Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
First, Do No Harm
As Planet Earth continues to hemorrhage crude oil from its wound — with a worst-case estimate of as much as 100,000 barrels a day — we grope, beyond our anger and guilt, simply to imagine what damage we have done in the pursuit of human empowerment.
This is bigger than BP, blameworthy though the company may be. This is bigger than any sort of “us vs. them” scenario we can think of. It’s a crisis of civilization, which means all of us.
If we drive, use energy, buy products wrapped in absurd, throwaway plastic — if we live at all — it cuts across our lives. The roots of this disaster, and, God help us, the ones to come, are political and corporate and governmental, and they are also intensely personal. We all collude in society’s “addiction” to oil, or what I would call its sense of entitlement: This is our planet. We’re the boss.
What we’re truly addicted to, or at least inextricably caught up in, is what my friend Jim Oberg calls “doomsday capitalism” and its need for reckless, unlimited economic growth. With this system operative, we trend toward war, empire and exploitation.
Maybe, as we look at the graphics of this disaster — pelicans, for instance, covered in black goo — we begin to grasp our immaturity as a species. Let’s say we do survive ourselves and create a sustainable, eco-harmonious way to live and prosper: What we’re presently churning up in our clumsiness and techno-entitlement is a warning to the future of how not to be. We’re scaring up a whole new mythology, and new definitions of sacrilege.
I know nowhere to start except here. And I know of nothing less to reach for than . . . salvation.
I use this language not to promote existing religions, which far too often collude in the problem, but to reach deep into the human core, into the raw material of existence, to find new commonality with one another and to discover new — or perhaps I mean to rediscover ancient, uncompromised and uncorrupted — principles to live by.
The rebuilding of human society cannot be superficial. It must begin with a realization that those in power mostly have no idea what they’re doing; they operate with crippling short-sightedness, in a context of eerily limited self-interest. (“History, we don't know,” George Bush said to Bob Woodward, regarding future assessments of the Iraq war. “We’ll all be dead.”) We’re, like, on our own here.
Knowledge that this is the case leads either to despair and cynicism or translates into a deeper, more profound sense of personal responsibility. I opt for the latter, understanding that present-day U.S. democracy is comfortable with a spectator citizenry: entertained, isolated and disengaged. We don’t pursue the sort of awareness that would propel us into troubled discontent, and we’re not supposed to. But it’s our only choice. And while this sort of awareness doesn’t translate into easy or obvious action, maybe that’s OK.
First, do no harm.
What if that phrase, which is the byword of many professions, became a sort of operating principle with which to proceed, individually and collectively, into the future? Even if it’s an impossible standard, wouldn’t we be far better off attempting to live by its implications, or at least reflecting on them and debating them, than by mockingly dismissing them?
Our most destructive enterprises all depend on moral relativism and a suspension of this value, allegedly in service to a greater good, which generally fails to materialize. I submit that the “greater good” argument is a convenient scam, pulled out of a hat time and again by those intent on gaming the system for limited, self-serving ends.
Yet it springs eternal — certainly as the ultimate argument for war, but also for anything that might generate a profit.
Harvey Wasserman, for instance, writing about the resurgence of the nuclear power industry and its backing by the Obama administration, notes that, “Like BP, their builders would enjoy financial liability limits dwarfed by damage they could do.”
Nuclear power has been able to recast itself as a green alternative to coal and oil only by minimizing or dismissing the problem of radioactive waste and the dangers of meltdown. “If the White House has a reliable plan for deploying and funding a credible response to a disaster at a reactor that’s superior to the one we’ve seen at the Deepwater Horizon, we’d sure like to see it,” Wasserman writes.
As I read this, my thought is that the forces that ultimately determine the future of this industry will be responding to something more short-sighted and “pragmatic” than my proposed operating principle: First, do no harm.
The United States is both an aggressive empire and a throwaway society. We wage open-ended wars that are mostly for the sake of resource control, and we package our groceries in “disposable” plastic bags, given away by the billions, which are made from the primary resource we seek to control.
The crisis is upon us. Our paradoxes have come home to roost, and they’re covered with oil.
