On Mon, 3 Apr 1995, Ronnie Hawkins wrote:
>
> I find myself wondering about ecofeminism's interest in such
> issues, however. Apparently no one does want to say anything about the
> seal kill, or the Pope--and it seems, no matter how much I, or addressing a
> broader public Arne Naess, or Paul Ehrlich, or "Deep Ecologists"
> or various others talk about the importance of population limitation in the
> *industrialized* countries, a frequent reaction from those identifying in
> some way with ecofeminism is not to hear such statements. It makes me
>
Perhaps this is one of the conflicts between being an ecologist or "deep
ecologist" and being an ecofeminist. I see the feminist establishment
as against attempts to control population growth. I understand that this
rightly comes from a sense of justice and human rights. I absolutely
agree that the most just way to help curb population growth is to make
birth control and safe abortions freely available and to open greater
educational and professional opportunities to women, but this will be a
very slow process as affluent families may be able to afford more
children. Many cultural traditions (including affluent countries) revere
the female gender for their ability to give birth. How do you promote
small family size (even childlessness) with such a strong tradition?
I look around for good examples (Does Paul Ehrlich have "biological"
children?). I think many women, even femininst feel a kind of either
social or biological need to be mothers. I wonder about this and how this
might figure into the population problem. I remember asking my parents as
a teenager why they had children. I never got a satisfactory answer, at
best they said "it was what people do". I still have this question.
BTW, has anyone noticed that the ecofeminism department in the magazine
MS. has been missing in the last few issues?
Michelle
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tue Apr 4 10:15:22 MDT 1995
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 1995 12:15:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Bertina Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Faith Freewoman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Creating a New Civilzation (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950403161227.18979F-100000@case>
The only problem I would have with this is that what exactly is Newt
Gingrich striving for when he is recommending a book about futuristic
possibility? If i believed he thinks that the future is bright for
change in the way America relates to its environment and the way
Americans deal with other problems such as poverty, crime and welfare,
then I would agree with his thoughts on that. I do not believe he is
gung-ho about trying to make life more sustainable at all. I think he's
just like all the other political pontifs out there who say a lot but do
little.
It would be wonderful if he was concerned about such problems. The only
thing I think he has going for him is the fact he has a lesbian half-sister
whose an activist in many issues.
MHO,
Bertina Miller
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 3 Apr 1995, Faith Freewoman wrote:
> I thought you all might enjoy the following from another list.
>
> Faith
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Sun, 2 Apr 1995 01:36:03 -0800
> From: Flemming Funch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Creating a New Civilzation
>
>
> I just finished reading "Creating a New Civilization - The Politics of the
> Third Wave" by Alvin and Heidi Toffler.
>
> I just found it in the bookstore last week and I think it just came out.
>
> It has a foreword by Newt Gingrich and he has been waving it in front of
> the U.S, Congress, insisting that everybody read it, from what I
> understand, which in itself should be about enough to make it a best
> seller.
>
> I am not exactly a republican and didn't have any favourable impression of
> Newt Gingrich, but this forces me to reevaluate my opinion a bit.
>
> This is a quite subversive and revolutionary book, actually, predicting a
> total change of society as we have known it, and the breakdown of most
> traditional power structures, to be replaced by something new.
>
> Toffler has written about what he calls the "Third Wave" before, and this
> is for that matter merely a further elaboration. But it is putting it in a
> context that makes it hit home very well.
>
> The First Wave was the agricultural society. The Second Wave was the
> industrial revolution. The Third Wave is the information society.
>
> The Second Wave is symbolized by the factory model. Everything is
> mass-produced by centralized, hierarchical, bureaucratic institutions.
>
> Most of our known ways of manufacturing things, of education, of finance,
> and of government, are based on Second Wave principles. We have centralized
> governments that try to make rules for everything and run things from one
> place. We send our kids to learning factories where they are all treated
> the same and spit out as standardized products.
>
> The Third Wave is unavoidably upon us. It is driven in part by the
> increased speed of everything, the increased inter-connectedness, and vast
> amounts of information. Information is increasingly becoming more important
> than physical goods.
>
> Second Wave institutions are failing to keep up with Third Wave society.
> Governments and centralized mega-corporations and educational institutions
> and mass-media are largely unable to keep up with the speed things are
> developing at. And to that degree they are failing.
>
> Third wave is represented by smaller teams, flexibility and ability to
> change, reduction of overhead, just-in-time principles.
>
> 2nd Wave institutions will not voluntarily give up control, even when they
> are failing to deliver what is needed. There is therefore a struggle
> between 2nd and 3rd Wave institutions, which 3rd Wave will unescapably win
> in the end.
>
> In 2nd Wave politics there was the idea of the "majority". If we let the
> most people choose some representatives and we let them make rules that
> apply to most people, then things will stay pretty well organized and
> acceptable.
>
> In the 3rd Wave there is no longer any meaningful "majority". Society is
> increasingly divided into special interest groups. There is a large number
> of minorities, rather than one majority. And hardly anybody really like
> what the governments are doing.
>
> 2nd Wave politicians try to undo the change and turn the clock back. If we
> can just all have good, decent family values and we can protect the
> production facilities of the country, and we spend more money on education,
> then everything will be alright.
>
> Mass media are increasingly unable to show what is really going on. They
> will mostly give the 2nd wave story, showing us what the centralized power
> figures are doing and saying. But that is no longer what matters the most.
>
> It is no longer possible to uphold the illusion of political parties having
> clear agendas you can count on. The divisions between political parties,
> what is left and right and so forth no longer make much sense.
>
> In the former Soviet Union the Communists are now called "conservatives".
> We can no longer classify things in the usual simplistic ways.
>
> 2nd Wave economy was based on finite exhaustible outputs. We were talking
> about physical goods that took raw materials to make and that had a
> tangible permanence to them.
>
> Information, which is the life blood of the 3rd wave, doesn't work by the
> same rules. You can use one piece of information any number of times
> without depreciating its value. You can not treat it the same as a tangible
> product from a factory.
>
> The 3rd Wave and the 2nd Wave are colliding right now. That creates a
> considerable amount of chaos and uncertainty and trauma. But there is no
> doubt that the 3rd wave will win.
>
> Many people still operate by 2nd wave principles in their own lives. If you
> expect that you can just get a good secure job, a nice middle-class house
> and car, send your kids to college, and just settle back and wait for
> retirement, that ain't gonna work very well anymore.
>
> In the 3rd wave you need to be flexible, ready for change, always learning,
> developing your abilities, continuously creating your own opportunities.
> You can not expect that some centralized institution is going to do it for
> you. You will need to keep up to date with what is going on.
>
> It is of great value to be able to recognize the difference between 2nd and
> 3rd wave, to know what horse to bet on. Simply put, if it looks like a
> factory it is 2nd Wave and it is on its way out. If the solutions proposed
> are about the "masses", if they put all eggs in one basket, if they are
> vertically, hiearchically controlled, then they are 2nd Wave and they are
> going to lose out.
>
> 3rd Wave solutions are de-centralized, de-massified, diversified, virtual
> organizations with distributed decision making.
>
> Also, 3rd Wave organization re-empowers the home. The idea of us all
> driving off to centralized locations to work, be educated, etc, is 2nd
> wave. The 3rd Wave is more about working and learning where it makes most
> sense, or where you are most comfortable or productive. There will often be
> more reason to stay home than to drive off to work.
>
> Anyway, enough said, I recommend reading this book. It is small and easily read.
>
> - Flemming
>
> "Creating a New Civilization" by Alvin and Heidi Toffler, Turner
> Publishing, ISBN 1-57036-223-8
>
>
> o o
> / \------------------ Flemming A. Funch ------------------/ \
> / * \ World Transformation/New Civilization/Whole Systems / * \
> / * * \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] / * * \
> o-------o ------http://www.protree.com/worldtrans/--------o-------o
>
>
>
>
