Turn Back, O Man: a review of "Small is Beautiful" by E. F. Schumacher

Small is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered by E. F. Schumacher (Blond & Briggs Ltd., London, 1973; reprinted by Harper Perennial 2010.)

In some ways the title of this classic 1973 book is a misnomer, leading one to think in terms of small ideas. Nothing could be further from the truth; these ideas are huge. Schumacher, a colleague of John Maynard Keynes at Oxford University, takes us on a tour of twentieth century human behavior as if he were in outer space photographing the earth from afar. His message is just as relevant today, and even more urgent.

Schumacher points out that the study of economics, far from being about mathematics and statistics alone, needs to answer the most basic questions of who we are and why we are here. To measure our success in terms of Gross National Product is not only stupid but downright dangerous, as it feeds into our already enlarged appetites for material goods and expensive, energy-hogging, huge scale technologies. Our problem is not a lack of production or even economic activity; it goes much deeper than that. Our problem is that our entire economic world system is based on greed, envy and the lust for more, as well as a self-centered and extremely short-sighted vision of where we are going and what the consequences might be.

We are out of touch with reality, Schumacher says, and we fail to see that all of our wealth comes ultimately from the earth, something that we did not make. We take this “capital” for granted, as if it is a limitless resource. He specifies “three categories of this 'capital'; fossil fuels, the tolerance margins of nature, and the human substance.” We fail to recognize that our economic system is consuming the very basis on which it is built. Our most important task, he says, is to get off the present collision course and develop a life-style designed for permanence.

We live in a society where the vices of greed and envy are systematically cultivated. This leads us, Schumacher says, to the destruction of intelligence, happiness and peace. “The cultivation and expansion of needs is the antithesis of wisdom....Wisdom demands a new orientation of science and technology towards the organic, the gentle, the non-violent, the elegant and beautiful.” Is this just naïve, wishful thinking? Or is this the way we were intended to live, and we deviate from this path of wisdom at our peril?

The image comes to mind of the frog in the pot of boiling water. At first the cold temperature is comfortable, but little by little the temperature increases unnoticed by the frog until it is too late. Are we like that frog, unaware that the choices we have made are heating up the pot (quite literally in the case of global warming)?

Schumacher, who obviously has a brilliant mind capable of pondering the deep intricacies of science, nevertheless sees knowledge of the sciences as subordinate to, for instance, the study of Shakespeare. “Science cannot produce ideas by which we could live,” he says. “...it tells (man) nothing about the meaning of life and can in no way cure his estrangement and secret despair.” At the same time, he deplores the direction the humanities have gone beginning in the nineteenth century. He questions the “canon” of the ideas of Darwin, Marx and Freud, as well as the ideas of relativism and materialism, much of which bypasses true ethics or wisdom. As these “sins of the fathers,” in his words, have percolated through the generations, we are left with no anchor of meaning and purpose and no guidance in answering the desperate questions we now face. If we were to conceive, for example, of a "Buddhist" economics, much of what passes for economics today would be obviously ridiculous. Traditional wisdom, he says, will speak to us, if we have ears to hear.

Note: Schumacher converted to the Catholic Church at age 60 (as did this blog author).

What is Permaculture?

Would you like to have healthy and delicious food, beautiful surroundings, meaningful work for yourself and your family, more connection to the natural world, happy children and animals? Would you like to nurture the earth and the environment, reduce non-renewable fuel use and global warming, and help break the power of multinational corporations who exploit people, animals and the earth? Would you like to (maybe) work part-time at your job, spend more time with your family, get more outdoor exercise and do a few pleasant, interesting and varied chores? Would you like to reduce your expenses for food, energy and other needs, build your local economy and make some extra income? If any of these apply to you, you might be interested in permaculture.

The word “permaculture” was coined in the 1970s by Bill Mollison and David Holmgren, two Australian academics and environmentalists. At first their intention was to create a “permanent agriculture,” but later they discovered that they were thinking along the lines of a “permanent culture.” Their ideas have spread literally around the world on every continent and have made huge strides in places like Africa where the re-establishment of small scale fertility and farming projects is crucial to health and survival.

Permaculture is primarily a system of land design for small scale home (or larger scale village) food production and energy use. The study of permaculture encompasses ecology, sustainability, organic growing methods, efficient energy use, home design, recycling, appropriate technology, and much more.

