[Chapter_Fourteen] Chapter 14

Tue Nov 9 14:30:31 PST 2010

to clarify my last post:
i didn't mean to imply that horizontal, rhizomatic, network (pick your
metaphor!) structures of organizations are inherently ineffective or faulty,
but rather that I am increasingly aware of a tendency on the left, permie,
etc circles to idealize these structures as more "correct". obviously there
are so many ways to build a garden, and so many ways to create change. our
challenge, i believe, is to analytically and critically discern what works
for us in our particular conditions.

Metaphors from nature as applied social organization are tricky, though they
may be useful at times. But personally I try to steer clear from "this is
true in nature" therefore "this is how we should organize". Patterns are
patterns, and should be observed, not used as a basis for dogma. (i'm not
accusing anyone on this thread of that--just pointing out a pattern I've
seen, and participated in!)

all the best,
antonio

p.s. i love the "reverse hierarchy" model...this is exactly what modern
nation state governments have ass backwards: local communities are beholden
to decisions made on successively larger levels, reducing accountability,
transparency, and appropriateness to place. double agree with the last
margaretha's paragraph about our work's focus:  What I would describe as
being broadly concerned with strengthening our communities' nodes, hubs, and
links, while somehow not ignoring the equally important dismantling (or
making obsolete?) of the current structures/networks of destructive power.

On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:46 AM, margaretha haughwout <
xmargarethax at gmail.com> wrote:

> dear ron, antonio, rachel and all --
>
> many interesting threads through the conversation here. ron, thanks so much
> for starting the conversation; it seems a vital one to begin at the launch
> of this new list -- how effective is permaculture at enacting real change?
>
> one thing i always found sort of frustrating with the foucault i've read is
> his avoidance of a clear definition of power. he talks about it all the time
> but rarely defines it. the most i can get for a definition out of discipline
> and punish (the whole book can be found here<http://aaaaarg.org/text/15247/discipline-and-punish-birth-prison>- just register!)  is something along the lines that power is the ability to
> exert force. the ability to exert force via a hierarchical king or
> hierarchical nation state needs no long explication as to its devastation.
> if we were to toss deleuze (hardt and negri too?) into the mix (i know i
> know, so predictable), we'd be able to think broadly about the double
> death-like nature of fixed, organizations, of solidified power but also to
> argue that the only way out of hierarchy + capitalism is a rhizomatic ever
> multiplying network, where relations and cross pollinations are made
> spontaneously and across species. in permaculture terms i think this would
> be adding more, diverse life to problems (integrating rather than
> segregating), closing loops, valuing diversity. and yes thanks to rachel for
> that keeper of a pdf - finding the leverage points in the system....
>
> there are many things i agree with in gladwell's article you mention above,
> antonio. i have the same criticism of clay shirky (though i wish gladwell
> had been more explicit about the implicit racism shirky's social media
> story) and of social media. however there are lots of different kind of
> networks -- centralized networks (which may or may not be the same as top
> down hierarchies), decentralized networks, and distributed networks being 3
> main kinds -- and i question whether it is a simply matter of vertical vs.
> lateral. for instance, one functioning model for land stewardship for
> indigenous tribes in maine (among other places) is a reverse hierarchy,
> where the people living closest to the land have ultimate veto power. this
> is in effect still a centralized network where leaders of nations petition
> tribes who petition clans who petition families who petition women (the
> closest to the land) - who then say yea or nay. i think we need a more
> coherent analysis of networks. there are strong tie networks and weak tie
> networks that can apply to any of the types described above; no doubt the
> internet supplies an abundance of weak ties - weak ties only to other humans
> with the exception of the occasional lolcat.
>
> the water wars of bolivia, i think, are a good example of a successful
> decentralized resistance.
>
> i also think it is a matter of who tells the history. we all know that
> hierarchies align histories with powerful central figures, while the people,
> the connections between people, and between people and place, go
> unrecognized.
>
> no doubt hierarchy combined with capitalism is a positive feedback loop
> that seems to eat every opposition and grow from it. but i do think there
> are cracks in the system. an economic system based on profit cannot continue
> indefinitely. i would also assert that power is in fact afraid of networks.
> take the virus, for example; both computer viruses and SARS travel networks
> (be it the internet or airlines), and this terrifies. also regardless of
> whether al qaeda actually was a decentralized network or a hierarchy, the
> narrative sold to the american public is that al qaeda cells are
> distributed, can exist independently of each other - therefore scary!
>
> i think the real challenge is to make our networks thick and full of trust.
> thick with people and community as well as plants and animals. if we are
> tied to place as closely as we are to our children, lovers or our friends,
> we fight for them. so, it is not just a matter of making a backyard garden,
> but to make gardens with others in empty lots, toss seed bombs, and engage
> the marginal. it is also a matter of closing loops - feed off of the waste
> that capitalism outpours, turn it all into nutrient and grow food from its
> disaster. is it possible to turn the feedback loop around?  undoubtedly,
> power is not going to give up without a fight, and as derrick jensen so
> convincingly argues, we need each of us to figure out when, where and how we
> draw the line.
>
> /m
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Rachel A. Buddeberg <rachel at rabe.org>wrote:
>
>> There was an interesting (and somewhat depressing/discouraging) interview
>> with Heather Rogers on Against the Grain a few weeks ago who was talking
>> exactly about the co-option of alternative ways of being by the mainstream
>> capitalist system.  See
>> http://www.againstthegrain.org/program/342/id/351519/mon-8-30-10-green-panaceas.
>>  BUT as I don't see one thing that would bring the whole system down (well,
>> with the except of running out of oil but even that doesn't seem to stop the
>> system, at least not yet), I think we just have to keep trying from as many
>> angles as we can think of.  Maybe there are leverage points that we hit by
>> accident or design that can change things more dramatically (
>> http://www.sustainer.org/?page_id=106).  Also, I think it's important to
>> show that alternatives are possible because one counter-argument that is
>> often hurled at people suggesting alternatives is the "it's not possible"
>> mantra.  If we can point to place where it is done that counter-argument
>> implodes...
>>
>> Thanks for sending the two Foucault pieces, Ron!
>>
>>
>> On Nov 8, 2010, at 9:35 AM, Antonio Roman-Alcala wrote:
>>
>> A few brief comments:
>>
>> 1) My entrance into the world of permaculture was surely rooted in just
>> this foucault-style description of means of challenging power (though I've
>> never read him of course). But as I've spent time doing this work, I am
>> extremely skeptical about its ability to fundamentally alter the conditions
>> of production (food or otherwise) or address longstanding iniquities, at
>> least in any relatively quick timespan (50-100 years). The reasons for this
>> are manifold, but one major aspect is that the capitalist system has a
>> powerful drive to re-incorporate critique into its functions and
>> justifications for its continued existence. (see "The New Spirit of
>> Capitalism" by Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello). Another critique I'm
>> finding more and more persuasive is that the network, horizontal mode of
>> organization (while it has incredible value in many respects) is not
>> necessary conducive to mass culture change in a society where so many of the
>> links in that network are tenuous or weak (see Malcolm Gladwell's article<http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_gladwell?currentPage=1>on Twitter: I don't agree with everything he says but its something to
>> consider). Effective counter-power may require more resources and
>> organization than the network permaculturists/anti-capitalists/etc currently
>> manifest. I don't know.
>>
>> 2) Re: specialization: this is a distinct outgrowth of university system
>> expansion in the US in the late 19th, early 20th century. Before that, most
>> people were autodidacts and "experts" (or at least dabblers) in all sorts of
>> fields of inquiry (both upper class officially "educated" and
>> homesteader/farmer alike). I'd really like to see us promoting a vision of a
>> new world where we can have both the benefits of specialist knowledge
>> production and see a generalization of the population's understanding of the
>> world and (the way I fantasize about my own future) even an ability to make
>> a living from multiple interests/vocations: farming/gardening/the production
>> of basic needs as one aspect that a majority of folks are involved in.
>>
>> 3) Re: land question. Also, I'm not sure it's "the solution", but it's
>> interesting to consider, as a post-capitalist land ownership model to pursue
>> (if we can't forsee a return to non-ownership of land, aka full commons):
>> Henry George and his "single land tax". just google it, pretty easy to find
>> info.
>>
>> Best,
>> Antonio
>> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:57 PM, ron stanford <rstan1122 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>>
>>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> sf urban ag alliance @ sfuaa.org
>> movie and blog @ insearchofgoodfood.org
>> community farm @ www.alemanyfarm.org
>> permaculty @ www.permaculture-sf.org
>> newspaper @
>> http://soex.org/alternativeexposure/index.php/antonio-roman-alcala/
>> personal music @ www.myspace.com/ammra
>> people people @www.myspace.com/mercurialbombastictenacity
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>

-- 
sf urban ag alliance @ sfuaa.org
movie and blog @ insearchofgoodfood.org
community farm @ www.alemanyfarm.org
permaculty @ www.permaculture-sf.org
newspaper @
http://soex.org/alternativeexposure/index.php/antonio-roman-alcala/
personal music @ www.myspace.com/ammra
people people @www.myspace.com/mercurialbombastictenacity
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.beforebefore.net/pipermail/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net/attachments/20101109/ab4b369b/attachment-0004.htm>