- Posted in
84 Comments so far
Show Alldo no harm...of course...
what about own no land? make no money?
right now, a man with a gun insists I come up with a couple of thousand dollars every month, and timely, too, or there's gonna be trouble...
I need to be free of this man and his gun, to do no harm...
harm is the only way to make money to pay this man...
can we all, together, agree to say goodbye to this man and his gun, and share our world free of industry?
The "do no harm" mantra can be applied to every issue facing us.
Unfortunately, the reaction to every issue so far has been to do MORE harm.
Corporations profit from harm.
>>with a worst-case estimate of as much as 100,000 barrels a day<<
BP pumped 80 barrels of mud per minute into the gusher which ejected the mud as soon as it was pumped in. 80 barrels times 1440 minutes in a day is equal to 115,200 barrels a day of matter being ejected from the well head.
>>
CAVNAR: I think they certainly probably—they likely had a casing failure during the Top Kill procedure. Remember, they had 30,000 horsepower pumping mud at about as much as 80 barrels a minute. That kind of casing was probably already damaged, could have certainly failed.
<<
See complete story at:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37592156/ns/msnbc_tv-countdown_with_keith_olbermann/
Plastic and all other uses of oil account for 8% of oil use. All the rest is burned. Identifying our use of plastic as part of the problem is pretty misleading. There have been alternatives to burning oil for heating and transportation for a long time. The political will to develop them has been absent, mostly because the stupid oil billionaires have successfully suppressed them. "those in power mostly have no idea what they’re doing; they operate with crippling short-sightedness": very true, and it's easy to see why Americans are so "disengaged" from a political game they've been shut out of for -- what, 50 years?
I don't have a problem with the principle, first do no harm. What are some suggestions on how to get there? I don't see anything in this article to actually help us to achieve this worthy goal.
Maybe the author doesn't have any answers of a practical kind and is hoping that bringing up this idea may, in and of itself, have some value. But surely more is needed; otherwise, this is just another proof that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
"The greatest achievement of humanity is not its works of art, science or technology, but the recognition of its own dysfunction, its own madness"....Eckhart Tolle
The demand for oil goes up when an economy rebounds. We just so happened to realize this only when an accident like BP surfaced.
Some people on this forum have mentioned hemp as an alternative to oil for plastics but why aren't other countries that don't forbid it not using it for plastics? Does it not have market value or does it not meet the same specs for manufacturing plastics with oil?
Do no harm might mean stop sucking oil and stop frantically scrabbling around for something that could replace it so we can continue to live a high-energy/ultra consumer lifestyle. The message that we need to be hearing is- we must restructure our lives and our communities to USE LESS ENERGY. A LOT less. And we better start doing that in earnest soon, because obviously, easy/cheap energy is in the rear view mirror and we are ill prepared to deal with what is coming.
There are lotsa ways to reduce energy use aside from our own savings. Instead of buying replacements, repair when you can. I like repairing appliances and have kool conversations with my customers. More repairs and less buying new would reduce consumption a lot. We could also call for upgrading our buildings and homes to consuming less energy. My next job contract will involve renovating buildings and building new homes with energy saving technologies. Alternative sources of energy shouldn't be left out.
Thank you blueskykate1.
We MUST STOP buying all the unnecessary crap that is part of the oil industry. We MUST undergo a life-style change. When we stop feeding our own greed for "stuff" we can starve the oil monster to death.
I agree that easy/cheap energy is in the rear view mirror. An individual, working toward the goal of planet stewardship is more than capable of influencing their neighbours and their community. It wasn't all that long ago that recycling became widespread. Individuals are the only ones who CAN initiate the change in attitude required to sustain life on this planet. Like-minded individuals become the many.
What % of your weekly or monthly shopping goes directly into recycling or the land fill? It does not even pause on the way to the trash. THAT is the crap that none of us needs. London ON, Canada has now outlawed the sale of bottled water in that community. That started with the idea of an individual.
