One can only pour gasoline on a fire for so long until a random spark sets the whole pile ablaze.
Create a threat and people prepare
Add tension, make incendiary comments, orchestrate an us vs. them mindset
eventually someone does the unthinkable.
self fulfilling prophesy. God help us all, I pray its the end rather than the beginning.
Showing posts with label pontification. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pontification. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
coming up for air
I've been lax in my posting, especially when you consider all that has happened. The situation may continue until the 27th when my work gets the equivalent of a new president. Lets just say I am going to be beyond busy for the next week and leave it at that.
I do feel the need to say a couple things though. This past sunday (17th) we had a baptism and party for our children. I am, to my core, normally averse to large social gatherings. This was incredible though. So many people came, including my best friend of25 years. (thats 1st grade for those doing the math)...all the way from North Carolina. I have to be honest, I worked my butt off getting everything outside tidy and presentable in the garden for the sole purpose of impressing people, not because of any vanity thing, but because I am so desperate to spread the word as it were. Nate and I wandered outside and walked around, I gave him a quick tour, he nodded a lot and said. "You know, I really want to start a garden back home."
I'm counting that as three!
I also found out his father in law has similar proclivities for diggin in the dirt. Its amazing who you'll connect to sometimes.
I also discovered that another longtime friend also recently adopted. I don't know if my example planted that seed or simply gave it a little fertilizer, but I'd like to think that in some way I was at least a snowflake in the avalanch of the decision.
Melinda at Simple, Green, Frugal Co-op penned this fantastic piece. Its amazing sometimes how things seem to be "in the air." I'd like to think that my own transformation has allowed me, in at least some regard to similarly manifest my true self. It did remind me how far I need to go. During one of our late night chats with friends who were visiting this weekend, I found that I was the sole person in the room who, if given the chance, would not return to school to persue a more advanced degree in my field. I do what I do because it pays the bills, is pleasant, allows me to work for an organization that I can "look at myself in the mirror each day" and barring major events like the one currently going on...lets me go home at 4:30 and leave work at work.
There are drawbacks to this though. There are times when I feel like I am cheating, I find the work easy most of the time. I spend 40 hours a week doing something which I have no passion for, I simply derive enjoyment from interactions with my coworkers, and the sense of "helping out" that I get from fixing their technical difficulties. I have wrestled with ennui for most of my life, which I'm sure is equal parts genetic, chemical, and cognative. My demons flog me with alterating blows of doubt, anxiety and angst and how far from my goals I am. But there are moments, like this weekend, when I my joy can barely contain itself. I don't think I could proclaim that I too am living absolutely true to my inner ethos, but I think each baby step I take brings me that much closer, and sometimes (like this weekend) its nice to stop and realize how far we have come.
that being said I have tons of other things that I will try to get posted, but bear with me. Oh, and I spotted potato plants poking through!
I do feel the need to say a couple things though. This past sunday (17th) we had a baptism and party for our children. I am, to my core, normally averse to large social gatherings. This was incredible though. So many people came, including my best friend of25 years. (thats 1st grade for those doing the math)...all the way from North Carolina. I have to be honest, I worked my butt off getting everything outside tidy and presentable in the garden for the sole purpose of impressing people, not because of any vanity thing, but because I am so desperate to spread the word as it were. Nate and I wandered outside and walked around, I gave him a quick tour, he nodded a lot and said. "You know, I really want to start a garden back home."
I'm counting that as three!
I also found out his father in law has similar proclivities for diggin in the dirt. Its amazing who you'll connect to sometimes.
I also discovered that another longtime friend also recently adopted. I don't know if my example planted that seed or simply gave it a little fertilizer, but I'd like to think that in some way I was at least a snowflake in the avalanch of the decision.
Melinda at Simple, Green, Frugal Co-op penned this fantastic piece. Its amazing sometimes how things seem to be "in the air." I'd like to think that my own transformation has allowed me, in at least some regard to similarly manifest my true self. It did remind me how far I need to go. During one of our late night chats with friends who were visiting this weekend, I found that I was the sole person in the room who, if given the chance, would not return to school to persue a more advanced degree in my field. I do what I do because it pays the bills, is pleasant, allows me to work for an organization that I can "look at myself in the mirror each day" and barring major events like the one currently going on...lets me go home at 4:30 and leave work at work.
There are drawbacks to this though. There are times when I feel like I am cheating, I find the work easy most of the time. I spend 40 hours a week doing something which I have no passion for, I simply derive enjoyment from interactions with my coworkers, and the sense of "helping out" that I get from fixing their technical difficulties. I have wrestled with ennui for most of my life, which I'm sure is equal parts genetic, chemical, and cognative. My demons flog me with alterating blows of doubt, anxiety and angst and how far from my goals I am. But there are moments, like this weekend, when I my joy can barely contain itself. I don't think I could proclaim that I too am living absolutely true to my inner ethos, but I think each baby step I take brings me that much closer, and sometimes (like this weekend) its nice to stop and realize how far we have come.
that being said I have tons of other things that I will try to get posted, but bear with me. Oh, and I spotted potato plants poking through!
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
True Confessions
A post over at Path to Freedom got me thinking. My gardening has honestly not "saved" us any money in a strict sense of the word. (I refuse to equate the word saving as it applies to "look how much we saved" when it comes to buying things we would not otherwise buy.)
Gardening has not reduced the cost of eating fresh (or home preserved) organic produce one iota. Gardening forced us to eat fresh (or home preserved) organic produce. Society may give lip service to living "green" but if you follow the money, its not where our priorities lay. For mainstream america, living lightly is an expensive proposition. I simply pulled price out of the equation.
I suspect I am not alone in the sense that I do not depend on my garden for economic survival, but for spiritual, healthful, and global survival. We must be prepared to accept the fact that many, in fact much of society views our arcane gardening practice as a luxury. Primarily one of time. The most common response I get (and I'm sure I'm not the exception) is "I wish I had the time for that."
Second confession. I don't have the time. By sunset I have been pulled in 50 different different directions trying to get all the little projects, appointments, and routine this and that done. But I make the time, because in a life where so many things are beyond your control, its nice to have a moment when your time is your own. So for us the cost of eating organic is time.
Gardening has not reduced the cost of eating fresh (or home preserved) organic produce one iota. Gardening forced us to eat fresh (or home preserved) organic produce. Society may give lip service to living "green" but if you follow the money, its not where our priorities lay. For mainstream america, living lightly is an expensive proposition. I simply pulled price out of the equation.
I suspect I am not alone in the sense that I do not depend on my garden for economic survival, but for spiritual, healthful, and global survival. We must be prepared to accept the fact that many, in fact much of society views our arcane gardening practice as a luxury. Primarily one of time. The most common response I get (and I'm sure I'm not the exception) is "I wish I had the time for that."
Second confession. I don't have the time. By sunset I have been pulled in 50 different different directions trying to get all the little projects, appointments, and routine this and that done. But I make the time, because in a life where so many things are beyond your control, its nice to have a moment when your time is your own. So for us the cost of eating organic is time.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
I bleed green
In several (metaphorical) senses of the term.
I thought I would revisit a little "family" history on today's occasion. What does the Irish Diaspora have to do with gardening and sustainability? Turns out, quite a bit. First a little background.
By 1845 most of the tennant holdings (the majority of irish did not actually own the land they worked on) were less than five acres for 24% and less than 15 for 40%. With much of the land devoted to raising crops simply to pay the rent, the farmers and their families had to feed themselves on what little space remained. (Corned beef was out, not enough pasture land.) Potatoes were caloric and nutritionally dense and space efficient. The inherent cruelty was brought about by a taste for beef that was growing next door in England. Quite simply, to make room for English ranchers, the locals were pushed out of the best grazing and farming areas.
The "great famine" was not the first time that potatoes had failed in ireland, in fact, due to other diseases, there were significant crop losses 24 times between, 1728 and 1844. The potato was far from reliable, but when faces with something unreliable, or watching your family starve, well, you roll the dice.
And in 1845 the dice came up snake eyes. Phytophthora infestans or late blight first manifested in the Americas but due to expanding trade, travel, and lax agricultural inspection, found its way into Europe where it also struck in belgium, but in Ireland, wiped out from what reports estimate a third to a half of the potato crops. The following year was even worse, as losses hit 3/4ths of the crop. Losses receded the following year, but because of the devastation, much of the seed potato stock had been eaten, and fewer fields could be planted.
Early efforts to provide relief from the British were successful, but Prime Minister Robert Peel's efforts raised the ire from laissez faire factions. Peel's successor John Russel created then later abandoned a set of unproductive public works efforts, and parliamentary law basically left the starving tenants the responsibility of the landlords, who in turn evicted them. Aid and relief rules dictated that nothing be distributed to families who held more than a quarter acre. So in effect, if you could grow enough to pay the rent, you had to starve. But if you fed yourself with the crops grown on your meager plot, you got the boot.
When the previously mentioned potato failure occurred in the 1780s, Ireland closed her ports to export, and the other crops that had been grown (to pay the rent) were kept on the island. Food prices dropped during this abundance and famine was averted. However, the landlords and merchants, who would have otherwise sold those commodities at a higher profit applied the golden rule: he who has the gold makes the rules. The lobbied parliment to ensure that this sort of thing didn't happen again. Their success meant that during the majority of the 1840's famine, starving families loaded grain onto wagons bound for the eastern shores, and shipped it off to England. The market had decided, and the Irish were expendable.
