A space for Suzuki Elders members to share their stories, reflections, and insights on environmental action and issues. From personal experiences to deep beliefs, this platform will amplify voices committed to a sustainable future. Stay tuned!

In 2018, I wrote that the world seemed caught in a conflict between “globalists,” Pickup the urban elites who welcome and support the world-wide integration of communications, commerce and transportation, and “locals” who view with suspicion the move from traditions, home, flag and family to the “new world order” and its chaotic clash of cultures. I was tempted to call this a conflict between the hillbillies and the city slickers but then the author of “Hillbilly Elegies” graduated from Yale Law School, the Appalachian red-necks joined forces with the Silicon Valley oligarchs, Tesla outsold Prius and Elon moved his operations to Texas so those categories are now more confused than ever. We still refer to “red states” and “blue states” but most states have become varying shades of purple. Culture wars have turned toxic but perhaps understanding those differences is a better path for more constructive conversations that lead to better outcomes.

I suggested that beyond the red and the blue worldviews is a green perspective that, like old 3-D glasses, provides more depth and clarity than that found in most current discussion of this fragmented world. I based that on Ken Wilber’s analysis of cognitive and cultural development passing though progressive stages. He uses terms like mythic/tribal for “red,” reasoned/global for “blue” and integrated/holistic for “green.” I am adding the metaphor of people who drive Priuses or Pickup Trucks as representing worldviews.

Polarization is not new to history since often one is usually either “with us” or “against us” on any number of issues such as the Site C dam, pipelines, trophy hunting or the development of nuclear energy. There are always grey areas but the spectrum still mostly ranges from black to white. Red, Blue and Green adds some colour to the discussion.

There are other polarities now in addition to global/local such as urban/rural, religious/scientific, masculine/feminine, educated/uneducated and young/old. Many of these have taken on a political coloration. I would argue that between the polarities and dichotomies that have emerged in the last decade there is a new “ecological” perspective which sees that everything has its role and place.

This may sound like just another wishy-washy, “woke folk” perspective but it is not. Globalists see local perspectives as too limited and narrow yet the global is made up of a mosaic of local conditions, each of which emerged from the particular circumstances of that region. Locals discount the cosmopolitans as out of touch with the day-to-day realities of lived experience yet as workers and managers they clearly depend on the big (global?) picture. Masculine/feminine divisions make sense from an ecological if not evolutionary perspective that, ideally, work (and play) together creatively.

It is not surprising that groups polarize around particular issues – jobs, growth, taxation or regulation. It is unfortunate that environmentalists sometimes contribute to unnecessary polarization. As Jim Hoggan (2016) suggests, “you’re wrong” can easily degenerate into “you’re evil! (or stupid.)” The “green” viewpoint steps back to try to find the bigger picture that puts both red and blue in perspective. It does not require an either/or split but looks for the interdependence in parts of the whole.

That, of course, is more easily said than done. The Peace River Site C dam may very well bring jobs and prosperity to some people in the region while displacing others. It may allow Albertans to close down their fossil fueled electrical utilities but still encourage fracking. First Nations do not always agree among themselves on what is in their best interests and may resent that the “city slickers” calling the shots on their environmental issues. It is easy to see how anger and resentment emerge regardless of the outcome. The green perspective may not avoid conflict but it can, at least, appreciate that positions affect people and there may be three or more sides to an issue.

There are legitimate concerns to be addressed and not papered over as “deplorable” or ignorant. The green perspective will recognize that being in the majority on an issue is not a reassurance that it is wise. Popular causes are notoriously fickle and, according to Bertrand Russell, “all movements go too far.” The green perspective is not just the middle ground between two extremes, it can be a radical position of its own – something beyond the boundaries of the conventional.

The green perspective would dive deeper into the imagination to find things unseen – “your young people shall see visions, and your old people shall dream dreams.” Here is where a “green” vision can go further. If locals can see global patterns and globalists consider universal patterns, then what can “green” become?

New scientific insights seem to point to deeper spiritual insights as “old” stories reveal new meanings. Interdependence resonates with indigenous “two-eyed seeing” and, possibly, the third eye described in some Eastern traditions.

Nature provides a deep, rich model of how the world works, but perhaps even that view is limited. Some spiritual traditions claim that now we “see through the glass darkly” and that even more depth may be revealed to those who “see through not with the eye (Blake).” If the old 3D movie goggles with red and blue lenses converted the hazy images on screen into three dimensions then maybe “green” lenses can give us even more depth. Our emerging “cosmological” understanding keeps astonishing us with quantum possibilities of multi-verses, dark matter and “n” dimensional space. Ecological understanding may yet give way to something more deeply cosmological than we have yet to imagine.

For now, it may be that the “wisdom of the elders” is to see the world with new eyes, perhaps even the eyes of a child across generations. Biologists tell us that evolution is random, chaotic with no particular outcome more “privileged” than another, yet we feel that some outcomes are better, truer and more beautiful than others. Let us trust that feeling and look into the greening future with hope, imagination and grit. We need not avert our eyes from the difficulties of our current situation or numb ourselves from its pain but the green perspective may see hope and resilience as a fundamental property of our “universe story” which we have had the good fortune become a part of and which will keep us and future generations “greener.”

It is becoming increasing apparent that the dream of incremental progress toward a prosperous, progressive future based on the Age of Enlightenment values of rationality, humanity and universality has faded in the light of the 21st century. Progress, of course, has been made. We can point to the many ways our lives are better, healthier and more comfortable than they would have been 100 or even 50 years ago. It is also clearly apparent that the “progress” has been unequal. While some have done spectacularly well, many have struggled to maintain the lifestyle that was advertised by the dream-makers.

