permaculture

[Cory Brennan <cory8570@yahoo.com>]

Kevin, 

I would say the major omission about this discussion is OBSERVATION OF THE 
SYSTEM.  You are worrying about a problem that we dont' even know exists. If 
you know of a specific permaculture project that is run by some unethical 
people and is a bad reflection on permaculture, then let's discuss what we 
should do about it.  

But you are speculating about projects as yet undone or some project you know 
nothing about personally, and that is my main beef with this. I had a bunch 
of negative speculation done about one of my projects before it even started 
because of a nebulous association with a group (which wasn't even doing the 
project) and all the fears turned out to be completely unfounded.  What is 
the point?  Do we have nothing better to do with our time than speculate 
about "what bad things might happen" to someone else's project????  Let's 
take existing projects and discuss how they can be improved and ethics can be 
a larger part of them, please.  Let's also not forget to look, as objectively 
as possible, for the positive elements of other people's projects and not 
just for whatever reflects our personal fears. 

Best, Cory

--- On Tue, 8/17/10, kevin skvorak <k.skvorak@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: kevin skvorak <k.skvorak@gmail.com>
> Subject: [permaculture] Design / Ethics / Movement / etc
> To: permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
> Date: Tuesday, August 17, 2010, 8:47 AM
> I gotta chime in one more time!
> 
> i have much appreciated all the wise input. thanks
> everyone. (except the
> abusers who are a problem for us all)
> 
> for clarity, self-defense, and perhaps useful addition to
> the conversation
> (tho i doubt i can do that)
> 
> i want to say i resonate alot with chris' post below.
> 
> this is essentially my position as well. i didn't create
> permaculture. i
> didn't design it around an ethical foundation.  i am
> simply asking the
> question; "what does actually taking PC principles
> seriously look like in
> practice?"
> 
> i ask in the first post i ask; "is two out of three enough
> to be considered
> permaculture?"
> 
> i do NOT want to be a PC cop.  i DO want to understand
> how we actually,
> practically, embody our ethics or not.  obviously (to
> me anyway)
> exclusionary capitalist, or facist, or racist groups are
> NOT following PC
> principles/ethics, so can we not simply articulate that?
> say it out loud?
> 
> and how do we offer accountability to each other on these
> issues?  and i
> want accountability, or something like it NOT to judge or
> decide who is good
> or who is bad  but because i believe "bad" PC  -
> ("bad" in this context
> being PC designs, identifcation, "brand" usage etc that
> does not (even try
> to) embody the central ethics) - is a negative reflection
> on all of us using
> the brand.  it IS all of our business.
> 
> the reality is non-pc people will clearly judge whether a
> particular PC
> identified project in their community is ethical or not, is
> hypocritical or
> not, is only serving elite interests etc, so it would
> behoove us to in some
> way make some of the same judgements, critical analysis,
> public peer review
> etc etc
> 
> i wish i was as eloquent as so many others have been on
> this! i hope this
> pint is coming across tho.
> 
> kevin
> 
> 
> 
> Message: 8
> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 18:50:40 -0500
> From: Christophe McKeon <polypus74@gmail.com>
> To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
> Subject: Re: [permaculture] Design / Ethics / Movement /
> etc.
> Message-ID:
>        <AANLkTik2VZRdKSQVyjmqzNHf_57wgtZqtQu3cAePG9Og@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> > These conversations have been extremely engaging and
> proactive.
> 
> indeed.
> 
> they've also gone on for quite a bit longer than i
> thought,
> and perhaps longer than some would have wanted, but
> that's what these lists are for aren't they. anyway, the
> threads tenacity has given some time to chew on it a bit.
> 
> toby's conceptual division of permaculture into both a
> movement
> and a design science is certainly a clarifying one which
> i've been
> thinking about a bit.
> 
> i do think that permaculture whether we want it to be or
> not is a
> movement, or might better be described as a multiplicity of
> movements.
> the kind of hydra you get when you have no leader, and the
> kind that
> resonates with me for that very reason.
> 
> but i think that the question as to whether it is a
> movement or not is not
> really relevant here. fundamentally the problem some people
> have with
> institutions such as the u.s. military is an ethical one.
> if permaculture
> were
> just a design science we wouldn't really have much to talk
> about here. what
> does a design science ultimately have to say about the
> comportment of
> some group or institution?
> 
> but it isn't just a design science, it is also a
> philosophical framework
> with an ethical basis. in fact, i'd call the ethical
> component the root of
> permaculture. ethics, if they are to have any teeth, must
> be able to make
> value judgements both in the negative and in the positive.
> else why even
> engage in them?
> 
> the u.s. military as an organization, is the largest
> consumer of energy
> resources on the planet -- care of earth?
> 
> the aim of the military is to kill people in the name of
> such and such a
> policy or such and such an idea. you may or may not agree
> with those
> ideas, but the aim is clear -- care of people?
> 
> and finally, let's not be naive, throughout history one of
> the primary uses
> of military force has been the acquisition of resources,
> and their
> reallocation
> to the vanquishing force, and the society driving that
> force -- fair share?
> 
> another way to say that, is that an institution such as the
> u.s. military
> is the embodied antithesis of permaculture. that is why i
> think that the
> points brought up by those with concerns about engagement
> with such
> an institution are highly relevant enquiries into the very
> nature of what
> it means to actually have a functional, relevant, and
> living ethics.
> 
> i happen to think that if there is somebody in the military
> who is willing
> to listen even for a moment to anything having to do with
> permaculture,
> there should not be an instant of hesitation in indulging
> them. that is
> the positive inclusive nature of permaculture which i think
> has made
> it as successful as it has been.
> 
> i also think that to dismiss concerns & analysis about
> the true nature
> of the institutions that some of us may be dealing with, as
> politically
> correct, or somehow overly radical, is to willfully ignore
> the antithetical
> nature of those institutions to the very ethical roots of
> permaculture
> itself.
> 
> so to recapitulate; i think that we should be able to
> honestly make
> hard assessments in accordance with the most basic of
> permacultural
> ethics without then having to take a counter-productive
> stance of purity
> or exclusivity, vis a vis those groups or institutions
> assessed. ultimately
> what this requires of us is flexibility of mind, and a
> certain degree
> of tolerance
> and humility.
> 
> _c
> _______________________________________________
> permaculture mailing list
> permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
> Subscribe or unsubscribe here:
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
> Google command to search archives:
> site:http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/permaculture
> searchstring
>