I think the criticisms of Koehler's column here are all valid, but the suggestion he makes is actually a very powerful one. How many of us ever do give a moment's thought throughout the day to "doing no harm" to the planet? It's true that the corporations have vast collective power, but so do individual humans, if millions of us were to at least attempt to consciously do no harm, do less harm, even once a day. Even if we only changed one action a day, collectively it makes a difference. You don't have to quit your job or blow up a corporate headquarters. I'm not saying this well, but I'm thinking of my own unconscious behavior, day in and day out. Even though I have a near-religious love of nature, day in and day out I use plastic bags, take public transportation when I could walk, eat junk food, buy junk products, out of laziness and also because it never occurs to me to live with the conscious thought, "first, do no harm" to that which I love. It's a goal. It's worth thinking about every day, and collectively it can make a difference. I think that's Koehler's point.
What you're speaking of is a form of earnest, heartfelt prayer. It is indeed time for such response. We must reach for the light now. We (& especially that/those we love) will be helped by doing so. It at least does no harm doing so. It would be best to pray in secret. Those are the loudest prayers.
Here's where I see a problem:
Here's recent news from California.
"All of the House lawmakers seeking re-election this year won their primary races Tuesday night."
Here's some numbers:
California Congressional victories 2006/2008
(correct these numbers, please. they scare the dickens out of me, as well as proust).
Incumbents 110, anybody else 1.
This week Californians showed how much they really care. They gave their political leaders the only job review we have available, and they re-nominated ALL the incumbents.
They promised ALL our political leaders that they will keep their jobs.
Things being as they are, and all.
As California goes (or doesn't) so goes (or doesn't) the nation.
Wow, the incumbents must be worried.
Aren't primaries mainly about the two major political parties? It varies by state, but often independent voters cannot take part (and in my case do not particularly want to take part) in primary elections. I always thought that 'voting on who to vote for' was ridiculous on its face and have always refused to be anything other than 'independent' or 'non-aligned'. Here in OR my 'primary' election ballot contained only issues, no candidates. Let's hope for real choices on the real election ballot and give primaries the attention they deserve, none.
We can't solve the problem piecemeal. That should be obvious by now; although, by necessity, we have to put much of our energies into specific problems...putting out fires (more aptly termed conflagrations as the chickens come home to roost.)
Beyond internalizing "first, do no harm" through a myriad of cultural processes, we have to be political pioneers to fashion a system where doing harm is blocked or redirected. I realize that this has been a problem considered for millennia, but we can either say we were unsuccessful and give up or we can say, "But we have to do it."
In my opinion, decentralization is crucial because less harm can be done with decentralized control of resources than with centralized. In addition, people are more likely to be in touch with the processes necessary for their living.
We have to go far beyond conventional wisdom, as conventional wisdom has been unsuccessful in diverting our trajectory to extinction (taking with us to extinction wondrerful biological diversity.) Our models need to be "outsiders" who have proven to be right and cultures that make a point of moving through time and the moment in a numinous and direct relation with nature.
It's asking a lot, and may be unachievable, but aren't the contours of our survival becoming clear?
I relate to this quote:
"we have to be political pioneers to fashion a system where doing harm is blocked or redirected."
Yes, exactly. Thank you for your thoughtful, clear call for a solution.
To see the problem clearly, see Dan Lazare's interview about his book Frozen Republic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_AwOZmnDO0
And the solutions are relatively simple.
Read here for a summary of all the world's national systems (they have a free PDF of their summary):
www.idea.int/esd
And here for designs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_system
Many nations have such a system. It is a system whereby the will of the people becomes the law of the land.
These are multi-party systems, free of monied corruption via public financing. And legislatures are mirrors of the people via proportional representation. Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, New Zealand, and several other nations have such a system. It is no mystery. We need to make the transition from a totalitarian, corporate-controlled, militarist, parasitic, conservative, gridlocked, plutocratic system to one like I described above. That means a peaceful, constitutional, progressive revolution.
Here is a place to start:
www.callaconvention.org
Nothing new in this hand-wringing piece. We are witness to the accelerating sixth global extinction event. Ain't nothin' gonna change that. Humans aren't going to wake up or change or transcend, they--we--are simply going to die. No big deal.
"Our most destructive enterprises all depend on moral relativism and a suspension of this value, allegedly in service to a greater good, which generally fails to materialize. I submit that the “greater good” argument is a convenient scam, pulled out of a hat time and again by those intent on gaming the system for limited, self-serving ends."
