Comments

Episode-2734- The Expert Council Show for 9-18-20 — 31 Comments

  1. Actually, you ran with that question exactly where I was aiming for… thinking of the elements & features one things would want in a town/city, and the kind of systems & incentives you’d want in place there. The idea is such a vision could be used both to build something entirely new and to better identify existing communities that already have (or are in a position to develop) those beneficial features & systems. I do agree it’d probably be easiest to sell this idea with a brand new community, if for no other reason that it would be far easier to have the right kind of incentives established from the get-go. Trying to change an existing system would be harder and take much longer, but should get easier if they have an example to point to and say, “yeah, we want THAT!”

    The idea I’ve mulled over the most touches on your ‘complex of villages’ point. My first thought was keeping individual communities small enough to make it reasonably easy to know or at least be acquainted with most others in the village/neighborhood. The second thought was to create barriers to strong centralization, not only by keeping each one small but making use of the ‘buffer’ park/garden/woodland areas between neighboring ‘villages’ (not so much it makes visiting another problematic or time-consuming but just enough to better enable each village/neighborhood to keep it’s own sense of self). Third, it makes it far more likely that any given person in said place will live in walking or biking distance to large park, woodland, or nature areas. That last one was something I really liked about growing up in Alaska, where even the largest city (Anchorage) used to have many large, undeveloped wooded lots scattered around. Having those ‘woods out back’ was something I really appreciated in hindsight.

    3
    7
  2. “When we talk about limits to population in Permaculture we are not talking about enforced birth control. We are talking about looking at your surroundings, evaluating the natural resources that are available to you and making a decision based on your findings.”

    but people disagree. not only that, but their findings will disagree – your neighbor may make a rational decision that benefits him at your expense, for example taking water from a creek on his property thus depriving those downstream of the use of that water. historically such disagreements are resolved through the imposition of top-down polities, recently (the last few centuries) moderated by input from the lower classes. how are disagreements resolved in “permaculture” societies?

    6
    3
    • You are not even close to qualified sufficiently to engage in this discussion.

      Many people disagree that the earth is round, I have no time for them either.

      3
      6
    • I dunno… how about TALKING with your neighbor? Finding some common ground or compromise that benefits you both? There’s no guarantees but no matter which way the result goes, as long as both parties are halfway reasonable people it’s more likely to turn out better than turning to the State for answers.

      The idea isn’t to find the PERFECT system… just one that works BETTER than the current one. And performing better than a system run by government bureaucrats (whose primary interest is in perpetuating the system they operate in) is NOT exactly difficult. Stop looking for reasons why something CAN’T be done and start asking yourself “how COULD this be done”? It doesn’t even have to be a permaculture or agorist answer… there’s usually more than one ‘better’ solution to a given problem out there. You just need to break out of the either-or/black-white narrative.

      2
      6
      • “how about TALKING with your neighbor? Finding some common ground or compromise that benefits you both?”

        sure. but what if there is no common ground? “my water.” “no, my water.” entire range wars were fought in the western united states over water rights. “our hunting grounds.” “no, our hunting grounds.” indian tribes would genocide each other over who was to hunt the limited supply of deer. “my radio bandwidth.” “no, my radio bandwidth.” radio stations in the 1920’s would build ever larger transmitters attempting to dominate available frequencies until the federal government stepped in and decreed allocated bandwidth. and so on.

        so sure, talking is good, and finding mutual solutions without courts and lawyers (or hitmen and guns) is good – but lots of win/lose disagreements frequently arise. how does a “permaculture” society resolve them?

        “The idea isn’t to find the PERFECT system… just one that works BETTER than the current one”

        I understand. good vs better, bad vs worse, and all that. but usually what happens is that the proposed better system assumes that the desirable results presently achieved in the existing system simply are a given and simply will naturally continue on in the new system. but usually they don’t continue on, rather they’re lost.

        the system we see around us right now is the result of thousands of years of attempted cooperation and resolved conflicts – finding anything better would be unexpected. likely this is as good as it gets.

