Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - Re: [permaculture] Democratic solutions to Permacultures conflicts?

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Michael Burns <burns@panix.com>
  • To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [permaculture] Democratic solutions to Permacultures conflicts?
  • Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2007 00:15:56 -0400

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
--------------------------------------------------------







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page