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

Re: Copyleft and Fukuoka's books

Expand Messages
  • vruiz.jurado
    ... yes, but also the spending power of people in the world varies widely ;) ... More and more groups are using this model:
    Message 1 of 25 , Nov 8, 2008
      --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "laurie \(Mother Mastiff\)"
      <mother@...> wrote:
      >
      > I admire Radiohead for their grand experiment. The fact that it was a
      > long awaited album helped them, also the fact that it was better than
      > some of their other offerings. I noticed that the reports of how much
      > people paid and how many people paid varied widely.

      yes, but also the spending power of people in the world varies widely ;)

      > They offered material THEY owned, and let the people choose. Lovely
      > if you can afford such a gesture.

      More and more groups are using this model:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamendo
      is a good form to skip intermediaries and to share their work widely.

      > Most people won't pay any more than they must, to acquire anything
      > they want or need.
      >
      > Did Fukuoka have family or heirs? He died very recently. Perhaps his
      > estate is still being sorted out.
      >
      > It would make sense to identify and approach whoever inherited the
      > rights to his books, and ask THEM about offering the books in
      > electronic form, on the basis you admire. If they admired his values
      > and share them, who knows, they might agree.
      >
      > If he had no heirs and left the rights to the publisher, I suspect you
      > would have a more difficult time persuading them of the value of
      > allowing buyers to choose the price.

      Thanks for the suggestions. This is a topic we have to think about it
      when publishing our works in other areas (different than music) like
      NF, Permaculture or ecology in general.

      Some samples: Graham Bumet has a book (the Permaculture a begginer's
      guide) with this kind of license:
      http://www.spiralseed.co.uk/
      Plants for a future website:
      http://www.pfaf.org/index.php
      and some publications like the Spanish "El Ecologista":
      http://www.ecologistasenaccion.org/spip.php?rubrique124
      also.

      We must spread widely our ideas and principles to fight against bad
      environmental practices.

      Off course you/they can publish your/their NF works with privative
      copyrights, but for me this means less people doing seed bombing :) a
      slower process and we don't have too much time.

      BR,


      Vicente
    • Jean Villafuerte
      Hooolooo everyone and greetings from Ormoc City, Philippines! I ve been reading threads on Fukuoka Farming and the debate on acquiring, distributing and
      Message 2 of 25 , Nov 8, 2008
        Hooolooo everyone and greetings from Ormoc City, Philippines!

        I've been reading threads on Fukuoka Farming and the debate on acquiring, distributing and reading the Fukuoka book on natural farming. Although I haven't read the book but the summary of his work in the fukuoka farming web site is enough for us to know what the fukuoka farming method is all about.

        I believe Fukuoka was not alone in doing natural farming during his lifetime. Only the others did not write down their experiences. Fukuoka did and his supporters made it famous the world over.

        However, anybody passionate on natural farming must not stop on the fukuoka method. While doing farming yourself, and researching in agriculture websites, you'll know what to do. A lot of our "giving" scientists publish their findings in their own websites. We get ideas from them too.

        In our small "Ecology Farm" we get ideas from here and there and use our common sense in the application of such ideas. Since this farm is supposed to be a showcase for peasant filipino families, we try our very best to show them how to raise food for their tables and raise extra to sell for cash.

        Actually, we started with green manuring, composting, then manufacturing the famous fermented juices. But, to understand farming is to understand ecology and Genesis where everything was created for a purpose. Pests are there to be the food for other insects, so why kill them when they have their own predators by nature?

        There are websites that publish the kind of plants that are hosts to insects that eat other insects that have become pests to our favorite plants.
        jean
        www.ammado.com/pfi
        www.ormocwomen.blogspot.com
        www.evyouth.blogspot.com
        www.tcfoc.blogspot.com
        www.pfi.blogspot.com
        www.geocities.com/pfft_2000

        visit my blogs and leave your comments.





        ________________________________
        From: Dieter Brand <diebrand@...>
        To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Saturday, November 8, 2008 11:01:24 PM
        Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books

        Vincente,

        Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka�s books from Steve Solomon�s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org? Steve operates his site like a virtual lending library, which means you get a personalized PDF file with your name on the understanding that you won�t redistribute it for commercial gain. I don�t know if this is completely in accord with international copyright law, but so far there seem to be no objections. I think this is a good way of making out of print books available to the public.

        Personally, I�m mainly interested in Natural Farming and I had hoped that this list would serve as a place to share and discuss our experience, but perhaps that hope was in vain.

        To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell the truth as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a person, who never made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell Fukuoka�s books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which has often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to point out that to use another person�s labor to make a commercial profit by selling his work is neither legal nor moral.

        To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the other person is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity to propagate our own ideology.

        We also need to maintain a minimum level of mutual respect and civility, which, in my opinion, includes introducing yourself to a group you join and letting the group know who you are, what you do and what interest you have in Natural Farming. And if we do want to tell others about our ideas, I think it is preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with the arguments of others by the PC�s copy and paste commands or by Internet links.

        If you had been interested in a serious discussion (as you claim), you could have commented on my reply to Jeff, in which I explained the function and the benefits to society of intellectual property rights. Since you did not, I have to assume that you are primarily interested in spreading an ideology and not in discussions. Hence, there is no point in repeating my arguments.

        Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are after), �real socialism�, the sole experiment of doing away with private property known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions after tens of millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme poverty and humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high degree of penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural resources and destroying the environment in a big way.

        If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural Farming you know that a farmer needs to �own� his land; it needs to be his property. To rebuild soil that has been depleted by conventional farming can easily take 10 or 20 years of backbreaking labor. No farmer is going to do that without a degree of assurance that he or she will be able to continue working on the land for the foreseeable future. The nature romantics from the city who make a day excursion to the country, on the other hand, take it all for granted, mistake the cultured land created by generations of farmers for nature pure, like to trample down the wheat and start wild fires by throwing away cigarette buts or by crowning their Sunday afternoon excursion with a barbecue in the middle of a forest. Then it�s back to the city and nobody cares about the damage that may have been done. Why should they? It is not their own property.

        Intellectual property is no different from other forms of property. At least in socialism there is the idea of taking away from those who have much to give to those who have little. By abolishing intellectual property, on the other hand, we take away from those who have little, from all those creators who barely make a living by scrubbing other people�s floors.

        Lastly, already the Bible mentioned something about �giving� being nobler than �taking�. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made it very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to unknown levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?

        Dieter Brand
        Portugal





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


        ------------------------------------

        Yahoo! Groups Links






        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • laurie (Mother Mastiff)
        Dieter, What an eloquent post! My hat is off to you. You put the issue in a greater framework. I hope everyone got as much out of it as I did! Thank you so
        Message 3 of 25 , Nov 9, 2008
          Dieter,

          What an eloquent post! My hat is off to you. You put the issue in a
          greater framework. I hope everyone got as much out of it as I did!
          Thank you so much.

          P.S., To the person who cited them as heroes of free intellectual
          material, did you not read the entire article?

          The Radiohead album was only "choose your price" for two months, then
          it was marketed as a higher-than-average priced luxury set, and now at
          a year old, it appears to be offered as an ordinary CD at the same
          pricing as any other CD.