This paragraph has a personal impact for me. I am currently engaged in an environmental debate. The first response to my concern was, "to the greater good." My response was exactly what Mr Koehler is talking about.
I told "them" that doing harm in the name of the greater good was NOT an acceptable response when "do no harm" solutions are available. Do no harm solutions are not always the easiest, but they certainly are the best.
It does take "a profound sense of personal responsibility" to refuse to accept plastic packaging. I'm not talking merely of plastic produce & shopping bags.
Plastic covers those new pliers & screwdrivers, as well as the screws, nuts & bolts. It covers the batteries for all your electronic gadgets. Plastic covers that roll of Scotch tape and the gift wrap you stick it to. Your children's toys come sealed inside plastic bubbles. Your pillows & bed linens are packaged in plastic. Your personal toiletries come in plastic containers.Your Coke & Pepsi etc., milk, ice cream & yogurt come in plastic containers, as does your ketchup, mustard, relish and mayonnaise. Uh-oh! Your bottled salad dressing comes in plastic too.
It's easier to list what DOESN'T come in plastic packaging.
Personal responsibility requires each of us to quit being too damned lazy to peel and cut our own potatoes and grate our own cheese. Learn to COOK, dammit! Even the most primitive cultures can do that. It isn't difficult. You don't even have to know how to read to be able to cook. Jamie Oliver was shocked to learn that elementary children in the US don't know how to use a fork. They only know how to eat with their hands - McD burgers & fries, Taco Bell & KFC.
Not enough time? That's BS. I was raised in a single parent home with a working mother & we had home cooked meals - we all learned to cook & we all sat down to eat together.
Thank you Mr Koehler. Taking personal responsibility requires each of us to get off her/his ass.
I believe in managed capitalism, where government regulators promote responsible behavior, even as corporations seek profit. I don't like the 'first, do no harm' ethic because it promotes doing nothing, and that is not an option. Thermodynamically speaking, you cannot move forward in time without impacting your environment. If that environment wanted to be preserved, guess what, it ain't happening. Therefore, we are change agents, and there's not a living thing on the planet that isn't. Furthermore, and this also relates to thermodynamics, we have found that the societies that effect the greatest amount of change in their environment become the most powerful. And while power may not mean much to many CommonDreams posters, its definitely in the minds of our corporate CEOs and other 'Masters of the Universe' types. Their power to change their environment also is creative: it creates diversity, new forms, like Apple iPads, etc.
But as we create change in service of diversity, we also see a need, or desire, to maintain the diversity that naturally has evolved here. Furthermore, it's no secret that the energy to power our civilization times 10 billion is being thrown away by our nearest star, every second. We don't need to befoul our planet to empower ourselves. If we 'manage' our capitalism, it can be a win, win: maintaining the geo- and bio-diversity of our planet while empowering our citizens and businesses. The problem is that we don't manage our capitalism, and fully half the population thinks thats the way it is supposed to be. Lets not overblow the Deepwater Horizon tragedy beyond its causes: it was not caused by capitalism, but by unmanaged capitalism, i.e. lack of regulation and enforcement, i.e. of big government (the most hated word in every Republicans lexicon).
'First, do no harm' is 'nice' to think about but impractical. I like the idea behind 350.org, instead. Pick a single number and aim for it, and trust that when you hit it, you'll have effected positive changes that will ignite further positive change, even after the goal has been reached. Thats the brilliance behind McKibbens idea. Its like a diet for the planet. When you go on a personal diet, you'll feel success or failure at times, but there's just no getting around the bathroom scale. You either hit your goal or you don't. And, you know that if you do, you'll have made healthy changes to not just your diet, but your lifestyle. Changes that will maintain themselves even after your diet is over. So, I'm sympathetic to the concept behind Koehlers 'do no harm' ethic. I just think it is better encompassed by McKibben's '350'.
Thanks, ubrew12, fellow pragmatist. It's easy to become depressed by all the impossibilities of our civilization. Better management is always possible in every situation.
