portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article

Cascadia Swaraj

The Cascadia Biorgion could represent an entirely new way of achiving change- through awareness and place-based reciprocity
But where's the fun? 05.Mar.2001 14:03

warren wwn2flea@hotmail.com

Don't movements get their energy from destroying stuff? How can we build cascadia if we don't get to destroy a bunch of consumer crap? No one will be interested. Didn't emma goldman say "if this revolution isn't throwing bombs I don't want any part of it" or some thing like that.
Just joking!
The idea of no revolution has much weight in the building of Cascadia. We are building a society not a goverment. If we are to bypass the whole 'general strike' or 'mass revolt' which need amazing visioning, and coordination by a few. We can see Cascadian society developing through families, neighborhoods, cites, water sheds, and bio-regions. Through "downrooting" Cascadia grows fully from the people, and not through a "uprising" which grows from a few.
So how do we do this?
My idea is that the few who are able to use their energy to organize "uprisings"; Instead use their energy in "downrooting" by helping people to identify that they are cascadians. Instead of paving the road for a revolution, give valitity to the road which is already being built.
How so?
Identify the cultural diversity in cascadia. Use this to strengthen bio-regional mind set. Cascadian cultur evolves directly from the resources that are in thier locality. That's amazing revolutionary stuff. Give it validity.
Identify the systems of production and consumption this culturally diverse society follows. Ex: relationships between punk community and intentional community in Olympia and Eugene.
With All Kinds of Absolutly Revolting Love,

How Do Cascadia's Poor Stay Put? 05.Mar.2001 18:31


Personally, I think this view is way too "biocentric" and lifestylist. To me, the point of attaining regional autonomy for Cascadia is not simply environmental, but also includes cultural, human, economic and many other aspects that make our region both unique and similar across borders of the state. It is this narrow view of bioregionalism that leads to the idea that we "don't need a revolution" because the "bioregion is already independent". What does that mean, anyway? To bridge this gap in logic, Jordan says that the problem is that we don't have a common culture because no one "stays put." It is hard to stay put in for instance, Seattle, when rents go way up due to gentrification. People are forced out to Burien and outlying areas instead. Therefore in order for people to be ABLE to stay put and develop the culture Jordan talks about, capitalism and wealth inequality would need to be overthrown. Doing that requires some form of revolution. However, I agree with much of what Jordan said as well.