          So the give-away was very short-lived and didn't preclude a hefty
          profit for the group. Their give-away was more a clever marketing
          gimmick than a true freebie.

          If it were a true freebie, the album would ALWAYS be available at any
          price the buyer wanted.

          laurie (Mother Mastiff)
          Southeastern USA (NC and FL)



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • ai3131
          I have both copies on my flash drive, for my own personal use. Since these books are hard to find, having them available on the library at soilandhealth.org is
          Message 4 of 25 , Nov 9, 2008
            I have both copies on my flash drive, for my own personal use. Since
            these books are hard to find, having them available on the library at
            soilandhealth.org is a great service to the public.

            Not only that, but why even raise the copyright issue in the first
            place? Of course I do believe in respecting copyright laws, but I do
            not recall Fukuoka-sensei ever giving anyone exclusive rights over his
            method to anyone. (He never said it was "his" method.) His vision was
            that EVERYONE would practice natural farming. And since natural farming
            is an ancient method that has been practiced throughout the ages and
            the world in one way or another, stamping a copyright on it is not
            feasible.

            - Arian I.


            --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, Anders Skarlind
            <Anders.Skalman@...> wrote:
            >
            > Two of Fukuoka's books, One Straw Revolution and The Natural Way of
            > Farming can be downloaded from The Soil and Health Library, on the
            > conditions that apply to this library. I e you will get, as a loan, a
            > personalised copy. You will have to give your full name and email
            > address. I recommend this service fully. Click on Agriculture
            > Library, then on the book you want to loan, and follow instructions.
            >
            > http://www.soilandhealth.org/
            >
          • vruiz.jurado
            ... Heroes? I was trying to explain the use of Free as in Freedom vs Free as in No Cost. Two more links. The staff of the oldest digital library:
            Message 5 of 25 , Nov 9, 2008
              --- In fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com, "laurie \(Mother Mastiff\)"
              <mother@...> wrote:
              > P.S., To the person who cited them as heroes of free intellectual
              > material, did you not read the entire article?

              Heroes? I was trying to explain the use of Free as in Freedom vs Free
              as in No Cost.

              Two more links. The staff of the oldest digital library:
              http://www.gutenberg.org/
              doing their explanation:
              http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Gutenberg:No_Cost_or_Freedom%3F

              Dieter, sorry, I wasn't defending soviets, freely taking or the
              abolishing of property. Also I'm not searching for personalized copies
              of books, but thanks for the link (that I read before in this thread).

              And Jean, I agree with you when you talk about common sense use and to
              understand nature.

              BR,

              Vicente
            • Dieter Brand
              Jean,   You are certainly right in that there are innumerable unsung heroes in the history of agriculture.   Would you be prepared to share the recipe for
              Message 6 of 25 , Nov 10, 2008
                Jean,

                You are certainly right in that there are innumerable unsung heroes in the history of agriculture.

                Would you be prepared to share the recipe for your fermented juices and how to apply them?

                Here in Portugal, tilling and manure is the traditional way of farming, but most farmers use synthetic fertilizers nowadays.

                In the beginning, I used some manure from a neighbouring cattle farmer, now I only use what grows on-site; mostly mulching and cover cropping and a bit of composting, but mostly in-place-composting.� Anyways, this is just on a small scale (the area I can irrigate during the summer).� To do farming on a larger scale, I would have to till, no-till is difficult in an arid region.� But lack of rain is not a problem you are likely to have in the Philippines.


                Dieter Brand
                Portugal



                --- On Sun, 11/9/08, Jean Villafuerte <dayjean455@...> wrote:

                From: Jean Villafuerte <dayjean455@...>
                Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                Date: Sunday, November 9, 2008, 3:45 AM

                Hooolooo everyone and greetings from Ormoc City, Philippines!

                I've been reading threads on Fukuoka Farming and the debate on acquiring,
                distributing and reading the Fukuoka book on natural farming. Although I
                haven't read the book but the summary of his work in the fukuoka farming web
                site is enough for us to know what the fukuoka farming method is all about.

                I believe Fukuoka was not alone in doing natural farming during his lifetime.
                Only the others did not write down their experiences. Fukuoka did and his
                supporters made it famous the world over.

                However, anybody passionate on natural farming must not stop on the fukuoka
                method. While doing farming yourself, and researching in agriculture websites,
                you'll know what to do. A lot of our "giving" scientists publish
                their findings in their own websites. We get ideas from them too.

                In our small "Ecology Farm" we get ideas from here and there and use
                our common sense in the application of such ideas. Since this farm is supposed
                to be a showcase for peasant filipino families, we try our very best to show
                them how to raise food for their tables and raise extra to sell for cash.

                Actually, we started with green manuring, composting, then manufacturing the
                famous fermented juices. But, to understand farming is to understand ecology
                and Genesis where everything was created for a purpose. Pests are there to be
                the food for other insects, so why kill them when they have their own predators
                by nature?

                There are websites that publish the kind of plants that are hosts to insects
                that eat other insects that have become pests to our favorite plants.
                jean
                www.ammado.com/pfi
                www.ormocwomen.blogspot.com
                www.evyouth.blogspot.com
                www.tcfoc.blogspot.com
                www.pfi.blogspot.com
                www.geocities.com/pfft_2000

                visit my blogs and leave your comments.





                ________________________________
                From: Dieter Brand <diebrand@...>
                To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Saturday, November 8, 2008 11:01:24 PM
                Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books

                Vincente,

                Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka�s books from Steve
                Solomon�s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org? Steve operates his
                site like a virtual lending library, which means you get a personalized PDF file
                with your name on the understanding that you won�t redistribute it for
                commercial gain. I don�t know if this is completely in accord with
                international copyright law, but so far there seem to be no objections. I think
                this is a good way of making out of print books available to the public.

                Personally, I�m mainly interested in Natural Farming and I had hoped that
                this list would serve as a place to share and discuss our experience, but
                perhaps that hope was in vain.

                To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell the truth
                as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a person, who never
                made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell Fukuoka�s
                books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which has
                often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to point out
                that to use another person�s labor to make a commercial profit by selling his
                work is neither legal nor moral.

                To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the other person
                is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity to propagate
                our own ideology.

                We also need to maintain a minimum level of mutual respect and civility, which,
                in my opinion, includes introducing yourself to a group you join and letting the
                group know who you are, what you do and what interest you have in Natural
                Farming. And if we do want to tell others about our ideas, I think it is
                preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with the arguments of others
                by the PC�s copy and paste commands or by Internet links.

                If you had been interested in a serious discussion (as you claim), you could
                have commented on my reply to Jeff, in which I explained the function and the
                benefits to society of intellectual property rights. Since you did not, I have
                to assume that you are primarily interested in spreading an ideology and not in
                discussions. Hence, there is no point in repeating my arguments.

                Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are after),
                �real socialism�, the sole experiment of doing away with private property
                known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions after tens of
                millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme poverty and
                humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high degree of
                penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural resources and
                destroying the environment in a big way.

