Comments - Aspects and Perspectives on Localization and Relocalization - Transition Whatcom2024-03-28T10:53:12Zhttp://transitionwhatcom.ning.com/profiles/comment/feed?attachedTo=2723460%3ABlogPost%3A87298&xn_auth=noHi Garrett,
I realized it was…tag:transitionwhatcom.ning.com,2013-02-24:2723460:Comment:871542013-02-24T01:16:52.015ZDavid MacLeodhttp://transitionwhatcom.ning.com/profile/DavidMacLeod
<p>Hi Garrett,</p>
<p>I realized it was probably a mistake in some ways to link to that B&S article, because 1) I haven't even looked at the Corey DeVos article or the Ken Wilber video that the article is responding to, and 2) I didn't even remember much of the contents of the opening article.</p>
<p>What I was primarily wanting to point to is what emerged in the comment section, especially the 2nd half of the comment section - which fortunately you had enough fortitude to wade through, at…</p>
<p>Hi Garrett,</p>
<p>I realized it was probably a mistake in some ways to link to that B&S article, because 1) I haven't even looked at the Corey DeVos article or the Ken Wilber video that the article is responding to, and 2) I didn't even remember much of the contents of the opening article.</p>
<p>What I was primarily wanting to point to is what emerged in the comment section, especially the 2nd half of the comment section - which fortunately you had enough fortitude to wade through, at least to look at my comments - I appreciate that.</p>
<p>In regards to Wilber, I also am not a big fan of his politics, and I also think his ego occasionally gets in the way of his message. I am a big fan of his Integral theory, however. Even there I think some critiques are valid, and I have some critiques of my own that I won't get into here. For a proper understanding of that integral theory, I'd recommend a book, such as Wilber's "A Brief History of Everything," which is a good starting place - not too brief and not too complex.</p>
<p>One aspect of the Integral worldspace I like is that there is room for different expressions and perspectives, such as on the political front, which the linked article demonstrates.</p>
<p></p>
<p>Glad you had a chance to read the Ran Prieur piece. He's got a very interesting and somewhat unique voice. You might also appreciate the new entry just posted at B&S that is a follow on to the previously linked article, on the subject "<a href="http://beamsandstruts.com/essays/item/1158-network-logic-2-resources" target="_blank">Rhizomatic for the People: Notes on Networks and Decentralization</a>" by Trevor Malkinson.</p>
<p>My comment there fits in this thread as well, some of which I've already stated here.</p>
<p></p>
<p>"People tend to polarize with either/or dialectics, when I think what is often called for is both/and inclusiveness. <br/> <br/> In Tim Winton’s PatternDynamics (<a target="_blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.patterndynamics.com.au/patterns/#">http://www.patterndynamics.com.au/patterns/#</a> ), he has Structure as a first-order Pattern, with its second-order Patterns being Field, Holarchy, Complexity, Network, Hierarchy, Holon, and Boundary. These are all patterns that exist in the natural world. Some are more appropriate than others depending on the situation and context (and Wilber points out that we shouldn’t confuse all hierarchies with dominator hierarchies). <br/> <br/> For me, the overwhelming emphasis on hierarchy in the modern period is very understandable, largely due to available energy and the Maximum Power Principle that Howard Odum put forward (<a target="_blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_principle">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_principle</a> ). As strains on energy and ecology resources manifest, decentralized networks become much more appropriate and effective. This is much like the laws of succession in an ecosystem – at earlier stages, growth of pioneer species crowd out and dominate; at later stages a more balanced and harmonious complex of networked inter-relationships become the hallmarks of healthy eco-systems. Hierarchies and cooperative networks both exist at all stages of succession (itself a form of hierarchy), but the balances shift. <br/> <br/> To conflate a little bit the two terms decentralization and localization, Rob Hopkins likes to quote economist/ecologist David Fleming regarding his assessment of near future conditions: “Localisation stands, at best, at the limits of practical possibility, but it has the decisive argument in its favour that there will be no alternative.” (<a target="_blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://www.resilience.org/stories/2010-11-29/dr-david-fleming-1940-2010">http://www.resilience.org/stories/2010-11-29/dr-david-fleming-1940-...</a> )<br/> <br/> I agree that current and expected future conditions recommend a dramatic shift in the balance of these two Patterns, and so a big emphasis on networks and decentralization is what seems to be called for, and the balance Edgar Morin speaks of is wise: <em>'(a) everywhere to safeguard, propogate, cultivate, or develop unity; and (b) and everywhere to safeguard, propagate, cultivate or develop diversity.'</em> "</p>
<p></p> Garrett,
