She was arresting for obstructing jsutice and resisting an officer.

I'm reading this with friends here about what we think really happened:

Rather than saying "Oh, officer, I'm so sorry, I didn't realize I needed to cooperate with the department of natural resources and other agencies in my vision to replant the world. I'll stop what I'm doing here and contact the appropriate scientists and naturalists to coordinate with them THEIR replanting/ native species initiatives."

 No, that most definitely didn't happen. She wasn't arrested for trespassing, or for biological terrorism, or anything related to the plants...

This is what I imagine happening:

"YOU CAN'T STOP ME PIG!!! You're reign over mother nature has come to an end, you rape the earth and I'm jsut try to heal her. You can arrest me if you want but I believe in MY way of doing things SO DEEPLY I'd rather sit in jail and have you stop me from doing what I'm doing than cooperate with the earth-murderers." 

What do you think?

OFFICER: What are you doing?!

REWILDER: Planting some native seeds.

OFFICER: Don't you know that's illegal?!

REWILDER: I'm outta here.

OFFICER: I'm confiscating all that!

REWILDER: What?!

OFFICER: You don't think I can?  Fine! Resisting an officer, obstructing justice... have fun in jail!

REWILDER: <large rant with lots of swear words>

Note: Resisting an officer and obstructing justice are also code words nowadays for "I don't have anything to arrest you on, but I want to arrest you so I will."  They're great laws because unless it's being filmed, it's your word against them.

"Change comes from giving up the myth that you are in control."

You re-wild to workand enhance the living environment.  Basic biology; foreign life can radically re-alter a system, destroying its balance and permanently altering it.  If you have the ability, re-wilding is simply a cost effective, easy way to maintain a sensible dynamic equilibrium.

Who has the time to re-wild?  Well, obviously she did.  So do others.  If you don't, fine.  Just don't assume others are as sedentary.

It's not pointless.  It's not conspiratorial.  It's a person planting a plant.  It's a person helping a system.  How in the hells in that useless?

Bill Maxwell

"Change comes from giving up the myth that you are in control."

Crazy as it may seem, you may not do whatever you want on territories that arent yours. There are proper ways of doing these sorts of things. Re wilding could become a great thing if it went through the proper channels. Dont break the law. It looks very bad and doesnt accomplish anything. This isnt a "we against them" fight, this is an enlightenment campaign. So make it a campaign first, then when people see that its a good idea, it can become mass scaled and actually accomplish something. Look here for example, what did she accomplish? She has only established that it all looks impossible. Simply because she chose to break the law. How would similar actions help anyone that wants to come to the green movement? What sort of people will it attract? Powerful celebrities? I dont think so. Instead it will attract only negative people that will do the same thing to the green movement as they have done for the socialist movement. Make it an ideological statement and run it down into the gutter. That being said, Im not a socialist; the idea of generosity and helpfulness does not originate with socialism. And neither does care for the enviroment originate with the green movement, but from people with a heart that care about something beyond themselves.

Hey --

I don't remember where I read about this... perhaps here... but there was a story about a guy in Switzerland (I think... maybe N Italy... in the Alps, anyway) that lived there before and after WWII and basically spent his entire life replanting the forest.  When he first went there, the landscape was mostly abandoned on wildlife, people, everything.  By the time he died, everything had been revitalized.  The villages were no longer abandoned, the vicious winds had been reduced and absorbed by the forest allowing other plant life to thrive and therefore the animals returned.... it CAN be done, without requiring some mass movement.

BTW.... HI GUYS! Hope everyone is well.... after October 1st I'll be around more and let you all in on what I've been doing

Janene 

Thats a great story! I find myself nodding to myself, I am thinking just like you do. I was listening to a nice Burke lecture by Stanley Hauerwas about a famed german theologian named Dietrich Bonhoeffer (who was part of a group that planned to assasinate Hitler) concerning the ideas of politics, truth, lies, honesty and so on. And it turned out to be some pretty interesting distinctions there. The main distinction was between being truthful and being cynical. But your story make me think about another distinction, that between pretending and lying. We thrive on pretense but we die from lying. We need our pretenses because they show good will towards others and even if others know that we are merely pretending it doesnt matter because it gives room for good humour and noone has to come out of it feeling like they have been cheated. But since the ends does not automatically justify the means an additional point has to be made, that pretending does not come from an ill will but from a generous spirit.

