A few months back a discussion was debated in the larger Transition Movement on applying the term “sacred” to the ongoing attempt. I smiled and thought of Gregory Bateson ( or should I say Alfred Korzybski ) statement: The name is not the thing named. After allowing my soul to digest the dire predictions from Bill Mckibben’s eaarth I began to wonder if time would afford us the opportunity to adapt or would something more ominous dictate the new rules of day to day living. The latter being a stronger motivator for myself to “get on with it” yet I acknowledge it’s the former reality we go to sleep in and wake up to, for now.
As the tragic events unfold in Japan, it becomes hard for me to appreciate deliberations of selecting the next economic model. What do you think the going rate should be for a bottle of water for our brothers and sisters in their time of need? I’m sure they would pay it. If you factor in the initial capitol outlay, shipping cost, and labor, I expect a person could still garnish a handsome profit on their investment.
As for partnering with local governments/corporations, would you want to bet your life on the factual honesty being distributed with regards to food safety or evacuation distances?
Perhaps our survival relies less on what we bring with us from a world we claim to be distancing ourselves from, and more on what we become willing to let go of i.e. racism, sexism, ageism, and all the benefits realized from manifest destiny ( both past and present versions ). This list could certainly be expanded upon and still may not be the silver bullet in our time of need, but it might move us closer to an appropriate use of the term “sacred” to the ongoing attempt of Transition.