You might (or might…tag:transitionwhatcom.ning.com,2013-02-21:2723460:Comment:873452013-02-21T01:50:35.042ZDavid MacLeodhttp://transitionwhatcom.ning.com/profile/DavidMacLeod
<p>Garrett,</p>
<p>You might (or might not) find the link below interesting. Perhaps the discussion in the comments more so than the original 8 perspective article. Some of the comments are from me, which might give a greater sense of where I'm coming from in regards to economics and politics and relocalization.</p>
<p></p>
<p>But it's a very long thread, not for the faint of heart. Many of the participants are coming from various versions of an Integral (ala Ken Wilber)…</p>
<p>Garrett,</p>
<p>You might (or might not) find the link below interesting. Perhaps the discussion in the comments more so than the original 8 perspective article. Some of the comments are from me, which might give a greater sense of where I'm coming from in regards to economics and politics and relocalization.</p>
<p></p>
<p>But it's a very long thread, not for the faint of heart. Many of the participants are coming from various versions of an Integral (ala Ken Wilber) perspective.</p>
<p><a href="http://beamsandstruts.com/articles/item/1143-eightperspectivespolitics" target="_blank">beamsandstruts.com/articles/item/1143-eightperspectivespolitics</a></p> Garrett,
Thanks for the comme…tag:transitionwhatcom.ning.com,2013-02-21:2723460:Comment:871272013-02-21T01:22:47.611ZDavid MacLeodhttp://transitionwhatcom.ning.com/profile/DavidMacLeod
<p>Garrett,</p>
<p>Thanks for the comment, and I apologize for the slow response...it is a busy time.</p>
<p></p>
<p>As a reply to my Community Rights post, yours is among the most thoughtful and on point that I have seen, and so I appreciate the input.</p>
<p>I read the excerpt you suggested (but not the entire article) by Kropotkin, and I have to say I didn't really resonate that much. I resonated more with Zinn and most with JM Greer. I've never really studied Anarchy as a philosophy. A…</p>
<p>Garrett,</p>
<p>Thanks for the comment, and I apologize for the slow response...it is a busy time.</p>
<p></p>
<p>As a reply to my Community Rights post, yours is among the most thoughtful and on point that I have seen, and so I appreciate the input.</p>
<p>I read the excerpt you suggested (but not the entire article) by Kropotkin, and I have to say I didn't really resonate that much. I resonated more with Zinn and most with JM Greer. I've never really studied Anarchy as a philosophy. A friend turned me on to Hakim Bey, and I think he offers a breath of fresh air that brings a much needed balance to the kinds of overly-structured existence most of us live in. I'm thinking of his concepts about Immediatism and Temporary Autonimous Zones.</p>
<p></p>
<p>I want to talk a bit about hierarchy. I used to be in the mindset of seeing all hierarchies as bad, and that we really needed to bring in more cooperative and networked modes to replace them. I still feel we need much more cooperative structures (but still structures), AND that hierarchies are also natural, and have their place.</p>
<p>Koestler and Wilber talk about "nested holarchies." ""holons exist simultaneously as self-contained wholes in relation to their sub-ordinate parts, and dependent parts when considered from the inverse direction.</p>
<p>Koestler also says holons are autonomous, self-reliant units that possess a degree of independence and handle contingencies without asking higher authorities for instructions. These holons are also simultaneously subject to control from one or more of these higher authorities. The first property ensures that holons are stable forms that are able to withstand disturbances, while the latter property signifies that they are intermediate forms, providing a context for the proper functionality for the larger whole.</p>
<p>Finally, Koestler defines a holarchy as a hierarchy of self-regulating holons that function first as autonomous wholes in supra-ordination to their parts, secondly as dependent parts in sub-ordination to controls on higher levels, and thirdly in coordination with their local environment."</p>
<p>(<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holarchy" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holarchy</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holon_%28philosophy%29" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holon_%28philosophy%29</a>).</p>
<p>Permaculture points out the role of natural succession which is a form of hierarchy. Systems ecologist Howard Odum talked about energy hierarchies, and Holmgren builds on this in several ways. Winton's PatternDynamics sees a first order Pattern of "Structure" with multiple second order patterns, which are Field, Holarchy, Complexity, Network, Hierarchy, Holon, and Boundary.</p>
<p>For me it seemed an important realization to see that all of these patterns exist in nature, and that the important thing is to find the right balance. And so I would agree that culture today is very much out of balance, and we definitely need more networked and cooperative modes to come forth, and I like to put a lot of emphasis on that. But as Ken Wilber points out, instead of saying all hierarchies are bad, we need to instead distinguish between destructive dominator hierarchies and helpful and constructive nested holarchies.</p>
<p></p>
<p></p>