i. Decolonizing Permaculture

DGR EUMENA private link

This was mostly intended for activist support: we don't look after ourselves and each other well enough, so we put together some models (with corresponding tools) that help a lot both for self-care but also to understand how imperialism works in more detail. The brilliance of Capitalism's design is precisely how well it works in all quadrants ... so we started with explaining the integral model.

Some Mechanics of Oppression

This was the second part of the presentation above, also at the DGR EUMENA first conference in London.

Racism & Colonialism

Humor is a great way to get people to open up very distressed minds to how colonialism has totally shaped western culture and our perception of the world. It is incredibly sad that so few people nowadays (especially 'greens' who insist 'we are all equal' - and so even labelling differences is offensive to them)

Permaculture Education

My contributions to the Permacuture Educators Facebook Group

from this thread, August 2015:

There's a very good reason why the explicit permaculture ethics are the exact opposite of the implicit destructo-cultural ethics (at least the original PC ethics are).

As long as we are severely limited in trying to get our 'livelyhood' within an inherently (and unavoidably) fiercely competitive capitalist system, we're all inherently (and unavoidably) working in conflict with permaculture ethics.

Would anyone seriously disagree with that?

In other words, if we don't actively cooperate, we're de-facto competing (even if we don't mean to). And simply because the system is set up for ALL of us to do that. It's where the current takes us: it actively discourages (system-subversive) cooperation.

Given that cooperation is one of our directives (and caring for people one of our ethics), I love seeing that question aired (thanks Heather): how are we designing for that (ie. doing permaculture) in terms of how we earn money from couses (teach permaculture)?

I would sugget that how capitalism (the soup we swim in, air we breathe, etc.) affects everything we do is very significant, & unless we aknowledge that at the beginning of any discussions about what to charge for PC courses, I think we're wasting our time, at best, and misleading ourselves and each other, at worst. Ignoring or dismissing a mega-pattern we're all affected by isn't likely to get us creating any useful new designs (and if we can't design, what the hell are we teaching?)

Certainly capitalism offers much opportunity for competition (also found in Nature) which does contribute to push innovation, drive excellence, etc. BUT - unlike Nature - it doesn't reward cooperation quite as much, and it pushes a very particular style of competition: towards destruction. Because it exists within a framework where we tend to consider 'excellent', 'innovative', etc. a lot of useless or downright damaging gunk - given we are all heavily conditioned to (for eg.):

- value appearances over substance (packaging over content),

- entertainment over intellectual effort,

- beliefs & prejudice over science,

- men's expertise & opinions over women's,

- white people's experience & perspective over anyone else's,

- etc. (just to mention a few quite self-defeating - for us - patterns)

- not to mention that we are very heavily brainwashed to value sound-bytes over discourse

- and superficial agreement over in-depth juicy debate.

So (I suggest) it is logically very, very unlikely that the PC courses (& products / services of any kind) that will make the 'excellence' mark (or be most popular) in our mostly consumerist, frivolous and superficial destructo-culture will actually be those most likely to change society (in a sustainability direction). ie. they are not likely to be the most permacultural ones. (All complex organisms self-preserve with their own homeostasis mechanisms, and the DC is no exception).

Which is a very interesting conundrum to be dealing with. Because of course the average customer will only pay big money for something they perceive as excellent, or at least popular. Which in this case would (most likely) be the least threatening (to this culture) permaculture courses.

(Incidentally this is a big reason some of us cringe big time when our colleagues suggest we need to 'popularize permaculture'. Because a brief glance at systems thinking would suggest that what we really need to do is to radicalize more people ... which is quite a different proposition).

That there's never a crowd on the cutting edge is an easily observable trend in history (even if the inverse isn't always true: wherever just a few people hang out there's not a cutting edge, necessarily, ok Emoticón smile )

It is very interesting therefore that the fathers of permaculture subscribed to letting (capitalist) market forces regulate permaculture courses: "let anyone teach because if they're no good they will not have students for long anyhow" - ie. 'let the best one win' (more students'). Hmmm...

What's any of this got to do with the original question? (now deleted for some reason)

In my opinion, as much as I love the first part of the question,

< how do we design for a >"Sustainable, viable collaboration?"

I don't think it's useful to couple that with the question of what we charge for courses. Because although that will always be an element of the overall design of anything, it is not the most important element, or where it's most useful to begin, I think.

That is IF we are thinking in terms of 'WE' and not 'me, me, me'.

