[Chapter_Fourteen] Chapter 14

Wed Nov 10 16:46:02 PST 2010

And those orchestras and/or quartets tend to sound better when they play the same music, i.e., not parts playing Wagner, others playing Bach, and then some Mozart thrown in.  (On second thought, though, who knows maybe that would actually sound rather cool and interesting! ;-). 

I also just wanted to say thank you for these great discussions!  This is a great antidote to the way too academic discussions I am involved in at school (I am pursuing a masters in philosophy at SF State - basically out of frustrated desperation to get out of my golden hand-cuffs that were my corporate job...).  These discussions here feel much more grounded in reality - after all it's ultimately about (heroin) needles on the farm and/or practically changing our prevalent system.  

On Nov 10, 2010, at 10:10 AM, ron stanford wrote:

> not a masterplan for taking over the world...just the public/community farm...maybe its a 'masterless' plan... vetted and w/ 'evolution'/malleability built in...but synergy-efficacy-accountability tend to be difficult in any circumstance. Without a sense of measureable goals, (don't think a more detailed site plan is controversial), mission creep, meetings on meetings, in-fighting, etc. become even harder to avoid...(particularly, (hopefully), when there is any money to be dispensed... (guess this has moved into the 'vision', 'organization-communication' arena..  )
> 
> drum circle vs. an orchestra...or maybe a series of string quartets...'--)
> 
> r
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 11:06 PM, margaretha haughwout <xmargarethax at gmail.com> wrote:
> is permaculture as a movement moving fast enough to reach enough people and turn back the devastation of capitalism? no, probably not.
> should we do it anyway? yes, because nothing is for certain. 
> time isn't as absolute as it seems, so maybe we can slow it down by planting food on a freeway for example.
> 
> should we have a master plan beyond taking a PDC or studying some other 10000-year old technology and implementing the principles? i vote no. i am very tired of masters. and each local circumstance requires it's own observation and interaction.
> 
> all best,
> /m
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Antonio Roman-Alcala <antidogmatist at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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 - 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 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 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"
>> 
>> 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://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://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
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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://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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.beforebefore.net/pipermail/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net/attachments/20101110/f63d1f0a/attachment-0004.htm>