Permaculturalists consider that the present system of big agriculture and agribusiness, the use of chemicals and pesticides, the unnatural treatment of animals and the omnipresence of monocultural farming (corn, soybeans, corn, soybeans, corn, soybeans....) is seriously flawed. Scientists speculate that these practices are responsible for the disappearance of honeybees and many other species. When humans fail to work with nature and instead impose their own will and destructive methods on it, the natural world inevitably suffers. The permaculture idea is to work with nature through careful planning and design (some consider the hammock to be the most important permacultural tool) to create systems that nourish the earth and ourselves with less work and more bountiful results.

Some of the fundamental principles of permaculture design include the following:
1. working with rather than against nature
2. plant diversity rather than single crop farming
3. taking advantage of “microclimates” in the yard such as sunny, shady, warm, dry or moist areas
4. taking advantage of beneficial interconnections between plants, water, structures, insects, and animals
5. an emphasis on low-care perennial food plants and trees
6. “stacking functions” – each plant, animal or location has multiple uses (for example, chickens have the
multiple functions of producing eggs and manure, eating unwanted insects, clearing a garden bed by eating weeds
and scratching the soil to loosen it up, providing heat for a greenhouse, and providing education and
entertainment for children and adults)
7. gardening in “layers” – root, plant, bush, tree and vine layers, if carefully planned, can make use of vertical
garden space and result in productive “food forests”
8. working with “zones” of use intensity such as planting herbs and salad greens close to the house, vegetable
beds somewhat further, and orchard and wild areas even further, where visits are less frequent
water conservation and management (working with gravity)
use of solar and other renewable energy sources for home and garden

In light of the problems of global warming and the depletion of fossil fuels, permaculture design is a way for anyone to become part of the solution. Permaculture design can be implemented in suburban, rural and even city settings. The now famous urban homesteader Jules Dervaes and his family grow 6,000 pounds of produce annually on their one-tenth acre lot in Pasadena using permaculture principles.

Permaculture can be implemented at any scale depending on the time and resources you have to invest. Even if you just grow some herbs in pots, compost your kitchen scraps and coffee grounds, learn about edible wild plants, and buy as much as you can from local farmer's markets, you are making a start; and if you think about it for a few minutes, you will realize you are making a difference. The more you delve into the practice of permaculture, the more you will discover a fun and satisfying way of life.

Why Buy Food from Farmers' Markets?

This article was written awhile back to persuade folks to consider their power as a consumer to "vote" their values.

Did you know that you have the power right in your pocketbook to change your health, your surroundings and the world??

Votes are not only cast at political elections. In fact, every time you spend money you are voting for something. Of course there are some things that you have little choice about such as taxes, but I am talking about the everyday buying decisions you make.

One example is buying from a local business rather than a big chain store. While the chain store may be cheaper, the profits eventually go to the pockets of corporate officials instead of being spent locally. Also, big box stores rely on cheap energy and transportation costs that are really an illusion; our high energy habits will someday have to be paid for by future generations who will not think kindly of us.

So what about farmers markets? Wise energy use and improving the local economy are both good reason to buy local produce. Nutrition is another. Would you rather buy a tomato that was bred for long-term storage, at the expense of nutrition and taste, and was shipped thousands of miles in a gas-guzzling vehicle, or a delicious tomato freshly picked from a local farmer? Over the last 40 years or so, people have actually forgotten what good food tastes like because of the skewed priorities of our food system.

Of course, if you are on a strict budget, you may be struggling to pay your food bill. You might consider growing your own food as a solution. If not, however, consider the cost of poor nutrition! Think of high medical bills, not to mention pain and suffering, if you are in poor health. Eating high quality food can make a huge difference in your health.

Support local farmers and businesses, and you will improve your health, your eating experience AND YOUR COMMUNITY!

Distributism: Neither Liberal nor Conservative

Note: The following are the ramblings of a non expert in economics, political structures or, for that matter, distributist philosophy. However, it is an attempt to start a conversation. ANY and all comments are welcome!

We live in an increasingly polarized society in which "liberals" and "conservatives" are pitted against each other. I personally don't want to be labeled as either one, and politics makes me want to just roll my eyes and go read a good book. Having some Anabaptist/Mennonite leanings, despite a recent conversion to the Catholic Church, I find the idea of separation from the world a strong temptation. Just go off with a community of like-minded people and don't worry about those crazies who are following their various paths to destruction. Perhaps for children in families, or those who are not cut out for the cut-throat world, this is a good idea.

