The Right to Live on a Healthy Planet

Earth Day 1971

This goes all the way back to childhood.  A small person realises there is pollution in the world. Where can I go to find clean air and water the child wonders?  The adult still does -- but it's not that bad.  Today we have hope.  We know better than to foul our nests and we are working on the solutions.

What can I say -- either you believe we have the right to live on a healthy planet -- or you don't. Whilst we are claiming our rights let's make sure we have everything we need.

Health and wealth -- inextricably intertwined.  Just as without the ecology there can be no economy, we must remember that our health can only ever be as good as that of the planet we live on.

So what are we waiting for?

We can join with people who are already working on the planet's health.  Here are some.

Points of Light.

Allan Savory.  The Savory Institute based in Boulder, Colorado, USA.
     Projects in place in Southern Africa and Western USA.
     Holistic Management of grazing land and large animal herds.

     http://www.savoryinstitute.com/savory-hubs/

Why does it only rain on your side of the fence?

Peter Andrews.  Based in Australia.  http://www.naturalsequencefarming.com/
     Delivering solutions for landscapes
     "rich with plants, using water efficiently, high in carbons, abundant with wildlife"
     http://www.regionalinnovations.com.au/

Sepp Holtzer. http://www.seppholzer.at/cms/index.php?id=69  Based in Austria.

     Has lived on his farm all his life and revolutionised high-altitude, cold climate farming.

     German language website http://www.krameterhof.at/cms60/index.php?id=5

     More on his work in English http://www.holzeragroecology.com/

Geoff Lawton.

     His favourite achievement of mine (there are many) has to be the discovery of a 2000 year old food forest
     while looking for a place to surf in Morocco (1975).

Date palms, above, with olives, bananas, dates, grapes,
 guava, mulberries, carob and tamarind growing underneath.   

Here's a link to the video.

      http://www.treehugger.com/green-food/2000-year-old-food-forestoasis-feeds-800-farmers-video.html

Masanobu Fukuoka (inspired projects).

     https://sites.google.com/site/onseedballs/worldwide-projects

     Seedballs are a method of easily introducing biodiversity into eclogically impoverished areas.

     Originally his work began in his native Japan. Projects in the above link are worldwide.

 One of Fukuoka's books.  And another..

“The ultimate goal of farming is not the growing of crops, but the cultivation and perfection of human beings.“ — Masanobu Fukuoka, One-Straw Revolution.

http://anthropogen.com/2012/03/11/masanobu-fukuoka-planting-100000-hectares-in-arnissa-greece-1998/

Here is access to a film about one of Fukuoka's projects -- in Greece.

Green Belt Movement.


This Kenyan group has it all -- social justice, people power and planting green belts.

"When we plant trees, we plant the seeds of peace and hope."

--Wangari Maathai

http://www.greenbeltmovement.org/

It won't be long before this is achieved.. http://www.bbc.com/news/10344622

A Green wall from Senegal to Djibouti planned by African leaders to halt the spread of the Sahara.

 

There is another form of planetary health and it is her consciousness.   Humans have done a great job of not destroying ourselves.  We have said no to Armageddon.  Eventually we will say yes to something else.  There are cycles within the earth -- humans need to know that not everything the earth does is about us.  However, our combined state of consciousness has great bearing on the earth's state.  Perhaps the earth cannot change gears as quickly as we can.  You want to head toward total destruction then you don't -- make up your mind!

Well what we need are earth whisperers who can speak the language the earth speaks to tell her it is safe to go on having humans living on her.  That we wish to participate in the healing that is needed -- rapidly for our sake more than for hers.  We can participate in the re-generation of life on earth which has been in decline for about 150 years -- coinciding with our push to industrialise, colonialise and populate every square inch of her surface.  Species may begin to return -- slowly if we allow them the space and time (but I wonder if they will be the same ones we are used to?).

This is all linked to us -- to our ability to coordinate with one another -- not necessarily following any one leader but together realising and acting in accordance with natural laws we have neglected far too long.  (Example -- how many people can we have living in one place and still have a healthy planet?)

