I appreciate the discussion. Thank you for sharing your views on this topic. As you say, we seem to simply see differently on this issue. However, it does sound as though we both feel that the culture in which we live is in opposition to life. I know that a lot of permaculturists are doing good. My point was not to attack permaculturists nor the good that some permaculturists are doing. On this topic my point is simply to share my concerns about the attitudes and viewpoints that I have noticed from permaculture as a field and from some permaculturists. Also, it is an opportunity to share alternative types of relationships.

As I said, I’m far from an expert on permaculture. Also, I do know that not all permaculturists have the same views and attitudes, nor do all permaculturists engage in the same sorts of relationships. I have read many of the standard permaculture texts such as the Bill Mollison books. I have never attended a permaculture workshop. I do know a fair number of permaculturists. That may answer where my information about permaculture is from. I don’t disagree that I’ve noticed the emphasis on care that you’ve mentioned. However, that attitude still seems to place humans (permaculturists) in a role in which they are in control. Again, I’m not attacking permaculture or permaculturists.

I think this is a good conversation to have. I felt moved to respond not just in the defense of permaculture, which I believe is firmly grounded in ethical principals but also from the need to mentally process the idea of “dominance” in my head.

We’re obviously coming from different places but both caught up in a culture that is abusive to living things. It seems that you’re very much having a negative reaction to the idea of dominance while I’m able to accept it as part of my worldview. It’s almost like your hypersensitivity to chemicals has broadened to some of the other trappings of civilization. I have become more and more aware of such things but have not yet passed the threshold where my body violently reacts yet.

The idea of dominance is just that; it is a mental construct which we use to organize and describe the world. It is not a perfect representation of what is happening. I like your alternative characterization of how the world works. Using words like relationship, mutual care, respect, nourishment, and communication are not inaccurate and would beneficially shape our interactions with the rest of the world. I think I will make sure to use them in the future.

I’m curious what your exposure to permaculture has been. There are many, many people who do not understand what permaculture really is. The core of permaculture, it’s ethical basis, is care of the earth, care of people, and a fair share for all beings. If it doesn’t align with those values it isn’t really permaculture.

Thank you for the comment. I have to respectfully disagree with the assertion the notion that “every living thing must dominate over something to survive.” Please understand that in no way am I attacking you for holding that belief. I simply disagree, and my disagreement is with the culture in which we live more than it is with you.

First off, I think that the language here says a lot about the attitudes we hold. We are taught to think of “things” instead of beings. What does it feel like if we instead say “every living being must dominate over someone to survive”? To me that is quite different in terms of how it feels.

Secondly, I don’t believe that it is a true statement. My entire point with this blog post is that there is an entirely different way of understanding relationship with others. It’s not a make-believe type of relationship. It’s an actual experience for many, for the indigenous, whether they are human or not. Trees do not seek to control and master anyone, nor do predators seek to control and master their prey. They are in relationship that requires mutual care and respect. They understand what all living beings understand unless they have been trained not to understand this basic truth, which is that survival depends on relationship that is founded in mutual care, respect, nourishment, and communication.

If we seek to control and master anyone then we separate ourselves and deny ourselves the possibility of real relationship. When we do that we cannot hear others expressing to us how we can nourish and care for them as they are nourishing and caring for us.

Permaculture does understand the importance of cycles and giving back. However, from my experience that knowledge is very mechanical. It is not founded in relationship. If it was founded in relationship then it would feel quite different to me, and I might not have a problem with it.

Those are my feelings about the issue. As I said, I’m not trying to make you or anyone else wrong for how you feel. I’m not judging you for liking permaculture. I see permaculture as an improvement over conventional agriculture. At the same time, I feel as though it is flawed because it is not founded in what I believe to be real relationship.

I absolutely agree with you that one of the most dangerous things about civilization is the idea that this world is ours to dominate. However, I don’t agree that permaculture participates in this notion. From what I’ve seen permaculture envisions people in partnership with the rest of the planet, where each element within a system has an intrinsic value of it’s own.

I’m not sure that every person who proclaims themselves a permaculturist completely understands this yet or has completely revamped their life to reflect this. I think it’s a long process and we’re coming from a very disturbed place. I also think that it’s important to realize that every living thing must dominate over something to survive. Trees over the earth, predators over prey, and humans? I think the question is where do we stop. We’ve definitely gone too far, but who’s going to volunteer to live with less?

That’s a very interesting point you make about grains and landmass, and one I will have to research further. How necessary are grains anyhow? From a macronutrient perspective, fresh fruits and vegetables provide the carbs required and I’m sure minerals and vitamins contained in grains are contained in various fruits and veggies as well. The main point historically for grains seems to have been convenience, i.e. ability to store them for a long time. But with supermarkets peddling fresh fruit and vegetables year-round, I wonder if they’re still a dietary necessity.

Although I am a vegan, I have never considered my hands ‘blood-free’. I realize that my dietary choices still have massive consequences, but from what I know an organic vegan diet is still less destructive than an omnivorous one. Minimizing our footprint has to start somewhere, but yes, there is a lot of room for improvement even in the standard vegan diet. But change rarely happens suddenly, a transitionary period is needed, and veganism might be an early transition towards a truly sustainable mass diet for our species.