A Homemade Life
Welcome to Homemade Life.

To take full advantage of everything offered by our forum, please log in if you are already a member or join our community if not ....

Chilli-head
Who is online?
In total there are 5 users online :: 0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 5 Guests

None

Most users ever online was 62 on 10th April 2015, 8:24 am
Latest topics
» What are you harvesting today?
by freebird Yesterday at 10:01 pm

» The September garden
by FloBear 21st September 2017, 8:59 pm

» Autumn planting vegetables
by Dandelion 15th September 2017, 9:29 pm

» Wildlife cameras
by FloBear 9th September 2017, 11:53 am

» whats on the menu
by Dandelion 5th September 2017, 10:10 pm

» Insect hotel
by FloBear 31st August 2017, 10:07 pm

» seed saving
by freebird 29th August 2017, 1:49 pm

» Argh - how do you grow lettuce ?
by Ploshkin 26th August 2017, 9:40 pm

» Knitting in the round
by FloBear 19th August 2017, 1:41 pm

» What happened to the garden in August ?
by freebird 19th August 2017, 12:24 pm

» Greek "oily" green beans
by Ploshkin 18th August 2017, 7:33 pm

» This year's challenge
by Chilli-head 12th August 2017, 9:09 pm

» The Polytunnel
by freebird 8th August 2017, 10:44 pm

» What are you preserving today?
by Ploshkin 31st July 2017, 11:17 pm

» Masaledar Sem (spicy green beans)
by Ploshkin 31st July 2017, 11:11 pm

» What have I done in the workshop today?
by Ploshkin 31st July 2017, 11:02 pm

» No more petrol / diesel cars from 2040 ?
by FloBear 31st July 2017, 10:21 pm

» Hugelkultur
by FloBear 23rd July 2017, 9:50 am

» Who knows what the weather will bring on the plot in July ?
by Dandelion 20th July 2017, 7:32 pm

» More mead ...
by Chilli-head 19th July 2017, 8:25 pm

Statistics
We have 631 registered users
The newest registered user is gseifrit

Our users have posted a total of 44716 messages in 2320 subjects
HML on FaceBook
RSS feeds



Donate to our Charity
The Homemade life supports Kiva - microloans for people in developing countries working to change their lives.  These loans are repaid to our KIVA account, so your donation is used many times to help different people - literally the gift that keeps on giving..

The Myth of Self Reliance

View previous topic View next topic Go down

default The Myth of Self Reliance

Post by Adrian on 1st January 2013, 1:47 pm

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A mass emailing went out a while back from a prominent permaculturist looking for “projects where people are fully self sufficient in providing for their own food, clothing, shelter, energy and community needs. . .” There it was, the myth of “fully self sufficient,” coming from one of the best-known permaculturists in the world. In most US permaculture circles, the idea that anyone could be self sufficient at anything past a very primitive level was abandoned a while ago, and the softer term “self reliant” replaced it. But even self-reliance is barely possible, and, other than as way of expressing a desire to throw off the shackles of corporate consumerism, I don’t think it’s desirable.

I took a Googling cruise around the internet and found that “self sufficient” shows up as a desirable goal on several top permaculture websites. I’d like to hammer a few coffin nails into that phrase. My dictionary says that self sufficient means being “able to maintain oneself without outside aid.” Who lives without outside aid? No one. Let’s unpack that a bit further. The meaning of “self sufficient in food” is something most of us can agree on: supplying 100% of your food needs from your own land and efforts. I have never met anyone who has done this. I’m sure there are a few people doing it, but even subsistence farmers usually raise, alongside their food, a cash crop to buy the foods that are impractical for them to grow.

I hear people say they are growing 30%, 50%, even 70% of their own food. What they usually mean is that they are growing fruits and vegetables that make up some percentage of the total cost or weight—but not calories—of their food. Vegetables are high in wet weight, but low in calories. If you are growing 100% of your own vegetables, they provide about 15-20% of your daily calories, unless you are living mostly on potatoes or other starchy veggies. Most daily calories come from grains, meat, or dairy products. So if you’re not raising large-scale grains or animals, it’s unlikely that you are growing more than one-quarter of your own food, measured honestly by nutritional content. In that case, it’s not accurate to claim you are “70% food self-sufficient.” If you are getting most of your calories from your land, you’re almost certainly a full-time farmer, and I salute you for your hard work. Now we begin to see how difficult, and even undesirable, self sufficiency is. You won’t have time for much else if you are truly food self-sufficient, even in a permaculture system.

But even if you grow all your own food, can you claim you are self sufficient if you don’t grow all your own seeds? Provide all your fertility? Where do your farm tools and fuel come from? Permaculturists understand as well as anyone how interconnected life is. At what point do you claim to be disconnected from the broad human community in anything? Is there really a way to be “fully self sufficient” in food?

Let’s take a quick pass at clothing, shelter and energy. Even if you sew all your clothes, do you grow the cotton, raise the sheep? If you milled all the lumber or dug the stone for your home, did you forge the glass, fabricate the wiring? In the off-the-grid house, what complex community of engineers and factories assembled the solar panels? We’re reliant on all of that.

Claiming self sufficiency in almost anything insults and ignores the mountain of shoulders we all stand on. US permaculturists are a pretty politically correct crew, and it became obvious to some of us that “self sufficient” was not just impossible, but was a slap in the face to all those whose sweat provides for us, and was another perpetuation of the cowboy ethic that puts the individual at the center of the universe. So the term morphed into “self reliance,” to show that we know we are interdependent, but are choosing to be less reliant on others. At its best, self reliance means developing skills to provide for basic needs, so we can stop supporting unethical and destructive industries. But I see much less need for self-reliant people who can do everything themselves, and much more need for self-reliant communities, where not everyone knows how to weave or farm, but there is clothing and food for all.

There is still a deep prejudice in permaculture, as websites and emails show, that doing it all ourselves, and on our own land, is the most noble path. And insofar as our skills make us less dependent on corporate monopolies, developing the abilities that we think of as self-reliant is worth doing. However, the more we limit our lives to what we can do ourselves, the fewer our opportunities are. Each connection outside ourselves enriches us. When we create a web of interdependencies, we grow richer, stronger, safer, and wiser. Why would you not want to rely on others? To fully probe that would take us down a psychological rabbit-hole, but some of it is grounded in a belief that others are unreliable or unethical, and that we weaken ourselves by interdependencies. But the old saying “if you want a job done well, do it yourself” simply shows poor management skills.

If you’re still skeptical, I’ll resort to scripture: a quote from the Book of Mollison, Introduction to Permaculture, page two: “We can also begin to take some part in food production. This doesn’t mean that we all need to grow our own potatoes, but it may mean that we will buy them directly from a person who is already growing potatoes responsibly. In fact, one would probably do better to organize a farmer-purchasing group in the neighborhood than to grow potatoes.”

As veteran permaculture designer Larry Santoyo says, go to the highest generalization to fill your needs. Thinking “I must grow my food” is painfully limited. Thinking “I must satisfy food needs responsibly” opens up a vast array of possibilities, from which you can choose the most stable and appropriate. Individual efforts are often less stable and resilient than community enterprises. And they’re bad design: self-reliance means that a critical function is supported in only one way. If you grow all your food and get hurt, you are now injured, hungry, and watching your crops wither from your wheelchair. That won’t happen in a community farm. And for those worried about an impending collapse of society, the roving turnip-bandits are much more likely to raid your lonely plot while you sleep exhausted from a hard day of spadework, and less likely to attack a garden protected by a crew of strong, pitchfork-wielding farmers who can guard it round the clock.

Creating community reliance gives us yet another application of permacultural zones: Zone zero in this sense is our home and land. Zone one is our connection to other individuals and families, zone two to local commerce and activities in our neighborhood, zone three to regional businesses and organizations, zone four to larger and more distant enterprises. Why would we limit ourselves to staying only in zone zero? We can organize our lives so that our need for zone-four excursions—say, to buy petroleum or metal products—is very limited, while our interactions with the local farmers’ market and restaurants are frequent. This builds a strong community.

Self reliance fails to grow social capital, a truly regenerative resource that can only increase by being used. Why would I not want to connect to my community in every way that I can? If we don’t help fill our community’s needs, there’s more chance that our neighbors will shop at big-box stores. An unexamined belief in self reliance is a destructive myth that hands opportunity to those who are taking our community away from us.

If you love being a farmer, then yes, grow all your own food. And sell the rest for the other things you need, in a way that supports your community. But is there really a difference between a farmer exchanging the product of her labor—food—for goods and money, and me selling the product of my labor—education—for goods and money? We both are trading our life energy within a system that supports us, and I’d like to think that we are both making wise ethical choices.

A good permaculture design is one that provides for the inhabitants’ needs in a responsible and ecologically sound manner. But there’s nothing in permaculture that says that it’s important for all yields to come from the owner’s site! If I can accomplish one thing in this essay, it is to smash that myth. Permaculture design simply says that our needs and products need to be taken care of responsibly in our design, not on our own land. That design can—and must—include off-site connections. If you are an acupuncturist whose income is provided by your community and you are getting most of your needs met from mostly local sources you believe to be ethical, then that’s excellent permaculture design. Your design will be stronger if your needs and products are connected to many off-site elements and systems.

It’s very permacultural to develop skills that will connect you more deeply to land, home, and community. And sometimes the skills that we gained in search of self reliance are the same ones we need to be more community-reliant. But self reliance, as a goal in itself, is a tired old myth that needs to die. It’s unpermacultural.

................................................................................................................................
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
Adrian
Founder and crotchety old git who wanders around in a threadbare dressing gown muttering

Posts : 2951
Join date : 2009-11-06
Age : 47
Location : Paradise, Nova Scotia

http://www.paradisepapercraft.ca

Back to top Go down

default Re: The Myth of Self Reliance

Post by Chilli-head on 1st January 2013, 8:49 pm

Part of my Christmas reading is "The Forgotten Arts" by John Seymour, 1914-2004. Lots of parts strike a resonance with me, but this bit might be relevant here.

Interdependence of craftsmen

Each craftsman was dependent on his brother craftsmen of different trades in order to carry on his own trade. The fisherman, for example, was dependent on the farmer who grew flax for his nets, the net maker who made them, the basket maker to make his pots and traps, the boat builder who builds his boat. The boat builder in turn was dependent on the blacksmith who forged the chain plates, spider-bands, anchors, chains and dozens of other items needed for a fishing boat, the woodsman who felled and carried the timber for the boat, sawyer who cut it up, the oil miller who made the linseed oil needed to preserve it, the flax spinners and weavers who made the canvas for the sails, the sail maker who made them, the rope maker who twisted the hemp for the ropes, the iron founder who cast the pigs of ballast for the bilge - and so it went on and on. All these interdependent craftsmen once knew each other. Each could go to his supplier and discuss with him exactly what he wanted. Each saw the beginning and the end of what he had created and each one of them probably thought of his own contribution as he ate the fish that the fisherman had caught.

avatar
Chilli-head
Admin and Boss man

Posts : 2345
Join date : 2010-02-23
Location : Bedfordshire

Back to top Go down

default Re: The Myth of Self Reliance

Post by Dandelion on 2nd January 2013, 5:50 pm

I've been pondering on this blog as I've pottered about. It did make me think that one danger of trying to live with no reference to anyone else is that fear or mistrust can creep in, and it becomes a survivalist lifestyle. We each have to play to our strengths. Thanks - both these passages are thought provoking.

................................................................................................................................
The richer we have become materially, the poorer we have become morally and spiritually. We have learned to fly in the air like birds and swim in the sea like fish, but we have not learned the simple art of living together as brothers and sisters.

-Martin Luther King, Jr.
avatar
Dandelion
Admin

Posts : 4504
Join date : 2010-01-17
Age : 61
Location : Ledbury, Herefordshire

Back to top Go down

default self

Post by frankbeswick on 15th April 2013, 8:38 am

The problem with self-reliance is the term itself. We have the idea of a self that is distinct from other selves and capable of living in isolation. This is incorrect. The self is social and exists within a network. Hence the self-reliant individual is a myth.

Far better is to use the word autonomy to suggest that all individuals do as much as they can to look after themselves.
avatar
frankbeswick

Posts : 99
Join date : 2010-07-12

Back to top Go down

default Re: The Myth of Self Reliance

Post by Dandelion on 15th April 2013, 2:49 pm

great

................................................................................................................................
The richer we have become materially, the poorer we have become morally and spiritually. We have learned to fly in the air like birds and swim in the sea like fish, but we have not learned the simple art of living together as brothers and sisters.

-Martin Luther King, Jr.
avatar
Dandelion
Admin

Posts : 4504
Join date : 2010-01-17
Age : 61
Location : Ledbury, Herefordshire

Back to top Go down

default Re: The Myth of Self Reliance

Post by Mike on 19th April 2013, 3:46 pm

But if "permaculture" there would be any of a number of starch/calorie sources besides grains.

Potato -- not usually grown that way but it is a perennial. Most obvious if growing a variety like "Green Mountain" which besides the main large tubers (harvest and eat) later in the season starts a second set which are just golf ball size by harvest time. You could leave those in place,replant immediately, or if saved till Spring plant uncut with no wounds making safe to plant earlier. Green Mountain has large plants. The main reason why not a commonly seen variety is because very blight susceptible (plant breeders take note: that would be a valuable project to try crossing with a very resistant variety).

Chestnut -- clearly premaculture and before the potato was introduced was a major carbohydrate source for the poor of Europe. I'm involved with breeding the American Chestnut for chestnut blight resistance (and "ink disease" resistance; a different phytopthera species than the potato blight species). American chestnut is much tastier than European. Chestnuts have to potential to yield as much carbohydrates as maize when neither is being fertilized (in the long run, maize will only produce about 30 bu/acre under those conditions).

Jerusalem artichoke, groundnut, dahlias, and numerous other New World species were used by the Native Peoples. The first two are usually thought of as weeds (seriously invasive; difficult to eradicate) and the last as a garden flower useful as food where the ground doesn't freeze hard but Britain probably too wet in Winter.

................................................................................................................................
There is no possibility of social justice on a dead planet except the equality of the grave.
avatar
Mike

Posts : 485
Join date : 2009-11-08
Age : 72
Location : Step by Step Farm, Berkshire Mtns, Massachusetts, USA

Back to top Go down

default Re: The Myth of Self Reliance

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum