Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - Re: [permaculture] private property and forests

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: christopher nesbitt <christopher.nesbitt@mmrfbz.org>
  • To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [permaculture] private property and forests
  • Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 10:09:12 -0600

I hate to get sucked into this, but your tone, Steve, since the issue of property has come up, has been combative, unpleasant, and superior. If you don't want to be seen as an asshole, maybe it would be best for you to be more careful with your tone. So far you have come off as bullying and condescending, but offered zero of substance. You seem to feel you have the right to dictate the parameters of this discussion, making the conversation smaller when you like, ignoring valid points, and opening it up to wide ranging topics when you think it suits you, while not bothering to read peoples posts clearly, assigning values to their statements the writers did not intend, then insinuating that anyone who doesn't agree with you on... and here I am still not sure what you are saying... is less evolved than you are.

You make these statements about property ownership that are really besides the point or peripheral to the discussion, bold, sweeping, monolithic, monochromatic pronouncements about "universal ills", but most issues are not black and white, or universal, and are nuanced, and then insultingly quote people when they say that they are "out of touch with things" when they broaden the conversation. Private ownership, of land, is one of these issues with 1000 shades of grey, many of them very positive. As some one (wonderful) said to me, off list: you "make such broad generalizations and confuse the tool of property rights with the sometimes distorted use/abuse of that tool by some entities" that some people, myself included, are seriously curious about your relationship with land and what your design work has produced.

In a discussion about the benefits of property rights, which had moved onto a discussion of the relationship to the land and property rights in Maya communities in southern Belize, you attempted to insert the evolving Chinese landlord class, which is fine, and certainly very, very interesting, but wasn't part of that conversation, has nothing to do with land tenure in Maya communities, and really added nothing to the discussion. You also commented on the subprime mortgage fall out, an interesting topic, but, again, not one that had anything to do with the conversation.

I think Dieter is well within the parameters of this discussion, those parameters set by your wandering topics, to bring up the "brutalities" of the lack of property rights in the former Soviet Union as one actual, tangible, real example of what the lack of property rights can lead to, collectivist/statist ownership models, one way that lack of property rights can go. In response to your Chinese land lords comment, I also brought up the Great Leap Forward, and cannibalism, another historical outcome of the lack of property rights. A logical evolution of this conversation, responding to your comments, which is an offshoot of other conversations, is to point out some examples of the damage lack of property rights has caused, especially since you have yet to trot out some working examples of where the absence of private property has resulted in positive results, merely leaving blank spots on the page for others to insert examples of where the absence of private property has led to people owning...... televisions. I am open minded, and would like to hear of these bright spots, so, please, feel free to show us them.

It is true that Dieter, and everyone else here, has no idea what you are doing, because you haven't shared that, merely (it appears to me) suggesting that other people here are not as enlightened as you are regarding land ownership. I, for one, am interested in what you're doing, because I am interested in where your world view is coming from (and what your view actually is). I find reading about peoples farming is much more interesting than watching petulant displays of contrariness and reactionary platitudes about "universal" "problems" the author is not offering solutions to.

Lastly, I think Dieter raises some excellent points, points you snittily choose to ignore when the polite thing to do would be to respond to them. I think your response to what could have been a conversation, was rude. Rather then copy and paste the whole email, I will say that I really thought all of it was good observation, especially the dissolution of the large estates through inheritance taxes, and that policies developed in urban areas are having lasting repercussions in rural Portugal. Thank you, Dieter, for sharing that.

So I will ask again, what's your point, here? Thesis statement, please. In the absence of a thesis statement, Steve, remember this old adage: when in a hole, stop digging.




On Nov 10, 2008, at 7:28 AM, Steve Read wrote:

Hello, Dieter Brand,

"f you are serious about your ideas, I suggest you put hand to shovel and try to make a living out of a piece of land"

I would politely suggest that you be a lot more careful with your tone, I would also suggest that you don't make unfounded assumptions about what I do and where I come from, if you can't
be bothered either to backtrack a thread then I wouldn't bother if I were you to make a contribution. The Soviet Union and its failures and brutalities has nothing to do with this discusssion.

You are completely correct I feel however when you say "I'm a little out of touch with things".

I'm off now to do some planting and to check on the area of buckwheat that seems to need some help.

SteveR

======= At 2008-11-10, 13:09:07 you wrote: =======

...The point I would like for a final time to re-iterate is that
private property gives the owner(s) the right (constrained
only by variable Govt and local laws) to do with it as they
like, in perpetuity and their children etc etc.

Over and out

SteveR,

Nothing is really over and out until it is really over and out. Regarding the "perpetuity" of landownership in the UK, isn't there also the little detail of inheritance tax that has effectively dissolved many of the old estates?

I haven't been able to follow this thread from the beginning, but I'm generally of the opinion that sustainable use of land requires private ownership or at least a system of tenure that enables a farmer to plan for the long term.

Anyways, landowners are far from "free to do" with their land as they like, apart from the local and Gov. laws you mentioned, there are also economic factors and, in Europe, the EU agricultural policy that determine everything a farmer can and cannot do.

Whatever evils of private ownership you can make out, surely that is nothing in comparison to the gigantic waste engendered by the collective ownership of the Soviet Union. I'm a little out of touch with things, but if the Hampstead Heath crowd is once again getting all befuddled with socialist revolution, there are still enough survivors of the Gulag of "real" socialism that are none to keen on repeating the experience.

The trouble I see is that many of the laws governing the land are made in the cities, while the rural population has little say in the way things are done. Here in Portugal were I live; many farmers have given up due to economic conditions. To make things worse, new laws (most of which are due to EU regulations) are putting on the screws even further. The result is that farmers are still leaving the land. In this dry climate, the abandoned land like the protected areas created EU-wide “to protect nature” will burn down in regular intervals, thus devastating whole regions.

Most farmers are unlikely to be enthusiastic about some day dream of collective ownership imposed on them by people from the cities. If you are serious about your ideas, I suggest you put hand to shovel and try to make a living out of a piece of land. You could even join some commune if you are able to stomach the internal political infighting these things often bring about.

Dieter Brand
Portugal

--- On Mon, 11/10/08, Steve Read <steveread@free.fr> wrote:

From: Steve Read <steveread@free.fr>
Subject: Re: [permaculture] private property and forests
To: "permaculture" <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 7:26 AM

Hello, Rain Tenaqiya,

All over Britain thousands of acres of land held by schools has been was sold
off, particularly during the Thatcher regime as schools made a quick pound out
of the booming housing development. That an analyst writes a book, that someone
reads it, and its got an ISBN number doesn't necessarily make the proposals
in it astute. Pension schemes can be as ill-judges in their practices as anyone
else. The point I would like for a final time to re-iterate is that private
property gives the owner(s) the right (constrained only by variable Govt and
local laws) to do with it as they like, in perpetuity and their children etc
etc.


Over and out


SteveR

======= At 2008-11-08, 20:26:26 you wrote: =======

I'm reading a book called More Tree Talk by Ray Raphael, a local
(northern California) historian. He explains how property owned by logging
corporations is logged at a faster than sustainable rate in order to produce a
profit in a capitalist society with high interest rates and multiple investment
options for capital. He proposes that a better solution would be to have
forest land owned by schools, retirement funds, and other groups who have less
pressure to make a quick profit, but who are interested in making money over a
longer time period.

Nothing is perfect, but using broad labels like "private
property" isn't good for making sustainable designs. Again, we have
to look at what our design goals are and do a needs and yields assessment for
our different options. Getting really specific about the different elements
and sites in our designs will help us come up with better results.

Rain



_______________________________________________
permaculture mailing list
permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Subscribe or unsubscribe here:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
Google command to search archives:
site:https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture searchstring

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Best regards.
Steve Read
steveread@free.fr
2008-11-10

_______________________________________________
permaculture mailing list
permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Subscribe or unsubscribe here:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
Google command to search archives:
site:https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture searchstring






_______________________________________________
permaculture mailing list
permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Subscribe or unsubscribe here:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
Google command to search archives:
site:https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture searchstring

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Best regards.
Steve Read
steveread@free.fr
2008-11-10

_______________________________________________
permaculture mailing list
permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
Subscribe or unsubscribe here:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
Google command to search archives:
site:https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture searchstring





_____________________________
Christopher Nesbitt

Maya Mountain Research Farm
San Pedro Columbia, Toledo
PO 153 Punta Gorda Town, Toledo
BELIZE,
Central America

www.mmrfbz.org







Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page