The Goods-Eco Warriors?

[Goodlife1970]

I had a rather heated discussion with a friend of mine last night,it kind of started with her saying that The Goods were Eco Warriors of the 1970s. I disagreed with her as I thought that they did whatever they did out of economic nessesity. But,my friend said,they recycled everything,used manure from their animals in the garden,made thier own clothes ect. My arguement was all this was done in order to free Tom from his job,that he hated,and didnt they run a vehicle (ok of sorts!) on petrol and provide electricity from methane (isnt that a greenhouse gas?) so therefore could not be seen as being "green", as well as their opt in/opt out of making money (selling their fruit crops,Toms occasional freelance work ect) not really that anti capitalist eh? We have eventually agreed to differ! Crikey all this bother over a fictional TV programme!

[Andy Hamilton]

They often sold their produce to pay for stuff they needed. Aside from that can you not be a capitalist eco warrior? There was no such term as eco warrior in the 70's so I guess they also had no identity to aspire to, they were essentially eco warrior trend setters.

I am not sure I like the term eco warrior. Have you read a book called no speak, I have only glanced through it to be fair. It talks about how terms are changed to fit a perpose such pro life or climate change. Climate change is a good one to mention on here, remember when it used to be called global warming? What sounds less disasterous and allow everyone to keep churning out carbon emmisons. Climate change just sounds like we might get a bit colder in winter and perhaps a bit more rain now and again or something.

So eco-warrior could be earth saver, climate keeper, future ensurer or whatever. I think that now in the mass publics eye the image is of people like swampy (remember him) and that is not the best image to portray to get results and respect.

Phew almost turned into a rant

[Goodlife1970]

Cant say that Im keen on "eco warrior" as a term either,conjures up the image of some Barbarian thatll bash you over the head if you dont buy organic food! I think what my friend was trying to say was that the Goods were,in essence,the first icons (can you be a fictional icon?) of the green movement,whereas my point was that they were really escaping from the 9-5 rat-race and were not on some kind of green crusade. (now shes having a go at me for raising chickens for meat,and no she ISNT a Veggie!)

[Wombat]

I think it was St Augustine who said that it is not so much what you do as why you do it. It is possible to be, say, a survivalist and do most of the stuff that we do and yet not give a damn about the environment (that is not to say that the two philosophies are mutually exclusive!). So while the Goods were doing the same things, it was more as GL says out of economic neccessity to get out of a job that was driving him crazy. To ake that argument to its logical conclusion, they could not have been eco-warriors (had the term existed).

I am not sure that I am rapt with the term "eco-warrior" either, it seems to signify that "war" gets involved in their somewhere, which inevitably means destruction at some point. I think thst the term "environmentalist" has far more positive connotations and then you can make your decision as to how green you are (light, mid, deep) etc. I like to think of myself as mid green moving to deep but to be more accurate I would be light moving to mid green.

It would interesting to get Stew's take on this argument!

Well thats my 2 bobs worth!

Nev

[Millymollymandy]

I have not heard of the term 'eco-warrior' except on this forum. Could someone explain please?

[woolcraft]

Also known as Environmental Activists, I think - those carrying on a war on behalf of the environment - against the apathy of most human inhabitants of the planet - also organised into groups (FoE, Greenpeace, looser internet affiliations and so on) to take direct action on different issues.

[Muddypause]

It is a pretty interesting question, actually.

I don't think that the Goods were eco-warriors, because they weren't trying to change anyone else's values or behavior. But had the phrase existed back then, I think that Tom would have had great fun with the idea (mostly at Margo's expense). I think the Goods were, in the main, economic peasants - using their own resources to provide for their own needs. But IIRC, they didn't disconnect themselves entirely from the wider economy. Maybe, also, the best kind of 'green icon' is the one that just quietly gets on with their life in the best way they can, without shouting about it. So maybe you can be a green icon without being a crusader of any kind.

I was resisting joining in a debate on another forum a while ago, where several people were expressing the opinion that so many environmental concerns were middle class guilt trips, and thus fundamentally hypocritical (the Make Poverty History wristbands came in for a lot of stick). I guess the implication was, that if you weren't an eco-fundamentalist, your efforts were not truly representative of your values. This doesn't seem to leave much room for people in the '-ish' position.

terms are changed to fit a perpose such pro life or climate change. Climate change is a good one to mention on here, remember when it used to be called global warming?

My current bugbear is 'identity theft' - what was wrong with 'fraud'? But of course we have a proposal for a national identity card that the government wants to impose upon us.

I am not sure that I am rapt with the term "eco-warrior" either, it seems to signify that "war" gets involved in their somewhere, which inevitably means destruction at some point. I think thst the term "environmentalist" has far more positive connotations and then you can make your decision as to how green you are (light, mid, deep) etc. I like to think of myself as mid green moving to deep but to be more accurate I would be light moving to mid green.

Whilst I probably have more sympathy with an eco-warrior than with a road building campaigner, the term 'eco-warrior' brings to my mind someone who is didactically fundamentalist, and we've seen the sort of trouble that brings in connection with religions. I have reflected upon the irony of Greenpeace calling their anti nuclear weapon flagship Rainbow 'Warrior'. To be fair, in the 70s and 80s it all seemed to make sense. 'Environmentalist' seems a good word; I prefer it to 'conservationist', because that seems to imply artificially preserving things (usually for our own convenience or entertainment), which is not always a good idea. And personally I have trouble coming to terms with organisations like the British Association for Shooting and Conservation. Conservation so often seems to be an expression of our own presumed needs, above those of other life.

Actually, I think it wouldn't be a bad idea to reappraise the use of the word 'green'. Commercially, it has become a sales credential - everything from peanut butter to petrol is now sold to us on the dubious basis of its greenness. Within the green movement, being green can mean trying to resolve the thorny issues of consumerism, world poverty and unsustainable consumption, or it can mean studying crop circles, getting in touch with your chakras and dancing with fairies. In retrospect, I think it was a mistake for the UK Green Party to have changed its name, years ago, from the 'Ecology' Party - not that it's got anything to do with me.

[albert onglebod]

There was a lot of TV coverage about being environmentally friendly even back then.Remember 'House for the future' with its solar panels and insulation.
The CND camp at Greenham common was often on the news.
Didn't the goods have 2 very 'way out' students helping them for a while with ideas of getting back to nature Seem to remember they were a disaster.
If you said back then that you would like to be self sufficient someone would say 'like the Good Life' so I think they did become icons for everyday people who wished they could live like that.
Jerry and Margot were what Tom and Barbara would have remained,had they not taken a different path.
Definitely I could relate to Tom's need to be self reliant even back then .The 70's seemed to be the beginning of the throw away age.

[Muddypause]

Remember 'House for the future' with its solar panels and insulation.

I do remember that programme. That must be 30 years ago. I was beginning to think I was the only person that ever watched it - I've often searched the web to see if I can find out anything more about it, but can find absolutely no reference to it. IIRC, they bought an ordinary town house that needed refurbishing, and then rebuilt it to a high standard of sustainability, partly as an experiment, to see how far they could take the idea.

It was fascinating, because they approached everything in a hands-on fashion, learning as they went, making their own solar hot water panels, and putting a wind turbine on top of a lamp post.

Any idea where in the country it was? I have a feeling it was made by Granada TV, which might put it around Manchester somewhere. Wonder what became of it.

[Andy Hamilton]

Well one of them is in a brass band that is about all google brings up. Sounds like the house is still going though.

There seems to be precious little stuff if a similar vein on TV at the moment. We get rubbish like the "The real good life" esentially a reality TV show or River cottage which is all good but I don't live in the country or partically want to live in the country especially as I don't want to drive.

[Muddypause]

Well one of them is in a brass band that is about all google brings up. Sounds like the house is still going though.

Well found, Andy. That's more than Google ever turned up for me about it.

[Goodlife1970]

I dont remember House of the future,probably because I wouldve been about five at the time,but that sounds facinating.I ofetn wonder how far you could take things without resorting to becomming a hermit and living in a wooden hut,how much could you produce for yourself and still maintain a reasonable standard of comfort? I do like the term economic peasant as it seems to reflect the way we are trying to live,intentionally poor(ish). Once again Stew has made me look deeper into things (thanks for that!) and Ive come to the realisation that although Ive always thought of myself as being "mid green" (Nev) I actually only do most of what I do for reasons of economy,the Eco balls thread being an example of this,too much of an initial outlay in the first instance,although yes they would be better for my septic tank and ultimately the environment. Feel guilty about using my usual brand of detergent? No. Prehaps I should change my true colour to pale green?

[Shirley]

I do remember this - although I was quite young.

http://www.pitbossannie.com/iss-th-0900727551.html gives details of the book.

[Goodlife1970]

I shall be checking on ebay for it,sounds very interesting. Im having a flashback of an elderlyish man and a 1930s semi, do I have the right programme or am I on the wrong track completely? I seem to think this chap was called Harry something.

[Wombat]

Hmmmm...........sounds like another series that never made it this far!

Wehn I was doing my masters I came across the varieties of "green", I'll see if I can find the reference. Maybe we could rate ourselves? But I can't remeber the criteria!

Nev