Dismantle Civilisation Rotating Header Image

April, 2009:

Culture Change Study – Collapse Concerns and Wishes

Collapse wishes — what a genre. It must not be healthy to dwell on collapse too much, or you’ll collapse! But since the topic is all too demanding and real, It should be worth trying to help shape the future with intention or conscious awareness of what can and should happen. So here are three questions for you:

(This study is not so much for reliable, statistical confidence, but to find out about and share our thoughts.)

(1) what we are acting toward. Or, what main outcome might we be looking forward to?
(2) what do we relish leaving behind, as collapse begins or as it will intensify?
(3) what do we not want to leave behind unresolved; or, what needs to be done before it’s too late to accomplish it?

You can be general, political, ecological, spiritual, or personal in your goals and dreams. Please be brief, and let us know if you are NOT living in the USA. We will publish on Culture Change many of the interesting stories, ideas, or dreams. Patterns will emerge. A part-two report will tabulate responses and describe the results.

The national traumatized but awakening psyche

We have noted that mass insanity seems to be making “progress,” and folks are hurting, having a hard time, are fearful, and undergoing deprivations. The New York Times did a service in reporting on the mental and emotional states of people on medications and having to cut corners in various departments of life. It was sad to read the histories and ongoing struggles.

Yet, the lack of awareness displayed by some of the anecdotes’ subject-patients, for example, made me believe that learning is in short supply for many of us. The advice one doctor gave was to metaphorically say to keep your eyes on the license plate of the car in front of you, or pull over at times. It’s a shame the idea of cutting car dependence to save money and help the environment, while depriving corporate bunglers of our hard-earned dwindling cash, is suppressed by corporate mass media and government.

When people act out their insanity — isn’t that a big part of what’s going on? — and masses cannot be ignored, there will probably be political change. You can include those thoughts for this survey, but to me the political changes are usually not as interesting or meaningful as a culture change.

But meanwhile, in this accelerated adjustment period — a Depression, some say — we are at least starting to question some things that weren’t discussed enough in the past. We have something in common, having to do with survival. We can get it right or I don’t think we’re gonna make it. Fortunately human kindness has been tested and is still ever present even in disastrous circumstances sometimes.

Culture Change is asking people to email brief answers to the 3 questions above by 27th April – not much time.

info@culturechange.org

Share

it’s an illusion – John Harris

Share

Time to start growing your own bread

Gene Logsdon at OrganicToBe. The long-awaited, and much-anticipated 2nd Edition of Small-Scale Grain Raising: An Organic Guide to Growing, Processing, and Using Nutritious Whole Grains, for Home Gardeners and Local Farmers
is now available.

No sooner had the news come out that rice stocks worldwide were at an all time modern low, and that the price of wheat had hit historic highs, when I started getting calls and letters from all over. Modern homesteaders wanted to know where they could get a copy of my old book, Small Scale Grain Raising.

It is gratifying to know there are still Americans who, instead of wringing their hands at a possible problem headed their way, start figuring what to do about it. I only wish I had some copies of that book left. It was published in 1977 and was as high as $300 a crack on the Internet. But I am happy to report that a new edition is now available.

I don’t really know if the high grain prices have anything to do with renewed interest in that book. What seems to me more likely is that self-reliant people are taking a look at what is happening in our financial world and wondering if it is time to plow up the backyard or that old horse lot and plant some food.

In my little world of writing books about rural life and culture, this is all the talk right now, as it was in 1973, 1982, and 1995 when the economy did “readjustments” like it is doing now, only not quite so profoundly. (In an economy ruled by interest on “pretend” money, as I call it, about every ten years there has to be a shakeup to bring the dreamers of riches, floating around in their bubbles, back down to earth again.) The idea of growing and threshing out several bushels of wheat (a bushel makes about 50-60 loaves of bread) in the backyard makes sense to self-reliant people. It isn’t really that difficult to do.

My wife and I first tried it in the late 1960s when living in the suburbs of Philadelphia, just for fun. We scythed the wheat we grew in our backyard, made bundles of it, shocked up the bundles and when the grain was dry we beat the bundles on a bed sheet with plastic ball bats, threshing out the grain. The kids thought it was great fun. We winnowed out the chaff by pouring the grain slowly from one bucket to another in front of a window fan.

That experience became the genesis of the book mentioned above, though at the time that wasn’t in my plans. I grew the wheat in the first place to feed to our chickens. I would just throw a bundle into the henhouse every day and the chickens would do the threshing, leaving the straw for bedding. It was only as a sort of afterthought that Carol decided to try to bake bread with it. She milled the grain in her blender, but that was very slow, so eventually, we got a hand-cranked mill which we still use today. I haven’t grown wheat for a few years now, having kindly farm neighbors who will sell us a few bushels out of their combine harvester.

A fellow small-scale farmer, Tim Moreland in Oregon, recently sent me a picture of his amazing way to harvest oats for his livestock. When it is nearly ripe, he cuts and windrows it like hay, then when it is suitably dry, forks it into huge sacks he found locally, suspending the sacks, one at a time, from the prongs of his front end loader (see photo). His whole family helps in the forking, which is another reason why we small-scale farmers do such crazy things. They involve the whole family. He then hauls the oat “hay” to the barn and feeds it to the livestock in winter or when pastures are short. The animals eat the grain and most of the straw as roughage.

I can remember when wheat was still ground into flour in mills in our county. It just beats me that in places burgeoning with grain like this area, that those local mills could not remain profitable. Did people just quit baking at home in the 1950s? Looks to me like home bread-making is on the rise (oh those puns) again, especially now with all the new kitchen flour mills and bread-makers available.

If you type “local flour mills” into your search engine. I think you will be surprised. There’s quite a few of them all over the U.S. and Canada. While the political pundits and the banking bandits wring their hands and steal our money and then promote rather tasteless mass-produced bread at over two dollars a loaf, there’s still a “grain” of contrariness in many Americans. That’s how we’ve survived so far.

Share

Food Rebellions: 7 Steps to Solving the Food Crisis

Resistance to the trade and “aid” policies that displace farmers and increase hunger.

by Eric Holt-Gimenez, at YES! magazine (Spring 2009: Food for Everyone Issue).

The World Food Program describes the current global food crisis as a silent tsunami, with billions of people going hungry. Hunger is, indeed, coming in waves, but not everyone will drown in famine. The recurrent food crises are making a handful of corporations very rich—even as they put the rest of the planet at risk.

Built over half a century, largely with public grain subsidies and foreign aid, the global food-industrial complex is made up of large corporations that sell grain, seed, chemicals, and fertilizer, along with global supermarket chains and food processors.

When these players first came on the scene, world agriculture was different. Forty years ago, the global South had yearly agricultural trade surpluses of $1 billion. After three “Development Decades,” they were importing $11 billion a year in food. Immediately following de-colonization in the 1960s, Africa exported $1.3 billion in food a year. Today it imports 25 percent of its food.

International trade agreements and pressure from the global North opened up entire continents to cheap, subsidized grain from the North. This put local farmers out of business, devastated local crop diversity, and consolidated control of the world’s food system in the hands of multinational corporations. Today three companies, Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Cargill, and Bunge control 90 percent of the world’s grain trade.

The official prescriptions for solving the world food crisis call for more subsidies for industrialized nations, more food aid, and more so-called Green (or Gene) Revolutions. Expecting the institutions that built the current flawed food system to solve the food crisis is like asking an arsonist to put out a forest fire. When the world food crisis exploded in early 2008, ADM’s profits increased by 38 percent, Cargill’s by 128 percent, and Mosaic Fertilizer (a Cargill subsidiary) by a whopping 1,615 percent!

For decades, family farmers the world over have resisted this corporate control. They have worked to diversify crops, protect soil and native seeds, and conserve nature. They have established local gardens, businesses, and community-based food systems. These strategies are effective. They need to be given a chance to work.

The solutions to the food crisis are those that make the lives of family farmers easier: re-regulate the market, reduce the power of the agri-foods industrial complex, and build ecologically resilient family agriculture. Here are some of the needed steps:

  1. Support domestic food production.
  2. Stabilize and guarantee fair prices to farmers and consumers by re-establishing floor prices and publicly owned national grain reserves. Establish living wages for workers on farms, in processing facilities, and in supermarkets.
  3. Halt agrofuels expansion.
  4. Curb speculation in food.
  5. Promote a return to smallholder farming. On a pound-per-acre basis, family farms are more productive than large-scale industrial farms. And they use less oil. Because 75 percent of the world’s poor are farmers, this will address poverty, too.
  6. Support agro-ecological production.
  7. Food sovereignty: Recognize the right of all people to healthy and culturally appropriate food produced through ecologically sound methods and their own food systems.

