Dismantle Civilisation

culturechange.org article, written by Jan Lundberg.

The fastest way to put the brakes on global heating is to embrace the peaking of world oil extraction and the implications of petrocollapse. As long as we deny there’s a terminal outcome for our petroleum-based infrastructure — and therefore society as we know it — we will keep dancing around the crisis of climate change. Precious time is being lost while feedback loops strengthen greenhouse gas output. Embracing collapse sounds crazy and, as we all would prefer, hopefully unnecessary. But what if that’s your only ticket out of the burning theater and the rafters are about to come down?

Let’s get our priorities straight. Is the economy a sacred cow? Is maintaining it along with its institutions of government and corporations the only way greenhouse gases will be slashed, and quickly enough to stave off climate hell? Writer George Monbiot is so certain that the answer is “yes” that he may have forgotten that direct action steps on certain toes.

I think the answer to those questions is emphatically “No!” Trusting the continuation of the economy and its self-serving components of Earth’s destruction includes their assuring first their own self-preservation — as if they were divine creations of Mother Nature to be loaded onto a Noah’s Ark to save the world. No, thank you. There’s another way, but many of us of a conventional bent are loathe to make the leap — even if it would be off a burning precipice to safety within reach. When will we do it, when our neck of the woods becomes uncomfortable?

Embracing collapse doesn’t sound at all crazy to us. There is no option. Collapse is coming either from peak oil or, if we carry on allowing civilisation to dictate the terms of our existence, from pollution, deforestation, species extinction and climate change. By embracing collapse, embracing change, we are recognising that this social model does not work for a large percentage of the earth’s population, human and non-human alike.

Putting collapse on the table

What if government and corporations and the global warming threat are one and the same thing? What if the inevitable collapse of government and corporations could bring about the desperately needed curtailment of greenhouse gas emissions? If that seems like an impossible dream scheme, we supposedly have the option of building our way out of climate hell through the popular green-techno “solution”: Monbiot says, “build the installations required to turn the energy economy around – wind farms, wave machines, solar thermal plants in the Sahara, new grid connections and public transport systems”.

If we are now in sudden peril, isn’t it a lot easier and quicker to cut off the gangrene of commercialism and consumerism than to reform it some day? Maybe I’m naive about cutting it off, but if it isn’t done now to get rid of a “mere” foot, and face the pain with grim determination, then soon we will be faced with losing the leg and then the whole organism.

Big government and corporations are the gangrene. The accummulation of wealth with all impacts of those activites ‘externalised’ has made a few people immensely wealthy, but at what cost to the rest of us and our planet?

Considering collapse with eyes wide open

Now to flesh out instant collapse. I don’t really want to do so or see it occur in my lifetime. But I feel compelled to refute the game players’ faith in keeping up the status quo for the sake of our survival amidst climate extinction. Some of them are truly without a clue as to natural living and decentralized forms of economics for whatever smaller human communities are manageable and sustainable. Others have gotten a whiff of the poorer, funkier lifestyle of those who have nothing to lose materially, and they say to themselves, “No way, I’m not gonna live in a f___ing yurt.” Out loud they continue to warn us of the climate crisis and command attention of everyone who isn’t an SUV die-hard, and point to the Promised Land of benign technology and smooth transitioning. Ah, thank you oh savior — but meanwhile I see your lifestyle is not a’ changin’.

I’m all for benign technology and smooth transitioning. However, for a whole overpopulated planet, where is it besides in theory? Yes, it’s vital to use some energy and to use technology for needs not normally associated with energy. There are ingenious ways of using less energy to do a lot of important tasks and to enjoy a full life of comfort. Yet, maintaining comfort for billions of people is not realistic, and only a few hundred million are actually living in comfort today. As we are seeing with food prices rising and pollution unabated, the vaunted social benefits of governments and corporations are failing us. George Monbiot warns us that we must not reject “all state and corporate solutions,” as he claims rejecting them is the main goal of some climate activists. Some “solutions” would be wonderful to see and actually come to pass. But will the state and the corporations ever promote such climate protection as needed by the biosphere so as to eliminate their own power?

Corporations by design are machines that take resources and turn them into products that we, denigrated to the role of consumers, consume in exchange for giving them money. Th acquire that money, we too have to find some natural resource – for many all we have is time and energy – and swap that for money. Viable ecosystems, and natural habitats have no value in that system, neither do love, joy, awe and wonder or other human feelings.

Historically the whole system only works with cheap abundant energy, for the past hundred years this has come in the shape of oil and its by-products. Before that it was slaves (and still is in many parts of the world now). You cannot turn shackles or guns into spades and garden tools, without first melting down the weapons. This system needs melting down, so we can rebuild it into something beautiful and benign, from the bottom up, based on consensual cooperation and goodwill.

What would a post-petrocollapse economy look like?

Let us now focus on the positive after having stated some negativities of the problem: What would a non-petroleum economy or a post-petrocollapse economy look like? What would the alternative to the “burning theater” look like? Let’s say we somehow abandon our dependence on government and corporations, and we slash our own energy use. If that means quitting your job now, let’s imagine it anyway. Let’s imagine the trucks not pulling into the supermarkets, and the grid going down. Not even emergency services as we know them are working. (I don’t want to see this, but what if they are about to happen?)

Our daily life at first would be in a panic — where to obtain food? What about water, and does the pump not work “’cause the vandals took the handles”? In some parts of the world, the less petroleum-dependent parts, the panic will be minimal. In others it will be full bore, where we presently drive down the street for our needs and we order no end of services for our homes through utilities and overnight couriers (who use greenhouse-gas emitting trucks and airplanes). Let’s say you’re in a modern city and petrocollapse hits before total climate breakdown causes something worse. Can we call up the government and corporations and ask them if they are still reconciling their priorities? Those priorities include protecting the wealth of the few and guaranteeing consumer splendor for those willing to work their butts off while not questioning authority.

It is hard to project a sustainable population size for a suddenly oil-deprived city. But we can picture the survivors looking at available ground for growing food and rigging rooftops and plastic tarps to gather rain water. Depaving will have to be by hand because we neglected to do it when we had the petroleum-energy. Will green technology be available off the shelf to do all we need in the post-petroleum world? Somewhat, but let’s keep in mind that no one was stocking any shelves lately.

Perhaps we’ll hear quirky songs with exhortations such as
“Monkeywrench the truck and car
By not spending su dolar”
(I wrote and recorded it and I perform it; the last two words are Spanish)

In smaller communities there will be coordination of available resources and immediate conversion of, say, pasture land to growing grain and vegetables. Where are the seeds for this? Let’s say we have them. What about tractors and fertilizers, etc.? The answer is human power. Biofuels are not and will not be in sufficient supply to maintain anything like our present practices (such as everyone eating food). Richard Heinberg of Post Carbon Institute said that we would need “50 million farmers in the US, one out of six people.” Animal power will be much appreciated, as in Cuba after its petrocollapse in the early ’90s. But have you seen any oxen lately in the U.S.? Pedal power systems exist already and will become extremely popular.

At the end of a hard day of physical work, petrocollapse survivors will not be turning on the telly and zoning out, only to take orders the next day from their former masters in government and corporations. Instead, there will be community meetings after work, and the next day there will be more physical work. But ingenuity and skills will be just as important. People will organize themselves for tasks cooperatively, as we did for uncounted millennia. Except, this time, gathering firewood for the meals to cook may include taking furniture out of abandoned homes and buildings. This is foreseeable as an easy option when die-off has happened — from our losing the petroleum for food production and distribution that we have been taking for granted for almost a century. Or we can foresee die-off from climate extinction.

Articles including short stories have been published in this column on the subject of post-oil society, so details won’t be restated here. The point is that we will soon be using a lot less energy, to a thankful degree for our cherished climate, and deforestation will also be crimped by our losing the fuel for the chainsaws and bulldozers. Petrocollapse saves the climate. So far we’ve talked about the involuntary collapse.

The nature of this website is to try to encourage more people to see what is coming, and embrace voluntary collapse. There are millions around the world who will be singing and dancing when the corporations implode, and can no longer oppress, exploit and enslave in the name of profit (for the few). Although it will be difficult for many many people, nowhere near as difficult as continuing to live within this abusive system.

