empowered and is a
leader, we won't get there in time, and we will suffer from the "too many
cooks" problem, which I see constantly in new endeavors. The process of
reinvigorating the national permaculture institute right now is hamstrung by
exactly this defect in consensus: no one is allowed to move until we all feel
equally empowered. So we are stalled. I think the idea that we will evolve to
"decentralized leadership structures" flies in the face of our human and
animal nature; we respond to and need clear, focused leadership. What's
lacking is accountability, not decent tools. God, the last thing I want
is to have to partici
pate in every decision that affects me. I trust other people to be competent.
So while we continue to hone newer and more equitable ways of sharing power
and responsibility, many of the current methods, applied at the right scale,
work very well, are comprehended by the mainstream and thus are more likely
to be followed, and will get us there faster.

Another example: there are tours in many cities of "sustainable living
examples" or the like. The ones that look like hippie houses are scoffed at
by most of those on the tours. The ones that look like familiar houses get
people excited. They aren't as "sustainable" as the hippie houses, but they
get far more people on board. And then, once they are on board, we can move
them yet farther. We need to meet people where they are, start with what they
are familiar with. Few can make a giant paradigm shift as the first step, and
it's a pipe dream to expect it as prerequisite for a solution.

We know that the big parts of the system are broken: national government, big
corporations and banks, etc. But the same tools that work so badly at huge
scale, when they are applied at small scale--local government, small
non-profits and business, independent schools, committees, charismatic
leaders--still work very well. I think we need to work with what we have at
the same time we work on the replacements. If we insist on everyone learning
new tools before we start, we will not get there in time. You cannot get
anywhere if you don't start from where you are.

This is written fairly quickly; I hope that instead of nit-picking over the
parts that aren't well developed you'll try to follow my intent.

Toby
http://patternliteracy.com


_______________________________________________
permaculture mailing list
permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Subscribe, unsubscribe, change your user configuration here:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
Read the public message archives here:
https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture
Command to put in your browser's Google search box to search these archives:
site:lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/permaculture [search string (omit the
brackets)]
List Usage & Guidelines:
http://ibiblio.org/permaculture/documents/permaculturelistguide.faq
Permaculture http://www.ibiblio.org/permaculture
Permaculture Mailing List Blog
http://permaculturelist.blogspot.com
permaculture forums http://www.permies.com/permaculture-forums
List contact: permacultureforum@gmail.com








Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page