permaculture

[Lee Flier <leeflier@comcast.net>]

 I'm not sure where in my post I implied that we should NOT be looking 
at these situations from the point of view of those being occupied.  
Permaculture by definition involves observance of the land and people 
and acting on that, not on imposing any top-down preconceived idea.  Any 
permaculture training administered to the US military, certainly by 
Scott, would be grounded in that ethic.  Permaculture's whole strength 
is in relationship building and assuming that the inhabitants of any 
ecosystem know best about that ecosystem.

So I'm not sure where your comment is coming from.


On 8/13/2010 5:49 PM, LBUZZELL@aol.com wrote:
> Thanks, Lee. I think this is an important discussion.
>
> I wonder how this might be viewed not just from the viewpoint of "we
> Americans" but by the people being occupied?  When we approach a new
> permaculture design, don't we look at the land not only from our own point of 
>  view but
> also consider how our possible actions might be received by or impact
> other living beings who may have lived here long before we arrived?
>
> It seems clear from this ongoing dialogue that there are a wide variety of
> opinions on whether or not permaculturists should or should not work for
> the US  military.  All worth considering.  Perhaps some kind of consensus will
>   emerge...
>
> Linda
>
>
> In a message dated 8/13/2010 12:48:22 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> leeflier@comcast.net writes:
>
> Wow.  I go out of town and come back to find this discussion  going on.
>
> If there's one thing I know about permaculture, it's that it  requires us
> to begin where we are.  Zone 1 starts outside our front  door.  It
> doesn't require that we wait until conditions are ideal  before we act -
> in fact, it seems to require exactly the  opposite.
>
> Where we are now is that we have troops deployed in places  where the
> land and people are extremely fragile.  While we Americans  can certainly
> do other things at the ballot box and elsewhere to try to  change that,
> right now this is where we are.  And if there's a chance  of any lives
> being saved because our troops have some knowledge of  permaculture, then
> it should absolutely be taught.  Would you  advocate denying a soldier
> first aid training, which could save lives,  because you disapprove of
> what that soldier is doing otherwise?   Because permaculture is first and
> foremost first aid for the earth.   We as permaculturists may be
> powerless for the time being to stop the  damage of war entirely, but if
> there's any damage committed through  ignorance that we can minimize, or
> any healing of the land or people that  can be done if our troops just
> had a little knowledge, then I think it's  imperative to teach our
> soldiers if we have the opportunity, as Scott  does.  I think it's
> imperative in fact to teach anyone willing to  learn, regardless of the
> compromised circumstances under which we all have  to work.  Working to
> change the system from the inside is just as  valid a pursuit as any
> other - and maybe more thankless since we often get  flack from within
> our own  ranks.