Lasse Nordlund, Finland in one of the posters shared following in a gallery during 2nd Conference on Economic Degrowth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Equity, Barcelona 26-29 March 2010.
The fundamental block to social change is not our lack of knowledge about global problems.
Unfortunately, a return to rural based existence and primary production is equated with impoverished lifestyle.
A change to the society also necessitates changes to our social standing within it. Most of us resist change until the very end out of the fear we will loose our place in the social hierarchy.
People in acknowledged positions of power will want to ensure their positions in the midst of any potential social upheaval. Such individuals tend to prefer to oversee others whom they expect to do the "dirty work" of social change.
We should not distinguish between "Handworkers" and "Headworkers". Self-sufficiency is an intellectual challenge also for the headworker.
Current systems of government have gone through a political "Evolution" over hundreds of years. They are optimized to efficiently control large populations of individuals. If this were not the case, these governments would have collapsed long ago.
The belief, that fundamental systemic change is possible within already - existent political channels ensures the dominants society's continuity - regardless of the specific individuals involved.
Job and career specialization are not necessarily related to increased productivity. A division of labour instead ensures a complete dependence between individuals, which disallows them to leave contemporary society.
Let us examine our assumptions of political processes. We must allow for the possibility that what we believe is resistance to injustice is in fact a disastrous support to it.
If you pay taxes and redirect your personal resources back toward the system, it really doesn't matter what you are thinking.
Creating independence from social services, trade and food supply will reliably minimize our contribution to an exploitative system.
Rediscovering the simple life is not so difficult. Learning back to the roots demands less efforts than learning skills for life in an abstract society.
YOU DON'T NEED TO BE RAMBO TO GET STARTED!
Showing posts with label Alternatives. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alternatives. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Technical Progress is an illusion
SORRY,...
Humans and the Environment cannot coexist if the majority of the world's population is working outside of primary production.
So called "energy efficient" technologies do not account for energy use in a broader context.
If the purpose of work is basic subsistence, most technologies are inefficient when when compared to the capabilities of the Human Body.
Advance technologies affect significant changes in the structure of society, human labour, and our psychological well being. These effects are complex and often unpredictable. This overrides even the theoretical advantages of technology.
Money transactions and energy transfer are closely interrelated. One underwrites the other's uncontrolled behaviour. Neither can be changed in separation without an immediate collapse of both.
...BUT...
Given the precarious nature of contemporary society, one way we can minimize catastrophe is by creative decentralized grassroots solutions for basic subsistence. They increase our autonomy and are more likely to avoid violence.
Governments are unable to decentralize their functioning because they essentially rely on resource exploitation. In times of crisis, these governments will heighten their power over people and tend toward totalitarianism.
While global communication is inherently unsustainable, it can contribute to an alternative unfolding of History.
...DO YOU HAVE A GARDEN?
Lasse Nordlund, Finland in one of the posters shared in a gallery during 2nd Conference on Economic Degrowth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Equity, Barcelona 26-29 March 2010.
Humans and the Environment cannot coexist if the majority of the world's population is working outside of primary production.
So called "energy efficient" technologies do not account for energy use in a broader context.
If the purpose of work is basic subsistence, most technologies are inefficient when when compared to the capabilities of the Human Body.
Advance technologies affect significant changes in the structure of society, human labour, and our psychological well being. These effects are complex and often unpredictable. This overrides even the theoretical advantages of technology.
Money transactions and energy transfer are closely interrelated. One underwrites the other's uncontrolled behaviour. Neither can be changed in separation without an immediate collapse of both.
...BUT...
Given the precarious nature of contemporary society, one way we can minimize catastrophe is by creative decentralized grassroots solutions for basic subsistence. They increase our autonomy and are more likely to avoid violence.
Governments are unable to decentralize their functioning because they essentially rely on resource exploitation. In times of crisis, these governments will heighten their power over people and tend toward totalitarianism.
While global communication is inherently unsustainable, it can contribute to an alternative unfolding of History.
...DO YOU HAVE A GARDEN?
Lasse Nordlund, Finland in one of the posters shared in a gallery during 2nd Conference on Economic Degrowth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Equity, Barcelona 26-29 March 2010.
Investigating Simple lifestyle
Lasse Nordlund, Finland in one of the posters shared following in a gallery during 2nd Conference on Economic Degrowth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Equity, Barcelona 26-29 March 2010.
I started my research on what I call "the simple lifestyle" at the end of 1980s. In my childhood I had wanted to become a scientist, but later I became aware how our lives within modern society affect other and the environment in countless ways. 100 years ago the pioneering atomic physicists were mostly pacifists who believed their work would serve the humankind. Yet when America dropped the atom bomb, many of them were close to suicide. I realized that as a scientist I would have little control overt the repercussions of my work.
Instead, I chose to minimize my harm towards others by taking a path of responsibility: to learn how to reproduce the basic necessities of life, which are delegated to others in contemporary society. If we specialize in a given profession it means that we only have a fragmented account of how we affect our environment. The other parts are in other hands. Within the modern world, it is impossible to live a responsible life.
Dependency and delegating responsibility to others are one and the same. The more people quit their manual work in primary production, the more machines took their part. On the one hand the use of machines and on the other hand the human working outside of agriculture made us reliant on fuel and resources we couldn't provide for ourselves.
As I moved toward establishing independence from such resources, I turned my attention to how humans can work for livelihood with simple hand tools or with extended use of technology, which increases input of energy. My theoretical results were entirely different from mainstream assessments that commonly espouse the benefits of any and all technological advances. The experience proved my theoretical conclusions.
In the beginning I presumed that if I were to combine contemporary knowledge and ancient facilities, it would be much easier for me to live in self-sufficiency than for people 200 years ago. Step by step I lost this view. Old ways might appear clumsy, but they are often more efficient than modern solutions. Engineers have developed more efficient ovens, devices and processes, but they have forgotten the Whole, which is not calculable.
My booklet "Foundations of our life" contains my reflections about human labour, money and energy from the self-sufficiency standpoint. It can be downloaded from here.
I started my research on what I call "the simple lifestyle" at the end of 1980s. In my childhood I had wanted to become a scientist, but later I became aware how our lives within modern society affect other and the environment in countless ways. 100 years ago the pioneering atomic physicists were mostly pacifists who believed their work would serve the humankind. Yet when America dropped the atom bomb, many of them were close to suicide. I realized that as a scientist I would have little control overt the repercussions of my work.
Instead, I chose to minimize my harm towards others by taking a path of responsibility: to learn how to reproduce the basic necessities of life, which are delegated to others in contemporary society. If we specialize in a given profession it means that we only have a fragmented account of how we affect our environment. The other parts are in other hands. Within the modern world, it is impossible to live a responsible life.
Dependency and delegating responsibility to others are one and the same. The more people quit their manual work in primary production, the more machines took their part. On the one hand the use of machines and on the other hand the human working outside of agriculture made us reliant on fuel and resources we couldn't provide for ourselves.
As I moved toward establishing independence from such resources, I turned my attention to how humans can work for livelihood with simple hand tools or with extended use of technology, which increases input of energy. My theoretical results were entirely different from mainstream assessments that commonly espouse the benefits of any and all technological advances. The experience proved my theoretical conclusions.
In the beginning I presumed that if I were to combine contemporary knowledge and ancient facilities, it would be much easier for me to live in self-sufficiency than for people 200 years ago. Step by step I lost this view. Old ways might appear clumsy, but they are often more efficient than modern solutions. Engineers have developed more efficient ovens, devices and processes, but they have forgotten the Whole, which is not calculable.
My booklet "Foundations of our life" contains my reflections about human labour, money and energy from the self-sufficiency standpoint. It can be downloaded from here.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Mining in Goa - if I had the power!
Dear All,
If I had the power, this is what I would get done immediately in Goa:
1 – There is no such thing as “sustainable or environmentally friendly mining “. It is urgent to ensure the current draft mining policy by Goa government is examined by a team of independent experts, and amended adequately before the draft becomes an Act.
Note: There are clear reasons to believe that Goa government is not equipped to draft a balanced and ecologically acceptable mining policy for Goa.
2 – Limits to mining exploitation in the territory need to be established ideally with a clear and final mining phasing-out time-table.
Note - The lack of data and current studies to evaluate Goa’s carrying capacity in terms of mining operations, need to be urgently addressed by experts. Goa is the smallest state in India, therefore it is important to know what % of the territory can go under the miner's bulldozers without causing irretrievable damage to its ecological balance - forests, wildlife, microclimate, water resources, agricultural land, public health, population displacement.
3 - Mine owners operating illegally and the ones who are operating legally but ignoring the law of the land, are doing it with impunity. A deterrent needs to be put in place urgently and acted upon.
Note- Non-compliance is rampant and the miners behave as if they are above the law.
The forest department needs to be strengthened in terms of legal power and manpower with a clear mandate to keep watch of illegal mining and non-compliance operations in forest land. Miners should be made to pay substantial fines and face jail if necessary.
4 – The above measures on the other hand are bound to create a fertile ground for further corruption and bribing of government officials by miners to allow them to carry on “business as usual”.
Note: To counter-act this, officials that proved to be honest and proved to have integrity should be publicly acknowledged and rewarded. An independent anti-corruption watchdog should keep overall watch.
5 - Rehabilitation of abandoned mining sites should begin immediately, paid by miners but controlled and supervised by forestry and other relevant experts.
Note: The money the miners have deposited for the job is far from adequate for the purpose of landscaping of mining sites, recovery of soil, forests and water tables. Realistic funding by miners for the rehabilitation of mining sites needs to be worked out and back dated, so that proper work can be carried out immediately with proper funding.
6 - The issue of mining concessions needs to be reviewed and new legislation should address the validity and cancellation of concessions if they don’t comply with the laws, and if they are not in operation within an established period of time (preferably a short period of time)
Note: The rehabilitation of land should be a priority and urgent. Mine owners tend to hang on to already explored mining sites for decades. This delays the process of landscaping the sites, and creating the conditions for regeneration of the land. A deadline should be given to miners to return the non-operating sites to the forest department within 6 months.
Ideally Goa should change from mining into a hub for alternative green industry and green energy which would give employment to everyone currently working on the mines. It is also high time to consider growing food again in Goa, and start the rehabilitation of the agricultural lands ruined by mining rejects and stop converting fertile agricultural land into urban development land. I believe FOOD SECURITY will be the issue of the near future. I think it is in fact going to be the BIG BUSINESS of the future together with GREEN RENEWABLE ENERGY and that is a sustainable and constructive instead of destructive alternative that the miners might consider investing in if they are smart!
That is where I would put my money if I had any!
Carmen Miranda on e-group western-ghats@googlegroups.com on Aug 31, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
