Democratic Forest Trusts (PDF)in Watson, Alan; Dean, Liese; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2006. Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: Eighth World Wilderness Congress Symposium; 2005 September 30-October 6; Anchorage, AK.Democratic trusts with leadership elected by citizen-members promise to solve many of the problems afflicting both traditional government and corporate ownership of forestlands. This article explores these issues in some depth.Complexity and the Dream of Human Control of Eco-Systems (PDF)in Watson, Alan; Dean, Liese; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2006. Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: Eighth World Wilderness Congress Symposium; 2005 September 30-October 6; Anchorage, AK.The title captures it. I then explore the kinds of institutions compatible with both nature and the modern world that are implied from this analysis.Rethinking the Obvious: Modernity and Living Respectfully With Nature (PDF)The Trumpeter: Journal of Ecosophy, Winter, 1997.Modernity is usually considered a wrong turn in terms of respect for and sustaining the environment. I argue the reality is more complex, for modernity has freed us from personal dependence on agriculture, ended the economic value of children, radically reduced the likelihood of large scale wat, and shifted much production to intellectual rather than material capital. This partially decouples society from nature, which gives us important opportunities as well as problems.Towards an Ecocentric Political Economy (PDF)The Trumpeter, Fall, 1996.This paper begins my effort at showing how liberal modernity can be harmonized with an ecocentric perspective on our relationship with the natural world. It is a corrective to much “free market environmental” literature that sacrifices Nature to money as well as to anti-liberal attacks by well-meaning but economically naïve environmentalists.Unexpected Harmonies: Self-Organization in Liberal Modernity and Ecology (PDF)The Trumpeter, Journal of Ecosophy, 10:1, Winter 1993This is my initial paper exploring how what I term ‘evolutionary liberal’ thought can be an important means by which society and nature can be brought into greater harmony. The other Trumpeter papers build on it.Deep Ecology and Liberalism: The Greener Implications of Evolutionary Liberalism (PDF)Review of Politics, Fall, 1996.Liberal thought and deep ecology are usually regarded as mutually exclusive. But the “evolutionary” tradition offers a way to integrate the two through commonalties in the work of David Hume, Michael Polanyi, Arne Naess, and Aldo Leopold, providing a stronger foundation for liberalism while strengthening the case for an ecocentric ethic.(Related subjects: Ecology)Saving Western Towns: A Jeffersonian Green Proposal (PDF)in Writers on the Range, Karl Hess and John Baden, eds., University Press of Colorado, 1998.Developmental pressures in the rural and small town West involve three groups: long term residents, new arrivals, and environmentalists. Today their interests often conflict. This conflict is in part the outcome of institutions which prevent harmonizing competing interests. The concept of developmental trusts, both for rural regions and for small communities offers a means whereby these interests can be harmonized for the benefit of all concerned.(Related subjects: Politics)Social Ecology, Deep Ecology, and Liberalism (PDF)Critical Review, 6: 2-3, 1992.Murray Bookchin is considered a leading radical environmental theorist. However, his analysis is incapable of leading humankind towards a more respectful and sustainable relationship with the natural world. Criticisms of Bookchin from both the deep ecology and evolutionary liberal perspective complement one another, pointing the way towards a better understanding of how modernity relates to the environment.The paper as a whole offers an early discussion of issues that are more clearly addressed in later papers, particularly Deep Ecology and Liberalism (1996) and the three Trumpeter articles in 1997, 1996, and 1993. However, there are other ideas in the article which have not been developed more thoroughly elsewhere.
Michael Lind has written a wonderful piece over at Salon on how America is Not a Christian Nation. Go on over and have a read! It has some good history in it that if it had ever been taught might be saving us much current misery.



posted April 14, 2009 at 11:53 pm
He’s absolutely right. Of course, this also isn’t an anti-Christian nation nor an un-Christian nation (nor is it nor should it ever be an anti-Muslim, anti-Pagan, anti-Buddhist, anti-Hindu, etc. nation). Certainly the 1st Amendment does not allow the government to set up a state-recognized and -supported religion, but that does not and should not prevent religious access, such as in providing chaplains. Nor should it prevent people from expressing what is in fact a deep human instinct and need in expressing religious faith.
posted April 15, 2009 at 4:24 am
I’d love to see a longer post about the Deists and Unitarians among the Founding Fathers … and perhaps some commentary on the letters of Abigail Adams and other Founding Mothers.
