Section 5 - Sustainability

Of Poverty and Other Things. 

The social aspect of sustainability is something that will develop, even if it becomes a revolutionary rather than an evolutionary movement. People who have too much, have much, have little, have nothing will be tiers of society that will interact more and more in a physical and violent way.

We give aid to third world countries not so much because we feel that they should have better lives, but very much so they don't swarm over to our countries and take, first what we waste and then what we have in excess. Survival of the fittest is paramount in all creatures and flaunting food, potable water and financial wealth is not going to make people stay in the countries where they were born and have little of the aforementioned.

Sustainability is much to do with sharing and caring and looking at the wide picture. Most wealthy countries have too much, and we won't go into that they have this much, in many instances, because they plundered the countries of the third world who now have very little and suffer from the climate changes that the excesses of the wealthy have created. That greed continues. Because it seems we have to dig out every bit of gold from the ground and store it in bunkers and banks and places where it can be easily reached, from which it can be stolen. We have to cut down every tree in the forest and stockpile the trees so they can be easily reached and have them handy before a wildfire burns them. We have to be there first, we have to destroy it first.

The tables will turn.

Enough is not enough any longer. We need more so that we can either demonstrate to our peers that we are better than they or that we can feel secure. Neither of these is achieved. They are chimera of society. The poor, downtrodden and put upon have destroyed kingdoms and armies trained to fight them. That's been proven in the history of human beings again and again and there is much unrest in the world at the moment. The numbers are on the side of the downtrodden who fund and maintain the lifestyles of the wealthy.

Security is no different. There is no security in this life, and being safe in many cases is being greedy and being secure means nothing if there is catastrophe and people on islands are being washed away to neighbouring countries as their land disappears beneath a broiling polluted sea security will be as nothing. Because people who have nothing, have nothing to lose.

The thing that is sustainable is community. People who share, people who care, people who stand up and be counted when things go awry and help their neighbours. The village or town garden, the home gardens the local butcher, baker and candlestick maker who source their raw materials from local people, sell to and barter with local people and buy what they need and don't make themselves from local people.

This does require a change in attitude, it requires the now generation to be patient and eat the foods that are in season. It can easily be detailed to show that this isn't a great sacrifice and will in fact maintain a healthier dietary regime that would suit many.

The best end result will be that it also benefits the environment.

At the moment we are in an ever tightening spiral that will turn us so we can't stop going the way we are because that's all we know. Making everything worse and worse, and when there are masses dying and the population reduced, we may again find an improving environment and an evolution that will centre on what is left, still intact and sustainable and slowly finding a balance.

The Challenge.

The problem we see is not the problem, because there is a great deal more that we don't see. We can't see the icecap, we can't see the water table, we don't yet see acid rain, or not acid enough.

We see weather and that's not climate change. It is the symptom of climate change, Like shrinking icecaps and warming sea water, more droughts and floods and other things that show a planet writhing under the strain. The natural evolved system trying to correct itself, over correcting and under correction happening. It's all happening to fast. The bucket heads see the weather when it's colder or warmer than it should be, as a confirmation that its just normal and there is no climate alteration happening other than what's natural, completely disassociated with human activity on the planet.

Those who are at the lower end of the economic scale will certainly be the first to suffer and perish. Those who are the most wealthy and making the rules and passing the legislation and will be in the best position when it all starts to go pear shaped. They will add to the crisis by using even greater amounts of power and fossil fuels to keep themselves comfortable and the less well off or greedy will sell themselves and their families to destruction keeping the dying, polluting systems running for money in the hope they too will be rich enough to be able to buy their survival.

There are some who think the problems generated now can be rectified very quickly. Good luck with that. No one can put the brakes on a juggernaut so quickly or with any certainty that it won't swerve. It takes quite a while to slow down.

In an attempt to wrest our species from absolute destruction or living in caves underground and grow skin like scales. It's not a matter so much of giving things up as it is about identifying what each of us needs. Then looking at all the other elements of daily life and justifying why we have these things and letting go of those that are not essential.

