Half Past Noon

Early in his career Wendell Berry wrote for the Whole Earth Catalog (motto: “Access to tools.” Later: “Stay hungry, stay foolish”). Steve Jobs considered the Whole Earth Catalog to be a “conceptual forerunner to Google”. It was a catalog of sustainable products and information sources. And it was the product of two of my hippie heroes: Stewart Brand and Kevin Kelly.

This week, Stewart Brand talked about the dangers of underpopulation.

Kevin Kelly talked about the Shirkey principle, which states that institutions can become so dedicated to the problem they are the solution to, that often they inadvertently perpetuate the problem. He uses the example of unions, and their codependency with management. His conclusion is brilliant – relevant to the food discussion, concern for the poor, and more:

In a strong sense we are defined by the problems we are solving. Yin/Yang, problem/solution, both sides form one unit. Because of the Shirky Principle, which says that every entity tends to prolong the problem it is solving, progress sometimes demands that we let go of problems. We can then look to marginal solutions and ask ourselves, what marginal problem is this solving that might be a more appreciated problem later on?

Just met someone who came into the store who is starting a new CSA in Moscow! It’s June-October, and limited to 15 spots. It’s under the auspices of Backyard Harvest, so your CSA subscription will also provide one for a local underprivileged family. Gyah, I’m so excited! Let me know if you want more details, or want to split a spot.

Chris and I were talking about localism, and some of the opposition we’ve encountered locally to some new avenues of inquiry (a lil’ agrarianism, a dash o’ distributism, a big chunk of ‘true religion’, higher liturgy, etc. – trust me, they’re all related).

Anywho, he was talking to someone else who’s coming from a different direction (probably not a Co-op shopper, for instance) and the charge was raised that localism is marked by ungratefulness. “We hate corporations, banks are robbing us, WinCo is evil”

Chris made the argument that he’s doing all this precisely in order to be grateful, to know how the food gets from the ground to his mouth. We must always be doing this out of gratefulness and love, emphasizing the positive side of the case. Having a negative case makes it reactionary, a passing fad, and makes it easy to swing all the way to the other side. “We want to explore the benefits of this thing right here, we think it might be good, and growing our own food is healthy and good for our souls and we can maybe share it if we get good at it,” as Chris put it.

All good points, but I think the original objection radically misses the point. I think I might even own that objection. Every new movement is based on discontent, and populated my malcontents. We started our own Classical Christian schools because we were dissatisfied by the available options. All the standard cautions against being reactionary apply, but this community shouldn’t have any problems with movements.

It reminded me of a post by Dr. Leithart on malcontents and church plants. 

In the end, this is tempest in a teakettle… we’re pursuing this stuff out of gratitude and divine discontent at the same time, and we’re attempting to be productive in all. I’m not an ivory tower kinda guy, so I test every new idea by attempting to do it and see if it works.

No offense intended to anyone, but I’m very grateful for WinCo, but there’s something off about it at the same time. I’m grateful for capitalism, but usury is evil. “What is this conversation that you are holding with each other as you walk?” y’know?

For any who are interested, Peter Hitchens’ recent article about the US election (reported from and written in Moscow, ID) is available here. A fun and fair read.

This is a continuation of Chris’ earlier Monk Discussion. Just a few scattered thoughts, since I haven’t had time to process a lot of this.

We need to consider the ‘Moscow Project’ in more detail. We all know Pastor Jim Wilson and the strategic / feasible story. But what were the overall goals of the second generation in Moscow?

There’s something very appealing about the new agrarianism (the books of Wendell Berry, specifically), but I think we all feel called to the cities. But in the country, you start your own small culture as the head of your family. In the city, many other forces come to bear. In the country, you’re closer to one another, and more interdependent. In the city you are spread apart, potentially anonymous and self-reliant.

Christians largely abandoned the cities for the suburbs, so it’s an uphill battle. What makes successful urban churches, like Seattle’s Mars Hill and New York’s Redeemer Pres., work? Closer to home, how is Christ Church Spokane doing?

Christ Church here in Moscow has recently grown such that there are now two services, and the elders are trying to divide the church into Parishes. Is it working? What makes a parish system succeed or fail?

Also, where do we all see ourselves?

There are many reasons why I am a fan of monks right now.

1. They can really tear through sewer rats and get great intelligence bonuses when they level up, while still having the discipline and strength to handle weapons not normally available to spellcaster classes:

2. They are pretty much the reason why Anglo Saxon and Protestant are found together in Western History textbooks these days.

3. I hear Linnaeus always smelled like lilac.

This is a thread that will hopefully be the springboard for a larger discussion I started last night with Davey and Austin (separately). In a nutshell, we’re pretty rad, and I think we could actually pull off a combined effort to plant another (but more different and thus sweeter) “Moscow Project” within our lifetimes. The idea is embryonic, but I’ve always figured I’ll end up going somewhere with a bunch of like-minded guys someday with the purpose of putting my NSA Diploma to some actual use.

The monk thing is apt because they traveled in groups, which was helpful, and they can enchant double-edged blades that will totally frag the undead, which is not only helpful but totally awesome.

Two starters:

1. The idea of one body, many parts. We have the beginnings of something can can make a dent, so long as we recognize and pursue individual strengths which, when developed, can contribute to the whole in a way that would surpass a collection of generalists. Example: Jones does the philosophy, Leithart the theology and lit, Schuler the music, and Wilson the popularism. Can we do something similar? Is it wise to consider our strengths and develop them now with a goal like this in mind?

2. Strategic and Feasible. Moscow used to be possible when Seattle wasn’t. Now Christians have begun to overrun the cities, and I think we can too, especially given our tastes and skills. Would people be willing to consider overrunning a city, having Austin set up a publishing wing, and cranking out books during breaks at the soup kitchens?

Discuss.