Once again history teaches that often, famine comes about not because of a lack of available food, but a lack of ability to pay. So lets all learn from this lesson folks, rotate and diversify your seed stocks, and buy only fairly traded imports.
Our modern taste for cheap coffee is a direct analog to the British desire for cheap beef and Irish grains. You do the math.
On another note, I started the spring crops in the greenhouse..er...sunroom sunday evening. more to follow later.
(a special thanks to the hordes of anonymous contributors at wikipedia for helping me track down some dates and statistics I could not immediately recall)
I thought I would revisit a little "family" history on today's occasion. What does the Irish Diaspora have to do with gardening and sustainability? Turns out, quite a bit. First a little background.
By 1845 most of the tennant holdings (the majority of irish did not actually own the land they worked on) were less than five acres for 24% and less than 15 for 40%. With much of the land devoted to raising crops simply to pay the rent, the farmers and their families had to feed themselves on what little space remained. (Corned beef was out, not enough pasture land.) Potatoes were caloric and nutritionally dense and space efficient. The inherent cruelty was brought about by a taste for beef that was growing next door in England. Quite simply, to make room for English ranchers, the locals were pushed out of the best grazing and farming areas.
The "great famine" was not the first time that potatoes had failed in ireland, in fact, due to other diseases, there were significant crop losses 24 times between, 1728 and 1844. The potato was far from reliable, but when faces with something unreliable, or watching your family starve, well, you roll the dice.
And in 1845 the dice came up snake eyes. Phytophthora infestans or late blight first manifested in the Americas but due to expanding trade, travel, and lax agricultural inspection, found its way into Europe where it also struck in belgium, but in Ireland, wiped out from what reports estimate a third to a half of the potato crops. The following year was even worse, as losses hit 3/4ths of the crop. Losses receded the following year, but because of the devastation, much of the seed potato stock had been eaten, and fewer fields could be planted.
Early efforts to provide relief from the British were successful, but Prime Minister Robert Peel's efforts raised the ire from laissez faire factions. Peel's successor John Russel created then later abandoned a set of unproductive public works efforts, and parliamentary law basically left the starving tenants the responsibility of the landlords, who in turn evicted them. Aid and relief rules dictated that nothing be distributed to families who held more than a quarter acre. So in effect, if you could grow enough to pay the rent, you had to starve. But if you fed yourself with the crops grown on your meager plot, you got the boot.
When the previously mentioned potato failure occurred in the 1780s, Ireland closed her ports to export, and the other crops that had been grown (to pay the rent) were kept on the island. Food prices dropped during this abundance and famine was averted. However, the landlords and merchants, who would have otherwise sold those commodities at a higher profit applied the golden rule: he who has the gold makes the rules. The lobbied parliment to ensure that this sort of thing didn't happen again. Their success meant that during the majority of the 1840's famine, starving families loaded grain onto wagons bound for the eastern shores, and shipped it off to England. The market had decided, and the Irish were expendable.
Once again history teaches that often, famine comes about not because of a lack of available food, but a lack of ability to pay. So lets all learn from this lesson folks, rotate and diversify your seed stocks, and buy only fairly traded imports.
Our modern taste for cheap coffee is a direct analog to the British desire for cheap beef and Irish grains. You do the math.
On another note, I started the spring crops in the greenhouse..er...sunroom sunday evening. more to follow later.
(a special thanks to the hordes of anonymous contributors at wikipedia for helping me track down some dates and statistics I could not immediately recall)
Friday, February 27, 2009
Touching the third rail...
and praying I don't get zapped.
There has been a rather disturbing meme in the landscape of American politics as of late. It would seem that Hannity and Beck in their usual race to the bottom of the barrel have captured the potential wind in the sails of certain elements of the emergency prep/survivalist movement.
First a couple things up front, I do not wish to debate or cast dispersions at the nature of the movement itself. The following observations have more to do with timing and the age old question "cui bono?" Second, because I believe in transparency I voted Democrat this time around, though at one point or another I have voted for candidates from just about every party (except the american Nazi party for obvious reasons). Unlike the windbags on TV and radio, I'm not going to claim I'm independent of anything. I'm not registered, but I have a worldview that can generally be described currently as an american liberal by textbook (not a pundit's) definition. Lastly, though I have some familiarity with many aspects of the movement via persons I grew up around, I am largely an outsider looking in, so if I misconstrue anything, no offense is intended.
On with the show.
During the 1990's a growing number of people became interested in emergency preparedness, or more specifically on the means by which individuals or groups might survive cataclysmic, regional or societal collapse. Granted, the movement was by no means recent, but it certainly gained prominence even if brief in the public mind at that time. This as you may well recall was, by and large "the Clinton Years." By and large the literature focused on two primary threats in a post cataclysm world (be it nuclear, weather, technological infrastructure failure) The first threat is usually "zombies" the faceless masses (or perhaps even your neighbors) who did not prepare and come seeking whatever resources you may have, they may range from annoying, to deadly. Second is the government itself, many believe that our own government would in fact be the source of the collapse in some cases, or in the matter I wish to touch upon, the nature of government would be such that people might find need to put Jefferson's axiom of refreshing the tree of liberty into practice.
That is what concerns me today. I will not argue that our nation stands upon a precipice of great peril. I will not debate that by and large the priorities of our society are misaligned. I do not question the sovereignty of the individual nor the responsibility of the individual to prepare to at least a minor extent. Only a fool would be caught without a shovel in the winter.
What I do wish to contest is the encouragement that evangelists from the minority party in government seem to be engaging in. I don't think there is any way to get around specifics at this point so here goes, where was the outrage during the last 8 years? From my point of view, the loss of things like Habeas Corpus, indefinite imprisonment, widespread wiretapping, and I'm sure several other things I missed, should have been a wake up call for those who are feeling the itch to raise their rifles today. I grew up at the tail end of the cold war, so I know what its like to go to bed wondering if the commies will come (thanks a lot Red Dawn). Commie socialist pinko was a dirty word back then and it still is now. So why is it that certain elements of the media feel the need to incite old fears? Quite frankly (and this is of course my opinion) the reason is, because its all they have left. Certain media personalities have made their living by championing causes for one team. Now that the shoe is on the other foot they have gone from speaking like Tories to playing Paul Revere. They have traded authentic elitism for pseudo populism. They have turned their screeds from decrying those upset by loss of civil liberties and the abuse of power in wartime, to revisiting the red baiting of the past. Gone is the mantra "love it or leave it," todays meme is "get ready for civil war." You cannot espouse authoritarianism one day and libertarianism the next without great leaps of intellectual dishonesty.
What does their elitism have to do with the message of emergency preparedness or survivalism?
They are out of people to market to at the moment. Narcissistic by nature these creatures need an audience. Turn off your TV and radio, read a book, plant something. Let these gasbags starve. If you happen to prep, don't be fooled into believing these people are on your side. They may ultimately be self fulfilling prophecies, by instilling fear uncertainty and doubt: panic, hording and scarcity will ensue, and its all downhill from there.
But the fundamental question I am left with dear readers, are the principles of survivalism (most notably its defensive posture) necessarily the province of one political party?
Does a person's disposition on a spectrum of liberal to conservative (for the sake of simplicty) dictate the temper of their response? We both may garden, we both may be interested in solar energy, in food security, self sufficiency. But whereas I am concerned about the frightening consolidation of corporations and the vast profits being used to manipulate society for monetary gain. My friends on the other side of the aisle would say we have more to fear from our own government, and at times our own neighbor, but such has been the thesis of modern conservatism (or at least as I have observed it.) Again, no offense, just observation.
Is it a case of country mouse/city mouse? Does my thinking that allotment gardens and urban co-ops seem so palatable simply because I am a suburban liberal. Were I conservative, would a "bug-out" bag and plan be the logical course of action?
Or is it something else, do we fall into a much deeper category of meta consciousness. Does a predisposition to vote a certain way or face crisis a certain way speak more to their opinion of society, or rather humankind itself? Does it come down to a battle of Hobbes vs. Locke? Or is it more a matter of rugged individualism vs. cooperative interdependence.
I'm talking myself dizzy right now. I'd love to hear from all of you, but please lets keep it civil. I touched a third rail but I don't want the passion which strains to break our bonds of affection. ;)
There has been a rather disturbing meme in the landscape of American politics as of late. It would seem that Hannity and Beck in their usual race to the bottom of the barrel have captured the potential wind in the sails of certain elements of the emergency prep/survivalist movement.
First a couple things up front, I do not wish to debate or cast dispersions at the nature of the movement itself. The following observations have more to do with timing and the age old question "cui bono?" Second, because I believe in transparency I voted Democrat this time around, though at one point or another I have voted for candidates from just about every party (except the american Nazi party for obvious reasons). Unlike the windbags on TV and radio, I'm not going to claim I'm independent of anything. I'm not registered, but I have a worldview that can generally be described currently as an american liberal by textbook (not a pundit's) definition. Lastly, though I have some familiarity with many aspects of the movement via persons I grew up around, I am largely an outsider looking in, so if I misconstrue anything, no offense is intended.
On with the show.
During the 1990's a growing number of people became interested in emergency preparedness, or more specifically on the means by which individuals or groups might survive cataclysmic, regional or societal collapse. Granted, the movement was by no means recent, but it certainly gained prominence even if brief in the public mind at that time. This as you may well recall was, by and large "the Clinton Years." By and large the literature focused on two primary threats in a post cataclysm world (be it nuclear, weather, technological infrastructure failure) The first threat is usually "zombies" the faceless masses (or perhaps even your neighbors) who did not prepare and come seeking whatever resources you may have, they may range from annoying, to deadly. Second is the government itself, many believe that our own government would in fact be the source of the collapse in some cases, or in the matter I wish to touch upon, the nature of government would be such that people might find need to put Jefferson's axiom of refreshing the tree of liberty into practice.
That is what concerns me today. I will not argue that our nation stands upon a precipice of great peril. I will not debate that by and large the priorities of our society are misaligned. I do not question the sovereignty of the individual nor the responsibility of the individual to prepare to at least a minor extent. Only a fool would be caught without a shovel in the winter.
What I do wish to contest is the encouragement that evangelists from the minority party in government seem to be engaging in. I don't think there is any way to get around specifics at this point so here goes, where was the outrage during the last 8 years? From my point of view, the loss of things like Habeas Corpus, indefinite imprisonment, widespread wiretapping, and I'm sure several other things I missed, should have been a wake up call for those who are feeling the itch to raise their rifles today. I grew up at the tail end of the cold war, so I know what its like to go to bed wondering if the commies will come (thanks a lot Red Dawn). Commie socialist pinko was a dirty word back then and it still is now. So why is it that certain elements of the media feel the need to incite old fears? Quite frankly (and this is of course my opinion) the reason is, because its all they have left. Certain media personalities have made their living by championing causes for one team. Now that the shoe is on the other foot they have gone from speaking like Tories to playing Paul Revere. They have traded authentic elitism for pseudo populism. They have turned their screeds from decrying those upset by loss of civil liberties and the abuse of power in wartime, to revisiting the red baiting of the past. Gone is the mantra "love it or leave it," todays meme is "get ready for civil war." You cannot espouse authoritarianism one day and libertarianism the next without great leaps of intellectual dishonesty.
What does their elitism have to do with the message of emergency preparedness or survivalism?
They are out of people to market to at the moment. Narcissistic by nature these creatures need an audience. Turn off your TV and radio, read a book, plant something. Let these gasbags starve. If you happen to prep, don't be fooled into believing these people are on your side. They may ultimately be self fulfilling prophecies, by instilling fear uncertainty and doubt: panic, hording and scarcity will ensue, and its all downhill from there.
But the fundamental question I am left with dear readers, are the principles of survivalism (most notably its defensive posture) necessarily the province of one political party?
Does a person's disposition on a spectrum of liberal to conservative (for the sake of simplicty) dictate the temper of their response? We both may garden, we both may be interested in solar energy, in food security, self sufficiency. But whereas I am concerned about the frightening consolidation of corporations and the vast profits being used to manipulate society for monetary gain. My friends on the other side of the aisle would say we have more to fear from our own government, and at times our own neighbor, but such has been the thesis of modern conservatism (or at least as I have observed it.) Again, no offense, just observation.
Is it a case of country mouse/city mouse? Does my thinking that allotment gardens and urban co-ops seem so palatable simply because I am a suburban liberal. Were I conservative, would a "bug-out" bag and plan be the logical course of action?
Or is it something else, do we fall into a much deeper category of meta consciousness. Does a predisposition to vote a certain way or face crisis a certain way speak more to their opinion of society, or rather humankind itself? Does it come down to a battle of Hobbes vs. Locke? Or is it more a matter of rugged individualism vs. cooperative interdependence.
I'm talking myself dizzy right now. I'd love to hear from all of you, but please lets keep it civil. I touched a third rail but I don't want the passion which strains to break our bonds of affection. ;)
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
carpe stimuli
hell in a handbasket might perhaps be exaggeration, then again...
A thought provoking post on freedom gardens got me wondering. The neighborhood kid (via parental leading I'm sure) had already made an assumption for the reason behind the garden. I think given the current mood of the nation people are going to start making assumptions about our motives, perhaps placing us in the same category as the perennial survivalist who jealously guards their canned goods with gun in hand.
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, it presents to the mind of the beholder a clear picture that "THIS IS A WAY OUT OF THE CRISIS" It connects the dots in a way that is so patently obvious that little explanation is needed. On the other hand it limits the perception of the intent of the garden and the gardener to a preconceived notion, and that notion is largely an unpalatable one. Do I want the casual observer to realize that food security is obtainable by our own hands on our own land? Of course, but to limit the perception to just a solution to a crisis merely allows us to survive the current one, it does not prevent the same thing from happening again.
This is not a discussion that can be confined to food security alone. The issue of crisis is merely the stimulus that makes this change of life more palatable to the "rest of the world."
I spend a lot of time wrestling with the urge to speak up, I don't want to be "that guy" but when silence means people assume I'm something else, then I'd happily settle for "that guy."
The skeptical side of me says that people reading tons of other posts and blogs means that there is no such thing as synchronicity, but odd coincidences in subject matter arise so often lately that part of me wants to think it is meaningful. Anyway, Rob at Onestraw has been staring at the big picture and drawn the conclusion that this entire exercise is not about merely surviving the world but changing it into something new. Amen.
A thought provoking post on freedom gardens got me wondering. The neighborhood kid (via parental leading I'm sure) had already made an assumption for the reason behind the garden. I think given the current mood of the nation people are going to start making assumptions about our motives, perhaps placing us in the same category as the perennial survivalist who jealously guards their canned goods with gun in hand.
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, it presents to the mind of the beholder a clear picture that "THIS IS A WAY OUT OF THE CRISIS" It connects the dots in a way that is so patently obvious that little explanation is needed. On the other hand it limits the perception of the intent of the garden and the gardener to a preconceived notion, and that notion is largely an unpalatable one. Do I want the casual observer to realize that food security is obtainable by our own hands on our own land? Of course, but to limit the perception to just a solution to a crisis merely allows us to survive the current one, it does not prevent the same thing from happening again.
This is not a discussion that can be confined to food security alone. The issue of crisis is merely the stimulus that makes this change of life more palatable to the "rest of the world."
I spend a lot of time wrestling with the urge to speak up, I don't want to be "that guy" but when silence means people assume I'm something else, then I'd happily settle for "that guy."
The skeptical side of me says that people reading tons of other posts and blogs means that there is no such thing as synchronicity, but odd coincidences in subject matter arise so often lately that part of me wants to think it is meaningful. Anyway, Rob at Onestraw has been staring at the big picture and drawn the conclusion that this entire exercise is not about merely surviving the world but changing it into something new. Amen.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Keep that old computer running...
Most of use in the western world have come to treat the personal computer as something that we keep around for a few years before it becomes obsolete, then we HAVE to get a new one. I ran a seminar yesterday at work to educate some of the retired members of our organization get up to speed with an email system our company is implementing. Yes, the retired members get email, in fact its mandatory, but before you reach for an application to sign up for the free email when you retire, I feel it fair to warn you, they're priests. Not that I wouldn't still encourage people to enter the seminary, but I believe in transparency in hiring.
Anywho, back to the original purpose...or rather the anecdote that leads to the moral of the story. I sat with a stereotypical "little old man" for some time going over the purest basics of use on the brand new laptop he had bought. Why is it that a man who is only ever going to open his mail needs to spend what was likely over a grand for a laptop because the bloated operating system requires such an inane amount of hardware horsepower? Having been a MS Windows user for years we just kind of took it as a fact of life that windows will get slower each week until you have to reinstall it or buy a new machine because the newest version wont run on the PC you have. And why is it that MS charges 150-300 just to get the software that most businesses require as a part of operation (MS Office)?
Are they the only game in town? No, as many Mac users will tell you. Unfortunately as nice as Mac computers are, everything seems to be twice as expensive. Apparently stability and ease of use come at a premium. Why? There are legions of geeks (speaking as one) on this planet, can't anyone come up with an alternative?
Some of you probably already are guessing where I am going...Linux. Linux is a community developed operating system that can be installed on just about any computer. (so long as you have the right installer). The idea hold immense appeal to me, community developed and supported...c'mon how crunchy is that!? I have made several attempts to implement it over the years to varying degrees of success, but I think I finally hit the mark this time. My wife brought home an old computer from her school that they were going to get rid of. A 1.1ghz celeron with "only" 256m of ram. The tag on the side said designed for windows 98 if thats any hint about the age of this. I downloaded a disk image from the Ubuntu site, popped it in the drive and in about an hour with minimal intervention on my part, this old machine is up and running WITHOUT a single issue or spending a single cent. It comes with everything most people need (web browser, email client, word processor, spreadsheet, graphics editor) and they all can use Microsoft file formats interchangeably. I installed flash so youtube will run (have to be able to watch "Homegrown Revolution") And Dansguardian to make sure the kids don't wander where they shouldn't online.
