Subject: Re: Anger - Ecofascism

From: "Guy Clark" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 00:40:09 -0600

Well-
	To put it short and sweet, "Remember, your KARMA will always run over your
DOGMA."  What about CATMA?
Namaste',
Guy Clark

---

From: FionaNyx <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 23:42:41 EST

I simply don't want to go around being angry all the time.  It's a very tiring
and thankless pursuit.  Instead of sniping at others and trying to tear down
their (sometimes ridiculous, sometimes obscene, & sometimes merely
misdirected) work, I'd rather design and create systems so compellingly
functional and so obviously sensible that people see that they are more
desireable solutions. I don't need anger to motivate me to plant trees (or
anything else)-- I use my desire to nurture and create beauty to fuel that
work.  

I do know the experience of and have become angry that, as April mentioned,
others deny that my results are due to my methods.  No matter how simply I
explain what I am doing, some people WILL insist my success must lie in either
incredible personal talent (very flattering, but I know how little I deserve
to steal the credit from Gaia) or vast quantities of labor.  These people are
more often than not gardeners who have done some traditional gardening and
feel they know what they are talking about.  There IS a lot of resistance to
accepting that a system exists which can PRODUCE MORE than they do with FAR
LESS WORK.  The longer they have been putting in that work, the less likely
they are to try anything different-- it amounts to admitting they were wasting
their effort.

I think the answer to spreading the word is to figure out how to reach those
who are having their "teachable moments" BEFORE they invest effort towards
becoming entrenched in other methods of growing.  To me, this means education
in permaculture techniques MUST BE CHEAP so that it is accessible to people
who don't already know what it is and people who may not choose to devote
their careers to it.  Also, there should be more emphasis on HOW EASY IT IS TO
GROW MANY LOCALLY APPROPRIATE THINGS TOGETHER, and less on what an amazing
complex topic permaculture can be for the carrerist.  Once people learn how
easy it is and use their own produce, they are motivated to learn in more
depth.  

Also, I feel a lot of development is needed to elaborate versions of
permaculture suitable to the urban nomad, the poor, and the landless.
Permaculture as I have seen it proposed for North America is very
technological and capital intensive (like most recent American endeavors)-- it
calls for greenhouses, solar panels, composting toilets...  And, chiefly, it
usually begins with the assumption that one owns the land and can expect to
remain in that place.  If these were truly essential conditions which
permaculture must have to occur, then it would not be such a tragedy to see
that most disadvantaged people view permaculture as out of their means, rather
than as a possible answer to some of their problems.  But many aspects of
permaculture can be applied in less than ideal conditions.  The less
technological solution is often the gentler and more elegant solution as well.

Are we cheating many out of the benefits they could have from us out of over-
zealousness about what one "has to do in order to be doing permaculture"?  Are
we failing to educate those who could use the knowledge most because they
can't pay us enough to support our preferred projects and standard of living? 

Are we more willing to be angry with projects others have created than to be
sad about the inadequacies of our own work?  Righteous anger-- how are we so
sure we're right?  It's easier to find flaws in other actually functioning
projects than in one's own pet theories about how things should be done.  I'm
not saying this is what anyone in particular is doing, but I'd emphasize the
importance of works over criticism any day.  

Are we, as Jack suggested, using anger to externalize our own dissatisfaction?
Are our own fears (or dissatisfactions with our own work) being projected in
what we find to infuriate us in other groups' work?  (I know this isn't always
the case, I am still angry about the Raleigh NC project to plant trees and
beautify the capital-- by raising funds to import English Lindens at about $90
per tree!)  but aren't such "solutions" a demonstration that these groups and
individuals are desperately lacking the education they need to approach their
work wisely?  Is is the lack of wisdom that makes old men grumpy?  Maybe
they've seen the same mistakes too many times.  Maybe they recognize the
patterns of wrong thought that will drag others off the path to creative
caring nutrure of the Earth and each other.  

I don't think all this is psychobabble.  I do think we need to examine the
sources of our anger.  I think naming the patterns of injustice in the system
is a very effective way of defining where one's anger comes from.  For me,
feminist theory validates my frustrations due to institutionalized gender
discrimination.  Naming it acknowledges that it is society's problem, not just
MY problem.  Similarly, critiques of our economic system express how it takes
profits today by ripping off our natural resources, poor labor, uneducated
consumers, and the future well-being of the corporation.

Another productive expression of anger as dissatisfaction with the system is
refusing to cooperate-- whether this is legal challenges, civil disobedience,
setting up alternatives, or merely not partaking (I don't have TV; I don't
shop at Walmart; I try to eat seasonal produce; I don't send my water filters
to the Chester incinerator to return their toxic burden to the air and
assuredly also my drinking water again).  What is the point of complaining
about a system while you support it with your actions?  (Rush-  "We fight the
fire, while we're feeding the flames.")  To me, disliking the way things are
can feed into my conviction to find other ways and to spread the word about
them.  Yet there are so many ways most of us participate in the waste and
exploitation that modern first world people inflict on the world.

---

From: "Rene and Lorraine van Raders" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 22:11:29 -0700

Hi David
Thought provoking post.