                If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural Farming
                you know that a farmer needs to �own� his land; it needs to be his property.
                To rebuild soil that has been depleted by conventional farming can easily take
                10 or 20 years of backbreaking labor. No farmer is going to do that without a
                degree of assurance that he or she will be able to continue working on the land
                for the foreseeable future. The nature romantics from the city who make a day
                excursion to the country, on the other hand, take it all for granted, mistake
                the cultured land created by generations of farmers for nature pure, like to
                trample down the wheat and start wild fires by throwing away cigarette buts or
                by crowning their Sunday afternoon excursion with a barbecue in the middle of a
                forest. Then it�s back to the city and nobody cares about the damage that may
                have been done. Why should they? It is not their own property.

                Intellectual property is no different from other forms of property. At least
                in socialism there is the idea of taking away from those who have much to give
                to those who have little. By abolishing intellectual property, on the other
                hand, we take away from those who have little, from all those creators who
                barely make a living by scrubbing other people�s floors.

                Lastly, already the Bible mentioned something about �giving� being nobler
                than �taking�. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made
                it very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by
                others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to unknown
                levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?

                Dieter Brand
                Portugal





                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                ------------------------------------

                Yahoo! Groups Links






                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                ------------------------------------

                Yahoo! Groups Links








                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Dieter Brand
                Laurie,   Thanks for your support.   Regarding the article you mentioned, I didn t read it at all, I only replied to Vincente s post.  I live in a remote
                Message 7 of 25 , Nov 10, 2008
                  Laurie,

                  Thanks for your support.

                  Regarding the article you mentioned, I didn't read it at all, I only replied to Vincente's post.� I live in a remote region with much nature but without infrastructure and a very bad Internet connection, which doesn't allow me to follow-up most Internet links.� Also, with advancing age, eyesight and time become less, which makes us concentrate on what is important in life.

                  Regarding intellectual property rights, many people seem to be under the mistaken impression that it is to restrict information; in fact, the opposite is the case.� Put in a nutshell, a patent, for example, is a contract between an inventor and society, which guaranties the inventor the right to commercially use his invention for 20 years.� In exchange, the inventor has to make public his invention so that others can use it, not commercially, but to improve on the invention, for example.� Without such a contract, the inventor would be forced to hide the invention as long as possible to prevent the fruit of his labor being stolen by others.� In most countries, an invention is made public�18 months after the patent application and usually long before a patent is even granted.� Copyright works a little different, but the purpose is the same.

                  That, of course, doesn�t mean that there isn�t any abuse of the system, but abuse would be still worse without any rules.

                  Dieter Brand
                  Portugal



                  --- On Sun, 11/9/08, laurie (Mother Mastiff) <mother@...> wrote:

                  From: laurie (Mother Mastiff) <mother@...>
                  Subject: [fukuoka_farming] Re: Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                  To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                  Date: Sunday, November 9, 2008, 3:35 PM






                  Dieter,

                  What an eloquent post! My hat is off to you. You put the issue in a
                  greater framework. I hope everyone got as much out of it as I did!
                  Thank you so much.

                  P.S., To the person who cited them as heroes of free intellectual
                  material, did you not read the entire article?

                  The Radiohead album was only "choose your price" for two months, then
                  it was marketed as a higher-than- average priced luxury set, and now at
                  a year old, it appears to be offered as an ordinary CD at the same
                  pricing as any other CD.

                  So the give-away was very short-lived and didn't preclude a hefty
                  profit for the group. Their give-away was more a clever marketing
                  gimmick than a true freebie.

                  If it were a true freebie, the album would ALWAYS be available at any
                  price the buyer wanted.

                  laurie (Mother Mastiff)
                  Southeastern USA (NC and FL)


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


















                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Jean Villafuerte
                  Willingly, Dieter. I will soon publish them on my blog, the ormocwomen blog. But the original recipe is not ours, we got them from TACDRUP, I forgot the full
                  Message 8 of 25 , Nov 10, 2008
                    Willingly, Dieter. I will soon publish them on my blog, the ormocwomen blog. But the original recipe is not ours, we got them from TACDRUP, I forgot the full name but of course I will mention them in my blog. Sorry, I can't have it here now. I'm in a hurry.

                    jean
                    www.ammado.com/pfi
                    www.ormocwomen.blogspot.com
                    www.evyouth.blogspot.com
                    www.tcfoc.blogspot.com
                    www.pfi.blogspot.com
                    www.geocities.com/pfft_2000

                    visit my blogs and leave your comments.





                    ________________________________
                    From: Dieter Brand <diebrand@...>
                    To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 5:09:54 PM
                    Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books

                    Jean,

                    You are certainly right in that there are innumerable unsung heroes in the history of agriculture.

                    Would you be prepared to share the recipe for your fermented juices and how to apply them?

                    Here in Portugal, tilling and manure is the traditional way of farming, but most farmers use synthetic fertilizers nowadays.

                    In the beginning, I used some manure from a neighbouring cattle farmer, now I only use what grows on-site; mostly mulching and cover cropping and a bit of composting, but mostly in-place-composting. Anyways, this is just on a small scale (the area I can irrigate during the summer). To do farming on a larger scale, I would have to till, no-till is difficult in an arid region. But lack of rain is not a problem you are likely to have in the Philippines.


                    Dieter Brand
                    Portugal



                    --- On Sun, 11/9/08, Jean Villafuerte <dayjean455@...> wrote:

                    From: Jean Villafuerte <dayjean455@...>
                    Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                    To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                    Date: Sunday, November 9, 2008, 3:45 AM

                    Hooolooo everyone and greetings from Ormoc City, Philippines!

                    I've been reading threads on Fukuoka Farming and the debate on acquiring,
                    distributing and reading the Fukuoka book on natural farming. Although I
                    haven't read the book but the summary of his work in the fukuoka farming web
                    site is enough for us to know what the fukuoka farming method is all about.

                    I believe Fukuoka was not alone in doing natural farming during his lifetime.
                    Only the others did not write down their experiences. Fukuoka did and his
                    supporters made it famous the world over.

                    However, anybody passionate on natural farming must not stop on the fukuoka
                    method. While doing farming yourself, and researching in agriculture websites,
                    you'll know what to do. A lot of our "giving" scientists publish
                    their findings in their own websites. We get ideas from them too.

                    In our small "Ecology Farm" we get ideas from here and there and use
                    our common sense in the application of such ideas. Since this farm is supposed
                    to be a showcase for peasant filipino families, we try our very best to show
                    them how to raise food for their tables and raise extra to sell for cash.

                    Actually, we started with green manuring, composting, then manufacturing the
                    famous fermented juices. But, to understand farming is to understand ecology
                    and Genesis where everything was created for a purpose. Pests are there to be
                    the food for other insects, so why kill them when they have their own predators
                    by nature?

                    There are websites that publish the kind of plants that are hosts to insects
                    that eat other insects that have become pests to our favorite plants.
                    jean
                    www.ammado.com/pfi
                    www.ormocwomen.blogspot.com
                    www.evyouth.blogspot.com
                    www.tcfoc.blogspot.com
                    www.pfi.blogspot.com
                    www.geocities.com/pfft_2000

                    visit my blogs and leave your comments.





                    ________________________________
                    From: Dieter Brand <diebrand@...>
                    To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Saturday, November 8, 2008 11:01:24 PM
                    Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books

                    Vincente,

                    Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka�s books from Steve
                    Solomon�s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org? Steve operates his
                    site like a virtual lending library, which means you get a personalized PDF file
                    with your name on the understanding that you won�t redistribute it for
                    commercial gain. I don�t know if this is completely in accord with
                    international copyright law, but so far there seem to be no objections. I think
                    this is a good way of making out of print books available to the public.

                    Personally, I�m mainly interested in Natural Farming and I had hoped that
                    this list would serve as a place to share and discuss our experience, but
                    perhaps that hope was in vain.

                    To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell the truth
                    as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a person, who never
                    made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell Fukuoka�s
                    books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which has
                    often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to point out
                    that to use another person�s labor to make a commercial profit by selling his
                    work is neither legal nor moral.

                    To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the other person
                    is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity to propagate
                    our own ideology.

                    We also need to maintain a minimum level of mutual respect and civility, which,
                    in my opinion, includes introducing yourself to a group you join and letting the
                    group know who you are, what you do and what interest you have in Natural
                    Farming. And if we do want to tell others about our ideas, I think it is
                    preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with the arguments of others
                    by the PC�s copy and paste commands or by Internet links.

                    If you had been interested in a serious discussion (as you claim), you could
                    have commented on my reply to Jeff, in which I explained the function and the
                    benefits to society of intellectual property rights. Since you did not, I have
                    to assume that you are primarily interested in spreading an ideology and not in
                    discussions. Hence, there is no point in repeating my arguments.

                    Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are after),
                    �real socialism�, the sole experiment of doing away with private property
                    known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions after tens of
                    millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme poverty and
                    humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high degree of
                    penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural resources and
                    destroying the environment in a big way.

                    If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural Farming
                    you know that a farmer needs to �own� his land; it needs to be his property.
                    To rebuild soil that has been depleted by conventional farming can easily take
                    10 or 20 years of backbreaking labor. No farmer is going to do that without a
                    degree of assurance that he or she will be able to continue working on the land
                    for the foreseeable future. The nature romantics from the city who make a day
                    excursion to the country, on the other hand, take it all for granted, mistake
                    the cultured land created by generations of farmers for nature pure, like to
                    trample down the wheat and start wild fires by throwing away cigarette buts or
                    by crowning their Sunday afternoon excursion with a barbecue in the middle of a
                    forest. Then it�s back to the city and nobody cares about the damage that may
                    have been done. Why should they? It is not their own property.

                    Intellectual property is no different from other forms of property. At least
                    in socialism there is the idea of taking away from those who have much to give
                    to those who have little. By abolishing intellectual property, on the other
                    hand, we take away from those who have little, from all those creators who
                    barely make a living by scrubbing other people�s floors.

                    Lastly, already the Bible mentioned something about �giving� being nobler
                    than �taking�. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made
                    it very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by
                    others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to unknown
                    levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?

                    Dieter Brand
                    Portugal





                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                    ------------------------------------

                    Yahoo! Groups Links






                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                    ------------------------------------

                    Yahoo! Groups Links








                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


                    ------------------------------------

                    Yahoo! Groups Links






                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Steven McCollough
                    Dieter, I must begin by saying I have enjoyed and profited by your posts in the past and continue to encourage your participation. I have posted infrequently
                    Message 9 of 25 , Nov 10, 2008
                      Dieter,

                      I must begin by saying I have enjoyed and profited by your posts in the
                      past and continue to encourage your participation. I have posted
                      infrequently because my contributions have been solely on my experiences
                      with natural farming which unfortunately are limited in extent and
                      successes. I must say though your attitude seems more on the order of
                      list proctor than participant. Also, please take advantage of quoting
                      certain sections of the previous posts you are referring to. It took me
                      nearly an hour to piece together who and what you were referring to even
                      given the subject line similarity.

                      Please see specific comments below.

                      Dieter Brand wrote:
                      > Vincente,
                      >
                      > Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka’s books from Steve Solomon’s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org?
                      >
                      This is the best single answer to all the previous posts as it addresses
                      the property rights issue while still leaving those unable to purchase
                      books an avenue to get knowledge.

                      > To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell the truth as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a person, who never made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell Fukuoka’s books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which has often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to point out that to use another person’s labor to make a commercial profit by selling his work is neither legal nor moral.
                      >
                      I agree with this totally.
                      >
                      > To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the other person is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity to propagate our own ideology.
                      >
                      It seems to me over the years you have "used part of an argument as an
                      opportunity to propagate our own ideology," more than just about anyone
                      one the list. This is just so slippery a concept I don't know how you
                      can differentiate your views and posts from propagating an ideology.
                      Your views on dry land no till for example.

                      > I think it is preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with the arguments of others by the PC’s copy and paste commands or by Internet links.
                      >
                      I strongly disagree with this sentiment. Only by using the whole body of
                      discussion on an issue is the truth to be found. I find the arguments of
                      higher authority just as valuable as the personal experience of the
                      novice. Also, some on this list have more experience than others and
                      feel this is authority enough for their arguments even when in contrast
                      with a more prevalent view. I have a tremendous respect for your view,
                      for example, while always looking for a counterpoint.

                      > Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are after), “real socialism”, the sole experiment of doing away with private property known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions after tens of millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme poverty and humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high degree of penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural resources and destroying the environment in a big way.
                      >
                      The fact that you felt it necessary to defend intellectual property
                      rights is a diversion of the list precepts in my view, as was your
                      defense of anti socialism that followed. I, for example, attribute a
                      different cause to squandering natural resources and destroying the
                      environment.
                      >
                      > If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural Farming you know that a farmer needs to “own” his land;
                      >
                      I disagree with this also. While this is the paradigm we suffer with
                      now, it may be a root problem. You, for example, have let the financial
                      aspects of making a profitable farm operation affect all your views on
                      natural farming. Some, if not most, on this list are interested in
                      blending farming into life - not blend life into a farming.
                      > Bible mentioned something about “giving” being nobler than “taking”. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made it very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to unknown levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?
                      >
                      I must have missed where someone said freely taking what was made by
                      others was natural farming. Giving is making more headway than you seem
                      to give credit for. If we were to ask Fukuoka if his words should be
                      available to all, I think he would say yes. Should we condone copyright
                      infringement? No, that would be going too far. Should we encourage
                      reasonable laws concerning copyright as was the main argument of some
                      here? Yes.

                      This reply is offered in respect and to further the discussions on the
                      list. If, Dieter, you wish to win this as an argument, I'm sure you can
                      with elegance as demonstrated by past eloquence. I would hope instead
                      you see it as constructive review. Your "ideology" may not be visible to
                      you, but it is to me. I would like to see more discussion of natural
                      farming just as you suggested. Unfortunately this is not it whether as
                      initiator or responder.

                      Steven McCollough
                    • Dieter Brand
                      Steven,   Thanks for your comments and critique.    Whether or not to include quoted messages and how is a matter for debate.  I know one ML with a very
                      Message 10 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                        Steven,

                        Thanks for your comments and critique.�

                        Whether or not to include quoted messages and how is a matter for debate.� I know one ML with a very high quality of discussion that strictly censors quoted text to the effect of cutting it to a bare minimum or excluding it altogether. �Personally, I don�t have any strong views on this.� And even though this list doesn�t seem to have any particular rules, I usually try to formulate my messages as well as possible so that others may read them with ease.� If I was a little careless in this one case, it may have been because I didn�t know if anyone would actually read it since I often don�t get a response to my arguments, or, if reaction there is, it goes off on a tangent.� In that respect your response is encouraging.

