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.
Tonight my Wicca 101 class will cover spells and related stuff, so it’s interesting that my “Open Thread” has focused in part on issues of spellcraft. This is an area where I am pretty cautious of “book learning” myself, but here is some basic book learning that I think some people might find useful.
In my understanding, spells are rooted in three assumptions
which I believe are well-founded.
First, that everything is in some sense conscious and therefore
accessible to other consciousness.
In short, there are no purely inviolable boundaries separating one thing
from another. From this perspective we are nodes, self-aware nodes, in a web of
consciousness.
Second, that focused strong intent can cross boundaries that
are relatively closed, and bring abut a response. We see this all the time at a mundane level. It also holds true at non-mundane
levels. A well crafted spell is
like a mental arrow penetrating an environment that would dissipate a less
focused less energetic effort.
Third, in a sense everything can be considered as vibrations
at different frequencies. All else
being equal, (and it need not be), lower frequencies can be penetrated more
easily than higher frequencies.
Think of a rotating fan.
When it turns slowly objects thrown against it can penetrate while when
it is spinning rapidly, objects thrown against it are bounced off as if it were
a solid barrier.
Spells are not intrinsically questionable ethically. They are a part of life. One way to see this is to consider the “power of
suggestion” as a simple’ spell,’ one that works with the recipient’s awareness,
but not their deliberate intent.
If the recipient’s vibrations are slow or if their trust is wide open
(they have few if any barriers) and the energetic content of the suggestion is
stronger than any energetic content (will) involved in rejecting it, the
suggestion will “take.” We do such
“spell work” on ourselves all the time.
Great harm as well as good comes from it with respect to raising
children. Socialization is a related kind
of social hypnosis and hypnosis is related to spell work.
On the other hand, because they focus on power – on my manipulating the world in some way to achieve my end, employing spells run the same risks we all run when possessing power. And let’s face it, human beings are not real good at handling power. Disney’s “The Sorcerer’s Apprentice” is very easy to relate to. Because they can be used to manipulate people without their consent or knowledge, spells are particularly prone to abuse. Fortunately major ones are often difficult to use, especially in this society. At a mundane level I found the same problem with Neuro-Linguistic Programming by the way.
Spells work best through the non-rational part of the mind -
both sending and receiving. The
rational mind is a mind with barriers of reason and distancing. Western reason separates us from
things. It is vitally important to
us and protects us from spells, but can also become a trap, closing ourselves off from others, which is the
flip side of separation. Being
willing to go beyond this part of your mind is vital in spell working (or understanding the world better). This is why so many spells involve
rhyme, rhythm, and movement.
Deliberate spellwork also carries a risk. When you work with the more open parts
of your mind you open yourself up more widely to the wider environment. When you do, the quality of your own protective
“vibrations” becomes increasingly important.
This issue becomes even more important if you invoke
entities to assist in a spell.
It is best in my opinion to work with an experienced person in this area and/or to use very strict ethical guidelines.