Voluntary collapse?

But wait. Some don’t talk about collapse, voluntary or otherwise, as they let their actions speak instead. They buy only local goods and services. They keep their income and spending to a minimum. Quality of life is far more important than quantity of wealth and material things. After all, we can only eat one meal at a time and wear only one pair of shoes at a time. Speaking of time, it should be our own, for our families and visible, familiar community, and not for the boss or the Tax Man. Furthermore, the most efficient conservation activity is accomplished by children who are not born; constrained fertility is the strongest action possible. All of this behavior contributes to collapse of the consumer economy and the authority of government.

Talking about a voluntary collapse prior to petrocollapse to save the climate is getting almost no public discussion. It implies an unpopular and hated — and many would say completely unrealistic and antisocial — course of action. And no one would participate. Well, some would as soon as they see there’s nothing to lose. It would be tragic if this undesirable and painful course became popular and chaotic. There could be ugly scenes and dislocation, were it somehow to succeed. But it could possibly be for the most part quite nonviolent. If the idea were circulated and followed that we must slash petroleum use now, and not buy any corporate products, and suspend having children, this would bring down the global warming industrial system very soon. It would take only a certain amount of this non-cooperation, as Gandhi called it, for success. Once the corporations fold and government power ebbs, as people take to the streets and meet their neighbors to work with them, our main challenge only begins. But the greenhouse gases will have at least been slashed.

If governments and corporations did not get enough continued slavish patience to give us a green society, we’ll say “You had your chance.” How long do we wait to say this — when they’ve allowed carbon dioxide to reach the fatal 450 parts per million in the atmosphere? The choice is still yours for now.

And there would be something growing in its place, as we reforge community links, support local sustainable business, enjoy where we live and travel less. There would not be a vaccuum full of nothing but need and hunger. As one system dies, taking the empire who has no clothes with it, another safer, cleaner and more democratic system will grow.

No Comments »

Don’t Believe Everything You’re Told, says Melinda at one green generation.

Ten Reasons To Grow A Four-Season Organic Garden

• Growing your own food reduces the distance your food travels from the farm to you (10 feet, say, versus 250-2,500 miles). That means you’re eliminating the petroleum products used in farming equipment, fertilizers, pesticides, packaging, storage, and transportation.
• By reducing the distance your food travels from the farm to you, you also reduce your overall carbon output, taking a bite out of your impact on climate change.
• In the winter when most farmer’s markets close up shop, you’ll still have fresh, tasty produce.
• When you grow your own food, you also know where your food is coming from (no weird salmonella strains in your tomatoes and spinach, for instance).
• Home grown food tastes many times better and has more vitamins and minerals than vegetables raised in a monocultural setting.
• You can choose to grow various heirloom crops that you just can’t buy in a grocery store.
• You can choose to grow crops that aren’t genetically modified.
• You can save seed and create different varieties that are best suited for your little backyard microclimate.
• Knowing how to grow your own food makes you much more adaptable to whatever economic or environmental hardship that comes your way in the future.
• And lastly, it’s fun, it tastes better, and gardening nourishes your soul.

When To Plant Fall and Winter Gardens

• Plant in early to mid-summer for a fall garden.
• Plant in the late summer and early fall for a winter garden.

Obviously this is a general rule of thumb. Some of you in the lower hardiness zones will want to be planting your winter gardens asap – yesterday even. I know I sound like a broken record, but seek out your local Master Gardeners and get your hands on a planting schedule for your area. It won’t be perfect, but it will be a general guide for you.

Then find out your average frost date. You can find this in the Farmer’s Almanac, or a good local nursery, or farmers in the area. When you find this out, you will know the date at which – more or less – your winter crops should be matured. You can work backwards from that date, looking at a seed packet for the “dates to maturity.” If your seed packet doesn’t tell you, a good gardening book will (see references in Part 2).

For example, if your first frost date is October 15th, and you’re planting something that needs 30 days from seeding until maturity, you’ll want to plant it at around September 15th, maybe a bit later depending on how warm your fall days are. But having said that, don’t be afraid to experiment and see if you can get more out of your garden – if it’s September 15th and your seeds don’t mature for 60 days, try planting a few anyway – they’re just seeds! Alternatively, you can plant seedlings from a nursery and gain at least 2-3 weeks.

Good Fall and Winter Crops

Root vegetables: carrots, radishes, beets, turnips, parsnips, rutabagas

Greens: kale, chard, spinach, mustard greens, collards, Asian greens (eg, bok choy, mizuna), arugula, radicchio, lambsquarters, mesclun lettuces, orach, sorrel, endive

Brassicas: brussels sprouts, cabbage, cauliflower, broccoli, kohlrabi

Herbs: oregano, marjoram, basil, cilantro, parsley, chives, fennel, and any perennial herb

Others: Jerusalem artichokes (sunchokes), scallions, leeks, peas, celery, celeriac, bush beans, fava beans, garbanzo beans, oats

Fruits: There also some fruits that are harvested in the winter, like apples, pears, persimmons, and citrus fruits. But you’ll need to plant these in late fall, winter, or early spring.

Summer Crops: Almost every summer crop can extend into November, if you live in a temperate climate. Tomatoes, tomatillos, winter squash, berries, beans are all good candidates for fall season extension.

Over-Wintering and Cover Crops: I’ll reserve these for another post. Over-wintering crops are ones that are planted in the fall, are then left well-mulched over the winter, and become your first crops of the early spring. Cover crops are those that protect the topsoil from rains and snow, and add nutrients to the soil – either through their roots or when dug into the soil in early spring.

Note: this is by no means a complete list – if you have other suggestions, please let everyone know in the comments. And do forgive my loose taxonomy.

An excellent article. There are plenty of things that many of us can start planting now, for xmas crops and to get a good start for next spring.

No Comments »

The do it your self handbook is packed full of useful information, from how to run meetings, to haw to set up a community garden, to organising a health collective and much more.

Climate change, resource wars, privatisation, the growing gap between rich and poor, politicians that don’t listen…

Massive issues, but how can we make any difference? ‘Do It Yourself: A Handbook for Changing Our World’ shows how. It’s not a book about what’s wrong with the world, but a collection of dynamic ideas which explore how we can build radical and meaningful social change, ourselves, here and now.

The book weaves together analysis, stories and experiences. It combines in-depth analytical chapters followed by easy to follow ‘How to Guides’ with practical ideas for change. Taken together, these small steps can move us towards taking back control of our lives from governments and corporations.

Written and edited by activists and grassroots campaigners, Do It Yourself is part of a growing response from the global social justice movement. The book reflects on their experiences covering nine different areas:

” Low impact living – reducing your energy consumption

” Decision making – organising without leaders

” Food – setting up and growing a community garden

” Health – organising a health collective

” Education – inspiring change through learning together

” Alternative media – challenging the mainstream by creating your own media

” Autonomous spaces – setting up and running a social centre

” Cultural activism – unleashing creative potential

” Direct action -building and maintaining effective campaigns

The Handbook for Changing Our World is the first book to be published by Pluto Press under the ground-breaking Creative Commons license allowing greater rights for non-commercial uses.

It available from Pluto Press, just £12.99 or $18.99.

No Comments »

Meetings can be boring. Lets face it, we simply haven’t been taught how to co-operate, in fact we have been trained our whole lives how not to cooperate. Everything in mainstream schools prepares us for a life of conflict and competition. So, when we try to work together some of us, maybe unconsciously, maybe totally aware, rush into it like a competition. We have to be heard, we have to get our views across, we are right!

But, this does not help when a group of people decide to undertake a project together. So, it makes sense to learn from others who have experience of what goes wrong in meetings, and to follow some simple guidelines of how to make meetings run smoothly and achieve understanding if not full agreement.

Meetings are necessary, as a place to communicate ideas, make plans, discuss ideas and delegate responsibilities. The facilitator role in a meeting is a little similar to the old chairman, but with a few differences. It is not a position of power or authority, but a great responsibility, where one person agrees to ignore their own feelings during the meeting, and to concentrate on the dynamics of that meeting.

Seeds for Change have a very useful factsheet concerning the role of the facilitator (which means: making easy, the act of assisting or making easier the progress or improvement of something), and there website has other very useful information to help activists (yes, if you are seeking to start working for a post carbon society, working with your neighbours, you are an activist!).

A facilitator is essentially a helper for the group to have an efficient and inclusive meeting. Depending on the group a facilitator might:
help the group decide on a structure and process for the meeting and to keep to it
keep the meeting focussed on one item at a time until decisions are reached
regulate the flow of discussion – drawing out quiet people and limiting over-talking
clarify and summarise points, test for consensus and formalise decisions
help the group in dealing with conflicts.

To ensure that the group is using the most effective means of working through topics the facilitator might introduce tools such as brainstorming, go-rounds or small-group discussion. See our Briefing on Tools for Facilitating Meetings for an overview of such tools.

Superficially a facilitator fills a role similar to that of the traditional chairperson. There are however important differences. A facilitator never ‘directs’ the group without its consent. At no time does the facilitator make decisions for the group or take on functions which are the responsibility of the group as a whole. A good facilitator stays neutral and helps the members of the meeting be aware that it is their business being conducted. The success of the meeting is the mutual responsibility of the whole group. The facilitator needs to be aware of this and always get the group’s agreement before using processes or tools.

Facilitation is a vital role that needs to be filled at every meeting. In small groups this function may be shared or rotated informally. However, difficult meetings or meetings with a larger number of participants (more than 8 or 10 people) should have always have a clearly designated and experienced facilitator. All members of the meeting should feel responsible for the progress of the meeting, and help the facilitator if necessary.

We would suggest that initially at least a few of the people you are working with should learn how to facilitate a meeting. Eventually though you should aim to empower everyone in your group to be able to take this role, and it should rotate so that no one is doing it too often. It may be that one person is very good at it, and everyone loves their style and how much you get agreed, while another person may rush the meeting too much for some of you, and yet another might allow too much discussion so meetings go on for too long. But by allowing all to take turns you ensure that everyone is empowered and has the skill, so that whoever manages to make any meeting, it will still be fine within agreed parameters.

It is good to empower everyone, and allow everyone a turn, and not to allow the role to end up stagnated with any one person or small group. Share the responsibility, to spread the skills throughout your group.

A Facilitator’s Skills and Qualities

Little emotional investment in the issues discussed. Avoid manipulating the meeting towards a particular outcome. If this becomes difficult, step out of role and let someone else facilitate.
Energy and attention for the job at hand.
Understanding of tasks for the meeting as well as long-term goals of the group.
Good listening skills including strategic questioning to be able to understand everyone’s viewpoint properly.
Confidence that good solutions will be found and consensus can be achieved.
Assertiveness that is not overbearing – know when to intervene decisively and give some direction to the meeting.
Respect for all participants and interest in what each individual has to offer.
Clear thinking – Observation of the whole group. Attend both to the content of the discussion and the process. How are people feeling?

Feelings are important. In traditional heirarchical meetings feelings are ignored or sidelined, and the focus is only on the matters to be discussed. Some collectives have regular ‘feelings meetings’ purely to discuss how people feel about the direction of the group etc. This is a great way to allow people to express themselves, but sometimes quite a challenge to facilitate. In our society as a whole how often are people asked how they feel? In a local sustainable community everyone has a vested interest in the feelings of everyone else, and a feelings meeting can allow people to be subjective about their feelings and so get to express things that may be bothering them without the baggage connected to those feelings.

If we truly want an inclusive, sustainable, caring society, we must learn how to listen to each other, how to express difficult subjects without anger or shame, and we must learn how to do so without damaging our community. Good facilitation, and hence well-trained facilitators can make this easier.

Some people are natural facilitators, but that doesnt mean you shouldnt allow those who find it difficult to have a go. They can gain enormous self respect from doing so, and you as a group will grow together.

We advocate consensus decision making, because although this is difficult, it does not leave anyone feeling like their viewpoint has not been listened to, and seeks to find a common ground that all can live with. Conventional voting arrangements always leaves a loser, someone or generally someones who dont agree with the group decision and invariably feels like a loser. In some instances where a decision is needed quickly, voting is better, but generally what do you need to do that is more important than working at a decision that everyone likes?

Facilitating for consensus
Below are some tips for facilitating a group that is using consensus decision-making. For an in-depth discussion of consensus please have a look at our briefing Consensus Decision-making.
A real consensus comes only after bringing differences out into the open. Encourage everyone to present their viewpoints, especially when they may be conflicting.
Listen carefully for agreements and concerns. When a decision cannot be made, state points of agreement and of hesitancy. Find out where worries come from, so that they can be resolved or new proposals drawn up that take them into account.
Test for agreement periodically. This helps to clarify disagreements. State the tentative consensus in question form and be specific. If you are not clear how to phrase the question ask for help.
Do not mistake silence for consent. Insist on a response from every participant. The group needs to be conscious of making a contract with each other.
When there is time pressure or the group has lapsed into nit-picking, it can help to state the perceived agreement in the negative: Is there anyone who does not agree that . . ?
Be suspicious of agreements reached too easily – test to make sure that members really are fully supportive of the decision and do agree on essential points.
When no agreement can be reached, try the following: Ask those disagreeing for alternative proposals / Propose a break or silence or postponing the decision to give people time to cool down and reflect / If the decision is postponed it is often a good idea to engage conflicting parties in conflict resolution before the issue is brought up again.
When one or two people are blocking consensus, ask if they are prepared to stand aside, to allow the group to proceed with the action (standing aside = not being involved in a decision and its consequences). It may help if the group assures them that the lack of unity will be recorded in the minutes, that the decision does not set a precedent and that they are not expected to carry out the decision.

Of course, you may collectively decide that consensus isn’t for you – but we would suggest that you step back and look at the dynamics of your group if this is the case. And even if you are voting, we’d suggest that you have a full and open discussion about the subject, ensuring that everyone feels able to contribute, before you vote. Take it as close to consensus as time allows, before counting the yays and nays.

Top Tips for Facilitators

• Design a good agenda. Set time limits and tackle all points.
• Watch both for content and process.
• Keep the group moving towards its aims.
• Use lots of facilitation tools.
• Get the best possible contribution from everyone.
• Create a safe and empowering atmosphere.
• Put a stop to domineering, interrupting, put-downs and guilt trips.

We also suggest that an agenda is pinned up, or publicised on the net, or some other place where your members can see it, think about it, and add topics to be discussed. You ideally want everyone to feel like this is their group, their meeting and that you are all equals in your ability to contribute and take part.

There is nothing quite so empowering as leaving a meeting that has efficiently and effectively dealt with issues, dicussed ideas and come up with plans of action, in which no one has left feeling like a loser. Good meetings can help forge very strong community links, while poor meetings can turn people off, disempower individuals and fragment your community into warring factions. Your community is your security and how your meetings work could mean the difference between life and death in the near future.

The seeds for change facilitation guide.

And some simple tools, that you may find useful in your meeting.

No Comments »

More from Sharon Astyk.

Ok, I’m going to run through a range of security options, covering both personal and community, and talk a little about the pros and cons of each. I’ve divided them into four categories – personal, preventative (ie, avoiding security issues in the first place); community, preventative, personal, responsive (ie, when something bad is/has already happened) and community responsive.

It is almost alwasy cheaper, easier and more efficient to devote most of your resources to personal and community preventative measures than to devote them to responsive ones. That’s not to say you shouldn’t have a way to respond to violence or threat – no preventative works all the time. But if you have limited resources, preventative measures are usually the easiest way to start, and the most effective overall. The most important thing to remember is that most threatening is based on a fairly rational risk assessment by the person doing it – they think they’ll be better off stealing from you or hurting you than not – now there are plenty of exceptions – some criminals are morons and can’t tell what their risks are, and some people are sociopaths, ormotivated by compulsions beyond rational control – but the odds are good that the person looking to steal from you or attack you and take your money is looking to do it with minimal risk to themselves and good odds of success. If they do this as a regular hobby or a living, they are probably pretty experienced at this. If they don’t do it very often, odds are they are quite nervous about being caught. So anything that slows them down (and thus increases their chance of being caught), make yourself and your family appear to be a less attractive victim, raises their risk of being caught, or raises their risk of being hurt reduces your risk.

Now at the moment, I’m talking mostly about criminal assault here. And I think the odds are that increasing poverty will increase the crime rate, although variably in various areas. It is worth remembering, however, that while individual or small band criminal assault is a fairly common scenario, it is not the only possible scenario. For most women and children, I would remind all of us again that domestic violence is far more common than external violence, and neighbors, friends, etc… often perpetrators as well. In a lower-energy world, most of our problems will probably come from people we know, or who don’t live very far away, rather than the bands of roaming marauders some people worry about. I think this is particularly important when we talk about guns (and it is so hard to talk about security without all the focus landing on guns, even if we don’t want to, because our thoughts are so heavily weighted and polarized on this issue).

One of the reasons I don’t recommend guns to every household is that for women who are victims of husbands, lovers and boyfriends (or occasionally girlfriends and wives), having a gun is probably more dangerous than not having one. Someone in an abusive partnership has already failed to use (and I understand this is a difficult thing to do in many situations) the most potent weapon they have – getting out (this does not necessarily apply to those who have left abusive situations and have to fear a partner coming after them). And if you can’t leave an abusive partner, odds are, you won’t shoot them either. On the other hand, abusive partners often kill the women they abuse, sometimes with their own guns. So as we go through, it is worth noting that all people, especially women (some men are abused too, but the situation is less chronic) need to think about not just “the stranger trying to jack my car” but other, more intimate realities.

It is unfortunately true, that you are far more likely to be abused, assaulted or murdered by a member of your own family than by a stranger.
It is a sad sid effect of heirarchies. A person who spends his or her day being oppressed by their boss, or someone else who is perceived as higher up the heirarchy ladder, very often then takes that out on loved ones who are perceived as being below them on the heirarchy.

No one knows how desperate things could get, or how much extra stress the trials and tribulations of transition will bring. If you cannot trust those near and dear to you now, you can pretty much guarantee that this will get worse. Our advice to anyone in an abusive relationship is to do your utmost to get away now if you can. It will not get better.

The other scenario worth talking about is state supported violence. If you are black in the US, you are already probably pretty clear on this one, at least one scale. A lot of us tend to leap immediate to the idea of ”camps” or something as the logical face of state authorized or created violence, but simply the idea that you have to be as or more afraid of the police than criminals is one form of state violence. This can occur at any level – town, state, federal. There are people and places where police will never be your allies, and it is definitely worth being aware that the US military, the police and the state can be used against you, and has been. The last charge of the US Cavalry, for example, occurred not against a foreign enemy but during the Great Depression when impoverished veterans of World War I marched peacefully upon Washington and set up shantytowns demanding that they be paid a promised subsidy. The fear of the state is perfectly reasonable. This does not mean that agents of the state are bad – or that they can’t also be a really good thing. It merely means that even the most humane and best agent of the state always risks being misused by an evil state.

That said, what you should do about the fear of the state is a tough question – personal solutions will probably only work in very rural areas where the state has few representatives, and while an armed populace represents something of a deterrant, it honestly isn’t clear to me how much. In the case of widespread federally supported state violence (and I should note by this I mean “more than now” and not to imply it doesn’t exist now), probably the best solution is a revolution, and probably a non-violent one. But this involves a level of community organization I’m not quite prepared to cover in this one post .

The role of the police is to maintain the staus quo, so as the staus quo becomes more untenable, it is likely that the activities of the police and other guardians of ‘law and order’ will become increasingly desperate. But, the state may collapse, leaving well armed and trained individuals without a purpose. Presumably how this pans out will be different in each area, and ex-police may become valuable members of your community, or may set themselves up as the biggest baddest gang on the block. Who knows? It may be worthwhile forging some links with the police in your region now, involve community police in transition meetings, and let them know that your actions are planned to help local people survive would will undoubtedly become desperate times. As with anyone in your locale, it will be better to have them with you than against you. Even if a feudal system arises in your locality, if the police or other local powers know that you are very useful to them it may save your life or at least put you in a better position than if you are perceived as some kind of hippie drop out, or competition for scarce resources.

Personal Preventative Measures:

1. Self-confidence, or at least the appearance thereof. It isn’t true that all victims look like victims, but it is the case that if someone is calculating whether to attack or steal or do something illegal, they are probably calculating their risk too. The stronger and harder to intimidate you appear, the less likely you will be to look like an easy target. For some people this is easy – for example, I’m 6′ tall and not thin. I’m a big woman and I walk and act like I take up space – this is to my advantage. But I’ve known very small and very elderly women who also have this quality. It may not truly be the case that all bullies are cowards, but some are, and you can put off some assaults with a certain measure of self confidence, and the ability not to respond fearfully. It isn’t magic, and it has to be carefully balanced with the instinct for self preservation, but it can help.

For women facing domestic violence, I realize this is much easier said than done, but part of this has to include the ability to say that it is never permissable for anyone to touch you violently, even if they love you, and that you will leave immediately, not the second or third time, but the first time it happens.

2. Common sense. Don’t make yourself unnecessarily vulnerable. Walk with another person when possible. Stay close to other people if you are out alone. Don’t flash cash where no one else has it. Don’t punch your atm card in clear view of everyone. Don’t leave your bags unattended. Don’t start bar fights you can’t finish. Don’t let your kids roam around alone if there are lots of human or animal predators around. Be aware of your surroundings, pay attention to other people, avoid people looking for fights or trouble. Use your brain – that’s what it is for.

3. The ability to shift the ground and understand the person you are dealing with. This may be about slowing things down, increasing the perception of risk by the criminal, making you seem a poor choice of victim or about making them fear being hurt (use that latter one carefully). If the threat to your security is a person, sometimes you can change the threat by talking to them, or dealing with them. I’ve already mentioned the woman I know who got out of a carjacking by talking about her kids and their need for her. But I’ve also met a woman who got out of being raped by claiming she had her period, and Derrick Jensen talks about his sister getting out of it by saying she had VD. That doesn’t mean things like this always work, but they are tools you have. I’ve also met an elderly nun who rather famously disarmed multiple soldiers on several seperate occasions – she lived in a nunnery near Serajevo, and soldiers would come to the nunnery – sometimes to steal, sometimes to intimidate, at least one time, she said, bent on rape, and she would talk to them, joke with them sometimes, guilt trip them others, remind them of their own mothers, and every single time, she ended up with the soldiers leaving, and a couple of times, she was holding their guns at the end. This is a gift, obviously, that not all of us have, and that some people are not susceptible to. But some are, and language, persuasion, emotional manipulation, identification even humor – these things are tools people have to use and should be aware of as such.

4. Basic home security measures that slow someone down and make it more likely they will be caught. Good locks. Actually lock them if things get risky (I live in an area where locks are not presently used much). Stout doors. Bars for the doors. Heavy metal screens or window bars for particularly dangerous areas. Fences to keep things out of sight. Padlocks on sheds. Locks on your gas caps. A safe place to move animals to.

5. A dog, geese or guinea hens. These work both to raise the risk of being caught, and to raise the risk of a criminal being hurt. I don’t generally suggest that most people get trained attack dogs, but some kind of animal deterrant that can alert you to unusual situations is a good idea. A dog is the most common choice, but geese have some real advantages – they are also excellent watchdogs, and in some ways, your average criminal may be more afraid of an aggressive gander than a dog, simply because it is more unfamiliar, and they eat grass. Basically, you want something that hears and smells better than you do, and will give you some warning time, while also discouraging the large number of people who want an easy target.

I don’t recommend this one if you don’t like animals, can’t take care of them, or don’t have a plan for supplying them with food in the longer term. The world does not need more abandoned or euthanized animals. If you have kids, the dog must be gentle and good with kids, ideally raised from a puppy, and you must not leave young children along with dogs ever. But if you are prepared to do this wisely and carefully, watch animals can reduce your risk and provide you with some warning of trouble.

