Does Permaculture Lead to Anarchism

[djv8ga]

Of course it does.
http://www.thesurvivalpodcast.com/pe...ture-anarchism Start @ the 13.50 mark.

[bobabode]

Make that desert bloom, you old anarchist.

[djv8ga]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Make that desert bloom, you old anarchist.

Loading up a truck load of Bush Cherries right now.

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by djv8ga

Loading up a truck load of Bush Cherries right now.

To answer your original question. Thoughtful stewardship of the land fosters interdependency and community, you neo-Granger.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Na...s_of_Husbandry

[finnbow]

Lay off the peyote, DJ.

[donquixote99]

The bullet list on the above web page tells the story by itself:

Why Permaculture leads to anarchy

It leads to real solutions, often that are illegal but work
Ethics based and concerned with “people care”
Teaches the practice of currency creation and private banking
It is a design science which causes you to question everything
No room for bureaucracy, a tree doesn’t’ care about your title
A meritocracy in other words those that get shit done succeed
It is about rewilding humans to live with nature vs. opposing it
Promotes community interdependence vs system and centralized dependence
Focuses on real wealth above persevered wealth
Creates wealth that is hard if not impossible to tax
Leads naturally to commerce at a local level
Can not be controlled, policed, slowed down or stopped by the oligarchy

Final thoughts on what real freedom is and why morality is required for it

This not-self-evident set of 'truths' points to a subculture that is quite stuck on itself, convinced they are special people with uniquely excellent values and customs. Thus, the writer misses that his last point actually says why 'real freedom' (or anarchy, I suppose) is not remotely possible for human cultures.

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

The bullet list on the above web page tells the story by itself:



This not-self-evident set of 'truths' points to a subculture that is quite stuck on itself, convinced they are special people with uniquely excellent values and customs. Thus, the writer misses that his last point actually says why 'real freedom' (or anarchy, I suppose) is not remotely possible for human cultures.

A love of earth is sufficient. This leads to non polluting behavior.
No need for heavy contortionist philosophy.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

The bullet list on the above web page tells the story by itself:



This not-self-evident set of 'truths' points to a subculture that is quite stuck on itself, convinced they are special people with uniquely excellent values and customs. Thus, the writer misses that his last point actually says why 'real freedom' (or anarchy, I suppose) is not remotely possible for human cultures.

They're human, that's the Achilles heel of any silly Utopian dream. And make no mistake, that's what this is. All it needs is a few Unicorns, a couple of rainbows and some sparkly magic dust.

Communism would have worked wonderfully, if it weren't for human nature. Remember, the ultimate goal laid out in the Communist Manifesto was......ANARCHY. How did that work out? Show me a human society that succeeded relying solely upon unenforced "morality" as its backbone. They always end up passing laws, creating law enforcement, punishing criminals, experiencing corruption, establishing common defense, taxing people to pay for it all in one form or another...............

Nope, it always comes back to the same thing........Some form of governing structure.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

They're human, that's the Achilles heel of any silly Utopian dream. And make no mistake, that's what this is. All it needs is a few Unicorns, a couple of rainbows and some sparkly magic dust.

Communism would have worked wonderfully, if it weren't for human nature. Remember, the ultimate goal laid out in the Communist Manifesto was......ANARCHY. How did that work out? Show me a human society that succeeded relying solely upon unenforced "morality" as its backbone. They always end up passing laws, creating law enforcement, punishing criminals, experiencing corruption, establishing common defense, taxing people to pay for it all in one form or another...............

Nope, it always comes back to the same thing........Some form of governing structure.

Well, yes. You can make this sort of thing work with a particularly dedicated small group of monks. Any more typical group of humans comes to grief.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Well, yes. You can make this sort of thing work with a particularly dedicated small group of monks. Any more typical group of humans comes to grief.

It may be easier in small groups and becomes more difficult as a society grows into the hundreds, thousands and millions. I can agree with that.

However; Religion also tends to be a hierarchical and full of tenet rules, does it not?