From my perspective not only is this not a Christian nation, but the Founding Fathers held relatively diverse views for the time, and got along with one another well in forming this experimental government.
posted April 15, 2009 at 11:41 am
I think both you and Michael Lind both meant to say “United States not specifically a Christian nation” unless you were going for a FoxNews flaming headline. The use of adjectives can add power and precision to your writing. This is your writing tip of the day.
posted April 15, 2009 at 5:22 pm
From the quoted article.
“Here’s George Washington in a letter to the Hebrew Congregation of Newport, Rhode Island in 1790: “The citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy — a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship. It is now no more that toleration is spoken of as if it were the indulgence of one class of people that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent natural rights, for, happily, the Government of the United States,
which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance,
requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support … May the children of the stock of Abraham who dwell in this land continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other inhabitants — while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and fig tree and there shall be none to make him afraid.”
For General Washington. President.
Honors, hup.
And so mote it be, yaknow?
Emphasis added.
posted April 15, 2009 at 6:08 pm
.Not that I much go in for the authority of words, but, that’s my America talking.
You know it when you see it. If someone takes it upon themselves to ‘prove’ that demagoguery and specific religions should hold more sway….we know that, too.
Everyone knows it.
We Pagans are some of the seeds that Liberty tended, fed, and nurtured on these shores.
We are these little seeds brought from strange places and half-remembrances and all manner of scuffling about it all. Cause someone had a little faith in the future.
We grow, when so many others would call us ‘pests’ and make mere pesticide of not only their own God, but our American heritage.
They fear much, offer little, then claim our very dear Liberty was really ‘meant’ to be just another excuse for people to take power in the name of a Bible.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, not against any terrifying heterodoxy of whatever kkind or another, but against those fears which make us forget what we’re supposed to be defending.
Not allegiance suborned to be about ‘a God’ …but to each other. And may that please any and all Gods who are friends to our people.
Call it an act of faith, but we can, peoples of the world fall upon each other with books and authorities and fears and point objects *any* old time. That had all been done before when this nation was new.
We can agree to do this American thing, as our forefathers did, with few conditions, but nigh-infinite hope.
America is about….believing if any of what we do matters, it’s not going to matter any more or less if we make it about fear of each other.
It’s about we all get together on this. As equals. And as equal as we can refine ourselves to be.
Or it won’t work.
Already our nation has done what was at the time counted *impossible.*
Let’s go with it.
Like General Washington said.
Like we mean it.
Even if it hurts. Or scares us. Or someone offers an ‘easier answer.’
Cause those easy answers have a history of not working.
Frankly, if we’re to be defeated by some ‘foreigners,’ let’s be defeated for what we *really are.* Like Washington says.
Christians shouldn’t ask me to, out of fear, be a fanatic for …what, nothing different, nothing with a plan, nothing with a solution, nothing with a hope.
Shouldn’t talk to each other like I’m a great place to displace their anxiety, either.
This nonsense that has frightened and dividen our nation these past ten years has gone far enough. In fact, is receding, ….but some don’t seem to realize what these tides of ‘opinion’ have been washing *over.8
Pardon the ranting, but the news media don’t get it. The pundits don’t get it. Religious and political leaders have largely *forgotten how* to distinguish religion and politics, insiders and outsiders. If there’s good in any and all of our religions, and our persons, and Gods-help-us, *America….*
Lady Liberty says, of what we made from contentious beginnings, ‘Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.’
What do those trying to rewrite our American heritage have to say about those huddled masses?
Nothing good.
Not. Our. Country. Anyway, not by standards of books and authorities and empires.
But a promise was crafted. By us. As people. We can cleave to that or wonder with GWB why we aren’t ‘respected’ for thinking we’re better than the rest of the battle royal out there.
If we’re gonna be America, how bout American rules. Preachers are just another dude, whatever book they wave or hat they wear.
How bout America?
Right?
posted June 4, 2010 at 1:25 pm
Depends what you mean by christian nation.what are we using here for a reference?dont say the bible ..thats too broad.give me the passages you are taking from.and how are you applying those?to whos standard?ours?It seems to always be ours.to a God we create in our mind cause we cant live with the real one,hes just not agreeing with us and we cant have that sort of God.we need a God for our egos.