permaculture

["Ben Martin Horst" <ben.martinhorst@gmail.com>]

I think I see what you mean, but I would suggest that it all depends
on what type of permanence we're talking about. The universe is
permanent, for all practical purposes. The earth is permanent. I would
hope that life is permanent. That said, none of these things is
unchanging.  A "permanent agri/culture" will undoubtably have to
change, but I like the sense of continuity the word "permaculture"
provides. People like myself who come out of Western civilization are
(to generalize wildly) descended from generations of people who moved
from place to place, obsessed with domination, unconcerned with the
perpetuation of any value other than the accumulation of power. The
"permanence" aspect of permaculture holds out a vision of a different
way, in which we become integrated parts of our ecosystems, not just
in the present generation, but for many more to come.

It seems to me that our only hope is in permanent, but of course
changing, cultures that replace the current paradigm of impermanent
metastasizing cultures.

Ben


On 22 Feb 2007 11:58:00 -0600, kran0072@umn.edu <kran0072@umn.edu> wrote:
> I love permaculture, but I've long thought the noun to fall short. I would
> like agricultures and cultures in general that are enduring, conserving and
> generative, but I don't know if I believe in permanence, as a goal or a
> possibility.
>
> This doesn't bother me too much and I am happy to spread the word of
> permaculture by employing the word 'permaculture', but sometimes I am
> reminded that the word doesn't fit my worldview.
>
> Andy KM
> _______________________________________________
> permaculture mailing list
> permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture