From his mouth to god’s ear…
July 1st, 2008This is what we’re up against:
Self reliance, part 3.
April 10th, 2008In part 1 of this article series, I wrote in general terms about an alternative paradigm for conceptualizing the relationship between economics and ecosystems, between the sustainability of human livelihoods and landscapes. It is not a new paradigm, by any means, but one that we seem set on relegating to a less-civilized past. Indeed the march of civilization has systematically rooted-out (or is still in the process of doing so) every example of self-reliance that it has encountered. Nevertheless, it stands as the only paradigm in history that has successfully mediated a concomitant relationship between people and ecosystems. I followed this up with some anecdotes of how capitalist ideals have come to take precedent over our democratic cultural and political ideals. To paraphrase E.F. Schumacher, the modern perception of prestige tends to vary in inverse proportion to one’s closeness to actual production; so pervasive is this notion that we sadly forsake the hard-won principles of solidarity and self-determination that we built this nation, on in the name of “looking out for number one.” Inevitably, this ego-centricity and preoccupation with the accumulation of wealth has spelled disaster for our communities and ecosystems. Read the rest of this entry »
Self reliance, part 2.
March 15th, 2008Once upon a time there was a modest, unsuspecting Canadian corn farmer who had the great misfortune of happenstance having conspired with a strong gust of wind. Unbeknownst to the farmer, corn seed containing patented genetic material blew from a passing truck into his fields. Now, the gentle farmer had been saving his own seed for many seasons, perfecting his own special, local variety of maize, continuing one of the oldest North American traditions. However, clever agents of the company who owned these patented seeds serendipitously materialized one morning in their dark suits and dark glasses on the gentleman farmer’s land, to test his crop for evidence he had stolen their trade secret. Just as they suspected, their precious genetically-modified germplasm had indeed infiltrated the farmer’s bounty – or booty – as the man was clearly not an honest farmer but a thieving pirate! He was surreptitiously growing the company’s secret species without ever having paid for their seed. “No no,” pleaded the farmer, “it is their seed that has contaminated mine!” But the wisest and most powerful courts of the land saw through his humble guile, and the farmer was found guilty and ordered to pay reparations for his heinous crime. Read the rest of this entry »
Thinking with your head AND your heart.
January 10th, 2008The 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)