Just as an example, do you really need to have all electrical appliances on standby? Maybe there are people who do, that would be something they need. But most of us would not. It can't be that hard to press the button to fire up the television before grabbing the remote control? Possibly that's just my thoughts, and no one else agrees.

Spirit Sustainability.

I didn't really get what the TED talk was getting to. Society functions on money, money that belongs to the country and the earnings of individuals. That's fine, though not desirable.

Something that did interest me is that people must value themselves and suddenly money doesn't matter.

How does it **not** matter? Because people are empowered and realise that not eating pheasant or driving a Mercedes doesn't make them lesser beings. The food they eat is good, possibly more sustainable with less input and just as nutritious. 

The holidays overseas are fine, but no more satisfying than a trip to the local swimming pool or beach, because most who can afford to travel extensively keep travelling. They have never seen enough. The wealthy keep travelling and the poorer people keep going to the swimming pool, the beach or the zoo. Each a different experience because each time is different.

That the most wealthy have no more of enough than the poorest people. Each wants more, so who cares what anyone has, drives or where they go, as long as they enjoy it?

Is that sustainability? People being happy with what they can do and what they can attempt and love the experience rather than the result? Maybe that's the sustainable thing. People feeling they are no better or worse than anyone else could be the clue to human sustainability? If we have respect and tolerance for other sentient beings on the planet and the form and structure of our planet as if that also has a life force, then we will have a respect and tolerance for one another and a self respect for ourselves that won't be shaken.

What is natural?

What is natural? A question that can't be answered other than anything that's sustainable in the long term because it evolves without the direct interference of humans. We come full circle. We are moving through the realm of where do we come from and what do we rely upon? That's not a specific question, it's a general query which requires no specific answer. We come from the source that is organic and spiritual. Organic being evolution of things that were present in the mud as it dried out. Birthed by the spewing up, morning sickness planet? Or blown in by solar winds. It doesn't matter.

Over time anything that has naturalised in the area where it was cast, planted, washed ashore, rode on the wings or feet of a traveller or whatever, is natural. That it came from another place makes no difference. The whole planet came from another place, and it's natural.

We don't have to break our mind over this and stop eating potatoes and tomatoes because we don't live in the countries where they grow like weeds.

Human species better than any other? Hardly.

The focus of humans on humans and placing ourselves above all other sentient beings, is what has caused most of the problems we face today. It manifests itself in arrogance and disrespect for all living things and a certainty that we may kill them with impunity and consider some of them as inferior to ourselves, allowing human beings to do some terrible things to other lifeforms, practice for atrocities to our own species.

It is an impossibility to be cruel to animals and not transfer that to our own species. There has been some research done on this. And found, humans who treat animals badly, also treat humans badly. Humans who can kill animals, can also kill humans.

The respect for all sentient beings, including plants and insects, if we have it, allows us to live with them, causes us to look to understand them, makes us wiser and more aware and thoughtful of what we do. This expands not only our knowledge but our well being and self worth and ensures sustainability by observation and constant adjustment.

Human beings kill to eat as does every other carnivorous or omnivorous creature. So human beings taken by sharks when they come into their territory or eaten by lions or tigers, wolves or bears is not something to frown upon. Self protection is fine, but to try to destroy or completely remove an animal from its natural environment so that humans are “safe” or “secure” in their activity/recreation in that environment is wrong on so many levels. Absolutely wrong. It shows the disrespect and arrogance of human beings not only for these, but for other humans as well.

We are all creatures of the same material and if asked, and knowing what humans have done, should we think humanity is different from all other species? The most inhuman things are done in the name of humanity, and yet few other creatures are as cruel to their own or other species. So do we really want to cling to humanity rather than something more wholesome?

Learning to live with the animals, toxic, venomous or aggressive is the same as living with humans who have aggressive and toxic tendencies. Yet humans kill what they fear, destroy what doesn't suit or fit in, or competes, because they can and because they don't want to be mindful of anything but themselves and their own comfort and wants.

Can we blame only religion for that? Maybe. Religion is notorious for this anthropocentric justification. Because there is some misinterpretation of the scripture, I hope.

Even the ritual killing of the fatted calf or the sacrifice of the goat showed that the deity of these earlier humans was pleased to receive such a valuable gift. The sacrifice of human beings was also accepted, because they were not inferior to goat of ox, but valued the same.

