Reading: The Efficiency Dilemma (which you can read HERE!)

The better (more efficient) we are at doing something industrial (using coal power, increasing miles-per=gallon), the more we end up doing it. That is, rather than see an overall decrease of gasoline consumption due to more efficient motors, we see a net increase in fuel consumption – more people driving more hours. The more electricity we can squeeze out of coal, the more plants we build, the more power we use.

Here's a picture of Jimmy Carter, for some reason.

There’s just one small neuron that makes this link happen in the brain. Just one tiny bit of information – the better we are, the more we are – is the turning point for the rest of society and civilization. You’re heard me repeat the adage: “If you’re driving to Mexico and you actually want to go to Canada, just slowing down won’t actually help.” That is, if we need to become a sustainable society, simply minimizing non-sustainability won’t actually help – at the very best, you’ve just postponed utter destruction for a while. Where we need to go is in the exact opposite direction, and the only way we’re going to get there is by stopping entirely, turning around, and going the other way.

With the addition of the Jeavons Paradox, we see the worst of it: by simply slowing down, we actually speed our trip up. By conserving fuel, we can drive longer and get more cars on the road, increasing this mass migration to Mexico while Canada slips farther and farther away.

What do you think?

To me, it says one thing: An unsustainable system cannot be retrofitted to sustainability. The very system itself must become something completely different. Anyone who totes themselves as a “green” or “environmentalist” or anything like that, and is all in favor of increasing the efficiency of our current systems needs to stop, read this article, and think very seriously about the wisdom of making a bad machine better at what it does.

In the meantime, the only author I’ve read who actually understands the repercussions of what I’ve just said is Derrick Jensen, and even he stops short of instigating the full-scale revolution that’s needed.

Ah… will I, when that day comes?

The obscure we always see sooner or later; the obvious always seems to take a little longer. – Edward R. Murrow

I’m rather fortunate – a few days before the block started, a friend had picked some some sustainability-themed books at a local second-hand store and gave them to me. Among them was Natural Capitalism, which I think I should read from front to back soon.

While some fundamental assumptions about our civilization’s basic structure and momentum (specifically, their need for complete overhaul) aren’t addressed (at least, not in these readings), taken in their own light they are, again, head-to-desk obvious. Really, knowing these things, and then seeing how the mass of humanity continues to stumble about in such gross and offensive inefficiency would drive anyone borderline mad, and make you wonder if mankind’s truest curse is his own stupidity.

However, the authors don’t seem to apply a completely holistic systems-thinking in their approach. They stop their systems at the building itself, in relation to roads and parks surrounding it… one or two more layers should bring that system into completion – with the planet itself, and all life living upon it.

Indeed, as Joel Kovel mightily suggests in his book The Enemy of Nature: The End of Capitalism or the End of the World, the very foundations of our societal structure may be the largest destructive (i.e. inefficient) element in any design process. And while, yes, we do need to live in super-insulated homes and use 90% less energy to do everything, those basic capitalistic drives towards more and more seem unaddressed – encouraged, even, by the “gained” energy in those ultra-efficient designs.

So I’ll read this book, at some point, and I’ll come to a more complete conclusion - I’ll also have to read The Enemy of Nature and see if I’ve done it justice. In the meantime, no matter where you are, the basic elements presented in this book make a lot of sense and should be embraced.

I’ve been wrestling with this idea for years, but I think I’ve finally come to terms with the fact that might makes right.

“Right,” in this case, means actualized, manifest correctness. It does not mean, nor imply, any unrealized concept of correctness – that is to say, as understanding and experience increase, so to the potential for better rightness. Until that improved rightness is successfully implemented in the world, however, it is not right.

The method by which an improved right is brought to the world is Might. Ability. Power.

This means that any dominate thing is right, at this moment and in whatever place it holds power. To replace it with something new requires energy, attention – that is, a conscious effort to replace old with new. Without power this could never occur. We can say, then, that any concept that has failed to replace an old concept (or paradigm) is not mighty – that is, it is not right.

