Re: Save the Seeds Movement...was Consensus

Instead of all this theoretical BSing and nattering why
don't we hear who everyone's contacted about the
"Save the Seeds Movement" .....what you suggested to
help them, USD or otherwise.  Or, what they've
suggested can be done.... there, Iraq or elsewhere
...how 'bout less talk and more action (reports)...or, puttin' your money
where your mouth is....

The first link has contacts in 10 different countries, inclduding the US and 
Canada.  So instead of saying it is impossible, contribute to what is 
already
possible.   Time for exscuse the phrase'....getting "boots on the 
ground".....report back to the rest of us please to give others inspiration 
instead of
desperation.


 Save the Seeds Movement
http://www.alliance21.org/caravan/en/3/seeds.htm

 A few sources of inspiration on biodiversity
T he Nayakrishi Andolan (New Agricultural Movement) of peasants in 
Bangladesh strives to promote community knowledge around local plant 
resources in an attempt to secure food security. The movement highlights the 
importance of wild uncultivated plants, which play a major role in the 
survival of poor and marginal population when agricultural productions fail
http://www.alliance21.org/caravan/en/3/pg12.htm


 Sow the seeds of revolution
 Today, when the onslaught of globalisation is fought by a multi-million 
dollar ngo industry, a non-profit initiative like bba has proved that even 
without funds and resources, those on the fringes of society can achieve for 
the people an impossible and lost dream.

       http://tinyurl.com/4r4oa

      Additional google results:
       http://tinyurl.com/5xhc3


Do or donate,
Kit



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Globalcircle" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 11:08 PM
Subject: [Ecobal]Consensus/ was Another Bush Crime against humanity and Gaia


>
> Just because you don't like my idea of consensus doesn't mean I don't
> understand consensus. Let's be adults. You can define consensus any way 
> you
> want, and so can I. I've never heard consensus defined as everybody doing
> something together, but you can believe anything you want.  In fact,
> consensus in most local societies simply means people usually go along 
> with
> whoever exercises leadership by persuasion or initiative. Leaders arise in
> every kind of organization and this is natural.  The main reason so many
> intentional communities' grandiose plans fail miserably is because someone
> decides in advance that this or that process of consensus must be used by
> the group to make decisions.  And before it ever gets off the ground,
> everybody involved gets really tired of every clueless participant wasting
> everybody else's time.  You see it all over the Internet.  One person
> thinks they have to impose their vision on the others, and the others
> aren't buying.  Case in point - your insistence that "Dissenting views are
> accommodated and integrated throughout the process".  You're narrowing 
> down
> consensus to what you think it ought to be, and that's final.  Call it
> whatever you want, but traditional local or tribal governance 
> ("consensus",
> if you will) generally rejects or ignores dissenting views because they
> can't be "integrated".  Most want it one way, and some want it the other
> way. They can't have it both ways. A little common sense would go a long
> way here.
>
> paul [email protected]
> http://largocreekfarms.com
> http://medicinehill.net
>
> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********
>
> On 1/28/2005 at 8:36 PM Jan Steinman wrote:
>
>>On 28 Jan 2005, at 19:15, Globalcircle wrote:
>>
>>> I agree and promote " the paradigm shift to small decentralized
>>> bioregional
>>> consensus group land based actions...." but without the consensus group
>>> part... Such
>>> communities usually had the independence to decide their own governance
>>> without ideas of democracy, consensus, or dictatorship shoved down
>>> their
>>> throats from outside.
>>
>>I don't think you understand consensus. And I think the only societies
>>that have ever survived for long had some form of consensus -- whatever
>>they called it.
>>
>>In whatever words, it's a feature that Jared Diamond says is essential
>>to long-term survival. (In his new book, "Collapse.")
>>
>>Consensus does not mean everyone agrees with something; it means
>>everyone does something together.
>>
>>There's a world of difference in beating the last dissenter into doing
>>something the way everyone else wants to do it and having no dissent in
>>the first place. Consensus drives agreement into the process at the
>>very beginning, including dissenting views. Dissenting views are
>>accommodated and integrated throughout the process.
>>
>>That sure is different from what people are calling "democracy" today!
>>And I imagine it's very different from what you imagined it was.
>>
>>:::: Nothing  will replace what we are burning up quickly now. Every
>>possible  replacement has problems which have received little
>>publicity. -- Dr. Kenneth Watt
>>:::: Jan Steinman <http://www.Bytesmiths.com/Van>
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------
>>To subscribe or unsubscribe to ecobalance go to:
>>http://www.ecovillage.org/ecobalance
>>------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe to ecobalance go to:
> http://www.ecovillage.org/ecobalance
> ------------------------------------------------
> 



------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe to ecobalance go to:
http://www.ecovillage.org/ecobalance
------------------------------------------------