Human Animal Reltionships.

The relationship with animals and human beings isn't one size fits all. Those who were were interested in wealth, who were becoming farmers for the purpose of making money, and saw animals only as dollar signs on legs had a different relationship with animals than others and were probably never the hunters of the early tribal system.

The relationship with animals for most people is the same as it ever was. A difficulty to kill these animals, any animals persists. Was every male Neanderthal a killer, capable of killing animals or were there some who couldn't do this and traded yams and fruits for flesh?

The reason that farmers are different is through their genes as well as through their outlook and what they want from life. How can anyone love the the animals they breed for no other reason than slaughter?

We see the brutality and cruelty in the live animal trade, and yet farmers are not going to stop selling livestock to the people who abuse them before or, in the act of killing them. In fact farmers are opposed to the groups who are trying to stop cruelty. Farmers breed animals to kill, they have a different outlook from most people.

In Oz the lamb carcases hanging in the butcher shop windows, next to the posters of small lambs frolicking amongst the the long grass and flowers in the sun were removed. Butchers feared their business would suffer if people put the two together. Business, commerce money made by exploiting animals came before all else.

For some of us, there is no difference between the life of a human or cockroach or anything else. We all take our chances and live our lives and try to survive as best we can without impacting on others who are doing the same to survive. Virus's, bacteria and all the things that we have to live with are not evil, they do in fact increase the strength of our species if we allow it, if we accept that all will die, some younger than others. This hasn't changed since medicine has been interfering and no one can predict what this medical interference will mean generations from now. It's certain that the human gene pool has been weakened. Medicine will ensure it is forever needed in this way.

Being ecocentric, I am of as well as from the world that is not only the planet but the universe. It's a belief that there is the universe however far it reaches that connects us all as one large entity and all are part of it even those who think they are not. Because we are connected in so many ways we cannot be different or separate from it, so respect and love must be bestowed on even those we eat to survive and those that eat us to survive as well.

Death is the reward of life, not the end of it. Life is the merely a path and the other creatures that also move in that direction are not lesser than any of us.

It becomes obvious that anyone, human, animal, insect, plant etc., that can live with the sentient beings that it shares the planet and its environment, is to some extent considerate of its surroundings and environment. This species/being learns the old way of living, it discovers that sharing is not onerous and even by doing nothing a balance will slowly develop. An ever changing balance that may not suit the human mind, but which can be gently tweaked and guided to suit. i.e nets on some fruit trees to stop the birds, decoy crops etc.. Because balance is not constant, like evolution it moves on. Not only the weights and elements along the beam and at each end, but also the shifting fulcrum upon which the balance pivots.

The creatures of what might be called the natural world by many are essential for more than just intrinsic reasons. So we, human beings must pull back our tendency to grab any and as much land or area we think we want.

We can share the environment. Gently settle in amongst it, not clear vast areas to build houses and to put down concrete. We must be willing to accept some discomfort and some level of vigilance. An example is that if we live where there are many snakes during summer, we have to be aware where we walk so we don't step on any of these who might think that we are attacking them and therefore bite us. Snakes and spiders do not see us as a food item, but only a threat if we are inconsiderate of their presence.

If we hunt in the sea, we should not have the fish we spear hanging against our body as we look for more. Because a hungry shark who is a species that has terrible eyesight and no finesse will try to take the fish and sometimes accidentally take part of our leg.

Trees we cut for fodder must be checked at any time of the year as there may be a birds nest that we expose to the predators. So many things where we must be aware and awake as well as tolerant and considerate. In this way humans can live with most animals on the planet.

So many things that people have forgotten to watch out for as we build a sterile human only friendly environment, allowing it only to be populated by companion animals over which we think we have control. Not clever, though many will disagree.

Sustainability and Art.

Do I have an opinion about this? I know that many have an opinion and enjoy art, as I do myself. But it's a very personal thing and without it there will be other arts that will prevail. No matter that I like one kind of music or only certain pictures, and others by great painters that look naive to me are in fact adored by others? I'm certain it was a great achievement to construct the colour blue from other pigments, but that doesn't intrigue me about a picture.

