Relocalization Network › Coordinator HUB › Forums › Choosing Possibilities

Choosing Possibilities

Dave Ewoldt's picture
Posted by Dave Ewoldt on April 14th, 2008 at 2:28 pm | 1 Replies

On 14 Apr 2008 at 7:11, Holistek wrote:

> I am pleased to say that I agree with Dave here. There is more to PCI than
> personal physical preparation. And given that I think I started this particular

Hi David... Something that may have gotten lost in the discussion is that I actually agree with what you're saying here. Well, at least as far as it goes :-)

I don't disagree that we're heading for collapse, both from the perspective of overly consumptive Western civilization and from being well into the overshoot range of ecosystem carrying capacity. We've already done way too much damage, and there's no possible way to go back to the way things were, at least on a timescale relevant even to the seventh generation.

And, if we don't rationally prepare for a major change in how we relate to the world and to each other, generally bad behaviors will be the _best_ we can expect.

Some people need to be forced into change, others work for it. I don't think it is the wisest thing to do to extrapolate general behaviors based on the actions of a subset. I also think much of our cultural blindness is due to the cultural stories we've accepted, not because this blindness is a hardwired aspect of human nature.

I think a good case can be made that what we have now is not all that great, both socially and personally. There is also a whole lot of evidence that humans can do and have done things differently, as well as being able to change rather quickly. We could use, as a base for creating relationships, cooperative partnerships instead of competitive domination. It seems to me that the former is the way life was created and evolves. It would thus be both easier and require less energy.

The reason I feel that becoming aware of this possibility is of the utmost importance is because we've all been told that there's no alternative possible to the status quo, and even if there were, it would have to be worse because what we have now is the best that could ever be. There are also numerous stories based on both Eastern and Western religions that life is about suffering, that nature is a cruel and heartless mistress, and that humans are inherently flawed -- they can always be counted on to do the wrong thing.

But as our current system unravels in myriad ways, and as it becomes impossible for all but the most obstinate to continue denying it, people will need both hope that change is possible and a framework for change to plug their actions into. Relocalization not only provides these things, but combined with a process for reconnecting with nature, provides a new story that can improve quality of life because it cares for life; that it would be in our and the planet's best interests to change, even if it weren't for catastrophic climate destabilization and general resource depletion.

I very firmly believe that only in a society that intentionally disconnects people from any actual possibility (only providing empty promises) of achieving true fulfillment can you expect the worst of people. I think we can provide a story as well as functioning examples of the benefits of doing things differently that can provide both hope and opportunities that we can work mitigate the worst aspects of collapse and work together to create a sustainable future based on ecological wisdom and social justice. This is what the vast majority of people actually want.

Yes, we may (as a society) refuse to accept this challenge. But that doesn't mean we should all decide not to even bother trying or even putting any effort into making people aware of the possibility, even as we remain honest about the worst that might happen.

Holistek's picture
Holistek
April 15th, 2008

Re: Choosing Possibilities



Dave, I agree with much of what you see coming towards us, but I think I see a major misapprehension in the way you propose to respond (which is where we came in, I guess).
 
Your analysis is built on the repudiation of a whole set of human archetypal behaviours, and I think that means that it cannot work.  We need to work with human nature as it is, not as we think it should be, or what we propose will simply fail.
 
For example, you say, "We could use, as a base for creating relationships, cooperative partnerships instead of competitive domination. It seems to me that the former is the way life was created and evolves."
 
But our natural history, and the whole of the natural world, is about both competition and cooperation.  There is little question that evolution proceeds via the extinction of traits and species that cannot compete as successfully.  Life was created and evolves through competition just as much as cooperation.  I live on 25 acres of forest land, and there is no question that most of the young saplings that grow in the woods around my house starve to death, victims of the ruthless competition for light among trees.  And, of course, their rotting corpses provide food for other trees, an example of the cooperation that is also inherent in the natural system.  It is a system in balance, and part of what is in balance is competition and cooperation.
 
I have learned that we need diversity of ideas as well as diversity of life.  It is in the tension between polarities that life thrives.  The tension between masculine and feminine, between right and left, between young and old, etc.  Life itself is ignited anew when male and female get together, and not from either one alone.
 