We have the means -- make no mistake.  Communication is already in place.  What we need is to break down the man-made boundaries and barriers that have tended to separate all from all -- gender, race, religion, socio-economic status and political persuasion.  These things mean nothing if they prevent us from recognising the most important distinction of all -- living and dead.  Living people should stick together if they don't want to be the other way.  Very basic.

Can we still tell the difference?

UNIVERSAL LAND RIGHTS

Further to this -- we have the subject upon which this entire blog is based.  Humans can do so much more with and for the planet if we have the right to call some of it our own.  To take pride in ownership -- viz the difference between a rental property and a lovingly tended family-owned estate.  I rest my case.

Prototypical earth-whisperers.
The Lorax and..

The Russian dachniks.

(See post March 3, 2014)

Rebel With a Cause -- The Magna Carta Story

     Here we are now it is nearly 800 years since the document was signed and what have we learned? The Rule of Law has been tried, tested and approved.  But are we better off than before?  The population is more or less divided among law breakers, law makers and law enforcers and avoiders.

     However, not all laws have human and civil rights at heart, and it could be said that rules are made by a few for the benefit of a few (and their close associates and friends).  I am not an anarchist -- as I can easily see that into the void left by the absence of rules and laws would step those who would see themselves as leading or head anarchists. (Not a pretty picture.)

     What then?  Let's travel in time to the beginning of the great Civil Rights Declaration (Magna Carta, 1215).  It may help to see where we've been as it has a direct bearing on the place we find ourselves in.

I follow authority.  Then I become authority.  Then I realise others who would have authority over me do not have the full story -- their judgment is no longer valid.  Then I rebel.  Do I lead?  Or do I follow the will of the people and show them how they may succeed.  Against tyranny.  They just need to claim their authority.  To unite.  To make their voices heard.  There is a precedent.  We will follow it, and we will add to it as suits our present scenario. Together we are strong.  Expressed clearly, our vision cannot be denied.  We will not be underestimated.  My place is to guide, and to stand firm.  What happens to me personally is of no consequence -- as my abilities are not limited by outside circumstance.  The message will get through.

     So I rebelled, was banished, and then returned.  My oppressors cannot live forever.  It could be said that change happens one funeral at a time!  At least one can leave a legacy that is appreciated, welcomed and celebrated.  Why have it any other way?  We can forgive actions made in error, words of a careless nature.  But the feelings engendered from painful encounters are the hardest to forget.  Somehow we must continue in our work, time is very much on our side, and those to come look forward (and backward) to our bravery.

~ Our triumph shall be! ~

     In relation to rules and laws -- here is a thought for you.  I see contracts in a similar way.  It is my opinion (I have signed a few of these things) that contracts are not needed when all parties (aka both sides) are trustworthy, acting in good faith.  And with those who are not trustworthy, the contract is meaningless because it will be abused, bent or otherwise broken, perhaps twisted to suit ends not intended by one party in the original agreement.

     Rules may be a starting point, a signal of good intentions, or wish for others to conform to a certain mode of behaviour.  However, what one does with rules is always a matter of free choice, and where is the judgment on that?  The fruits of the actions are what we should measure.  We need to get better at assessing each other's intentions before actions occur, and thus realising who or what is trustworthy well in advance of any injurious (or otherwise) actions.

     There is more subtlety in this than judging adherence to statutes written in a time and place far removed from the current situation.  So I will advocate on the side (or lack of sides) in favour of shades of grey (or numerous beautiful colours!).

     This is complex I know, and certainly there are many issues to which I can only say I completely, utterly and thoroughly disagree.  And I continue on my beautifully coloured path as befits the occasion.  The actions of another person are not my responsibility nor are their choices.  An example is a powerful enough choice to make.  Leadership is not necessary if others choose freely to go in the same direction.

Note on text:
A comment here to explain an apparent paradox in the post.  I'm a fan of koans and paradoxes because they send us scurrying back to the evidence of our senses -- and intuition.  The last part about endorsing shades of grey while taking a firm stand I reconcile as follows.  It is ok to recognise and appreciate the myriad approaches (beautiful colours) of the people around us.  It is also ok to know your own mind and not be distracted in your work by the differences that exist.