I will admit I have more than twenty years behind a keyboard, but little to any of that experience was needed to get this up and running, in fact if you put two people in front of a windows and a Ubuntu machine, I would wager the Ubuntu user would find the learning curve much shorter. The menus are clear and easy to understand.
I rarely get this excited about technology anymore, the iphone was a big meh as far as I am concerned, but I think this is definitely something people should test drive, and thanks to the fact that the cd image you download can be booted and allow you to demo the system without installing anything, there really is no harm in trying it.
Its secure, community focused, stable and free. Isn't that the goal?
So in the end we prevented another computer from going in the landfill, and got a computer out of it that will be more than adequate for our daughter to write her stories on and play webkinz.
And by the way, I am posting this message from that computer.
Anywho, back to the original purpose...or rather the anecdote that leads to the moral of the story. I sat with a stereotypical "little old man" for some time going over the purest basics of use on the brand new laptop he had bought. Why is it that a man who is only ever going to open his mail needs to spend what was likely over a grand for a laptop because the bloated operating system requires such an inane amount of hardware horsepower? Having been a MS Windows user for years we just kind of took it as a fact of life that windows will get slower each week until you have to reinstall it or buy a new machine because the newest version wont run on the PC you have. And why is it that MS charges 150-300 just to get the software that most businesses require as a part of operation (MS Office)?
Are they the only game in town? No, as many Mac users will tell you. Unfortunately as nice as Mac computers are, everything seems to be twice as expensive. Apparently stability and ease of use come at a premium. Why? There are legions of geeks (speaking as one) on this planet, can't anyone come up with an alternative?
Some of you probably already are guessing where I am going...Linux. Linux is a community developed operating system that can be installed on just about any computer. (so long as you have the right installer). The idea hold immense appeal to me, community developed and supported...c'mon how crunchy is that!? I have made several attempts to implement it over the years to varying degrees of success, but I think I finally hit the mark this time. My wife brought home an old computer from her school that they were going to get rid of. A 1.1ghz celeron with "only" 256m of ram. The tag on the side said designed for windows 98 if thats any hint about the age of this. I downloaded a disk image from the Ubuntu site, popped it in the drive and in about an hour with minimal intervention on my part, this old machine is up and running WITHOUT a single issue or spending a single cent. It comes with everything most people need (web browser, email client, word processor, spreadsheet, graphics editor) and they all can use Microsoft file formats interchangeably. I installed flash so youtube will run (have to be able to watch "Homegrown Revolution") And Dansguardian to make sure the kids don't wander where they shouldn't online.
I will admit I have more than twenty years behind a keyboard, but little to any of that experience was needed to get this up and running, in fact if you put two people in front of a windows and a Ubuntu machine, I would wager the Ubuntu user would find the learning curve much shorter. The menus are clear and easy to understand.
I rarely get this excited about technology anymore, the iphone was a big meh as far as I am concerned, but I think this is definitely something people should test drive, and thanks to the fact that the cd image you download can be booted and allow you to demo the system without installing anything, there really is no harm in trying it.
Its secure, community focused, stable and free. Isn't that the goal?
So in the end we prevented another computer from going in the landfill, and got a computer out of it that will be more than adequate for our daughter to write her stories on and play webkinz.
And by the way, I am posting this message from that computer.
Monday, August 18, 2008
close to home
cnn reports that on the tug hill plateau here in NY not everyone appreciates the wind farm.
This is eerily similar to a conversation I had with my father not long ago. He lives farther out in the country (albeit 5 minutes from the city I grew up in) but it definitely has a more rural feel. Anyway, aside from always lamenting the arrival of new neighbors and the slow evolution to a more suburban setting he has been an opponent of the windfarm that went up on the ridge some 5 miles away, on the grounds that it spoils the view. I always counter with the notion of acid rain or fallout from nine mile point as being the alternatives. No dice. Anyway, when his neighbor put in a home scale turbine he was furious, the noise being of primary concern. Personally, I live in a more urban/suburban setting, noise unfortunately is a part of my life, and I could just as easily adapt to that, but he has been "in the country" for almost 17 years now, so this is a big change. Like the man in the article he has also grown up with a sense of respect for the land and tried to pass that value on. The part I found ironic was that the son was protesting the windfarm on the grounds that it spoils the natural beauty. Most of my readers are probably thinking "that windfarm might be the only thing that saves it." But we have to understand that no solution is perfect, has absolutely zero impact, and is universally acceptable to everyone, because not everyone places value on the same things. Ask this man if he cares about the health of the land and I'm sure he will say "of course I do" but there may be other factors he values more.
noise is energy, energy that could be put to better use, so as turbines become more efficient, and quieter I imagine this will be less of an issue, but there is still the visual impact, and well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. While some see independence and a bright future, others see the spoiling of natural scenery. Progress does not come without cost, the difference now is that the cost is no longer being hidden to society. If we want to dance, we will need to pay the piper, we can't keep letting our children or our mother pay the tab. I suppose it is the same with home gardens. Neighborhood covenants and traditionally minded neighbors concerned with maintaining property value (one of the last remaining legal forms of segregation) will always oppose widescale and visible gardens, chicken coops, etc on the grounds that they are an eyesore. Personally I feel that endless undifferentiated monocultural lawns are an obscenity, and likely no covenant board would ever tolerate my kicking and screaming for change. Is there a compromise? Is there a way to appeal to more traditionally minded folks that what is being introduced in the form of a windfarm over the hill, or a garden in the yard is not the destruction of something dear but an evolution into something more valuable? Will we one day see a time when the annual yield of a home orchard or garden is included in the for sale listing? When smart home shoppers will prefer homes where the soil is well cared for and trees are productive?
The entire "green" movement is not intrinsically a shift in purchasing habits (despite its marketing of such). It is a shift of values, and an accounting of the full cost of our choices. When we make that clear, we will no longer find ourselves swimming against the current.
This is eerily similar to a conversation I had with my father not long ago. He lives farther out in the country (albeit 5 minutes from the city I grew up in) but it definitely has a more rural feel. Anyway, aside from always lamenting the arrival of new neighbors and the slow evolution to a more suburban setting he has been an opponent of the windfarm that went up on the ridge some 5 miles away, on the grounds that it spoils the view. I always counter with the notion of acid rain or fallout from nine mile point as being the alternatives. No dice. Anyway, when his neighbor put in a home scale turbine he was furious, the noise being of primary concern. Personally, I live in a more urban/suburban setting, noise unfortunately is a part of my life, and I could just as easily adapt to that, but he has been "in the country" for almost 17 years now, so this is a big change. Like the man in the article he has also grown up with a sense of respect for the land and tried to pass that value on. The part I found ironic was that the son was protesting the windfarm on the grounds that it spoils the natural beauty. Most of my readers are probably thinking "that windfarm might be the only thing that saves it." But we have to understand that no solution is perfect, has absolutely zero impact, and is universally acceptable to everyone, because not everyone places value on the same things. Ask this man if he cares about the health of the land and I'm sure he will say "of course I do" but there may be other factors he values more.
noise is energy, energy that could be put to better use, so as turbines become more efficient, and quieter I imagine this will be less of an issue, but there is still the visual impact, and well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. While some see independence and a bright future, others see the spoiling of natural scenery. Progress does not come without cost, the difference now is that the cost is no longer being hidden to society. If we want to dance, we will need to pay the piper, we can't keep letting our children or our mother pay the tab. I suppose it is the same with home gardens. Neighborhood covenants and traditionally minded neighbors concerned with maintaining property value (one of the last remaining legal forms of segregation) will always oppose widescale and visible gardens, chicken coops, etc on the grounds that they are an eyesore. Personally I feel that endless undifferentiated monocultural lawns are an obscenity, and likely no covenant board would ever tolerate my kicking and screaming for change. Is there a compromise? Is there a way to appeal to more traditionally minded folks that what is being introduced in the form of a windfarm over the hill, or a garden in the yard is not the destruction of something dear but an evolution into something more valuable? Will we one day see a time when the annual yield of a home orchard or garden is included in the for sale listing? When smart home shoppers will prefer homes where the soil is well cared for and trees are productive?
The entire "green" movement is not intrinsically a shift in purchasing habits (despite its marketing of such). It is a shift of values, and an accounting of the full cost of our choices. When we make that clear, we will no longer find ourselves swimming against the current.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
What if?
Fatguy on a little bike found this link from John Jeavons. If anyone owns the "How to grow..." you will find a lot rehashed, but it is interesting to see that there is new information (even though my copy is a fairly recent edition) so it just goes to show you how relentless the people involved in Biointensive have been researching. Kudos. And this article is from 95, so I'd love to see what new developments have been unearthed. A couple of points I'd like to dig out and chew on for a moment.
There is a human cost to the outsourcing and industrializing of our food sources.
What I saw in King Corn frightened me, the farmers were dependent, they went to a fertilizer dealer who made the decision for them what to spray, they planted a GM crop designed for two things, pesticide resistance and the ability to grow in cramped quarters. They showed none of the independence and know how that we traditionally associate with farm life. Onestraw really puts a fine edge on things, specialists, while useful cannot survive on their own. What does it say about the state of a nation when its farmers have stopped looking at the larger picture and have become specialists at one thing. Perhaps the saddest point in the movie was how powerless some of the farmers felt to stop the trend.
