permaculture

[LBUZZELL@aol.com]

I agree that this is an important discussion.
 
One thing I've noticed is that those who are uncomfortable with the idea of 
 teaching permaculture in an official military context seem to focus on the 
 organization/ecosystem, while those who defend teaching permaculture to  
"everyone" seem to focus on individuals.  Sort of like the forest and the  
trees?  Would it be possible to adopt a "yes/and" approach, where we look  at 
both?
 
For example, I can see how if I were an individual soldier or an individual 
 Afghani farmer I might benefit from the opportunity to learn permaculture, 
but  it might also be true that the military system could use permaculture 
for  purposes that might conflict with PmC ethics and Afghanis might resent 
PmC for  that reason or even attack future permaculture teachers who arrived 
in their  country.  It's very complicated! 
 
I don't see a way to simplify this into a simple "rule" -- "teach PmC to  
anyone and everyone who's interested"  or "don't teach PmC to military  
organizations that might misuse it for nasty purposes." So how do we make our 
 
ethical decisions?
 
Linda
 
 
In a message dated 8/19/2010 10:59:05 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
cory8570@yahoo.com writes:

"Permaculture is a revolution disguised as gardening."  That  is a  
succinct way to describe the movement that carries with it many  
implications. I've 
told that to people on virtually every point of the  political spectrum and 
they actually get it - they get that permaculture  offers individual 
freedom and quality of life, a way out from under the thumb  of the oppressor 
(whoever they may feel that is), and a healthier way to live.  

Permaculture can be forwarded by any group, and it is up to those of  us 
that understand the subject to ensure that inaccurate information about it  
is 
corrected. There are a number of ways to achieve that that have been  
mentioned here. I feel that is an important discussion - how should we keep  
the 
subject accurate, as it leaks out into the mainstream and various other  
groups?  It is inevitable that it will, so why try to stop it?  What  we 
really 
need to do is control the accuracy of the subject.  

The  most active permaculturists on this list tend toward the left/hippie 
modality,  but as others have mentioned, there are permaculturists at any 
political  spectrum. 

I find the discussions about excluding people from the  "movement" simply 
because of where they work (like the army), or their  religious affiliation, 
or political affiliation, etc, to be a form of  discrimination and a human 
and civil rights violation, as well as a clear lack  of understanding of the 
ethics of "people care."  

Who here thinks  that people care means "only the people I personally agree 
with?"  or  "only the people I personally feel are worthy of being exposed 
to natural  principles?"  or "only the people I personally think could 
possibly  understand these natural principles, even though they are 
universally  
understood by all living being, on a visceral level, when they actually 
listen  to themselves?"  

I think it is incredibly egoistic to assume that  any of us knows best who 
should be exposed to this knowledge, or that they  could possibly predict 
how it might affect them, change them, enlighten them,  increase their 
ability 
to be ethical and decent human beings, etc.  

Haven't we all been through paradigm shift in some way or other? For  many 
of us it has been a gut wrenching experience. For me, it is a life long  
journey which delves ever deeper. I would feel terrible if I denied someone  
else the opportunity to explore those depths, simply because of some  
unexamined prejudice I have about some group they belong to. I personally 
know  
someone who used to be "Aryan race" proponent who saw the light and 
completely  
reformed and is now a civil rights activist for minorities. There is a 25 
year  career ex-Army guy in the PDC I'm giving right now at Pine Ridge Lakota 
 
reservation that is turning himself inside out to help Pine Ridge.  

ANYTHING can happen, guys, people are very volatile  beings.   

I use very hands on methods of teaching  permaculture that takes people 
outside of their paradigm and puts them in  touch with the natural world on 
that visceral level - such as Tom Brown  techniques, etc. I have personally 
witnessed massive paradigm shifts so I know  it can be done, even if a person 
is immersed in the "corporate" or "army"  paradigm. Those are the people we 
need to reach most. Some of us embrace that  challenge, and some of us want 
nothing to do with it.  Great!  I'm  all for diversity, but please don't try 
to tell another experienced  permaculturist who they should talk to about 
permaculture, when you don't even  know them or the situation. 

Best, Cory


--- On Mon, 8/16/10,  Toby Hemenway <toby@patternliteracy.com> wrote:

> From: Toby  Hemenway <toby@patternliteracy.com>
> Subject: Re: [permaculture]  Movement thinking (was Designing a Movement)
> To: "permaculture"  <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
> Date: Monday, August 16, 2010,  8:41 PM
> Rafter-- as usual, I get and
> appreciate what you say  and the tone in which you say it,
> and take it in the kind spirit it is  given. I agree that I
> oversimplified and showed a lot of bias in my  description of
> what movements are. Mostly because I see little upside,  and
> a lot of downside, to permaculture being regarded as a
>  movement. There have been many memorable and effective
> movements, of  course: civil rights, anti-war, anti-abortion,
> German National  Socialism, and others all over the map.
> Movements attract . . . what's  a polite word for fanatic?
> Perhaps activist is. Some do immense good,  some immense
> harm. Some movements increase the rights of one group at  the
> expense of others. Some do better than that. Civil rights  is
> the broadest and best model I can think of. 
> 
> But  almost any movement comes with its own political
> framework and can  usually be placed in a fairly small region
> of the political spectrum.  If we look at permaculture as a
> movement, it's in the quite left-wing,  Earth-worshipping,
> hippie-descended, middle and upper middle class,  etc, etc,
> region, with a modest number of outliers included. A  narrow
> slice. Who else would even be arguing about working with  the
> army?
> 
> So what are the odds of a movement like  this getting a wide
> reception? To anyone outside of permaculture's  primary
> political clique, the "movement" baggage poses a huge
>  hurdle. It's possible that as a movement permaculture can do
> the same  for ecological consciousness that the civil rights
> movement did for  racial consciousness. But there are some
> big differences. The civil  rights movement as a whole was
> not a methodology or a set of  principles; it wasn't
> primarily holding classes or looking to be  taught in
> universities. It had one easily grasped central point:  equal
> rights for all races. We can't define our central point,  if
> we have one, in less than a fat black book or a two-week
>  course. And a politicized movement is not going to be
> invited into  schools or local governments or churches or
> other institutions except  in those instances where the
> politics of the institution match that of  permaculture
> activists. Civil rights had to batter its way in, at a  very
> high personal cost t
>  o many. Is that what we want  to do? I think that is an
> unnecessarily difficult road for us to take;  the design
> standpoint will reach people much more quickly.  Permaculture
> as a movement won't be invited anywhere that the politics  or
> socio-economic groundings don't match the movement's. A
>  design approach, however, will be welcomed almost anywhere.
> That's why  I'd like to see the design side of permaculture
> emphasized over the  movement aspect.
> 
> Also, I don't see the ethical basis of  permaculture as an
> impediment. Who is going to argue against caring  for the
> Earth and people? The ethics are bland enough to appeal  to
> all. The fact that permaculture involves ethics is quite
>  radical, but even very conservative groups grasp the need
> for ethical  guidelines. That part can have wide appeal. A
> left-ish movement  doesn't.
> 
> I do often think of myself as part of a  movement--who
> doesn't want to belong to a tribe? But political  movement
> design and process are very different from those of  an
> ecological design system. Maybe our failure to identify and
>  deal with the distinction is why permaculture has made so
> little  progress in 30 years. I think there are some good
> things to be learned  from pursuing this a bit.
> 
> Toby
>  http://patternliteracy.com
> 
> 
> 
> On Aug 16, 2010,  at 4:28 PM, rafter sass wrote:
> 
> > Hey Toby,
> >  
> > As usual, I'm crazy about your response, in tone,
>  quality of thinking, and content.
> > 
> > All except for  the third paragraph where, for reasons
> I can't fathom, you  redefine
> > the concept of "movement"  - and by  implication,
> movement participants -
> > as simpleton  ideological cliques. It bears no relation
> to any recognizable
>  > definition of social movement. 
> > 
> > Why, Toby,  why? [insert wringing of hands]
> > 
> > Why work to isolate  Pc from the inspiring history, and
> critical present-day
> >  reality of global social movements? Advocate for your
> vision of Pc,  please.
> > It's needed. Plus I mostly agree with you. ;) 
>  > 
> > But don't paint this distorted picture of social
>  movements. 
> > 
> > Do I agree with you about avoiding  evangelism,
> self-righteousness,
> > and "purity vs.  pollution" thinking? Absolutely. And
> the distribution of these
>  > traits - on this list alone! - makes it clear that
> there is no  correlation with 
> > the trait of movement thinking. 
> >  
> > Permaculture is a design approach and a movement at
> the  very same time - if you use
> > a recognizable definition of  movement. (I guess I'm
> camping in both of your camps.) 
> >  
> > It is certainly not unique among movements. It's a
>  fellow traveller with many other 
> > examples of: large numbers of  people working together
> in a more-or-less organized, 
> >  more-or-less spontaneous fashion, to make the world
> safe, just, and  sustainable. (Check out Hawken's
> > Blessed Unrest to see this point  made in vastly more
> detail.) Like other grassroots movements,  it's
> > not pure, it's not objective, and to the degree that
>  it's adherents are self-righteous evangelical
> > nincompoops, it  will fail!
> > 
> > Every significant historical gain in  freedom,
> worldwide, has been fought for and won -
> > not  through some idealized, objective, design
> practice, but through messy,  difficult social movements.
> > Furthermore, they've been fought for  with tactics of
> disruptive protest, among other tools in the toolbox.  
> > It's bad form, to say the least, for white males in
> the  North, like you and me, to foster ignorance of that
> fact.
> >  
> > Likewise for so much of the significant defenses of
>  ecological health that we've been able to accomplish - 
