shifting thoughts

we've been discussing this notion of buying a farm with large enough buildings for several families every chance we get over the past week or so. imagining this or that aspect of it. talking about details of everything from how to construct it (should it be a company or what's called an andel in danish or something else?) to how it would work in practical everyday terms.

one of the things we envision is that although the buildings would support three, maybe four families living in separately, we would have one big kitchen that would be shared by all. because part of the whole idea is to get away from the notion that we need so much stuff. if we shared a big kitchen and passed around the cooking duties on a rotating basis, we'd make the burden lighter on ourselves and on the environment.

in discussing all of this, i've found myself thinking about how thinking shifts incrementally. the transition for being a single family in a single family dwelling to living together with several other families and sharing at least parts of the dwelling will be a big one. and how can we mentally make the leap--because that's what it will take to make the leap in actuality, right?

so i thought about the things i'm right now, at this very minute, willing to change:

1. sharing the cooking duties. i find it difficult to be inspired to cook for three at times and think i would enjoy more cooking for a larger group, so i look forward to when it's "my" turn to do the cooking.
2. sharing a car. i only find that i need the car a couple of times a week anyway, so i'm totally ready to be in a situation with a shared car. and as part of this, i'm completely cool with letting someone else decide what kind of car and all that jazz. 
3. having a big kitchen garden and truly embracing eating more locally. eating and enjoying what's in season when it's in season appeals. big time.

these are the things that are a bit harder to imagine changing:

1. what if the others don't take care when they're using "my" beloved kitchen-aid appliances?
2. do i really want to share my starbucks mug collection and my favorite red plates with everyone? on the other hand, do i want to hide them away and NOT use them on an everyday basis just because i'm unwilling to share?
3. what if someone objects to the colors of paint i like and the decorating style i would choose (what if they want everything white!!??)

and these are the things i'm really struggling with:

1. giving up my beautiful blue room. it's my sanctuary. it's where i'm creative. it's perfect (to me) in every way. will i have a similar space to call my own? is it too selfish to think you need your own space?
2. i don't want to live without a bathtub again....7 years was enough.
3. i love having a job where i travel, but is that actually something i can defend in light of what we now know about global warming? i will miss jetting across the world. a lot.
4. what if we don't find the right people--people we can share this living situation with and who we can be friends with and feel comfortable with long term? and how will we know that they're that when we commit to entering into the project together?
5. i'm really not ready to leave this house yet. i've got a lot of mental shifting work do there. but hopefully it's already begun and by the time it happens (perhaps a year from now), i'll be ready.

if you're already in the midst of such a project, we'd love to hear from you and what your thoughts and fears were before you entered into it and how you dealt with those.

in an ideal world

when i think of the world that our daughter will inherit, i get a little overwhelmed. there's a lot of talk of C02, global warming, rising sea levels, oil shortages, cap & trade, quotas...and it's hard to sort it all out. and if it's hard for me, when i write about that stuff for a living, then i can imagine that people feel really overwhelmed and we begin to wonder what we can do.

we were wondering about that and discussing it a lot at our house. and the conclusion that we've come to is that although it's pretty overwhelming, we've got to do something about it. as us. as individuals. because that's the only way to begin to make a difference while governments tussle over how to decide and figure this stuff out in a meaningful way. because if we don't start doing stuff ourselves, it may be too late for our 8-year-old and the world she will inherit. we've got to change now. we have to consume less and get a totally different relationship to the world we live in. or there won't be a world to live in--at least not one that's a nice place to be.

so if i could imagine how i would begin to make this change, here's what it would look like:

1. hillary clinton was right when she wrote her book, it takes a village. although she was talking about raising children into productive adults, this is a meaningful notion--because only together can we make a difference.
2. we would live on a farm with 2-3 other families - a place with enough space to raise a lot of our own food and become as self-sufficient as is possible in today's world, while still maintaining our regular world jobs (not intending to become farmers). 
3. being locovores--using what's in season and grown locally--being conscious about the CO2 footprint of the food we eat. inspired by barbara kingsolver's animal, vegetable, miracle.
4. wind energy - generating as much of our electricity as possible via renewable wind energy.
5. sharing a car - let's face it, we need a car only some of the time, so the families on the farm could share.
6. public transport - using it as much as possible.
7. being conscious of water usage.
8. being conscious of CO2 footprint.
9. eating less meat.
10. eating organic, ecological produce.

these are just my own initial thoughts on this project. if you are like-minded, please do leave us a comment, we'd love to start a dialogue on how to begin to make this change.

* * *

NOTE: this blog is a collaboration between a dane and an american who have been together for a decade--which explains the danish/english mix. we're looking for like-minded people to enter into this project together with us. we've been looking at farm properties, but have only just begun. email us at livetpaalandet@gmail.com if you're interested.

are we frog or human?

