You've found another inspiring project. Ignoring governments is a good idea for getting small grassroots actions off the ground. When we see how bad actors abuse governments, it's hard to imagine small communities of practical people putting up with the same nonsense. Thank you for the shout-out! I hope you enjoyed the extra attention to silences and in-betweens. :-) I'm here in just such a moment right now.
I think there's an interesting point (between the words) that perhaps government as conceived isn't the problem, so much as how it can be and is abused (despite measures which were designed to prevent that).
After the divisive Brexit shortly followed by Boris at the same time America was experiencing disunited states, I know that we personally experienced an 'enough is enough', let's get out while we still can and find our tribe.
I did (still am) enjoy the extra attention to silences and in-betweens. It's quite a mindful way to live and I suspect increases sensitivity and compassion.
Britain has been a communist country since the Peterloo Massacre . . . Karl Marx, who was descended from rabbinical families on both the maternal and paternal sides, spent most of his life under his Jewish father's assumed surname in London.
-
Funding Both Sides: How Jewish Money Controls British Politics . . .
❝During the previous Labour government, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were ardent Zionists because they accepted the justice of Israel’s cause, not because Labour’s chief fund-raisers were first the Jew Michael Levy and then the Jew Jonathan Mendelsohn (both are now members of the House of Lords). And during the current Conservative government, David Cameron, Theresa May and Boris Johnson have been ardent Zionists because they too accept the justice of Israel’s cause, not because the Conservatives’ chief fund-raisers have been first the Jew Sir Mick Davis and then the Jew Sir Ehud Sheleg.❞
So interesting - I used to be a landscape architecture theoretician (of all things) and this is a reminder of all the ways we have believed nature and the land to be in relationship to ourselves as humans. And how we have constructed political movements out of those beliefs. As well as how we garden and construct landscapes! And also, thanks so much for the shout out
Landscape architecture theoretician! I'm intrigued, but using my imagination to figure out what that entails. I'm wondering if it is similar to what we're trying to do this winter to keep all the water that runs alongside our site on site so it is available to our plantings during drought. Theory being, if you theoretically move water that way, what are the implications for what's around it? What sorts of relationships and networks might that disrupt? That sort of thing?
That’s more of practical landscape architecture thing. The theory is more about why you choose to make certain decisions about your garden (and the wider environment) based on your beliefs about what is the right to manipulate (or not) nature and the natural world
I loved this essay, Safar. At one point, I was reminded of a colleague who once told me when I asked him if it was all right to do something at work, “I just do it until they tell me I can’t.” That philosophy helped me to take (calculated) chances I wouldn’t have if he hadn’t said it.
I agree that we need a new way of social organization as (most of) the ways we’ve tried in history haven’t worked out the way we’d planned.
My wife and I built a little house here in Japan. Our dream was to have a little farm (actually a large garden), and that dream came true. We’ve been growing veggies and some fruit trees for over 10 years now. I don’t know how many kilos of fruit and vegetables I’ve hauled to work to give to friends and staff. We don’t need that much, and if it helps someone else, then we’re more than happy to share. We’ve started to cut down on how much we plant now because 1) we’re getting older and with the heat in summer, I can’t manage to do so much, and 2) I no longer work at that place. The neighbors have their own gardens, so...
Paco Ayana’s project and vision for the future is remarkable and laudable. As I watched, and as I read your message, I wondered how this would work here in Japan. I find it a challenge to get my students to even understand how their purchases are related to energy footprints, virtual water use, plastics in clothing, and so much more. It just doesn’t seem to phase them. How is it possible to bring about the change in values along with a new way of social organization?
"Do it until they tell you you can't" - sounds like a good maxim to hold on to. I think I've always been that way and react negatively when someone says I can't do something.
Calculated chances is a good approach. I think that's what is great about a lot of the quiet revolutionaries I've been trying to showcase, they're not particularly radical, often what they do has been drawn from history, tradition, has been tried and tested, but they also make use of new discoveries (e.g. about how plants communicate with each other). It's a synthesis that seems so much like common sense to them, that they take that calculated chance. From what I've studied and observed, Paco is the pinnacle of bringing all that understanding together in one place.
