Arcology and Human Scale There is a need to create viable development plans and schemes for humanity. That means planning ecologically orientated communities and cities that are appropriate to the present demographic makeup of a six billion plus human population. Large scale, top-down macro-level solutions undermine the autonomous and independent character of the individual and on a larger level, the community. Possibly the original skeletal federalist character of the US government--which for a short time created a stunning degree of self-reliance and autonomy in the US society (1790-1840)--could be a model that we might seek to refine for a ecovillage/ecocity model of society centered around a new more fluid political geography that is based not on arbitrary human notions that center around colonial and neocolonial aspirations of power and domination, but rather around cultural, ethnic, geographical and biological considerations. Is Paolo Soleri’s vision of Arcology a real authentic viable solution or simply another “better kind of Wrongness?”
We cannot overcome this tendency to gravitate towards better kinds of wrongness without looking at how we use our energy. I mean this mean this spiritually, mentally and emotionally. Do we put ourselves unnecessarily in a mental and emotional space that squanders our energy, and keeps us distant from our dreams. All these people that have come together at Arcosanti and Cosanti at one time or another inspired by one man’s dream and vision of a more ideal future social system. No doubt such a vision is unique in history if not in modern times itself. We have to varying degrees made his vision our own. The problem with this is expressed in what is traditionally referred to as guru worship and hero worship. That we respect and appreciate the vision of Arcology that is expressed in Arcosanti should in no way imply that our dreams are any less in value than his. Yet to many that come to Arcosanti, it is automatic, in the sense that their function at Arcosanti can be replaced by another. Paolo however is irreplaceable. The foundation does value many of the long term people involved in the project, but only in the sense that they perform valuable skills that are needed in the articulation of Paolo’s vision to the world. When we refer to the Arcology theories there is vagueness in reference to socio-political interactions. Possibly because Paolo’s real feelings are not very politically correct. We get drips and drabs though. In speaking of an automaton, Paolo seeks the function of society to become more automatic. This would imply a manipulation of human behavior that is similar to that outlined by B.F Skinner in Walden Two.
It takes time to overcome our conditioning. While the media continues to obsess about cults, it is that the greatest threat to humanity comes with the rise of a global culture that encourages uniformity of thought. Uniformity of thought is leading to conformity to the prevailing financial abstractions that drive the modern economy. While we need to be aware of the global trends that are emerging as the global economy, our focus should be on starting to figure how we can get the resources to create a massive social movement that will re-ignite people's imagination about what we humans are capable of doing. This is no small thing we are talking about here, but it must start small. Much of society is geared to distract us from what’s real. It is hardly fair to blame this on modern systems. The institutions of society are simply the vehicle for ancient modes of thinking that still survive and drive us despite the appearance of significant change through technological transformations of human social systems. The major reason why the society is closed to real change is that a certain type of male has dominated civilized societies since before recorded history. The term patriarchy described a society that is primarily influenced by the male influence and what are typically seen as male attributes. It is not about male domination, so much as it about how the leading alpha males in history have traditionally or typically thought.