The Green behavior notion prescribes leaving others alone, period.
It's about a GREEN MOVEMENT, not a Green Party.
Ecology - Grassroots Democracy - Sustainability - Social Justice at Home, Community, Nation, World.
Page Menu - Bottom
No, it's not a shack, it's a sustainable house, a home for human beings' long term survival without the demands of mortgages, 40 hour work weeks, and an elimination of tons of stress. It's mobile, too.
We cannot all llive in a tiny house, but we could if we wanted. Do you want to or should you? It comes with building plans, free. Recycled material creates an ideal living space for individuals, couples, and families. It leaves a tiny footprint on Mother Earth and her children compared to a Mc Mansions. What ought we to do for the 7th generation?
Will Greens end homelessness with tiny houses?
"Cal-Earth's mission is guided by three principles: (1) shelter is a basic human right, (2) every human being should be able to build a house for him or herself, and (3) the best way to provide shelter for the exponentially increasing human population is by building with earth." Nader Khalili (1936-2008)
This quotation does not mean to imply that Nader Khalili would agree with this web sites green information. A "fellow traveler" we might call this thinker and builder of sustainable housing.
Climate Change Essay (WORKING PAPER)
Please excuse my presumptuous title, What Greens Believe. I do have a BA in sociology so stereotyping remains well fixed in my mind as a poor manner of thinking about individuals and groups. Besides, certain ideas remain in place among Green Movement types, like the power and efficiency of composting. Don't laugh, our future requires composting on a massive scale.
I can say this much for sure about the Green Movement type beliefs. The Green Movement' first priority was, is, and will be education: Each one teach one.
Ecology and ecological living for sustainability might lead the education list for Green beliefs. We thinking globally and acting locally for long-term ecological outcomes, rather than taking the easy way out with short-term outcomes for our way of life, Green's think of life more like this:
Green economics tells us that growth economics cannot sustain people, other species, or habitat for long-term survival, judging on past performance. This does not discount the use and meaning of free enterprise.
Free enterprise does not necessarily mean "capitalism" any more than capitalism means "free enterprise" in practice. But first let's get a working definition of capitalism as use by this Green.
Capitalism means the growth of money from investments in money, as used by this Green. There's tons more that I can write about capitalism, but that's not why I'm here at the moment. Capitalism will have its own pages soon enough. Suffice it to say that all indicators point to the failure of capitalism to protect habitat on earth as well as notions of equality and social justice world wide.
I could argue that the Soviet Union practiced state capitalism rather than socialism. But there's no point in going over dead bones at the moment. Suffice it to say that the Soviet Union's style of "socialism" failed to protect habitat on earth as well as notions of equality and social justice world wide.
I could also argue that Cuban communism practices a failed communism, but that would be unfair considering the number hardships encountered by Cuba; the US has for a long time made life difficult for that tiny country that chose to follow its own dictates, for whatever reason. I understand that at the moment Cuba has a dictator and that it has a command economy, which it had following it latest revolution. Most recently free markets, free enterprise, has developed. This does not mean that this dictatorship has moved to taking surplus value, profits, and investing these to grow greater profits worldwide; I'm speaking of the exportation of capital into other countries, bioregions in the not distant future.
I do not see Cuba growing capital, money which begets money, for the sake of exporting growth capital to other countries for self-enrichment at the expense of indigenous populations. No, I don't see that. I hope that I'm not proven wrong.
So we're left with Green economics. Green economics must arise from the grassroots just as grassroots democracy must grow from the grass roots. In many cases this calls for inter-external mutual aid from local and external concerns; mutual aid replaces the growth economic paradigms of economics hostile to life forms and grassroots democracy.
If any of this sounds "idealistic," it should. Meanwhile, come up with your own sustainable, economic plans for a planet losing its genetic diversity and crop land.
No idea comes close to the idea of ecology when it comes to Green thinking. Other ideas like peace, social justice, and sustainability give the Green Movement a "left leaning" appearance, but make no mistake about it, ecology as a science carries a lot of weight when it comes to Green Politics and the critique of capitalism.
To quote Murray Bookchin,
'This is an anti-ecological society. It is an anti-ecological society because it forces the great majority of people to function in an anti-ecological way. The very morphology of life today, its very structure, its very architecture, pits human against human, isolates human from human, and creates a law of survival in which 'grow or die, I'm all right Jack, to hell with you',becomes the way in which we orchestrate our everyday lives. - Murry Bookchin - Economics and the Moral Order
Busindess as usual will not free our polital system of ecomonic stranglehold of Earth's life giving conditions. Our ecological crisis threaten life on Earth in the short term, a new twist on the long-term crisis just some 30 years ago. Neither the state nor the capitalist system own or control the means of ending our growing ecological crisis. Both must bow to growth economics. Earth's life forms cannot wait, including humanity. This is what Green Movement types think.
Ecology teaches us about nature's vast number of relationships, many known, many unknowable. Ecology teaches us that "Nature is very complex to think about, and probably more complex than we can think," to quote presidential candidate Berry Commoner. Berry Commoner was a was an American biologist, college professor, and politician. His presidential campaign in 1980 brought the Citizens Party to our attentions.
Professor Commoner believed that the world economic system would serve humanity and nature with strict "unbending laws of ecology." I happen to think this high idea deserves our consideration. We might keep in mind that our ecological knowledge remain meager. We have a long way to go before ecology shares its powers to humanity.
What generally distinguishes a Green person from others is their belief that our local and global politics should reflect the needs of future generations as well as our own.
Obviously, this leaves nuclear energy and fossil fuels out the Green philosophy for a sustainable, ecological future. If we briefly look into electoral politics, we find that Greens suspect the Democrats and Republicans of the United State political parties represent more or less the same interests. Although in recent year the Republican Party's swing to a greater focus on capital growth over human and ecological concerns tends to shock the faint of heart.
We would look to the role of Oligarchs like the Koch Brothers and Ruport Murdoch for examples of a dominating, elitist group of billionaires. They play a major role in the manipulation or outright manufacture of ideas, such as global warming denial. A Green discussing the needs of the planet with the Koch Brothers would find an unconcerned antagonist.
The Democratic Party sometimes claims to represent the best electoral party for saving the Earth from human caused biohazards, like global warming, ebola, HIV and more. Their approach to medical care for more of the US population shows a sentiment similar to Green Politics as followed by a several Green philosophies.
I would not give too much credence to the Democrats politics when it comes to ecological matters. This is not to say that the Democratic Party and its representatives do not deserve our support in ecological and social issues. They do. Their practices tell this writer that they need to clear their heads of past notions of humanity's place on this planet.
With that said, keep in mind that Greens, writing with a broad brush, so to speak, prefer to abide by "an unconditional positive regard for others," to use a phrase borrowed from the Humanist Carl Rogers. I get away with this claim because Greens understand that we must have peace in our homes and world; anything less leads to more degradation of ecological conditions worldwide. Rogers has given us a working phrase to articulate a Green Philosophy.
It's about grassroots democracy, which requires group consensus; this approach by far frustrates more people out of active Green Politics than almost any other complaint. "It's a waste of time."
Participants need to respect the weaker voices while ensuring gender balance. Green Politics requires what any democratic, grassroots movement requires, people actively accepting responsibility for their community's political well-being and future. This requires time, patience, and a will to live democratically. We see a giant role for education in this single Green issue.
So, Green Movement people prefer small group discussions for getting their Green Politics right. In electoral politics terminology, visitors to a Green Movement political discussion will find a strong bias for libertarian thinking; this is not to say that Greens are "Libertarian Party" people, although some do belong to that party. Greens believe that we should not do unto others what we would not have them do unto us, borrowing from the Anarchist Prince Kropotkin. I do not mean to suggest that Green Movement people want anarchism. Reread what I wrote.
Now compare the above to this golden rule: do unto other what you would have them do unto you.
Although these to notions sound so similar, they must always remain far different in outcomes.
"Keep out of their face". It's not for the Green Movement types to cause others to follow a philosophical, theological, or party ideology; far from it, Green Politics requires that Greens avoid proselytizing.
Why the Localism?
Local control allows for accountability. Accountability must take place on the local level since Green Politics by its nature requires local control and accountability. Without accountability and local control, habitat remains at risk from marauding government and corporate growth maniacs.