Prout - Local Economy Issues
Q. Following your focus on solution-oriented approach, I find that my mind increasingly is thinking about local-level development. In rural areas, the organization of people around multi-level development schemes, the different factors of block level planning, one other facet of this, capitalization perhaps, so I was just wondering if you, at this point, have more to say on one or another aspect of local planning, block level planning. Or it could be any topic of your choice as well.
A. All right. I would say that this block-level planning is the smallest component, not autonomous, because it is of a smaller district. It is part of a local more autonomous region. So autonomy comes not in the block but in the region. So, let us say, a region that is defined in some way. For example, Sonoma County, or Sonoma County and Mendocino and Napa counties that have some similarity, an area where there is a similarity of geography, a similarity of needs, a similarity of population distribution, becomes a viable area to attain in itself a degree of autonomy. It must be large enough to have the means of production and the means of distribution and the means and the peoples and organization to become an autonomous region economically. In Prout, it is not the desire that any region be politically autonomous. It is not to return to feudalism. That would be a return to feudalism. Prout is a progressive movement to an integrated society, not a return to feudalism.
You see, everything is in excess, out of balance. So when you get multinational corporations, these meta-corporations, attempting to make the world a company town and to each one gain power and control then they become out of balance forces. For their own satisfaction they will enslave the peoples of the world but if you break them down and you return to only local development, then you return to feudalism. You return to fiefdoms, each warring with the other, isn’t it?
Thus, you do not want this multinational domination taking power and control of the local life away from the people. Nor do you want a return to fiefdoms where one is armored against the other and they are forever in endless battles and the society is in a kind of general chaos. One thing that happens in that type of situation is that it may be very nice in Sonoma County where there are rich farmlands and many resources, but in the deserts in Nevada they have a little problem, isn’t it? So the poorer people will want the resources of the richer people and so on and so forth and naturally, urban areas such as San Francisco will not have the farmland to support their populations. So there are fundamental problems with too much local autonomy. As there as fundamental problems with too much globalism. So either direction brings society out of balance.
There is a need for the development of a global infrastructure. It must support the development and sustainability of all beings upon the planet, bring aid in times of need and crisis, redistribute resources from rich areas to poorer areas, help in so many ways to see that all the living beings are cared for. If one merely thinks locally, this larger picture of humanity disappears and one can become very territorial and protective of one’s own region. Then the feudalism develops. So this global interconnected, interdependent society is a must. But, unlike the present trend, which puts the power over local development in the hands of those self-centered capitalists who would, for their own gain and profit, utilize the resources of the world, rather it puts the power back in the hands of the people. It does not mean that vegetables grown in California will not feed people in Nevada or in Wisconsin in the heart of winter where they cannot grow the vegetables. If they can grow them, good. If they cannot, they will have to bring them in. So it is not to cut off trade entirely, but it is to encourage as much local autonomy and use of resources as is viable for the particular area and region.
Some things are simply not practical in certain regions. They are simply not practical. If one lives in the country of Bahrain - do you know Bahrain? If one says those in Bahrain should have local autonomy and grow all their vegetables at home and eat only the foods they can grow in their white sand desert, they will have a very restricted diet. It is possible through technology that they will develop hydroponics and learn to distill water and in some future time have capacities to do more than they do. But if one says live only on the resources available on this island in Bahrain, one will have a very sparse diet and a lot of oil. They will travel endlessly around their small island while they are going hungry. It is impractical, isn’t it? They will have the best air-conditioning in the world but they will not have food because they have much oil and simply deserts to grow their food. So the practicality of sustainability is something that would only be worked out over time with the utilization of certain technologies. Without those technologies, really speaking, the area is in its own natural way, unfit for human life. So if the human beings are to live there, because there is a resource of high value, they conglomerate to tap this resource of high value but they will have to sustain themselves by bringing in products essential to their life which cannot be produced in that area. Unless, of course, very technological developments allow hydroponics and so on.
The same is true in the far North. Shall we tell the Alaskan Indians that they cannot import anything? They would not have a single vegetable because they cannot grow it. They have need for some things that are outside of their region. Unless, of course, these regions are deemed inhospitable and people are left in them at their own risk. This does not seem compassionate. There is an impossibility to have full local autonomy in certain areas of the world. Local autonomy is something that can be achieved to one degree or another depending upon the prosperity of an area, depending upon the availability of the resources there for human life. You are so fortunate to live in areas with green things growing, long growing seasons, abundant rains. You have everything there and ample farmland. When these are there then you can think in those terms.
But many places in the world do not have the resources and life before globalization was very rough, a very hard life. For the Arab countries, some of the desert countries, life was hard. A single vegetable would be so precious. You will have to realize that local economic autonomy is relatively possible depending upon the resources of the environment and how the resources might be developed and enhanced.
If one is to do any type of local planning, one will have to look into the resources available and make a checklist of what is available in a particular region and what could be available in a particular region. So making a checklist of all of those items that are necessary for good quality modern life and seeing what can be produced locally. For example, electricity is generally considered a must of life these days, isn’t it? So, can it be produced in a certain area or not? And how? In fact, what would be required to have it produced? So a list can be made of all those needed items to sustain a quality life for the residents of an area and what is available already and can be enhanced, and what would potentially be available, and what simply cannot be produced in that area.
For example, the petroleum development in Sonoma County is not particularly high, is it? It is unlikely that petroleum will be developed in Sonoma County, isn’t it? So is petroleum needed? If it is needed to one degree or another, it is a commodity unavailable in this county. Diamonds; there have not been too many diamond mines in Sonoma County. Yet it is true that the people like to wear the diamond on their ring and who is to say they cannot have diamonds? But diamonds will not be produced in Sonoma County. Now one can be very authoritarian and say, "No one in Sonoma County is allowed to wear diamonds." But this will maybe seem oppressive to some people, isn’t it?
