Does Permaculture Lead to Anarchism

[donquixote99]

Life requires adaptation, or compromise one may say. To attempt purity is to attempt suicide.

[VanishingPoi]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

The bullet list on the above web page tells the story by itself:



This not-self-evident set of 'truths' points to a subculture that is quite stuck on itself, convinced they are special people with uniquely excellent values and customs. Thus, the writer misses that his last point actually says why 'real freedom' (or anarchy, I suppose) is not remotely possible for human cultures.

Is not remotely possible for humankind. Yup, I second that!

[djv8ga]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

"1.Care of the Earth, 2. Care of people, and 3. Set limits to consumption and reproduction, and redistribute surplus to the benefit of the Earth and people. Click on the link for the reasons."

^^^Looks like governance to me. And, particularly So(c)ialistic government at that.^^^

Face it. Anywhere humans dwell together and must share resources equitably to survive and prosper............

The 'Prime Directive of Permaculture'
"The only ethical decision is to take responsibility for our own existence and that of our children." Bill Mollison.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by djv8ga

"The only ethical decision is to take responsibility for our own existence and that of our children." Bill Mollison.

Meaning anarchy.

The "our" in the above is taken to mean "me, my mate and my kids" and screw anyone else, especially people I don't know. They're on their own just like I am and have the identical responsibility to themselves and the identical lack of it where anyone else is concerned.

It cannot work in any context. Even at its most basic level, human societies have relied on an intricate level of interdepencence.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by djv8ga

The 'Prime Directive of Permaculture'
"The only ethical decision is to take responsibility for our own existence and that of our children." Bill Mollison.

Originally Posted by Boreas

Meaning anarchy.

The "our" in the above is taken to mean "me, my mate and my kids" and screw anyone else, especially people I don't know. They're on their own just like I am and have the identical responsibility to themselves and the identical lack of it where anyone else is concerned.

It cannot work in any context. Even at its most basic level, human societies have relied on an intricate level of interdepencence.

Actually, it's too bare bones by itself. That one sentence can mean whatever a reader wants it to mean. The 'our' is ambiguous, can mean anything from the nuclear family to the whole planet. And even a person considering it narrowly should recognize that the conservative fantasy of radical individualism offers no possibility of really securing the 'existence' of oneself and one's children. There's only one planet, to save 'your' kids you have to save the whole thing. Steve Pittman's three-point ethics defining duties to the planet and to others is more real, responsible, and capable of being elaborated into something that could work.

Bill Mollison's ethics, by contrast, if taken narrowly, pretty much seem to me to be the equivalent of 'Ray Donovan' ethics, born of a similar level of 'sociability.' Note that Donovan's way of doing things angers and alienates the ones he loves, while putting them at ridiculous levels of risk.

[djv8ga]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Meaning anarchy.

The "our" in the above is taken to mean "me, my mate and my kids" and screw anyone else, especially people I don't know. They're on their own just like I am and have the identical responsibility to themselves and the identical lack of it where anyone else is concerned.

It cannot work in any context. Even at its most basic level, human societies have relied on an intricate level of interdepencence.

What he meant was that you can't just sit around posting on Political Chat all day & not grow or produce anything. Just consuming will not work, is not working, and is nothing but being lazy & irresponsible. Just claiming you care about the planet, just blaming somebody else for the problems, & just expecting government to do it for you is not working & will never work.

[Boreas]

There are some things that are too big for the individual to do by himself.

There are some things that are too big for the family to do by itself.

There are some things that are too big for the clan to do by itself.

There are some things that are too big for the tribe to do by itself.

At some point collective action on a very large scale is the only way to accomplish a thing. Sometimes, as with the creation and maintenance of infrastructure, it's just the way it is. At other times, as with combating climate change, it's a necessity born of individual and collective failures at every level of society.

[donquixote99]

Likewise, one owes loyalty to the clan, and to the tribe, and to all of humanity. The fantasy of hoping to inherit the earth after they all die is...well it's Freud's good old Oedipus complex isn't it?

[donquixote99]

Saw this, and it put me in mind of these conversations we used to have....

Bealtaine Project: Colette O'Neill's Irish Permaculture Journey

https://www.motherearthnews.com/orga...anSYrW4Ie2HAE8

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Saw this, and it put me in mind of these conversations we used to have....

Bealtaine Project: Colette O'Neill's Irish Permaculture Journey

https://www.motherearthnews.com/orga...anSYrW4Ie2HAE8

I've been reading alot about 'living soil' since I grew 'some' cannabis last year on my back patio. Fun stuff for a city dweller.