Also, the book featured in the beginning of the post I have not read, so I cannot give a recommendation or otherwise.  (To be honest, I only chose that for the image.)  It seems a fairly intuitive choice..  The book according to reviews (long link here) http://www.amazon.com/1215-The-Year-Magna-Carta/product-reviews/0340824751/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?showViewpoints=1


tells the story of the year 1215 in all its detailed glory.  The Magna Carta was just one thing occurring in medieval English society.  I did not quote from the book but wished to tell a first person account of one of the instigators -- to show you that we are not mere pawns of history but its makers and shapers.

The Right to Build a Home of Your Own

 http://www.ben-law.co.uk/books.html

Let's look at Maslow's pyramid of needs.. 

Surely the premise of all I am saying [the blog, the post] is that if we have a fundamental need then we have a fundamental right to its fulfilment.

Purpose of our existence -- not merely survival, what Maslow has sign-posted for us is -- beyond the fulfilment of basic needs, self-actualisation is possible.

Surely it is a higher utilisation of our (collective) time and energy on earth to seek (collective) self-actualisation than (collectively) to seek our own individual survival.  The collective evolution of the energy level of our planet is at stake!

Distinction between Human and Civil Rights.

Whilst researching previous post (Right to Dream) I uncovered a tangled web [in relation to the Right to the Pursuit of Property].

Firstly, I would like to make clear that I understand the difference (semantically) to be that Human Rights are what we are born with and Civil Rights are what we give one another.

The Highest Role I can imagine for any (form of) government is to ensure the two are perfectly aligned -- that our Human Rights are universally acknowledged and granted to one another in the form of our Civil Rights.  (That is Theory and Practice both match.)

When it comes to the need for housing, we must also examine our ability.  This quote comes from the Ringing Cedars series.  "...even today everyone can build a home."  [from Anastasia].  But local government (certainly in Australia) abridges our right to choose the manner in which we put a roof over our heads and our family.

Formerly I believed building codes existed to guarantee quality of workmanship (and -womanship) so that we could live snugly without a roof collapsing, leaking or catching fire.  In more cynical moments I imagined that the building product industry had cleverly guaranteed themselves an income by lobbying for their specific products to be include in National/State/Local building regulations.

Be that as it may -- we have a situation where commonly used materials for houses come from great distances at great expense -- in terms of transport, distribution and production.

Yet we have all heard of or know of people [Home Work] who have built charming cottages [or Tasmanian shacks] with what was readily available and close at hand.

So much so, that it must be that more of us could do this sort of thing if a) we felt it was our right, and b) we thought it would be legal.

A friend who knows a local [Australian] building inspector has told this story.  Local councils within Australia (as elsewhere) are responsible for administering the building codes, approving plans and designs and homes and renovations and enforcing the adherence to and execution of the codes by the builder.  (Sounds quite draconian, no?)

Well it is.  And one reason why councils hire the building inspectors is not to protect inhabitants or prop up the building industry but to ensure that neighbours to the proposed and actual constructions will not complain.  It seems that councils are pro-active in their avoidance of negative reactions by local citizens.  Which in itself seems like another form of reactivity.  [Once I came to the conclusion that the most frightening thing in life was not the difficulty of our daily work but the reactions of other people we have to deal while doing it.]

Let's be pro-active.

Back to the role of government, and yet another Right [in capital letters].  Particularly regarding local government.  There is a fine line between interference and assistance.  Ideally assistance is offered where needed and requested and interference is kept to a bare minimum.  As when one is raising children or helping some one with a differing level of ability (who is developmentally or physically or intellectually challenged) it is important to cultivate an appropriate level of skill without having the reverse effect of de-skilling  by doing for some one what they could/should or would like to be doing for themself.  {It is about empowerment.}

How are we going to learn to build our own homes, such as even animals do -- in some cases -- not just a human right but an organismal (common to all living things) one -- unless we are granted it by others.  That is we are allowed to and this right is not abridged in any way shape or form.

It sounds absurd that we would even consider letting any one take this right from us.  Why we do so is a different matter and I will not get into it here.