Lige siden mennesket for omkring 10.000 år siden fik den geniale idé at kaste sig ud i landbrugets ædle kunst, har den menneskelige udviklingshistorie for store dele af menneskeheden været en lang rejse mod bedre tider. De dele af menneskeheden, der ikke er nået lige så langt, som den industrialiserede verden (eller den fejludviklede verden som jeg også har set den benævnt), halser efter det bedste de har lært.

Disse bedre tider har for en stor dels vedkommende været kendetegnet ved at opbygge et stadigt voksende forbrug af Jordens ressourcer. Et ressourceforbrug, som nogen mener, er blevet så voldsomt, at det er blevet en trussel mod menneskeheden selv.

Truslen består væsentligst i form af kemikalier, der ødelægger vores evne til at forplante os eller bare gør os syge, manglen på energi eller råstoffer, der gør at nogen har materielle goder og andre har ikke, eller klimaforandringer, der truer med at ødelægge menneskers eksistensgrundlag.

Man kan naturligvis enten hævde at dette blot er et skæmmebillede, der er skabt af medier og moderne dommedagsmænd, eller man kan være overbevidst at videnskaben nok skal redde os. I så tilfælde kan alle I små Bjørn Lomborg'ere godt stoppe med at læse her!

Vi tror at nedenstående billede fra berlingske's tegner lars andersen er meget sigende for situationen lige nu, for det går jo meget godt, verdenshavene stiger kun 3 mm om året, finanskrisen har alt andet lige ikke været en katastrofe, men "bare" bragt os tilbage til en økonomisk normaltilstand, og vi kan købe øko-mælk på den lokale tankstation, hvilket faktisk er et fremskridt ... men alt dette og meget meget mere er jo lige nu, hvad med fremtiden og den planet vi efterlader til vores børn?

Man kan så spørge, hvordan det er kommet så vidt, at den vestlige kultur har bragt menneskeheden i en situation, hvor vi skal diskutere og forholde os til murens ankomst. For det er naturligvis muren der rammer os og ikke omvendt, for det ville jo placere et ansvar hos os mennesker og det skal vi ikke have noget af.

Der er skrevet mange og meget tykke bøger om dette emne, men den ultrakorte version er i vores øjne følgende...

Udviklingsmæssige er dyret "mennesket" stukket af fra andre dyrearter bl.a. på grund af menneskets evne til at opstille hypoteser, så som "hvad nu hvis man byggede et hus, så ville man ikke fryse om vinteren," "hvad nu hvis man satte stigbøjler på hesten, så ville man sidde sikrere i sadlen" eller "hvad nu hvis man indførte McDonalds i Danmark, så behøvede man ikke at have velopdragne børn for at kunne gå på restaurant og man kunne samtidig få noget at spise, der er af så lav kvalitet at det jf. svenske myndigheder ikke kan kategoriseres som fødevare (altså menneskelig innovation når det er bedst)" osv og osv.

Drivkraften bag denne udvikling er, hvad nogen har kaldt paradis-genet. Paradis-genet er en genetisk drift, der driver os mod det behagelige, det er derfor vi har svært ved at udgå sukkerholdig eller fed kost, selvom vi godt ved at det gør os overvægtige og kan forårsage sukkersyge mv. Det er derfor vi lige bliver lidt længere under den varme bruser, selvom vi godt ved, at det indebærer ekstra CO2 udledning og forbrug af knappe vandressourcer etc.

Det er netop dette dilemma, der udgør menneskehedens problem, for hvordan skal politikere kunne fortælle de befolkninger, der skal genvælge dem, at de skal reducere deres forbrug, når nu et flertal så gerne vil have mere af alting og helst til den halve pris.

Man kan så mene, at det oplyste menneske, er et rationelt menneske, og som sådan i stand til individuelt at træffe de for Moder Jord og menneskeheden rigtige beslutninger.

Der er efter sigende lavet forsøg, hvor man har taget en frø, puttet den ned i koldt vand og langsomt varmet vandet op til kogepunktet. Frøen skulle efter sigende ikke have opdaget hvad, der foregik og langsomt lidt koge-døden. Hvorimod hvis frøen blev præsenteret for allerede kogende vand, så vidste frøen, at det skulle den ikke ned i, for det er frøer jo som bekendt ikke skabt til at bade i.

Vi tror, at så længe muren kommer snigende som i tilfældet med frøen der bliver puttet ned i koldt vand, så vil paradis-genet samlet set vinde over fornuften. Mens hvis muren derimod kommer flyvende i form af en balje kogende vand, så vil mennesket reagere rationelt. Vores konklusion er, at skal mennesker i den nuværende situation, hvor vandet stadigt er koldt, udvise rationel adfærd, så kan vi ikke gøre det alene eller som isolerede familier, og når nu politikerne ikke vil hjælpe os i kampen mod paradis-genets tilbøjelighed for det behagelige, så må vi gøre noget andet.

Denne blog har til formål at diskutere, hvad vi som rationelle og oplyste frøer, der stadig befinder os i koldt vand, kan gøre for at vende udviklingen eller afbøde effekterne af murens ankomst.