A recent hubbub in the Fairbanks city council about banning the much-loved pass-time of dumpster diving has got me thinking about self reliance: about the economics of self reliance, its relationship to environmental stewardship and sustainability, and of obstacles like this silly ban that governments and businesses so frequently put in the way of achieving it. If there has been one unifying theme behind the articles of my column Outpost Agriculture, it is the importance of building self reliance back into our communities. In this three-part series that our editor has so graciously offered to publish, I will explore the concept of self reliance, not just to define it but to justify it as a strategy that everyone can participate in for making positive impacts on their communities and local environments. The pursuit of self reliance is an inalienable right of every person and community. We need to come to understand that, and learn to recognize the many obstacles that both we and other people have placed in its way, so that we may discard them and change our lives for the better. (more…)

“Reducing this nation’s dependence on foreign oil” is nearly as common a political platitude as my other favorites “crossing the aisle” and “fighting the war on terror.” But the politics of energy are of particular interest to me, not surprisingly because of their relationship to food. This column, however, is neither about eating local nor farming practices that can eliminate chemical fertilizers as strategies for reducing the oil addiction (at least not explicitly). Instead, I want to spend some time speaking out against the most popular oil alternative: ethanol. (more…)

The post I wrote yesterday has been nagging me in the bottom of my gut since I clicked submit… At first I thought it was just a nagging worry I have about going full-bore to endorse John Edwards only to find that he is indeed just a smarmy trial lawyer behind a facade that convinced even my self-proclaimed-expert scrutiny. (Everyone thinks them the best at spotting a fake, no?) But I came back to re-read my post this morning and began to wonder if I actually believe some of the things I wrote.

I think its common sense to assume that people will ultimately make their decision regarding a candidate, or any other political decision, based to some extent on their emotions. But does this break democracy? Fear can break a democracy, that is certain. But fear and emotion are very different things. What about feelings, passions that come from the heart and from the gut. Are emotion and reason irreconcilable? My article yesterday notwithstanding, I believe the answer is a resounding no. In fact, I believe that without both we are crippled. I grew up with Kirk and Spock, after all.

Can anyone deny the emotion in these words of democracy:

As a long and violent abuse of power is generally the means of calling the right of it in question, (and in matters too which might never have been thought of, had not the sufferers been aggravated into the inquiry,) and as the king of England hath undertaken in his own right, to support the parliament in what he calls theirs, and as the good people of this country are grievously oppressed by the combination, they have an undoubted privilege to inquire into the pretensions of both, and equally to reject the usurpations of either.

Or these words:

The sun never shined on a cause of greater worth. ‘Tis not the affair of a city, a country, a province, or a kingdom, but of a continent- of at least one eighth part of the habitable globe. ‘Tis not the concern of a day, a year, or an age; posterity are virtually involved in the contest, and will be more or less affected, even to the end of time, by the proceedings now. Now is the seed time of continental union, faith and honor. The least fracture now will be like a name engraved with the point of a pin on the tender rind of a young oak; The wound will enlarge with the tree, and posterity read it in full grown characters.

(both by Thomas Paine, Common Sense)

(more…)

(note: I respond to the things I’ve written here in the very next post)

It interests me to hear on news broadcasts what drives people to select a presidential candidate. It seems like this time around, more than ever, a great many people are making this democratic primary an emotional choice. For the first time in history, an African American has a legitimate shot at the White House. For the second time in history, a woman has a legitimate shot. Both of these people are remarkable individuals, and indeed remarkable candidates. Nevertheless, I believe that should a majority of democrats nominate a candidate based on their emotional feelings regarding a candidate’s gender or the color of their skin, we will have further proof that our democracy is broken. (more…)