                        Do I act like a �proctor�, or is my aim to win arguments?� Well, I will try to think about this.� But what do you mean by my �ideology�, or ideology of dry-land farming?� You really lost me there.� Living in a region where food crops have been grown for centuries by dry-land farming, I have attempted to adapt Natural Farming to this environment by field work for nearly five years.� I have also tried to research the question in the literature and on the net.� Among other things, I have described my work and the results on this and half a dozen other lists in the hope of generating a debate or of getting some new input.� Where in all of this do you see an ideology?

                        You are of course right in that we all use �parts of other people�s� speech to present our own views.� To reply to every single statement would generate endless worms of messages that would be completely unreadable.� But I think there is a fundamental difference between picking out one argument of a message in the middle of a thread dating back several months to use it out of context for propagating a �general idea� of free sharing, or whatever, that may or may not be valid and without presenting any arguments (hence �ideology�), on one the hand, and a qualified reply that tries, however imperfectly, to take into consideration the �gist� of what another person is trying to say, on the other hand.� Hence, I do take issue, with your claim that I �try to propagate an ideology more than anyone else on this list�.� If you make such sweeping accusation, the very least you have to do is to give some specific examples.

                        Steven, this is getting too long and I don�t have time to answer your other points at present.� But perhaps you have misunderstood what I said or misinterpreted my intention.� It may also be that I didn�t express my thoughts as effectively as I would have liked to, or that, being of different cultural background and experience, my way of expressing myself feels a bit alien to you.� Please don�t forget that different varieties of English, using different modes of expression, are spoken around the World.� Hence, we need to treat each other with a degree of tolerance.� If I did criticize some willful or arbitrary posts in the past, it is not because I enjoy criticizing others, but because, for much of the time, the level of debate on this list really is rock bottom (if you think this is only my view, you are wrong).

                        To finish, just let me say a word about the �gist� of what I�m trying to say (the part you forgot to quote): �I�m mainly interested in Natural farming�, how (or if) it can be practiced in environments different from that in which it was conceived, �and a constructive discussion of the same�.� Natural Farming probably means something different to each one of us.� Personally, I�m not interested in Natural Farming as an ideology or in Fukuoka�s philosophy; even though I have translated some of it to offer it to the group as a basis for discussion (that never happened). �I do subscribe to a number of Japanese groups on Natural Farming and know that there are people who, ideology aside, do develop practical methods for growing food for subsistence or market farming and gardening by what can broadly be described as �natural� means.� In different climates, these methods are of limited use; hence, I had hoped that this list would
                        serve as a platform to discuss such issues.� Unfortunately I feel, that in all the years I have been subscribed to this list, discussions have rarely gone to the core of the matter, and arguments, if there are, are all too often presented as items of believe that cannot be discussed.

                        Dieter Brand
                        Portugal

                        PS:� I will be off the net for a couple of weeks for �technical� reasons.� But will be back soon for further discussions.

                        --- On Mon, 11/10/08, Steven McCollough <steb@...> wrote:

                        From: Steven McCollough <steb@...>
                        Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                        To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                        Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 4:13 PM

                        Dieter,

                        I must begin by saying I have enjoyed and profited by your posts in the
                        past and continue to encourage your participation. I have posted
                        infrequently because my contributions have been solely on my experiences
                        with natural farming which unfortunately are limited in extent and
                        successes. I must say though your attitude seems more on the order of
                        list proctor than participant. Also, please take advantage of quoting
                        certain sections of the previous posts you are referring to. It took me
                        nearly an hour to piece together who and what you were referring to even
                        given the subject line similarity.

                        Please see specific comments below.

                        Dieter Brand wrote:
                        > Vincente,
                        >
                        > Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka�s books from Steve
                        Solomon�s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org?
                        >
                        This is the best single answer to all the previous posts as it addresses
                        the property rights issue while still leaving those unable to purchase
                        books an avenue to get knowledge.

                        > To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell the
                        truth as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a person, who
                        never made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell Fukuoka�s
                        books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which has
                        often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to point out
                        that to use another person�s labor to make a commercial profit by selling his
                        work is neither legal nor moral.
                        >
                        I agree with this totally.
                        >
                        > To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the other
                        person is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity to
                        propagate our own ideology.
                        >
                        It seems to me over the years you have "used part of an argument as an
                        opportunity to propagate our own ideology," more than just about anyone
                        one the list. This is just so slippery a concept I don't know how you
                        can differentiate your views and posts from propagating an ideology.
                        Your views on dry land no till for example.

                        > I think it is preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with the
                        arguments of others by the PC�s copy and paste commands or by Internet links.
                        >
                        I strongly disagree with this sentiment. Only by using the whole body of
                        discussion on an issue is the truth to be found. I find the arguments of
                        higher authority just as valuable as the personal experience of the
                        novice. Also, some on this list have more experience than others and
                        feel this is authority enough for their arguments even when in contrast
                        with a more prevalent view. I have a tremendous respect for your view,
                        for example, while always looking for a counterpoint.

                        > Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are
                        after), �real socialism�, the sole experiment of doing away with private
                        property known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions after tens
                        of millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme poverty
                        and humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high
                        degree of penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural
                        resources and destroying the environment in a big way.
                        >
                        The fact that you felt it necessary to defend intellectual property
                        rights is a diversion of the list precepts in my view, as was your
                        defense of anti socialism that followed. I, for example, attribute a
                        different cause to squandering natural resources and destroying the
                        environment.
                        >
                        > If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural
                        Farming you know that a farmer needs to �own� his land;
                        >
                        I disagree with this also. While this is the paradigm we suffer with
                        now, it may be a root problem. You, for example, have let the financial
                        aspects of making a profitable farm operation affect all your views on
                        natural farming. Some, if not most, on this list are interested in
                        blending farming into life - not blend life into a farming.
                        > Bible mentioned something about �giving� being nobler than
                        �taking�. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made it
                        very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by
                        others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to unknown
                        levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?
                        >
                        I must have missed where someone said freely taking what was made by
                        others was natural farming. Giving is making more headway than you seem
                        to give credit for. If we were to ask Fukuoka if his words should be
                        available to all, I think he would say yes. Should we condone copyright
                        infringement? No, that would be going too far. Should we encourage
                        reasonable laws concerning copyright as was the main argument of some
                        here? Yes.

                        This reply is offered in respect and to further the discussions on the
                        list. If, Dieter, you wish to win this as an argument, I'm sure you can
                        with elegance as demonstrated by past eloquence. I would hope instead
                        you see it as constructive review. Your "ideology" may not be visible
                        to
                        you, but it is to me. I would like to see more discussion of natural
                        farming just as you suggested. Unfortunately this is not it whether as
                        initiator or responder.

                        Steven McCollough

                        ------------------------------------

                        Yahoo! Groups Links








                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Steven McCollough
                        Dieter, Thank you for taking this in the context of improving the discussions on the list. ... I should have said, as much as anyone on the list. By ideology
                        Message 11 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                          Dieter,

                          Thank you for taking this in the context of improving the discussions on
                          the list.

                          Dieter Brand wrote:
                          > Steven,
                          >
                          > Thanks for your comments and critique.
                          >
                          > But what do you mean by my “ideology”
                          > Hence, I do take issue, with your claim that I “try to propagate an ideology more than anyone else on this list”. If you make such sweeping accusation, the very least you have to do is to give some specific examples.
                          >
                          I should have said, "as much as anyone on the list." By ideology I mean
                          those core values and impressions we have built up over the years that
                          inform our perceptions of the world and natural farming in this case.
                          From this one post I can point to (and did) the ideologies you are
                          working under. A protective interest in defending personal property, a
                          dislike of socialism, land ownership, etc.. These are not, you must
                          admit, precepts of natural farming and are a distraction to the main
                          topic. At the very least, they make the discussion expand to the extent
                          we lose site of the original topic. Since your posts are also lengthy,
                          these diversions are doubly deviating from the topic.
                          > it is not because I enjoy criticizing others, but because, for much of the time, the level of debate on this list really is rock bottom (if you think this is only my view, you are wrong).
                          >
                          I can agree the discussions fall short of what they could be. Rock
                          bottom and I would have left long ago. My point is this post of yours is
                          no better in this respect. I believe we would have been better served if
                          you would have pointed out the availability of the books on the Journey
                          to Forever site, its implications for copyright issues and left it at
                          that. On the other hand, your posts have more meat as a rule than the
                          average so please don't leave.
                          >
                          > To finish, just let me say a word about the “gist” of what I’m trying to say (the part you forgot to quote)
                          I didn't quote that because it was a sideline issue to your post. While
                          probably the most important issue it was not your main point. From my
                          earlier post: "I would like to see more discussion of natural farming
                          just as you suggested."
                          > : “I’m mainly interested in Natural farming”, how (or if) it can be practiced in environments different from that in which it was conceived, “and a constructive discussion of the same”. Natural Farming probably means something different to each one of us.
                          This is a great summary of what we all want. Unfortunately, there is
                          precious little I can add so I lurk most of the time.
                          > I do subscribe to a number of Japanese groups on Natural Farming and know that there are people who, ideology aside, do develop practical methods for growing food for subsistence or market farming and gardening by what can broadly be described as “natural” means. In different climates, these methods are of limited use; hence, I had hoped that this list would
                          > serve as a platform to discuss such issues.
                          We need a person or persons that can bring this valuable information to
                          our list, as I remember you have done on occasion.
                          > Unfortunately I feel, that in all the years I have been subscribed to this list, discussions have rarely gone to the core of the matter, and arguments, if there are, are all too often presented as items of believe that cannot be discussed.
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          I have noticed this also, it seems the natural farming concept on the
                          list is suffering from the same problems of dogma you see in organic
                          gardening circles. It has come to the point organic growers can't
                          certify because of an entrenchment of the concepts, at least in America.
                          You can't have organic chicken that is fed meat, for example, even if
                          the feed is organic and meat is part of their natural diet. You have
                          argued a need to till in semi arid farming and have taken flak for
                          breaking Fukuoka's four principles, while receiving precious little help
                          from the list on how you might have overlooked something. Best of luck
                          in your natural farming and thank you for informative posts.

                          With respect

                          Steve McCollough
                          > From: Steven McCollough
                          > Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                          > To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                          > Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 4:13 PM
                          >
                          > Dieter,
                          >
                          > I must begin by saying I have enjoyed and profited by your posts in the
                          > past and continue to encourage your participation. I have posted
                          > infrequently because my contributions have been solely on my experiences
                          > with natural farming which unfortunately are limited in extent and
                          > successes. I must say though your attitude seems more on the order of
                          > list proctor than participant. Also, please take advantage of quoting
                          > certain sections of the previous posts you are referring to. It took me
                          > nearly an hour to piece together who and what you were referring to even
                          > given the subject line similarity.
                          >
                          > Please see specific comments below.
                          >
                          > Dieter Brand wrote:
                          >
                          >> Vincente,
                          >>
                          >> Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka’s books from Steve
                          >>
                          > Solomon’s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org?
                          >
                          >>
                          >>
                          > This is the best single answer to all the previous posts as it addresses
                          > the property rights issue while still leaving those unable to purchase
                          > books an avenue to get knowledge.
                          >
                          >
                          >> To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell the
                          >>
                          > truth as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a person, who
                          > never made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell Fukuoka’s
                          > books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which has
                          > often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to point out
                          > that to use another person’s labor to make a commercial profit by selling his
                          > work is neither legal nor moral.
                          >
                          >>
                          >>
                          > I agree with this totally.
                          >
                          >>
                          >> To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the other
                          >>
                          > person is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity to
                          > propagate our own ideology.
                          >
                          >>
                          >>
                          > It seems to me over the years you have "used part of an argument as an
                          > opportunity to propagate our own ideology," more than just about anyone
                          > one the list. This is just so slippery a concept I don't know how you
                          > can differentiate your views and posts from propagating an ideology.
                          > Your views on dry land no till for example.
                          >
                          >
                          >> I think it is preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with the
                          >>
                          > arguments of others by the PC’s copy and paste commands or by Internet links.
                          >
                          >>
                          >>
                          > I strongly disagree with this sentiment. Only by using the whole body of
                          > discussion on an issue is the truth to be found. I find the arguments of
                          > higher authority just as valuable as the personal experience of the
                          > novice. Also, some on this list have more experience than others and
                          > feel this is authority enough for their arguments even when in contrast
                          > with a more prevalent view. I have a tremendous respect for your view,
                          > for example, while always looking for a counterpoint.
                          >
                          >
                          >> Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are
                          >>
                          > after), “real socialism”, the sole experiment of doing away with private
                          > property known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions after tens
                          > of millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme poverty
                          > and humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high
                          > degree of penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural
                          > resources and destroying the environment in a big way.
                          >
                          >>
                          >>
                          > The fact that you felt it necessary to defend intellectual property
                          > rights is a diversion of the list precepts in my view, as was your
                          > defense of anti socialism that followed. I, for example, attribute a
                          > different cause to squandering natural resources and destroying the
                          > environment.
                          >
                          >>
                          >> If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural
                          >>
                          > Farming you know that a farmer needs to “own” his land;
                          >
                          >>
                          >>
                          > I disagree with this also. While this is the paradigm we suffer with
                          > now, it may be a root problem. You, for example, have let the financial
                          > aspects of making a profitable farm operation affect all your views on
                          > natural farming. Some, if not most, on this list are interested in
                          > blending farming into life - not blend life into a farming.
                          >
                          >> Bible mentioned something about “giving” being nobler than
                          >>
                          > “taking”. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made it
                          > very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by
                          > others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to unknown
                          > levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?
                          >
                          >>
                          >>
                          > I must have missed where someone said freely taking what was made by
                          > others was natural farming. Giving is making more headway than you seem
                          > to give credit for. If we were to ask Fukuoka if his words should be
                          > available to all, I think he would say yes. Should we condone copyright
                          > infringement? No, that would be going too far. Should we encourage
                          > reasonable laws concerning copyright as was the main argument of some
                          > here? Yes.
                          >
                          > This reply is offered in respect and to further the discussions on the
                          > list. If, Dieter, you wish to win this as an argument, I'm sure you can
                          > with elegance as demonstrated by past eloquence. I would hope instead
                          > you see it as constructive review. Your "ideology" may not be visible
                          > to
                          > you, but it is to me. I would like to see more discussion of natural
                          > farming just as you suggested. Unfortunately this is not it whether as
                          > initiator or responder.
                          >
                          > Steven McCollough
                          >
                          > ------------------------------------
                          >
                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >
                          >
                          > ------------------------------------
                          >
                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          >
                          >
                          > No virus found in this incoming message.
                          > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                          > Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.0/1779 - Release Date: 11/10/2008 7:53 AM
                          >
                          >
                        • laurie (Mother Mastiff)
                          Steven, It was my impression that both Dieter and I were objecting to someone coming to the group and posting nothing BUT other s information, including an
                          Message 12 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                            Steven,