I love certain pictures that others would consider rubbish or of no value and they can be prints, because the subject speaks to me, and I like it best when the subject has me questioning why I like it. What is the mystique that draws me to it. Good wine is only as good as it tastes to my palate.

I have no real opinion of art, and in music the writer of the words and the one who crafts the music to them is more important than the singer who delivers it, in all except the version I enjoy the most and then they are all equal. I see no nothing about sustainability in this.

Sustainability Language.

The quote on the course page attributed to Confucius is interesting, because I have oft used another that is attributed to him:

All wisdom is rooted in learning

to call things by the right name.

When things are properly identified,

they fall into natural categories and

understanding becomes orderly.

....................Confucius

I'm not certain that things like Global Warming or Climate Change aren't really euphemisms so they don't offend or startle people who really need to be startled and offended so they get thinking.

Having already written about recycling, which could be called: Excess Desperate Reuse there is not much to say.

The reason shock jocks get peoples attention is because they do just that, shock with their language as well as the topics they engage in.

Get real and tell things as they are, and allow people to think about issues that are impacting on [there's one, it should be “destroying”] our planet. Euphemisms are used everywhere.

Getting well behind here.

Some more thoughts:

Not much to write here:

The focus of humans on humans and placing ourselves above all other living organisms, is what has caused most of the problems we face today and as we have seen by the rape and pillage of so many diseases still raging, completely wrong. This assumption manifests itself in arrogance and disrespect for all living things and a certainty that we may kill them with impunity allowing human beings to do some terrible things to other lifeforms, practice for atrocities to our own species.

It is an impossibility to be cruel to animals and not transfer that to our own species. There has been some research done on this. Finding, humans who treat animals badly, also treat humans badly to some extent. Humans who can kill animals, can also kill humans.

The respect for all sentient beings, including plants and insects, if we have it, allows us to live with them, causes us to look to understand them, makes us wiser and more aware and thoughtful of what we do. This expands not only our knowledge but our well being and self worth and ensures sustainability by observation and constant adjustment.

Human beings kill to eat as does every other carnivorous or omnivorous creature. So human beings taken by sharks when they come into their territory or eaten by lions or tigers, wolves or bears is not something to frown upon. Self protection is fine, but to try to destroy or completely remove an animal from its natural environment so that humans are “safe” or “secure” in their activity/recreation in that environment is wrong on so many levels. Absolutely wrong. It shows the disrespect and arrogance of human beings not only for these, but for other humans as well.

We are all creatures of the same material and if asked, and knowing what humans have done, should we think humanity is different from all other species, or better in any way? The most inhuman things are done in the name of humanity, and yet few other creatures are as cruel to their own or other species. Do we really want to cling to humanity rather than something more wholesome?

Learning to live with the animals, toxic, venomous or aggressive is the same as living with humans who have aggressive and toxic tendencies. Yet humans kill what they fear, destroy other species that don't suit or fit in, or competes, because they can and because they don't want to be mindful of anything but themselves and their own comfort and wants.

Can we blame only religion for that? Maybe. Religion is notorious for this anthropocentric justification. Because there is some misinterpretation of the scripture, I hope. However, an anthropocentric religion is one that has little regard for animals and is therefore able to commit atrocities on people, men women and children through not only sexual acts, though they are the ones that are in the news at the moment, but other brutalities as well. Any group, tight or loosely bound that has a respect and concern for all the other creatures of the earth does not harm it's own species to the same extent, nor does it have the same taboos.

Even the ritual killing of the fatted calf or the sacrifice of the goat showed that the deity of these earlier humans was pleased to receive such a valuable gift. The sacrifice of human beings was also accepted, because they were not inferior to goat of ox, but valued the same.

The change in attitude toward animals:

That could be the case, that human beings when they started to tame animals thought they owned them, were the master. Domesticating them was another step toward control, and we have seen what control can do in the catholic church and the salvation army, or wherever people have control over something those of their own who are weaker and subservient. There is abuse of the power, trust and affection is destroyed and fear and helplessness grows in those that allow themselves to be controlled.