> Mollison's angry branding of different green groups as ecofascists had
> (until this weekend) looked to me to be inflammatory and
> counter-productive.  I asked myself "How can he lash out at those who
> should be Pc allies?"  I had the attitude critiqued by Lee Flier:

Two sides to every argument... the green movement can be very blinkered (I
think they've got it wrong... but does that mean they have?).   They are
our actual or potential allies (as is everyone).. so care should be taken
.. are we being rude to awaken them or to relieve our frustration?

> >From some comments I've seen on this list and others in the PC
> Activist, it appears there are a lot of people who seem to sum up the
> Grumpy pattern by saying (I'm paraphrasing):  "Well, Bill Mollison
> obviously has a lot of great ideas, but he's just a quaint little old man
> from a different era whose social skills need refining, and WE can do
> better in that arena."  It's a way of derailing what is actually a very
> important part of Mollison's (and others') philosophy and is responsible
> for much of his effectiveness: his anger.
> "
> 

Formidable.. not quaint surely.  Rude?   I feel rude gossiping about him..
do we need to?  Ok his anger can be effective, but likewise it can also be
ineffective.. perhaps a diversity of approaches is called for.

> This weekend I attended a regional "Landcare Forum".  Landcare is an
> extensive, national, grassroots, volunteer organisation that does
fantastic
> work restoring degraded landscapes planting local trees.  To my surprise,
I
> discovered they can also accurately be described as ecofascists.
> Q.  How can a group of green, ecologically aware, educated and motivated
> people also be fascists?
> A.  By being preoccupied with destruction.  Through their love for
nature,
> these people have developed a cult of weed hatred.  At any cost
> (labour-herbicide) the weed/enemy has to destroyed.
> 
> The War on Weeds had been declared and, like other war efforts e.g.
WoIraq,
> WoDrugs, dissenters have to be denounced, ridiculed or ignored.
> 

I'm in a landcare group... members of local green groups and landcare are
often miles apart and bitter enemies.  Landcare is often a farmer pressure
group, but with all members feeling they care for the land.   As you say
their paradigm is usually very mainstream... thus organics is for looneys
and doesn't work in a modern world.  Herbicides are necessary... no
understanding of ecology.  But some wonderful practical land
management/farming experience.

> Some permaculturists would respond to this situation by saying.
> "These people are on the path, they will get there eventually, you cannot
> push them"
> 

Yes they need pushing.. but often if the pushing is done by someone they
don't respect they won't even notice.  My policy has been to sit quiet for
four years... now they're talking to me and finally starting to listen...
but they are from such a completely different background it is not always
easy to communicate.

> If Bill was there, I am sure he would have ignored his own advice on not
> wasting your efforts with people who don't want to hear the message and
> given a biting and angry critique.
> 
> Another (repressed?) option that I and a few other permies employed was
to
> get angry internally and snipe from the sidelines indicating there were
> some unbelievers.

Mmmmm, I think you need to really know what you're talking about
(especially understanding what they are thinking / understand what life is
like on their farm).  I'm still learning and often biting my tongue (angry
at the folly of the general population), but basically the landcare farmers
are just nice people with a different viewpoint (I can't stay angry with
them).

> 
> How dangerous are ecofascists?  Very.  "Earthcarers" are a large and
> influential group.  They look set to link with herbicide companies and
Govt
> Ag Depts to come up with a formula for future farming:-  farms + some
> native trees = ecologically sustainable farming.  Affluent countries have
> set in place policies that they will be green/sustainable.  Within the
next
> few years these policies WILL be achieved.  Governments cannot function
> without their policies in place.  A best case scenario is that the
policies
> will result in a dull lime-green brand of sustainability.  The worst case
> scenario is that efforts in the name of sustainability will push us in
the
> wrong direction.
> 
> Well-meaning, concerned citizens are joining green groups whose narrow
> focus may make them irrational.  In this, I would even include
anti-genetic
> engineering, anti-biocide, .pro-wilderness etc.  groups.  Then there are
> the green grass roots groups sponsored by multinationals...  Successes by
> narrow green lobbies may produce a patchwork of green and pseudo-green
> policy/practise such that it will be less workable that the current
> mish-mash.
> 

Yes, I agree... but how come we're right and they're not.  I mean I know in
my heart we're right, but don't they too.  Perhaps it all boils down to
allowing diversity and not being to strident about having the truth.  Pc is
a great system but is it the only truth?  Dull lime green politics aren't
going to change much, just add more red tape... but showing by example
works... so I'm planning to make more working models (within agriculture
and outside it).

> Permaculture needs to loudly proclaim its identity and follow Bill's lead
> to challenge
> stupidity.  This will often appear angry and often get an angry response.

Yes, we should be seen, not hiding like mice... but we can be an elephant
that people respect and appreciate, not necessarily an angry bull.   Sorry,
if some of this doesn't sound right.. really just thinking aloud.... I'm
confused, but it's getting clearer.

Cheers Rene

---

From: [email-masked] (David de Vries)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 10:34:54 +1000

Rene

>works... so I'm planning to make more working models (within agriculture

I hoped not to appear too dogmatic - indeed, what I would like to propose
is a War on Dogma  - including Pc techniques.  The situation is too complex
for simple solutions. If you hear anyone pushing a technique too hard -
disbelieve them.  Design concepts - now there is something that is very
powerful but only a concept, and thus difficult to push down someones
throat.

David