Breeding Politics

SEARCHING FOR AN ORGANIC WORLD

by Ethan Stein

INTRODUCTION

Breeding Politics is a search for an organic world.  Since such a world does not exist, this must instead become the search for a reasoned and rational world-view, one which could lead to an organic world.  Such a world-view would necessarily reflect the values of sustainability, stability and harmony.  Also, such a world-view would find a place for humans within Nature (and not above Nature, as is presently the case).

I understand these are subjective moral values.  Every analysis requires there to be some assumptions.  Certainly these qualities would appear to some to be fundamental as well as essential.  I know that on its own, Nature causes sustainability to arise and then maintains it, and that stability and balance (hence harmony) arise as a consequence.  And my understanding of evolution leaves me with some very clear ideas and the notion that Nature was created for the benefit of humans is not among them.  The only life that I can imagine to be worth living would certainly feature these qualities at its very foundation.  Hence the desirability of their presence seems to me to be both a reasonable and a rational assumption.

Look as I might, I cannot find such qualities anywhere in the world today, though interestingly, large parts of the so-called "traditional world" had been familiar with them.  However, while the traditional world may have been constructed according to organic principles, it seems that it had largely arrived at them despite itself, that is, by trial and error, and it was much aided in this by the fact that at the time all the options were essentially organic.  In other words, the choices made were still merely the most expeditious and opportunistic, but previously this did not block organic choices simply because all the choices were essentially organic (see Endnote 1).

Today we have a much more complex situation as the choices are no longer limited to organic choices, and inorganic choices possess powers that greatly exceed organic choices.  Deliberately rejecting inorganic choices requires qualities which so far we've either not been able to acquire or, in any event, we've not been able to maintain for any appreciable length of time (to a large measure due to the need to respond to relentless attacks from more exploitative and aggressive elements).

All in all, I believe it can be shown that the majority of people have managed to live relatively peacefully, having achieved sustainable relationships with their surroundings.  This is because those harsh regions which have periodically produced invaders have a limited capacity to produce such invaders.

We also find another pattern which is that those invaders attracted from the harsher homelands to more fertile areas of settlement, having settled down in their new homelands, gradually merged with the existing populations and lost their harshness.  This pattern is well illustrated with the histories of China and India.  Here we find that despite repeated invasions, the pressure within remained relatively low as the invaders were well absorbed.  There is, however, an opposing example and that is the case of Europe.  Here we find that various factors resulted in an endless upward spiral of the development of aggressive traits.  So while the rest of the world relatively peacefully slumbered between bouts of periodic low-intensity conflicts, Europe was busy creating a 'superfighter'.

Beginning in the 15th century, Europe began unleashing this 'superfighter' on an unsuspecting world with such success that within a very short time the rest of the world became the property of Europe.  And (in brief), in the process, the entire planet was set on a path of cultural change as European methods and standards of non-sustainable wealth extraction are widely adopted.

Another important thread lies in the realm of 'attitudes'.  Here we can see a conflict of two opposing notions – that of an Earth as a 'sacred mother', one which can be used by humans under certain conditions, and that of an Earth having been expressly created for human use.  These two ideas need not be separated by distance, they can even occur within the same belief system.

At another level of inquiry, it may be seen that human history consists of episodes of two very different kinds of sentiment.  One kind might be characteristed as a 'free feast' or a 'gold rush', and the other kind might be characterised as a 'slice of bread'.  By far the greater in extent in time, area and numbers has been that of the 'slice of bread', but the 'free feast' has also occurred repeatedly.  They frequently exist simulaneously, but then they either form closed societies or the 'free feast' tends to dominate.  These two create very different cultures around themselves: the 'slice of bread' generally achieves a strong measure of sustainability while the 'free feast' institutionalises the stampede.

The present era is very much dominated by the stampede.

Such thoughts lead to many questions.  If organic qualities existed previously, then why is it that today all avenues leading in their direction are so badly obstructed?  Is it possible for as many people as presently exist to live alongside a flourishing and stable Nature?  What are our options for correcting the gross environmental imbalances as exist today?  Is a real solution limited to replacing carbon fuels with non-carbon fuels or would that merely represent another attempt at avoiding dealing with the real problems?  If the future is telling us that something major and structural is wrong, then does this not necessarily tell us that something major and structural is wrong with the present as well?  These and similar questions provide the basic themes of this inquiry.

My meditations on these and related issues have led to a number of interesting observations and conclusions:

1. The environmental crisis forces an examination of fundamentals as it appears that real progress in dealing with our environmental problems would involve massive lifestyle changes and expectation shifts.  This is because the environmental crisis is not an accident but is closely associated with the dominant strains of our cultural ethos.
   
