permaculture

[Michael Burns <burns@panix.com>]

jedd <jedd@...> writes:

---snip---
>  Let's go back a couple of emails.  Or even just back to the Subject.
>
---snip--

>  So I ask you -- what are the problem(s) that you see right now?
>
>  Once we've yakked about that, solutions can be explored more easily.

Nice... let us step back in this discussion and consider what exactly  
we are talking about. In Kevin's original email, he questions why we  
don't have a national Pc organization in the USA, and suggested one  
be formed along democratic lines. Two problems come to mind  
immediately. The first is what makes an organization legitimately  
democratic, or what democratic methods would work for whom. These are  
good questions that could be part of the design process for a  
national organization... if we need one (oops, that's another question!)

The second problem is if you do not believe a national organization  
is needed or appropriate at this time, to disagree with Kevin's idea  
as presented also meant you would appear to agree with his  
characteraztions of those who would disagree as lacking in "trust in  
democratic process and organization," and prone to "individualistic  
trends." Earlier in his questions/proposal he suggested that we  
needed a process that "does not further divide us all, or place  
people in turf battles, or cause any of the other internal problems  
that seem to plague the 'movement'?

Unwittingly, a discussion becomes framed as you are either for a  
democratic national organization OR if not you are an undemocratic  
individualist that accepts the divisions and turf battles. Egos,  
values, and our own personal worth are at stake and the original  
question becomes mired in distracting accusation, comparisons,  
personal declarations, and dormant and minor disagreements become  
divisions in a movement.

Here I sit (as the coyotes howl outside my window!) wondering...
...I do not clearly see a need for a national org yet I don't oppose  
democratic organization.
...I run an institute and see its initial success as a result of a  
closed process between 3 and 4 people... where's the problem? I don't  
see one. I do desire a grassroots democratic Pc org in my local area,  
but not for the certification course.
...I do not clearly see a need for a national org and don't see how  
it reflects a selfish individualist tendency on my part.
...From my perspective in the Finger Lakes, I'm fairly oblivious to  
turf battles. Further divide? How bad is this divide  if I've never  
noticed it? What side am I on? Gosh, if there are divisions should I  
pick sides? How can I protect the Finger Lakes Permaculture Institute  
from being caught up or dragged down by all this? Dang, is this going  
to take time away from my land?

Suddenly, the debate is removed from my reality. The issues being  
discussed do not reflect the conditions of permaculture in my area or  
on my land. Why do I have to pick sides? Why aren't we discussing  
real needs? Is this debate exacerbating the "division" that a few are  
privy to?

Now we are not discussing the viability, form or need for a national  
organization but rather having a pissing match about democracy while  
participants dig in to protect their egos, project their agenda,  
while most retreat from the discussion losing interest in a hardened  
debate between a bunch of sectarian ready-to-escalate-the-rhetoric men.

Meanwhile the rest of us decide to continue our work on the ground,  
feeling disempowered on the national level because we don't have the  
stomach, thick skin, or intellectual prowess to prove ourselves on  
this political proving ground. The national organization project is  
almost dead already.

We could step back, think about our work at home and consider how a  
national organization would serve our needs. Rather than throw around  
Pc principles in the heat of debate, we could start with observation,  
needs assessment, etc and apply the design process we all learned  
(presumably) in our PDCs to the eventual design of a national  
organization. There is no rush. We should think in terms of scale and  
succession and set up reasonable expectations for implementation. We  
might also want to avoid the notion that permaculture is a political  
movement, unless we want to risk acting and failing like one.

BTW, it is not as though I'm unpolitical. I've spent the last week  
preparing for the 2007 New York Green Fest held at my homestead this  
Saturday: http://nygreenfest.blogspot.com

peace and ripe tomatoes to all,

Michael Burns


--------------------------------------------------------
Finger Lakes Permaculture Institute, Summer '07
June 13-17 -- ADVANCED PERMACULTURE DESIGN SEMINAR with Dave Jacke &  
Jono Neiger
June 18-23 -- WATER FOR EVERT FARM: KEYLINE DESIGN with Darren Doherty
July 6-8 -- 2007 NORTHEASTERN PERMACULTURE CONVERGENCE
August 3-19 -- PERMACULTURE DESIGN CERTIFICATION COURSE
http://www.fingerlakespermaculture.org
--------------------------------------------------------