But Jesus didn't exactly do that. Despite withdrawing from time to time, He also moved into the thick of things and confronted the people in power. He walked into Jerusalem even though He knew it wouldn't be fun. He wanted to reach the poor multitudes with mercy and the power structure with justice. But his commitment ran deeper than most of us can say of ourselves.

So, what are we to do? We can sit in our homes and listen to the news and the pundits that we already agree with, and breathe a sigh of relief that we have lots of company. The trouble is, people with opposite viewpoints are doing the same thing.

Is there a middle ground, anywhere?

Distributism might be a possibility. You might use other terms such as localism, permaculture, cooperativism, etc. On the one hand, big government could be avoided if everyone had a bit of land, or training, or a share in a corporation, or other resources that could give them a way to make a living without government help. On the other hand, big business could be avoided if we did more things for ourselves, made more things for ourselves, grew our own food, boycotted big businesses that are overly controlling, and supported smaller, more local enterprises. More on this in future posts.

One thing for sure: instead of just pointing our fingers at "them" in a spirit of blame, we should occasionally turn the fingers back at ourselves and ask, how am I contributing to the problems rather than the solutions? As the Quaker John Woolman said, "May we look upon our treasure, the furniture of our houses, and our garments, and try to discover whether the seeds of war have nourishment in these our possessions."

In the end, our Christian duty is not to point the finger, but to keep our hands on the plow.

About that "ism"...

A favorite movie in our family is the 1938 film "You Can't Take It With You" starring Jean Arthur, Jimmy Stewart and Lionel Barrymore. The main characters in this lighthearted film grapple with the evils of capitalism versus the pleasures of home and family life, but with a few twists. The "family" depicted consists of extended relations along with several collected friends who live and work together under one roof, just doing what they enjoy most in a sort of cottage industry arrangement. The grandfather buys and sells stamps, one granddaughter studies ballet, two men make fireworks, and the mother writes plays on an old typewriter that was delivered to the house by mistake.

Grandpa Vanderhof, the family patriarch, has turned his back on the world of big business and the "isms" of capitalism, socialism, and fascism, though he admires heroism and patriotism. As he rants about "isms," his daughter Penny, the playwright, is working on a character who visits a monastery. Not sure where the plot is going, she is suddenly struck with the idea of her character having an "ism" in the monastery.

The clear message in this movie is that making big bucks doesn't lead to happiness. Only family, friends and enjoyable work can do that. The interesting thing is that the philosophy of the family in this film, lived in the face of threats by big bankers to force Vanderhof to sell his house, bears a strong resemblance to the philosophy of "Distributism" formulated by an early industrial era pope and a couple of large cigar-smoking Catholic writers from the early 20th century, G.K. Chesterton and Hillaire Belloc. An "ism" in the monastery, indeed.

Dale Ahlquist, president of the American Chesterton Society, writes on the Houston Catholic Worker website:

"The first encyclical on Catholic Social Teaching was issued in the midst of the industrial revolution, just before the dawn of the 20th century, by Pope Leo XIII. In Rerum Novarum he argued that in a just society, as many as possible should be owners.

"Ownership is an ideal. Pope Leo XIII recognized that this ideal was not being acknowledged in the modern world. The reason why ownership is important is that it provides independence and protects that basic unit of society, the family. This basic principle has been reaffirmed by all of the social encyclicals issued by the popes from Leo XIII to Pope Benedict XVI.

"G. K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc and others took Pope Leo XIII’s teaching and developed a social and economic idea known as Distributism. It differs from both Socialism and Capitalism. The best way of explaining it is that Socialism is based on communal rights and Capitalism is based on individual rights, but Distributism is based on family rights, and the idea that a society and an economy should be to protect, nurture, and serve that primary institution consisting of a father, a mother, and children.

"Distributism defends the ideal of ownership, keeping the connection between home and work rather than separating the two as the modern world has separated everything from everything else. We have seen the separation of work from home, the separation of business from morality, the separation of morality from religion, the separation of sex from birth, the separation of husband from wife.

"Chesterton argues that the academic economic models simply do not work. They do not consider moral consequences. The Social encyclicals have affirmed this point. In Caritas in Veritate, Pope Benedict made it clear that every economic decision has moral consequences, and that we have to act with principles other than pure profit. If Capitalism is mere acquisition and accumulation, it will always provoke Communism. Big Business and Big Government are dueling giants that are chained to each other."

That, dear friends, is Distributism in a nutshell. At least, it is a beginning of a broad and interesting subject. Please feel free to leave a comment or question. To be continued...