yeah…a big part of my mentality seems based on trying to rally and join with others to help mitigate, if not prevent catastrophe. Another approach is to work w/ others to cope and adapt to those catastrophes once we think we can’t do much to stop them from happening.
The former and latter are not necessarily mutually exclusive. But it seems a good idea to know when preventing the catastrophe is a lost cause, and therefore, when our energy is better spent on adaptation than prevention. The latter view is emerging among some concerned about peak oil, climate change and the uncertain future of our political freedoms.
Some people have gone some distance in preparing themselves, their families and small intentional communities. Richard Heinberg refers to this as life boat communities.
But me ? I’ve done very little of this. Yeah, I bike wherever I go around town, and grow some food. But I’d starve, freeze to death or die of cholera w/o the amenities of modern life.
What you say about government and activism not being there to help me amid crisis reminds me of what some of my anarchist and self-described ‘radical’ friends tell me.
But I’m undecided on this. When they say government can’t and won’t help, I wonder whether their perspective amounts to brutal realism or just glorified apathy. Sometimes, I suspect the latter when it seems we can still do some good with activism.
It’s good—to say the least—to be prepared for disasters— natural or economic or political. But ideally, doing that would involve (1) a survivalist, life-boat community mentality somehow combined with (2) continuing to engage via our political systems while we still have them.
When it comes to being prepared, the hardcore survivalist crowd can tend to seem focused too much on their small groups. Yet, people putting their energies into activism, such as me, can tend to have our heads in the clouds too much, paying inadequate attention to the practical details that enable us to be alive.
But perhaps I’m not totally oblivious. Regarding activism, it seems its success requires participants to engage our heads, our hearts, and our hands. That is, we have to apply ourselves intellectually, socially, and practically to the issues we’re working on or fighting for.
As I’ve said before, a good example of engaging heads, hearts and hands is growing one’s own food as an attempt at a rational response to concerns about peak oil, corporate power, climate change, and so on.
What I get from your comments Jon is not a basis for refuting the legitimacy of activism. Instead, you’re calling attention to the fact that activism has to connect with people’s daily lives in a hands-on and otherwise practical way. That could be putting food into people’s stomachs; providing housing; creating safer streets and safer drinking water; helping people to feel less lonely and isolated.
Leave a Reply