Discuss: What Love Looks Like

“More of a painting than a photograph.”

That’s a nice metaphor.

This soul-scraping interview has been on my mind for days, and I appreciate the hard look at both our current situation and our (in)actions. I’m now struggling even harder to find my place in the conversation where I can make a difference. Terry said (and I think Tim agreed?) that we each have our own gifts or strengths and situations, and I keep coming back to my 8-year-old son. He does not comprise the “stuff” that holds me back from risking all, but his upbringing is a huge part of where I stand and what I can bring to the world. If there’s any hope—not of avoiding collapse, but of surviving it in a positive way—how we raise and equip our children for that different world, rather than abandoning or screwing them the way previous generations have, is incredibly important to talk about. And I’m not sure what looks like. Aside from glib ideas such as teaching him to value experience more than stuff (which is its own tremendous challenge), how will I help him live and grow in both our current world his future? The world I grew up in was already dying, which I was deeply aware of in my childhood, but I grew up with the hope that I could change it. Now that I know I will never be able to deliver to him the world his generation deserves, I’m interested in what use I am (we are) to the next generation.

Brigitte, if I may, I suggest that the conversation under this other article may interest you:

http://www.dark-mountain.net/wordpress/2011/08/31/on-the-correct-management-of-despair/

31 i 12 Read the long piece on p.5 with comments on despair.  FGR

Both Tim and Terry are phenomenal people. What I have again read here reinforces the perception of them and others like them.  All of those active in the OWS movement, no matter to what degree—still vitally essential and carefully watched by those who share their principles—ought to read what they said in this fine dialogue! Right to the last sentence. FGR Portland, Oregon 2/2

Join Orion on February 21st to discuss DeChristopher’s case and others where activists are seemingly made examples of by courts for acts of civil disobedience. Info and registration here:

https://cc.readytalk.com/cc/s/showReg?udc=cg6ygd00kmbq

It’s a free, live, roundtable discussion featuring DeChristopher’s lawyer, Patrick Shea, and Heidi Boghosian, Executive Director of the National Lawyers Guild.

Hope you can join us,

Erik
Orion

Nice Article.  I wish I knew Tim better and I agree he is right in his pessimism.  We need so much more than his act of civil disobedience.  I am a nonviolent Unitarian Humanist with a (superficially) down-to earth technology education.  I am of the generation that failed Tim and my own son along with the fore bearers who ignored Rev.

I’ve been prompted to read this again by my good friends Cory Morningstar and Dave Pollard, and I’m so glad I did, because the line “I would never go to jail to protect animals or plants or wilderness. For me, it’s about the people.” hadn’t registered with me at first - and it’s a critical one.

Essentially Tim is saying two things, both of which are disturbing. First, on a basic level, he sees no reason to go to jail to protect, say, a forest and it’s complex ecosystem and all that entails - he sees nothing in the non-human world that he would lose even a small part of liberty for. A few years ago I interviewed an activist called The Ant for an article (http://earth-blog.bravejournal.com/entry/22804) and the words he said at the end made perfect sense:

Asked if he would, with hindsight, go through the prison cell trauma again if he knew what would happen, The Ant said: “Hindsight is a lovely thing to have when things go badly wrong. Us hardcore non-violent campaigners can only do what is in our heart. That’s one of the big problems with humans, they think with their ‘head’ not their ‘heart’. I would try and save life again, risking my own life, because all life is worth saving.”

I just can’t square Tim’s lack of compassion for non-human life with someone who really cares about humans - which leads onto the second point. You see, it makes perfect sense to care about humans *above* other forms of life (it really makes me spit when I see the word “animal” used instead of “non-human animal”) because we are evolved to protect and care for what is genetically closest to us; but it makes no sense to separate non-human life from humans.

Going back to that forest: would Tim, or any similar activist, risk arrest and jail *only* if they knew its destruction also meant the direct destruction of humans? Or would they make the link between the life of the forest - the deep connection between all life as an intrinsic part of human soul - and the lives of humans; the visceral tug that comes when one sees the trees ripped from the ground, the loss of the habitat of centuries and more, the catastrophic turmoil created at all organic levels by this brutal act against all life?

It may only be a line, but it’s a very revealing one indeed, and one that goes to the heart (but maybe not the head) of what it means to be human.