The political will to take these steps must come from informed social movements. These movements already exist, and are gaining strength in the face of the food crisis. Together we can fix the food system and solve the food crisis once and for all.

Eric Holt-Gimenez wrote this article as part of Food for Everyone, the Spring 2009 issue of YES! Magazine. Eric is executive director of Food First. This article was adapted from “The World Food Crisis.” Find the full-length version at www.foodfirst.org.

Share

The Coming Siege of Austerity

More on what to expect from the future (and perhaps, what we need to combat climate change – austerity) from Jim Kunstler’s Clusterfuck.

It’s a curious symptom of the consensus trance zombifying the American public and its auditors in the media that something like a “recovery” is now deemed to be underway. And, as events compel me to repeat in this space, it begs the question: recovery to what? To Wall Street booking stupendous profits by laundering “risk” out of bad loans with new issues of tranche-o-matic securitized paper? This I doubt, since there isn’t a pension fund left from San Jose to Bratislava that would touch this stuff with a stick, even if it could be turned out in collector’s editions of boxed sets. Does it mean that American “consumers” (so-called) are awaited momentarily in the flat-screen TV sales parlors with their credit cards fanned-out like poker hands, ready for “action?” Not too likely with massive non-performance out in cardholder-land, and half the nation’s electronics inventory wending its way onto Craig’s List. Are we expecting more asteroid belts of new suburbs carved in the loamy outlands of Dallas and Minneapolis, complete with new highway strips of Big Box shopping and Chuck E. Cheeses? Go to banking’s intensive care unit and inquire (if you can) among the flat-lining production home-builders and the real estate investment trusts on life support when they expect to rev up the heavy equipment.

The idea that we’re about to resume the insane behavior that induced the current epochal malaise of economy is so absurd it will only be heard in the faculty dining halls of the Ivy League. And if America is not picking up where it left off eighteen months ago — the orgy of spending future claims on wealth unlikely to accrue — then what is our destiny? Based on what’s out there in the organs of public thinking, it seems that we don’t want to think about it.

So many forces are arrayed against a return to the previous “normal” that we will be lucky, in another eighteen months, to still find ourselves speaking English and celebrating Christmas. What’s “out there” is a panorama of mutually reinforcing critical problems pertaining to how we live on this continent. Like the obesity, heart disease, and diabetes that plague the public, these problems are disorders of lifestyle habits and the only possible “cure” is a comprehensive revision of lifestyle. With the onset of spring weather and the cheez doodles and monster truck rallies and Nascar tailgate barbeques and the drive-in beer emporiums all beckoning, can the public shift its attention from these infantile preoccupations to saving its own ass?

So far, the most striking piece of the economic fiasco is the absence of any galvanizing spirit among the millions getting crushed in the tragic unwind of our relations with money. It will be interesting to see, for instance, if there is any uproar over the evolving story of Goldman Sachs’s latest raid on the US Treasury, after booking billions in taxpayer-funded payouts funneled through AIG, based on double-hedged credit default swaps. Such magic tricks are understandably hard to follow, but a dozen-or-so federal attorneys with a middling background in differential calculus might suss out the trail that leads from Ben Bernanke’s work station to Lloyd Blankfein’s cappuccino machine.

Something similar may be said in regard to revelations last week of White House economic advisor Larry Summers’ connection with a number of hedge funds shoveling millions into his deep pockets for showing up once a week to cheerlead their “innovations” — not to mention his shadowy visits to the Goldman Sachs gravy train even after he signed onto the Obama campaign. As long as the stock markets seem to rally — no matter what else is really going on in America — nobody will pay much attention to these disgusting irregularities.

Since it is that time of year, and I am haunting the gardening shop, one can’t fail to notice the many styles of pitchforks for sale. My guess is that the current mood of public paralysis will dissolve in a blur of blood and spittle sometime between Memorial Day and July Fourth, even with Nascar in full swing, and the mushrooming ranks of the unemployed lost in raptures of engine noise and fried cornmeal. It doesn’t take too many determined, pissed-off people to create a lot of mischief in a complex society.