Rightness and might are contained within each other, and as each new and better form of right evolves, so to does the power it contains.

So consider this: You might be right, on your terms – but if that rightness cannot manifest in the world because it lacks mightiness, then of what use is it?

Part One: The Beginning of Time to the First Settlers

Part Two: The First Settlers to Today

It took me significantly longer than I anticipated to write these things. First, I put considerably more effort into writing them – I don’t think I put that level of research into any academic paper I’ve had. Second, I kept getting sidetracked by interesting stories and information that didn’t make it into (or had almost nothing to do with) the article.

For instance, upon reading how Central Park (the Square) was considered to be the center of the county (although it was off by a mile or so), I stopped reading, found a map, and traced from the original survey to the actual center spot. THEN I read that the county borders expanded at some point, throwing my original spot off… some hours later, by finally going off the current county borders, I found the place. …but so what? I guess I did use it for a picture, but I could have easily used a photo of the Square – learning where the center of the count was for my benefit, because I wanted to know.

It was a good project, on the whole, and I think people have been enjoying the fruits of that effort. I certainly feel enriched, being able to bust out facts and “did-you-knows” about relevant historical events during conversations with friends. Check ‘em out, maybe you’ll enjoy them too!

I know it’s a myth, the idea of pioneers and settlers “discovering” the land, when people have been living here since 10,000 BCE. And, of course, what happened to the Native Americans was freaking tragic.

But the settlers themselves didn’t really think about that. To them, this land was new, and they were effectively the first people on it. The things they did – build a cabin, apply a name to an area, survey an plot of land – was the first time, for them, that anyone did these things. The names they used still apply today, the groundwork and structures they constructed have lasted over 200 years.

In this day and age, however, there is no “unclaimed” land, no unexplored areas (in harsh and deadly areas, perhaps, but certainly not around here). Everything we do in this day and age is within the framework of the settlers – by all accounts, people no different from you or I, other than their position in time.

It seems rather unfair that I, being born in this time, can no longer explore and settle. If I gain land, it’s within the Jefferson County, maybe even part of Fairfield, certainly part of the United States. The forms and structures available to me are the same that are universally enforced across a 3,000-mile stretch of land, throwing me into a group that I neither understand or particularly wish to be associated with. However, any attempt to break free of this structure would result in my immediate land loss and possible death.

I certainly understand the reasons why a society would choose to enforce itself so intently – but without the ability to try something new, innovation and the drive to experiment is lost. We’re running on a 200+ year old document not because it’s the best thing ever, but simply because we’ve been unwilling to find a better one. Some might say “that’s because there IS no better system!” but how could we know this, scientifically, without running experiments? How can we really know American Democracy is the Best Ever, without allowing modern Americans the option to try something else?

Maybe, lurking deep inside of every American, is a better American, a person who adapts quickly and prospers greatly within the framework of a new system of government we haven’t conceived of yet? It’s easy to enforce one uniform system with an iron fist and say “hey, it works!” Of course  it works. No one is debating that. Over time, however, as our understanding and maturity as the human race grows, we have to grow and adapt with it – the easier and quicker we can do this, the better chance we have to survive into the future.

If we do not, if we simply sit and assume we’ve the best system ever, then at some point someone with a better idea will overtake us. Our stagnation is our undoing. Our innovation is our salvation.

To this end, the only apparent way of achieving this goal is to go back to a pioneer mentality. We must look at the land with brand new eyes, as if it is the first time anyone has seen it. We must claim some as our own, through whatever possible means. We must give it new names and bring new agricultural techniques and technology to improve it. We must give it new names, protect it from those who would harm it, those who would take it way, and ourselves. We must think of how best to organize ourselves, bringing every available advantage to the fore.

We must step on the same ground we’ve tread our entire lives for the first time, with all the awe and responsibility that brings.

