talk to Orion

1 - While I sympathize with all those who desire to express their otherwise impotent rage at the cavalier destruction of nature that as humans blithely go about fulfilling their greedy desires, I am reminded in reading this article of an interesting line from Tibetan Buddhist teacher Dzongsar Khyentze Norbu Rinpoche, who is featured in the indy film "Words of My Perfect Teacher." He tells his students, "Don't believe your own thoughts." I think these eco-defenders may have done just that to an extent that has cost them way more than they probably deserve to have to pay. (Comment this)

2 - Violence breeds violence and our government is much better at violence than the perpetrators. They are completely counterproductive to the hope of a peaceful transition to living sustainably and in harmony with the natural systems of our planet.

If they are correct in their belief that civilization is the cause of a disaster that will result in the extinction of countless species and countless numbers of humans, they don't have to do a thing. Civilization will collapse of its own accord.

Our planet has been through extremely distructive periods. Collisions with asteroids, Massive volcanic explosions, advance of glaciers to name a few. There have been massive extinctions in the past.

Life has recovered. In fact, a reasonable argument can be made that were it not for the catastrophe that resulted in the end of the age of dinosaurs. Humans would never have evolved. Life will go on with or without humanity.

Our real moral dilemma is that, only our species has both the capability to see the consequences of our actions and this same capability of the human mind is resulting those actions.

The jury is still out on whether humanity will survive. But more importantly the issue is how we treat each other and our companions on this ride through the void right now in the present.

Wisdom and compassion must work in concert. The radicals may have acted out of compassion but they sorely lack wisdom.

The proper course requires nonviolent actions to try to raise our consciousness and moral understanding. At the same time we need to establish refuges for ourselves and other species so there is a chance of withstanding the possibility (some would say probability) of the collapse of civilization as we know it.

Hopefully the transition to a sustainable civilization in harmony with the natural world will be with a minimum of suffering.

But if it is not, Perhaps from the ashes of disaster a new Phoenix will arise. Let us work to see that it is a bird of healing, of wisdom, and of compassion for all living beings.

May we live with compassion
May we live with wisdom
May we be free from hatred
May we live with awareness
May we be free (Comment this)

3 - While I can symphasize greatly with their frusteration and decisions to act, I think the most effective course is to encourage widespread, Gandhian nonviolent resistance. After all, everyone is on our side, whether or not they currently know it, because it is their neck too.

Besides, maybe the extinction of homo sapiens would not be such a bad thing after all! Nature will regroup, rebuild and continue without us, as it always has. (Comment this)

4 - Er, rather embarassing, should be "frustration" rather than "frusteration." (Comment this)

5 - This is a conversation I've been hosting in my online Deep Ecology course. The question is really about the definition of violence. In American society where property is often considered a higher value and right than the wellbeing of sentient beings, damage to or destruction of property is considered 'violence.' Many eco-activists, on the other hand, do not consider damage to or destruction of inanimate objects to be violence, but rather 'ecotage' - ecological sabotage. Violence is more narrowly defined in some ecological circles as harm to sentient beings, which is deplored. So it's a question of values: what's more important? Human-made objects or living beings? Obviously, in our materialistic civilization, human-made objects are often more protected by the law than human beings, much less animals, trees, and ecosystems. This, I think, is the crux of the matter.

What to do about it if one values sentient life more than objects? Ecotage may have been an effective way to bring attention to this conflict in values, but for the long haul I don't think it is an effective way to change consciousness and values - not in the current climate of fear and obsession with 'security.' It is wiser and safer for eco-activists to pursue challenges to the laws, and thus the values, that protect 'property' (and by extension 'profit') at the expense of public health, ecological health, and ecological security or sustainability. That would get people thinking and talking about what really matters: the web of life or the profit of a few? What is truly sacred: the miracle of each life form - each polar bear, each wildflower, each redwood tree - or the inanimate creations of human beings? Are buildings, vehicles, equipment, fences, cages and walls more valuable, more irreplaceable, than the creatures and ecosystems of the Earth?

I think this is what we humans must decide in this 21st century, and that how we decide will determine our fate.