As with any level of industrialization, automation leads to lost jobs. Before I get the label of a Luddite let me say that there are some fields for which mechanization is called for, whether it is for reasons of heath or safety (mental or physical). But America is on the verge of outsourcing and automating itself out of existence. In an era of high unemployment and higher underemployment, in a time of high dissatisfaction with the jobs we do, should we not try to shift the focus of our labors back to becoming producers, back to a life where our toil creates a visible gain? What if we stopped chasing that carrot on a stick, forever a step in front of us, and stopped to realize there is plenty to sustain us if we stop and look around. In a world where we are all farmers to one extent or another we reclaim the dignity of our work. How much do we need to work for another if we remember what it is like to provide for ourselves? If we change the focus on our lives to seek the things that we truly need, we will rediscover what things truly make us happy. What if we stopped just working and started living as an artform.
In the age of information, of ideas, of the abstract, we will lose our balance unless we reconnect to the tangible, to the basics.
So now that we have had discussions here, here and here and shared our stories of why we changed, what made us look for a better life in the form of a simple life. And often we focus as a community on the change itself on using less today than yesterday, on growing more today than yesterday. Would anyone care to share how their life has been enriched by this change?
There is a human cost to the outsourcing and industrializing of our food sources.
What I saw in King Corn frightened me, the farmers were dependent, they went to a fertilizer dealer who made the decision for them what to spray, they planted a GM crop designed for two things, pesticide resistance and the ability to grow in cramped quarters. They showed none of the independence and know how that we traditionally associate with farm life. Onestraw really puts a fine edge on things, specialists, while useful cannot survive on their own. What does it say about the state of a nation when its farmers have stopped looking at the larger picture and have become specialists at one thing. Perhaps the saddest point in the movie was how powerless some of the farmers felt to stop the trend.
As with any level of industrialization, automation leads to lost jobs. Before I get the label of a Luddite let me say that there are some fields for which mechanization is called for, whether it is for reasons of heath or safety (mental or physical). But America is on the verge of outsourcing and automating itself out of existence. In an era of high unemployment and higher underemployment, in a time of high dissatisfaction with the jobs we do, should we not try to shift the focus of our labors back to becoming producers, back to a life where our toil creates a visible gain? What if we stopped chasing that carrot on a stick, forever a step in front of us, and stopped to realize there is plenty to sustain us if we stop and look around. In a world where we are all farmers to one extent or another we reclaim the dignity of our work. How much do we need to work for another if we remember what it is like to provide for ourselves? If we change the focus on our lives to seek the things that we truly need, we will rediscover what things truly make us happy. What if we stopped just working and started living as an artform.
In the age of information, of ideas, of the abstract, we will lose our balance unless we reconnect to the tangible, to the basics.
So now that we have had discussions here, here and here and shared our stories of why we changed, what made us look for a better life in the form of a simple life. And often we focus as a community on the change itself on using less today than yesterday, on growing more today than yesterday. Would anyone care to share how their life has been enriched by this change?
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
beansprouts and brain droppings
The bush beans have begun to sprout up in earnest now, tonight I start corn, and hopefully harvest the cabbage to start the kimchi. I bought a shopping cart full of canning supplies the other night, and my wife, who is often my mainstream "reality checker" and voice of moderation, didn't even blink. This weekend we are going strawberry picking with some friends, and then...canning party. Over at PTF there is a news roundup that is rather gloomy to say the least, but it actually had the opposite effect on me (maybe its just my contrarian nature). I realized something. Everyone has a tipping point. I have a bit more of a hair trigger than most when it comes to concerns about the future, but barring instances of sociopathy, eventually when things get bad enough, even stubborn people change.
What about situations where your fate is tied to others who may be sympathetic but not as shall we say ready to make a 180 degree change. A casual observer might remark that my wife and I are polar opposites. Not true at all, we share the same values and goals, we simply prioritize differently. Having that outside perspective to hold a mirror to my own is an incredible asset. I would wager that our relationship might be analogous to society at large. In the end I believe to my core that there is more common ground out there than the media and powermad politicos will allow us to see.
In the end all we need is the right motivation. Maybe I'm being overly sensitive to this but I have rarely seen in my brief 30 years the kind of inspiring motivation that I think is so desperately needed. GreenBean hits home, and after talking to my wife who has spent several years now teaching children with special needs, or in impoverished areas was expounding on the difficulty of reaching children and families who do not have their basic needs met. Her talk about Maslow's heirarchy got me thinking. For the longest time the green movement has been using the same tactics essentially as those who would endorse an "everything's fine" approach to the status quo. Appeals to deficiency primarily at the basest levels. Food, safety, health, protection, employment, and yes even status. When we offer alternatives to the current system they appear merely as competing opinions. Its the reason so many people have taken one of two approaches to politics, cynicism: they're all evil so why bother to worry about anyone but myself, and compartmentalization: my political beliefs have no effect on any other aspect of my life. What the "green movement" needs to do is to make the old appeals obsolete. Sustainable living can bring food security, employment, nutrition, and ultimately safety, but those are perhaps the least rare to obtain. Most conventional philosophy can self rationalize themselves into the belief that their method of living can provide those things. Sustainable societies can bring something to the table that the others can't. Sustainable society can transform humanity from a thought pattern of competition and conquest, to one of cooperation and creativity. Sustainable societies empower, conventional societies exploit. Everything is connected whether we see them or not, if we continue to use the same appeals we will be doomed to the same cycles of failure.
Appeals to the lowest levels, while essential to start the ball rolling so to speak cannot keep it going. To be truly effective, the method and the message must be sustainable. Any conversation which starts at the lowest level of needs must end at the highest, and then we will truly display the advantage to our alternative.
What about situations where your fate is tied to others who may be sympathetic but not as shall we say ready to make a 180 degree change. A casual observer might remark that my wife and I are polar opposites. Not true at all, we share the same values and goals, we simply prioritize differently. Having that outside perspective to hold a mirror to my own is an incredible asset. I would wager that our relationship might be analogous to society at large. In the end I believe to my core that there is more common ground out there than the media and powermad politicos will allow us to see.
In the end all we need is the right motivation. Maybe I'm being overly sensitive to this but I have rarely seen in my brief 30 years the kind of inspiring motivation that I think is so desperately needed. GreenBean hits home, and after talking to my wife who has spent several years now teaching children with special needs, or in impoverished areas was expounding on the difficulty of reaching children and families who do not have their basic needs met. Her talk about Maslow's heirarchy got me thinking. For the longest time the green movement has been using the same tactics essentially as those who would endorse an "everything's fine" approach to the status quo. Appeals to deficiency primarily at the basest levels. Food, safety, health, protection, employment, and yes even status. When we offer alternatives to the current system they appear merely as competing opinions. Its the reason so many people have taken one of two approaches to politics, cynicism: they're all evil so why bother to worry about anyone but myself, and compartmentalization: my political beliefs have no effect on any other aspect of my life. What the "green movement" needs to do is to make the old appeals obsolete. Sustainable living can bring food security, employment, nutrition, and ultimately safety, but those are perhaps the least rare to obtain. Most conventional philosophy can self rationalize themselves into the belief that their method of living can provide those things. Sustainable societies can bring something to the table that the others can't. Sustainable society can transform humanity from a thought pattern of competition and conquest, to one of cooperation and creativity. Sustainable societies empower, conventional societies exploit. Everything is connected whether we see them or not, if we continue to use the same appeals we will be doomed to the same cycles of failure.
Appeals to the lowest levels, while essential to start the ball rolling so to speak cannot keep it going. To be truly effective, the method and the message must be sustainable. Any conversation which starts at the lowest level of needs must end at the highest, and then we will truly display the advantage to our alternative.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Hope Faith and Love
Hope: twice in one day our daughter, completely unprompted and unprovoked, blew my mind. First in the home depot while we walked by the toilet aisle on the way to get screws to fix the deck gate. Her: composting toilets? they compost your poop? Me: yep Her: can we get one? Me: I don't think it will be equally appreciated by everyone in the house. Her: huh? Me: ask mom.
second, while riding in the car with the family and my mother a roadgoing monster passed us. Her: Was that a hummer? Me: it certainly was. Grandma: Do you like hummers? Her: No, they waste gas and pollute the environment.
Faith: Yesterday I saw the first buds of the potatoes pushing through the soil. I'll say it again, I'm an anxious person, and I'm sure by now I've spent hours staring at that side of the garden. Being my first time with spuds I was apprehensive. Did I plant to deep too shallow? upside down? was the soil to dry? too wet? Anyhow, as of this morning, about 6 of the 50 or so have completely pushed their leaves up through. As Tyler Durden would say, stop trying to control everything and just let go.
Love: Yesterday my brother shipped off to 29 palms california for 2 months training, after that, iraq. The family event at the reserve depot was remarkably different from the first deployment 4 years ago, you could read it on the faces of everyone there. The trust is gone. The trust in safety, in the rightness of the mission, in the leadership. Gone. The most unsustainable, unrenewable action a government can enact, wanton destruction of participant and bystander alike, the squandering of resources, starving the needy to feed an all consuming beast, and somehow, by not spending every breath trying to avert it, are complicit in the crime. No More.