It may not seem like it at first glance, (and certainly not after reading some of the things I’ve had to say about our government) but it’s true.

Moreover, I believe that America has been a net profit of good for the world. Of course I’m not ruling out or glossing over our transgresses (these come as part of being a modern nation, it seems, and unavoidable). There have been some actions that we have taken as a nation that, now, seem to smell of the worst evils… but we see things clearly now, more than before. And we work now to correct our mistakes, to guard against future mistakes… doesn’t it seem like we are just like an evolving adult, learning more about the world in which we live and changing out actions accordingly?

It’s heartbreakingly often we see people scream bloody murder at our nation from within, that everything that has been and is being done for us can be so easily forgotten in the mindless outrages. And while these causes are certainly noble, to despise the very entity that loves you and works for your happiness shows no maturity and wisdom, and like the parents of an ungrateful teenager that hurls insults at the two people who have given up their lives for him or her, America can only wonder what it has done to wrong the people it works for.

For it’s stated purpose and vision, I cannot fault America or those who work for it, and instead praise them in their efforts. If you were to ask me to find fault, my only concern is that America has not gone far enough. America has stifled itself, lost it’s own power and muddied it’s original vision. I can see no ready fix, but I’m not studied in the arts of political science, so any suggestions I would have would be worthless. But this much seems clear: America is a force of good in the world, and it must fulfill it’s spiritual destiny upon the world.

America is the reason I am well-fed, despite not being a farmer. America is the reason I am educated, the reason I am hygienic and properly housed. America is the reason I can imagine a better world, the reason I can devote myself to attaining it. America is the roads, the social structure, the industry, the technology and sciences, indeed, the very direction of enlightenment in the world. Even now it is the beacon of power, the place of pilgrimage for those who which to truly achieve in the world. And we can demonstrate that, as basic human decency is a fundamental situation around the world, so to is the American desire to help, support and uplift the rest of the world into a vastly better place than it was before.

So yes, I am an American, and proud of it. I love my country, not just for shaping me into the spoiled prince that I am, but for everything it has done and will do in the world.

from “How To Grow More Vegetables” -
“One mini-farmer may be able to net $20,000 to $40,000+ a year on a 1/8-acre mini-farm. He or she might work a 40 hour work week and take a 4-month vacation each year.”

When I heard this for the first time, my jaw dropped. First, straight-up, that’s more a year than I’ve ever made – and I’d have all the fresh free food I could eat, too. In fact, that sentence was the reasons I started this whole mini-farm/garden in the first place. How could I pass up the chance to make money while increasing my health and reducing dependency on the current food distribution system? How could anyone, really?

Oh right… I guess most people make more money than me. But just to be sure, I did some checking around. Yup… the average American makes about $50,000 a year. But then I noticed this: “The median income per household member (including all working and non-working members above the age of 14) was $26,036 in 2006.”

$26,036? That’s right in the range of supposed income from mini-farming! And then this idea hits me: median income. That means basically average – half of Americans make less than that.

But maybe people would hate working outside, planting and watering and harvesting. Maybe people really like their jobs! Which is somewhat true, but maybe not? (I can’t find figures that back up this “77% of Americans hate their jobs” I found elsewhere). But maybe they’d go for a job where they could make just as much money working significantly less time (4 month yearly vacation, anyone?). After all, people are generally working more than 40 hours a week now.

If you’ve been following my links, you should know by now that I suck at research. I’ll just get to my point:

Half of America could be farm their own food and see not only an increase in income, but also significant health gains as well.

There is a link between poverty and health problems, due to mostly to diet. So it follows, then, that if people below a certain income level were to farm and eat fresh fruits and vegetables while getting more exercise… well, you see my point.

Since I fall below the poverty level in terms of income, I decided to see if this would really work. This blog is my testing ground. If you find anything interesting on these subjects, please keep me informed. More to come!

Get Volume 1 Now!

]]> http://forcedsimplicity.com/american-farmer-gf/feed/ 0