   
2. As in the case of physical characteristics, culture also exists within a process of evolution based on the selection of characteristics within the context of survival.  This interaction normally takes place within the complex relationship that exists between natural competition (see Endnote 2) and sustainability.  Under normal conditions the relationship between competition and sustainability results in overall balance and order.
   
   
3. All forms of intelligence (see Endnote 3) are a product of natural selection (i.e. competition).
   
   
4. The entire natural system has evolved to deliver sustainability and hence all human endeavours would also be expected to take place within the interests of the maintenance of sustainability.  However, the prerogatives of survival in the context of an expanding human intelligence which draws its strength from consistent extreme levels of competition, opportunism and artfullness, result in a situation where the interests of immediate survival result in the creation of an intelligence which is harmful to sustainability.
   
   
5. A complex dynamic exists between competition, intelligence and sustainability: although intelligence is derived from competition, as intelligence matures it passes through a phase where it becomes antagonistic towards sustainability, which causes competition (to the extent to which it relates to the specific source of intelligence which has become antagonistic towards sustainability) to lose its inherent integrity.  Accordingly, competition, despite its apparent role as principal designer, should not be seen as something truly fundamental, rather it must be seen as a catalyst or a bridge towards something more enduring.
   
   
6. The harmful consequences of the relationship between intelligence and competition have already made themselves felt, and it is now only a matter of time before the negative aspects of this relationship are more broadly accepted.
   
   
7. Alternatives to competition have been seeking birth for a long time now, beginning several thousand years ago.  Yet the logic and power of ideologies conditioned in the arena of extreme survivalism, producing in turn extreme forms of competition, opportunism and artfullness, is such as to cause a message of universality, tolerance and love to be widely perverted to one of bigotry, militant nationalism and rampant exploitation.
   
   
8. The present economy causes the destruction of Nature.  To save Nature an entirely new and different sort of economy has to arise, one which has many elements in common with the traditional agrarian economy of earlier pre-industrial times.  Economies which support cities and industry are resource-heavy.  If the entire planet cannot sustain the standard of living that has lately developed in Industrialised countries, then this standard of living is itself unsupportable, as it is not possible (or moral) to prevent others from seeking what some possess.  And if the lifestyle that has lately developed in Industrialised countries, especially when applied to the entire population of the planet, is itself not compatible with a stable and flourishing Nature, then this lifestyle must be characterised as being the result of misguided values and policies.
   
   
9. We must not lose sight of the fact that whatever exists, even the things that appear incongruous, are the result of survival strategies playing themselves out, and therefore it is urgently necessary for us to understand and appreciate both the driving forces as well as the scope of the problem.
   
   
10. That the environmental crisis will eventually and inevitably lead to the establishment of one or more new eco-friendly religions which is/are based on the preservation of nature.  And also, that various existing religions, which at present have either totally sold out to 'modern economics' and 'industrial development' and/or have yet to grasp the fundamentals of the environmental catastrophe (or which pay a notional 'lip service' to nature), will, under pressure of this catastrophe, develop or rediscover hitherto unknown, ignored, dormant, under-evolved, what-have-you, environmentally friendly 'roots'.
    
    
11. Whichever means (or combination of means) arise that move us away from the present morass (of economy based on the destruction of Nature), the laws of survival will eventually bring this about.  If for no other reason, this would be due to the fact that intelligence has unlimited potential and the seeds of its own growth are inherent.  The law of survival – which is that people will do whatever it takes to survive – ensures that a workable alternative to competition will ultimately arise and proliferate.
    

Why call this Breeding Politics ?  It so happens that breeding politics is simply an expression that came into my mind years ago.  As I saw it, there were (and are) politics associated with the breeding process.  At every possible level, Nature is filled with politics.  One observes the antics of the hermit crab who decorates his shell so artistically.  Surely that is not art for art's sake but art for the sake of some form of politics?  In the natural world, males, females and infants alike are all adept at politics.  Is there anything about the male lion that is not politics?  The females may conduct their politics in an altogether different time-frame, but nevertheless, they too are highly political.  Even infants, who seem to be so vulnerable and so helpless, exist in a world of politics.  There are politics surrounding the capture of the more productive teats.  Early hatchlings survive at a higher rate than late hatchlings.  The child learns how to manipulate the adult.  All these factors mean juveniles are introduced to the Art of Politics at a very tender age.  After all, broadly speaking, politics may just as well be defined as "the arts associated with survival".

One can argue that politics require a conscious awareness of one's self-interest, otherwise it is simply instinct or genetics.  But such an argument serves well to maintain the barrier we've chosen, for our own personal reasons, to erect between ourselves and the rest of Nature and does not appear to be supported by any consistent logic.

Our world is undeniably very bleak, today everything is topsy-turvey.  In a world where traditionally order is established by size and strength (not by courtesy and mutual consent), the advent of intelligence has resulted in a challenge of massive proportions.  It appears that intelligence is to be built up assidiously and at great cost and must inevitably transit a phase in which it is so incomplete as to be a danger to the group, even if it conveys benefits to the individual.

There are those who argue that humans are selectively headed for extinction and that all our present turmoils are merely inevitable steps in a process that is itself inevitable.  This argument ignores much critical evidence and at the same time assumes that humans can be brushed aside without much further damage to Nature. (It also hints of 'hopeful thinking'.)

The findings mentioned above would seem to me to be of importance.  And while they don't offer any hope that we'll be spared great horrors in the coming years (only a miracle can now prevent the glaciers from melting, the oceans from rising, billions upon billions from being dislocated, our lives from changing unrecognisably, nature from being trashed), they do indicate a direction, a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel.  We will eventually 'get our heads together' because that is inherent in the process (see Endnote 4).

At present we appear to be entirely obsessed with wealth-creation, innovative technology and the zealous pursuit of extravagance and pleasure, i.e. consumerism, all of which are, in one way or the other, inevitable consequences of competition and opportunism which, in turn, have managed to gain great merit in our eyes even though they cannot co-exist with mutual respect and cooperation.  However, these 'false values' (wealth-creation, innovative technology and consumerism) are rapidly exposing themselves as being suicidal and once this begins to sink in, we should begin to start seeing some positive changes.

(Of course, this presupposes that we don't manage to 'achieve' runaway greenhouse status. If that happens, then of course all bets are off.)

I understand that many will not find this prognosis satisfying.  From my perspective, while I believe I've managed to find something positive, I had no idea that it existed when I began investigating and I don't think I was particularly predisposed to finding 'silver linings'.  But the commonly held idea that humanity will destroy itself didn't seem to match all the available evidence.  Yet, if humanity wasn't to destroy itself, then some sort of a mechanism had to exist which would prevent this happening, as we seem to be doing just about everything we can to bring this about, i.e. to destroy ourselves.

Perhaps we are 'lucky' to be living in a post-Darwin-Russell world?  After all, it is after much confusion and misdirection that we have finally come to understand the mechanism that creates the design of the living physical world.  Now, however, we need to utilise the gains acquired by this understanding towards a different, though allied, goal.  We need to take our understanding of the mechanism that lies behind the developments which take place in the biotic physical world and use it to acquire an understanding of the process and the opportunities for change as they pertain to the cultural world.  After all, both worlds – physical as well as cultural – exist withing a context of pressures associated with survival.

Anyway, I am getting ahead of myself, so I'll leave it to you to join my exploration as recorded in the chapters given below.

I would mention to the reader that these essays do not follow the lines of an academic study.  The reason for this is that when I started writing I had no idea where it was going.  As mentioned in the first chapter (Prologue), when I started writing I was primarily interested in what was happening to our feathered friends, the birds.  And although the scope widened almost immediately, I still had no idea where it was heading.  It was only some 20 years after I started writing, that I began to perceive the basic themes emerging.  Perhaps some day I will attempt to pull these ideas together and give clearer expression to their 'logical order', but for the moment, they are simply a number of arrows all aimed in the direction of a single target.  This 'target' is the basic question: How can humans live on Earth without making a mess?

The reader should feel free to browse the list of chapter titles and read in any way that appeals.  On the other hand, there is a 'flow of ideas', so it does make some sense to approach them sequentially.

I would also like to mention that this is very much 'a work in progress', so any feedback will be much appreciated.

Endnote 1: This is not to deny that much wisdom existed in the traditional world.  However, much wisdom exists in the contemporary world also, yet it does not determine major decisions and there is no evidence that earlier it was any different.

Endnote 2: Natural competition would be competition under purely natural settings, i.e. where the only sustenance and energy available are attributed to recent photosysthesis produced under natural conditions.  This would include farming but exclude chemical inputs.

Endnote 3: I refer to intelligence in its broadest evolutionary sense, that is a non-inherited cultural process based on the development of articulated speech, progressing to complex verbal communication, recall of abstractions, acquiring experience gained through verbal communication and the ability to analyse based on complex associations involving information acquired through the senses, all of which in turn convey significant survival advantages.

Endnote 4: This is not to suggest that we should therefore sit back and relax. Activism is an integral part of the domain of political evolution.