This paper “argues that agroecology is contesting and, at least in some places, effectively changing the main social relations of production in today’s agriculture.” 🧵 tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.10…
“In this respect, [#agroecology] has a strategically important potential for allowing farmers to regain control over the labour process.”
“These practices have emerged as response to distortions in the process of agricultural production that arose as a consequence of increased dependency on external agents (the providers of inputs and technologies, banks, and processing industries)…
… and/or as a response to the unequal distribution of value in agricultural supply chains to which farmers1 are subjected.”
“….it is clearly shown that the organization of farming does not need to be scripted by the requirements of capital. Indeed it can be organized in a way that it is antithetical to those interests.”
“The organization and development of farms and farming does not need to follow the trajectory of scale-enlargement, technology-driven intensification and specialization.”
“The negative externalities that accompany this trajectory – such as the degradation of landscapes, the destruction of biodiversity, increased CO2 emissions, the weakening of regional rural economies and many more, are not inevitable.”
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
“#Permaculture should be viewed as a dynamic social movement that can provide a vision for radical transformation of human societies… As a system based on cooperation and solidarity among humans and non-human nature, permaculture offers a radical reimagination of the possible.”
Of course, there are many things to add from a critical and nuance-seeking perspective— that would start with the truthiness of stating how #permaculture is a historical intellectual artifact and practice with its own biases and blind spots built in. Just like any design practice
But, as a “toy model” to be reckoned with and revised, it’s offers a damn fine integration of practical protocols with a general ethics. Now let’s get about the revision work..
“We conduct a systematic review of 1,682 academic studies on human adaptation responses to identify patterns in constraints and limits to adaptation for different regions, sectors, hazards, adaptation response types, and actors.”
“we find that most literature identifies constraints to adaptation but that there is limited literature focused on limits to adaptation.”
Here’s my thesis: so many established, secure and privileged folks have an aversion to “radical” politics and discourse, where civil obedience is challenged or disagreement and conflict is intense, because *we* outsource genuine contestation to the military.
Care to discuss?
Which a to say, the desire and normative demand to not be adversarial, or to maintain civility and polite discourse, even with things that determine other people’s lives and dignity, is afforded by having cops and military use force to maintain established relations of power.
And it is this established system and culture of de-intensified political exchange — where agents are automatically expected to behave in a way that move towards consensus and peaceful co-existence — that effectively erases important and crucial world-making or remaking concerns.
My personal experience and academic research, both, confirms what Christina is saying. Most people just want to live meaningful lives filled w abundance (of love, fun, food & creativity). It’s our ideologies that block us from seeing the myriad of alternative ways to get this.
The caveat here is that it’s simply not true that people are unable to make the small changes, immediately. There are a lot of “little” lifestyle/consumer changes people are either too lazy, or don’t care enough to make. It’s about AGENCY. We have more than some might think.
I reject the premise that the current global mess we are all in is based solely on “the stories we tell.” These systems (in both their pathological and regenerative forms) are fundamentally relational. This means also material & energetic. Relations are never solely about ideas.
Relations of economic production. Relations of social reproduction. There are systemic and structural relations between bodies, plants, microbes, polities, climate, tools, animals, militaries, institutions, rivers, cops, etc., that generate the very conditions of life.
So if we want to improve the conditions for living we need to do more that just talk, or express, or weave new narratives. We need to forge new relations, “right relations” (as some indigenous folk put it). We need to renegotiate our arrangements with each other and ecology.
“At its core, #bioregionalism aims to address the inequitable distribution of resources and the disproportionate strain that current economic models places on natural environments and local people.” earth.org/bioregionalism/
“American environmental writer Peter Berg popularised the ideology, emphasising a social structure where community ties were strengthened, awareness of natural resources enhanced and dedication to environmental conservation imprinted upon the public.”
“In the bioregional view, such a society could be achieved by grouping populations in accordance to bioregions. Ecologically speaking, a bioregion is a specific geographic area that is distinct from others by the characteristics of its natural environment.”