Plukrijp

Declaration of Dependence
Fearful for the preservation of an evolutionary future for humankind, we
wish to express our concern for the way the current globalizing culture (civilization),
by means of its expansion, is destroying the Earth and any prospects
for the lives of future generations. We consider it proven that the Earth does
not belong to humans and that humans are not superior to nature. Despite
this our culture is destroying irreversibly the majestic creation of terrestrial
evolution that has been shaped over billions of years; it is exhausting the nonrenewable
natural capital of the Earth, exterminating living organisms and
vast ecosystems that are millions of years old and encroaching on the dispersed
remnants of the biosphere. It is eliminating natural conditions that
witnessed the origination of humans and with which we are still biologically
homogeneous. It is high time that the short-sighted and self-satis ed
admiration for everything human and cultural was brought to an end and
a dissemination of admiration for and humility in the face of the fascinating
complexity of the biosphere, which is the only possible host system for
our culture, was initiated. In the age of globalized culture we must leave
behind the predatory approach to the Earth that was once so useful in the
rapid expansion of local cultures in a healthy biosphere. No biological species,
not even ours, is able to control itself.  e biosphere is the cradle, home
and grave of humans, and culture has to submit to it.
 e contemporary state of scienti c knowledge allows us to reconstruct
credibly the development of the Universe in time – from the Big Bang to
the present – and explain the origination and development of the Earth
and life on it, including the evolution of the human species. In the same
credible way we are able to imagine a human future on a healthy, no longer
culture-damaged Earth. Yet unless we end the con ict between the antinatural
culture and the Earth, the habitability of our planet will deteriorate
and the whole human species could be subject to premature extinction
through its own fault. Into the focus of general intellectual contemplation,
which consisted in wonder in ancient times, in humility in the Middle Ages
and in doubt in the modern period, there now comes a fear for our survival.
 e new, evolutionary-ontological understanding of the world therefore
challenges us to acknowledge the imperative value of nature and the naturedependent,
merely instrumental value of culture. Philosophy, science, arts and
education systems, informed as they are by negative experience of the present
expansion of a consumer-technological civilization, must issue atimely
warning of the danger of the destructive self-movement of anti-natural culture,
and of the indi erence and retardation of the ability of humankind to
understand the world while taking into account its own future.
In compliance with what has been presented above,
we would like to emphasize that:
1 Only the biosphere as a whole is the smallest relatively autonomous system
capable of long-term development in time. All of its subsystems,
individuals, populations, biocenoses and culture are temporary and conditional,
existentially dependent on the creativeness and prosperity of the biotic
assembly. Even a harmonious upbringing of our children beside their biological
mothers presumes the presence of an impersonal mother nature.
2 Nature is contained not only in our external environment but also in
every one of us. We are one of many species of the planet Earth that are
of evolutionary origination and well harmonized with the biosphere. Yet we
also know that we are an exceptional species, the only one that has ever created
a culture because, in harmony with its genome, it has ignited another
evolution, the oppositional cultural evolution.
3  e once inconspicuous cultural evolution now threatens the future of humankind
due to its predatory orientation that is masked behind a uence
and the expansion of consumer technology.  is is because culture is neither
a cultivation of nature nor a continuation of its evolution by other means. It is
an arti cial physical system with its own internal information; this information
is not, however, genetic information, but a human spiritual culture.
4  is spiritual culture, the imagined genome of the cultural system, is
not as wonderful and exalted as it once seemed. Since it is rooted in
the human genome and since its partial components are still liable to the
predatory spiritual foundations of ancient cultures, it is species-sel sh, limited
and short-sighted. It helps to expand a cultural system that ravages the
planet irreparably.
5 In the last three hundred years in particular we have succumbed to
atemptation to develop preferentially those human abilities and powers
– cool symbolic communication, partial scienti c rationality and
economic calculation – that result in a growth of material riches and secular
power over both humans and nature.  e end result of this is aglobal
technosphere unadjusted to natural reproduction.
6 In a comparatively short period of time we have ravaged easily accessible
natural assets, namely forests, ores and liquid fossil fuels.  e
planetary expansion of a technically developed culture has been achieved
only at the cost of occupying the Earth for ourselves and damaging it for
other living systems. By means of contemporary culture we are the only
cause of the mass extinction of biological species currently in progress.
And we, too, are a species endangered by our own culture.
7 Since the laws of conservation of materials and energy apply to the
whole universe, cultural existence can originate only by means of destroying
the older natural existence.  e expansion of an arti cial cultural
existence causes a dangerous retreat of natural existence, the disappearance
of the original natural order of the Earth; and it is with this natural
order that evolution has harmonized the human organism. Cultural
existence, which does not originate via positive destruction of nature but
via negative technical destruction, is dependent and transient; it is not
harmonized with humans in evolutionary terms. Nature cannot even integrate
it or support its evolution without humans.
8  e predatory spiritual foundation of culture (the predatory paradigm)
disseminated by contemporary science, education and politics
must be replaced with respect and reverence for nature, by a biophile
spiritual paradigm.  e never-ending political arguments about the correctness
of either right-wing or le -wing orientation hide the seriousness
of the con ict between culture and the Earth, human biological invariability
and dependence on nature. It prevents a modi cation of culture
in favour of cooperation with nature.
9 It seems that natural evolution also tests the success of the biological
evolutionary construction of humans.  is test is, however, an
indirect one; it is performed by means of human creations, i.e. the
compa tibility of the functions and body of culture with the biosphere.
A cultural system that exceeds a notional limit of stress exerted on the
Earth, that will be too extensive and anti-natural, will inevitably cease
to exist, and humankind along with it, independent of its technical and
informational level.
10  e Earth‘s host system may tolerate and feed the allochtonous
cultural system in the long term only if the inanimate system of
culture achieves maturity over time – if it grows, like the biosphere, qualitatively
only. And this means the intentional bringing nearer of contemporary
culture‘s metabolism, which is not adapted to nature, to the
metabolism of living systems. Otherwise we will exhaust too quickly and
unnecessarily natural raw materials and fuels and infest the planet with
waste and products of culture that are incompatible with nature.
11 In a situation where it is impossible to demonstrate either somatic
or mental improvement of humans by culture, the purpose of
culture cannot consist in mere growth of manufacturing and consumption,
in a notional utility that we cannot even de ne. It cannot consist
in questionable pro t which we cannot distribute equitably. It must consist
in the health and welfare of humans inside a healthy biosphere. Even
though we have a natural right to live and realize our potential as appropriate,
i.e. to create and develop the culture, we must abandon its current
aggressive strategy. For the near and remote future we need ahealthy
and habitable Earth.
We therefore invite the public to consider anew the relationship between
nature and culture, and to be cautious about the wider and more remote
consequences of human creations. Anti-natural culture is nowadays expanding
at an ever faster rate. It brings previously unknown a uence
to the technically developed part of humankind, yet it doesn‘t remove
poverty, war, violence and inequality. As a whole it functions as the largest
destructive power on the Earth.  e more we cooperate globally, the
greater the harm we do to nature. Since culture destroys what we did not
create, it can also destroy everything we have created. Contemporary
culture can be adapted to the Earth and to the human biological essence
only if we approach it as an arti cial, non-biological structure with inadequate
internal information.  e biophile reconstruction of culture which
awaits us is therefore a challenge to all responsible people on this planet –
scient ists, politicians and laypersons alike.  ink, act and make decisions
while taking into account that the Earth is the only inhabited planet in
the currently-known universe, that it is a precious, original piece of the
universe, which transcends both us and culture and which we have no
right to devastate. It is high time we returned the Earth to its sacredness,
its long-overlooked evolutionary and informational value, its subjectivity
that is superior to humans. We may have created huge technical systems
and developed information networks, but the natural order of both
inanimate and animate forms we have lost cannot be re-created even by
natural evolution. If we want to survive on the Earth, we have to be wise
and give way to nature.  e age of a symbiosis of culture and nature is
still ahead of us.

A la caisse d’un super marché une vieille femme choisit un sac en plastique pour ranger ses achats. La caissière lui a alors reproché de ne pas se mettre à « l’écologie » et lui dit :
“Votre génération ne comprend tout simplement pas le mouvement écologique. Seuls les jeunes vont payer pour la vieille génération qui a gaspillé toutes les ressources! ”

La vieille femme s’est excusée auprès de la caissière et a expliqué :

” Je suis désolée, nous n’avions pas de mouvement écologique dans mon temps.”

Alors qu’elle quittait le magasin, la mine déconfite, la caissière en rajouta :

” Ce sont des gens comme vous qui ont ruiné toutes les ressources à notre dépens. C’est vrai, vous ne considériez absolument pas la protection de l’environnement dans votre temps! ”

La vieille dame admît qu’à l’époque,

On retournait les bouteilles de lait, les bouteilles de Coke et de bière au magasin. Le magasin les renvoyait à l’usine pour être lavées, stérilisées et remplies à nouveau; on utilisait les mêmes bouteilles à plusieurs reprises. À cette époque, les bouteilles étaient réellement recyclées, mais on ne connaissait pas le mouvement écologique.

De mon temps,

On montait l’escalier à pied : on n’avait pas d’escaliers roulants dans tous les magasins ou dans les bureaux.
On marchait jusqu’à l’épicerie du coin aussi. On ne prenait pas sa voiture à chaque fois qu’il fallait se déplacer de deux rues. Mais, c’est vrai, on ne connaissait pas le mouvement écologique.

À l’époque,

On lavait les couches de bébé; on ne connaissait pas les couches jetables.
On faisait sécher les vêtements dehors sur une corde à linge; pas dans un machine avalant 3000watts à l’heure.
On utilisait l’énergie éolienne et solaire pour vraiment sécher les vêtements.

À l’époque,
on recyclait systématiquement les vêtements qui passaient d’un frère ou d’une soeur à l’autre.

C’est vrai ! on ne connaissait pas le mouvement écologique

À l’époque,
on n’avait qu’une TV ou une radio dans la maison; pas une télé dans chaque chambre. Et la télévision avait un petit écran de la taille d’une boîte de pizza, pas un écran de la taille de l’État du Texas.

Dans la cuisine,
on s’activait pour fouetter les préparations culinaires et pour préparer les repas; on ne disposait pas de tous ces gadgets électriques spécialisés pour tout préparer sans efforts et qui bouffent des watts autant qu’EDF en produit.
Quand on emballait des éléments fragiles à envoyer par la poste, on utilisait comme rembourrage du papier journal ou de la ouate, dans des boites ayant déjà servies, pas des bulles en mousse de polystyrène ou en plastique.

À l’époque,
on utilisait l’huile de coude pour tondre le gazon; on n’avait pas de tondeuses à essence autopropulsées ou auto portées.

À l’époque,
on travaillait physiquement; on n’avait pas besoin d’aller dans un club de gym pour courir sur des tapis roulants qui fonctionnent à l’électricité.

Mais, vous avez raison : on ne connaissait pas le mouvement écologique.

À l’époque,
On buvait de l’eau à la fontaine quand on avait soif; on n’utilisait pas de tasses ou de bouteilles en plastique à jeter à chaque fois qu’on voulait prendre de l’eau.
On remplissait les stylos plumes dans une bouteille d’encre au lieu d’acheter un nouveau stylo; on remplaçait les lames de rasoir au lieu de jeter le rasoir après chaque rasage.

Mais, c’est vrai, on ne connaissait pas le mouvement écologique.

À l’époque,
Les gens prenaient le bus, le métro et les enfants prenaient leur vélo pour se rendre à l’école au lieu d’utiliser la voiture familiale et maman comme un service de taxi de 24 heures sur 24.

À l’époque,
les enfants gardaient le même cartable durant plusieurs années, les cahiers continuaient d’une année sur l’autre, les crayons de couleurs, gommes, taille crayon et autres accessoires duraient tant qu’ils pouvaient, pas un cartable tous les ans et des cahiers jeter fin juin, de nouveaux crayons et gommes avec un nouveau slogan à chaque rentrée.

Mais, c’est vrai, on ne connaissait pas le mouvement écologique.

On avait une prise de courant par pièce, pas une bande multiprises pour alimenter toute la panoplie des accessoires électriques indispensables aux jeunes d’aujourd’hui.

ALORS NE VIENS PAS ME FAIRE CH…   AVEC TON MOUVEMENT ÉCOLOGIQUE

Fear, insecurity, suffering and refuge

1 We are constantly searching for security because we are fearful.

We are fearful because we search for security

instead of giving ourselves up to the insecurity that life is:

if we gave ourselves up to insecurity we would feel secure,

for we would have no fear of insecurity.

Escaping insecurity, instead, implies and begets fear:

the more we escape, the more we affirm that there is something to fear;

the more we affirm there is something to fear, the more we fear.

Thus, we search for security because we fear

and we fear because we search for security.

2 We fear the terrible sensation that fear is

but the fear of the sensation of fear

begets the sensation of fear that we fear.

3 We try to elude our fear by taking refuge in objects:

friends, lovers, groups, beliefs, identities, position.

Since these objects are breakable and unstable

by taking refuge in them we condemn ourselves to the fear of losing our refuge:

we take refuge because we fear losing the refuge that we take

because we fear losing the refuge that we take because we fear…

da capo sine fine…

4 We fear that others discover our fear

but our fear that our fear may be discovered

is fear that may be discovered by others:

we fear that they may discover the fear that they may discover

the fear that they may discover the fear that…

da capo sine fine…

http://www.diggersanddreamers.org.uk/index.php?one=new&two=new&sel=5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qacvAqru108#!