So it is with competition and cooperation, with hierarchy and consensus, with life and death as well.  Both are necessary.  As much as we love life, we must not seek to eradicate death (one of the errors of our current culture that I imagine we can agree upon).
 
So I urge you to embrace competition as well as cooperation, and to see the need for both.  Indeed, this very dialogue is a case in point: we are competing with each other at one level, and cooperating together in a search for truth at another.  The two go together.  The kind of ideological purity that you seem to embrace (seeing competition as domination, and wrong, and cooperation as always valuable) is ultimately sterile, like just maleness alone, or more precisely like just femaleness alone.  It will fail to provide either the inspiration we need (because it is primarily reactionary against the excesses of our current culture) or the practical wisdom (because it is flawed through incompleteness).
 
It has been said that "he [or she] who understands all forgives all."  I think that as long as we are in reaction against our current mainstream culture, unable to understand, get past and forgive its excesses, we will not be ready to lead into a truly better alternative.
 
Regards to you and all the list, and apologies to those sensitive to philosophical discussions.  It seems to me that this is very relevant to our purpose on the list, but that is just my own perspective.
 
David Shackleton
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 5:30 PM
Subject: CoordinatorHUB Choosing Possibilities

On 14 Apr 2008 at 7:11, Holistek wrote:

> I am pleased to say that I agree with Dave here. There is more to PCI than
> personal physical preparation. And given that I think I started this particular

Hi David... Something that may have gotten lost in the discussion is that I actually agree with what you're saying here. Well, at least as far as it goes :-)

I don't disagree that we're heading for collapse, both from the perspective of overly consumptive Western civilization and from being well into the overshoot range of ecosystem carrying capacity. We've already done way too much damage, and there's no possible way to go back to the way things were, at least on a timescale relevant even to the seventh generation.

And, if we don't rationally prepare for a major change in how we relate to the world and to each other, generally bad behaviors will be the _best_ we can expect.

Some people need to be forced into change, others work for it. I don't think it is the wisest thing to do to extrapolate general behaviors based on the actions of a subset. I also think much of our cultural blindness is due to the cultural stories we've accepted, not because this blindness is a hardwired aspect of human nature.

I think a good case can be made that what we have now is not all that great, both socially and personally. There is also a whole lot of evidence that humans can do and have done things differently, as well as being able to change rather quickly. We could use, as a base for creating relationships, cooperative partnerships instead of competitive domination. It seems to me that the former is the way life was created and evolves. It would thus be both easier and require less energy.

The reason I feel that becoming aware of this possibility is of the utmost importance is because we've all been told that there's no alternative possible to the status quo, and even if there were, it would have to be worse because what we have now is the best that could ever be. There are also numerous stories based on both Eastern and Western religions that life is about suffering, that nature is a cruel and heartless mistress, and that humans are inherently flawed -- they can always be counted on to do the wrong thing.

But as our current system unravels in myriad ways, and as it becomes impossible for all but the most obstinate to continue denying it, people will need both hope that change is possible and a framework for change to plug their actions into. Relocalization not only provides these things, but combined with a process for reconnecting with nature, provides a new story that can improve quality of life because it cares for life; that it would be in our and the planet's best interests to change, even if it weren't for catastrophic climate destabilization and general resource depletion.

I very firmly believe that only in a society that intentionally disconnects people from any actual possibility (only providing empty promises) of achieving true fulfillment can you expect the worst of people. I think we can provide a story as well as functioning examples of the benefits of doing things differently that can provide both hope and opportunities that we can work mitigate the worst aspects of collapse and work together to create a sustainable future based on ecological wisdom and social justice. This is what the vast majority of people actually want.

Yes, we may (as a society) refuse to accept this challenge. But that doesn't mean we should all decide not to even bother trying or even putting any effort into making people aware of the possibility, even as we remain honest about the worst that might happen.



You are subscribed to Coordinator HUB group mailing list.
To view this group on the web, visit The Coordinator HUB Home Page
To Unsubscribe from this list visit your My Subscription page for the group

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.518 / Virus Database: 269.22.13/1377 - Release Date: 4/14/2008 9:26 AM