[Chapter_Fourteen] Chapter 14

Sun Nov 7 20:57:10 PST 2010

some foucault and tangential permaculture...

The analysis of power *“should not concern itself with the regulated and
legitimate forms of power in their central locations', **but **'with power
at its extremities, in its ultimate destinations, with those points where it
becomes capillary...”** **“...the point where power surmounts the rules of
right which organize and delimit it, and extends itself beyond them...”*

*p.96 "Two Lectures." Power / Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other
Writings, 1972-1977. Ed.*

*Colin Gordon. Brighton: Harvester, 1980.*

This 'de-centered' interpretation of power and its potential pragmatic
implications, (of which I had personally been generally skeptical), is what
I was referring to in offering 'Permaculture' as a kind of qualified,
(obviously 'minimalizing'), 'acquittal' of Foucault. While he himself did
not focus on pragmatist 'action' per se, my point would be that as one does
look at Permaculture based 'action', (essntially building-rebuilding
sustainable/resilient ecologies from the ground up), Foucault's conceptual
formation presents an imageable overlay on which to map the
coherence/co-adherents of that action as influence and organizational
transformation moves back *up* the scale.

The example we're all somewhat involved in would obviously be this broad
question of transforming food production/land use patterns-distribution
networks-consumption patterns. At one end of the scale there might be
agribusiness-trade regimes-federal subsidies-commodities trading/global
shipping-big box distribution/advertising-predatory pricing...*(collectively
represented as juridicial or monarchic power in the liberal and marxist
models)*. But it is the other end of the scale, at the most discrete level,
*the 'capillary' level*, where Foucault's model suggests the power actually
manifests itself, in what you put into your mouth on a daily basis, in the
not so subtle coercion to 'super size', to accept the putative convenience
the system offers, to 'pay no attention to the infrastructure behind the
'package', etc.

Conventional 'structuralist' thinking, (simplified into cliché, (and I still
consider myself to be something of a structuralist...), might argue that one
person's organic garden or individual food choices cannot really impact such
a large scale problem; That It must be attacked closer to the multiple
heads, at the level of trade accords and protocols, perhaps with direct
action against the companies/the W.T.O., better mass organizing strategies,
mass boycotts, etc...

Permaculture, it seems to me,(without any necessity for discarding other
transformational strategies), has a relatively inspiring track record of
more or less *doing* the solution, and allowing the collective 'power' of
the idea to accumulate discretely. And in that way, making the case, maybe
more effectively than many louder voices, that it is actually possible to
impact the problem from the 'ground' up.

Refs.:

The Two Lectures writings cited above should be attached, the relevant
section is page 11 of the PDF, (Pg. 96 of the text.)

Also attached: Chandra Kumar, “Foucault, Disciplinary Power, and the
'Decentering' of Political Thought, A Marxian View” 2009

 On the question of how 'necessary' private property might be. I'd also be
interested if anyone could present some sort of model of organization/non
organization and argue how it might scale, while avoiding the well known
pitfalls of the past. Malcolm X once said: “Revolution has never been about
a cup of coffee at a lunch counter; Its about land....”  As long as there
are hierarchies, there generally have to be a boundaries, literal or
otherwise, almost by default.  (typically starting with the protection of
children...)

Also might say that, at least in some measure, it is the very particular
position of specialization that confers a certain 'comfort' v.a.v.  decision
making. Not sure how long the list would be of people would feel comfortable
spontaneously making the same decision. But at the same time, I don't think
that is necessarily a bad thing. Hierarchies have an upside, (if they are
transparent and accountable...couple of big if's...'--)

ron.

On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 12:43 PM, margaretha haughwout <
xmargarethax at gmail.com> wrote:

> dear ron & rachel,
>
> absolutely - break the protocols! ha. we'll have moderators every two weeks
> who will introduce a topic, a problem, an assertion, or a solution for the
> list. they hopefully inspire conversation and debate with the intention of
> deepening our sense of what are the possible and ethical steps we can take
> to move into a regenerative world... jay rosenberg and i will put forward
> some stories in the next couple of days about the fence line at hayes valley
> farm, about how we find heroin needles in our broccoli plants, and the reach
> of the decisions we make about that fence.... we're looking forward to your
> engagement!
>
> that said spontaneous conversations around chapter fourteen topics on this
> list are very welcome also!
>
> in regards to your the topics you raise -
> a) how is permaculture an "acquittal of Foucault" ? wondering what texts
> of foucault you could quote or refer us to here.
> b) i want to challenge the thinking that there must be land ownership.
> enclosure <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure> seems to me to be one
> of the most damaging movements in the western world. what if we unraveled
> the idea of property. how could we begin to do this? perhaps to show how
> much more fun it is to share land, to close loops in empty lots, share
> yields, invite folks into your backyard, etc. slow and steady solutions.
> c) permaculture, being in part the reinvigoration of ecological systems
> through feedback and "closing loops" is also geared toward making food
> forests, flourishing systems that also produce yields. the idea is that
> these food forests, as opposed to current "top down" agricultural practices,
> require very little inputs. in turn the yield also is more diverse and more
> abundant (compare an acre of food forest to an acre of corn...).  this is to
> say yes, i think we can still have dentists. but the impetus becomes not
> necessarily one of survival (must have a job to survive) but one of real
> curiosity and desire to contribute to community, health, etc. one of the
> questions becomes: if you have food, community and shelter, what do you want
> to do for your community, rather than what do you have to do. i am hesitant
> to come up with state, top down rules and laws to make examples of how this
> is possible - maybe someone can step in here to fill in some of the blanks.
> i'd love to hear an anarchist perspective on how people self organize...
> because it is an issue of self organization. i don't see how self
> organization is possible if we put a price on land, and people own it. in
> one scenario we act in service to land and in another we act in service to
> the wealthy, the dollar.
>
> i can speak a little to self organization (bottom up models) through what
> i've seen at hayes valley farm in this regard. i've seen people, myself
> included, first come on the farm and say "look i have this specialty that is
> of value!" "you need me because of my specialty!" what i've noticed over
> time is that, while people still have specializations, we all also find
> great satisfaction from dedicating at least part of our time to the needs of
> the moment, and the more mundane needs of the farm. it's an interesting
> transition to note: the dominant culture tells us we are not valuable to
> others unless we have a specialty, but on the farm, where the orientation is
> more cooperative, we are valued not just for a specialty we may have, but
> also for our responsiveness to the needs of the moment, for our ability to
> work together, do at least some mundane tasks, etc. etc. most of my time
> these days in spent in the greenhouse and in research, but the other day i
> walked by the front gate and noticed it needed some attention, so i planted
> some trees, comfrey and clover. i think when the orientation is toward self
> organization, we have a more nuanced responsiveness that allows for
> specialization (into dentistry, for example) but also that allows for deep
> pleasure in responding to the needs of nature, self, and community...
>
> much more can be said here. in my opinion these questions dive to the heart
> of how we get from here to there.
>
> my friend aimee reminded me of permaculture principle #4 yesterday: "accept
> feedback and apply self regulation<http://permacultureprinciples.com/principle_4.php>
> "
>
> all the best,
> /m
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 9:31 AM, ron stanford <rstan1122 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> realized that might have sounded like Shakespeare championed Jay, the
>> bastard...not quite was i was thinking, although Shakespeare  no doubt would
>> have loved jay, i don't think he's actually a bastard, either literally or
>> figuratively...the long lost thought there was more an off-handed defense of
>> 'non-pedigree' thinking...(really...(sic...))...
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Rachel A. Buddeberg <rachel at rabe.org>wrote:
>>
>>> Not quite sure what protocols you might have breeched...  I found your
>>> question intriguing because I've wondered about that myself.  It seems that
>>> not everyone might become a successful farmer... Given our knowledge of
>>> where markets can lead - at least the unregulated kinds - maybe exchange
>>> might be better.  Historically, when buyer and seller haggled directly,
>>> prices tended to be fairer than now when most of the money I pay for
>>> athletic shoes (for example) goes into the pockets of the CEO of [fill in
>>> your least favorite shoe company].  I can't haggle - and neither can the
>>> person ask for higher wages.   Of course, there remain other
>>> power-differentials to watch out for in 1-on-1 markets.  I am sure that the
>>> craftsperson didn't feel as comfortable setting a price for a
>>> nobleperson...
>>>
>>> Rachel
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:22 AM, ron stanford wrote:
>>>
>>> not quite sure how the idea exchange here is supposed to work, but just
>>> diving in: (as a relative neophyte), marvelously impressed by the gravity of
>>> fukuoka, the look of his 'farm', the food forest concept, seed balls, etc.
>>> My first question v.a.v. discussion would be the macro level implications
>>> of.traditional property rights and markets/ exchange of 'surplus'.
>>> Recognizing that permaculture, (seems to me), is something, (literally), of
>>> a ground up' concept, (the best e.g. acquittal of Foucault i've personally
>>> encountered...), i wonder about the convergence of enlightened 'ground up'
>>> food production and the perhaps not so comfortable atrophy of top down-large
>>> scale production/distribution models.
>>> In the new model, if one is not specifically a grower, or one in
>>> possession of land, (maybe a dedicated painter/writer/old school doctor,
>>> etc.), is there the comfortable possibility of making one's 'specialized'
>>> way, without being a 'farmer' oneself, (and not relying on charity, strictly
>>> speaking...), that is, an exchange, a market, where services/goods/produce
>>> can be priced?
>>>
>>> have no doubt breeched any number of protocols, but...testing,
>>> testing...is this thing on...? ...'--)
>>>
>>> ron.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Jay <protojay at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Website: onestrawrevolution.net
>>>>
>>>> Chapter 14 discussion invite
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>>>
>>>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>>
>>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>>
>>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>
>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> ♫ Spread the word, please help us support the farm on Kickstarter!
> http://bit.ly/hvf-kickstarter
>
> Lead Researcher, Hayes Valley Farm
> http://www.hayesvalleyfarm.com/
>
> Lecturer, Film and Digital Media
> University of California Santa Cruz
> Communications 151
>
> chapter fourteen<http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net>
> http://www.beforebefore.net/
> http://www.bitterpattern.net/
>
> I am best contacted by email:
> xmargarethax at gmail.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>
> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.beforebefore.net/pipermail/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net/attachments/20101107/e2147953/attachment-0003.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: foucault two lectures .pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 254945 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.beforebefore.net/pipermail/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net/attachments/20101107/e2147953/attachment-0006.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: KUMAR ON FOUCALT 2009.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 116884 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.beforebefore.net/pipermail/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net/attachments/20101107/e2147953/attachment-0007.pdf>