Yes, but I'm depressed nevertheless. It's been observed repeatedly here in CommonDreams that the problem isn't physical, its psychological. The green sources this planet is awash in are there for the plucking, but we remain enslaved to an ethic that demands homage be paid to todays 'top dog'. Our 'free market' ethos demands we bend our noses to the grindstone of king kapital and king fossil even as, the moment we take a break, we can see the brighter horizon just beyond the sweatshop. Physically, it really is there. Physically, energy really is unlimited. Not just in our dreams. Not just in the distant horizon. Here, right here, right now. The planet is awash in energy. But we're told by Faux News and others that to grasp it would be 'communism' and that is a fate worse than death. Younger, I would have laughed that such ideas could gain permanent currency, especially among an enlightened American population. Now, informed by experience, I'm not so sure. American's were stupid to elect Reagan to office. Reagan and many others have acted, in the intervening 30 years, to make Americans more stupid, if that is possible. I remarked the other day that the religious fundamentalism that America increasingly finds itself subject to is not the fundamentalist faith that could destroy it. There's a faith in the 'free market' here that is off-the-hook. No evidence can exist to sway it, even though such evidence exists in abundance. Look, I don't think humans are scr*wed, just Americans. Pragmatism rules in most other countries. Eventually, such pragmatism empowers the countries that accept it, and disempowers those that cling to their fundamentalist faith. I just am tired of seeing my fellow Americans choose that latter path. I am thinking of jumping ship and moving. Who would knowingly stay on the Titanic, after all, if they knew it was sinking? There are other boats in this ocean.
I think the fundamentalist faith in Jesus, Mohammad, and the Free Market are three of the more troubling aspects of our human existence. I would argue that pragmatism and fossil fuels are so intertwined, due to these fuels ease of use and versatility, that breaking that bond between humans and gasoline feels perhaps worse than the death of a friend.
"He who must be sure before taking a step, will spend his entire life on one leg"
I meant my comments to be taken in that sense. I know, I'm being too literal. Mostly, I wanted to plug the concept of '350' as Koehler's 'single idea' to promote as we move forward, and away from fossil fuels. There are many ways to reach 350: we should be promoting them all. We'll save the planet. But, I really think that, if we reach 350, we'll see that we saved ourselves as well.
You say: "we have found that the societies that effect the greatest amount of change in their environment become the most powerful. And while power may not mean much to many CommonDreams posters, it’s definitely in the minds of our corporate CEOs and other 'Masters of the Universe' types".
You equate "Power" with change. But, every civilization that has ever collapsed could be given as an example of this quest to manipulate the environment and wield power. The power to change one's environment works well to expand the state; until resources run out. Power to continue on the same course blindly, after resources are scarce, depends upon conquest abroad and repression at home. I think CD posters are well aware of the power of the state and its weaknesses.
I'm just saying that we've identified energy as being the resource that undergirds all other resources. And I'm pointing out the irony that this should be considered 'limited'. Our planet is awash in the sun's energy, and subtends one-billionth of its angular output. There is no energy shortage, just a shortage of imagination. We have come to the point where we don't have to rob our planet to build powerful societies; and most alternative energy proposals are directed at ending this theft.
"Power to continue on the same course blindly": When I say I prefer 'managed capitalism', I'm saying we need to harness the power to choose our course with eyes open.
In large industrial societies (which function) managed Capitalism usually includes some Socialism. We have ways to "manage" capitalism right now in the USA but they are not being used. Laws are being broken because too much capital is being wielded by those in power to ignore the law and the costs. Nader has pointed out that the Office of Technology Assessment has withered due to under funding. We can't understand and implement other ways of harnessing energy as long as the model of corporate capitalism being used is in place. Any call for alternative energy gets twisted into "Clean" coal and nuclear and new liquid natural gas pipelines. Even solar requires mining. Affluence in wealthy countries is a big part of the problem. The model of capitalism which claims resources are unlimited, also claim that there is an unlimited supply of consumer demand, but does not figure in all the costs.
Marx told us of the costs of capitalist economies in terms of labor and human misery, but his economic theories are not taught in American public schools. Now we are seeing the cost in environmental misery come to the forefront as well. The capitalist model has pushed consumer demand and marketing way ahead of any sort of assessment of future problems and social needs. Capitalism is like a Ponzi scheme and always dumps the costs on the poor dopes who bought in last (or the environmental costs on the next generation). Thus, it is based upon short term gain and inherent selfishness; which is hard to get out of once a country is on that economic trajectory.
