Looking forward, not backward (of course)

When I say there have been two distinct human lifeways — the for-the-most-part generally sustainable “Old Ways” prior to the Neolithic Revolution and the crazy “New Ways” (of the “civilization” period) characterized by statism, class division, technological development, expansionism, etc. — it may sound to some as if I’m advocating going back to the former.

No. It couldn’t be done. First of all, the Old Ways could only support a fraction of our current population levels.

I’m all for getting the human population to gradually decline from what figures to be a peak of around ten billion toward the end of this century. But contraction of the population should be done gradually and with great sensitivity and patience. No mandates. It should involve a cultural realization about our species “ecological footprint.”

Aspirations re: de-growth, devolution, descent, etc. likewise need to be handled with great sensitivity and patience. And it would be counterproductive to associate them with “going backward.”

Our movement should paint a positive picture. Of a better way to live in the future. Free-er. Liberated — from the burdens of the current mass institutional-technological society and its alienation from nature.

Paint a picture of an appealing Green world of humanly-scaled governments, institutions, technologies. Not utopian, but better. Better than what we put up with now. Bioregional; communitarian; localist. Stable. Less stressful on people and the planet.

Forward to a Third Way. Different from anything that’s come before. More sustainable and more satisfying.