> > c.f. the  success of the disruptive, law-breaking,
> anti-nuke movement here at  home. Do you think
> > that we'll get decent climate treaties, or  stop
> mountaintop removal mining, without
> > the pressure  brought to bear by disruptive protest,
> and the movements that 
>  > make it happen? History tells us, decisively, "No."
> > 
>  > We can't do an end-run around the need to think about
> the  Permaculture milieu as a whole, by focusing
> > on practice alone.  And we need to regard ourselves,
> our whole movement, as part of a  greater whole -
> > and not only ecologically. We do this so that we  don't
> isolate ourselves from our fellow travelers, so we 
> >  can share the crucial and unique resources that we
> bring, with the  folks most prepared to make good use of
> them. 
> > 
>  > And also because we need those other movements that we
> are making  this path with. 
> > Permaculture alone won't get us the world we  want - a
> world that's worth living in.
> > 
> >  Thank for all your incredible contributions, Toby. I'm
> confident that  you will receive this in 
> > the spirit of collegiality and respect  in which it is
> intended.
> > 
> > Best,
> >  Rafter
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  rafter sass
> > liberationecology.org
> > 
> >>  From: Toby Hemenway <toby@patternliteracy.com>
> >> Date:  August 16, 2010 10:38:59 AM EDT
> >> To: permaculture  <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
> >> Subject: Re:  [permaculture] Designing a Movement
> (was: Ethics of whatever)
>  >> Reply-To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
>  >> 
> >> 
> >> rafter wrote:
> >>  
> >>> Teaching Pc for, and to, white nationalists,
>  would be bad for the movement. 
> >> 
> >> I think  this gets to one of the central confusions
> of this discussion, and why  at times we are talking past
> each other (and BTW, I know someone who  taught a PDC for
> white ideologists, who told me that a lot of  important
> insights came out--for the instructor as well). 
>  >> 
> >> I think we fall into two camps: those who  view
> permaculture as a movement, and those who view it as a
>  design approach. Of course, most of us--myself
> included--hold portions  of both views, but I think one will
> predominate in each person.  
> >> 
> >> If you think of Pc as a movement, then we  are
> activists who are trying to transform people's view of the
>  world, and we need everyone to see it our way. We are right.
>  Permaculture is then a worldview, an ideology of sorts, and
> people  need to do it our way, or the wrong side will win.
> And our ideology  needs to remain pure and uncorrupted. 
> If the wrong people  infiltrate us, permaculture will become
> tainted, ruined, and it will  turn into something we don't
> want. You are either following it or not;  you're with us or
> against us, and if you are against us, you need to  be
> transformed.You can see that I don't like the idea of Pc
>  being a movement, even though I'm often caught up in its
> evangelical  qualities. And it's not a big step from being a
> movement to being a  cult, which some accuse permaculture of
> being. Some of the arguments  made here are almost cult-like:
> we have secret knowledge that needs to  be kept from the army
> or they will do harm with it. 
> >>  
> >> Or the other view: If permaculture is a design
>  approach, then at its essence it is a set of tools for
> Earth- and  people-care that is not dependent on belief or
> ideology. It can't be  corrupted because its use either does
> or doesn't follow the ethics and  principles, and it stops
> being permaculture when those are not being  adhered to. Or
> at least we can say it is a poor or incomplete use  of
> permaculture. A person is either a good designer or a poor
>  one. You use the principles in your work or you don't. You
> use  ecological and social metrics to assess whether you've
> been  successful: As biodiversity up? Are people healthy?
> This puts the  responsibility on the user, and not on
> permaculture as a movement that  may be corrupted by bad
> people.
> >> 
> >>  Larry Santoyo's phrase is useful here: We don't DO
> permaculture, we  USE permaculture in what we do. Activists
> in a movement do  permaculture. Designers use permaculture in
> what they do. If the army  uses permaculture, it will result
> in Earth care and people care. If it  doesn't have that
> result, then they aren't using permaculture; they  are
> ideologists applying capitalist/corporate ideology to yet
>  another tool they have made poor use of. If we don't teach
> them  permaculture, there is no chance of them doing the good
> it can do. It  cannot make them worse, in my view. It will
> either be abandoned by  them, or it will make them good
> designers of healthy systems.
>  >> 
> >> Again, I think "go where you are invited"  applies.
> I have no intention of trying to transform the army  with
> permaculture: that's ideology.  But if they come to  me
> to ask how they can use permaculture to have ecologically
>  and socially successful and sound projects, I'll be there.
> The student  must be ready for the teacher, or there will be
> no learning. 
>  >> 
> >> And incidentally, I've really appreciated  what
> Rafter and manyy others have written here, especially the
>  Rafter/Scott dialog. Thanks for a thought provoking thread.
> 
>  >> 
> >> And, Cory and all: Permaculture is already  being
> taught in over 25 universities in the US alone, at last
>  count.
> >> 
> >> And: I absolutely approve, as Kevin  suggested, of
> making the ethics, principles, and curriculum much  clearer
> and less subject to wild interpretations. Hence the need  for
> organizations that link permaculturists together,
> >>  
> >> Toby
> >> http://patternliteracy.com
>  >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On Aug 12,  2010, at 2:55 PM, rafter sass wrote:
> >> 
> >>  
> >> _______________________________________________
>  >> permaculture mailing list
> >>  permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
> >>  http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
> > 
>  > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 



_______________________________________________
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