Here are some examples of amazing, simple and beautiful homes put up by those who have been given land for the purpose of growing food [refers to post on the Dachnik movement].  Now that we have mastered the concepts of the right to own land, the Right to Privacy [both inside our homes with doors that lock already a norm, now extended to the outside areas with hedges]* let's return to zone zero, as permaculturists say, and emphasise the desirable qualities of owner built, hand built homes.  Who wouldn't like to have a go?

____________
* And remember, with a privacy hedge, neighbours would not be so affected by the sight of their neighbour's home that they would seek to alter the housing behaviour of all potential neighbours (past, present and future).  And building inspectors would have to find other work!  (Or other reasons to..)

Creature comforts -- a beaver lodge

Group building an earthship in Haiti

Simon Dale's Hobbit House

To Dream the Possible Dream

You have the right to dream -- do not forget.  There are many possible solutions to one problem and just as many ways of finding the answer.  Here are some.  Let's start with ratiocination (as opposed to hallucination?).  Reasoning -- of which there are some types.  A great metaphor for these comes from Masanobu Fukuoka an agricultural pioneer.  He likens inductive reasoning to the lowermost of two rock climbers working in tandem.

This one is Dr. Watson to the uppermost -- Sherlock Holmes himself.  To deduce is to work from a first (a priori) assumption backward through the details necessary to make it true.  Holmes lowers the rope to Watson who painstakingly works his way through the clues the great detective has already noted on his way up.  Watson, the sounding board tests Holmes' train of thought for himself -- and they both reach the top -- the solution to the mystery.

Fukuoka -- who advocates working from a great vision back [did Einstein do this?] to find the necessary measures to achieve it -- calls this intuitive reasoning.  He says this is tantamount to lowering the rock climber

onto the summit from a helicopter.  To be really scientific, you could test all of these styles and see what works best for you!

So you have your senses -- requisite equipment for any investigation.  But would you say you have ever had a conclusion come to you in a flash?  It happens.  Reams of data that don't support the chosen a priori assumption (hypothesis) because they are aberrant -- unexplainable -- may be the very ones pointing us to great discoveries -- the real breakthroughs in science (which Fukuoka describes).

Here are some a priori assumptions that have guided the actions and behaviours of many over the years.

*  Humans are the crown of creation.  The world was made for us, and we may do with it what we like.

*  Humans are disease organisms on the face of earth (Gaia) and we are giving her a fever.

*  All things in Nature -- animals, plants, people and spirit exist in a delicate balance.  The earth which contains our ancestors is loving and benign toward us.

*  Nature has many dangers in store for us, and we must use our science to ensure we survive.

*  Everything that can be known can be known through science and the study of our three-dimensional world.

*  Some things you can know to be true because you feel them -- such as the existence of love -- but you cannot prove them.

*  The government and the economy like death and taxes are certain and cannot be changed.

*  The elders will always have authority over the youngers because they have accumulated wisdom and knowledge.

*  More.. The day will come when there is peace on earth but we haven't found how to achieve it.

I am saying all these things to show how each and every culture (and religion) has basic assumptions that you may challenge at your own peril.  Even science (a religion for some?)  has a priori assumptions -- beyond which the evidence of the senses is useless.  Aboriginal dreaming and the European status quo are alike because they take events of the past (creation, science) and presence them in the everlasting now.  And can they change?  Here is the common ground of the the two.  The difference is in the details.  And the way the senses are used.  And the approach to nature..

To me, intuitive reasoning (knowing, believing what is possible before it is done) is the backbone of the creative process.  Here is another example, from the field of architecture -- showing backward and forward reasoning working beautifully together.  Jorn Utzon who designed the Sydney Opera House was not an engineer.  However, after years of working on the problem of the concrete 'sails' (a key -- years of familiarity are necessary to achieve mastery) -- he got the answer in a flash.  Use spheres as the mathematical underpinning of the shells' curvature.

And the engineers did the rest..  It worked.

I encourage you to pay attention to those

still small voices deep inside (or do you already).

Once the status quo and the ancestral dreaming are put on the table for investigation, what do we have?

Open slather on the future.  A good time for new beginnings methinks.  I doubt many solutions will come from a considered approach to the status quo.  What we need are breakthroughs -- real acts of unfettered genius.