And only genuine 'we' thinking will get us designing (and moving) in the right direction. Very difficult to do if we have bills to pay, granted!

Another thing I see as obvious as it is inevitable (and growing worse as economic crisis worsen - as they will continue to) is that if we don't ACTIVELY design for cooperation, we will continue to collude with this destructo-system by competing ever more fiercely with each other - in teaching permaculture as in anything else. And that is BOUND to corrupt permaculture to the core. (if it hasn't already ...) - there's simply no integrity in that.

...

..........................................

I also started in urban PC (http://www.gaiatasiri.org/home/antecedentes) - and it certainly taught me a hell of a lot about

1) the need to teach permaculture design correctly and

2) it completely blew up my theory that people would 'learn permaculture from doing it' as I had hoped

I never wanted to go into teaching (was quite stuck in the "those who can, do, those who can't, teach" mentality, which I do think is true in some cases) and didn't see teaching as that important, since it seemed so obvious, especially with something as hands-on as PC.

... and I learned that I was totally, crushingly wrong about this.

Our project was an early and successful example of what we now call a 'transition community project' but it could have been SO much more ... if we would only have had a few more great PC designers on board (or / & have been very strict about sending all of our management committee, staff & volunteers on good PC courses - but even then, I could see that the standards on most PC courses weren't up to the complexity of the work we were doing ... so we started inventing them).

I totally agree that it's absurd that anyone ever teach *anything* they have no proven track record in DOING reasonably well, especially something like permaculture design.

To me it's pretty obvious that the erosion in standards in permaculture has a lot (if not everything?) to do with that.

Even those of us who have been wildly successful in doing (say) amazing soil regeneration work ... how successful have we been in restoring the (much more critical) soil of community? Because we pass on our mistakes & unhealthy patterns as surely as we pass on our wisdom and brilliant abilities, whenever we pretend to be teachers (which is also why team-teaching is critical, in my opinion - but a team with real diversity)

I believe anyone can only ever teach others to 3/4 of their own level, in anything (but hopefully inspire them to 9/4ths of their level). So we'd better look for teachers with a very high level of mastery in whatever we aspire to learn. Anyone else see this as just common sense or am I seriously deluded? (or just plain wrong about this?)

So it is critical, I believe, that we actively discourage people from teaching PC UNTIL they have a decent level of (proven) mastery of the design process, and real-life permaculture, which they've actually taken leadership-level responsibility for (not just hung around the edges of some great project designed and led by others: it's all too easy to learn 'the wrong things' whenever you're just a spectator).

And you'd think the regular capitalist competition process would take care of that, at least, in self-selecting in the right direction ... but what I think I see in practice (& please do prove me wrong about this because it's just too depressing ...) is that most 'customers' looking for PC courses actually don't look into or care all that much for the practical professional background of the people who are going to teach them, but are FAR more swayed by the popularity and marketing gizmos thing - like whether they've written a book or have a snazzy web presence.

All the 'teacher training' courses in the world cannot substitute for on-the-ground complex project management experience in DOING real life peraculture projects, in my opinion. Mostly because we actually learn a lot of counter-intuitive things which are VERY expensive (in time, resources and energy) to have to re-learn by every generation that follows, and quite difficult to explain / go through during a course anyhow.

Really good, solid PC action-learning training you can only (in my opinion) get with a solid ongoing mentorship programme, like the one (originally, at least in Europe) designed into the PC Diploma process.

..................................

One of the things we repeatedly try to emphasize is that nobody needs land to 'do' permaculture. I think it's critical because there's a very imperialist bend to that (very persistent) idea, and it's done our movement no end of harm to keep pushing that permaculture design is mostly about how we design lands or buildings.

In fact the most critical things we need to re-design are ideas and mythologies. We need to re-design the whole Culture to create a PermaCulture. And I suggest we notice that it's when we get offended, uncomfortable or upset that we're most likely to be on the edge of some real cultural shift: our deepest beliefs being questioned.

So I suggest that nobody raised in the hyper-consumerist west can even start to dismantle any DestructoCulture out there if they haven't done some serious work of dismantling it inside themselves.

Call that 'academic' if you like, but I suggest that anyone with an eye for pattern should note that where the 'developed west' is now, is simply the furthest stage of a demonic 'natural succession' that civilizing people and lands inevitably follow.

That is IF we don't put some seriously disruptive technologies in the way (and gardening ain't it, sorry. If it were we would have noticed by now).

