Två utvecklingsparadigmer - och ett tredje

Läs inte denna sida om du inte är beredd på ett paradigmskifte. Det som har stått här en dag står kanske inte kvar följande dag. Tillägg kommer eventuellt också att göras utan att det särskilt anges i texten. I den ovannämnda artikeln kontrasterar jag det sk kriget mot terrorism mot den sk hållbara utvecklingen. Dessa två bildar ett militärt respektive ett ekonomiskt utvecklingsparadigm. Konturerna av ett tredje utvecklingsparadigm börjar småningom också framträda. Det tredje paradigmet gäller kulturens och i synnerhet bibliotekens utveckling.

Inom biblioteksparadigmet utgör The Digital Textbook Initiative i Kalifornien under Arnold Schwarzenegger en motsvarighet i tiden till nyheten om DESERTEC, som tänks representera en hållbar utveckling, och KASOTC, som förmodas lägga grunden till framtida segrar i kriget mot terrorism.

Guvernör Schwarzenegger meddelade i början av juni 2009, att skolorna i Kalifornien hädanefter ska använda endast digitala läromedel i sin undervisning av matematik och naturvetenskaper. Initiativet är dels sparåtgärd (avsikten är att minska delstatens utgifter med ca 300-400 miljarder dollar), dels en fråga om image: "The textbooks are outdated, as far as I'm concerned, and there's no reason why our schools should have our students lug around these antiquated and heavy and expensive textbooks. California is the home of Silicon Valley. We are the world leader in technology and innovation, so we can do better than that." (Schwarzenegger)

* * *

Utvecklingsparadigmerna är endast bilder av verklighetens motsägelsefulla strukturer. Den hållbara utvecklingens paradigm tyder på att utvecklingen är ohållbar. Bakom det militära utvecklingsparadigmet skymtar det militära nederlaget. Google förgår, biblioteket består.

* * *

Freds- och konfliktforskaren Lassi Heininen tar upp förhållandet mellan miljö och militär i sin beskrivning av undervisningsmodulen "Security" som ingår i en kurs om samtidsfrågor vid Arctic University i Lappland:

Social scientist Johan Galtung emphasized, in the beginning of the 1980s, the keen relationship between the environment and the military. "It is an error to think that there is little or no relation between the degradation of the environment and security matters" (Galtung 1982; see also Westing 1988). In general, and on a global scale, there are relevant links, relations, and contradictions between the military and the environment that can be seen in the routine activities of armies. They have many elements: armies use the air, water, and land--worldwide about 0.5 to one per cent of all the land; they need natural resources, such as copper, nickel, and lead; armies use energy, especially oil; and armies are both "normal" (pollution caused by regular human activities) and "special" polluters (toxic and radioactive waste), but are "protected" polluters in that they generally operate outside environmental legislation.
Is it correct to call it a "keen relationship"? No, because the the military and the environment are not precisely like intimate lovers. However, it is a deplorable fact that the present development is unsustainable, and this fact is indeed closely related to the continuing dominance of the military-industrial complex and the corresponding military development paradigm.


    tillbaka till hemsidan


Hi Taylor ,

it is finally your entry about the donkey driven libraries in Zimbabwe which makes me want to send you a greeting from Finland. I also love this story. In addition to what you say, it is a good example of "intermediate technology" (E.F.Schumacher).

How did I find your blog? Well, I was writing a comment to a comment in my blog (Spinelli's Footsteps), whereby I had to check some facts about the so called Second Superpower. On that little fact finding mission I then stumbled on an "excerpt from a proposal on how 2.0 technology could be applied to deliberative forums... was developed as part of an American Library Association Workshop on Library 2.0 in May 2006". You know the rest.

Still about solar energy, have you noticed DESERTEC and the (mainly) German plans to construct a gigantic solar power station in the Sahara to cover some 10-20 percent of the electricity need of Europe? An important new press release from the project is expected tomorrow, 13 July.

DESERTEC could perhaps be a step towards a sustainable development, if investments of the same magnitude were made as if people and animals mattered, and if it were not for KASOTC.

DESERTEC stands for the sustainable, KASOTC for the military development. Unfortunately, all human development is still dominated by the military paradigm. Highly centralized electricity production may not be socially desirable, even if it is ecologically sustainable and the energy source is renewable (and not producing cesium, strontium, plutonium etc. as byproducts). But, living in a cold region (Finland) with long and dark winters, I must admit that DESERTEC sounds like a promising proposal.

Thank you also for the link to readings about those women librarians on pack horses, who delivered services to the inhabitants of remote rural areas of Kentucky in the period of the New Deal. The link you give is actually dead, but the material can be retrieved via the Internet Archive.

There, in the Internet Archive, I stumble upon another exciting item. namely, Dr David Ray Griffin's lecture, based on his book "The 9/11 Commission Report. Omissions and Distortions". It is up on the front page today, as the curator's choice. [Now already there: http://www.archive.org/details/drgriffin]

In sum:
The Sustainable Development Paradigm (DESERTEC)
The military paradigm (KASOTC)
and
The Library Paradigm

All the best. Keep up the good work. And keep in touch!

- Mikael


That letter was written during the Summer. Now it is October, and Taylor has not replied. Anyway, the dialogue remains a possibility. Like between Dorothee Sölle and Chico Whitaker (although it is partly in German and Dorothee has died ).
    back to the homepage