That's why I enjoy telling people about universal land rights.  A real new beginning..  For me the journey was accelerated on reading the Ringing Cedars.  I could be Watson to Anastasia's Holmes (although I hope I would not be so slow!). 

This is serious -- I envision a new Bill of Rights for Humanity including Land Rights for all as a key item.  The Right to Dream could be included..

Check this for a blast from the past --an apocryphal story re the founding of America.  Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness was supposed to be Life, Liberty and the Right to Land [or property].  Were we ready?  Perhaps not.  Are we now?

You have the right to dream.

European Settlement of Australia -- a co-creation story

Once there was an ancestor who lost his homeland through revolution.  He remained loyal to the colonising army.  When these people were sent back where they came from, he went with them.  Others must feel the same as me, he reckoned.  They will have to leave their homes too because they backed the wrong side, and where will they live?  These are my people and I must help them.

Some people organised a scientific expedition (that meant they wanted to explore new lands).  This man was still young and he went with them.  When a new land was found as hoped, a new people was also found.  Many new people -- some of whom were hostile and some of whom were welcoming.  The new people thought the visitors very strange and were glad when they left.

The man, who was starting to get older, thought about the place he had visited and the people who had not been hostile.  My people can live there he thought.  I must tell my friends.  The elders did not care about the man's people who had lost their homes, but they had a problem of their own.  Some of their own people -- many, many in fact -- had broken the rules of their society and were not welcome any longer.

The people had broken laws because they were hungry.  Their own land had become too crowded and dirty.  They did not know how to feed themselves or their families without stealing from other people.  This was because they had lost their ancestral connection to their land.  Some one had taken it for themselves and left them out of their plans for prosperity.

So it was decided the law-breakers, who could no longer be sent to the man's homeland because of the battle that was lost, would go to the new place instead.  Arrangements were made for ships to be filled with food, young woman and men, and warriors.

And so it happened that the people of Europe came to live in the continent of Australia.  The new people, as the Europeans called them did not like this name.  They had been living in this place from the beginning and remembered its story, its creation.  Of course, they believed the Europeans were new.  And destructive to their lands and ways.  European people did not tell stories of their creation in the same way, their stories came from different lands, far apart from Europe.  The land of Europe clearly could not hold them any more.  And all they had was their fearful ambition and desire to dominate one another.

It would be many years before the people of the land of Europe and of the continent of Australia were able to work together, to play together and dream together.  It was a long time.

An Invitation to Comment

Dear Readers,

Thanks for your interest thus far.  Don't worry there's plenty to come from me!

I would like to take this opportunity to ask if there is anything you would like to share on the subject of
Universal Land Rights.  Thoughts, feelings or experiences that may be of benefit to others.

As Anitra said in the first comment, this is a subject that affects all of us.

Thanks again.  You've inspired me to keep on blogging.

Yours,

roborigine

The Right to Privacy

Fences.  What does this call to mind?  White pickets, purely symbolical (but they do block access). Chain link?  Very institutional.  A brick wall -- how high can you afford to build one.. knee high maybe.  Hardwood, colourbond [an Australian corrugated metal product], willow screen, a vine on a lattice.  A swimming pool fence of metal grids and bars.  Anything else?

Actually sometimes when you drive down a country lane you will see that some one, a long time ago has taken the trouble to construct (plant) a hedge.  Generally associations to this are pretty positive.  It's a bit quaint, attractive, perhaps a twinge of envy passes over us, or wistfulness.  And then you drive past.  It's a blur.  The next fence that comes up is a blight on the landscape.  Barbed wire.  Multi-strands of metal wire and star pickets.  Sometimes rusty.  Well, they have to keep their cows in somehow, you say to yourself without thinking.

Cows have been domesticated a lot longer than there has been wire -- barbed or otherwise. Traditionally, thorny barriers were used to delineate one's personal space, keeping unwanted wanderers out and precious beasts in.  But despite years of so-called permaculture involvement and spare time spent in the garden, I would be hard-pressed to name more than a few suitable hedge species.  There must be thousands!

