Cob: Re: "Class warfare" vs. Cob for the People!

[Ocean]

Interesting to interpret a cobbing liberation philosophy as "class 
warfare".

Cob as advocated by Ianto and Linda is essential a "self-help" housing 
solution, ideal for the vast number of citizens (dare I say majority?) 
who are forced into substandard housing by a corrupt and unjust system 
of building codes and industrial construction.

  The only "weapons" in this "class war" seem to be the legal and 
economic tools used by the corporate elite, prohibiting the underclass 
from building perfectly safe earthen structures by legally declaring 
then "unsound" and then requiring the rental or 30-year-mortgaged 
"purchase" of "sound" conventional structures at ridiculously 
unaffordable rates.

Ianto and Linda nowhere advocate attacking anyone.  They only want to 
help people take care of themselves, by modeling a simple lifestyle and 
offering a beautifully elegant, affordable way for us to build our own 
homes.  Linda and Ianto embody the essence of nonviolent liberation, and 
I bristle at the suggestion they are advocating "class warfare".

Ocean


On Monday, August 19, 2002, at 05:14 AM, David Knowlton wrote:

> i agree. a beautiful and natural building method is just that. making 
> it a weapon in class warfare is - strange.
>
>
>> From: John Fordice <otherfish at attbi.com>
>> Reply-To: John Fordice <otherfish at attbi.com>
>> To: Ocean <ocean at peacemaking.org>
>> CC: coblist at deatech.com
>> Subject: Cob: cob philosophy
>> Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 12:41:12 -0700
>>
>> To all on the list,
>>
>> Here is something I posted in 1998.
>> It's still relevant in the light of the recent Coblist wrangling about
>> the new Cob Book (  which I eagerly look forward to reading ).
>> Ianto and Linda have done a lot to open my eyes & for that I thank 
>> them.
>> However, in my analysis of the way the world works, there are some
>> things in the view they espouse to which I cannot subscribe.
>>
>> This is that 1998 writing.
>> It's basically a discussion of some implications of the "purist" cob 
>> philosophy.
>>
>> ...............................
>> .......has reminded me of a certain philosophy re cob that I find
>> troublesome.
>>
>> Specifically that of: low cost as the "ideal" ethic of a "correct" cob
>> culture.
>>
>> Each of us is in an economic reality - some folks have less $ ( either
>> by
>> choice or circumstance ) and some folks have more. These are realities
>> of our
>> personal lives & we are faced with either living within our economic
>> means or
>> changing them ( having access to more $).
>>
>> I am pleased when I hear of someone creating a low cost cob building
>> based (in
>> part) on using low cost or no cost recycled materials. Getting free of
>> the
>> economic burdens of modern life is a noble thing.
>> However it bothers me when this use of recycled, reused, rejected or
>> cast off
>> materials is touted as somehow freeing us from the "evils" of modern
>> industrial production and thereby making the us more "correct" than we
>> might
>> otherwise be.
>> I am troubled by this for two reasons:
>>
>> 1. It ignores the fact that for these cast off materials to be 
>> available
>> to us
>> they still had to be manufactured by someone. And if the materials are
>> low/no
>> cost because they are industrial seconds, that simply means that 
>> another
>> unit
>> of the same industrial product that was not a second was produced to
>> take its
>> place ( a gain for you, but an additional loss for the planet). Only a
>> recycling that reduces pollution , unnecessary transportation or
>> wasteful
>> original manufacturing has real benefit to the larger world. I mean,
>> recycle
>> & reuse as much as you can - just don't hold it up to be more than the
>> personal
>> bargain that it is (if that's all that it really is). It's important to
>> be
>> brutally honest with ourselves on this - no delusions are needed - we
>> have
>> enough of those already.
>>
>> 2. This bothers me even more - the idea that removing cob from the
>> economic
>> mainstream is a superior goal. Again, if you can get free from modern
>> economic madness by all means do so. Its just that there is a WHOLE
>> WORLD
>> of people for whom that is not reality. For cob to be effective in the
>> lives
>> of most people it (cob) must find a way to fit into the mainstream
>> patterns of
>> economic life. To say that cob must be in a non money world as much as
>> any
>> honest cobber can stand is selling us all short. We as cobbers need to
>> work
>> on all fronts. If we see cob as limited to only a frugal & humble being
>> then
>> we are marginalizing ourselves and cob into a position that will keep 
>> us
>> on
>> the fringe. Again - the fringe is fine if that's where you personally
>> want to
>> be - its just that the fringe is just that, the fringe. But if we truly
>> want to
>> change the beast we must strike at its heart & like it or not - being
>> able to
>> have an economic impact on the lives of people will do that in a way
>> that the
>> economic and cultural margin cannot do.
>>
>> please think on this -
>> regards
>> john fordice
>> THE COB CODE PROJECT
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Join the worldís largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
> http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
>
Ocean Liff-Anderson

Steward of Ahimsa Sanctuary (check out our newly updated website!!!!!)
http://www.peacemaking.org

Owner/Manager of Intaba's Kitchen (best food and coolest cob ambiance on 
the west coast!)
http://www.intabas.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 5452 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.deatech.com/pipermail/coblist/attachments/20020820/0f16e946/attachment.bin>