So my argument is that capitalism is inherently destructive, especially the way it developed in mass industrial societies. And always destructive when it requires military agression to keep it afloat. People hang onto the idea of capitalism as "good' because they think production and trade are good and everyone dreams of kicking their job and being their own boss. Many don't know the history of capitalism and the way industry developed by taking people's land so they had to seek a "job" in capitalist production or starve (and many did).
I have hope that when the real disasters hit in the coming years due to peak oil and the inevitable wars of end game capitalism, we might use that imagination you speak of to come up with something entirely new - which won't be like any form of Capitalism.
Well, maybe. But when people talk about the end of capitalism, I worry. 'Wealth as a stand-in for worth' has been around a long time, is there any fair way to replace it? So far, none has come up. Money was just supposed to make it easier to exchange value. Get rid of money, of wealth, and we are left with what? How do we assign value? How do we trade? So I just call for a leftward tilt to our democracy, the better to rein in the worst abuses of our capitalism. Primarily, this is opposed by Republicans because of the unfairness of progressive taxation. Somehow, to them, driving on paved roads is fair, stringing electricity out to the boondocks is fair, but paying for this stuff by taxing people with money, as opposed to people without money, is 'unfair'. My arguments are threefold:
1. I use the 'Dillinger Principle' when taxing the rich more: that's where the money is. That is, taxation isn't about fairness, its about running your government. Nothing is certain but death and taxes. Is Death fair? Why should taxes be fair? Settle for 'least-painful': you're never going to agree on, much less achieve, tax fairness. And the wealthy I know are not hurting, not in any particular way.
2. So far, under the low-tax ascendency of Reaganomics, we have avoided the unfairness of taxing the rich by taxing the unborn instead (debt). How fair is that?
3. If being rich under progressive taxation is unfair, people would seek to avoid it. Does this match the reality?
Many of the worst abuses of capitalism we see today are a result of the corporations having captured our government (and the public discussion via the MSM). We need to take our government back, and campaign finance reform is the way to do it, in my opinion. Then we need to progressive-tax the bejesus out of corporations and the wealthy, and reregulate them. Then, we'll get back to the managed capitalism we enjoyed for much of the 20th century. But first we have to sever the legalized bribery going on in Wash DC.
But, since everything seems to be going in the other direction, I'm thinking I may end up having to agree with you.
I agree it is a very complicated problem.
Perhaps trade and money was a good idea at one time because it gave local economies a chance to do new things (and created independence in some places). We have gone to such an unhealthy extreme I doubt change can come from within the global financial system we have today.
I think the most important thing we can do is use the imagination you mention and act to change people's perceptions which they hold without thinking at all.
I'm not a Marxist, but I think everyone in America should read Marx, and Anarchist writers too. Question authority; question everything, and perhaps someday dream a new dream which transforms society and our relationship to nature.
Sioux Rose
REVENGE GIRL: Great posts!
Tru dat.
"First do no harm" does not preclude your practical advice.
These madmen do no harm by simply kicking the can down the road - by doing nothing that might possibly offend anyone with access to a microphone.
The fact that there is another huge leak out there they will not acknowledge is just another worst-kept secret. They have decided to let the reservoir bleed out until there's nothing left to drip - that will take years.
Eventually they cap the riser - so what! The media will then have a workable cover story for a month or so, but then the oil gets into the gulf current, hits Florida and then starts its way up the east coast - by then, it won't matter whether they lied to us about the other leak(s).
There will be so many bad news stories - more ongoing hard news stories than 9/11, that there won't be time to re-examine ourselves.
These are my feelings at the moment.
I cannot even begin to imagine a scenario that would create the incentive for corporate America to be more inward-looking and introspective.
Can you?
Small scale independent attempts at less destructive societies were tried a few decades ago. They were called communes. Often as not those involved had few practical skills but a sense that there had to be a better way than the consumer theme park the US had become. The experiments were quickly marginalized and persecuted. Peace and Love and respect for Mother Earth were the hallmarks of most of them. It's no wonder they were so demonized.