When we think of planting a suitably deep, wide and long hedge around our land (if you have one hectare, that's 100m x 100m so the perimeter is 400m) -- doesn't the cost stop you in your tracks?

Well here's an idea.  All plants of a large enough size to make a hedge produce flowers (if they are angiosperms) and all plants produce seeds (including gymnosperms -- the pines for example). What we need to do is collect a suitable quantity of seeds to go all the way around. And lots of time of course, to wait for the things to grow into hedges.  That is lacking if we are paying rent, don't know where well be living in a year or so, or see the property as an investment (because of mortgage or equity).

Still the choice will always be there -- as long as we live on some land.  Why the emphasis on hedges?  This vision is for the long term.  If our aim is to keep the children on the land (with us and after we're gone)  we would be wise, considerate and well-advised to not leave too much fragile infrastructure around that requires expensive maintenance.  Even a hardwood fence after 20 years or so will start to show signs of decrepitude and need to be re-done.  Children are no fools.  They can can tell the difference between living and non-living things.  Non-living things always tend toward decay (cars for example!).  Horses and hedges also have a life-span (as individual entities) but have the distinct advantage of being self-perpetuating.

So an individual hedge plant or horse may not exist 30 years later, but the pattern of the horse (embodied in its offspring) and of the hedge lives on.. forever potentially.  Here we have the perm in permaculture and the sust- in sustainability.  (Also living things are more likely to give us hugs).

Other benefits of hedgerows -- they may themselves provide a source of food -- berries and apples -- habitat for animals, and of course a source of new hedgerow plants.

Choice of species need not be limited to the conventional -- why not try natives, pines, or so-called noxious weeds.  These are quite prolific and seem to create their own natural hedges.

       For example, holly (Ilex aquifolium, shown right).  After reading Peter Andrews two books, I am convinced -- if it's green it's good!


Why am I telling you this?  Because I am interested in things that affect quality of life -- the degree of privacy is one of those.  It is something we all want when we are at home, and yet what do we actually do about it?

If you look at modern housing, suburban housing developments put one in a rather compromised position privacy-wise.

I've often noted the norm is to ignore what is happening on the next property -- not to even acknowledge some one who is in close proximity and clearly visible!  Well, we are only fooling ourselves.  To act as if we cannot be seen when we can, and to act as if we do not see when we do -- there is something rather distorted and even schizophrenic in this behaviour.  To shrink our world to the point where barriers don't exist but we pretend they do -- is the stuff of fantasy and pantomime!

How absurd, yet how commonplace.  (We might think we are attired in beautiful fine clothing -- but the neighbours know otherwise.-- there's nothing on!)

What concerns me in all this is it interferes with our basic human freedom to think and act, well, freely.  At some level, we know there is no privacy and we limit our behaviour accordingly.  Even though neighbours pretend not to see, they are busy taking note of our actions.  Anything out of the ordinary will duly be reported -- to their friends, family -- or back to us in some cases.

How do we know this?  Because we are busy doing it too.  Why am I concerned by it?  Because anything that limits our behaviour also limits our thoughts and vice versa.  Anything that limits these two things then prevents us from being fully human.  And we need to explore this.

Since privacy is a personal matter, I will get personal with you.  I am not in an ideal situation regarding privacy.  Before I tell you anything you don't want to know, I will say this.  We all have a long way to go. Here is my story.  Renting one hectare, but it is shared -- with other tenants in a nearby building and a landlord who has installed a caravan for fortnightly visits.  Our domain is virtual -- there is no privacy hedge and territory is what is dictated or limited by common decency.

I understand that isolation has its drawbacks.  Cloistering oneself in an ivory tower really contributes little to society.  We live in an era of transparency and accountability -- if I am using a scythe to mow my lawn -- it is my neighbours' right to know (and they do).  Perhaps they can benefit from seeing an alternative to ride-on lawnmower-hood.  (It does not really take the power of twenty horses to cut a blade of grass.)

However, what if I do not wish to be made aware of their activities, and I am?  Somewhere we must draw the line.  I feel it is possible to remain active and engaged in society whilst still enjoying visual and auditory privacy and a cushion of real and tangible space between me and the next denizen of earth.  Without good fences, where are the good neighbours?