Note that the cutting edge of that destructo-system is precisely this: the most privileged in the destroyed, already civilized places move from their wasted lands to relatively pristine lands abroad ... to continue the patterns they learned at home - even when we delude ourselves we are doing something different.

I work in permaculture education (specifically in modernizing and radicalizing the curriculum) because I don't see that most permaculture designers are aware enough of the civilization patterns we carry to even begin to question (never mind stop) that massively destructive machinery.

It's just as destructive when painted green. If not more, because we take so much longer to notice we're just repeating the same old story. I know we love the deeply comforting, very simplistic PC mantras that kid us it's otherwise (and get lots of good, deeply caring people onto our courses), but please do look a little deeper: no amount of blissful gardening will ever stop multinationals from pillaging the planet.

And please don't shoot the messanger, just look around.

The big ironies of western permis going to colonise less spoiled (& cheaper) lands shoudn't be lost to us: they're quite critical to note. Remember all colonizers always fervently believe they are introducing more advanced ideas to the local primitives. Another easy to spot pattern is that all of them deeply believe they are creating 'a new world'. Most don't even hide they are 'empire building', but are in fact proud of that.

So it is naive at best to imagine that (without seriously disrupting the overall design of globalization) we're creating anything 'sustainable' by just planting gardens, or making land more productive (for humans), especially if we go do so in relatively unspoiled areas.

It's in the brain of the beast that real change can begin to happen, and (whether we like it or not) it's us western permis that have the best shot - as well as the strongest ethical imperative, and responsibility - at stopping this crap from the inside, at its source. But first we have to really understand how it is designed.

And we mostly don't. Because - I suggest - we don't actually teach design on our design courses. We mostly teach agroecology & agroforestry. Subjects I love dearly (passionately, even: it's what I do at home every day), but nothing in any danger of re-designing society.

Diet (Eating Meat)

There have been various videos circulating in Facebook of children refusing to eat meat.

One of a girl crying at seeing animals chopped up on her plate appeared on one of Dani's posts (a permaculture colleague I respect a lot), August 2015

https://proteinpower.com/.../07/01/obesity-in-ancient-egypt/

This just came up in my FB feed right under this one.

Quite relevant given that diabetes, obesity and depression are growing astronomically in younger and younger people, in the west. And it's not because they're carnivores - it's actually because they're mostly carbivores.

This kind of mis-directed propaganda helps us all to badly confuse the gruesome industrial meat production industry we have now for 'eating meat'. Yet if people actually knew the costs of industrially produced vegetables - especially grains - they wouldn't eat them either, if they had any compassion whatever.

ALL industrial production (of anything, not just food, although agriculture is responsible for the hugest toll of destruction) is done at the cost of brutal injustice, massive suffering (of other species, and 'other' humans, also) and astonishing amounts of waste and pollution, which kill 200 species PER DAY.

Ironically (the kid should be told ...) it is precisely the animals that humans have domesticated for food that are the least likely to become extinct, even within this brutal industrial system.

But (even more ironically ... ) it looks like our salvation from climate change apocalypse (which will do away with more Life & species than most people can even imagine) might come from restoring the massive herds of herbivores that used to exist on this planet (and stopping agriculture from creating more and more deserts).

I totally agree that nobody should eat meat who isn't prepared to (respectfully) kill it themselves. And it's no coincidence that in lots of native cultures (the only sustainable humans on this planet) the rites of growing up (into adults) included killing your own meat.

It simbolizes taking responsibility for one's place in the cycle of Nature: the cycle of Life and Death. Not surprising therefore that most 'adults' in this adolescent culture of ours (proudly!?) admit to not being able to or even wanting to learn to kill their own food.

I totally agree (if you hadn't guessed already) that industrial meat production has to be stopped. As soon as possible. But I agree because our only job on Earth now is to return all species (that are left) to their rightful habitat, to their birthright. And there is nothing compassionate about letting animals (or people?) die slowly of painful disease in old age. That's probably why Nature, in her wisdom, invented predators.

Slave to the Matrix

The Matrix trilogy is a great model that 'maps' the destructo-culture in an interesting and quite useful (especially for activists) ways. We enjoy playing with this (and other) in Class 1.10 of the Integral Permaculture curriculum: 6. Political Model: The Matrix

The Matrix (Political) model starts at slide 48:

of Class 1.10, Models of the Destructo-Culture