When environmental thinker and activist Vandana Shiva visits a small town in Sweden, filmmaker Mattias Olsson records a conversation with her about forests, biodiversity and the meaning of activism. He then sends the interview to Maria Westerberg – a Swedish artist, poet and forest restorer.
Separated by worlds, the two women are drawn together by a shared understanding: that activism need not begin with confronting everything that is wrong. It can begin where we are, with what we love, and with the simple question of what is ours to do.
Yes, love has to be part of activism. It always is, we just need to be aware of what it is we love and bring that consciously into what we do. That gives our work direction and sustains and nourishes it over time.
As Joanna Macy said, there are three forms of actions in this context: (a) Stopping actions, stopping harm. (b) Creating and living alternatives, finding a more life-centered way of life. (c) Examining our current worldview and it’s shadow sides, and developing and living from more life-centered and integral worldviews.
All of these come from love. For me, I choose (b) and (c) although I have a great deal of appreciation and respect for those who chose (a) – that too is essential, especially in our times.
I love Vananda Shiva and her work. What she says here is roughly accurate, but it can also be misunderstood.
It’s important to differentiate between the many scientific methods and the how they are used, the worldviews, assumptions, and aims of the people using them.
THE METHODS OF SCIENCE
The essence of science is the scientific methods.
These are common-sense ways to figure something out, which are then put in system. We all use the principles behind many of the scientific methods in daily life.
Scientific methods are inherently free from either domination or partnership orientations. They are just organized ways to learn about the world, some methods may be more appropriate for some situations than others, and all of them can be used with a domination or partnership mindset.
For instance, we can use quantitative methods with a domination mindset (genetic engineering of plants to make them propriatary) or a partnership mindset (measuring the increase in wildlife in a food forest). Similarly, we can use qualitative methods with a domination (generate data to justify xenophobia) or partnership (better understand the needs ot minorities) mindset.
IMMEDIATE REASONS
Of course, at one level, the difference lies in our goals, the demands put on us, what organization we are part of, and so on.
At another level, it’s all rooted in our worldview and basic assumptions about the world.
THE WORLDVIEWS THE SCIENCE HAPPENS WITHIN
Some worldviews and assumptions are inherently domination-oriented.
For instance: We are separate from nature. Nature is here for our use. Nature is infinite. The sacred is out there in a sky god and the afterlife. Non-human beings are inferior. We understand something best by taking it apart to its smallest parts. Life is a zero-sum game.
This worldview and these assumptions came out of the agricultural revolution and were used to justify the domination of animals, land, and people.
Other worldviews and assumptions are inherently partnership-oriented.
For instance: We are nature. We are ephemeral and local expressions of the living system we call Earth. The sacred is in everyone and everything. We understand something by seeing it in context and as part of larger seamless systems. We are the universe bringing itself into consciousness. We can find win-win-win solutions.
All scientific methods can be used within either of these worldviews and from any of these assumptions.
A SPECTRUM
It’s also important to point out that the domination and partnership orientation exists on a spectrum, and there is always some of each.
Also, even if we come from a partnership orientation, it makes sense to make use of whatever useful comes out of the domination culture and the science produced by the domination culture.
For instance, if we are developing a food forest, there is a lot of helpful science about soil, plants, ecology, succession, and so on that originally came out of a domination culture.
OUR BACKGROUND COLORS OUR PERCEPTION
Maybe this differentiation seems important to me since I grew up in and studied in Norway which has more of a partnership culture, so I have seen many examples of science being used with a partnership mindset.
I also understand why Vananda Shiva talks about it this way, and it’s obviously just a small exerpt from a longer interview. She has fought the horrors of the modern agricultural industry, so she knows how science has often been used from a domination mindset.