In case you’re in a better mood now, I’ll ignore the straw man and just ask you what carbon taxes would be needed (allowing the huuuuge assumption that they would have any desirable effect, given who is implementing them and how) if we were to successfully promote permaculture worldwide?

I know that the mainstream media and many celebrities are trying to make us think we are either with the ‘authorities’ or with the terrorists (e.g. George Bush, who said exactly that) but it is not true. Not everyone who is opposed to carbon taxes is in favor of making lots of CO2. My post is a very clear example of that. It’s not the Mysterons we have to worry about, you can spot them a mile off, mate!

In reply to the second half of your message, I can really only ask if you are in the right page. Please explain to me exactly how it is that you deduced that I do not understand the principles of permaculture, as outlined in Permaculture 1 and 2 (for example) and exactly how it is that Carbon Taxes fit in to the self-supporting and cyclical systems threrin described?

In case that is too long a sentence (sorry but I can only go by what little you wrote)- what natural systems does a global carbon tax implemented by bureaucrats, designed by bankers and imposed by force on the people mimic?

What exactly does that mean? You fear a carbon tax, right? Do you think Permaculture allows you to have your cake and eat it too? A food forest AND happy-motoring forever in Hummers?

I’m always surprised to read these comments on permaculture-mothership because they reflect how many people come to permaculture with all this ideological baggage and they bastardize the message of permaculture in order to cannibalize it for a few useful gardening tips while desperately avoiding:

a) changing the way they think
and
b) making any behavioral changes that could be considered a personal sacrifice.

I think a problem has been outlined in a way that divides people instead of bringing them together. Permaculture people have been aware of big problems in the way civilization operates for a long time. Bill came up with a thesis that resonated with many people and has been worked on and adapted hugely since.

How a problem is presented has a huge bearing on the reaction and thereby on the solutions chosen. Look at what Bill’s presentation gave birth to, and then look at the Climate Change fiasco. Same problem, different people’s presentation. Now look at the ’solutions’ that come from those presentations. It’s like the difference between allopathic and holistic medicine.

The solutions presented by permaculture say ‘let’s get together and make our world beautiful, a place where we can live happily and thrive’. They look at the whole problem and present solutions that address all of the different aspects of our lives, as well as seeing us in the wider context of life on earth. They also leave open opportunities for everyone to do things in their own way and encourage diversity.

The climate change debate and its ’solutions’ divert people into a neurotic fascination with one aspect of our behavior and produce the same top-down, authoritarian reaction that has brought us into this mess already. The solutions it proposes address only climate change. Carbon quotas are an accountant’s solution, they address only one aspect of the already narrow spectrum imposed by the reduction to concentrating on climate change.

By diverting our attention from the whole view permaculture has, we can be more easily led to accept the solutions proposed by the people who led us in to the mess.

Climate change is but one aspect, and permaculture already addresses almost everything (and for those who understand the importance of zone 5, everything). We don’t need this narrowing of our vision. Following and building upon the principles of permaculture, climate change would be fixed (if it is a problem) anyway, along with all the others.

The reason the powerful people want to divert everyone’s attention is, I believe, that holistic solutions would produce a world in which they are just normal everyday people, with no more power than anyone else. They realize there are big problems for survival, but can’t get their heads around real solutions because they are unable to imagine a world they are not ‘in control’ of.

charlatans? or science? at lest the charletans are not backed by money.
what reason do you think mr rudd hasn’t started the climate tax yet? not enough evidence thats why.Not saying that there wont be enough evidence in the future, as i’m open minded to that but as of yet there isnt enough.The sciance is to young.
unfortunately it seems People like you are just trying to win this ego game all the time and take sides to point at the losser, which is a shame as i think we need to leave the ego behind. Like permaculture teaches us we should look at the issue from all sides then get to together as a (human)group and come up with a solution. As much as i dont agree with what your saying dosn’t mean i’m not on yourside, If climate change is man made, then great its man made lets deal with it together, and if its not man made then great Its not man made lets deal with that together also.Us humans need to start working together not taking sides.
lets not all end up like the politicians.
be happy
knighter