6. Electronic security systems depend on electricity, money, monitors, police infrastructure and cars to get there quickly – they are an option while things are good, but I wouldn’t bet on them unless you are quite wealthy and you and your neighborhood can afford to maintain the infrastructure behind them. Even then, the “gated community” model is not something that particularly takes my interest, so I’m going to skip over it.

And now Sharon’s suggestions for community security:

1. A community. This is one of those “duh” things, but it is useful to have those relationships built *before* you need them – that way if things change quickly, you’ve got this in place. And honestly, a non-car community – a place where people walk and bike and talk to each other and sit on porches or interact regularly at meals and occasions – ie, where there are people around and connected to each other, is itself a measure of deterrence. That is, a neighborhood where there are people isn’t as easy pickings to a burglar as a place where people aren’t.

2. Neighborhood watch – this is related to the above. Getting together, keeping an eye on things, having people out in the streets, showing presence – these things help make you look less vulnerable. Obvious neighborhood unity is protective against state violence as well, because if the police have to deal with a large community en masse they will be less powerful than if they can deal with isolated citizens. A neighborhood watch that looks within may also be a preventative against domestic abuse as well, discretely enabling victims to get away, or making it clear to perpetrator that they pay a public price as well.

3. Bells, code words and other alert methods. Jews in urban New York city use a yiddish codeword. Carnival operators yell “Hey Rube!” In some places “Help” or “Socorro!” or some other equivalent gets the response. Other places may use whistles or loud bells. But the idea is that when an alarm is sounded, everyone drops what they are doing and comes running, ideally armed with what ever is at hand – a stick, a rock, a loud voice. This works on any kind of violence or criminal activity (and is especially effective if neighbors can bring themselves to do it in the case of domestic violence, which relies heavily on the tacit silence of neighbors and their fear of intervention). Numbers have power! Two criminals with knives are scary if they are facing a few people – against 30 or so angry neighbors, they aren’t quite as scary.

4. Public and private security, and a good relationship with them. There are places where police have little relationship to the people they serve and protect – and many times this can be remedied. Getting to know the police, and talking to them, having them have a relationship with your neighborhood or community group can be really helpful. Their presence can provide a deterrant, slow crime down and increase the chance of a criminal paying a price. In some situations, post-collapse, many societies rely on private security – in some cases, you may have no choice but to rely on private security, as in some places the choice is “hire” protection or need protection from those you might otherwise have hired. Having people whose job it is to see to security is a good thing, assuming they are good people with the public (whole public) interest in mind.

5. Walls, gates, lights, speed bumps, etc… barriers to entry. While I’m not much interested in the wealthy gated community, in some neighborhoods reducing car or pedestrian access to certain areas, providing motion sensor lighting, etc… make a lot of sense. Do an evaluation of your area and its needs.

6. Organized non-violence. This can be an extension of much of the above, but also can include passive resistance strategies and a host of other things. I strongly recommend Mark Kurlansky’s excellent history of non-violence. This is actually potentially the most effective strategy ever against state violence, and can be used quite effectively. It does require, however that you have a strongly organized and consistent community that pretty much agrees to this policy – that is, it can’t work without strong community ties.

And then there are situations that might require personal presponsive actions, but as Sharon says, don’t try using these unless you know how to, and definitely not if you are not 100% sure that you need to, and that the ‘threat’ is real. Not everyone who looks like a burglar or a threat actually is. There will probably be plenty of people seeking shelter and help wandering the countryside, and they will often act as though they are burglars. Obviously anyone entering a new area will be as wary of what they may find there as the people there will be wary of the newcomers. In most situations, an attempt to communicate is vitally important. That ‘burglar’ may well turn out to be the composting expert that your community needs, and it could help to find this out before you chase them off! History is full of accounts of travellers being run out of town for simply ‘not being from round these here parts’. Obviously no where can take in every waif and stray, but can you really do without some extra pairs of hands?

Personal Responsive: Everything in this category is totally pointless if you don’t know what you are doing with it. Seriously, if you can’t take the time and energy to deal with learning how to use this properly, when to use it, when not to use it and a host of other things, don’t bother – concentrate on the above. Because having a weapon that can be taken from you and used on you is a bad idea.

It is just as important to know when *NOT* to use these as when to use them. For example, self-defense trainers teach people not to hang onto their purses during most purse snatchings – the first thing most of them teach is how to let your purse go. The reason is that most purses don’t have anything worth risking your life for. If you respond to a low level threat with a strong response, maybe you’ll end the situation – but if it goes wrong, or you make a mistake (and mistakes happen, and will no matter what), you may find yourself facing a much greater threat. One of the classic peak oil worries is the question of the marauding band. My feeling is that if there’s someone after my food, and I have young children, it doesn’t matter if my band is bigger and meaner than the food hunting band – the minute the shooting starts, I risk the loss of someone to crossfire, which kills as many people as intended violence when bullets are flying. There are situations where each of these tools can be useful – but plenty of situations where they are not, and telling one from the other is a bigger problem than can be handled in this post. So if you are going to pick up one of these methods, think hard about when you might want to use them and when not.

All of these options act as deterrents, as well as actual responses. But the problem is that if you aren’t prepared to use them, they can be easily used against you. But it is never a bad idea to gently let people know that you are familiar with self-defensive methods (the only exception to this is that some kinds of martial arts, in some kinds of crowds, I’m told create a guy kind of “I have to try and take him” crap, so keep that in mind), or perhaps to not make your non-violent proclivities the subject of public discussion. If you are resolutely non-violent, you might consider an unloaded shotgun which can still be “pumped’ because the sound of a shotgun is such a visceral and powerful one.

1. Self defense or martial arts training. This ranges hugely from purely defensive techniques to aggressive ones, to basic police sponsored self defense training to serious martial arts. Almost anything you will get is better than nothing, assuming it comes with a competent trainer that can help you with evaluating your situation. In the broadest possible terms, even very basic self defense training will help you make yourself a lot harder to hurt or attack. It won’t fix everything, but again, assuming that people who want to hurt you in part rely on the fact that you will be frightened, panicky and not know how to hurt them, this helps a lot. It is also a huge confidence booster – I was friends with a woman who used to teach self defense to elderly women who lived in urban areas, a terribly vulnerable population, many quite frail and disabled, and she said their tracking showed that assaults halved, mostly not because the women could do terribly much harm, but because they acted like they could, and made it difficult for their attackers.

2. Blunt objects. I really like these. A good, heavy blunt object has a lot of uses in icky times. Baseball bats, one of my students like Maglite flashlights, axe or hatchet handles, even a good cane for them that use them. Now knowing some commonsense use is really helpful – it is easy for a strong attacker with a long reach to take this away and use it on you (this is true to varying degrees of all weapons). Still, if you can figure out how to use them productively, they are cheap, widely available and useful at close range. Various blunt objects traditionally used in stick fighting of various sorts can be trained upon, and this is not a bad idea. But often in a non-weaponed conflict, simply the sight of a stick or other weapon makes you look like a bad target.

3. Pepper spray – I’ve heard very mixed things about this stuff, and must admit to no personal experience with it. It has the advantage of being usually (but not always) non-lethal, of being painful as hell to the attacker, and cheap and widely available. I’ve known several people, however, who didn’t realize just how close together you have to be to use it successfully. Two of those people used it at a far enough range that it wasn’t very effective, and one of the attackers was *REALLY* pissed off. So like everything KNOW HOW TO USE IT. It is also worth noting that it can cause death by asthma and is incredibly painful – so you might not want to use it in uncertain situations.

4. Tasers cannot be classified as a non-lethal, as they do cause death sometimes. They are legal, including for concealed carry in many states, and they do work rather well – but shouldn’t be used casually or treated as a non-lethal weapon. They do tend to end a confrontation quite rapidly, but they depend on fairly close proximity and decent aim. They are not legal in my state for civilian use. It would be wise to treat a taser as less likely to kill than a gun, but as potentially as dangerous.

