Subject: Re: [permaculture] Democratic solutions to Permacultures conflicts?
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2007 00:15:56 -0400
jedd <jedd@...> writes:
---snip---
> Let's go back a couple of emails. Or even just back to the Subject.
>
---snip--
> So I ask you -- what are the problem(s) that you see right now?
>
> Once we've yakked about that, solutions can be explored more easily.
Nice... let us step back in this discussion and consider what exactly
we are talking about. In Kevin's original email, he questions why we
don't have a national Pc organization in the USA, and suggested one
be formed along democratic lines. Two problems come to mind
immediately. The first is what makes an organization legitimately
democratic, or what democratic methods would work for whom. These are
good questions that could be part of the design process for a
national organization... if we need one (oops, that's another question!)
The second problem is if you do not believe a national organization
is needed or appropriate at this time, to disagree with Kevin's idea
as presented also meant you would appear to agree with his
characteraztions of those who would disagree as lacking in "trust in
democratic process and organization," and prone to "individualistic
trends." Earlier in his questions/proposal he suggested that we
needed a process that "does not further divide us all, or place
people in turf battles, or cause any of the other internal problems
that seem to plague the 'movement'?
Unwittingly, a discussion becomes framed as you are either for a
democratic national organization OR if not you are an undemocratic
individualist that accepts the divisions and turf battles. Egos,
values, and our own personal worth are at stake and the original
question becomes mired in distracting accusation, comparisons,
personal declarations, and dormant and minor disagreements become
divisions in a movement.
Here I sit (as the coyotes howl outside my window!) wondering...
...I do not clearly see a need for a national org yet I don't oppose
democratic organization.
...I run an institute and see its initial success as a result of a
closed process between 3 and 4 people... where's the problem? I don't
see one. I do desire a grassroots democratic Pc org in my local area,
but not for the certification course.
...I do not clearly see a need for a national org and don't see how
it reflects a selfish individualist tendency on my part.
...From my perspective in the Finger Lakes, I'm fairly oblivious to
turf battles. Further divide? How bad is this divide if I've never
noticed it? What side am I on? Gosh, if there are divisions should I
pick sides? How can I protect the Finger Lakes Permaculture Institute
from being caught up or dragged down by all this? Dang, is this going
to take time away from my land?
Suddenly, the debate is removed from my reality. The issues being
discussed do not reflect the conditions of permaculture in my area or
on my land. Why do I have to pick sides? Why aren't we discussing
real needs? Is this debate exacerbating the "division" that a few are
privy to?
Now we are not discussing the viability, form or need for a national
organization but rather having a pissing match about democracy while
participants dig in to protect their egos, project their agenda,
while most retreat from the discussion losing interest in a hardened
debate between a bunch of sectarian ready-to-escalate-the-rhetoric men.
Meanwhile the rest of us decide to continue our work on the ground,
feeling disempowered on the national level because we don't have the
stomach, thick skin, or intellectual prowess to prove ourselves on
this political proving ground. The national organization project is
almost dead already.
We could step back, think about our work at home and consider how a
national organization would serve our needs. Rather than throw around
Pc principles in the heat of debate, we could start with observation,
needs assessment, etc and apply the design process we all learned
(presumably) in our PDCs to the eventual design of a national
organization. There is no rush. We should think in terms of scale and
succession and set up reasonable expectations for implementation. We
might also want to avoid the notion that permaculture is a political
movement, unless we want to risk acting and failing like one.
BTW, it is not as though I'm unpolitical. I've spent the last week
preparing for the 2007 New York Green Fest held at my homestead this
Saturday: http://nygreenfest.blogspot.com
peace and ripe tomatoes to all,
Michael Burns
--------------------------------------------------------
Finger Lakes Permaculture Institute, Summer '07
June 13-17 -- ADVANCED PERMACULTURE DESIGN SEMINAR with Dave Jacke &
Jono Neiger
June 18-23 -- WATER FOR EVERT FARM: KEYLINE DESIGN with Darren Doherty
July 6-8 -- 2007 NORTHEASTERN PERMACULTURE CONVERGENCE
August 3-19 -- PERMACULTURE DESIGN CERTIFICATION COURSE http://www.fingerlakespermaculture.org
--------------------------------------------------------