Russ et al.
Interesting that you worked with Ted Trainer, Russ - I have been raeding
through his work and am a fan.
I think your discussion about a 'hi-tech' conserver society is an
interesting one. It is almost a discussion that is saying 'what do we
keep?'. If there isn't as much energy around what will we prioritise.
Holmgren and others argue to this point it has been travel as you
identified. It seems that modern society is addicted to moving around and
using a lot of energy to do it.
i don't know if we do need that many high-tech tools.
it would be interesting to do an audit of internet communication to see how much of it
is of actual tangible value to people. (i.e. how much of this information
is practically used?)
or do we still prefer to try and work it out
ourselves? or turn to a local expert to show us?
Side note:
I think people reject Ted's approach not because they are living in a 'hi
tech' world that makes sense, I think more and more people are seeing the
vaccum that is a life based on consumption.
They reject ideas because ultimately what Ted is saying is there is a lot of good stuff we've left
behind and change is hard at any time - change back to a time that people
think is regressive is even harder.
We all see the value of permaculture, but why doesn't all of society...not because they don't see the value, but
because to actually break out of one way of living is so extrodinarily hard
- and who tend to be attracted to permaculture ideas. People on the edge,
and we know the value of the edge, that is where it all happens where the
interactions take place.
The most interesting thing is we are headed (in time) far away from the edge, back to pre-modern times when life is stable
and uniform and doesn't change as much as it has in the last 100 years...it will probably take another 200 to get back there, but Holmgren presents some strong arguments for this.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.