5. SCA weapons. I’m unfairly putting bows of all sorts, swords, fighting knives and a host of things in this category. I am not doing so because I dismiss them, but because they are not things to fuck with unless you know what you are doing, and generally speaking, the SCA isn’t a bad place to master them. The problem with the SCA as I see it is that there are a certain number of gamer geeks who think that once a week waving a sword about makes them quite something, and who are totally wrong. Don’t get me wrong – I don’t think that the SCA is made up only of these people. But I think it would be easy, with the wrong people, to get the sense that your weaponry is more useful than it is, or that you are more skillful than you are. If you are going to rely on SCA weapons, train extensively with multiple people, and know their limitations and abilities.

6. Knives. An emergency backup, if you are using your knife in a conflict, you are already pretty screwed. Knives, like everything else, can be taken away from you, and most people know this. If you are already in close quarters, getting out a knife and using it will be awkward, but if you can do it, might be as effective as all hell. But stabbing someone is not physically easy (bodies do not penetrate as easily as on tv). Not the worst reserve item ever, but not easy to use.

7. Guns. We’ve already talked so much about guns that I feel like we’ve covered a lot of the ground. Who shouldn’t have a gun? Kids who still think they are immortal and those with mental or psychological disabilities, anyone likely to seriously consider suicide, anyone who hates and fears guns, anyone who doesn’t think they’d use a gun, morons who think guns make the invincible (although though these people probably already have them), and anyone who is vulnerable to violence from someone they love. Who might want to consider them? Anyone with animal predators around (and packs of feral dogs are a likely consequence of a poorer society), hunters, women, especially single women, and older women and couples. Anyone who is good with guns and will take the time to use them carefully. Anyone who needs a long range weapon, and who can effectively use a gun, never pointing it unless they are prepared to use it. Anyone who can disconnect themselves from TV and the popular culture relationship to guns and treat it as a tool of limited usefulness.

We really need to point out again, that not all travellers are threats. Just because someone appears to be a threat doesn’t mean that they necessarily are. An attempt at communication could change a deadly situation into a harmless conversation, and most situations can be calmed with a few words. Even aggressors can sometimes be turned away simply by being told about your defences.

Community Responses:

1. Organized Collective Non-Violence with Media Attention. I mentioned this above, but I think it works both actively and passively. It is worth noting that non-violence is not the same as “non-resistance” – it does not mean accepting outcomes, but thwarting violence before it happens. The reason I mention “media attention” is that perhaps the most important things non-violent resister’s can do in a violent situation is draw the attention to the realities, make people see what they do not see. One of the points of Kurlansky’s book on non-violence is that the inevitability of violence is almost always clear – at the point that we have lost every chance to resolve a conflict without violence, usually simply discarding those moments of possibility, in which public sentiment and other practices might have been used. That is, it is very easy to say “Oh, non-violence wouldn’t have saved the Jews under the Nazis” – and that is almost certainly true. On the other hand, non-violent forms of resistance did save the Danish Jews, who virtually all survived. There is no question that allied nations could have opened their borders to the Jews and most of the loss of life would have been prevented. That is, violence became inevitable once we closed down every other choice – and that may well happen to many of us. But that doesn’t mean that non-violence pointless, or has no role in the lives of people who are not pacifists – sometimes, often, especially when states are involved, nonviolence is extremely effective and powerful. It is not, as some argue (including Kurlansky, and I think he’s wrong) the only tool – but it is a tool and important one.

2. Militias/Community self-Policing. This works best if you are trained by someone who actually knows what they are doing – I don’t recommend it otherwise. Getting a bunch of people together to practice using weapons is kind of pointless, if no one has ever thought critically about strategy, or when not to use weapons or fight. Half of such work is knowing how to disperse a crowd, distract a drunk and send him home, or recognize trouble waiting to happen and intervene. If the police are unavailable, corrupt or absent and private security untrustworthy or too expensive to manage, get someone with serious training to teach you. While I think the risks of guns are often overstated by the mainstream media, I think the risks of weekend warriors with weapons waving them around without a lot of training couldn’t possibly be overstated

And there is always the danger that a militia will take control of your community and use the rest of you as slaves. It can’t be stated enough, the need to trust those around us. Strong community ties, more than anything else give us both the sense of and reality of security on many levels. If we feel secure within our community of family, friends and neighbours we are more likely to act secure and give potential threats the impression that we just aren’t worth the risk.

Hopefully most people will not need any of the above, but, particularly in america, the state is bankrupt and corrupt, and times are changing. The transition to a peaceful secure sustainable future will bring with it plenty of problems, and plenty of people who didn’t think to prepare, who have clung onto the staus quo, and think they are deserving of more than a local shared economy can provide.

It feels odd, to be writing this at a time when society for most of us has not unravelled much, and plenty of people feel that it will not, that ‘they’ will come up with something. But, better to have thought about the worst-case situations, and have some level of preparation, than to have blindly carried on at our unsustainable realities and get caught totally unawares.

No Comments »

Heres something to think about, originally posted on Gristmill, by Stephanie Paige Ogburn.

Should small-scale farmers who grow organically and sell locally or regionally be able to make a middle-class living with farming as their sole source of income?

I’ve always answered this question with a fervent “yes,” at least from a philosophical perspective. But the answer to the follow-up question — “do they?” — is nearly always a resounding no.

Sure, there are exceptions. In Southwest Colorado, I live in an immature market for small-scale, local food, so farmers here are probably doing worse on the whole due to lack of market penetration. (When you live in a rural area with low population, you can’t just sell to the top 1 or 2 percent of customers — you really have to have a widespread appeal in order to lift sales, since your population base is so much smaller than if you were selling to an urban center. And that depth of customer base takes a long time to build.) So here, out of say, 25 vegetable farmers I know selling at area markets, only one of them earns a full time living from her farming occupation.

The reality is, it’s really hard to make a living selling a low-end product that is easily replicable and requires a high quantity of labor, but, comparatively speaking, a low level of skill to produce. And food is a low-end product. Tomatoes at $3/lb, which is what they go for here, are cheap. Like it or not, small farmers locally and across the U.S. are selling a cheap product at a minuscule scale, which, anyway you look at it, is a failing business model.

This is a problem, and the small growers I know have a variety of solutions.

Surely the question we should all be asking at this point is, can the planet sustain a middle-class american lifestyle for anyone? Should we be lowering our expectations, so that we view survival as success. And things like food growing should be viewed as successful if it contributes to the overall survival of a regions populace, even if it doesnt make money.

We have been spoilt. We don’t regard a business as being successful unless it employs people, and makes enough money for the owners to save, invest, expand their operations and other luxuries that aren’t truly necessities for life.

If it keeps you and others around you alive, and even in a comparable state of food abundance, it is a success, whether it makes you rich or not…. and we are going to see a lot less instant millionaires as fuel gets more and more scarce and expensive. Small scale local food enterprises set up now may not make us rich, but may be the difference between comfort and strife in the near future.

In this economy, if you want to be a small farmer, it’s probably more practical to assume it will be an income-boosting hobby rather than your primary source of income, even if it is what you spend the majority of your time doing. I’ve run into this reality repeatedly over the time period that I’ve been engaged in the alternative food movement, and as a result, I’ve come to think of small scale farming more as one of a diverse set of economic activities practiced by an individual or couple than as a primarily income-generating career occupation.

Maybe I’m getting worn down by the dominant economic system; and I’m certainly starting to think of market farming as being no different from running any small business in America — from a financial standpoint, if the business owner wants to keep her operation small, it’s by and large a losing proposition, and only one worth entering for quality of life reasons.

The exception is if one offers a high-end product that rich people will pay a lot for, thus enabling one to keep quantities small, quality high, and the business local and independent. Thus, someone entering small scale farming, and expecting to stay small, should either develop a value-added product that she can sell at a high margin or expect to be poor, yet happy and work additional jobs to make ends meet.

