Plan B: What is Our Plan if Things Go Pear-shaped Rapidly?

Nitpicking. My whole point is that such underestimation of the effect of language risks having a good cause subverted or piggybacked on for ugly purpose, disallowing access to changing the root of the matter. English-speaking peoples are particularly prone to this (see http://www.greenparty.ca/en/node/4576#comment-5041). But you make exactly my point, in spades, by mentioning the war on this, the war on that. All three wars you cite are fake, and gotten away with in large part because of the corruption of discourse.

You can't apply the words, "great achievements", except to those kinds of military-related things? But you do want to "steer clear of war analogies". So we agree somewhat, even as Brian and I would likely like to see many of the same things happen. That leaves difference of language which betrays different conceptuality. The things we'd both like to see then might only have too surface a similarity to get at the green root of a problem. I cannot imagine an "aggressive" "retooling" as greenly appropriate. More like an educative de-tooling or scale-down. Here's a comment of mine from last month on another gpc forum (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gpc-members/message/...), "Resilient Communities", using a Heinberg piece as starting point:

from http://globalpublicmedia.com/museletter_192_resili... ,
"Resilient Communities: A Guide to Disaster Management":
.....................
At some point during the lively conversation, Faith Morgan, the Director of the film The Power of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil, reminded us how, early in Cuba's crisis period, organic farming advocates had provided crucial advice that helped quickly transform the nation's food system; without the input of these previously marginalized alternatives advocates, the nation probably would not have survived. I was certainly familiar with the story: I have recounted it in print and in lectures on many occasions. Nevertheless, as Faith spoke, a (compact-fluorescent) light bulb flickered somewhere in my murky skull. Perhaps something similar could happen in other nations or communities�and not just with regard to food, but all the other aspects of modern existence. There are plenty of marginalized "alternatives" advocates who for decades have been researching and promoting low-energy ways of doing things that will make perfect sense in a post-petroleum environment. What if these folks could be mobilized and coordinated, their knowledge made readily available to local officials and the public at large, in preparation for the imminent period when existing systems start to fail in ever more obvious ways?

The notion solidified as I read Naomi Klein's recent book, The Shock Doctrine, which details how savvy politicians and business leaders have used natural disasters, wars, and economic upheavals as propitious moments for the introduction of neo-liberal economic policies�privatization, free trade, slashed social spending�that are themselves disastrous (though immensely profitable for the few), and that would normally be rejected. In the current instance, as we contemplate a global mega-disaster-in-the-making, it is not difficult to envision neo-liberal or neo-conservative power-holders licking their collective chops over the prospect of doing away with all labor and environmental regulations as citizens everywhere clamor for strong leaders who can implement bold policies to restore relative normalcy.
.....................

This is quite in line with what I've been writing about Cons.-types grasping the un-"sustainability" of things, but with policy generally in exactly the wrong direction. The most notable Canadian precedent was with Mike Harris' PCs in Ontario. It does not mean that they don't get some things "accidentally" right from a green point of view, as can happen when an intransigent order gets busted up. So, for instance, I think some Cons. are right to look to the absence of some traditionalism as needing rectification, they're more admissive of "religion in the public square". But what's made of that is often woeful. (I've heard a few times Preston Manning's radio series, This I Believe, of American model, and it's not been offensive, but I just can't shake a background feeling of creepiness at hearing his voice behind it all.) Regarding their demeaning of centralist authorities that stand in the way of corporatist freedoms, in some ways of course they are right, entrenched bureaucracies or unions with modernist bases need to be wedged open. But their "postmodern" version is the hapless disjointed one, comparable to "postmodern" aesthetic kitsch. Earthier tones evocative of more elemental beauty, even if at times a terrifying reality is thereby met, even if apparently chaotic at times, that's the kind of green aesthetic that is exactly the opposite of Cons.', which engenders truly pointless man-made terror. Their corporateering "overgrown modern offspring of a premodern age" (as I put it at http://www.greenparty.ca/en/node/4264#comment-4183 ) in playing postmodern actually exacerbates the overarching sins of the Western world that extend well back into antiquity.

Hope you don't mind my using Heinberg to jump off & take abstract flight, as he as usual is competently addressing more clearly closer-to-the-ground concerns. I'm as usual trying to fill a philosophical niche that I really think needs filling to deepen any Green political effect. No candidate should even want to spout this kind of material directly for Canadian audience (we're not in France, for instance). But that there is deep & abiding philosophic buttress available I hope serves to inspire, embolden, if in necessarily quieter Canadian ways.