As someone engaging and coordinating accross multiple federal and state agencies to bring out wetland plants raised by young people so they can make a difference... I would be rather annoyed to show up to a planting site that was designated a bullrish plating site and have it filled with spartina!

Because then we'd have to pull the spartina before we could plant the bullrush! (not that that would happen necessarily)....

I wish I could communicate effectively how there are more than just peope who read a bok that are trying to 'save the world', but alas, people choose their worldviews, they aren't given to them....

People just do their thing.

She's is definately doing her own thing!

You gotta clap for that!

I disagree that people choose their worldviews.  How can you know the scope of a worldview that you don't share, unless you already have it?

How can you know something before you know it?

And expect that you'll choose it?

Belief.  Believing that you know before actually knowing.

You can think that you have a worldview.  But everyday is a new day.  Every second is a new second.  And nothing is concrete.... not even concrete! , not even thought.

I don't have a point

I most definitely do not have to clap for someone who could be potentially undermining my work ... what's the opposite of clap? Slap? Just kidding

Sure, people change their worldviews all the TIME! Look at Dennis Miller and all the people wh went running scared for their security mom!

Lot's of things are concrete ... like concrete!

You can't just 'choose' how concrete is made from one day to another ... you can make it green and purple and gravelly, but it will always require lime and stone ground down enough to have the surface area to stick!

A worldview is the primary reaction you have to circumstances -- it isn't about your favorite flavor of ice cream!

A worldview isn't a set of facts and preferences, it's the lens through which all things are perceived, it isn't the rulebook, it's the playbook.

But you also said something I think is worth considering, that its a matter of choice. I would agree and add, its a matter of belief. I dont see man as a machine, so I dont believe in psychoanalysis that tries to find the "causes" of mans behaviour or his "automatic" responses to his enviroment, as if he were a goddamn robot. I dont buy that view. If you believe in such a view, that may be what you end up behaving like. But its a false image, a false god!

To believe is actually a conscious choice. It is an action, not a reaction. One reason I get so tired with nonbelievers all the time is because they think that everyone think like they do, only when they disagree they just got it logically wrong. They think that belief is the antithesis of reason. And since they think reason is an action of value, they consider belief a mere reaction and without value.

St. Anselm wrote something very interesting about this, consider it; you must believe in order to understand.

Since all secularists are liberals in one form or another, they will believe that you have to start from reason to understand anything. But this is obviously false. If you use reason you can merely end up with a conclusion. Thats not understanding. Its just a summary or end result. But if you believe in something, you can find a whole new area of understanding.

To open and close your hand, you don't need belief in order to do so... you just do it.  No conscious choice necessary.  Conscious choice takes time.  It delays action. 

If we had to consciously choose every nuance of opening our hand, it could take for ever...

Belief can trigger an action but action doesn't require belief. imo ... I think that trees agree with me on that one.

Conscious choice is like looking through a black and white lens (speaking of lens').  Where we pick out the white as important.  And want nothing to do with the black.

Little do we know that they are one.

  How would you know what you believed, if there weren't someone thinking the opposite?.... you'd have nothing to contrast with. 

You could thank them for playing the game with you.

It goes back to how the lady in this story played it out with the cop.  She had a belief that contrasted his.... and she wanted to duke it out!  So they played goodguy/badgirl.

Like, that's fun and all, but it doesn't HAVE to be that way.  We MAKE it that way.... we believe that we should. colonizing ourselves to meet our worldview/beliefs.

To me, they are the same thing.  You reason your way, and 'nonbelievers' reason theirs.

Nonbelievers ARE believers.  They believe in non-belief...... (I believe)

North and South are necessary for a magnet to occur.  They're cousins...they're one magnet.  Unseperable.  Best buds. 

