Discuss: Resistance Resisters

Sure thing Derrick, all you needed to do was ask….

THE BURNING OF FOSSIL FUELS MUST STOP! NOW! I MEAN IT! REALLY!

(Umm, ‘kay….? What now?)

I’m a believer in both/and rather than either/or.  I believe we need both active resistance and lifestyle changes.  In fact, I see lifestyle change as a serious form of resistance.  But what I’m talking about is radical lifestyle change—really disengaging from the system totally, not just taking shorter showers.  When we disengage totally we attack the financial viability of the whole system.  If the sytem is wobbling financially, then it makes the job easier for measures of active resistance to be effective.  We have to attack the system on all fronts—and weakening it financially through radical lifestyle change is not only viable, but critical, IMO.

Derrick just cracks me up, continuously. Go man….go! His writings are more like temper tantrums than how-to manuals on reconstructing ecosystems. He must feel really, really exhilirated after firing off one of these, yessiree…Gawd, I was ready to smash my monitor and slash my own tires by the end of it. Whew!

Railing against the burning of fossil fuels, you warrior man you, on an electronic medium…hilarious…funnier than anything I’ve read this week so far.

Constructive (Hell..even DEstructive) advice? Not so much.

As Melanie pointed out, it is Both/And. 
However, Jensen is always poking at the complacency component that
enables the status quo. There is
often a self-satisfied smugness that accompanies the individual
walking the Green Talk.  Walking the Green Talk is important. But,
so what is more realistic?
  Is it more realistic that millions of Americans are going to
disengage totally from the system…like in the next year or two?  Or is more realistic that local resistance to BIG can impact
cogs in the wheels of corporatization?  Until we get thousands in the streets WITH media coverage for local issues; AND hundreds of thousands in the streets, nationwide, that STAY in the streets, we will not effect real change.
  Jensen evokes the Urgency of our
endangered Earth. Let’s do Both/And.  But if I had to say what is more important now…it is
organized resistance to Corporatization on local levels.
Georgeann

Derrick reminds me more than anything of the self-styled “revolutionaries” that you used to find on every street corner way back in the day. They were extremely articulate about how we needed to “rise up” against “The Man” and how the sins of the nation could only be cleansed away by blood (to crib from John Brown before them) etc., etc.  The impression I always took away was that they were more than willing to put MY ass on the line for The Revolution, but, thank-you-very-much, THEY had classes to attend, a dissertation to write,  and a girlfriend to keep in the manner she was accustomed to, soooo….maybe won’t see them on the barricades that night.

Derrick, you probably make a modest but steady income with your appearances and writings…nothing wrong with that. You’re probably really comfortable in this world right now…maybe a dog or cat, hot cup of coffee in the morning and books that show up at your door. Good work boots…man’s best friend, eh?

So, I guess my rejoinder to your attempt to seperate yourself out from the vast majority of the rest of those you would no doubt view as sheeple is this: You first. I mean, if you think that bold, violent action is necessary in the defense of the Earth, don’t sit around flapping your gums about it..do it. Until you do, you are to me just the last in a long list of hucksters, soap-sellers and wanna-be dimestore revolutionaries who always seem to make themselves scarce when the lead starts flying. I God, we’ve got enough of those in this land already.

I don’t think that Jensen is incorrect in seeing what’s needed, but can he visualize the multitude of “hows” that will take us where we need to go. I myself have made “lifestyle” changes in the last six months, so that I have “commuted” my commute from 2 hours a day to maybe 60 seconds and my salary down to zero—which means zero ability to “consume.” That said, the long-term change will involve taking a class to gain a new skill that will be important in the years to come. That class involves a six-hour commute one day a week. So, I’m not fossil-fool free at this point, but aiming in that direction.

My point? Tradeoffs, as always, come into play. To make the connections needed in these times, we still need ancient sunlight—be it petroleum for mobility or coal for electronic communications. I guess we cannot have our descent and eat, too. At least, not yet.

The world financial crisis is our way in.  We can use it to our advantage to bring down the system.  It’s going to fail no matter what but we can help it along.  Those of us pulling out of the system by making radical lifestyle changes—pulling investments, eliminating mortgages, going off-grid, growing our food, selling our cars, becoming self-employed—weaken it.  Our friends who are of the more radical resistance persuasion (like Jensen)can come in behind us and take advantage of the cracks we’ve helped to create. 

Say our lifestyle choices reduce the demand for jewelry…diamonds, gold, silver, rubies, etc.  The corporate owners begin to suffer and they pass that suffering along to their employees by laying them off.  The radical resistance can then organize with the disgruntled former employees to shut the mines down entirely.  First we weaken the system through financial losses, then we shut them down.

Unrealistic?  I think that’s the way it’ll ultimately play out no matter what.  We can help it unravel sooner—that’s within our power.  I get Jensen’s sense of urgency.  Yeah, species are going extinct daily, CO2 levels are increasing, the time was yesterday to do something about it.  But I don’t think he should be so quick to dismiss those of us making radical lifestyle choices.  That will matter and will help the radical resistance.

Yes, Melanie…change most often encompasses more the both/and rather than either/or slant. And an “all hands on deck” approach is better than singling out only those who know how to sail. Whatever anyone does to slow things down can help.

But fear almost always accompanies change of any sort, even the least radical, so there have to be other ways to “sell” different prospects to people. It’s for each person to weigh what disengagement means—whether that means quitting a job that requires a commute or ramping up household-based production (where food and clothing are concerned)...all this is needed, and more.