 (Comment this)

6 - Jerry,

I agree with your sentiments, although I would blame all governments on Earth for being good at violence and not just that of the United States. If we are to have any hope of continuing human life and civilization on Earth, in my view, we need to preserve a "can do" spirit, characteristic in the U.S. for good and for bad.

You mentioned collisions with asteroids, one of the issues I follow closely as a member of what is known as the "space advocacy community."

I believe that if humankind were to identify all of Earth with being a part of the "Orion ecosystem" of the Milky Way, we would give countless generations of human beings the gifts of mental, spiritual, and political space in which to cooperate and perish together in expanding and ensuring the security of the great cause of humankind. (Comment this)

7 - Martin A. Schwab,

Thanks for your reply.

Yes, I agree many other nations are quite well versed in the use of violence.

I also agree that the U.S. does have an element of a "can do" attitude that hopefully can be harnessed to the benefit of all.

Wishing you a peaceful and meaningful new year,

Jerry

I don't quite understand how expanding our identity to the "orion ecosystem" would address the immediate issues that face civilization today. If it implies a recognition that we are part of a vast mystery and provides a sense of belonging and meaning beyond personal or national identification, this can be beneficial.

If there is an agenda to populate other star systems, even if this were possible, I think we had better clean up our own house first.

Those who have a broad vision of humanities potential will have to work with people and organizations who are at differing levels of understanding and consciousness. We cannot afford to wait until everybody is in agreement as this will never happen. I would guess that even 5% or 10% of a population who have a broader and compassionate level of understanding and are willing to work with others and appeal to what ever level of consciousness they have can have a major effect on the course of events. (Comment this)

8 - If you thought the "kill a commie for Christ" argument was reprehensible, how can you support ELF? Same thing. (Comment this)

9 - The ELF defendants combined their righteous rage over environmental destruction, with the hot house politics of Eugene. They possessed a moral certainty that they were clearing the way for a bright new day for the earth. The residents of the White House, combined righteous rage over 9/11, with the hermetically sealed politics of the neo-cons. They possessed a moral certainty that they were clearing the way for a bright new day for the Middle East. They both ended up on the losing end of a bad deal. Beware of righteous rage. It can turn on you.

You have to be able to distinguish between actions that lead to social change, and actions that are just politically justified acts of social or personal therapy. I think all of us can understand the rage of the ELF defendants, but that understanding cannot excuse actions that are futile, and destructive of both activists and movements. I, for one, prefer my activists to be out on the streets, not buried alive in prison.

Finally let us praise the intellectuals who helped the ELF defendants construct their rationales for their self immolation. I have to wonder if these intellectuals will visit their students in prison, just as I wonder if the intellectuals who concocted the invasion of Iraq, visit the wards of Bethesda Naval Hospital or Walter Reed. “Can I interest you in my latest book?”

Randy Cunningham
Cleveland, Ohio
 (Comment this)

10 - FEEDBACK LOOPS

"Don't believe your own thoughts." - Dzongsar Khyentze Norbu Rinpoche (previous blog)

“Never believe your own press” – old adage

As living entities, we rely (among many other things) on positive and negative feedback to determine our position relative to the environment. It is our natural tendency to probe our surroundings and obtain feedback (sensory, emotional and intellectual). This applies to our physical existence, the emotional/psychological relationships we develop with those around us and is a vital component of reality and theory testing.

In mechanical and electrical systems, negative feedback is often deliberately introduced to increase stability and accuracy. If we only ever solicit information supportive of our point of view, the positive arm of the feedback loop becomes abnormally strong at the expense of the negative limb, which grows atretic.

What we can be left with is a system out of control.

Could this be one of the characteristics of radical fundamentalist groups (religious, political and even environmental), which refuse to consider any information which conflicts with their point of view? Could this be the reason why many decisions for action under these circumstances have resulted in disaster?

I realize that this may a somewhat simplistic point of view but I would encourage us all to consider and evaluate our (especially our most closely held) beliefs from different and divergent points of view.

Let’s bring some sanity back into the equation.

All the best for 2007!

John (Comment this)