Comments on: Responding to Sharon Astyk on Permaculture and Transition

By: P2P Foundation » Blog Archive » Can we re-size civilisation?

P2P Foundation » Blog Archive » Can we re-size civilisation? — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 11:09:42 +0000

[...] We also recommend you read the following companion debate here. [...]

By: Graham

Graham — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:36:35 +0000

John Gibbons has a great piece in the Irish Times today, “When Science is reduced to a game, anyone can play”, basically making the same points that I have been making, linking quackery with climate change denial:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0723/1224251143766.html

By: Reto Stauss (retostauss) 's status on Thursday, 23-Jul-09 20:49:39 UTC - Identi.ca

Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:50:03 +0000

[...] http://transitionculture.org/2009/07/03/responding-to-sharon-astyk-on-permaculture-and-transition/ [...]

By: Kevin Carson

Kevin Carson — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 06:51:02 +0000

I agree that saying permaculture and transition are the only games in town is rhetorical overkill.

What about, for example, Open Source Ecology’s demo project at Factor E Farm? One of the most important aspects of the Peak Oil transition is radically shortening industrial logistical chains and relocalizing manufacturing.

By: Zone5 » Faith in Transition

Zone5 » Faith in Transition — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 10:55:11 +0000

[...] paid a visit to a forum on Transition and permaculture over at Transition Culture recently- wow, I only just got out in time before they lynched me! Apparently, post-modern lunacy [...]

By: Robin P Clarke

Robin P Clarke — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:00:08 +0000

ceridwen–“an embarrassed smile”…. perhaps because the conception of “engaging with all faiths” has to be one that is embarassed about engaging one’s moral and intellectual critical functions in the process?
“This discussion is clearly over now as far as most of us are concerned.”… (because there are no valid answers to defend their presumptions?)

Funny how so many tons of words are written about the supposed religion of peace but as soon as someone starts quoting the actual key facts of Islam, the documented words of Allah, people always want to hide away and censor and so on. Honesty anyone?

How about this formula?:- “We require members to endorse inclusivity of at least all those others who themselves are perceived to endorse inclusivity”. But still the movement would leave significant numbers excluded, depending on the defining criteria of “inclusivity”.

By: ceridwen

ceridwen — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 05:18:40 +0000

SARAH

I guess we’d better just leave this now for the couple of people with particular “bones to pick” and they’re just using a T.T. website to do so to continue with their personal “(off) topics”. This discussion is clearly over now as far as most of us are concerned.

We can only apologise to others who read this that some people have strayed off onto their “personal things” and well away from talking about Transition topics. So – apologies that that has happened. (Where’s an embarrassed smilie when one needs one? – which I’m sure is how most of us feel about some recent posts..).

By: Robin P Clarke

Robin P Clarke — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:47:56 +0000

because our discussions are focused on the projects and work tasks we share commitments to accomplishing.
And that’s the point that so many seem to be missing. Do for instance car-salesmen or supermarket advertisers or cat-food manufacturers “engage with all faiths”?

By: Sarah Edwards

Sarah Edwards — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:39:00 +0000

Robin asked if our local initiative includes Neo-Nazis and those with other types of beliefs mentioned. I don’t believe so, but we don’t know actually what religious and politcal backgrounds our participants have because our discussions are focused on the projects and work tasks we share commitments to accomplishing.

By: Robin P Clarke

Robin P Clarke — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:32:16 +0000

The Roma people are over here now with Indic skin and language, because they were marched out of India over the Hindu Kush (translation: “Hindu Slaughter”) into enslavement by the religion of peace. Saint Mohammed died from the poisoning by one of his own Jewish slaves. I haven’t even scratched the surface of the greatest filth in history here, but must leave off now. Some things are not worthy of respect.

By: Robin P Clarke

Robin P Clarke — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:26:32 +0000

(Battle of Tours 732, followed by 900 further years of trying to destroy the rest of Christendom, till turned finally back at Battle of Vienna 1683…) Meanwhile whole cities and universities and thousands of temples destroyed once the jihad reached civilised India. See no evil…

By: Robin P Clarke

Robin P Clarke — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:13:45 +0000

“Every being that is in the heavens and on earth: all are devoutly obedient to Him” [Qur'an 30:26].
Including me? Flawless words of God? Or the only book written by an ?all-powerful god? who has such vast communication handicap that only qualified experts are entitled to tell you what he is trying to say? (And 14 centuries of ongoing wars have resulted from the communication error.)

By: Robin P Clarke

Robin P Clarke — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:00:10 +0000

Sarah: Here in our local Transition Initiative we have people of all faiths and beliefs.
Would this include a welcoming of NeoNazis (as long as they shut up perhaps)? Or of those who believe the following to be the flawless last testament of an Allah who is all-powerful and so presumably quite capable of making a message clear:
Qur’an 59:2-7 is a commentary on the start of Mohammed’s ethnic cleansing of Arabia, with his military attack against the Jews of Bani-Nadir. (As with much of the Qur’an its context is only made fully clear by the related sacred Hadiths which are detailed accounts of Mohammed’s sayings.)
These Qur’an verses below make clear that the Jews were acting defensively, that Allah approved of their being forced into exile and the unexpected innovation of cutting down their desert food trees to terrorise them, and Allah granted Mohammed and his followers the ownership of the property of the now homeless Jewish citizens.
[Qur'an 59:2-7:]
“He it is who hath caused the Jews who disbelieved to go forth from their homes unto the first exile. Ye deemed not that they would go forth, while they deemed that their strongholds would protect them from Allah. But Allah reached them from a place whereof they reckoned not, and cast terror in their hearts so that they ruined their houses with their own hands…“[59:2]
“This is because they were opposed to Allah and his messenger ….” [59:4][or more precisely because their poet criticised Mohammed; c.f. famous cartoons incident]
“Whatsoever palm trees ye cut down or left standing on their roots, it was by Allah’s leave, in order that he might confound the evil-livers.”[59:5]
“And that which Allah gives as spoil unto His messenger from them, ye urged not any horse or riding-camel for the sake thereof, but Allah giveth His messenger lordship over whom he will. Allah is able to do all things.”[59:6]
“The spoils of war taken from the town-dwellers and assigned by Allah to His apostle shall belong to Allah, to the Apostle and his kinsfolk, to orphans, …..” [59:7]

As I’ve said above or elsewhere, the concept of requiring inclusiveness logically contradicts itself unless every other human on the planet shares it with you, which they most certainly don’t.

By: julian duggan

julian duggan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:31:17 +0000

I think that was “THE SUBJECT IN HAND”

By: julian duggan

julian duggan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 21:29:53 +0000

CERIDWEN-Sorry and all that but you’ve kind of made the point perfectly.Maybe you could provide a profile of the type of chaps/chapesses that you would like to “wander” in and join the circle and be made to feel welcome in to the light of the infinite sun.I have already witnessed inquisitive folk “wander”off from transition meetings for the foreseeable even before the enlightened ones hands have clasped one another.Perhaps the speed at which this debate has moved from circles to religion to exclusion should tell us something!