This month's theme was water. The presentations were wide-ranging: water as a cause of war, a source of disease, a fascinating part of our local landscape. The most important message was that 'Water is an energy issue'. Some 5% of world energy is used in pumping our water . . . and sewage.
You can't talk water, it seems, without also talking dirty. We learned how it is fairly recently that we have used water as profligately as we do now, largely as a channel for taking our wastes out of sight and out of smelling distance, thus effectively removing them from our minds. But not from the environment, of course. For they remain just a short distance from us, in rivers and seas, decomposing and providing a friendly home to bacteria and viruses.
Yet just as I have had to learn on the farm that dung is our friend, so can we form a much closer relationship with our wastes. It emerged that many who were at the discussion already proudly fill piss-pots which they use as compost activators. Human 'solid waste' still seems hedged around with taboos, as I have felt impelled to head it round with quotation marks. It can provide excellent fertiliser when treated suitably.
The solutions to the problem of water and waste are very local indeed. The model appears to be to turn your home into a water recycling unit. By taking the rainwater from the roof and the barely soiled water pumped to your home and circulating them you can minimise the need to bring water in and send sewage out.
Why aren't more people doing this? The pressure of the market and of making profits appears to be the culprit again. It is at the points that water enters and leaves the home that profits can be made, hence the political pressure to keep us all tied into a vast, bureaucratic water system rather than playing our role as part of Nature's water cycle.
So, a lot was learned, although the content of the learning was perhaps something we already knew. The economic system Marx called capitalism is just not a very good way of organising things, and taking more responsibility and doing things on a smaller scale can usually work better. A simple, but important message that is being relearned through various more or less savoury media.
Tweet
Hi Molly,
ReplyDeleteInteresting piece ... I'm a pee-recycler too, and would love to have a composting toilet.
But, how can Marx, a man who died in 1883, help in understanding 21st century corporate capitalism and its frightening nexus with Nulabour-style socialism, which we are up against today?
He may be interesting as a very 19th century figure, with his linear approach to history and his denigration of "primitive" cultures, but he has little or nothing to tell us about today, and bringing him in surely only alienates a lot of people.
Thanks for this comment, Dorothea. I think we still have lots of learn from Marx, as well as many other historical thinkers who influence my writing. Nobody was right about everything, while lots of thinkers have valuable insights to offer. I'm not sure why Marx should be excluded from this list. Because some of his advocates made a mess of running various countries? Because he doesn't fit with US-style capitalism? Marx's most valuable contribution to the onward march of ideas, I think, is his creation of critical concepts. Interestingly, my favourite is alienation.
ReplyDeleteMolly - I'm not suggesting "excluding" Marx, as you put it, just concerned that many, many people who want to learn more about green ideas and contribute to making our society a more sustainable one, will be thoroughly put off if they get the feeling that you have to be a marxist or a socialist in order to be green.
ReplyDeleteThere were so many interesting characters around in the 19th century, with plenty to say to us today, yet Marx gets 5 postings mentioning him, while William Morris, for example, gets zilch.
Even the great Schumacher only rates 2 mentions here.
My feeling is that the green movement needs to be a "broad church" for all eco-friendly people and not exclusive.
http://another-green-world.blogspot.com/2007/06/talking-about-how-to-save-world.html#631460302670752630
ReplyDeleteHere Cardozo says "Capitalism" is a pretty loose term, is it not? To which Derek replies “i don't use capitalism loosely!”
The point is, does Derek’s strict definition line up with everybody else’s? I doubt it. We also have the impact of the way the media presents such concepts to the masses, in a sort of BB glib sort of way. The same is true of Marxism. And Socialism.
Using such terms in the company of those of similar understanding is fine, but once you broaden out to the people you wish to engage and persuade [not the committed activists] some caution is essential. Otherwise you can “alienate” people very quickly.
This is precisely what some in the Green Party are doing.
The Green Parties Philosophical Basis and policies [as far as I recall] does not use such terms. In fact some while back I printed it off and went through it using different colour highlight pens for what I judged to be Conservative, Socialist, Liberal, Marxist ideas. I ended up with a rainbow!!!!!! There is much here to attract people of all persuasions, but above all when it comes to placing an X on a ballot paper what people want is reassurance and competence. The self-perpetuating rule of established parties will only be broken by cutting across it in a completely new dimension.
Link for Dorothea:
http://policy.greenparty.org.uk/
Weggis said;
ReplyDelete"...some while back I printed it off and went through it using different colour highlight pens for what I judged to be Conservative, Socialist, Liberal, Marxist ideas. I ended up with a rainbow!!!!!! There is much here to attract people of all persuasions, but above all when it comes to placing an X on a ballot paper what people want is reassurance and competence. The self-perpetuating rule of established parties will only be broken by cutting across it in a completely new dimension."
That's reassuring, Weggis, thanks for the link.
I agree with you, in that Green ideas will benefit from escaping the straitjacket of rigid ideologies.
It's a matter of priorities, I guess. We self-styled modern people need to get back to considering the rest of nature more respectfully, not just thinking about ourselves.
Since the 18th century the mainstream of Western culture has really gone down the wrong path, imo. Some humility, and learning from pre-"Enlightenment" societies might help us survive?