How is it possible to bring about the change in values along with a new way of social organization?
This is something I want to explore in the next series. I feel we are at the crux of that change and we experience it in the conflictual discourse , the conservationists say vs those who see change as necessary - an example being the LBGTQ+ movement and book banning in some American states.
I'm not sure the age of your students, but I used to work with 16-18 year olds and experienced similar challenges. At the beginning of a sociology course I would ask them if they could change one thing in society what would it be. I often got back, nothing, society was ok as it was.
Finally, with your own garden, your dream and reality sounds a lot like ours. This question about becoming too old to care for what you began was raised in response to this family's project: https://thefiertzeside.substack.com/p/the-most-radical-of-acts (scroll down for the video).
For our own project, we've decided to adjust the design to make it ageing-friendlier. The truth is though, the new now (to quote @Russel C. Smith) or future, is a community endeavour. These projects can't be sustained alone.
I think I've given away some spoilers for what's coming up over the next few weeks! Thank you so much, Louise, for your input. 🙂
I’m sorry, I am in a quirky sort of mood and need to ask the question - what is the difference between a dead person and a very dead person? As an ex-nurse I find the idea intriguing. A partially dead person is perhaps only dead on Monday & Tuesday, whereas a very dead person stays mouldering in their grave?
Perhaps we should go back to the old ways, and attach a string to the big toe of a ‘dead’ person, with a bell on the end. Then, if the person was not very dead, they would ring the bell when they had a not-dead-day.
I appreciate ‘very dead’ means they died a long time ago, the sentence just tickled my funny bone. I do not intend to be disrespectful to your writing - which is always erudite and very interesting.
Glad to make you laugh because the concept of a very dead (or not) person really amused me. It is a good day with a laugh in it. I am always here - just lingering on the edges.
You've found another inspiring project. Ignoring governments is a good idea for getting small grassroots actions off the ground. When we see how bad actors abuse governments, it's hard to imagine small communities of practical people putting up with the same nonsense. Thank you for the shout-out! I hope you enjoyed the extra attention to silences and in-betweens. :-) I'm here in just such a moment right now.
I think there's an interesting point (between the words) that perhaps government as conceived isn't the problem, so much as how it can be and is abused (despite measures which were designed to prevent that).
After the divisive Brexit shortly followed by Boris at the same time America was experiencing disunited states, I know that we personally experienced an 'enough is enough', let's get out while we still can and find our tribe.
I did (still am) enjoy the extra attention to silences and in-betweens. It's quite a mindful way to live and I suspect increases sensitivity and compassion.
Britain has been a communist country since the Peterloo Massacre . . . Karl Marx, who was descended from rabbinical families on both the maternal and paternal sides, spent most of his life under his Jewish father's assumed surname in London.
-
Funding Both Sides: How Jewish Money Controls British Politics . . .
❝During the previous Labour government, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown were ardent Zionists because they accepted the justice of Israel’s cause, not because Labour’s chief fund-raisers were first the Jew Michael Levy and then the Jew Jonathan Mendelsohn (both are now members of the House of Lords). And during the current Conservative government, David Cameron, Theresa May and Boris Johnson have been ardent Zionists because they too accept the justice of Israel’s cause, not because the Conservatives’ chief fund-raisers have been first the Jew Sir Mick Davis and then the Jew Sir Ehud Sheleg.❞
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2021/10/04/funding-both-sides-how-jewish-money-controls-british-politics/
So interesting - I used to be a landscape architecture theoretician (of all things) and this is a reminder of all the ways we have believed nature and the land to be in relationship to ourselves as humans. And how we have constructed political movements out of those beliefs. As well as how we garden and construct landscapes! And also, thanks so much for the shout out
Landscape architecture theoretician! I'm intrigued, but using my imagination to figure out what that entails. I'm wondering if it is similar to what we're trying to do this winter to keep all the water that runs alongside our site on site so it is available to our plantings during drought. Theory being, if you theoretically move water that way, what are the implications for what's around it? What sorts of relationships and networks might that disrupt? That sort of thing?
That’s more of practical landscape architecture thing. The theory is more about why you choose to make certain decisions about your garden (and the wider environment) based on your beliefs about what is the right to manipulate (or not) nature and the natural world
I loved this essay, Safar. At one point, I was reminded of a colleague who once told me when I asked him if it was all right to do something at work, “I just do it until they tell me I can’t.” That philosophy helped me to take (calculated) chances I wouldn’t have if he hadn’t said it.
I agree that we need a new way of social organization as (most of) the ways we’ve tried in history haven’t worked out the way we’d planned.
My wife and I built a little house here in Japan. Our dream was to have a little farm (actually a large garden), and that dream came true. We’ve been growing veggies and some fruit trees for over 10 years now. I don’t know how many kilos of fruit and vegetables I’ve hauled to work to give to friends and staff. We don’t need that much, and if it helps someone else, then we’re more than happy to share. We’ve started to cut down on how much we plant now because 1) we’re getting older and with the heat in summer, I can’t manage to do so much, and 2) I no longer work at that place. The neighbors have their own gardens, so...
Paco Ayana’s project and vision for the future is remarkable and laudable. As I watched, and as I read your message, I wondered how this would work here in Japan. I find it a challenge to get my students to even understand how their purchases are related to energy footprints, virtual water use, plastics in clothing, and so much more. It just doesn’t seem to phase them. How is it possible to bring about the change in values along with a new way of social organization?
"Do it until they tell you you can't" - sounds like a good maxim to hold on to. I think I've always been that way and react negatively when someone says I can't do something.
Calculated chances is a good approach. I think that's what is great about a lot of the quiet revolutionaries I've been trying to showcase, they're not particularly radical, often what they do has been drawn from history, tradition, has been tried and tested, but they also make use of new discoveries (e.g. about how plants communicate with each other). It's a synthesis that seems so much like common sense to them, that they take that calculated chance. From what I've studied and observed, Paco is the pinnacle of bringing all that understanding together in one place.
How is it possible to bring about the change in values along with a new way of social organization?
This is something I want to explore in the next series. I feel we are at the crux of that change and we experience it in the conflictual discourse , the conservationists say vs those who see change as necessary - an example being the LBGTQ+ movement and book banning in some American states.
I'm not sure the age of your students, but I used to work with 16-18 year olds and experienced similar challenges. At the beginning of a sociology course I would ask them if they could change one thing in society what would it be. I often got back, nothing, society was ok as it was.
Finally, with your own garden, your dream and reality sounds a lot like ours. This question about becoming too old to care for what you began was raised in response to this family's project: https://thefiertzeside.substack.com/p/the-most-radical-of-acts (scroll down for the video).
For our own project, we've decided to adjust the design to make it ageing-friendlier. The truth is though, the new now (to quote @Russel C. Smith) or future, is a community endeavour. These projects can't be sustained alone.
I think I've given away some spoilers for what's coming up over the next few weeks! Thank you so much, Louise, for your input. 🙂
I’m sorry, I am in a quirky sort of mood and need to ask the question - what is the difference between a dead person and a very dead person? As an ex-nurse I find the idea intriguing. A partially dead person is perhaps only dead on Monday & Tuesday, whereas a very dead person stays mouldering in their grave?
Perhaps we should go back to the old ways, and attach a string to the big toe of a ‘dead’ person, with a bell on the end. Then, if the person was not very dead, they would ring the bell when they had a not-dead-day.
I appreciate ‘very dead’ means they died a long time ago, the sentence just tickled my funny bone. I do not intend to be disrespectful to your writing - which is always erudite and very interesting.
You made me laugh. 😆. Very good point!
Your comment is a lovely piece of writing in itself and I feel there is a story to be told buried in there somewhere.
Lovely to hear from you again, Kate. 🤗
Glad to make you laugh because the concept of a very dead (or not) person really amused me. It is a good day with a laugh in it. I am always here - just lingering on the edges.
I will never ever again be able to write "very dead" without a chortle! Enjoy the rest of your day!