On Wed, 9 Nov 1994, Jonathan M Poppele wrote:
> I feel (and would welcome others input) that ecofeminism is
> inherently spiritual.
I wonder about this idea, and I don't think I agree. However, I was
wondering if you could expand upon what you mean by the term
"spirituality."
Anyone, everyone:
How is Ecofeminism inherently spiritual?
amanda
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 10 10:59:50 MST 1994
From: "LALONDE ROXANNE" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Organization: Dept. of Geography, Univ. of Alta.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 11:01:55 MDT
Subject: Re: Post Election Distress, etc.
Hi all again,
Oh dear, I was afraid that after that first response to what I
said on this subject that I would be misunderstood. Before I get on
to that, please call me Roxanne. The administrator of our system here
is responsible for my backwards-in-bold-face-type address and it
really bugs me but he's really busy and I don't want to bother him
with something so trivial.
Now, on to this comment and others:
> This brings me to my second concern: Brian and (I think) Lalonde suggest
> that the political system is a complete waste of time and that we should
> not vote or participate in it.
I am NOT an anarchist, nor am I anti-political. However, the partisan
political system as it is practiced in most democratic countries is
inherently flawed. The system itself allows for people with charisma
and political and financial connections and a great way with crowds
to get into positions where they are responsible for making decisions
that affect the lives of people who may not share their values. If we
had an electoral system that was based on the spiritual and moral
qualities that each of us possesses instead of the superficial
trappings of a materialistic society, we might have a more effective
political system. But instead, regardless of the ideological view of
the individuals in parliament or congress or whatever, if they are in
opposition, they are required to oppose those who have been elected
to manage things (even if the policy in question might actually have
great potential to repair some damage). How much more
counterproductive and ultimately self-destructive can you get?
On the news this morning it was reported that the U.S. election
attracted a higher voter turnout than usual, something like 33%.
33%!!! This is democracy??!! It is obvious that most U.S. voters are
totally disenchanted with the political system there. How much less
voter support will the political system there allow before the powers-
that-be realize that there just might be something wrong with the
system? But I am not endorsing anarchy as an option. Human society is
far too complex to be able to sustain such individualism and
potential fragmentation.
What we need is unifying framework that enables each person in a
given community (local, regional, national, global) to express
her/his gifts and to serve others. There are such systems in place in
many religious and secular humanitiarian organizations, in community
development initiatives, in environmental groups that interact with
other local efforts to challenge the prevailing system, etc. etc.
These endeavours can be constructive and positive beacons of light in
societies that appear to be darkening with despair. I could name
hundreds of examples of really fantastic and exciting initiatives
that are standing ready to pick up the pieces when things really fall
apart. Personally, I'd rather be on one of the safe and secure life
boats that are part of a burgeoning interconnected web to create a
better world than on the sinking ship that the current systems of
partisan politics, trickle-down economic policies, and band-aid
social programs represents. Sorry about all the mixed metaphors here;
I guess it's time to wind up.
The internet in general and ecofem in particular (and other
groups like us) are wonderful tools to create the global sense of
community that I think is required to start working with the tools we
have to build a new world. And what we learn here from each other can
give us inspiration off-line to share constructive ideas with our
friends and families and others in our communities. All we have to do
is tap into that light that radiates throughout creation and allow
ourselves to be transformed into the truly wonderful gems we all have
the potential to be.
Now I've really gotten carried away! Hope I've cleared up a few
misconceptions.
Bye for now,
Roxanne
> threat. Withdrawal and disassociation are not really possible in this=20
> kind of situation. Or, if they are possible they are extremely=20
> *dangerous* positions to take since we are as likely as not to wake up in=
> 5 years or so and discover that the very considerable force of the state=20
> has been turned against us....
>
> =09So much for the bad news about my experiences.... the good news=20
> is that there are a *lot* of people out there who heard a wake up call. =20
> I have connected with loads of progressive neighbors who had never felt=20
> compelled to really act on their convictions and concerns... We don't=20
> have answers, but we have found each other and we are starting to raise=20
> and discuss lots of important questions -- political, social, and=20
> environmental -- all of which we see as very interconnected. Not all of=20
> the anwers are seen as politically based -- so the creation of grassroots=
> =20
> alternatives is being combined with political activism.
> =09The other good news is that the people on the other side are not=20
> demons. Some of them are my neighbors (36% of my precinct went for=20
> North). It *is* possible to talk with some of them and it is possible to=
> =20
> acknowledge their fear without accepting their proposed solutions...
> So, don't write off the politics of conciliation and dialogue. If it is=20
> accompanied by clearly stated moral boundaries, it can be effective and=20
> important when it comes to preventing polarization and increased=20
> hostility....
> =FE=F1=DC
> I have been much too long winded here -- for which I apologize.... But,=20
> really there has to be something other than panic/fear and withdrawal in=20
> response to this situation.
>
> Jayne
> =F6=E7=F1
>
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Nov 10 11:22:41 MST 1994
id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu,
10 Nov 1994 13:21:31 -0500 (EST)
id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu,
10 Nov 1994 13:17:09 -0500 (EST)
MR-Received: by mta CARINA; Relayed; Thu, 10 Nov 1994 13:12:36 -0500
Alternate-recipient: prohibited
Disclose-recipients: prohibited
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 12:44:00 -0500 (EST)
From: BOB FORREST 214-665-2275 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fear
To: ecofem <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Posting-date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 13:10:00 -0500 (EST)
Importance: normal
A1-type: MAIL
Hop-count: 1
Essentially spiritual...Hmmmmm. Well, I like to feel being alive
is essentially spiritual, with ecomasculinism perhap muffling
that sense of itself for a variety of stultifications not so
strongly influential within ecofeminism. It seems the rhetoric of
ecofeminism is more persuasively concerned with the intuitive,
gut-felt rather than mind-felt aspects of being...less fearful of
verbalizing those inner feelings that may be heard by others as
reflections of a spirituality, particularly against the
ecomasculinist persona.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
