:: Re: [Bricolabs] William Bowles on t…
Page principale
Supprimer ce message
Répondre à ce message
Auteur: Jaromil
Date:  
À: Bricolabs startup mailinglist
Sujet: Re: [Bricolabs] William Bowles on the revolt of the Middle Class Proletariat
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011, Patrice Riemens wrote:

> Good stuff, Devin. OccupyEverywhere it is indeed! (I don't think
> Occupy the World was intended as a slogan/ parole, rather as a
> description) Cheers, p+3D!


From the global to the local, here something maybe different, but
still related to the 99% claims, a public statement about a recent
disgrace here in Amsterdam where a tractor unexplainably passed over a
Permaculture garden partially destroying it.

http://lab.dyne.org/SlimPickins

Open Letter about the destruction of a Permaculture garden in Amsterdam Noord

On the 25 October 2011 a tractor drove over a permaculture garden and
other gardens nearby in what was a community setup for urban gardening
since 4 years in Buiksloterweg, Amsterdam Noord. The setup is a
concession by the renters of the place and neither renters or
gardeners had ever wanted a tractor to pass there. At the moment of
writing still noone knows why the tractor had to drive there,
destroying a variety of approximately 60 different species of plants,
but I understood the order was given by the "cultural management" of
Amsterdam Noord, the so called "Cultuur aan t IJ" foundation.

More documentation about the so called "Slim Pickins" garden,
maintained by artist and permaculture designer Debra Solomon, can be
found here:

http://culiblog.org/2009/04/slim-pickins-the-occasional-garden-restaurant/

http://culiblog.org/2009/05/slim-pickins-restaurant-review/

http://culiblog.org/2009/09/not-piss-poor-fertilized-with-pee/

Here an high resolution picture about the damages made by the tractor,
free to publish for the press
http://lab.dyne.org/SlimPickins?action=AttachFile&do=view&target=sloper.JPG


I'm airing my protest in public about what happened because it is
injustice, something that gives me no peace. For years the people who
were busy in the garden, together with the old and new renters of the
ateliers inside the building, were always gracefully agreeing on the
use and destiny of the place. There weren't problems for the
communication among the people involved in activities on the place. I
am just a volunteer, very happy with helping and learning about
permaculture, and I know for sure there was agreement to keep the so
called Slim Pickins permaculture garden.

So why the garden was ripped off like that? Without even a decision
being made about it? We are talking about a urban patch of patiently
regenerated land following permaculture design principles, gathering
about 60 different plant species and an happy swarm of bees every
summer. How could this happen if noone of the people active in the
place wanted it to be ripped off?

Calling it error is too simple and I don't believe it is the fault of
whoever drove that tractor over the garden. The problem is more
complex.

If a tractor is driven over a garden by someone who evidently has
never seen the place before, the problem lies in the order to do
so. Of one thing I can be sure: the tractor and its driver didn't took
such an initiative alone.

One doesn't happily drives tractor inside a small urban garden where
several smart people were busy in the last 4 years to regenerate the
place and make it blossom. It is easy to realize how delicate is such
a garden if you take the time to observe it at least once. Number one:
lack of observation.

Furthermore, when we talk about urban gardeners we are not talking
about people unable to communicate: to the contrary! we are talking
about a flock of very knowledgeable and well connected, totally
reachable cultural operators and artists living in the city of
Amsterdam. Number two: lack of communication.

Why somoene who cannot observe well and cannot communicate well is
given so much power over the planning of a city to the point that a
tractor can be moved over a community garden? And how is it possible
that such a power reaches beyond the boundaries of common sense? or at
least the shared sense of all people involved in developing the place,
who had in fact decided to keep the garden. Number three: lack of
common sense.

Lets stop it here, but I could go on for more. I believe what happened
is the responsibility of someone with too much power on the place, but
that is not related at all with it nor with the people active in it. I
also think that the lack of accountability of cultuur ambtenaaren, the
layer of institutions between such blind designers and the people, is
a crucial issue.

Let me be clear: I'm not asking for the name of the responsible now:
tt is too late now and I'm definitely not interested in being a judge
nor an executor. I'm thinking in terms of systems and I believe the
system is wrong.

To make it simple: if the people that are already involved bottom-up
on the place would have been contacted, would have been involved in
such a decision as moving a tractor on a garden, all this wouldn't
have happened. This is an easy argument just in the days of the 99%
claiming their occupation grounds on Amsterdam. But let me go further.

If the 99% of people get involved in designing a place, a total mess
can happen and some equally bad errors can be made. I think this is
reasonable to say: the majority of people isn't interested in taking
care of gardens. Many people means many interests and if we think of a
bottom-up process it doesn't means involving everyone, but just those
who want and who can do it well. I wouldn't be a volunteer there
without finding actual experts to learn from.

But I think the problem is that the people who are administering the
space have nothing to loose and no reason to be in touch with those
who are experts and who are activating the place. As a paradox all
people who animate the place are well known Amsterdammers, many of
them operating in the cultural sector and have a reputation to defend:
that's why so far most of the negotiations around the destiny of that
garden were clear, reasonable, peaceful and sensible. There couldn't
be ever any conflict about that place, the only possibility I can
think of is a tractor passing over it without anyone asking for it -
and unfortunately that's exactly what happened.

But I don't believe who sent the tractor "is evil": seriously, I never
liked Walt Disney not even when i was a kid. And let me be clear once
again: it is not the fault of the tractor driver. This is a systemic
error, that of a system where too much power is given to people who
are not actively participating, who are not stakeholders of a
reputation system, who are not connected, are not experiencing the
space they design and administer.

Today it happened on a simple garden, but tomorrow it can happen on a
different scale, since this is how urban planning operates: decisions
are made above the heads of interested people. Those who have the
power to make the decisions and give orders can never have a
comprehension of all what counts for the humans below them, nor they
need to, so they aren't connected.

Production processes are given no value, nor are social processes:
there is a radical abstraction between the world of those who take
quick design decisions and those who have long term commitment to
development. As this cohesion lacks, the system will suffer from
growing conflicts and we will recognize this kind of injustice in more
sad occasions.

--
jaromil, dyne.org developer, http://jaromil.dyne.org
GPG: B2D9 9376 BFB2 60B7 601F 5B62 F6D3 FBD9 C2B6 8E39