Anger is not sustainable, Faith, Hope and Love are.
second, while riding in the car with the family and my mother a roadgoing monster passed us. Her: Was that a hummer? Me: it certainly was. Grandma: Do you like hummers? Her: No, they waste gas and pollute the environment.
Faith: Yesterday I saw the first buds of the potatoes pushing through the soil. I'll say it again, I'm an anxious person, and I'm sure by now I've spent hours staring at that side of the garden. Being my first time with spuds I was apprehensive. Did I plant to deep too shallow? upside down? was the soil to dry? too wet? Anyhow, as of this morning, about 6 of the 50 or so have completely pushed their leaves up through. As Tyler Durden would say, stop trying to control everything and just let go.
Love: Yesterday my brother shipped off to 29 palms california for 2 months training, after that, iraq. The family event at the reserve depot was remarkably different from the first deployment 4 years ago, you could read it on the faces of everyone there. The trust is gone. The trust in safety, in the rightness of the mission, in the leadership. Gone. The most unsustainable, unrenewable action a government can enact, wanton destruction of participant and bystander alike, the squandering of resources, starving the needy to feed an all consuming beast, and somehow, by not spending every breath trying to avert it, are complicit in the crime. No More.
Anger is not sustainable, Faith, Hope and Love are.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Can we decide once and for all who rules?
As a ahem...reformed greasemonkey I no longer recieve any of the usual magazines, partly because they offered little to no technical advice that I found usable, their articles were little more than thinly veiled advertisements for companies who already buy ads in their rags, and well the quality of the writing was just plain sub par. After saying goodbye to the likes of hotrod and sportcompactcar I never looked back. The magazines, much like the industry they are built upon are little more than the same old garbage reused again and again.
Glad to see I'm still not missing out on anything.
And for the record I don't believe the entire "hot rodding" industry is worthless. There are some genuinely innovative, and artistic people doing some amazing work. What bothers me is the cookie cutter nature that publications seem to engender. They prop up the latest trend and then the companies flood the market with parts for your Civic, 5.0 Mustang, Gen 1 Camaro, 32 Ford or whatever and soon you've spend a bunch of money so your vehicle can be unique, just like every other one out there.
Why did I feel the need to put this on a blog focused primarily on sustainability? Allow me a moment to explain. First, the "true spirit of hot rodding" is not just about making ridiculous amounts of power. When the soldiers came back from the World Wars and started chopping surplus army motorcycles, in the 50'swhen the teenagers bought up old beat up cars from the 30's and fixed them up, it was about making use of what was available (commonly a limitation) and transforming it with ingenuity and skill (a human surplus). Add in drag racing and you had a reason to push farther and innovate more. And it was done by individuals who had to put up or shut up, not some company thousands of miles away who became less concerned with what would work and last and more concerned with what would sell. It is not about trends, its not about trophies.
America is obsessed with the automobile, and we may never truly shake that obsession. But if we can transform the manner in which it expresses itself, we may yet tap into that aspect which truly gives hope for the future. Ingenuity.
And where's my damn flying electric car?
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Out with the Hippies, in with the Yawns, and why did you change?
According to CNN living lightly...even if you have the means to do otherwise is a growing phenomenon. Seems almost fitting that its popular emergence is amoung the well to due. I suppose once you realize you can buy almost anything, there is a good chance you realize that buying everything won't make you any happier. I would hardly put myself anywhere near the income bracket of some of the referenced examples, but I can say that my wife and I earn a comfortable amount of income, and I do feel a certain kinship with the people in the article, even though the difference between potential and actual consumption is less pronounced in my case. I imagine that the individuals in the article climbed up to the top of the consumption mountain and said: geeze, I'm no happier than I was at the bottom. I am guessing, but its probably harder for someone halfway up the hill, still intent on reaching the top, to understand the rule of diminishing returns as it applies to materialism.
And then there is the other argument I'm heard that living ethically is expensive. All the green goods and carbon offsets and local foods are more expensive than piling everyone in the car and going to burger king. And who the heck has the time to cook if you're working two jobs to pay off the debts. Its easier to plop the kids in front of the tv and buy them whatever is being pimped this week than to spend time with them after a stressful day. Being an "instant" father I recently have begun to see the seduction of the things I so cheerfully criticized prior.
So what motivates someone like well me and you to stop trying to claw our way up the hill of consumerism. What motivated me? Well read back to my first post, but I'll tell you up front I was not happy. A quarter life crisis so to speak, coupled with an obsessive tendency to dig deeper into the things that caused my anxiety. Eventually I reached a point where one way or another I was not going to keep ending up panicing, and by extention surrendering to defeat.
But life "outside the box" is alien to most, its lonely at times, and often requires the living to separate from the ways of the dead. Not an appealing proposition.
So why did you leave your box?
And then there is the other argument I'm heard that living ethically is expensive. All the green goods and carbon offsets and local foods are more expensive than piling everyone in the car and going to burger king. And who the heck has the time to cook if you're working two jobs to pay off the debts. Its easier to plop the kids in front of the tv and buy them whatever is being pimped this week than to spend time with them after a stressful day. Being an "instant" father I recently have begun to see the seduction of the things I so cheerfully criticized prior.
So what motivates someone like well me and you to stop trying to claw our way up the hill of consumerism. What motivated me? Well read back to my first post, but I'll tell you up front I was not happy. A quarter life crisis so to speak, coupled with an obsessive tendency to dig deeper into the things that caused my anxiety. Eventually I reached a point where one way or another I was not going to keep ending up panicing, and by extention surrendering to defeat.
But life "outside the box" is alien to most, its lonely at times, and often requires the living to separate from the ways of the dead. Not an appealing proposition.
So why did you leave your box?
Thursday, May 1, 2008
So Long "green" revolution, hello "Green" revolution
I'm really trying not to let this blog devolve into just another whackjob pontificating on the evils of the world, so rather than talk about the bad side of a story, I'll look at the positives.
The Bad:
Fertilizer is getting expensive. Since much of the commercial fertilizer is petroleum based...well you do the math.
and the P in the NPK is getting harder to come by: http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/2/13/64820/6921
The Upside:
The eternal struggle of agriculturalized society has been to maximize output of the land. More readily available nutrients makes for faster growing plants, thats the bottom line. These nutrients can come from a bag that you buy and spread on your crops...And keep you dependent on an industry. Fortunately, there was a time before petrochemical fertilizer when people were able to have good harvests without such inputs. Its called a circle of life for a reason. One organism's waste is another's food. Somewhere along the line we convinced ourselves that life was a one way street, and recycling is something you only do with manufactured goods. Now faced with a shortage of a precious commodity we will have to kick that old habit, and learn to walk on our own feet again. Forced with adaptation or exctinction we WILL remember how to nurture life from the soil without fertilizers or pesticides. I'm not concerned about my own garden plot, I make all the NPK fertilizer I can possibly use. Humanity will learn to close the loop again or we will not survive. And this challenge is something I am actually optimistic about, because challenge brings out the best in us, so long as we carefully stand guard against the worst in us.
The Bad:
Fertilizer is getting expensive. Since much of the commercial fertilizer is petroleum based...well you do the math.
and the P in the NPK is getting harder to come by: http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/2/13/64820/6921
The Upside:
The eternal struggle of agriculturalized society has been to maximize output of the land. More readily available nutrients makes for faster growing plants, thats the bottom line. These nutrients can come from a bag that you buy and spread on your crops...And keep you dependent on an industry. Fortunately, there was a time before petrochemical fertilizer when people were able to have good harvests without such inputs. Its called a circle of life for a reason. One organism's waste is another's food. Somewhere along the line we convinced ourselves that life was a one way street, and recycling is something you only do with manufactured goods. Now faced with a shortage of a precious commodity we will have to kick that old habit, and learn to walk on our own feet again. Forced with adaptation or exctinction we WILL remember how to nurture life from the soil without fertilizers or pesticides. I'm not concerned about my own garden plot, I make all the NPK fertilizer I can possibly use. Humanity will learn to close the loop again or we will not survive. And this challenge is something I am actually optimistic about, because challenge brings out the best in us, so long as we carefully stand guard against the worst in us.
Friday, April 25, 2008
why do I punish myself like this...
The whore of babylon dared bring in a bible scholar to refute Speaker Pelosi's assertion that God commands us to care for the planet. Actually, I'll put the quote here because it is rather striking...
"The Bible tells us in the Old Testament, 'To minister to the needs of God's creation is an act of worship. To ignore those needs is to dishonor the God who made us.' "
Amen.
I purposfully avoided bringing religion into this site for fear of alienating people, but I feel this is a moment where two parts of my life must intersect.
For the record, Speaker Pelosi has disappointed me as of late, but I feel this needs defending. She was not quoting any specific verse, which the $hill they brought in as an expert asserts, but rather summarizing rather eloquently several, not the least of which is one of my favorite.
Gen 2:15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.
If that is not a clear cut directive to be good stewards I don't know what is. The Pharisees at Fox are content to pluck splinters and exalt their own virtues don't get it, and I fear they never will.
"The Bible tells us in the Old Testament, 'To minister to the needs of God's creation is an act of worship. To ignore those needs is to dishonor the God who made us.' "
Amen.
I purposfully avoided bringing religion into this site for fear of alienating people, but I feel this is a moment where two parts of my life must intersect.
For the record, Speaker Pelosi has disappointed me as of late, but I feel this needs defending. She was not quoting any specific verse, which the $hill they brought in as an expert asserts, but rather summarizing rather eloquently several, not the least of which is one of my favorite.
Gen 2:15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.
If that is not a clear cut directive to be good stewards I don't know what is. The Pharisees at Fox are content to pluck splinters and exalt their own virtues don't get it, and I fear they never will.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Is going green making you crazy?
yet another gem from foxnews (why the heck do I torture myself I dont know). Long story short people are developing anxiety about global warming and pollution. Nice how fox points the blame for the neurosis on going green rather than the pollution in their headline.
Since I probably fall into that diagnosis I have a plan for people suffering form this malais du jour.
DO SOMETHING.
chances are, if you are suffering from eco-anxiety, then you are generally prone to generalized anxiety. Anxiety demands a fight or flight response, anxiety is tension....so... release that tension and decide on fight or flight. (preferrably fight)
Rather than go to one of the growing number of therapists who suddenly specialize in ecoanxiety, spend that time and money actually doing something about the thing you fear.
Anxiety is a natural human response to a threat, if we try to philosophize, minimize, or convince ourselves that we are just crazy we ignore the thing that bothers us. Anxiety can be crippling (believe me I know) or it can be a powerful tool. Look at what bothers you, and use that unresolved tension that pulls on you, and put that energy to work.
Take the permaculture approach to anxiety, its only a waste if you cannot find a way for the system to reuse it.
Since I probably fall into that diagnosis I have a plan for people suffering form this malais du jour.
DO SOMETHING.
chances are, if you are suffering from eco-anxiety, then you are generally prone to generalized anxiety. Anxiety demands a fight or flight response, anxiety is tension....so... release that tension and decide on fight or flight. (preferrably fight)
Rather than go to one of the growing number of therapists who suddenly specialize in ecoanxiety, spend that time and money actually doing something about the thing you fear.
Anxiety is a natural human response to a threat, if we try to philosophize, minimize, or convince ourselves that we are just crazy we ignore the thing that bothers us. Anxiety can be crippling (believe me I know) or it can be a powerful tool. Look at what bothers you, and use that unresolved tension that pulls on you, and put that energy to work.
Take the permaculture approach to anxiety, its only a waste if you cannot find a way for the system to reuse it.
Monday, April 14, 2008
Theory and Practice Part 3: Throw diversity at the problem
I found the second chapter of Gaia’s Garden particularly inspiring. The author retells a story about a group of permaculturists who were working with a relatively ingenious self watering bed setup adjacent to a wetland. Unsurprisingly they ran into roadblocks along the way in the form of local wildlife who found their garden particularly tasty. After giving up on trying to thwart the varmints, they found that the next year predatory species and other forms of competition were keeping the offenders in check. In other words, nature will balance the scales if given the opportunity. In theory then all we gardeners have to do is sit back and things will eventually take care of themselves right? Right?
The difference between myself and the above intrepid horticulturalists is one of diversity. Quite simply, there is no way I (nor most on a suburban lot) ever hope to approach the level of biological diversity present in the wetland example, nor even the average field/ forest boundary. Nor can most of us living on an 1/8th of an acre city lot afford the space to spare for the “wild” zones prescribed in permaculture landscaping. The only thing that comes close to being a zone five on my lot is the space behind the shed. So how do I cram the necessary number of species into my lot to never concern myself with pests again? Well, unfortunately I don’t believe that is an option, however I believe I can come close.
Anyone who has picked up a gardening book has heard of companion plants. I’m not going to go into adjacent plants providing enhancement to the soil, what I want to focus on is the ability certain crops have to attract certain animals, be they the “trap crops” which divert the attention of garden freeloaders, or nursery crops to shelter and attract beneficial predators. While it is impossible for the average enthusiast to know what every plant attracts or repels, I don’t think that is a problem. Simply increasing the number of plant species in any given area increases the chances of reducing the size of the bulls eye on your favorite vegetables. It’s a game of sheer statistical chance. If you plant it, they will come. So what do I plant?
Taking a cue from every permaculture reference out there, perennials, you cant beat the maintenance factor, and self seeding annuals aren’t far behind. I don’t need to plant borage near my tomato plants anymore, I did it once, and each year it comes back in such numbers that I continually thin it for weeks. The nice thing is, a lot of common herbs are perennial and hardy to most zones in the US. So I got seeds for all my favorite kitchen herbs, tea herbs, flowers, and some I hadn’t heard of and started growing them right around Christmas.
To date I have started
Hyssop, Lavender, St. John’s Wort, Valerian, mint, Creeping thyme, feverfew, chamomile, lemon balm, bee balm, wormwood, 3 kinds of basil, anise, angelica, bee balm, coneflower, red leaf plantain, black cohosh, garlic chives, common sage, rosemary, hollyhock, zinnias, morning glory, nasturtiums and I’m probably forgetting something. That’s 27 by my count. 26 Extra species this year who are doing nothing but looking nice, attracting bugs, and providing the occasional leaf for seasoning or tea. Ideally I’d like to have 2 species of non harvested plant for each one that is harvested. All of these are going in a section of the yard adjacent to the small pond we put in last year. Before the end of this year hopefully I will have some kind of cattails or lilies for even more diversity.
Over the centuries humanity has bred into our agricultural stocks desirable traits for our own consumption. This does not necessarily make them ideally suited to grow in the wild, but I believe by simply adding a touch of the wild in an area near our prized plants, we reintroduce the biological support systems which in turn reduce our dependency on “imported controls” to pest populations. Permaculture design does this by progressively wilder zones, but ultimately I think the real benefit there is diversity. I do not believe it is necessary to target specific pest populations if one has enough diversity present in the local flora. After 3 years of disappointing curcurbit experiences due to cucumber beetles I am going to try to not try this year. I’m not going to bother trying the “plant X to control Y” method, especially in light of its questionable effectiveness thus far. I’m going to throw a whole bundle of stuff at the wall and hope that something sticks, and if not, add even more next year.
The difference between myself and the above intrepid horticulturalists is one of diversity. Quite simply, there is no way I (nor most on a suburban lot) ever hope to approach the level of biological diversity present in the wetland example, nor even the average field/ forest boundary. Nor can most of us living on an 1/8th of an acre city lot afford the space to spare for the “wild” zones prescribed in permaculture landscaping. The only thing that comes close to being a zone five on my lot is the space behind the shed. So how do I cram the necessary number of species into my lot to never concern myself with pests again? Well, unfortunately I don’t believe that is an option, however I believe I can come close.
Anyone who has picked up a gardening book has heard of companion plants. I’m not going to go into adjacent plants providing enhancement to the soil, what I want to focus on is the ability certain crops have to attract certain animals, be they the “trap crops” which divert the attention of garden freeloaders, or nursery crops to shelter and attract beneficial predators. While it is impossible for the average enthusiast to know what every plant attracts or repels, I don’t think that is a problem. Simply increasing the number of plant species in any given area increases the chances of reducing the size of the bulls eye on your favorite vegetables. It’s a game of sheer statistical chance. If you plant it, they will come. So what do I plant?
Taking a cue from every permaculture reference out there, perennials, you cant beat the maintenance factor, and self seeding annuals aren’t far behind. I don’t need to plant borage near my tomato plants anymore, I did it once, and each year it comes back in such numbers that I continually thin it for weeks. The nice thing is, a lot of common herbs are perennial and hardy to most zones in the US. So I got seeds for all my favorite kitchen herbs, tea herbs, flowers, and some I hadn’t heard of and started growing them right around Christmas.
To date I have started
Hyssop, Lavender, St. John’s Wort, Valerian, mint, Creeping thyme, feverfew, chamomile, lemon balm, bee balm, wormwood, 3 kinds of basil, anise, angelica, bee balm, coneflower, red leaf plantain, black cohosh, garlic chives, common sage, rosemary, hollyhock, zinnias, morning glory, nasturtiums and I’m probably forgetting something. That’s 27 by my count. 26 Extra species this year who are doing nothing but looking nice, attracting bugs, and providing the occasional leaf for seasoning or tea. Ideally I’d like to have 2 species of non harvested plant for each one that is harvested. All of these are going in a section of the yard adjacent to the small pond we put in last year. Before the end of this year hopefully I will have some kind of cattails or lilies for even more diversity.
Over the centuries humanity has bred into our agricultural stocks desirable traits for our own consumption. This does not necessarily make them ideally suited to grow in the wild, but I believe by simply adding a touch of the wild in an area near our prized plants, we reintroduce the biological support systems which in turn reduce our dependency on “imported controls” to pest populations. Permaculture design does this by progressively wilder zones, but ultimately I think the real benefit there is diversity. I do not believe it is necessary to target specific pest populations if one has enough diversity present in the local flora. After 3 years of disappointing curcurbit experiences due to cucumber beetles I am going to try to not try this year. I’m not going to bother trying the “plant X to control Y” method, especially in light of its questionable effectiveness thus far. I’m going to throw a whole bundle of stuff at the wall and hope that something sticks, and if not, add even more next year.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Hope and Faith
Wow, just when I was really feeling grouchy and cynical...
