[Pil-pc-oceania] Politics?

[Graeme George - Earthcare Permaculture]

Dear Colleagues

I support the comments made by David, John, Steve, Robyn and Sue on this 
issue.

One doesn't have to form a political party in order to become 
politically active. Local Government has already been mentioned as a 
good starting point. Joining an existing party and having some influence 
on policy development is another, as is personal lobbying, letter 
writing to politicians, and active membership of community groups. In a 
permaculture design you don't waste the embodied energy in a solid house 
because it's energy inefficient - you retro-fit it. The same should 
apply to our invisible structures. As Steve has pointed out we should be 
taking advantage of political structures that are already heading in the 
right direction and work from the grass roots up to effect top-down 
change further down the track. We seem to have two camps developing, 
those wanting revolutionary change and those taking an evolutionary 
approach.  As a biologist and pragmatist I believe that the latter 
approach is more likely to succeed in our industrialised society.

I'm surprised that the design technique of analysing options and 
pathways (Designer's Manual, p 47) appears not to have been utilised on 
this occasion. We've been presented with a  /fait accompli -/ a 
structure and a name for a political party without any debate or 
consensus. How can such a party purport to represent the permaculture 
movement? We've all been taught that permaculture is non-hierarchical 
and bio-regionally focussed. Now we're being urged to go national and 
even international. John rounded off a previous discussion about Future 
Directions for Permaculture on this list with the comment -
> this issue needs to be high on the agenda for APC9 in Sydney. Before that though,I feel we need solid discussion papers fleshing out all possible options.
I agree and see that this starting to happen. We've now had a number of 
cautionary emails and there is obviously no consensus that a 
permaculture party is the way to go. Without that consensus, how can it 
happen? I wonder if this is just kite-flying by Bill.

Stuart Hill, in his keynote paper presented at the APC8 Symposium in 
Melbourne in April 2005, said, in discussing the way forward for Phase 
Two of Permaculture -

> Because we live in a culture that over-values /Olympic/ scale 
> initiatives, which are impossible for most of us to be involved in, we 
> should make a special effort to emphasise the importance of /small, 
> meaningful projects that individuals or small groups can guarantee to 
> carry through to completion./ Indeed, I put forward the fairly 
> revolutionary idea that by celebrating these publicly (for example, 
> through the local media and social gatherings) they are likely to be 
> copied by others and, paradoxically, be much more likely to bring 
> about positive sustainable change in society than the mega-projects 
> that currently attract most attention and resources.
>
Lots of suggestions are coming forward in line with this approach. It 
seems to me that a dedicated political party is a very un-permacultural 
way to achieve change in society. I'm reminded of the strategy of using 
gravity when building a house - design the access so that you don't have 
to cart everything uphill!

Regards

Graeme George
*Earthcare Permaculture*
35 Deering Ave, Healesville, Vic 3777
(03) 5962 5070




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://jasper.cmsarchitects.com/pipermail/pil-pc-oceania/attachments/20070702/3f47a0bf/attachment.html