The areas of decline have been extensively documented and there is a general feeling of malaise that affirms what the data demonstrates. This seems particularly acute in the most recent X, Y and Z generations that have had to attenuate their expectations for the future.

It may be possible to maintain the dream of progress by focusing on the things that have improved: cell phone speed and memory, transportation costs, AI-assisted answers to probing questions. The decline is more difficult to bring into focus especially if your degrees, career and TFSAs are secure and your mortgage mostly paid off. If you are younger, without degrees, working two or more jobs and facing an increase in your rent (or mortgage rate) then it is easier to believe that things are not getting better. Evidence for the decline is in the apparent nostalgia to “make America great again” or by getting lost in the distractions of a consumer culture.

And yet the dream persists. We feel that “progress” is our right and the inevitable result of western Enlightenment that brought industrialization, science and universal human rights. What could go wrong? Progress is not a natural state since many natural systems follow a “resilience” model that goes through boom-and-bust cycles with peaks and valleys. A “bust” recovery is never guaranteed since collapse and extinction are not uncommon consequences. One can say that such chaotic systems are unpredictable yet we heed the weather when “atmospheric rivers” are predicted. Complex systems require complex analyses and “black swan” events can confound even the most careful analyses yet prediction is possible.

Avoiding worst-case scenarios sometimes requires counter-intuitive solutions. When a plane is about to stall it takes training and practice to point it towards the ground. It is often easier to see in hind sight how catastrophes might have been avoided. The American revolution might have been avoided with better diplomacy and Americans might have had the “responsible government” model of Canada with its membership in the Commonwealth.

There are now persistent indications that “progress” is not taking us where we want to go; we are in a “predicament” which, unlike a problem, has no obvious solutions. Our best public health knowledge was ignored for political expediency.

Our best climate science is demeaned in deference to profits from fossil fuel extraction. Resilient systems do not necessarily return to the same forms that led to their demise; systems often reorganize, adapt and thrive on the changes in their environment. When systems collapse here are some common features of resilience that have been identified. These include diversity, redundancy, flexibility, interconnectedness, a capacity for alarm, reorganization and adaptation to change.

Rather than bemoan the possibility that the progress inherited from the 20st century has become dysfunctional, we should sit in the fire of possibilities that new things are born out of adversity. While transitions are turbulent and painful, reorganization can also bring positive change. Warm-blooded hummingbirds emerged from their cold-blooded ancestors who were unable to sip the nectar from new forms of flowers. Flowers themselves emerged from the needles and buds of their coniferous forebearers. Even destructive fires can prepare the ground for a new ecology. The collapse of one civilization creates room for new societies to arise. As we look at the creative process that builds, destroys and builds again the words of T.S. Eliot come to mind:

“We only live, only suspire, consumed by either fire or fire.”

Have you been inside a non-polluting human-made modern building?

What: Third Space Commons served as a net-zero energy and carbon-minimalist single-family home for the Solar Decathlon competition and now is used as a living lab with smart features. A guide will assist us on this FREE tour. After the tour we have the option to view the planned natural Japanese Nitobe Memorial Garden. Also, optional to eat and reflect together at Browns Crafthouse Restaurant after the tours.

Where: It is all happening at the UBC main campus:

• • Third Space Commons facility at UBC
    • 6363 Biological Sciences Rd, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4
  • followed by a 7-8 min walk to Nitobe Memorial Garden where a tour will be scheduled for those interested (cost of the tour $10/person)
    • 1895 Lower Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4
  • Browns Crafthouse Restaurant (optional)
    • 101 – 6111 University Blvd, Vancouver, BC, V6T 0C7
  • Parking: Convenient parking at the UBC West Parkade, a short walk to the 3rd Space Commons Facility
    • 2140 Lower Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z2

How to get there:

• • By bus: The UBC bus loop, near the UBC Aquatic Centre, is a pleasant 10 min walk to the Third Space Commons facility. UBC also has a shuttle bus system, Translink bus Route 68, a mini-bus
  • By car: Convenient parking at the UBC West Parkade, accessed from Lower Mall road, then a short walk to the 3^rd Space Commons Facility

Background: Third Space Commons aligns building design and construction with global efforts to combat the climate emergency. Built on the design principles of carbon minimalism, system minimalism, flexibility & adaptability, resilience, and living lab. Third Space Commons served as a net-zero energy and carbon single-family home for the Solar Decathlon competition. With a growing population, it responded to the need for flexibility in everyday life through its live-work typology. The space itself was adaptable to the needs of a family during different times of the day. Design decisions were guided by five key principles: carbon minimalism, circularity, flexibility, living lab, and resilience.

After its first life for the competition, the building has a second life as a living lab for experiential and research-based learning on zero emissions, regenerative, and climate-resilient design. UBC students will come together across faculties to collaborate on solutions to the climate emergency. The space’s flexibility will allow for both formal and informal interactions in the form of a classroom and commons area. Integrated building systems such as rainwater collection, mixed-mode ventilation, and smart controls ensure that students have a ‘living lab’ to learn about, experiment, and test climate-resilient solutions.

For more information, contact:
● Gordon Floe: ✉ Gordon.Floe@gmail.com | ☎ +1 (604)-880-8075
● Dan Kingsbury: ✉ DanKingsburydds@gmail.com
● Rosalind Kellett: ✉ RosKellett@gmail.com | ☎ +1 (604) 219-9750
To register, contact: (car pooling can be arranged)
● Gordon Floe: ✉ Gordon.Floe@gmail.com | ☎ +1 (604)-880-8075