Yesterday while work continued digging the new beds, I noticed something. Buds, buds everywhere, but first a little background. Last year, against what prior experience would say is wise, we planted 5 new trees. Prior to that, we have attempted trees, and met with repeated failure. I don't know if it was poor quality stock (possibly) or poor site preparation (probably). But the bottom line is they don't last long for us. After transplanting last year things were not looking good for this batch either. The 4 lilacs had dropped quite a few leaves before the season was out, I'd say we were left with about 30% remaining...not good. The ornamental cherry did not fare much better. I was not expecting a return in the spring.
I was wrong. The lilacs are bursting with buds everywhere, and the cherry appears to have lost some of its longer branches, but is fairly vigorous on the shorter ones. But they survived!
If that was not enough, I found a bud on one of the grape cuttings, in spite of my anxiety about the process, it is working.
And to top it off, our son (well not legally ours yet but it matters little) just turned one yesterday. There's another one who beat the odds. Born at 27 weeks, a mere 2.2lbs, now a healthy growing 17 pounder crawling all over God's green earth and sprouting teeth.
So I guess I got exactly the lesson I needed yesterday, funny how things work out like that.
Yesterday while work continued digging the new beds, I noticed something. Buds, buds everywhere, but first a little background. Last year, against what prior experience would say is wise, we planted 5 new trees. Prior to that, we have attempted trees, and met with repeated failure. I don't know if it was poor quality stock (possibly) or poor site preparation (probably). But the bottom line is they don't last long for us. After transplanting last year things were not looking good for this batch either. The 4 lilacs had dropped quite a few leaves before the season was out, I'd say we were left with about 30% remaining...not good. The ornamental cherry did not fare much better. I was not expecting a return in the spring.
I was wrong. The lilacs are bursting with buds everywhere, and the cherry appears to have lost some of its longer branches, but is fairly vigorous on the shorter ones. But they survived!
If that was not enough, I found a bud on one of the grape cuttings, in spite of my anxiety about the process, it is working.
And to top it off, our son (well not legally ours yet but it matters little) just turned one yesterday. There's another one who beat the odds. Born at 27 weeks, a mere 2.2lbs, now a healthy growing 17 pounder crawling all over God's green earth and sprouting teeth.
So I guess I got exactly the lesson I needed yesterday, funny how things work out like that.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
the horrors of change
How are we ever to grow if people like this get paid to write this crap...an excerpt which is at the heart of the problem.
It doesn't matter what the overwhelming evidence says, if a person percieves that there is no problem, then there is no need to change. If a person percieves that to change requires sacrifice, and that ultimately that sacrifice will only result in an intangible change in total, then there will be no change. No one wants to reduce their standard of living, especially when the net gain will be negligable.
What we must first attack is the idea that the change in lifestyle is a reduction at all. Ask Mr. Dervaes if he is happier now, or before. Ask the folks over at elements in time if they are happier now? Everytime anyone consciously makes a decision about where their food, clothes and life's necessities come from, everytime someone realizes that personal responsibility and sovreignty is as much about choosing what you really want, and not what everyone seems to want...they are that much closer to truly being free and fully actualized. It is not so much a reduction in the standard of living as a realization of what living really means.
And for all the talk about the so called sacrifice not having any effect? Every person that stops by Path to Freedom and says, "wow, I never thought about that, I might try a few of those ideas." Every person that stops by the farmer's market "just to check it out" Every person who looks at the news and sees what the monsanto's of the world are doing, and wonders where the food in their fridge actually came from...
is one step closer to the turning the tide. Person by person the tide IS turning, and someday people who think like that WILL be in the minority, but by then, they'll just blindly follow what the rest of us consciously decided to do long ago.
and if its all for naught, at least I can meet my end knowing that I tried.
Why am I in such a mood to rant today? yesterday evening I broke my forked spade. Its not even a year old and snapped right at the tang. Post mortem revealed cheap cast "steel." Buy cheap buy twice. But hey I just caused economic growth, because I will have to buy another spade. Sell cheap, sell twice. Watch the GDP rise! the economy is GROWING! Hurray!
Grrrrr.
In "An Inconvenient Truth," Al Gore preached to us about downsizing ouremphasis mine.
lifestyles. He wants us to take colder showers, hang our clothes outside to dry,
avoid driving, use less heating and air conditioning and generally reduce our
standard of living.
It doesn't matter what the overwhelming evidence says, if a person percieves that there is no problem, then there is no need to change. If a person percieves that to change requires sacrifice, and that ultimately that sacrifice will only result in an intangible change in total, then there will be no change. No one wants to reduce their standard of living, especially when the net gain will be negligable.
What we must first attack is the idea that the change in lifestyle is a reduction at all. Ask Mr. Dervaes if he is happier now, or before. Ask the folks over at elements in time if they are happier now? Everytime anyone consciously makes a decision about where their food, clothes and life's necessities come from, everytime someone realizes that personal responsibility and sovreignty is as much about choosing what you really want, and not what everyone seems to want...they are that much closer to truly being free and fully actualized. It is not so much a reduction in the standard of living as a realization of what living really means.
And for all the talk about the so called sacrifice not having any effect? Every person that stops by Path to Freedom and says, "wow, I never thought about that, I might try a few of those ideas." Every person that stops by the farmer's market "just to check it out" Every person who looks at the news and sees what the monsanto's of the world are doing, and wonders where the food in their fridge actually came from...
is one step closer to the turning the tide. Person by person the tide IS turning, and someday people who think like that WILL be in the minority, but by then, they'll just blindly follow what the rest of us consciously decided to do long ago.
and if its all for naught, at least I can meet my end knowing that I tried.
Why am I in such a mood to rant today? yesterday evening I broke my forked spade. Its not even a year old and snapped right at the tang. Post mortem revealed cheap cast "steel." Buy cheap buy twice. But hey I just caused economic growth, because I will have to buy another spade. Sell cheap, sell twice. Watch the GDP rise! the economy is GROWING! Hurray!
Grrrrr.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
If it was just political it might be funny
A friend of mine recently affixed this to his truck. "Hydrocarbon powered Eco Vehicle" well duh, all internal combustion engines burn hydrocarbons. His response was that only chemists will know the truth and he'll fool all the silly hippies. I like this guy, I really do, we've been friends for a while, but sometimes the unapolagetic unabashed elitism grinds my gears.
Or the people who vow to eat twice as much meat to make up for my vegetarianism.
Is one person's uncloseted environmentalism as much an invitation to backlash so as to provide yet another example of Jeavon's paradox?
The phrase "South Park Republicans" has come and gone, their ilk mostly concerned with libertarian issues of non-interference. I think the effect remains though, we are now a "South Park Nation" a country full of people who will deride anyone who cares about anything. Now Mr's Parker and Stone (south park creators) and Mr. Beck (who's smarmy storefront provied my friend with his adhesive clad vinyl statement) would say they don't mind people having opinions, so long as they keep them to themselves. (And God forbid perhaps make you rethink your position) But isn't speaking your mind part of having an opinion? If there is a fire in a crowded theater, please excuse me if I dare to open my mouth and let people know. If I'm wrong, and there is no fire, then I'll suffer the jibes for the inconvenience I caused. But I would be morally remiss if I said nothing.
I used to think that once I started caring about one thing, I will have to start caring about everything. I was right. Its made me neurotic, angry, and depressed at times, but in seeing the world for what it is and not just how I wanted to see it, I also see hope. I see people who are slowly remembering what it means to live, what is necessary and what is distraction or destructive, people who are learning to innovate again, people who are breaking dependency on a system that exploits them.
I can't help but keep referring back to the works of Frank Herbert. I'm reading Heretics of Dune right now. Herbert's analogy of hydraulic despotism, humanity's dependence on a single commodity leading to stagnation and possible demise, is so prescient.
But maybe I'm the elitist one.
Or the people who vow to eat twice as much meat to make up for my vegetarianism.
Is one person's uncloseted environmentalism as much an invitation to backlash so as to provide yet another example of Jeavon's paradox?
The phrase "South Park Republicans" has come and gone, their ilk mostly concerned with libertarian issues of non-interference. I think the effect remains though, we are now a "South Park Nation" a country full of people who will deride anyone who cares about anything. Now Mr's Parker and Stone (south park creators) and Mr. Beck (who's smarmy storefront provied my friend with his adhesive clad vinyl statement) would say they don't mind people having opinions, so long as they keep them to themselves. (And God forbid perhaps make you rethink your position) But isn't speaking your mind part of having an opinion? If there is a fire in a crowded theater, please excuse me if I dare to open my mouth and let people know. If I'm wrong, and there is no fire, then I'll suffer the jibes for the inconvenience I caused. But I would be morally remiss if I said nothing.
I used to think that once I started caring about one thing, I will have to start caring about everything. I was right. Its made me neurotic, angry, and depressed at times, but in seeing the world for what it is and not just how I wanted to see it, I also see hope. I see people who are slowly remembering what it means to live, what is necessary and what is distraction or destructive, people who are learning to innovate again, people who are breaking dependency on a system that exploits them.
I can't help but keep referring back to the works of Frank Herbert. I'm reading Heretics of Dune right now. Herbert's analogy of hydraulic despotism, humanity's dependence on a single commodity leading to stagnation and possible demise, is so prescient.
But maybe I'm the elitist one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