                            It was my impression that both Dieter and I were objecting to someone
                            coming to the group and posting nothing BUT other's information,
                            including an expressed desire to violate copyright laws.

                            Let's talk about farming again, OK?

                            laurie (Mother Mastiff)
                            Southeastern USA (NC and FL)



                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • Vicente J. Ruiz Jurado
                            ... Copyleft is based on copyright law and is totally legal. Always is the decision of authors. If I share my works (something that I always do), I don t
                            Message 13 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                              laurie (Mother Mastiff) escribió:
                              > including an expressed desire to violate copyright laws.

                              Copyleft is based on copyright law and is totally legal. Always is the
                              decision of authors. If I share my works (something that I always do), I
                              don't violate nothing.

                              Good collection of misunderstandings.

                              > Let's talk about farming again, OK?

                              yes, please.
                              --
                              Vicente J. Ruiz Jurado

                              http://homes.ourproject.org/~vjrj/blog
                              http://ourproject.org

                              "Recently, someone asked me if I believed in astrology. He seemed
                              somewhat puzzled when I explained that the reason I don't is that I'm a
                              Gemini." [Raymond Smullyan]
                            • Dieter Brand
                              Steven,   What do you mean by ideology?  The occasional joke aside, I m prepared to defend every single word I said on this and any other list by argument,
                              Message 14 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                                Steven,

                                What do you mean by ideology?� The occasional joke aside, I'm prepared to defend every single word I said on this and any other list by argument, and if you or anyone�can show�my arguments to be erroneous, I'm prepared to say thank you, I was wrong, I see what you mean.� Is that ideology?

                                >�From this one post I can point to (and did) the ideologies you are
                                > working under. A protective interest in defending personal property, a
                                > dislike of socialism, land ownership, etc..

                                These are your assumptions.� I'm not prepared to publish my personal curriculum vitae on the list (nobody should), but from the time I can remember, my heart has always beaten "on the left", and I don't mean "left" in the US sense of progressive democrat, but in the European sense.

                                But I have never been prepared to confine my thinking to little boxes, and when I see somebody talking nonsense about the virtues of collective ownership and the like, I don't see why I should not call a spade a spade.

                                >�These are not, you must�admit, precepts of natural farming and
                                > are a distraction to the main�topic.

                                Remember, the distraction was not from me, my initial argument went unanswered, and the post I replied to was dug out by someone with his own agenda months later.� You really try hard to find fault with me personally.� I think we should not discuss each other's personality in public on this list.� If there is something that bothers you, you are welcome to contact me off-list.

                                > while receiving precious little help from the list on how you
                                > might have overlooked something.

                                Here we go again!� The assumption (or ideology) that a method has absolute validity, in any place and always, even if that has not been demonstrated and even though you haven't told us if you have ever carried out that method anywhere.�And if somebody reports facts that�do not match the theory, well then he�must have "overlooked" something and we must fiddle around with�the facts�until they�correspond to the theory.� I take my hat off to Fukuoka the _farmer_, who after 30 years of practice was able to say: "the proof is growing right in front of your eyes".� I don't have the same respect for people who, having read a book, claim that they know it all and that farmers who don't see it their way are really stup*d .� And please, don't start with talk about "methodless methods" or other such meaningless meaning as we have heard on this list before.

                                Dieter Brand
                                Portugal

                                PS: I'm�still not�through with�the reflection you�have�told me to do.� But I may have a first hunch about��wanting to win an argument".��This is�really only a hunch, so don't take it too seriously: I think the competitive instinct is universal, we wouldn't be here otherwise.� Further, to present a clear well reasoned argument�is a bit like putting on a clean shirt and trousers to present a positive image in public so as to maintain our self-esteem and to show respect to others.� Nobody wants to be with a stinking old jerk.� I think a lot depends on what we try to do.�Do we try to help others, provide information, provide our ideas about how we see things and promote the discussion on Natural Farming?� Or do we only reply to criticize and find fault with somebody?� I think, with a few exceptions, there is a lot of goodwill and desire to help others on this list.�It is only the framework of discussions that makes things go awry at
                                times.



                                --- On Tue, 11/11/08, Steven McCollough <steb@...> wrote:

                                From: Steven McCollough <steb@...>
                                Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                                To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                                Date: Tuesday, November 11, 2008, 4:25 PM

                                Dieter,

                                Thank you for taking this in the context of improving the discussions on
                                the list.

                                Dieter Brand wrote:
                                > Steven,
                                >
                                > Thanks for your comments and critique.
                                >
                                > But what do you mean by my �ideology�
                                > Hence, I do take issue, with your claim that I �try to propagate an
                                ideology more than anyone else on this list�. If you make such sweeping
                                accusation, the very least you have to do is to give some specific examples.
                                >
                                I should have said, "as much as anyone on the list." By ideology I
                                mean
                                those core values and impressions we have built up over the years that
                                inform our perceptions of the world and natural farming in this case.
                                From this one post I can point to (and did) the ideologies you are
                                working under. A protective interest in defending personal property, a
                                dislike of socialism, land ownership, etc.. These are not, you must
                                admit, precepts of natural farming and are a distraction to the main
                                topic. At the very least, they make the discussion expand to the extent
                                we lose site of the original topic. Since your posts are also lengthy,
                                these diversions are doubly deviating from the topic.
                                > it is not because I enjoy criticizing others, but because, for much of the
                                time, the level of debate on this list really is rock bottom (if you think this
                                is only my view, you are wrong).
                                >
                                I can agree the discussions fall short of what they could be. Rock
                                bottom and I would have left long ago. My point is this post of yours is
                                no better in this respect. I believe we would have been better served if
                                you would have pointed out the availability of the books on the Journey
                                to Forever site, its implications for copyright issues and left it at
                                that. On the other hand, your posts have more meat as a rule than the
                                average so please don't leave.
                                >
                                > To finish, just let me say a word about the �gist� of what I�m
                                trying to say (the part you forgot to quote)
                                I didn't quote that because it was a sideline issue to your post. While
                                probably the most important issue it was not your main point. From my
                                earlier post: "I would like to see more discussion of natural farming
                                just as you suggested."
                                > : �I�m mainly interested in Natural farming�, how (or if) it can be
                                practiced in environments different from that in which it was conceived, �and
                                a constructive discussion of the same�. Natural Farming probably means
                                something different to each one of us.
                                This is a great summary of what we all want. Unfortunately, there is
                                precious little I can add so I lurk most of the time.
                                > I do subscribe to a number of Japanese groups on Natural Farming and know
                                that there are people who, ideology aside, do develop practical methods for
                                growing food for subsistence or market farming and gardening by what can broadly
                                be described as �natural� means. In different climates, these methods are
                                of limited use; hence, I had hoped that this list would
                                > serve as a platform to discuss such issues.
                                We need a person or persons that can bring this valuable information to
                                our list, as I remember you have done on occasion.
                                > Unfortunately I feel, that in all the years I have been subscribed to this
                                list, discussions have rarely gone to the core of the matter, and arguments, if
                                there are, are all too often presented as items of believe that cannot be
                                discussed.
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                I have noticed this also, it seems the natural farming concept on the
                                list is suffering from the same problems of dogma you see in organic
                                gardening circles. It has come to the point organic growers can't
                                certify because of an entrenchment of the concepts, at least in America.
                                You can't have organic chicken that is fed meat, for example, even if
                                the feed is organic and meat is part of their natural diet. You have
                                argued a need to till in semi arid farming and have taken flak for
                                breaking Fukuoka's four principles, while receiving precious little help
                                from the list on how you might have overlooked something. Best of luck
                                in your natural farming and thank you for informative posts.

