Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - Re: [permaculture] The Fed

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Sean Maley <semaley@yahoo.com>
  • To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [permaculture] The Fed
  • Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 13:16:43 -0700 (PDT)

I agree that the land issue will be the central focus, sooner or later. I've
gone into this before in this forum, but few seam to really get it. Maybe it
was me that didn't really get it. As I see it, we've all been had by pitting
us against each other, coercing us into rent/mortgage, and promising a
crystal palace and race car for working a little harder.

Start here:
http://biz.yahoo.com/p/4mktd.html

These are the land and business owners at this point. Very few of us truly
own and depend exclusively on our own land or have the means to persist
anywhere near a major city (where we could have the greatest influence on
global lifestyle). Even if you are the rare outright owner of the land your
lifestyle occupies, you almost certainly pay municipal taxes, which usually
involve municipal bonds, which essentially feeds the same monetary system a
mortgage feeds. Your municipal taxes keep increasing because investment
banks get some of that money, too (municipal bonds are a fancy way to say
municipal loan sold to the public and skimmed by a bank via originator,
insurance, and trading fees).

http://thismatter.com/money/Bonds/Primary-Bond-Market.htm

Since most of us aren't independently wealthy, the answer to this enigma
requires us to work more closely and locally together than we have
previously. We need to lend each other money, rather than borrowing from the
monetary system. If we pay to ourselves the same usurious interest rates
they charge, we can pool our money yet faster. If we buy our food and
resources from within our own local network of permies, that money builds our
land and resource base, yet faster. With a good mutual support savings plan,
we can begin putting land into Trust which we use to Care for yet more
permies. The more permies we pull out of the broken system, the more we can
purchase land; more land, more permies; more permies, more land. Pay taxes
and sell our services today to remain invisible to the monetary system, then
halt our economic participation when such an action would result in an end to
the market-state. Organized like a fungal network, there would be little
notice in a
system temporarily relieved of some of it's burdens and inefficiencies and
nothing that could be done to seemingly infinite targets if we were noticed.
At some point, we have the power to pull the plug on the monetary Ponzi
scheme and the many other inner workings of empire culture.

http://www.solari.com/
http://prosper.com/


-Sean.
----- Original Message ----
From: Paul Cereghino <paul.cereghino@comcast.net>
To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2007 12:51:19 PM
Subject: Re: [permaculture] The Fed

"why is it that permaculture [as an example of decentralized ecological
design] has such a small cult following in the US rather than having
broad attention and appeal?".

>I suspect because the educational system, does not support it

I learned about permaculture by going to college, and though the college
didn't teach permaculture, it did teach a range of skills that I have
retrofitted, and it gave me resources with which to make choices about
how I apply my life energy to affect the fabric of human ecologies.
There is a little of the chicken or the egg here, in that you need
people who think ecological design to teach ecological design... I
wonder if integration into primary and secondary education would be more
powerful? Over the last 20 years there are increasing academic programs
teaching 'holistic' stuff, and this is because they are competing for
students who demand 'holistic' stuff. The populice and the dominant
economic model doesn't support it, and the educational system is just a
service provider.

I want to redirect the character of this analysis -- this idea that Pc
doesn't thrive because of 'them' or 'the system'. That is just the easy
way out. If we are such good designers, then lets design! The problem
is the solution, right... so show me! Least action greatest response?
Show me! Why is it when we come to human systems we throw up our hands
and say 'the system' is flawed? Perhaps we are just ignorant of the
actual design context?!

>there are not vast economic dependancies associated with it, in the
minds of policy makers
>material returns of investors, rather than address the investments of
the natural world
> you might find yourself working as a carpenter.

I think these combine -- Pc doesnt produce revenue that can be
concentrated to produce a lobbying force or a political caucus.
Pc offers guilt free subsistance but the potential for emotionally
stressful isolation. It is land dependant, but land ownership is
concentrated, and it is difficult to own land outside the
investment-mortgage system without fleeing population centers -- so
again, isolation. Then there is also increasing insecurity in becoming old.

>The uncertainties of business are being minimized by causing the
customers to behave in a way to allow for a significant return beyond
expenditures.

The horrific irony is that 'causing the customers to behave' part is
very penetrating and pervasive. It is a economic landscape phenomena
that must be overcome. The Pc idea is that you invest the surplus in
the land -- not give it to a shareholder. So you limit you
'constituency'. Pc has a very limited 'constituency'. Economic
interest groups use their surplus to influence the economic landscape
for the benefit of their industry. Pc is busy working on soil fertility
on land they have barely secured, while the rest of the world is
creating the cultural infrastructure in support of their revenue
streams. The Pc answer is that the rest of the word will fall apart and
settle into Pc and so we focus on soil rather then 'the system' or 'the
man'. Is that a safe or accurate assumption?

I think land ownership is central to this thread. If I owned land
outright, I would have more options, but I trade work for land over a
lifetime, and to squirrel away capital for future security. Although I
deviate from norms quite substantially, some of my behaviors are quite
normal, because they are driven by economic insecurity context.

>If your not perceived by those pulling the strings in society as
acceptable your going to be swimming up stream a lot.

But only when you are dependant on string pulling, i.e. you are not
generating your own revenue, not generating your own power, rather you
are trying to appeal to a non-functioning populist ideal and you go
appealing to the string-pullers and find that they have no interest or
use for you. If you want to redirect the stream you learn the stream
dynamics and start looking for weakness in the bank where you can cause
an avulsion.

>Permaculture is a frontier and that is why you don't find lots of
people out there. It is not what
>has been going on the last 10,000 in agriculture.

Perhaps I am an unforgiving perfectionist, but I am not convinced that
our designs are so spankin' special at this point.

Paul Cereghino



_______________________________________________
permaculture mailing list
permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
-go to the above link to subscribe to or unsubscribe from this list-






____________________________________________________________________________________
It's here! Your new message!
Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page