Although the local foods movement does seem to be thriving, I haven’t seen an equivalent jump in the percentage of small farmers being able to base their entire livelihood on their farming occupation. I guess I’m glad there are a lot of people out there who are willing to farm on a small scale because it’s what they believe in, but I’m also sad that it’s so hard to make money farming. I’m also curious if others, possibly those living near higher-end markets like San Francisco or New York City, have seen an increase in farmers making a livable wage as the number of local consumers and the prices they pay for fresh produce rise.

Agriculture has been skewed by our ‘bigger is better’ economy, and we suspect that in the coming years local people will start turning to local farmers (as well as growing some food themselves) as the supermarket shelves start being empty more often. But, some action on the part of government would be welcome, in the form of the same breaks that have been given to big agri-business ie tax breaks, grants and training. It would be nice if governments started recognising the increasing contribution to survival made by small scale farms, but don’t hold your breath.

No Comments »

Having just spent a slow-paced week in the woods learning the basics of the art of bushcraft, the return to civilisation has been somewhat disorientating.  Many things bothered my mind on my return, from the urban noises to the claustrophobia of the buildings and the density of people.  But the main underlying cause of this unease was the jump from very simple living on what nature provides compared to the massively complex way of life currently gripping humanity.

From dawn to dusk in each of our western lives, we use objects and energy derived from far-off places via many hands to bring it here.  The very houses we live in, the manner in which we transport ourselves, the food we eat and how we cook it, it’s all provided for us with us having very little control of it.  The raw materials for even the most simplest tool is shipped from abroad to be manufactured and distributed to us via a huge network.  Very few things can be said to have come from our own hands or from the local environment.

Compared to bushcraft, the level of complexity is huge.  Although still using some basic tools from civilization, the abundance of nature was clear to see in its ability to provide for fairly comfortable human existence.  Food, medicine, tools, shelter – all could be found and made usable by oneself.  The realisation of how difficult it was to provide these very basic needs in the middle of a huge selection of resources brought home how disempowered we are in this way of life, unable to provide for our needs without the massive life-support machine of civilisation.

How could we survive without the life-support system though?  Using bushcraft in the woods is no doubt very useful, but it is impossible for the current population to survive off the relatively few tracts of unabused land for long without destroying them too.  This is where Permaculture comes in, in its ability to take the abused land and rewild it with humans and biodiversity in mind.  By designing the recovery of the land, we can live off the land with very little impact.  Although the earth will regenerate in time after humans, if we wish to survive too we need to give all the assistance we can in accelerating this process before any more damage is done.

This is all necessary to reduce the complexity of our lives and thus reduce its destructive impacts on the earth and ourselves.  It is hard to suddenly ‘drop-out’ of civilisation though, and this must be done gradually for the majority of us.  In the meantime we must take responsibility of the complexity.  If you drive a car, do you really currently need it?  If not, remove it from your life, if you do then keep it, but only if you accept the consequences of that and commit to eventually being able to finally change.  The same can be applied to everything in our lives, to every object and activity that depends upon the life-support system of civilisation.  We must slowly become independent of it, accepting what we currently need from it with the full commitment to as soon as possible to destroy these links too.

No Comments »

Reading throuth the Post Carbon Institute’s call to action for individuals, it feels like this really isnt enough. Ok, some people will start all of this, and some will be very effective at creating local food for their friends and families, connections with their neighbours, reduce their carbon footprints, and all the rest.

But, the transition to a post carbon world, and the steps needed to reduce human impact on the climate needs so much more.

So, we suggest that local businesses need to act. If you run a local business, start thinking about what it is you do, and where resources that you use come from. Will you be able to continue without cheap abundant energy? Should you continue ie does your business pollute the environment and/or create waste?

What do you do with your ‘waste’? Could it be used as a resource? ie cardboard and sawdust could be donated to gardeners.

Why should local people support your business? Ok, we have all the general reasons for supporting local rather than some global corporation. But, what does your business contribute to the local area?

We need to completely redefine ‘waste’. Your business probably has some waste byproducts, that could be donated or swapped with others in your local area.

And finally, does your buiness make money? Presumably so,  or you wouldn’t be doing it. How much could you afford to donate to local people and groups trying to prepare for post-carbon. While your business is still able to function and make money with the aid of oil, don’t you think that you may be better investing some of your income towards local growing or energy or insulation projects. You may find in the future that you need to rely on people around you to survive. Couldn’t you invest now in your local area (as donations or inventive advertising through your accounts) to help?

In days gone by, successful local businesses tended to support the area and people in that area, sharing the wealth generated, and forging close ties of community between business and local inhabitants. This too has been lost, but we are proposing that you recreate it now.

There is a lot to do, everywhere, and much that could cost money. Why not give your neighbours a reason to support your business by helping to support them?

Or perhaps you are a landowner, with unutilised land, that could be turned into perennial food gardens, or orchards? Why not talk to your neighbours, and offer the use of the land as community garden.

We have to rethink how we do business, concepts of landownership and recreate community connections everywhere. Some of us have more than others, but on our own will still find it difficult, and businesses generally have greater access to finance – perhaps in the form of an advertising budget. What better advertising than donating to local projects, after all, local people may be your only customers in the post-oil future!

No Comments »

A call to action, by the Post Carbon Institute.

Marching into the new millennium, we as a species have reached a peak that is at once both breathtaking and terrifying. The last century saw an explosion of advances in technology, communication, industry, health, science, mobility, and knowledge. These advances—developed in large part as a result of cheap, abundant energy—have created unprecedented levels of population, life expectancy, and prosperity.

At the same time, our dependence on fossil fuels has reduced our self-reliance, and had incalculable impacts on the environment. And because fossil fuels are non-renewable, we have or are quickly reaching the point when we can’t produce as much of these energy sources as we need.
We are at a cross roads. Business as usual is simply unsustainable.

The climate crisis calls on us to move quickly away from oil, coal, and natural gas for the health and well-being of our planet and people. The depletion of fossil fuels calls on us to move with urgency for our short-term economic survival.

We will use fewer fossil fuels one way or another; but if we fail to adapt intelligently to the post-carbon era, the next few decades will see ever higher energy costs and continued high carbon emissions—leaving us with a ruined environment and a shattered economy, unable to face a future without fossil fuels.

And so it is incumbent upon each of us to face this challenge with courage, creativity, and cooperation.

The suggested 10 (US centric) steps:

1. Understand the issues. Understand your impact.
In order to properly respond to the crises we face resulting from our dependence on fossil fuels, it’s key to understand:

• The ways in which we rely on coal, oil, and natural gas—everything from our modes of transportation, our food, the plastics from which so many of our products are made, and the distance from which most of the goods come.
• The impacts of fossil fuels on the environment—primarily climate change but also deforestation, strip mining, water use, and pollution.
• Peak oil and the decline of other fossil fuels.
• Your role. This includes examining your carbon footprint and your personal dependence on oil and natural gas, in particular.

Resources:
Read What is Peak Oil?
Read Climate Change 101 by Climate Protection Campaign
Watch End of Suburbia
Use Footprint Calculator of Berkeley Institute for the Environment

2. Plan to reduce your impact and increase your self-resilience.
It can be daunting, time consuming, and downright frustrating to know where to begin, let alone substantially change the way we live, travel, and work. But it’s key, once you’ve begun to assess and understand they ways in which you depend on fossil fuels, to make a plan that balances actions that are achievable and ones that have a meaningful impact.

Resources:
Make a plan at Make Me Sustainable
Sign up for the Post Peak Living Uncrash Course
Start or join a Low Carbon Diet Eco Team

3. Reduce your consumption. Reduce your impact.
There’s a reason why reduce is listed first in the Waste Hierarchy. Reducing the amount of waste you produce, the products you buy, the distance you and the things you buy travel, and the electricity you use is not only the lowest hanging fruit, it’s key as a first step in order to know where to invest your resources. For example, before installing solar panels, it’s critical to look at how to reduce the amount of electricity you use.

Resources:
Join Solar Car Share
Take public transportation
Find ways to ride your bike
Get a home energy audit
Reduce your water consumption

4. Share resources, knowledge, and tasks.
Sharing with one’s neighbors has been a universal cultural value across human societies for millennia. And with good reason—because resources were scarce. But sharing in this way is something that, for many Americans in particular, has become unfamiliar, even uncomfortable. As we shift into a post carbon world, however, sharing will become a renewed value. Perhaps the most critical.

