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.
Today Canadians are celebrating Canada Day, their national equivalent to our 4th of July. Their celebration reminds me of how fortunate I think we are to have such an independent country as our northern neighbor.
I will never forget a few winters ago when a friend and I drove to Mt. Ste. Anne in Quebec, to go skiing. Shortly after crossing the border from Maine, we stopped at the Benedict Arnold Inn for dinner. A lovely place with good food and service, the Inn was named after a man Americans regard as a traitor and Canadians regard far more ambiguously.
Or on another trip, when I stopped at a historical marker honoring Laura Ingersoll Secord for her death defying journey 30 km through the snow to warn troops of an impending American attack. If American troops had discovered what she was up to, she would have been shot. They did not, and Americans suffered a defeat in their second campaign to subjugate Canada during the War of 1812.
Or when I visited Quebec City, which has one of the most beautiful old parts of town I have ever seen. While walking along the walls and cannons high on a bluff over the St. Lawrence River, I noticed the cannons mostly pointed south, towards us.
Or that Canada is culturally distinct from us in part because it became home to thousands of Loyalists who settled there after the American Revolution. A different set of political values accompanied them, and gave a lasting distinctiveness to our northern neighbor. Even now, despite American grumblings, Canada honors the many contributions to their country made by American draft evaders who opposed the Vietnam War enough to leave the US, and make Canada their home.
These experiences were good for me if for no other reason than indicating one country’s heroes and villains might be another country’s villains and heroes. On such issues there need be no connection between a person’s historical position and his or her qualities as a human being. But living in a continent sized country like ours can give us the impression that what we know from our national self-image is simply the way things are. Travel to other nations is perhaps the only antidote to this error, though it requires some personal qualities to take root.
Respecting neighbors who see the world differently is a perfect antidote to infection by the stupidity of our national idiots such as Liz Cheney, who recently claimed “I believe unequivocally, unapologetically, America is the best nation that ever existed in history, and clearly that exists today.” She added that President Obama is to be faulted for not telling the rest of the world a similar absurdity.
Love of country need mean diminishing other countries no more than love of family and friends need mean diminishing other people’s families and friends.
Over at Daily Kos, where I found the Cheney quote, one of their own commentors, mjshep, observed
What if someone you knew said, “I believe in my exceptionalism. I believe unequivocally, unapologetically, I am the best person that ever existed in history, and clearly that exists today. Although I can make rules for you, and tell you what you can and can not do, I do not have to abide by those rules. Whatever I do is right, because I am doing it and I am exceptional. And, if you don’t like it, I will beat the crap out of you.”
You would clearly think they are both dangerous and crazy. Either that, or a Republican. And you’d be right.
I wonder whether the ability to respect other countries is related to the ability to respect other people. If it were it would explain Cheney’s jingoism and defense of torture.



posted July 1, 2009 at 8:09 pm
Wow..What an article, I totally agree and am surprized and grateful that you shared such a great peice of work…
posted July 1, 2009 at 11:09 pm
Thanks for the blog post.
We do appreciate when Americans notice that we are not the 51st state, but are a distinct peoples (plural intended)
From a Canadian
posted July 2, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Don’t take the pointed cannons so personally. They are actually pointed towards the St. Lawrence river which has historically been the stage for our invasions and military dramas.
Worry more about the dragon hidden at the top of Chateau Frontenac. Oh yah… a dragon. We’ve got a dragon. You betcha.
posted July 2, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Also, Canada is in North America, too. People in the U.S. are not the only “Americans”.
posted July 2, 2009 at 9:03 pm
Ah! So when I’ve heard Europeans use the term “ugly Americans” referencing travelers — they mean you guys too! I’m so glad I didn’t take it personally.
posted July 11, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Thanks Gus,
We Canadians always enjoy intelligent discourse with our neighbours. Particularly those occasions when eyes and minds are open. To be honest, we’re often shocked when we are even noticed, never mind considered. Despite this, we don’t hate you up here. Rather, we have a love/hate relationship. There are so many truly admirable things to be found in America and it’s History.
At the same time, we have a uniquely close view of your foibles and failings, we so often feel the effects of your mistakes. I think privilege puts blinders on all who share in it, and that is why so few Americans step outside their own context, they have no need to understand the needs of those they subjugate. This is the essence of Standpoint Epistemology, a theory that I believe should be taught to every schoolchild. Maybe then more of us wouldn’t be prisoners of our assumptions?