>From: bon moun >
> >In fact I proposed:
> >
> >1) a switch to "localism"
>
>Define it, and explain how we get there from here. What does this imply
>right now in terms of the next indicated step? Without examining this
>question, this kind of "solution" remains an abstraction, dissociated from
>the actually existing conditions--physical, social, political, economic,
>and military--that bear on the question.
2 things: I said I was using shorthand and generality in my response to you.
"Localism" can stand examination quite well. At some point I'd like to
explain it, I am disheartened that is is not a familiar term to you.
also I would feel much better if your "actually existing conditions" made it
clear that "physical" has an awful lot to do with "biosphere".
>How do we get to that "adoption?" It's an academic solution. Great on
>paper, but how does it get implemented?
It all goes back to an earlier discussion I had tried to expand about not
worrying so much about the fromat of the vehicle that drives us to where we
want to go, but to changing "attitude". It's not an academic solution at
all, (but I do admit that Wittgenstein is a chief proponent.) There is an
awful lot in deep ecology lit and enviro stuff about changing minds and that
"adoption." Not so much outside of biocentric viewpoints, I'm afraid.
>You've missed one of our main points. Capitalism is not some impregnable
>system we will destroy. It will self-destruct when the fuel runs out. And
>it is this system, capitalism--driven by the competitive momentum of
>markets and capital accumulation--that constitutes the "runaway train"
>aspect of the whole situation. You can not tease apart capitalism from
>mechanized industrialism. These are two facets of the same system.
>Social, economic, and political policy are not decided by a committee of
>rational people. These policies are driven by the interests of a class of
>people who refuse to relinquish their power, people who themselves are
>imbedded in a system.
Uhhh, yeah. I thought I was arguing the same thing. I keep hearing this "the
revolution is first" stuff, however. How does that square with your
statement above? We need to have a mind to survival before the fuel runs
out and all this becomes moot. Are we STILL just arguing the same concepts
in different languages.?
>
>They are not proposals. They are visions. There is not a single practical
>step articulated.
True, and I plead guilty. I have outlined practical steps before; (usually
to the "choir") I don't think practical steps can be discussed on crashlist
yet, not till we truly quit yelling at each other.
>Pretty arbitrary date. Meanwhile, the US has mobilized its awesome
>military machine to gain control over remaining reserves. The stock market
>has shattered, precipitating a crisis that brings class war out into the
>open. In my own country, the US, existing divisions are exploited to turn
>the working class against each other. Fascism has begun to emerge more
>openly. Rebellion in Indonesia, Haiti, the Balkans, Ecuador. OPen war in
>the Middle East.
I'd feel better if your list had included the deaths of whales or the loss
of all the amphibians. Still seems too anthropocentric to me, but that is
prolly "carping".
>Propose first that those who will be most directly and painfully affected
>prepare for their self-defense. That we who are not in the line of fire
>exercise solidarity with them. Begin now to articulate to those who are
>already in crisis WHY they are in crisis and where that crisis is leading.
>Develop cadres of leadership now that can provide the organizational
>structure for resistance, so when all other hope is lost, there is
>something in place for those sinking into misery and repression have
>somewhere to go.
Would that include exercising solidarity with "neo-malthusians"?
Thanks for the proposal, however. I think we should REALLY discuss the
nature of that self defense as one of the FIRST things on the agenda as soon
as we quit calling each other names.
>Public education is important, which means
>both finding the resources to conduct that public education, then
>overcoming the information hegemony exercised by our rulers. As a
>political organizer by trade, however, the first steps are always recruit,
>train, organize... your cadres, without which there is no mass movement,
>without which there is no solution.
Howabout if we don't have time and need to protect critical habitat in order
to assure some self defense against the enviromental crash?>
> >
> >What do you propose that will lead to ending population overshoot by
>2035?
>
>We won't. We've already passed the point of no return.
Yeah. I agree, [sigh]. That's why I'm harping on local communities that can
save themselves here and there.
> >
> >OR ... what do you propose that will lead to mitigating the consequences
>of
> >those threats after 2035?
>
>A mass transfer of political power. But that begins today with
>recruitment, education, training, organization...
I accept that. Would it be okay to ask you for what you asked of me? First
practical steps?
>Let's prepare to survive first, then get rid of the "problem" politically,
>then take power, then we will have the wherewithall.
This may be the heart of my disagreement with you. If we don't have some
critical habitat and some repair to the biosphere very very soon, the idea
of "wherewithall" totally disappears, ... just when you are looking around
to want to have it.
Thank you very much for responding this way. I'll try to get more specific
in my proposals, too, if we can maintain this level of communication.
tom
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