We will need not only to share knowledge (something that has been on the ascent with the explosion of the Internet) but also things and tasks. And sharing can have a profound impact, both in terms of reducing our dependency on fossil fuels and re-instilling that sense of community many of us lament not having.

5. Participate in local and global solutions.
Advocate for collective action. Self-resilience is community resilience. No matter how prepared for the energy transition or how much you’ve reduced your own carbon footprint, it will take communal solutions to face these challenges. Therefore, it is critical that each of us participate on the local, regional, and national level by sharing our knowledge and ideas, engaging in local projects, and expressing our priorities at the ballot box.

Resources:
Join the Relocalization Network
Support (your local) County Climate Action Plan
Read the McCain Energy Plan and Obama Energy Plan (or local and central govt)
Vote in local, state and national elections

Note: as stated, these steps are US centric and Sonoma County in particular.
Although we feel that national elections are a sham, local elections can actually make a difference to your life. And although we do not support the concept of voting for people to make local decisions for us, a green or independent vote can, at times, completely change your local council policies. And we may get to a point where conventional ideas and politicians are seen as not working for local people, and you find that the most unlikely of people vote for something different.

6. Reskill to live a life less dependent on fossil fuels.
As our workforces have grown more specialized and our supply chains more globalized, much of the knowledge-base required for community resiliency has disappeared. How many of us know how to mend garments, repair furniture, and grow food? It’s critical that we as individuals and communities look to rebuild these assets. Now, it’s impossible for anyone to know everything. But that is where understanding what resources are around you and sharing become critical.

Resources:
Sign up for a class at Occidental Arts & Ecology Center (or at your local college?)

7. Reinvest your time and money to build a local economy.
It’s no news that with the increasing focus on corporate financial bottom lines, the industrialization of everything from textiles to food, and the globalization of the supply chain, many local economies have suffered. Our own economy in Sonoma County is heavily dependent on tourism, which accounts for about $1 billion annually and $23 million in tax receipts, which helps our local governments fund much needed social services. What will happen to our economy as tourism falters in the wake of higher and higher gas prices?

On average, about 80 cents of every dollar spent leaves the local economy. Just increasing that number to 40% would double the local economy. A quick and rewarding place to start is by focusing on buying local (ideally, organic) food.

Resources:
Visit Local Harvest, which provides a list of farmers’ markets and community supported agriculture in your area.
Farmers Markets in the UK.

8. Generate your own power.
Distributing our electricity production through the use of renewable sources is a key step in building our individual and community self-reliance, and in reducing our impact on the climate. Renewable energy sources vary from region to region. Thankfully, Sonoma County is blessed with ample sunshine and local resources that can help make solar power work for you.

Resources:
Contact Solar Sebastopol or Solar Sonoma County to find out about local resources
Use the Solar Estimator tool by the American Solar Energy Society
Check out the Database of State Incentives for Renewable Energy (DSIRE) for rebate information and Alliance to Save Energy’s guide to energy efficiency mortgages

9. Grow your own food.
As books like Fast Food Nation, Omnivore’s Dilemma and The End of Food well document, our industrialized food system is not only incredibly unhealthy for our bodies and the environment, it’s exceptionally vulnerable to the double crises of climate change and peak oil. The average piece of food travels 1,500 miles to get to your plate. And oil is literally embedded in nearly every element of industrial food production—from pesticides to harvesting and transport.

Growing your own food is one of the most important things you can do to increase your self-reliance and reduce your dependence on fossil fuels. While very, very few of us are able to become self-sufficient in this respect, becoming part of a local food system is critical. If you don’t have your own property or enough land to grow, strike a deal with your neighbors or join a community garden.

Resources:
Visit our Energy Garden to see a practical demonstration close up
Start a community garden
Spin Farming is a non-technical farming system designed specifically for small plots.

10. Monitor your impact and adjust according to realities on the ground.
Reducing your reliance on fossil fuels is a process. Indeed, it’s a journey. For each of us, and for our communities collectively, it’s an unchartered path. And for that reason, it’s critical to get real-time feedback as much as possible, to continuously assess our progress and impact, and to adjust accordingly.

It may surprise you to discover, for example, how much gas you waste when your tires aren’t properly inflated or because of your tendency for quick starts and stops. It’s been proven that with just a little feedback, the average person will reduce their consumption by 20%. Thankfully, there are some handy new tools available that can help.

Resources:
The Kill a Watt Reader will help you determine how much electricity and money individual appliances use
The PowerCost Monitor can tell you how much electricity your whole house is using at any given moment
Devices like Scangauge will show you your current miles per gallon

No Comments »

By Peter Goodchild on countercurrents.org

Yes, there are other factors beside oil to consider in the Great Crash. We live in a morass of bad politics, bad economics, and bad education (and bad news media that spoon-feed us with half-truths), and we elect thieves and liars to guide us. But the loss of oil, which is almost the only support of our unique industrial society, will be the factor that brings all the rest down.

Transitional Silliness

The transition to global collapse should not been seen in terms of middle-class Country Elegance. There are no “transition towns” that acquire food, clothing, or shelter without large quantities of fossil fuels somewhere in the background.

Although we should all be preparing for the worst, it seems that some of us are heading into Eco-Silliness. For the most part, “transition towns” (a.k.a. “eco-villages” etc.) are just make-believe. Without fossil fuels, any country can support only about 4 people per hectare of arable land, as David Pimentel has explained in great detail. That puts many countries at well beyond the maximum sustainable size. What is going to happen to the excess population between now and the year 2030 (when oil production will be down to half of its present level)? Answer: either emigration or starvation.

The post-oil world will be much grimmer than these people imagine, and that is partly because they are not looking at the big picture. Hydrocarbons are the entire substructure of modern society. Electricity comes largely from coal or natural gas. The energy for mining comes mainly from diesel fuel, or it is transmitted through electricity. So without fossil fuels there will be no electricity, and without those same fossil fuels there will be no metals. We’re looking at something less than the above-mentioned Country Elegance.

We are inclined to agree, and disagree. Permaculture practises are far more efficient than any other method of agriculture/horticulture. 4 people per hectare seems a little low, but we must recognise that if we are forced to change our lifestyles by peak oil and climate change, civilisation can do a lot of damage to the world before the oil runs out, and their won’t be resources available to ease the transition. If we start even now to put our energy towards transition, its still going to be a lot more painful for most of us than it would have been had we used oil over the last 30 years to build local horticulture systems, orchards, public transport, rainwater collecting, sustainable education, composting facilities etc.

But no, our glorious leaders have done their utmost to hide this from us, and to waste so much wealth to create roads to nowhere. Channelling wealth into the hands of a few, and destroying local communities has been the reality, exporting our stupid system around the whole world, and dumbing us down into mindless consumers.

Primitive Technology

One reason why I’m unimpressed by most survivalist or primitive-technology books is that they say very little about how to get food. Perhaps that’s because it’s easy to talk about roots and berries, but not easy to explain that getting food may include hunting, trapping, and fishing. At least, that’s certainly true in North America north of about latitude 45, since the climate and soil are largely unsuitable for agriculture. It’s also true for any other geographical area that doesn’t have naturally fertile soil and good weather. But the problem for the writer is that hunting and trapping — and perhaps even fishing — are politically incorrect. We aren’t supposed to be murdering cute little animals, we’re supposed to buy our meat wrapped in cellophane, which is somehow not the same thing. The average survivalist book therefore teaches its readers how to make bowls and baskets but doesn’t tell them how to avoid starving to death in the meantime.

Unfortunately, we have been very good at cutting down forests and privatising all things traditionally held in common. Hunting may be a solution for a few people, but if everyone started expecting to eat meat that they caught themselves, every day, there would very soon be very little wildlife left. Permaculture and sustainable organic smallscale horticulture can feed small groups of people with surprisingly little work or skills. We do need to learn those skills, more than how to make traps and arrows, which are more likely to end up being used to steal vegetables than to hunt non-existant game.

No Comments »