                                With respect

                                Steve McCollough
                                > From: Steven McCollough
                                > Subject: Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books
                                > To: fukuoka_farming@yahoogroups.com
                                > Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 4:13 PM
                                >
                                > Dieter,
                                >
                                > I must begin by saying I have enjoyed and profited by your posts in the
                                > past and continue to encourage your participation. I have posted
                                > infrequently because my contributions have been solely on my experiences
                                > with natural farming which unfortunately are limited in extent and
                                > successes. I must say though your attitude seems more on the order of
                                > list proctor than participant. Also, please take advantage of quoting
                                > certain sections of the previous posts you are referring to. It took me
                                > nearly an hour to piece together who and what you were referring to even
                                > given the subject line similarity.
                                >
                                > Please see specific comments below.
                                >
                                > Dieter Brand wrote:
                                >
                                >> Vincente,
                                >>
                                >> Did you know that you can download two of Fukuoka�s books from Steve
                                >>
                                > Solomon�s Soil and Health library at: soilandhealth.org?
                                >
                                >>
                                >>
                                > This is the best single answer to all the previous posts as it addresses
                                > the property rights issue while still leaving those unable to purchase
                                > books an avenue to get knowledge.
                                >
                                >
                                >> To have a meaningful discussion we need to have the courage to tell
                                the
                                >>
                                > truth as we know it even if it is not trendy or popular. E.g., if a
                                person, who
                                > never made any contribution to this group, suddenly turns up to sell
                                Fukuoka�s
                                > books, then we need to be able to ask a question about copyright, which
                                has
                                > often been discussed but never been answered. Somebody also needs to
                                point out
                                > that to use another person�s labor to make a commercial profit by
                                selling his
                                > work is neither legal nor moral.
                                >
                                >>
                                >>
                                > I agree with this totally.
                                >
                                >>
                                >> To have a meaningful discussion we also need to reply to what the
                                other
                                >>
                                > person is trying to say and not use part of an argument as an opportunity
                                to
                                > propagate our own ideology.
                                >
                                >>
                                >>
                                > It seems to me over the years you have "used part of an argument as
                                an
                                > opportunity to propagate our own ideology," more than just about
                                anyone
                                > one the list. This is just so slippery a concept I don't know how you
                                > can differentiate your views and posts from propagating an ideology.
                                > Your views on dry land no till for example.
                                >
                                >
                                >> I think it is preferable to do so in our own words and not argue with
                                the
                                >>
                                > arguments of others by the PC�s copy and paste commands or by Internet
                                links.
                                >
                                >>
                                >>
                                > I strongly disagree with this sentiment. Only by using the whole body of
                                > discussion on an issue is the truth to be found. I find the arguments of
                                > higher authority just as valuable as the personal experience of the
                                > novice. Also, some on this list have more experience than others and
                                > feel this is authority enough for their arguments even when in contrast
                                > with a more prevalent view. I have a tremendous respect for your view,
                                > for example, while always looking for a counterpoint.
                                >
                                >
                                >> Regarding a World without private property (if that is what you are
                                >>
                                > after), �real socialism�, the sole experiment of doing away with
                                private
                                > property known to mankind, has collapsed under its own contradictions
                                after tens
                                > of millions of death and hundreds of millions were reduced to extreme
                                poverty
                                > and humiliation. They even managed the incredible feat of creating a high
                                > degree of penury for the people while at the same time squandering natural
                                > resources and destroying the environment in a big way.
                                >
                                >>
                                >>
                                > The fact that you felt it necessary to defend intellectual property
                                > rights is a diversion of the list precepts in my view, as was your
                                > defense of anti socialism that followed. I, for example, attribute a
                                > different cause to squandering natural resources and destroying the
                                > environment.
                                >
                                >>
                                >> If you have any experience with farming and in particular with Natural
                                >>
                                > Farming you know that a farmer needs to �own� his land;
                                >
                                >>
                                >>
                                > I disagree with this also. While this is the paradigm we suffer with
                                > now, it may be a root problem. You, for example, have let the financial
                                > aspects of making a profitable farm operation affect all your views on
                                > natural farming. Some, if not most, on this list are interested in
                                > blending farming into life - not blend life into a farming.
                                >
                                >> Bible mentioned something about �giving� being nobler than
                                >>
                                > �taking�. Alas, human avarice being what it is, that idea never made
                                it
                                > very far. Yet by making an ideology out of freely taking what was made by
                                > others to serve our personal gain seems to propel human perversion to
                                unknown
                                > levels. And you say that is Natural Farming!?
                                >
                                >>
                                >>
                                > I must have missed where someone said freely taking what was made by
                                > others was natural farming. Giving is making more headway than you seem
                                > to give credit for. If we were to ask Fukuoka if his words should be
                                > available to all, I think he would say yes. Should we condone copyright
                                > infringement? No, that would be going too far. Should we encourage
                                > reasonable laws concerning copyright as was the main argument of some
                                > here? Yes.
                                >
                                > This reply is offered in respect and to further the discussions on the
                                > list. If, Dieter, you wish to win this as an argument, I'm sure you
                                can
                                > with elegance as demonstrated by past eloquence. I would hope instead
                                > you see it as constructive review. Your "ideology" may not be
                                visible
                                > to
                                > you, but it is to me. I would like to see more discussion of natural
                                > farming just as you suggested. Unfortunately this is not it whether as
                                > initiator or responder.
                                >
                                > Steven McCollough
                                >
                                > ------------------------------------
                                >
                                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                >
                                >
                                > ------------------------------------
                                >
                                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                >
                                >
                                > No virus found in this incoming message.
                                > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                                > Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.0/1779 - Release Date: 11/10/2008
                                7:53 AM
                                >
                                >

                                ------------------------------------

                                Yahoo! Groups Links








                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.