Q. The planners will also have to make decisions regarding where they are going to allocate their resources. Should the necessities have more importance than the luxuries?
A. They should have more importance but individual choice is there and unless you want a totalitarian political system, the person who really, really wants a diamond will have to have the freedom to try to acquire one. And if there are one-hundred people who want a diamond they may themselves think, "I am going to make a shipment to Africa to get the diamond." You see? You cannot stop this type of trade without oppressive totalitarianism, which is not to be encouraged. But, indeed, the foremost is that which is most sustainable, can be developed in the area. All of these principles you are working with are very, very good. I am warning against extremism so that everything must be in balance.
By redistribution of resources so many human needs can be met and so much can be done with so much less plunder of this Earth. But really speaking, the human population is also at its peak and it cannot go on growing and doubling and growing and doubling endlessly. The problem of resources is first, distribution and utilization, and second, population. The degree of resource required. So as the human population grows, it crowds out other species, isn’t it? So there is another imbalance.
You know, if you kill all the predators in an area, the deer population will grow out of proportion and they will be starving after a time; there will be no food, isn’t it? Until finally their population is naturally brought in check. But their population will continue to suffer and they will continue to starve unless a predator is introduced. In the balance of nature, there are natural predators. When the predators are taken away, the population grows in an unnatural and imbalanced way to a point where balance is lost. The same is true with the human population. People have learned to sustain life better and better but they have not learned to regulate their population. This will come. When population grows too great, there are natural means by which it is checked. So when doing planning in the smaller region, in the town, and even in the smaller areas, then the planning becomes a part of a larger system.
The town of Sebastopol is part of Sonoma County. It can do a certain part of autonomous action. Beyond that, it becomes dependent on its surrounding environment, is it not? An area can sustain itself if all of the resources are there but in the modern world, as much as is possible, people will want to bring in from outside. The realism is, though, the dependency upon the oil will shift, has to shift. People are very, very resourceful and when the oil is truly not there, they will find other means to move their transportation and heat their houses. As long as the most usable means is the oil, it will not change. Eventually even the vested interests cannot hold out against necessity. I do not see this peak oil as a permanent change in global communication and transportation systems but a necessitator of innovative alterations in present energy systems in order to meet the demands.
It is unrealistic to think that all transportations and communications will really slow down. Perhaps for a time in a period of crisis when new energy forms develop but those new energy forms will come with the necessity of their existence and with them, life will change. The main problem today is not peak oil. That will be a roadblock, something that will upset the distribution of power and temporarily create inconveniences to many oil-dependent functions but people will adapt so it can create a certain crisis for a period of time but it is not the barrier; it is only a shortage which will cause adaptation.
Q. And if this adaptation is fortuitous, it will likely encourage more localism.
A. That is correct and that will break down. As I said, it will be the instigator of a change in the distribution of power. Now the trend is to the glory of multinational capitalists. But their backs will be broken when they cannot transport their goods and they have vested their all and everything in the oil but they can only bleed the people so far and they themselves will start to bleed because they have not had forethought. Then those companies that have had forethought to begin to develop alternatives, they will come to the lead; there will be a shift. All of the local authorities who have taken the charge fill the gap. You know, it is a fact, when there is a gap, water flows into it, isn’t it? There is a dip then the water will flow in to make it level, isn’t it? So it is in the human society. So it is with energy. When there is a need that is not met, then the vital force flows to meet that need. As long as the need is being met, the vital force does not flow to that need. Even though it is very inconvenient and everybody complains, "The oil is so expensive," still there is oil aplenty and people have the money to buy it. They can complain, "Oh I can’t; it is so expensive!" And then they go and fill their gas tank, isn’t it?
More and more cars are being sold in China. More and more and more. The trend in those countries is, "Give me more of these things." That is why the crisis is developing. The more there is planning the less gap there will be in transition. The more these types of methods as I was describing to analyze resources and to find what resources can be there is used, the more it will be all right. So I do not see the need for over-worry regarding peak oil. Yes there will be troubles as a result and there will be a shifting in the balance of power. The real problem comes not about peak oil but about the power and authority given to self-centered entities who use all resources of the world to the exploitation of the human beings for their aggrandizement of the corporate entity and those who hold a high post.
These self-aggrandizing corporate entities will have to see a downfall of their psychology and this will occur through peak oil and other variables so that they find themselves not in the enviable position they had planned. Local development with people taking as much as they can back into their own hands good as long as it does not become too extreme. This needs to be put in balance with all of life.
Q. So as we work as Proutists, it seems to me that creating some mechanisms for communication and coordination between different local planning units and regional planning units will become important.
A. Yes. There must be.
Q. Eventually these planning bodies will exist within the context of the political administration?
A. These local planning bodies will be upon the regional, the townships, the block; they will be in these. Yes, within these elected democratic officials or appointed officials. Why not? So they will be adapted within the political arena to sponsor, to support these types of movements within the community but certain types of arenas they will shy away from.
Q. Excuse me? Certain political arenas these planning bodies will shy away from?
A. Yes. So planning will be done in those local but they will not be giving their support to larger bodies that will plan political development. That is to say the husbandry of the land by the larger global confederation, isn’t it? So that political arena has local input. It starts from local election then goes on to larger bodies. But regarding economics, that will be handled by the local political appointed or elected people.
