Re: GBlist: Whose Globalization?

[david seth melchert <dmelchert@earthlink.net>]

Good conversation here. I've got a few comments myself.

Mary Bull wrote:

"Your and the other greenbuilders' resistance to the idea of being part of
nature--one with the forest--is troubling to me."

"I think we can be an integral part of the ecosystem. But, evidently, this
notion is appalling to many of the Greenbuilders--for whatever reasons, many
of you argue to keep humans apart."


Mary:

I appreciate your love for the forest, but I would respectfully beg to differ with
your assessment. I sense that the majority of participants on this list feel a deep
respect for nature and the need and even sacred duty to work harmoniously with it. It
is just not in the narrow and simple ways you propose.

My own coming into construction was exactly because of extended field work I did in
nature when I was in college. I will spare the intimiate details of my experiences;
suffice to say, it was profound, life-altering, and borne of the silence and fullness
of the wilderness. I would be happy to tell you more of this off list if you were
interested.

In part, I realised that humankind was not some anomaly separate from nature, but
indeed an exact integral part of nature; not in some ideal potential way, but exactly
as we are right now.  Etiologically, Nature created us to elevate Creation to a whole
new quantum level. In a paradoxical way, our consumption and use of wood and land and
the materials of nature are nature's way of creating fine art, beautiful houses,
computer chips and, I will dare say, nuclear reactors.

That does not mean it is right or ok to do whatever the hell we please; infact, it is
our profound duty to do so in a responsible way, and I believe that it was profoundly
mistaken to develop nuclear reactors. Obviously we have been falling short in that
duty, but even the struggle to find an harmonious and sustainable way of living on
earth  is in itself part of our "creation work", and thus is sacred too.



ALISON EADES wrote:

> .....
>
> And just to link in with green building - you don't think we could find a myriad
> of excellent examples of green building in the Third World? Is anyone looking?

Alison:

3 years ago I visited a part of south India where there was no electricity, brick,
paint or other modern building materials. [I must have left a post on this list about
it, but I couldn't find the file.] People built houses with mud, sticks and palm
branches. I believe they were living as close to sustainably as I have ever seen.

The striking thing was that their technology was not something that stood alone, that
could somehow be transplanted. It was inextricably linked to their social order and
psycological bent. There is nothing "new" there...you'd never say to them, "Hey,
what's new?" They are locked in a lifestyle of doing exactly what their parents and
ancestors did before them and what their children may well spend their lives doing -
harvesting rice, worshiping at the local temple, and procreating. I was struck by how
impossible this would be for any of us in the west, and that the root of
sustainability is not some new kind of technology we can "cut and paste", but rather a
profound and radical shift in our psyche that directs us to a different way of seeing
life and the world.

Corporate power, greed, and material consumption are not the evil ones out there
shafting the rest of us...it is me, you, all of us who think and relate the ways we
do. Corporations are simply one vehicle [albeit a destructive one]we have created for
carrying out our ideas and hunger for power and stability.



and again, Mary Bull wrote:

"These are the forces I'm fighting on many fronts: from the bought politicians to the
lying
timber companies, to their greedy investors, to the unaware consumers."

"*I* am not doing the damage. Truth is truth. Facts are facts."

Mary:

Again I would beg to differ with you.

I appreciate the hard work you must put in, day after day, to fight against the way
things are. It must be exhausting at times.

But are you yourself not part of the problem? The computer you are using to write and
read these messages - wasn't it partly manufactured overseas but uprooted underpaid
exploited workers, part of the undermining of indigenous cultures and local economies?
And the communication technologies and corporations who are only helping to speed us
up far beyond to deep pulse of the forest, are you not supporting them every month
with your ISP fee?  Is your home free of articles made in China?

Facts are facts: The fact is that were are all corrupt hypocrits if you choose to look
at things that way. We are all wrong by your words.

I think that some of the friction your posts bring to this list is that your posts do
not recognize the paradox that our strivings are both utterly magnificent and grossly
imperfect. By upholding the activist banner of idealism, it lowers the tenor of
dialogue to one of attack and defense, of right and wrong, of good and evil. It reeks
of  self-hatred.

The original post on this subject of "Whose Globalization" brought forth sober
contemplation of the predicaments we face, and my responsibility for it, not guilt and
defense. I appreciate much of what you say, about the importance of keeping in touch
with the quiet pulse of the forest [or any other piece of the wild you may touch], but
for you to propose that your words are ruffling feathers because of an irrational
primeval fear of the forest is condescending and inappropriate for this list.

Seth

______________________________________________________________________
This greenbuilding dialogue is sponsored by CREST <www.crest.org>
BuildingGreen <www.buildinggreen.com> and Oikos <www.oikos.com>
For  instructions send  e-mail to  greenbuilding-request@crest.org.
______________________________________________________________________