On the agenda in the second quarter of ’09 are ominous rumblings in the oil and food sectors. Half a year of cratered oil prices have decimated the oil industry and we’re driving at 100-miles-an-hour straight off a cliff into a new kind of supply crisis — even if industrial production and global exports remain moribund. So many drilling rigs are being decommissioned that the oil industry itself looks like it’s preparing for its own death, investment in exploration and discovery has withered with the credit markets, and the world may never recover from the year long hiccup in oil industry activity — translation: peak oil is biting back now with a vengeance. Its peakness will look peakier and the yawning arc of depletion beyond will look steeper and pose a threat to every globalized and continental-scale enterprise in the known world.

So many dire elements are ranging around our food production system (i.e. farming), from widespread drought and water table depletion to “input” shortages (especially fertilizers) to sickness in credit availability, that we’re all one bad harvest away from something that will make Pieter Bruegel-the-elder’s “Triumph of Death” look like Vanity Fair’s annual Oscar Party in comparison.

Barack Obama, charming as he is, had better drop his pretensions about kick-starting the old consumer economy, fire the Wall Street clowns and parasites who are running that futile exercise, and start preparing a US Lifeboat Economy aimed at reducing the scale and scope of our outlays so we can survive the coming siege of austerity. Meanwhile, I’m glad that he finally got a dog for the White House, because the President knows full-well where to turn in Washington if you want some genuine love and affection.

Share

Let’s Not Recover

Too Big to Fail – Ecological Ignorance and Economic Collapse
By Chip Ward, at TomDispatch.

“Too big to fail.” It’s been the mantra of our economic meltdown. Although meant to emphasize the overwhelming importance of this bank or that corporation, the phrase also unwittingly expresses a shared delusion that may be at the root of our current crises — both economic and ecological.

In nature, nothing is too big to fail. In fact, big is bound to fail. To understand why that’s so means stepping away from a prevailing set of beliefs that holds us in its sway, especially the deep conviction that we operate apart from nature’s limits and rules.

Here’s the heart of the matter: We are ecologically illiterate — not just unfamiliar with the necessary scientific vocabulary and concepts, but spectacularly, catastrophically, tragically dumb. Oh yes, some of us now understand that draining those wetlands, clear-cutting the rainforests, and pumping all that CO2 into the atmosphere are self-destructively idiotic behaviors. But when it comes down to how nature itself behaves, we remain remarkably clueless.

The Adaptive Cycle from Google to GM

Science tells us that complex adaptive systems, like economies or ecosystems, tend to go through basic phases, however varied they may be. In the adaptive cycle, first comes a growth phase characterized by open opportunity. The system is weaving itself together and so there are all sorts of niches to be filled, paths to take, partnerships to be made, all involving seemingly endless possibilities and potential. Think of Google.

As niches are filled and the system sorts out, establishing strong interdependent relationships, the various players become less diverse and are bound together in ways that are ever more constricting. This is the consolidation phase that follows growth. As the system matures, it may look ever bigger and more indestructible, but it is actually growing ever more vulnerable. Think of General Motors.

The hidden weakness that underlies big systems is inherent in the consolidation phase. When every player gets woven ever more tightly into every other, a seemingly small change in a remote corner of the system can cascade catastrophically through the whole of it. Think of a lighted match at the edge of a dry forest. Think of Bear Stearns.

As global capitalism is melting down around us, we are experiencing just how, in an overly mature system, disruptions that start small can grow exponentially. So, for example, unemployment goes up another percent or two, just enough to make those of us with jobs save our cash, fearing we might be next. As we buy less, stocks pile up, production lags, more people are fired, more fear spreads, and consumption contracts further.

The above scenario, as familiar as can be, also provides an example of how easy it is to cross thresholds — even just that slim percent or two can do the trick — and fall into self-reinforcing feedback loops. Big consolidated systems are particularly vulnerable to such runaway scenarios. Think of the domino effect within the densely connected global economy that led to Bear Stearns, then Lehman, Merrill Lynch, AIG…

The third phase in the typical adaptive cycle is collapse. If you want to know what that’s like, turn on the TV, look out your window, or knock on your neighbor’s door, assuming that you still have a window or your neighbor still has a door. Since everything’s connected, when an overgrown system spirals out of control, collapse tends to feel like an avalanche rather than erosion.

