Jeff wrote:
> If we begin looking for root causes what do we find? For
> awhile i thought economics was the big problem. Then, slowly
> other factors began to creep in. Individual greed, unethical
> advertising, increasing population, and many others.
Me, too. And now I realize these are just more symptoms like
deforestation, pollution, etc. Although I might not put populationin that
category. Population intensifies the problem / sysmptoms. All populations
fill the space available, sometimes with disasterous consequences. Humans
might be able to aviod / lessen the disasterous consequences with some
forethought. Although we are better at forethought than most animals, we
don't seem to be good enough at it. The other intensifiers are the rates
of consumption and the efficency of consumption. Some estimate that the
earth can only support 2 billion humans (we're at 6 and counting), but of
course this number is greatly effected by the level of technology,
consuption and waste of that population. We need to lower the population
and minimize our consumption if we hope to become a sustainable member of
the earth's community. Of course, these are not the source of our problem,
they are only the basic elements of our distructiveness. And they do need
to be dealt with.
> Stepping back and looking at all these factors what i see is
> culture. Basic attitudes about exploiting resources and
> domination over nature that have been with us for hundreds of
> years.
> We have trouble seeing these cultural problems because it is
> us. All the media contains cultural assumptions and each new
> generation picks them up (cultural immersion).
I just finished reading a few things about the history and effects of this
kind of thinking, and it made a big impressions on me. I'd recommend "Deep
Ecology" edited by Michael Tobias 1984, "Simple in Means, Rich in Ends" by
Bill Devall 1988, and maybe "The Invisible Pyramid" by Loren Eiseley 1970
for starters. Some of the reading I did showed how deep these assuptions
goes. It forms the basis for science, religion and society as we know
them! I am ready to start writing an article or book about this topic
because I was so moved by the depth of the situation and the conculsions it
brings.
If we see how these assuptions were formed over time, it helps loosen their
grip on us. They were chosen thought patterns built on over time, and not
inevitable laws of nature or expressions of human nature. Stepping back
allows us to chose new assumptions on which to build a new society. It
allows us to put into perspective the destructive elements of large
population, over consumption, domination over nature, etc. We can more
clearly see the options we have to become responsible citizens of the
earth's communtiy.
> cultural activism - let's see.. actively attempting to change
> culture? Or maybe, trying to be the change
> one wants to see in the world and showing
> others it is possible.
> Cultural activism is about creating, sharing, and living a cultural
> target. It isn't passive or quiet and it tries to build
> rather than pressure others into different beliefs and
> behavior.
Sounds like a good working definition. To paraphrase: "Cultural activism
is the attempt to change the dominant cultural patterns by creating, living
and sharing viable options in the direction of the disired change."
I think one of the largest obsticles to change toward a sustainable society
is the cultural momentum that comes from deep and unseen assumptions. What
we are doing seems so "natural" or inevitable, making options very hard to
consider. Even when we think we are changing, we fail to see the
shallowness of the change because the assumptions run very deep.
We need people working at all levels. Someone needs to be the explorer
finding the new unseen world. Someone needs to be the guide helping others
get there from where they are. And someone needs to be the spokesman
helping others to realize that this new place exists adn that perhaps it is
a better place to be. One without the others will get us nowhere. This is
not to say that, as individuals, we can not be a combination of these
things. But, perhaps, it is not necessary for each of us to do all of
these things.
Eric:
