The amount of urgent news on the unravelling climate, or the perception and weight of it, does not drive many of us to take action. We know how bad things are getting, but we don't change society's or our own patterns. This remains true until we come up against the direct threats or consequences of climate change.
This has already begun for millions of climate-chaos victims. But at this point social and individual change look like they will mostly be involuntary. Significantly, whether our change is deliberate or not, we can find that climate change is personal and therefore quite activating.
Perhaps a key to overcoming the abstract threat of climate change is this personalizing, such that we feel our entire beings affected. This has to result in our lives changing outwardly too. Until this happens, when we're just on the intellectual level -- as consumers of news and facts -- we don't intimately sense our own lives' impact from climate change.
Fortunately, we don't have to all have a specific influence that's direct, such as our homes being inundated by sea level rise, for example, to graduate to climate consciousness. Such consciousness is not the destination; rather, it's a beginning for action that is immeasurable.
Not only is there the impact from climate change, there is our impact on climate change. For we reflect back into society and nature what is going on inside us. This can be powerful.
To illustrate my point that climate consciousness must flow from the personal, I will follow up on my recent climate-fast experience and share further findings that amount to more than my own fast. The mainly U.S. protest started on April 20. My short fast of 3 1/2 days does not compare impressively with the still-going fast by nine persons now entering their third week of no eating (some taking only water).
I'm sure they would agree that even a short fast is one way to become directly involved with climate change, if that is our intent. Our impact from this unique kind of act could be significant. If it is not, for all practical purposes, soon enough to tell we had an impact on society, we have still learned a lot which will be useful until this fight for a livable planet is won or lost.
One thing we're learning is that "this fight" is a narrow way to characterize our dreams and goals. We revere life, and invite everyone to share the good feeling -- for it seems some do not appreciate life in its diversity and mystery.
That's a good segue to say such folk might do well to learn about fasting. They may have to do it suddenly due to the intensifying Depression and ensuing deprivation. This implies stress instead of contemplating life's glory and wonder. Which way would most choose, if they were already somehow aware that our hopes are mostly pinned on "Fred Astaire in the White House" or a bogus techno-fix? Fortunately, many choices are going the way of common sense for economic survival, to creatively assure subsistence in the destructive wake of economic growth. Boom and bust never went away.
My inclusion of fasting in last week's Culture Change report, "Legally Drugged Populace: Handy Tool?" disappointed or scared some readers, but probably a low proportion. On an email list, someone commented on my report thusly:
"Fasting for more than two days is probably as controversial as over-consumption of calories, and not advisable for everyone! Certainly not a solution for much, except as an exigency measure."
I responded with this clarification and defense:
Fasting is a most ancient healing method that works consistently
unless done without regard to proper rest or proper breaking of the
fast. Western medicine doesn't profit off it, so fasting is
discouraged and is therefore controversial. Not in all cultures,
though.
In our culture we retain residual knowledge: English word "breakfast"
= break the fast. Same as in Spanish. We all fast, in the night
time: try eating really late or waking up in the middle of the night
and eat a meal, and see what rest you can then get.
In my 56 years I've not found any condition or person for whom fasting
is not advisable. Except, when I encounter those heavily ensnared in
the medical cult and they're on various drugs and treatments that are
compromising their health (and sending them to the poorhouse) -- they
cannot be approached and changed easily. Many modern persons have
theoretical disagreements, as do credentialed health professionals,
about fasting -- but never have I known the disagreements/fear/
objections/confusion to be based on evidence or actual experience.
The elimination of toxins -- symptoms -- is unpleasant and confused
with disease, hence interfered with by conventional medical practice.
The result is usually more advanced diseases and weakened states. In
a polluted world and sedentary lifestyle this can mean doom for one's
survival.
Detoxification through fasting = quickest healing or the enabling of
healing. Doing and seeing is believing. It's all empirical, giving
rise to simple, common-sense principles. Stopping pain and ending
addictions are no small accomplishments.
When healing has been put off or stifled (by failing to detoxify and
change life-style), at some point it becomes too late to do anything
but amputate or whatever.
If we don't all have the same ways in approaching climate change, that's okay. But the sooner people experience it directly, ideally voluntarily with willingness to share the knowledge, the sooner climate consciousness will take precedence over obsessing about the collapse of the old guard's outmoded control-tripping of humanity and nature.
* * * * *
"Legally Drugged Populace: Handy Tool?" by Jan Lundberg: culturechange.org
"Fred Astaire in the White House" by Michael Brownstein: culturechange.org
Culture Change mailing address: P.O. Box 3387, Santa Cruz, California, 95063, USA, Telephone 1-215-243-3144 (and fax). Culture Change was founded by Sustainable Energy Institute (formerly Fossil Fuels Policy Action), a nonprofit organization.
Some articles are published under Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. See Fair Use Notice for more information.