It may be hard to notice during the turmoil and confusion, but enormous amounts of energy are released in the collapse phase of an adaptive cycle and that leads to the final phase: regeneration. After seeds are cracked open by a forest fire, seedlings bloom in the nutrient-rich ashes of the former forest. They soak up newly available sunlight where the forest canopy has been opened. Then, as those open spaces start to fill, the growth phase begins anew. Hopefully, in our world, those empty auto-making factories will soon house a blooming business in wind turbines and mass transit.

It is important, however, to recognize that sometimes the collapse phase leads to renewal and sometimes to an entirely different and unwanted regime. Fire, for example, can renew a forest by clearing debris, opening niche space, and resetting the successional clock, or, if combined with a prolonged drought, it can set the stage for desertification. In human systems, we can influence whether the outcome is positive or negative by setting goals, providing incentives, and creating policies designed to reach them.

Building an Economy in Thin Air

Once you tune in to the phases of an adaptive cycle, you see them unfolding all around you. They may seem overwhelmingly complex, especially when compared to the neater, more linear models that shape our conventional ways of seeing the world, but ignoring that cycle as you build an economy is akin to denying gravity as you build a skyscraper.

Bigness is a warning signal that tells us to take a second look and consider whether the seemingly solid thing in front of us is far closer to collapse than it looks and, if so, to ask what can be done about it. If we were ecologically savvy, the conventional wisdom would be: If it ain’t broke but it sure is big, then fix it. We do that by breaking it up and creating space for new niches and for the more dynamic diversity that naturally flows into such a system.

It’s easy to attribute the creative fervor of the growth phase to an absence of regulation, rather than seeing it as the natural process of niche-filling in a system with lots of available space. As is now plain, freeing an already big corporate system of almost all regulation so that it can grow even bigger does not, in fact, encourage creativity; it just hastens the consolidation phase. So, to offer but one example, letting GM off the hook on fuel efficiency during the Bush era didn’t make the company more creative. It only added to its long-term vulnerability.

It was surely no coincidence that, after the mammoth AT&T monopoly was broken up in the 1980′s, cell phone technology emerged explosively starting in the 1990′s. In a sense, cell phones were the technological equivalent of a new species emerging after the collapse and regeneration phases of an ecosystem. In the same way, it wasn’t giant IBM which generated the revolutionary development of personal computers and the Internet. The next breakthrough in solar technology may be more likely to start in your neighbor’s garage than in Chevron’s lab.

Driving Off Cliffs

Our ignorance of the adaptive cycle is just one example of our ecological illiteracy. We are similarly inept at reading all sorts of natural signs. Take, for example, thresholds, those critical points where seemingly minor changes can tip an economy into recession or a climate into a new regime of monster storms and epic droughts.

Thresholds are like the doors between the phases in the adaptive cycle, except that they are often one-way — once you stumble through them, you can’t get back to the other side — so it is crucially important to understand where they are. Although we recognize that there are such things as “tipping points” and we recognize, belatedly, that we have already crossed too many of them, we’re lousy at seeing, let alone avoiding, thresholds before we reach them.

Understanding exactly where a threshold is located may be difficult, but we can at least look for such boundaries, and deliberately try not to cross them when the unintended consequences of doing so can be dire. There are, after all, usually warnings: the reservoir level is lower every year; the colors in the coral reef are fading away; mercury levels in the lake increase; you are more dependent than ever on imported oil…

Once you have driven off a cliff, it does you little good to realize that you are falling. The time to practice water conservation is before your well runs dry. Our culture’s ability to deal with thresholds has proven only slightly better than my dog’s ability to solve algebra problems.

Regeneration, Not Recovery

Still, if we really were attentive to the natural cycles unfolding around us, we wouldn’t be attracted to growth like moths to a flame. We wouldn’t equate bigness with success, but with risk, with enervation awaiting collapse. We certainly wouldn’t be aiming today to rebuild yesterday’s busted economy so that, tomorrow, we can resume our unlimited looting of nature’s storehouse.

Believing that we are unbounded by nature’s limits or rules, we built an economy where faster, cheaper, bigger, and more added up to the winning hand. Then — until the recent global meltdown at least — we acted as if our eventual triumph over anything from resource scarcity to those melting icebergs was a foregone conclusion. Facing problems (or thresholds) where the red lights were visibly blinking, we simply told ourselves that we’d figure out how to tweak the engineering a bit, and make room for a few more passengers.

We got it wrong. A capitalist economy based on constant, unlimited growth is a reckless fantasy because ecosystems are not limitless — there are just so many pollinators, so many aquifers, so much fertile soil. In nature, unchecked rapid growth is the ideology of the invasive species and the cancer cell. Growth as an end in itself is ultimately self-destructive. A (globally warming) rising sea may lift all boats, as capitalists like to point out, but it may also inundate the coastline and drown the people living there.

If “recovery” from economic meltdown is just another word for a return to business as usual, we will be squandering a crucial chance to begin to build an economy that could be viable over the long run, without overloading the Earth’s carrying capacity and courting catastrophe. We don’t have to go big.

Remember that regeneration phase of the adaptive cycle? Here’s where that comes in. Yes, collapse is a nightmare, but it also presents opportunities. If we were more aware of the thresholds we’ve already crossed, we might think differently about the next iteration of the economy. We could always cross a threshold of our own making and decide to live differently. Unrestrained growth, after all, was never a prerequisite for health, happiness, and justice. It’s not written into the Constitution.

What would an end to separation from nature and from each other feel like? How might it be expressed day to day? The regeneration phase that is now upon us begs us to answer those questions.

This much is clear. If we want to avoid endless darkness and hardship, we have to become ecologically literate — deeply so. The future is, you might say, too big to fail.
———-

Chip Ward is a political activist and author of Canaries on the Rim (Verso) and Hope’s Horizon (Island Press). He writes from Torrey, Utah, a small village that refuses to go big.

Share

Wake Up, Freak Out – then Get a Grip


Wake Up, Freak Out – then Get a Grip from Leo Murray on Vimeo.

Share

Money! – a talk by Charles Eisenstein

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

Share

‘The absurdity of endless economic growth’

David Suzuki on how economic growth is flawed and can’t continue:

Have you noticed that we describe the market and economy as if they were living entities? The market is showing signs of stress. The economy is healthy. The economy is on life support.

Sometimes, we act as if the economy is larger than life. In the past, people trembled in fear of dragons, demons, gods, and monsters, sacrificing anything— virgins, money, newborn babies—to appease them. We know now that those fears were superstitious imaginings, but we have replaced them with a new behemoth: the economy.

Even stranger, economists believe this behemoth can grow forever. Indeed, the measure of how well a government or corporation is doing is its record of economic growth. But our home—the biosphere, or zone of air, water, and land where all life exists—is finite and fixed. It can’t grow. And nothing within such a world can grow indefinitely. In focusing on constant growth, we fail to ask the important questions. What is an economy for? Am I happier with all this stuff? How much is enough?

A timely new book by York University environmental economist Peter Victor, Managing Without Growth: Slower by Design, Not Disaster, addresses the absurdity of an economic system based on endless growth. Dr. Victor also shows that the concept of growth as an indispensable feature of economics is a recent phenomenon.

The economy is not a force of nature—some kind of immutable, infallible entity. We created it and, when cracks appear, it makes no sense to simply shovel on more money to keep it going. Because it’s a human invention, an economy is something we should be able to fix—but if we can’t, we should toss it out and replace it with something better.

This current economic crisis provides an opportunity to re-examine our priorities. For decades, scientists and environmentalists have been alarmed at global environmental degradation. Today, the oceans are depleted of fish while “dead zones”, immense islands of plastic, and acidification from dissolving carbon dioxide are having untold effects. We have altered the chemistry of the atmosphere with our emissions, causing the planet to heat up, and have cleared land of forests, along with hundreds of thousands of species. Using air, water, and soil as dumps for our industrial wastes, we have poisoned ourselves.

For the first time in four billion years of life on Earth, one species has become so powerful and plentiful that it is altering the physical, chemical, and biological features of the planet on a geological scale. And so we have to ask, “What is the collective impact of everyone in the world?” We’ve never had to do that before and it’s difficult. Even when we do contemplate our global effects, we have no mechanism to respond as one species to the crises.

Driving much of this destructive activity is the economy itself. Years ago, during a heated debate about clear-cutting, a forest-company CEO yelled at me, “Listen, Suzuki: Are tree huggers like you willing to pay to protect those trees? Because if you’re not, they don’t have any value until someone cuts them down!” I was dumbstruck with the realization that in our economic system, he was correct.

You see, as long as that forest is intact, the plants photosynthesize and remove carbon dioxide from the air while putting oxygen back—not a bad service for animals like us that depend on clean air. However, economists dismiss this as an “externality”. What they mean is that photosynthesis is not relevant to the economic system they’ve created!