Absolutely, philiphoko. They've been tried for centuries but made to appear ridiculous or subversive because they conflicted with the "self-evident" mainstream view of "progress". The time of the "alternate tradition" has come. We need to study it and come to terms with it...with respect.
philiphoko - you have just described my life.
Whatever practical skill we lacked, we quickly had to learn. The Whole Earth Catalog was the reference book of choice. We learned everything from water witching to planting gardens, raising small livestock (goats), making bread & cheese etc.
I was thrilled when a cash strapped young mother of 2 expressed an interest in making her own bread. I hauled out my old my old recipes & cookbooks, introduced her to whole grains, and taught her to make bread, without a machine. It was a perfect activity for a mother at home all day with 2 children under the age of 3 (hubby worked out of town). She eventually won some prizes for her bread & was able to sell some to supplement the family income. Several years later, when she had established a rather large garden, she became interested in raising a couple of goats. She was a bit concerned that all the library books on the subject were written in the 1960's. Hippies were before her time. She did sufficient research to learn that it was cheaper to feed and milk 2 goats than it was to drive to town to buy milk. She was able to pasteurize the goat milk in her microwave and make her own cheeses & creams. Next came her free range chickens. I then taught her how to sew modern style washable flannel diapers for her toddler. Time she had - money she didn't. Her children are now healthy adults. Her son has just returned from a tour of duty in Afghanistan.
"Peace and Love and respect for Mother Earth..." It still works.
As always if I had a Time Machine and could go back in time 1000 years and tell them how insane things would be in this land 1000 years later they would never believe me. They would think I was telling them some whopping Sci-Fi horror story that could never happen upon Creator's earth.
But horror stories do happen upon Creator's earth, and have been happening all through time & will continue to happen. Now you have your pay your bills and die. You have your Starbuck's where you drink coffee with fancy names. You think electing Republicans or Democrats is going to change something and those things won't change anything. You reach for all sorts of solutions that will never happen. Welcome to Caesar's paradise upon the earth. Hail Rome. Hail Caesar. Hail the Senate.
I wonder if Jesus knew some 2000 years ago when he said, Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, that while it may look like Caesar is building some really grand swell world that eventually all Caesar's world will do is become hell on earth?
It's only been around 115 years now since the last of the Tribes were rounded up so the Europeans could build their really grand swell world. A person of Native heritage said maybe they should call the Tony guy of BP, "Dances With Oil Spills."
Just another day closer to my journey through an insane world being completed.
Life is good. What an experience! It's always best to forgive.
Sioux Rose
SHADOW DANCER: Love that "He Who Dances With Oil spills."
Who teaches the dolphin to forgive? Do the wild birds attempting to fish for food for their newborns understand their fate, feel the impact on the babies that will go hungry while they find themselves stuck in the oil-like quick sands of this awful fate?
ShadowDancer- It's almost inconceivable that this land was here in it's amazing perfection for millions of years, and we've managed to turn it into a polluted, noxious theme park in a mere 200 years. A visiting species from elsewhere would look at the way we foul our own nest and butcher each other like psychotic army ants, and reel in wonder that nature could produce anything so profane. But you're right. It's amazing to be alive. It's just that everything else will be a little better once we're not.
Government clearly lacks the authority to make demands on BP, Wall Street, or any other big industry. What is coming unravelled here is the pretense that "our" government is more than a paper and chickenwire construction set up in front of the cameras to make us feel that we are self determining people rather than cows in a corporate dairy farm. The two reliable tests for substantiality in society's hall of mirrors are money and power. Who gets the money? Who takes orders from whom? When sham institutions like Congress (along with the Executive and Judicial and the columned, paper maché amusement park they've set up for tourist snapshots) are seen to have no reality, who's left standing? The Pentagon (power), the banks (money) and big industry. A sort of - what would you call it? - military industrial complex. Didn't somebody try to warn us about that a while back?
I see. Then, we'll have a soiree and invite the oil coal and electric power people over and ask them to sign a paper that says, 'On my honor, I will do no harm.'
