 
Message-ID: 
Date: Sun,  5 Apr 1992 15:34:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Jon C. Slenk" 
Content-Type: X-BE2; 12
If-Type-Unsupported: alter
To: +dist+/afs/andrew/usr10/js9b/Public/camc.dl@andrew.cmu.edu
Subject: Fwd: Hope this finally gets through...
References: <9E315CEF60006432@YANG.EARLHAM.EDU>

\begindata{text,19269564}
\textdsversion{12}
\template{messages}
[Jesse was having problems sending his mail to the list. I think the problem 
was that he wasn't capitalizing correctly - make sure that when you send mail 
to the list you have the following as the address (verbatim, esp. 
capitalization):


	+dist+~js9b/Public/camc.dl@andrew.cmu.edu


-Jon.]


----------------------------------------


Hello again.

 

   Lemmesee.  Where'd I leave off? Bill letter #1...

 

>>*Bioshelters, Ocean Arks, and City Farming*, by John and Nancy Jack Todd

>>(of the long-running New Alchemy Institute), is *extremely* relevant to

>>our discussion (plus it has many nifty illustrations).  Finally, I might

>

>All the New Alchemy associated books are great, and, for the type of

>communities I'm interested in, a source of absolutely necessary

>technology and information.

 

   Yes-- although, oddly, I think they take a rather different approach to

all this stuff than Bill seems to.  I wonder what Nancy and John would

think of "corporate tribalism" as a way of life?

 

>>recommend the novel *Woman On the Edge of Time*, by Marge Piercy, on which

>

>That's a fine novel-- I also recommend it highly. Aldous Huxley's

>"Island" is also fine, another novel describing an alternative culture

>exceptionally well (though it's not as tightly writ as Piercy's...)

 

   *Island* I've heard about, but not read yet.  Yes, the Piercy is a fine

novel... with which I have some major problems!

 

   Bill then responded to my question:

 

>>  I wonder how willing each of us is to devote at least a

>>period of our lives to this kind of experiment? What does this really mean

>>to you, on a personal level?

 

   I was impressed by the answer.  I've not met one so serious about

trying all this stuff before!  It gives me some encouragement, I must

confess. :-)

   I also admired the touch of self-effacement:

 

>I'm forced to suspect, after so many years, that at least some of my

>strategies have been flawed.... ;-)

 

   Perhaps.  But whatever the case, I wish you much luck.  Who knows; if

this thing survives a while, maybe I'd come to visit... out of curiosity,

what sort of locations are probable?

 

>>  a quick addition.  In my last letter, I asked people to try to bring the

>>ideas down to a personal level.  One handle to grasp at: if a good community 
i

   s

>>one that meets the needs of its inhabitants, what would some of your needs 
be?

>

>One of my more important needs right now is to get started with at least

>a small model of a corporate tribe asap, in the next two years minimum.

 

   Hmm.  That's not really answering the question as I meant it.  What I

was asking was: what would a community have to offer you (that is,

everyone reading this question) to ensure that your personal needs would

be met? Socially, materially, psychologically?

 

   But on to more stuff.  Bill letter #2.

 

>From:  IN%"wce%hogbbs.scol.pa.us@CARNEGIE.BITNET" 25-MAR-1992 08:39:35.41

>To:    +dist+~js9b/Public/camc.dl@ANDREW.CMU.EDU

>CC:

>Subj:  Getting land

 

>How do we add the names of other interested people to this mailist? Can

>we build a library of ftp'able files? Should we develop an

>'advertisement' to post to other newsgroups, hunting for contributors?

>Well, I hope to hear from you soon---- Later, Bill Eichman

 

   I'm *not* the one to ask about technical details, unfortunately...

 

   Bill gave us some snippets from his book to look over.

 

>In an ideal and intellegent society, it would be a simple matter to

>begin and test the types of decentralized, hi-tech, and ecologically

>sound villages that we've been discussing.

 

   I agree...

 

>In an ideal society, an plan like this would be conceived and developed

>within the creative fringe, and then presented to the acaademic

>community, which would discuss it's strengths and shortcomings, and

>then devote academic resources to testing the idea. With nuetral and

>objective observers making measurements and reports, a 'test-model' of

>this new type of village would be built, and experimenter/researcher

>members selected, and soon high quality data would begin pouring into

>the society as a whole. If the idea was flawed, then it could be quickly

>set aside-- if it was a good idea, then what was learned could be

>rapidly passed on to new researchers.

 

   Now, this struck me as sort of odd.  You seem to be considering the

whole thing as a matter of formal experimentation, a very systematic

approach to things.  My instinct is to say, fuck scientific protocol;

distribute tools for self-sufficiency as quickly as possible, and let the

users figure things out for themselves!

 

>If the academics dubbed it a valuable idea, an efficient and profitable

>idea, then older monied investors would soon start to fund and support

>these villages, in hopes of founding and "owning" a think tank, a hothouse

>environment for the creative and commited entreprenuers and inventors so

>vitally needed in a globally competitive economy.

 

   And what is this about being part of a "globally competitive economy"? I

thought that was something worth *avoiding*!  Self-sufficiency is

attractive to me precisely because it would take away so much impetus to

compete, compete, compete... I see capitalism as part of the *problem*

we've been considering, and I thought that you were coming from that

direction as well.

 

>However, this doesn't seem a likely route for this idea; for we do not

>live in an intelligent or ideal society.

 

   Again, I agree.

 

>I have been discussing and presenting this idea in the academic

>environment of PSU for over fifteen years, to a universally negative

>response. I find a large percentage of students who find the idea

>attractive and exciting, but those with the power to effect changes and

>make funding rrequests, the Professors and Administrators, have devoted

>their attention wholeheartedly to serving the needs of existing

>industry.

 

   Maybe the need to acquire funding is part of the problem.

   A while back, I asked: how much material required to build efficient

shelters and a lowtech aquaculture (something like the fish-and-algae

cannisters used by New Alchemy) could conceivably be *scrounged* in

various world settings? In inner city ghettoes? In Third World environs?

   I heard about something recently-- an article in (I believe) *Mother

Jones* about a sort of shelter/greenhouse that was made entirely out of

found materials; the shelter itself was made with old tires filled with

earth, which made excellent insulator.  I also recall a shelter built out

of mortared cola cans.  And what about stuff like adobe and mud brick?

   Why ask the system to give you the knife to kill it with? The cat,

conceivably, could eat the corporation. :-)

 

>To give another example of this general opposition to radically new

>sustainable-living ideas, let me point out that despite nearly twenty

>years of ecological and alternative energy research and publication, no

>reputable academic community has attempted the one logical experiment--

>the construction of a superefficient, moderately self reliant housing

>development large enough to test economy of scale and the types of

>lifestyle changes mandated by a superefficient lifestyle.

 

   True, as far as I know.  And why not, I can't say.

 

> My point is this: If we want to see any results

>from these ideas, we must rely on ourselves to accomplish the first,

>and hardest, basic experiments.

 

   Exactly.  Now, who is the "ourselves"?

 

>Well, let's leave academia to it's ivory tower, and look at alternative

>ways of funding the first "test-models" of these sustainable hi-tech

>villages.

>

>It seems to me that there are four or five possibilities....

>

>(1) We work like demons on some money making scheme or another, try to

>build a store of wealth, and hope that we gather enough capital to start

>the projects while we're still young enough to enjoy the challenge.

>

>(2) We work like demons to find some alternative source of funding from

>some wealthy source or group of sources, something similar to the

>process that the builders of Biosphere II went through to fund their

>project, finally finding a texas oilman with the imagination to support

>the (admittedly suspect and possibly silly) biosphere project.

>

>(3) We make arrangements, or are lucky enough, to inherit a suitable

>piece of land. (Esalen started this way.)

>

>(4) We obtain a suitable piece of land using some technical trick, for

>instance, making a mining claim using the parameters set down by the

>federal Mining Act of 1872-1972.

>

>(5) My favorite possibility, and the one to which I plan to devote as

>much effort as possible in the next few years--- We find a suitable

>donor to either GIVE us the land, or to sell it to us at attractive

>terms, and with no down payment.

 

   How about squatter tactics?

   Think about possibilities that you might have missed.  And think about

*who* this is for.

   More soon.

 

 

     --Jesse.

 

 

----------------

 

----------------


-----------------------------------------------------

Jon Slenk        js9b+@andrew.cmu.edu   EVERYTHING is

Carnegie Mellon  Pittsburgh PA          Disclaimed

\enddata{text,19269564}


 prev message 
 next message