Page 18 RAIN Sept/Oct 1975 continued from page 17 . Nor, I suppose, would anyone wish to deny that many preindustrial societies have been able to create superlative cultures by placing their emphasis in the exactly opposite way. The greatest part of the modern world's cultural heritage stems from these societies. The affluent societies of today make such exorbitant demands on the world's resources, create ecological dangers of such intensity, and produce such a high level of neurosis among their populations that they cannot possibly serve as a model to be imitated by those tWO'thirds or three-quarters of mankind who are conventionally considered under-developed or developing. The failure of modern affluence-:which seems obvious enough, although it is by no means freely admitted by people of a purely materialistic outlook-cannot be attributed to affluence as such, but is directly due to mistaken priorities (the cause of which cannot be discussed here): a gross-over-emphasis on the ephemeral and a brutal under-. valuation of the eternal. Not surprisingly, no amount of indulgence on the ephemeral side can compensate for starvation on the eternal side. Reducing wants to needs In the light of these considerations, it is not difficult to understand the meaning and feasibility of a culture of poverty. It would be based on the insight that the real needs of human beings are limited and must b_e met, but that their wants tend to be unlimited, cannot be met, and must be resisted with the · utmos.t determination. Only by a reduction of wants to needs can resources for genuine progress be freed. The 'required resources cannot be found-from foreign aid; they cannot be mobilised via the technology of the affluent society which is immensely capital-intensive and labour-saving and is dependent on an elaborate infra-structure which is itself enormously expensive. Uncritical t~chnology transfer from the rich societies to the_poor cannot but transfer into poor societies a lifestyle which, placing-primary emphasis on ephemeral satisfactions, may suit the taste of smalL' rich minorities, but condemns the great, poor majority to increasing misery. The resources for genuine progress can be found only by,a life-style which emphasises frugal living in terms of ephemeral goods. Only such a•life-style can create, maintain and develop an ever-increasing supply of eternal goods. · Frugal living in terms of ephemeral goods means a dogged adherence to simplicity, a conscious·avoidance of any unnecessary elaborations, and a m~gnanimous rejection of luxurypuritanism, if you like-on the ephemeral side., This makes it possible to enjoy a high standard of living on the eternal side, as a compensation and reward. Luxury and refinement have their proper place and function, but only with eternal, not with ephemeral goods. That is the essence of a culture of poverty. One further point has to be added: the ultimate resource of any society is its labour power, which is inf~nitely creative. When the primary emphasis is on ephemeral goods, there is an_ automatic preference for mass-production, and there can be no doubt that mass production is more congenial to machines than it is to people. The result is the progressive elimination . of the human factor from the productive process. For a poor society, this means that its ultimate resource cannot be properly used; its creativity remains largely untapped. This is why Gandhi, with unerring instinct, insisted that "it is not mass production but only production by the masses that can do the trick." A society that places its primary emphasis on eternal goods will automatically prefer production by the masses to mass production, because such goods, intended to last, must frt the precise conditions of their place: they cannot be standardised. This brings the whole humap being back into the productive process, and it then emerges that even ephemer- •al goods (without which humari existence is obviously impossible) are far more efficient and economical when a proper "fit" has been ensured by the human factor. · All the above does not claim to be-more than an assembly of a few preliminary indications. I entertain the hope that, in view of increasing·threats to the very survival of culture-and even life itself_.:.there will be an upsurge of serious study of the possibilities of a cuJ{ure of poverty. We might find that we have nothing to lose and a world to gain. Reprinted from Undercurr;nts, #10-Resurgence #6/1 issue·. Undercurrents is $7.50 for 6 issues per year airmail from 275 Finchley Rd., London, NW3, England. . A Time to Plan, published by: hensive planning, enviror:imental,impact statements, methods of environmental analysis, social impact, economic impact. List of local agencies and organizations. Pretty much Oregon-oriented. ~AND USE ) In 1972, the City of Petaluma, Calif., passed an ordinance limiting housing projects (of S or more units) to a total of 500 dwellings per year through 1977. And the town endorsed the growthcontrol ordinance by-a vote of {181 to 906. The homebuilders associations screamed, and the courts at first agreed with them. But in August, the Appeals Court reversed that decision in favor of the citizens .. . a real landmark for communities worried about controlling the quality and nature of their growth. For details, see the mid-Septem~er issue of Not Man Apart. Planning Association of Wasington American Institute of Planners & Evergreen Environmental Re.source Center P.O. Box 280 Cheney, WA 99004 A collection of articles prepared to give land planners,a sense of the place of energy in land use strategies;_as well as the need for, and how to involve citizens in, the planning. Available from above. The Oregon Environment: A Citizen's Guide to Environmental Analysis and Planning Procedures. Dept. of Urban Planning Oniversity of Oregon Eugene, OR 97403 $2.00 . ' A non-prescriptiye description of the present state of land use laws. Compre- (MEDIA ) Public Media Center 275_1 Hyde St. San Francisco, CA 94109 A public interest advertising group, producing imaginative TV/radio public service spots. I've heard the latest spots on growth (we can't gro~ on like this) are especially good, introduced to the public by Tom McCall. Prices quite reasonable. They also help groups generally with media access and have a handbook on the subject. continued on page 22
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTc4NTAz