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

Re: [fukuoka_farming] Re:Copyleft and Fukuoka's books

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 25 , Nov 8, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      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 2 of 25 , Nov 9, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        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 3 of 25 , Nov 9, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          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 4 of 25 , Nov 9, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            --- 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 5 of 25 , Nov 10, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              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 6 of 25 , Nov 10, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                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 7 of 25 , Nov 10, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  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 8 of 25 , Nov 10, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    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 9 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      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 10 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        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 11 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          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 12 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            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 13 of 25 , Nov 11, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              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.