On the ground, I've several times mentioned among Greens, with no takers, that Greens should be very well positioned to involve themselves, with background political motivation, in developing such nucleus "reslience" communities as Heinberg describes. The "background political motivation" would be of greater import in Canada than Heinberg's U.S., given the more laudable American do-it-yourself approach than our tendency to look to government authority. But our reliance on govt. authority is at its best re law & order & fairness, which suggests possible centralized backing for localized solutions, in educative & investment ways, e.g. re currency as I've suggested repeatedly. In the '30s breakdown in the U.S., alternative currencies sprung up with local successes, but were suppressed by central authority (Heinberg mentions FDR re the several-year delay in creatively addressing that breakdown; but that was in an overly centralized way that "right-wingers" are "right for the wrong reasons" to oppose).

Heinberg also writes about curtailment of "growth", and we know & agree with most of what he means; but I stand by my warning to steer away from using that term politically or philosophically with any derision. Erich has expressed himself well in this regard (I think Heinberg does elsewhere, too, but maybe not using 'growth'), about different kinds of "growth".

Recently mentioned in the forum was Homer-Dixon's "slack", related to Heinberg's "resilience" & "redundancy", which he particularly takes up towards the end of his "museletter".

This "for decades" "previously marginalized alternatives advocate" & "organic farming advocate" believes that such local "resilience" groupings that Heinberg muses about would be very useful for Green political purpose. Libs. now flounder for lack of more specific support bases based in certain extra-political activities or groupings (consider their relative numbers recently discussed in this forum), like politicized nationalists for BQ, some religionists & corporateers for Cons., unions &c for NDP. The recent strongly worded discussion on the GPC blogsite regarding organizational abilities can be seen to be a function of the same difficulty Libs. have. And the more one plays purer politics as it has unfortunately come to be played in Canada, playing with polls & $ & just so much rah-rah-rah-ing, the more does GPC sometimes seem to approach the general emptiness of those floundering Libs. With even smallish groupings closer knit for extra-political purposes largely behind a party, political organization becomes that much easier & more effective. "Resilience" community networks are an example, especially as they of necessity comprehensively branch out to many other local organizations, of how Greens could form that "extra-political" base of support.

I would like to finally add that, as organic-local food advocacy was at the heart both of the Cuban model & the idea itself for Heinberg, I believe it to be at the absolute root of green advocacy, thus my "for decades" involvement therewith.

Daryl Vernon
York Centre

P.S. Just thought I'd share what I just had to interrupt composition of this post for: the computer screen is by a 2nd floor window, at which various bird species seem to take near-daily turns notifying me of the emptiness of their feeder, which we offer as compensation for making use of their otherwise partly destroyed urban habitat. "Partly", because on our small rented midtown property, we've permitted to flourish dozens of trees of over a dozen species, which has served to attract to our oasis of sorts over a dozen regular avian species. Today's informant was but a sparrow, who knew to land on the sill to berate my preoccupation with "airy" (!) matters when their rather "on-the-ground" (sort of) concerns are left unmet. There must be thousands of surrounding home properties in our district completely unlike the semi-wildness of our own before a wild ravine area is reached, in our very, very un-resilient community, likely to continue indefinitely, for all our per capita riches and walls of self-protection, sucking sustenance in too large part from distant enough violent & exploitive measures, all the while depriving birds, native & not, of their own due right where we live.

Your "Plan B" ideas are necessary. But in order to accomplish any of this we need to build infrastructure. And that is why we need to build strong EDAs across the country. The Green Party EDAs are the strongest grassroots environmental network in the country. If it becomes obvious to all and sundry that our parliamentry system has become hopelessly incapable of dealing with the environmental crisis it will be necessary to create "centres of citizen mobilization" across the country. That would be the role of the Green EDAs. Where they are strong, they already consist of a local "Who's Who" of environmentalists with the requist skills and knowledge to provide serious local leadership.

In order to do this, however, we have to do a much better job of organizing those local EDAs. Unfortunately, far too many Green members simply cannot see why we need strong EDAs and continue to support policies that keep us from organizing them across the country. :-(

"There is always an easy solution to every human problem--neat, plausible, and wrong." H.L. Mencken