        6
        3
        • The person saying something can’t be done should stay out of the way of people already doing it.

          4
          6
        • @gman-

          ” how does a “permaculture” society resolve them?”

          However it chooses to. Things like voluntary 3rd party arbitrators, contracts, private insurance, and private security don’t require a government or the present system to exist. It won’t stop the worst sociopaths from preying on others, but government & laws don’t do much to stop that type either. And some sociopaths actually manage to subvert government power to their own ends, so the government has the potential to make their negative impact on society WORSE. Centralized power can cut both ways.

          Strange that you present so much vocal opposition to a system/way-of-life that is not only completely voluntary, but also doesn’t involve taking ANY of your money or freedom or time. If it doesn’t work you’re no worse off, and if it does it represents an alternative to the present system should you ever find it too abusive or restrictive. So why spend your energy trashing it? Are you afraid of others’ chance for success… i.e. “Haters gonna hate”?

          3
          6
        • “people already doing it”

          they’re doing it from within the existing system. when that goes away then what they’re doing will change.

          6
          3
        • Like I said you are not qualified to have these discussions your ignorance is extreme. In history the more governments break down the greater the cooperation between individuals. This can be seen so many times though history that any claim to the contrary comes either from ignorance or stupidity. For the time I shall grant you the benefit of the doubt. No go ahead and thumb down this comment as though anyone gives two fucks.

          3
          6
        • “Centralized power can cut both ways”

          very good and thoroughly valid point. but I would point out that centralized power exists only with support and must mind that support, while single sociopaths simply choose what THEY want and operate alone, and do so against other single individuals who are vulnerable because they operate alone too – unless those individuals create a centralized power. thus the justification and creation and maintenance of centralized power in all societies everywhere.

          “Strange that you present so much vocal opposition to a system/way-of-life that is not only completely voluntary, but also doesn’t involve taking ANY of your money or freedom or time.”

          all I asked was how conflicts are to be resolved. the question is of course pointed, and the answers are as expected. your society too, should it ever stand alone, will develop a centralized authority to deal with conflicts and to enforce compliance. they always do. it’s unavoidable.

          6
          3
        • More ignorance of history. The briefest of wars happens among anarcho/tribal civilizations because the conflict costs both sides so much. This is historical fact and if you’d bother to learn anything outside your programming, you’d know it.

          Additionally you don’t even have knowledge of recent wars to make this claim…. Governments create war, they always have.

          In an interview with Gilbert in Göring’s jail cell during the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials (18 April 1946)

          Göring: Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.

          Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars.

          Göring: Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

          5
          6
        • “centralized power exists only with support and must mind that support”

          Technically true, but that support need not come from the population… only from those with the keys to power. Watch “Rules for Rulers” on Youtube for an excellent breakdown of this concept. Furthermore, you are conflating ‘cooperation between individuals’ with ‘centralized power structures’. The former does not require the latter, and in extreme cases the latter can actually hinder the former. The state of the USA is practically a poster child for this case, where centralized political & media power structures are stoking Americans’ hatred of other Americans for personal power & profit.

          “all I asked was how conflicts are to be resolved.”

          But Jack has covered this topic MULTIPLE times on the show (within the past couple years no less), and I listed some of the same solutions again in my last post. Yet you ignore and blow past both, and just continue making blanket assertions that societies MUST develop centralized power structures to deal with said challenges. You also ignore that humanity has done so without centralized power structures for the majority of its history. I’m not sure if you just like arguing for the sake of arguing, or if it’s because you have a vested interest in keeping the status quo going due to your job, location, or other circumstances. I know many people (retired members of my family for example) that to varying degrees fall into the latter category. It’s understandable to fall into that mindset, yet that doesn’t make it any less limiting to one’s perception of the world.