And we can all sing kumbaya my lords to them because they are our lords, for we tiptoe around them as if we're in a temple.
I think the suggestion is abundantly worthless and more indicative of our paralysis of action in the face of being raped by corporations and the politicians who are their prostitutes. I believe it is time for action.
People need to consider more radical actions and engage in mass civil disobedience. We need to take actions against both corporations and especially against the class which corporations serve--the rich. Let's make it very uncomfortable to be rich in America, just like PETA did with the assholes who wear fur. The fact is all the rich are assholes and we need to raise their taxes or all this shit about nukes or no nukes means less than absolute zero.
The elephant in the room is class. Everybody is looking at the elephant shit and scratching their heads. Gosh, how could a corporation CEO be so thick? (Or President, fill in the blank, you know.) Because HE'S PROTECTED, because he doesn't have to think. When we go into the water and get charged for it, we point to him and say "He's with me." Because, gosh, I wouldn't want to get people upset, now would I, after all, do no harm, I always say. Doctors believe that, and gosh, doctors are all good and loving people who just want to help us get over our pain.
And you think after being so thick as to say just about anything from day to day BP is some kind of exception to the rule? Hardly. BP is an exemplar. BP is why our rule should be this,
FIRST, WE ABOLISH THE CORPORATIONS.
Because even before we can do no harm, we need to remove the harm that just keeps on harming, don't you think? Or do you?
Good post. Why are Americans so paralytic? Solve that and we're starting down the right road.
I think it's somewhat unreasonable to think that we could ever abolish all corporations. There are responsible corporation out there that actually do MORE good than harm. Like a company that makes solar panels, or a design firm that designs sustainable buildings. The real problem is greed, and the notion that we are somehow above nature and can control it.
Higgs, I don't know if it is paralytic or just plain lazy.
"Do no harm" by itself does not go far enough. We could add to it: "Do no harm, even when we deceive ourselves into pretending it's necessary."
"Do no harm" is not as strong and effective and complete as "Love one another," which is our salvation.
This article is excellent, and I hope it is widely read.
Yeah, I was going to say, if we're choosing a phrase to direct us, 'do unto others' might be a good one. Compassion is everybody's ideal, and nobody's practice.
Greetings from xglampf and rglorpf who watch the earth from afar
What's going on down there? Looks like you're getting a sort of bathtub ring around your continent. And what are those black things thrashing around in it... OMG! It's pelicans!
rglorpf wants to know why your species is so prone to suffocating in your own crap. You were cute in an ugly sort of way when you lived in the trees, but the minute you hit the ground you got really busy doing what you called "progress," which entailed eradicating foliage and killing everything around you with sharp sticks, and then finally stealing things from each other and cramming yourselves into the dirty, dangerous congeries where you seem to be most comfortable.
rglorpf's theory is that the real earth people are cars, and that you guys are just sort of bipedal umpa dumpas whose job is to keep them zooming around car colonies like Los Angeles. That explains the beaches. Car engines hate sand. For cars, the perfect beach would be an elongated lube pit, a black, slippery, stinky, frictionless thing, like the Niger Delta and now Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida.
Thanks for giving up your space program. Whatever virus you've got we sure don't need it up here.
x&r
Excellent comments.
Thank you, x&r for your observations.
Thank you, Mr. Koehler, for holding us all accountable in a peaceful, positive, and hopeful way. I really appreciate your article.
'We all collude in society’s “addiction” to oil, or what I would call its sense of entitlement: This is our planet. We’re the boss.'
I'm glad someone is acknowledging that sense of entitlement because that's exactly what motivates us on the far-left to give elites and elite apologists "no quarter".
The title of the article has long been part of the far-left policy prescription - do no harm, the hippocratic oath - it's just common sense, when you are ready to stop your plunder, theft and oppression.
Love the title of this article. He's right.
As I have come to say
Humans have come to think that electricty and driving a car/truck etc, is a human right. IT'S NOT. WE DON'T DESREVE IT IF IT MEANS DESTOYING OTHER SPECIES, OTHER PEOPLE, OURSELVES AND OUR PLANET.
WE NEED TO STOP.
WE NEED TO GO BACK.