Those tree roots cling to the soil, so when it rains the soil doesn’t erode into the river and clog the salmon-spawning gravels, another externality to economists. The trees pump hundreds of thousands of litres of water out of the soil, transpiring it into the air and modulating weather and climate—an externality. The forest provides habitat to countless species of bacteria, fungi, insects, mammals, amphibians, and birds—externality. So all the things an intact ecosystem does to keep the planet vibrant and healthy for animals like us are simply ignored in our economy. No wonder futurist Hazel Henderson describes conventional economics as “a form of brain damage”.

Nature’s services keep the planet habitable for animals like us and must become an integral component of a new economic structure. We must get off this suicidal focus on endless, mindless growth.


We agree – endless economic growth is illogical in a finite world and ultimately a suicidal act for our species.  In order to cut our impact on the planet, it’s not enough just to conserve resources, make things more efficient and promise targets in emissions cuts.  If economic growth continues, all these efforts will be in vain as the global economy grows and inevitably creates a greater impact than what was previously conserved.  The cries for a Green New Deal tend to ignore this, instead hoping technological miracles will allow endless growth on less resources.  But this is impossible, and instead of demanding the governments to use this Green New Deal Greenwash, we need to start creating the local, steady-state economies that will be the future.  The governments and corporations won’t and can’t do that for us – it’s up to us to withdraw as much as possible from the growth system and instead put our energy into the sustainable, no-growth alternatives.

Share

How #Not# to bring down the Banking System

RBS City Branch at the G20 protests

RBS City Branch at the G20 protests

In an attack reminiscent of the scenes at the Royal Bank of Scotland branch in the City of London during the G20 protests, anarchists in Brighton have attacked and smashed the windows of an RBS branch claiming that “With this action we want to increase the rage against the capitalist system”.  This is born of a growing anti-capitalist movement against the banks and financial institutions that brought this economic crisis upon us, and many see it as a route to bring that system down.  However, the attacks these people have used are a particularly ineffective way to express their professed rage against this system, and actions such as this will not contribute to changing the system at all – in fact it could even work against it, with public opinion decidedly against seemingly random vandalism.

These acts are undoubtedly the result of true anger and rage against an economic system that puts profit and growth above people and planet, that rewards its bankster leaders with pensions vastly bigger than what most people have to scrape by on, and is then bailed out along with many other similarily corrupt institutions by these people’s taxes.  But vandalism such as this is a particularly unarticulated expression of this anger, and is ultimately an insignificant act that will only serve to briefly quench their desire for retribution.  It certainly doesn’t bother the bank itself much – they have enough taxpayers money to reglaze their stores indefinitely.  Indeed, the perpetrators don’t even pretend it will, instead seemingly hoping that this will increase other people’s rage against the system.  Unfortunately I suspect the vast majority of the public, many of whom may indeed share the same anger, will be put off by such acts by what they may perceive as violent thugs, rather than be encouraged by it to change the system.  And if we want to change the world, it’s the public we need to start convincing and not the small numbers of those hardcore anarchists with smashing tendencies.

So how can we really change the banking system?  A physical act is tempting and works well in revolutionary fantasies, but in our situation as I have described it is generally only symbolic and even counter-productive.  However, there is a much easier and perfectly legal way to direct your anger against and weaken those banks and financial institutions that prop up the system we work against, one so simple it’s staggering so few people have suggested it – stop giving them your money.  They need regular depositors like us to keep feeding in capital which they can then multiply vastly using various financial tricks to trade across the world and fund continued growth.  Why should we keep funding infinite economic growth when we know how its destroying people and planet?  Why should we willingly be giving them the money to do this?  Complete removal from the banking system may be difficult and currently impractical for most, but reducing the amount of money we stash away in the big corporate banks, investing some of that money in useful equipment necessary for the coming transition as well as for courses to reskill, and shifting the remains to more ethical and local establishments can start the process.

I’m not claiming this will bring down any banks any time soon, but funding the very system we wish to dismantle is counter-productive, and even if a trickle of people start to reduce their connection with the globalised financial webs that create continued growth it will start to help reduce their power.  It’s certainly more effective than smashing a few windows in the night, and is legal too.  So let’s stop funding civilisation’s grip on this planet, and get on with funding a new localised stable economy instead!

Share