permaculture

[FionaNyx <FionaNyx@aol.com>]

I simply don't want to go around being angry all the time.  It's a very tiring
and thankless pursuit.  Instead of sniping at others and trying to tear down
their (sometimes ridiculous, sometimes obscene, & sometimes merely
misdirected) work, I'd rather design and create systems so compellingly
functional and so obviously sensible that people see that they are more
desireable solutions. I don't need anger to motivate me to plant trees (or
anything else)-- I use my desire to nurture and create beauty to fuel that
work.  

I do know the experience of and have become angry that, as April mentioned,
others deny that my results are due to my methods.  No matter how simply I
explain what I am doing, some people WILL insist my success must lie in either
incredible personal talent (very flattering, but I know how little I deserve
to steal the credit from Gaia) or vast quantities of labor.  These people are
more often than not gardeners who have done some traditional gardening and
feel they know what they are talking about.  There IS a lot of resistance to
accepting that a system exists which can PRODUCE MORE than they do with FAR
LESS WORK.  The longer they have been putting in that work, the less likely
they are to try anything different-- it amounts to admitting they were wasting
their effort.

I think the answer to spreading the word is to figure out how to reach those
who are having their "teachable moments" BEFORE they invest effort towards
becoming entrenched in other methods of growing.  To me, this means education
in permaculture techniques MUST BE CHEAP so that it is accessible to people
who don't already know what it is and people who may not choose to devote
their careers to it.  Also, there should be more emphasis on HOW EASY IT IS TO
GROW MANY LOCALLY APPROPRIATE THINGS TOGETHER, and less on what an amazing
complex topic permaculture can be for the carrerist.  Once people learn how
easy it is and use their own produce, they are motivated to learn in more
depth.  

Also, I feel a lot of development is needed to elaborate versions of
permaculture suitable to the urban nomad, the poor, and the landless.
Permaculture as I have seen it proposed for North America is very
technological and capital intensive (like most recent American endeavors)-- it
calls for greenhouses, solar panels, composting toilets...  And, chiefly, it
usually begins with the assumption that one owns the land and can expect to
remain in that place.  If these were truly essential conditions which
permaculture must have to occur, then it would not be such a tragedy to see
that most disadvantaged people view permaculture as out of their means, rather
than as a possible answer to some of their problems.  But many aspects of
permaculture can be applied in less than ideal conditions.  The less
technological solution is often the gentler and more elegant solution as well.

Are we cheating many out of the benefits they could have from us out of over-
zealousness about what one "has to do in order to be doing permaculture"?  Are
we failing to educate those who could use the knowledge most because they
can't pay us enough to support our preferred projects and standard of living? 

Are we more willing to be angry with projects others have created than to be
sad about the inadequacies of our own work?  Righteous anger-- how are we so
sure we're right?  It's easier to find flaws in other actually functioning
projects than in one's own pet theories about how things should be done.  I'm
not saying this is what anyone in particular is doing, but I'd emphasize the
importance of works over criticism any day.  

Are we, as Jack suggested, using anger to externalize our own dissatisfaction?
Are our own fears (or dissatisfactions with our own work) being projected in
what we find to infuriate us in other groups' work?  (I know this isn't always
the case, I am still angry about the Raleigh NC project to plant trees and
beautify the capital-- by raising funds to import English Lindens at about $90
per tree!)  but aren't such "solutions" a demonstration that these groups and
individuals are desperately lacking the education they need to approach their
work wisely?  Is is the lack of wisdom that makes old men grumpy?  Maybe
they've seen the same mistakes too many times.  Maybe they recognize the
patterns of wrong thought that will drag others off the path to creative
caring nutrure of the Earth and each other.  

I don't think all this is psychobabble.  I do think we need to examine the
sources of our anger.  I think naming the patterns of injustice in the system
is a very effective way of defining where one's anger comes from.  For me,
feminist theory validates my frustrations due to institutionalized gender
discrimination.  Naming it acknowledges that it is society's problem, not just
MY problem.  Similarly, critiques of our economic system express how it takes
profits today by ripping off our natural resources, poor labor, uneducated
consumers, and the future well-being of the corporation.

Another productive expression of anger as dissatisfaction with the system is
refusing to cooperate-- whether this is legal challenges, civil disobedience,
setting up alternatives, or merely not partaking (I don't have TV; I don't
shop at Walmart; I try to eat seasonal produce; I don't send my water filters
to the Chester incinerator to return their toxic burden to the air and
assuredly also my drinking water again).  What is the point of complaining
about a system while you support it with your actions?  (Rush-  "We fight the
fire, while we're feeding the flames.")  To me, disliking the way things are
can feed into my conviction to find other ways and to spread the word about
them.  Yet there are so many ways most of us participate in the waste and
exploitation that modern first world people inflict on the world.