[Pil-pc-oceania] Rough thoughts on the PPP

[kerry dawborn]

You've made some very impassioned yet well-thought-out points Russ, most 
of which I agree with. I'd be interested to know what you and others 
think about my thoughts in my earlier message to PIL today, in response 
to Tamara's message with the subject Permaculture People's Party 2, 
regarding a coalition of independents, or some kind of lobby group....

cheers,

Kerry

pacific-edge wrote:
> I've just finished participating in the last of a three day, public planning
> process that would see sustainability values and indicators incorporated
> into a local government City Plan. And, reading the PIL email this evening,
> something occurred to me. It is this - that this local government process -
> it's called the Compass To Sustainability and was facilitated by Lee Hatcher
> from the Atkinson group in the USA - has been far more deliberative, far
> more partcipatory, far more democratic than the attempt to set up the
> Permacultuure People's Party (PPP) has been to date.
>
> Now, for a design system professing to 'care for people' and which makes
> periodic allusions to participation and consultation, it's saying something
> that a local government can outdo it when it comes to democratic process.
>
> Realising this, other thoughts came. I recall Bill making public statements,
> years back, that were very critical of the adversarial structure of the
> party political process. He spoke as if it were something to be eschewed,
> avoided as undesirable and having nothing to do with building sustainable
> societies. 
>
> Now, it seems from correspondence on this listserv, permaculturists are to
> throw out those old ideas of Bill's and adopt those same adversarial
> practices that Bill criticised. Adverserial politics is, by nature (and it's
> foolish to imagine you can play it any other way) competitive. Should we
> therefore be consistent and change that now-nuisance Permaculture principle
> that proposes 'cooperation not competition' the other way around?
>
> Watching the flow of dialog on this listserv, it's pretty clear that support
> for a PPP is far from universal. If the idea succeeds in capturing
> sufficient support, however, it could become a severe test of Permaculture
> and its future direction. Think about it - a PPP which gains enough public
> profile will paint (some might say 'taint') all practitioners of the design
> system with the colours of its brush.
>
> The PPP - would it be another fringe, single issue party doomed to wander
> the political borderlands between existence and nonexistence, tottering
> forever on the edge of the void? If not, then what about policies? Emails
> suggest that Bill is to work on policies. But Bill has never claimed to be a
> political strategist. Again - where's the opportunities for participation by
> the broad band of Permaculture practitioners across this country?
> Permaculture's Second Ethic predisposes it to a participatory, democratic
> mode of operation, but where is the is deliberative democracy? Where is the
> call to take part in policy formation on this country's two major
> Permaculture listservs? Where is it found on the PIL listserv, one of the
> main Permaculturte websites in this country? Are permaculturists to be
> dictated to when it comes to policy for a proto-political party that will
> probably lay claim to represent the design system in this country, our work
> and our reputation? Those same political parties that Permaculture would now
> compete with have already weakened democracy in this nation. Do we want
> Permaculture to add to this?
>
> And policies - what will the PPP's policy be on complex issues like Iraq -
> stay there? pull out and risk precipitating the already fractionalised
> nation deeper into civil war, sectarian conflict and into the hands of the
> doomsday cults of maniacal religionists and fanatical fudamentalists? And
> industrial relations? Australia's role in Asia-Pacific? Science policy and
> R&D investment? National water policy? Energy policy? Land management? The
> crises in Aboriginal communities? Defence policy? Poverty and the income
> gap? Social justice? Economic policy? The role of ministerial advisers and
> senior public servants? The relationship of Australia's intelligence
> agencies to government? Policies.
>
> Just passing thoughts.
>
> Now, there was recently a useful discussion on this listserv about the
> desirability of centralisation - that is, some form of representative,
> centralised process which would speak for Permaculture. The consensus, I
> believe, was that centralisation is undesirable. So how, then, would the
> centralised decision making that is part of the party political process be
> found acceptable? 
>
> One of Permaculture's interesting aspects is that is has been the venue in
> which differing political attitudes find common ground. Take a look at the
> political spectrum espoused by permaculturists and you find it travels from
> the Left, through the Greens (always a mixed palette of varying tints and
> shades) to the mainstream parties like the ALP and Libs (tweedledum &
> tweedledee) and then swings right out to the outer orbits of the lonely
> individualists of the Ann Rand libertarian far right where anarchism and
> neoliberalism become strange attractors and fellow travellers. How will the
> PPP structure its appeal to this political melange?
>
> I've written that a party-politicised Permaculture could, perhaps, see the
> loss of its tentative presence within local government, especially among
> sustainability eduators, environmental/resource (water, waste) educators and
> the odd planner (these, coincidentally, are sometimes Permaculture trained
> people) on account of policy that stipulates that local government officers
> not support political parties in their work. I wonder, too, were PPP to gain
> traction in future and develop a public profile, whether the ABC would be
> all that willing to promote it on programs like Gardening Australia?
>
> I imagine that the work in local government might continue, but probably not
> branded as Permaculture.
>
> Looking at the flurry of email the PPP proposal has unleashed, I think it
> could have the potential to become a big issue in Permaculture. Except for
> those enthused with the idea, the reticience I detect suggests that, rather
> than discussing policies for the fledgling party, it might be more pertinent
> and less divisive to discuss whether Permaculture should become a party
> political entity at all. Bill did say - and I remember his stating this -
> that we should engage in careful and thoughtful deliberation rather than
> thoughtless and precipitative action.
>
> As for the Designer's Manual becoming the policy groundwork for PPP (I
> believe it has been suggested), the book was written 20 years ago as an
> amalgam of existing ideas drawn from differing practices. The world is now
> quite a different place than it was when the book was written. I'm not
> denigrating the work - far from it - but it is not a political manifesto
> ("Permaculturists of the world unite - you have nothing to lose but your
> illusions") nor is is a policy framework or even a policy directions
> document. Perhaps the hopeful can anticipate it becoming another Wealth of
> Nations or Das Kapital but it certainly is unlikely to become another Little
> Red Book (those with long memories might explain this to those without).
>
> The idea still persists that Permaculture could be better placed to practice
> its politics through seeking influence, educating people to change their
> behaviour and making use of Dr Robert Gillman's 'demonstration effect' than
> through participation in the ethical wasteland that is party politics.
>
> There are currrent opportunities for permacultirists in the local climate
> action groups that have sprung up around the country and in the
> relocalisation agneda, still to be developed in this country. Are these more
> appropriate venues for enacting Permaculture than a political party.
>
> I wonder if the PPP thing is important enough to deserve more discussion,
> perhaps in a more structured manner, perhaps at the coming convergence?
>
> Sorry if this is a bit stream-of-consciousness sounding, but that is what it
> is.
>
> ...Russ Grayson
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pil-pc-oceania mailing list
> Pil-pc-oceania at lists.permacultureinternational.org
> http://jasper.cmsarchitects.com/mailman/listinfo/pil-pc-oceania
>
>