          3
          6
        • “if it’s because you have a vested interest in keeping the status quo going due to your job, location, or other circumstances”

          oh the status quo is going away, there’s no keeping it going. you boys have all kinds of great ideas – really you do, “modern survival” is doing a great job here – but they all function within and thus presume and depend upon the existing status quo. I’m only pointing out what’s just over the social horizon, kept at bay by the status quo, that will come flooding in when the status quo really does go away. I think you’ll find your ideas break down in the coming free-for-all.

          6
          3
        • “Governments create war, they always have”

          I was speaking of conflicts in general, not just warfare. limited local conflicts (family feuds, clan vendettas, fraud, malpractice, etc) can hinder and damage individuals just as thoroughly as any war event, and in individualist societies much more thoroughly – and absent governing enforcement mechanisms, without limit. a society that relies on ad-hoc conflict resolution will prove unviable over time and will drift or lurch into formal conflict resolution – that is, government.

          6
          2
        • I really have to congratulate you, you are the first person to talk out of your ass so much for so long as to rending my fathers statement of “you talk like a man with a paper asshole” insufficient to describe your bullshit. I shall endeavor to figure out something to top the old many colloquialism. It will be a tall order but if I succeed I will credit you as the inspiration for it.

          If you took 15 minutes to actually attempt to learn a damn thing you find that conflict resolution is a key component of anarchism. Again it is not without governance it is without rulers.

          3
          6
        • @gman-

          AGAIN you refuse to confront the points I made on how more decentralized societies can handle the challenges you mention, and AGAIN you talk past it to make more blanket assertions based only on your own opinion and ignorance of history. I don’t see any reason to continue the conversation with you, as you’re bringing as much value to this discussion as crystal meth brings to dental health…

          3
          7
  3. “’you talk like a man with a paper asshole’ insufficient to describe your bullshit” … “conflict resolution is a key component of anarchism”

    yeah, I can see that. good luck.

    “make more blanket assertions based only on your own opinion and ignorance of history”

    pretty soon you’ll have a chance to put your ideas into practice in a “play for keeps” setting. good luck.

    6
    1
  4. just curious. “Nick in NMG”‘s praise/positive post at 0302 has no upvotes and six downvotes for no reason I can see. also my initial post at 1228 has five upvotes, while the blog owner “modern survival”‘s response at 1249 has five downvotes and no upvotes – I’ve never seen any vote response like that on any other blog, usually the blog owner has at least some kind of following that supports him and that downvotes anyone who doesn’t. I’m wondering if your up/down vote algorithm is reversed or something? might want to look at it.

    7
    1
    • “just curious. “Nick in NMG”‘s praise/positive post at 0302 has no upvotes and six downvotes for no reason I can see. also my initial post at 1228 has five upvotes, while the blog owner “modern survival”‘s response at 1249 has five downvotes and no upvotes – I’ve never seen any vote response like that on any other blog”

      Giving benefit of the doubt and assuming your question is genuine, I would have to guess that Jack has attracted one or more obsessive trolls that come to the site just to downvote every post of his they see. And at some point in recent months they must have got butthurt by something I said and now do the same to me (no matter if my post is about riots or Thai cooking). It’s funny that they give us their power like that, and even kinda cute in 5-year-old tantrum sort of way.

      Though to be honest, at this stage in my life I’d hoped to attract a higher quality of troll. Step up your game, people! Obsessive downvoting is the Diet Coke of trolling… just one calorie, not nearly ‘troll’ enough!!! 🙂

      2
      6
      • Gman is one I know who the other is. The other will literally come in on multiple devices with different addresses just to do it multiple times. As though it matters.

        • “Gman is one”

          ? except for a single instance I don’t recall upvoting or downvoting anyone here. the discus system, if you hover the cursor over the up/down arrows, will list who has voted for what – perhaps you could implement that.

        • That’s that, I shall formulate a mead this weekend called “Downvoter’s Tears”. Seems like mint should be involved.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *