It is interesting that much of the content in this sphere is beginning to talk about how we restructure rather than whether we do and largely accepting some form of collapse whether it be short and catastrophic or slow and erratic.
The discussion on environmentalists really brought it home how whatever comes next has to be rooted in relationship. The more I read and listen to the more it feels right that care of others is caring for yourself. Not performative care but real concern through a sense of connection that is not just circumstantial but part of a web of connection with all life.
I have just finished re-reading Leaf Seligman's last book, Being Restorative, where she beautifully describes her lived experience of working with others (and herself) to uncover the barriers of blame and guilt that mask our innate sense of connection and the role of grieving and being accountable in reclaiming that very human need for relationship.
There is a great section where she points out how rushing off to right perceived wrongs is likely to result in disappointment or - worse - recreating that same wrong and how important it is to attend to our own grief first.
This is about building what comes next from the bottom up and we are the foundation of any society. Midwifing a new society into life is a huge and complex task and for many of us beyond our sense of agency. There is work we can do, though. We, the privileged, have a duty to use the time our privilege has afforded us to confront our own issues, grieve our losses and take responsibility for the harm we have caused others. Once we have done that we can treat others with greater compassion, wherever they are at, and support those who may not even realise the depth of their anguish with kindness and understanding.
The rest should take care of itself!
I've already got the Green Dreams up and look forward to listening to the episodes. Thanks Rachel.
Hi Richard – you are onto something here! Australian Robin Grille’s pertinent Parenting for a Peaceful World goes into depth about the connections between childhood trauma, aggression, and lack of compassion. As you point out, dealing with our own stuff is vitally important.
Regretfully though, I do not think that once folks come into a state of well-being and care the rest will take care of itself. I think it’s crucial to mobilize thoughtful public will to transform our destructive system. The League of Evolutionary Catalysts provides a vehicle for working on this. http://www.evolutionarycatalyst.net
Maybe there's something galvanizing about building a new world together.
I would like to think so!
Stable Planet Alliance has a new project, the League of Evolutionary Catalysts.
The League of Evolutionary Catalysts is set up as a community of practice to support individuals communicating about our existential emergency and the system that drives it. http://www.evolutionarycatalyst.net
We provide innovative communication tools and a novel theory of change.
Our ultimate aim, with others, is to mobilize public will to transform our destructive system.
Colleagues in the League act as autonomous agents. We align with the overarching goal of evolving a compassionate ecologically sustainable world.
Like sports players, Evolution Catalysts have to develop a minimal level of competence. They can increase their skills from there.
As always, plenty to appreciate Rachel. But I'm especially grateful for you raising ableism, advocating for accessibility and for the role of unwell and disabled people in the future we are seeking to build. We may not all be physically capable of working on the land, but it doesn't mean we don't deserve to be in communities that do; and we sure as hell have plenty of other skills and gifts to bring.
Rachel, I agree with you on the non-coercive; education, healthcare and housing for women to stabilize population, unfortunately, we are seeing the dark side of population control in Gaza. And then there is the seemingly unintentional method of control, i.e. persistent toxic chemicals. Etc.
On the subject of the leaders of fossil energy companies and politicians behind their criminal negligence, I think it's a big mistake to downplay the moral responsibility people in positions of power have specifically toward the things under their control or responsibility. Letting them off the hook by suggesting that they were just doing their jobs removes everyone from the obligation of right action when situations demanding it occur. Calling them evil isn't necessary and probably isn't even accurate. But they are responsible to behave morally and to protect society as we all are. Criminal behavior, such as hiding or denying the science that would/could have been used to save us all many decades ago should not be dismissed as mere inevitabilities or understandable behavior not fit for prosecution.
Hi Rachel, I felt I was transported back to 2015 when Charles c Mann released his journalistic memoirs in book form.
It gave me hope during my mid life ‘WTF’ now, crisis, having also learned Non violent communication in a world of mostly violent communication (speed).
25:32 ...I really take gumption with the phrasing like people "will have to", as if it's a kind of decree, essentially.
32:09 ...And frankly, we "will have to" mostly make do with what is available to us around us
The first example I feel like your are vehemently resisting a personal attack, yet, a few minutes later you now on the attack or at least forcing what you think we "will have to" do.
I'm sorry - I'm just an old guy in the woods who never comments but this one hooked me. This may be completely trivial but words and how they are used are important.
Hey Nino, I think you've taken two different cases of the same phrase and suggested that they carry the same meaning despite different contexts. Did you listen to the discussion, or only read the transcript? Reading the transcript might have led to your impression.
In the first case involving the discussion of "lifeboat ethics" Rachel latched onto her guest's phrase "and then the rest would have to die" as if what was meant by those behind these ethics was that they somehow believed it was necessary (rather than for example merely accidental) for those outside the lifeboat to die, or even that it was somehow right that they die. I was surprised at her reaction because it didn't seem to me to be a warranted assumption about the thinking of the lifeboat ethics individual her guest was referring to, but... it was this assumption that got her annoyed, that there were apparently some people who were to be saved and some who perhaps should or even deserved to die.
And the second example involving quite a different context reveals the phrase about people having to do something being an example of that phrase we all use every day that nobody has a problem with: when our options are limited to A, then we have to do A. End of story and no big deal.
Really interesting discussion this, I'll be having a look for that podcast. The musician you mentioned is I think Seun Kuti, him and his band are amazing
It is interesting that much of the content in this sphere is beginning to talk about how we restructure rather than whether we do and largely accepting some form of collapse whether it be short and catastrophic or slow and erratic.
The discussion on environmentalists really brought it home how whatever comes next has to be rooted in relationship. The more I read and listen to the more it feels right that care of others is caring for yourself. Not performative care but real concern through a sense of connection that is not just circumstantial but part of a web of connection with all life.
I have just finished re-reading Leaf Seligman's last book, Being Restorative, where she beautifully describes her lived experience of working with others (and herself) to uncover the barriers of blame and guilt that mask our innate sense of connection and the role of grieving and being accountable in reclaiming that very human need for relationship.
There is a great section where she points out how rushing off to right perceived wrongs is likely to result in disappointment or - worse - recreating that same wrong and how important it is to attend to our own grief first.
This is about building what comes next from the bottom up and we are the foundation of any society. Midwifing a new society into life is a huge and complex task and for many of us beyond our sense of agency. There is work we can do, though. We, the privileged, have a duty to use the time our privilege has afforded us to confront our own issues, grieve our losses and take responsibility for the harm we have caused others. Once we have done that we can treat others with greater compassion, wherever they are at, and support those who may not even realise the depth of their anguish with kindness and understanding.
The rest should take care of itself!
I've already got the Green Dreams up and look forward to listening to the episodes. Thanks Rachel.
Hi Richard – you are onto something here! Australian Robin Grille’s pertinent Parenting for a Peaceful World goes into depth about the connections between childhood trauma, aggression, and lack of compassion. As you point out, dealing with our own stuff is vitally important.
Regretfully though, I do not think that once folks come into a state of well-being and care the rest will take care of itself. I think it’s crucial to mobilize thoughtful public will to transform our destructive system. The League of Evolutionary Catalysts provides a vehicle for working on this. http://www.evolutionarycatalyst.net
Hi Rachel,
One excellent comment during the podcast was:
Maybe there's something galvanizing about building a new world together.
I would like to think so!
Stable Planet Alliance has a new project, the League of Evolutionary Catalysts.
The League of Evolutionary Catalysts is set up as a community of practice to support individuals communicating about our existential emergency and the system that drives it. http://www.evolutionarycatalyst.net
We provide innovative communication tools and a novel theory of change.
Our ultimate aim, with others, is to mobilize public will to transform our destructive system.
Colleagues in the League act as autonomous agents. We align with the overarching goal of evolving a compassionate ecologically sustainable world.
Like sports players, Evolution Catalysts have to develop a minimal level of competence. They can increase their skills from there.
Andrew Gaines FRSA
Andrew.Gaines@evolutionarycatalyst.net
As always, plenty to appreciate Rachel. But I'm especially grateful for you raising ableism, advocating for accessibility and for the role of unwell and disabled people in the future we are seeking to build. We may not all be physically capable of working on the land, but it doesn't mean we don't deserve to be in communities that do; and we sure as hell have plenty of other skills and gifts to bring.
Rachel, I agree with you on the non-coercive; education, healthcare and housing for women to stabilize population, unfortunately, we are seeing the dark side of population control in Gaza. And then there is the seemingly unintentional method of control, i.e. persistent toxic chemicals. Etc.
On the subject of the leaders of fossil energy companies and politicians behind their criminal negligence, I think it's a big mistake to downplay the moral responsibility people in positions of power have specifically toward the things under their control or responsibility. Letting them off the hook by suggesting that they were just doing their jobs removes everyone from the obligation of right action when situations demanding it occur. Calling them evil isn't necessary and probably isn't even accurate. But they are responsible to behave morally and to protect society as we all are. Criminal behavior, such as hiding or denying the science that would/could have been used to save us all many decades ago should not be dismissed as mere inevitabilities or understandable behavior not fit for prosecution.
Hi Rachel, I felt I was transported back to 2015 when Charles c Mann released his journalistic memoirs in book form.
It gave me hope during my mid life ‘WTF’ now, crisis, having also learned Non violent communication in a world of mostly violent communication (speed).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1493%3A_Uncovering_the_New_World_Columbus_Created
When is "will have to" a good thing and when not?
25:32 ...I really take gumption with the phrasing like people "will have to", as if it's a kind of decree, essentially.
32:09 ...And frankly, we "will have to" mostly make do with what is available to us around us
The first example I feel like your are vehemently resisting a personal attack, yet, a few minutes later you now on the attack or at least forcing what you think we "will have to" do.
I'm sorry - I'm just an old guy in the woods who never comments but this one hooked me. This may be completely trivial but words and how they are used are important.
Hey Nino, I think you've taken two different cases of the same phrase and suggested that they carry the same meaning despite different contexts. Did you listen to the discussion, or only read the transcript? Reading the transcript might have led to your impression.
In the first case involving the discussion of "lifeboat ethics" Rachel latched onto her guest's phrase "and then the rest would have to die" as if what was meant by those behind these ethics was that they somehow believed it was necessary (rather than for example merely accidental) for those outside the lifeboat to die, or even that it was somehow right that they die. I was surprised at her reaction because it didn't seem to me to be a warranted assumption about the thinking of the lifeboat ethics individual her guest was referring to, but... it was this assumption that got her annoyed, that there were apparently some people who were to be saved and some who perhaps should or even deserved to die.
And the second example involving quite a different context reveals the phrase about people having to do something being an example of that phrase we all use every day that nobody has a problem with: when our options are limited to A, then we have to do A. End of story and no big deal.
Really interesting discussion this, I'll be having a look for that podcast. The musician you mentioned is I think Seun Kuti, him and his band are amazing