Discuss: World at Gunpoint

It would be helpful—or at least honest—if Derrick Jensen mentioned that he published a book last year called “How Shall I Live My Life?”  I don’t know whether this column grows out of or turns away from that project, but it strikes me as relevant for his readers to know.

If his proposal to listen to the land plays out anything like his descriptions of listening to his chickens in A Language Older Than Words (where he insists that the chickens WANT him to kill and eat them), the project he proposes has little to offer.

In psychology there’s a word called “projection”...

I have a problem with the concept of acting “by any means necessary.” This suggests Mr. Jensen believes that the “problem” is already clearly defined and it is simply a matter of acting to address the problem…in reality it is not so cut and dried or obvious what the real problems are.

It is fine to decry the current culture and its impacts on Nature (as though Nature was somehow pristine and perfect before humanity), but what alternative does Mr. Jensen offer?

Listening to the land is wisdom for nomadic societies, hunter-gatherers, and the agriculturally based.  But it is of questionable value for folks already in urban settings. 

If Mr. Jensen wants to call us to more responsible stewardship, he needs to get significantly more detailed, more thoughtful, and more practical.

Thoughts?

Eschew “real solutions” please. My gut is that social planning got us into the mess as it did in the early part of the last century. There is an assertion that only war(number 2) got us out but look where that got us.

Be wary of large scale solutions.

Jamie (Poster #20) makes an excellent point: large scale solutions are frequently more problematic than salutary. I understand the scalar argument - if it works well here in a snall case, then it should be easy enough to scale up for state/regional/national/interna-
tional application, but that is not the case.  Think global, live local, and expect the unexpected…

Does this guy live in the real world? Most people cannot sustain the adrenaline that it takes to throw a psychopath out of the house and will return, thankfully and peacefully, to living as though the world was not in dire straits. Of course, it is, but it is crippling to focus on that 24/7. We are only human and do not have the capacity to face reality all day every day.

I just finished reading an article about the need for more toilets in the world.  According to this article, there are 2.6 billion people in the world who DO NOT have any type of toilet at this point, and they are adding 3.12 TRILLION tons of untreated human waste to the environment annually, which pollutes the water supply and who knows what else.  Even those of us who have toilets must realize on some level that our wastes also create problems.  And if I ask the world if it needs any more of this, I’m sure it would answer with a resounding NO.  However, that still leaves it up to us to figure out how to handle all of this waste.

Also, have you noticed that even “green” publications continue to advertise more and better stuff for sale all the time, as we hear constant talk about “growing” the economy.  The big question that no one seems to want to consider is how are we going to STOP extracting all of the finite resources of the world to feed today’s hunger for consumption of everything in sight.  People will gladly change a few lightbulbs if doing so absolves them of the responsibility of confronting the fact that ENORMOUS changes in “lifestyle” will be necessary to deal with what is required to maintain some sort of ecological balance.  I cannot believe anyone who says this is not so.  And until that issue is confronted in a serious way, no one will really be hearing what the “earth wants”. 

So I agree with the writers who are frustrated by beautiful thoughts written in beautiful articles which still find a way to dance, albeit beautifully, around the fact that you have to convince millions of very indulged people here in the U.S. to agree to some serious downsizing and to elect leaders who will make sure it happens.  And fast…..

Can this be done?

And note that this doesn’t begin to address the problems of all those billions who don’t even have toilets…..

I was thrilled to see that Derrick Jensen is to have a regular column in Orion. I don’t believe his “by any means necessary” means killing but I do believe he means nonviolent civil disobedience, which (to some including in India) can mean destruction of property (not people!). Personally I’m not going to go out and destroy the numerous developments happening where I live, though I would be happy if someone did. Because they are a manifestation of our current mindless culture that doesn’t understand or see or feel the spirit in the land or in anything else, for that matter. Money is what means something to way too many people in this culture. This is anti-nature as well as anti-human. I, too, am a writer and try and use my skills, such as they are, to open people to a more participatory relationship with the Earth, whatever that means for them. To listen to the land is, in actuality, deep listening to the spirits of all that lives in a place. And each of us is “hardwired” (because we are human, because we are part of the whole) to hear these voices. But each in our own way. Sometimes the land (or trees or rivers or mountains) does speak in words very clearly. Most times it’s more of a sense, a yearning, a compulsion to do something, to act in a particular way (or to not act in a particular way). The reciprocity that Native people understood to me feels like love flowing back and forth and within that love lies some questions and perhaps some answers. And sometimes there’s just an overwhelming feeling that fills me up and makes me cry for no reason. What I do with all of this is my choice. I can write about it (which I do sometimes), I can get my hands in the dirt and marvel at even the simplest of creatures, or I can stand there and let the tears flow and know that somehow this too matters in the larger, grand scheme of things. Because an open heart, a heart open to the beauty of this Earth and the pain of what we are doing to the Earth is the beginning. We have to feel. And we should share our stories and believe that we can have an impact despite the hugeness and overwhelmingness of our times and what we are facing. It’s hard to say: This is what we should be doing because each of us is unique, each of us came here with a purpose and a gift to give. It’s fuzzy and it changes sometimes from day to day. What remains constant is the life of the Earth which, as some have pointed out, will continue to live on long after we’re gone. (Check out the movie, I think it’s called “Life After People”). Will humans continue on? Who knows. Perhaps. That all depends on what we do, or don’t do, now. I believe our purpose is to continue the evolutionary process as partners with Earth, and that we have what it takes to do this. But we need to recognize that it’s not just up to us, that “listening to the land” may be metaphor, but a metaphor for action in the context of the whole.  I know. It’s still fuzzy. Words are inadequate. They run around the essense, trying to define it like a drawing on blank paper defines the spaces within lines.