Dear RN, There is an interesting synchronicity happening between my local work and this list. Lately, the list is discussing how we view the motives of people like George Bush and also the kind of censorship which happens in our media. Meanwhile, just this morning I wrote a letter-to-the-editor about very local realities, but which touches on the same issues. Looking at the way my own world view has changed and continues to change, I see how important it is how we talk about things. Once we see the "truth", once we get a glimpse of how capitalism, media bias, the "Taker" ideology, etc. all collude to lead us toward destroying the earth, it becomes very tempting to use strong language to denounce the "destroyers" and what they are doing. But I think we must resist this temptation. In the name of being honest, we could alienate people who, ultimately, are just like "us" and who we must never give up on. I think I can best explain this by citing another example. When I was in college, some 20 years ago, I used the masculine pronoun to include both sexes and my professor corrected me, explaining that this language was sexist. However, I wanted to kind of "co-opt" the masculine language and to make it inclusive, as I think many people did indeed use it at that time. With indsight, though, I see that the rethinking involved in using both pronouns was very educational for our society and I now use inclusive pronouns. (Note: I am a woman.) I gather something similar has happened with the use of "Negro", "black" and other terms. In any case, seeing how language evolves, I think it is totally counterproductive to react with anger towards those who choose language that is politically incorrect, unless you can be quite sure that the person doing do is working to undermine the development of a healthier paradigm. Similarly, while it can be highly entertaining for those of us who are more politically "up-to-date" to see how people can misunderstand our enlightenment (:>)!, I would never want to embarrass someone who didn't quite "get it". At the risk of going one for too long, let me copy below two "Enviro-ideas" I wrote for local publication, one of which was "censored": ************************************************************* Responsible ATV use If not used properly, ATV's can cause considerable damage to the environment. It is especially important that ATV users avoid all wetlands including lake and river shorelines. These special areas are known as the "ribbon of life". They provide excellent wildlife habitat, reduce the danger of flooding and act as environmental filters. Another sensitive area is sand dunes and beaches. ATV users can make an important contribution to habitat conservation by avoiding sensitive habitats and using established trails. *************************************************************** ATV-users, please stick to roads & stay out of parks and protected areas. Streams and ponds are being turned into mud holes because people with time and money to burn are ripping through the woods with ATVs. Using motor vehicles, including ATVs, is a privilege, not a right. ************************************************************ In the end, I didn't even feel that bad about rejecting the second one, which could have offended some advertisers in the publication the "Enviro-ideas" are printed in. I am still sharing the strongly worded piece though, because I think it is important that people _feel_ how frogs and mayflowers are being destroyed, how people are being desensitized, as they roar through the woods... But I think those of us who can feel the pain of that, must not allow our pain to incite us to lash out towards those who don't feel the pain. We have to find more creative ways to respond. In my case, I realize how thankful I am to my parents, who fostered my love of nature, and I am starting a local nature club. Ultimately, I would argue that it is very important that we consider our audience and the stage of "enlightenment" of our world and ourselves, and speak accordingly. Just this morning, I wrote a letter-to-the-editor, which fits in here: ****************************************************************** BRINGING GLOBALIZATION HOME Dear Editor, Every morning I go for a walk in the woods. I suppose, those woods are like my "church", where I go to pray and seek guidance for each new day. This spring it has been painful to see the damage being done to "my" woods by people roaring through the woods on ATV's. I wrote a fairly strongly worded "Enviro-idea" for the Clare Shopper about this, but in the end, we decided to use something more toned down. I do not really consider this "censorship" for if my words would offend someone they would not really help protect the woods anyhow. On the other hand, it struck me as indicative of the values of our society that one must be careful not to offend potential "customers" and yet very few Canadians do anything to prevent their government from violating human rights of people protesting the way war criminals were wined and dined at government expense during the APEC summit in Vancouver in 1997. And very few are trying to prevent our government from using similar tactics against people like myself who care enough about their children's future to be willing to put their bodies on the line to defend it. I have heard that pepper spray (which one person who did police training says is apparently so horrible you feel like dying) and some kind of bullets may be used to disperse crowds at the upcoming FTAA summit in Quebec city. Is this how we want our tax dollars spent? On the other hand, there are signs that citizens are waking up. Some university students will be allowed to defer exams in order to attend the protests. The mayor of Quebec City has decided to open community centres to protesters (given that apparently the federal government has bought up just about every hotel room in sight as part of its attempt to keep people out.... is this how we want tax money spent?) Locally, I know of 4 people who are planning to go to the FTAA summit to support efforts to derail corporate globalization and others who can't go have sked me how they can contribute to the costs of those who are going. I think we have reason to be hopeful. Sincerely, Jan Slakov, Weymouth, NS 837-4980 **************************************************************** Now, what about the language we use when speaking about the economy? Even now, I find it hard to feel happy when I hear the stock market is going "down" or that recession is coming. And yet, I fully support the work of people like Mike Nickerson (see sig below) who are trying to help us see (and in a very non-offensive way, I might add) that recession/depression is what we want! But we won't call it that! What we want is simpler, more fulfilling lives. We want to live lightly on the land, to live close to nature. We want sustainability! And even if we can't succeed, we are going to have great fulfilling lives just trying, aren't we? all the best, Jan **************************************************************** "There is only one power available to citizens which does not require great wealth or the use of violence. It is the power of collective persuasion. It works on the subtle levels of thought and conversation and it works directly through democracy." http://www.cyberus.ca/choose.sustain/index3.html 7th Generation Initiative P.O. Box 374, Merrickville, Ontario K0G 1N0 (613) 269-3500 e-mail: •••@••.•••