From: dean@vexcel.com (Dean Alaska)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.greens
Subject: Re: COMMUNITY SUPPORTED AGRICULTURE
Date: 22 Jan 93 23:35:16 GMT
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO

In article <1993Jan22.173404.21495@beaver.cs.washington.edu> pauld@cs.washington.edu (Paul Barton-Davis) writes:
>In article <1678600150@igc.apc.org> Dale McMillen <dmcmillen@igc.apc.org> writes:
>>
>>One of the concerns that have been raised about self-sufficient and
>>sustainable communities is that it is unreasonable to expect that
>>everyone would want to spend their days wrestling a plow behind a
>>mule.
>>
>
>[ ... more description elided ... ]
>
>Once again, I have to ask Dale why he thinks that such a system is so
>different from the current one, and more specifically, why he thinks
>that a CSA-type system would not just evolve (as ours has) into
>something like the present one. 
>
>-- paul
>
>(1) and yes, I do mean to imply that there is a spiritual side to
>    human existence, and yes, I do mean to imply that the production
>    of food, its preparation and its consumption have always been
>    a part of satisfying that spiritual existence.

I think Dale and Paul are looking at this issue with different goals.
It sounds like Dale is looking for a more sustainable system with
less environmental damage and the various community and self
sufficiency issues fall in line.  In _addition_, I think Paul is
looking for that "connection" that people have lost by being so
remote from what supports us.  Am I right?

In pre-industrial days, the majority of the people worked in some form
of agriculture.  Today it is less than 5% in the US.  Neither seems
like the optimum to me if only because natural diversity in people
means that the majority are unlikely to want to do the same thing.

I do think the number should be much higher than 5%, and I don't
think anyone would have to be forced to farm to get a much higher
percentage.  Many farmers are forced off the land and would love
to continue to be farmers, especially if it were a little more
stable financially.  I think the way to do this is to encourage
smaller farms and more sustainable techniques.  Such modern
techniques require more labor, but not so much as in historical
pastoral societies.

I don't think that farming is the only way to get back in touch
with the land and the environment.  Other jobs can have similar
effects and just having local farming puts people in somewhat
more contact with the land.  

As to what keeps a hybrid system from reverting to what we don't
like about todays system: if the change to something is done
without coercion, then there must be some thing that people find
more attractive about it.  This alone implies some staying power
for the new system. 

>-- 
>hybrid rather than pure; compromising rather than clean;    | Militant Agnostic
>distorted rather than straightforward; ambiguous rather than| I Don't Know
>articulated; both-and rather than either-or; the difficult  |   and You Don't
>unity of inclusion rather than the easy unity of exclusion. |   Know Either


-- 
==============================================================================
	Dean Myerson     (aka dingo in boulder)     dean@vexcel.com
==============================================================================