Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [fukuoka_farming] why fukuoka

Expand Messages
  • GLORIA BAIKAUSKAS
    I think the scientists don t get it because it seems to be in man s nature to try to improve on nature. I guess man just doesn t get it that Nature did it
    Message 1 of 3 , Feb 12 11:04 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      I think the scientists don't get it because it seems to be in man's nature to try to improve on nature. I guess man just doesn't get it that Nature did it just fine before man came along.......and somehow survives despite man's best attempts at meddling.

      Gloria
      Texas


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Adam Henne
      ... I came into the whole subject from what I imagine is probably a different place than most. I was studying radical environmental politics, such as Earth
      Message 2 of 3 , Feb 12 2:27 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        --- souscayrous <souscayrous@...> wrote:
        > Organic agriculture is not new, there is currently a
        > proliferation of
        > techniques that go by the label 'organic'. Yet, it
        > is Fukuoka that
        > holds my attention. Why?
        >
        > What does this far from simple Japenese farmer say
        > that is not said
        > by others?
        >
        > I'd love to know what has attracted others to
        > Fukuoka!

        I came into the whole subject from what I imagine is
        probably a different place than most. I was studying
        radical environmental politics, such as Earth First!
        and the Earth Liberation Front.

        Many of these groups rely on anarchist philosophy and
        anthropology in forming their theories. A common
        concept among them is that hunter-gatherer peoples are
        a social ideal -- no destruction of the environment,
        no oppression of each other. That began to change
        when societies began to develop agriculture. With a
        surplus of food and goods, a ruling class developed,
        leading to division of labor, oppression of the
        workers, and everything else we know as civilization.
        At the same time, human cultures began to experience a
        psychological split from the natural world. Rather
        than the earth being both home and relations,
        urbanized agriculturists began to see it as an
        exploitable resource, and the long downhill spiral we
        all know began.

        In theory this all works for me, but in practice most
        people that I know of in agriculture are in touch with
        the earth and hardly oppressive of other people. I'm
        also annoyed by some of the anarchists who suggest
        that we all must become hunter-gatherers in order to
        stop the destruction of the earth. It made more sense
        to me that there must be some _kind_ of agriculture, a
        different way of doing it that didn't involve creating
        the split between self and earth, turning a relation
        into a resource. I discovered permaculture first, and
        then the works of Fukuoka. His principles of
        non-doing, of the most minimal intervention into the
        natural process of growth and succession, strike me as
        a truly earth-integrated agriculture.

        If anyone is interested in the subject of
        anarcho-primitivism, or the critique of agriculture,
        drop me a line. I could recommend some other reading
        material, and I'd be curious to hear some opinions. I
        suspect most of the anarcho-primitivists have not been
        near a farm, so the opinions of real farmers on the
        subject would be interesting. Thanks,
        adam

        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
        http://greetings.yahoo.com
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.