Have faith that where they join, it is the most powerful point in existance.... no worries, no quams, no calculations, Just best buds for infinity. 

And your point is....?

i don't know.  I just say shit

How do you know that your way (the agency's way) is better than her's?

Until you know for sure, why be negative about it?  That's kind of self-frustrating, isn't it?

Colonialism:

"Okay.... Here's what needs to be done! ..... you, you, and you, go do that........  What? someone has a different way of doing it?.... tough, I gotta job to do here, I don't have time for this!"

Seems like we colonialize ourselves by going along to get along.

That's why I would clap for her.  Even for how she handled the officer..... what rush.

To me primary reaction is in-the-moment reflex.  Not contemplation--->action..... (too late)

I think all people would DUCK!! the same way...

to me...Worldview is a data log of past events that shape how a person contemplates existance/reality.  And then that person moves accordingly, by treating existance as if it were already defined and complete.... via the worldview.

To me worldviews are illusions to be overcome.

What if we waited for an answer to occur on its own, instead of trying to control every situation based on the past?

Concrete will break down, and therefore not concrete.

We treat it like it is indestructable, but it ain't.  We do that with a lot of 'things'.  

For starters, it is a well known fact that collaboration is more effective than acting alone.

Next, there are entire institutes, bodies of work, thousands of professionals, and millions of hours of fieldwork that say, as a basis of experiential fact, that integrated environmental management  is more effective than even, yes, leaving nature alone to heal herself.

One can be a lone warrior, but why fight a fight alone when so many people have already joined forces to fight the same fight?

For all the talk about cooperation, I really feel like Ishmael and all these other etherial lessons really only re-direct selfish, individuated action, rather than transform it.

Someone transformed by understanding the pyramid scheme shoud be empowered to cooperate, not go and find 'what works for them'

It's so hermetic !

-- hermetic -- the basis of the pyramid scheme.

Recognized the source as flowing from them, and not through them, the transformed individual then goes on to for their own pyramid scheme... time and time again, the voice of all of us is mistake as the voice of a singular god.

Imagine this scenario in stead of the one we've been living out -- the seeker finds The Source, but rather than perceiving it as flowing from the seeker, it is perceived (correctly) that the source is flowing from all of us, and we all have access to it equally. 

I agree.  The lady in the article wasn't necessarily acting alone.... like I said, she may communicate with the land.

Nature isn't sick, and does not need to be healed. The rain is raining, the sun is warm, the stars are still there....You are part of Nature... are you sick?

Nature is all that there is.

Since YOU are nature and SHE is nature, it doesn't matter to me who plants what where.  Both of you are equally valuable in my eyes.  And I clap for both.  But I might not do things your guyes way.

This is where community comes in.  Everyone has their ideas, and everyone respects everyone elses (though not necessarily agreeing).  This is the ideal situation, but just cause there are arguments doesn't mean it isn't a community.  Balance is balance.

It's when someone comes along stating that THEIR way is the most effective way, and all must yield.  It's fine and all, but a lot of extra energy can be wasted with arguing.  It's when an agency has the right to lock you up against your will that tyranny enters the community.

When we genuinely take interest in what other people do... how/why etc, they'll (for the most part) do it back.  That's community.

Since you are nature, do you trust yourself to live life unmanaged?  Or do you think that an agency knows what is a more effective way for you to live?

Does/can any one individual know all that Science knows?

Would they be the god of Science that we should worship?

Do you want to be managed by computers, and actuary statistics?

Told that you can't do something, even when you feel it is right?

There's no community in that. Its a bunch of people locked up in their houses, scared to come out without their happymasks on.  I'm not saying this is bad... it's what is happening to a lot of people, and therefore necessary for them.

A Coyote is a lone warrior, what is he fighting against?  What's this fight you speak of?

You're right.  BUT you can't transform it.  It's a tool, like a knife.  It's handy :) 

As long as people regard themselves as a separate self, there will always be selfishness!!

Maybe we are fighting our-selves?

A fool who persists in his folley becomes wise.  

Ishmael is one of many ways for us to be sped up in folley.  It's like a good gulp of wisdom, leaving us wanting to put all effort into acheiving the fullness.  Science and Religion does this too.  But Ishmael offers something that seems to be catching on for people fed up with the same old.  Not better, just different.  A different image to focus on.

All intellectual endevors are folley, and un/necessary.  When we participate in it, it's necessary, when we don't, it's not. 

cool.  I like that.

This source you speak of,  Does the lady who planted the plants have access to it?

If so, why not clap?   Aren't we all one, by this scenario?

You still get paid for your 8 hours either way right?

If so who cares?

If not who cares?.. you're alive, it's all good.... hey look wild potato...mmm

  All of you in your agency sound like a singular voice to me.

Is this good or bad?

You are clearly ill from so sort of foot-in-mouth disease, I know many treateurs.

IN one breath, you say there is no one right way to replant nature (exceptfor that dirty masty monocropping way)

In the next breath, you say there is only one way to duck! What about not-ducking? What about sidestepping? Collapsing? Or even, catching that which is aiming to hit you?

Your time magic ony makes sense in exercises of perception. Concrete is concrete until it isn't, and while you may be focused on how things are perceived in the end of days, for now, could you explain to me why describing concrete as concrete isn't sufficient for now?

You won't impress me with descriptions of what happens at a molecular level, where matter and energy break down and comingle, or how tiny humanly-imperceptable chunks flake off blurring the line between concrete and the atmosphere -- I'm already perceiving that.

And finally, what does overcoming a worldview acheive? What replaces the social function of a wordview (which contatins in it birth and death and all the mysteries in between)

The point isn't to be a blank slate (excuse me, I mean a cold nothingnessw where not even informatin exists), Its to be able to choose what is written on that slate when what was written no longertells the story we want to tell.

SUMMARY: Ishmael and this whole 'thing' is about creating space for choice, and seeing 'the one right way' as simply a choice. It's not about tearing down the walls of a structure that, SUPPOSEDLY we all left behind...

I am? What's a treateur?

I don't recall mentioning monocropping....

What about them? They can work too?

Life is an exercise of perception. 

I don't remember mentioning the end-of-days....? (I don't believe in the end of days... days will never end)

I never said it wasn't sufficient to call concrete concrete.

I was trying to illustrate that nothing is static.

When we define things as if they are static, I'm compelled to bring up the obvious as a reminder that they are not.   That way we don't get too comfortable hahaha

k thanks.

  Overcoming our worldviews allows us to fully connect with the source that comes from everything (like in your scenerio)....  rather than just talking about it as an intellectual exercise.  There is a MASSIVE difference between the two.

The words are not the event.

Talking about it doesn't mean you get it necessarily.  You can know all the words about hockey, but never play it..... so do you actually know hockey, then?

Hockey is a verb. Concrete, moves, therefore its a verb.  

Your right, the point isn't to be a blank slate.

Are animals blank slates?

Maybe you are scared of the images that horror movies handed to you?  Which is why you jumped to blank slate?

All animals have social function, and no worldviews.

Like I said the mind is a tool. It's useful. So I partly agree.   But it doesn't need to be taken too seriously. 

To be afraid  would be like a hunter obsessed with his knife.  Scared to lose it incase he can't survive without it.  But what's funny is he's never tried.  And would rather pass on excuses instead of facing that fear.  Excuses he got from images of wide-eyed cadavers, and scary ghosts lurking in wells, with piercing glares of  hell. blank slates.

Gotta love the media.... always the opposite.

Heyoka!

reply I've ever gotten.

I started to get the feeling that as you came more into being through added words, you might be one to appreciate!

nicely put.  I'm glad you share in understanding.   I took a while to answer, cause I didn't feel the need to. 

The community/will is everything (and everyone)..... We can know this in words.... but what of the action that those words describe?

It's funny. 

We are all actors putting on a tremendous show.  One can get all caught up in the drama/role, or one can stand aside - as will - and belly laugh with the divinity in all things. (cop shmop  hahaha)

You'll NEVER lose, cause there is no 'you' to fail.