Sustainability & Political/Economic Systems

[kib]

Yes, I think we are too. The thing I find so exasperating and baffling is that we don't seem designed for backcasting. Even if it were true that every human on the planet thinks sustainability is the end goal (and I'm not at all convinced that's true), we've evolved these amazingly complex systems that disregard it, and these complex individual existences that don't allow for fully acting on it even if we believe it.

Before we evolved civilization, we didn't need to consider an end goal because we were by definition just part of a sustainable system. I feel like the starting point for all of it is getting people on the same page about an end goal - NOT the configuration of the board, just an agreement about what checkmate means. What is the point of this game we're playing? To win. What does winning mean? "A world that is infinitely renewing itself in a way that allows for life including human life, in a word, sustainable."

[kib]

Alan, I don't think it is. My dream is that if everyone were on the same page about the definition of checkmate - again, the definition of what it means, not what the board will look like - then we would all be acting toward it. Not necessarily in ways that we all agreed with, but with the same final result in mind. So in a way, a mutually agreed backcasting point would reduce the need for Authority, not increase it.

[catherine]

Alan, I don't think it is. My dream is that if everyone were on the same page about the definition of checkmate - again, the definition of what it means, not what the board will look like - then we would all be acting toward it. Not necessarily in ways that we all agreed with, but with the same final result in mind. So in a way, a mutually agreed backcasting point would reduce the need for Authority, not increase it.

But I can see Alan's point. We can't make everyone agree with our endgame. Backcasting works for us, but what about everyone else who is NOT on the sustainability page, as you said?

To use another Daniel Quinn analogy, Christians didn't start out in the second century with a grand plan to make the Western world Christian. It was one man/one woman at a time, one meme at a time, and then we wind up with Constantine and then we wind up with the Holy Roman Empire etc etc. Peter and Paul probably wanted to see the world follow the teachings of Jesus and they did what they could to make it happen, but they didn't go around enlisting people to agree on the endgame, without first attracting them individually with a promise of the benefits that would be conferred (i.e. heaven).

The benefits of sustainability vs. the benefits of mass consumerism are being tested slowly, but we have a long way to go.

However, getting small groups together who have the common goal of sustainability and THEN backcasting with an eye on the individual group's circle of influence can, over time, help to attract and spread the word. Eventually all these little habitats get connected with a web of common understanding--the dots are connected, and there is a cultural shift.

[bae]

How about starting out simple: Who wants Planet Earth to be able to comfortably support human life in 200 years?

Anyone against that goal? Raise your hands....

[kib]

How about starting out simple: Who wants Planet Earth to be able to comfortably support human life in 200 years?

Anyone against that goal? Raise your hands....

Precisely. Well put.


We don't have to argue out the details of how we're going to get there. At least we don't have to start with that argument. We have to start with a consensus on where we want to go.

[kib]

However, getting small groups together who have the common goal of sustainability and THEN backcasting with an eye on the individual group's circle of influence can, over time, help to attract and spread the word. Eventually all these little habitats get connected with a web of common understanding--the dots are connected, and there is a cultural shift.

I agree and then I don't. Part of the issue is wanting too much control over how the process unfolds. (guilty as charged.) It's going to take generations, and maybe we don't have that much time, but if I say "I will buy no plastic", and Alan says well that's nuts ... but I want to make sure my grandchildren have a nice park to play in, and Bae says he's going to buy plastic and build no parks, however, he's investing $3M in technology to improve energy conservation, and you say you care about those things, but what you really want is to organize a group that has spiritual awareness of the connectedness of life ... well we're all doing what we want, what we believe, based on a common ideology that says put long term survival first.

ETA: at some point we're going to have to hash out the details, but that's still down the road. Orienting our compasses in the same direction is a great start. Which is why I was so blown away at this group of people who don't believe everything is connected. how can you choose an action based on the concept of future sustainability if you don't think there's a link between then and when and now? so I guess my "thing", besides the plastic and garbage, is, as you said, trying to nudge people into contemplating the idea of sustainability and connectedness. Perhaps with a cattle prod.

[catherine]

Orienting our compasses in the same direction is a great start. Which is why I was so blown away at this group of people who don't believe everything is connected. how can you choose an action based on the concept of future sustainability

Yeah, many people don't see the connection--they really don't. That "island unto myself" attitude manifests itself in racism, competition, and even in my DHs MADDENING habit of throwing his cigar wrappers out of the car window. (don't get me started). Never mind why we should care that our plastic is literally strangling wildlife. Or that the decline in bees is going to wind up affecting our food choices and food prices.

In terms of your cattle prod comment, I do think that there are catalysts along the way. While ideas are in the slow-cooker, some people are the sourdough starter: people like Rachel Carson, for instance. Al Gore/Bill McKibben might be considered catalysts for climate change, but maybe it will take catalysts in the form of extreme climate like the rain in Texas that will get us to the tipping point.

Another thought your comment brought to mind: I read once that behavior precedes action: not the other way around. That was a huge aha for me! I always thought it would be the other way around--you develop an attitude, and you change your behavior to fit your attitude. Actually, if you change your behavior, your attitude will change. I read about this in the context of seat belt laws. No one cared about the safety implications of seat belts much: until they were "encouraged" to wear them or else get a ticket. If all the seat belt ticketing laws went away tomorrow, I would still wear my seat belt, because my awareness and attitude has been raised.

That's where some legal intervention can help shape things. Not "nanny G" stuff: just a little shape shifting in the form of appropriate legislation.

[kib]

I checked in with the Unitarian Jihad Name Generator. I am "Sister cat-o-nine-tails of Understanding." Yes, yes I am.

http://rumandmonkey.com/widgets/toys...5#.VWtK-1I8l6r

-deleted part of this, too unformed.

[LDAHL]

How about starting out simple: Who wants Planet Earth to be able to comfortably support human life in 200 years?

Anyone against that goal? Raise your hands....

Since you're taking the broad view, why limit your vision to Planet Earth?

The end is the childishly easy part. It's the means that present the difficulty. We do in fact need to argue over the details if we want to progress beyond the navel-gazing stage.

Survival is good: stipulated. "Everything is connected": stipulated. How do we go about persuading or forcing the world's population to accept the sort of resource and reproductive rationing people here seem to favor?

[JaneV2.0]

The reproductive aspect seems pretty easy. Just educate and emancipate women. The birth rate is in serious decline in most first-world countries--to the extent that governments (Germany, for example) are concerned with a projected lack of workers.