Intro/chapter 1

 What I found most interesting about this chapter are the stark differences between the agricultural and land management practices of white/European settlers and the indigenous peoples. Indigenous groups maintained rich, fertile soils and healthy ecological systems through advanced environmental stewardship practices. These practices were based on observing nature and working in tandem with it, from the native tribes who maintained healthy prairies through prescribed burns, the cultivation of CAM plants in the southwest, the managed watershed systems of the Hawaiian people that ensured nutrient cycling, or the food forests of South America. These systems were highly efficient and sustained both the native people and the environment for hundreds of years. White settlers, on the other hand, brought ideas that "nature" and "agriculture" are separate from each other, and nature must be fought against to maintain agricultural systems. Colonizers were encouraged to heavily plow prairies, and buffalo were systematically hunted to deprive indigenous people of food and to establish mono-crop land. 

While I can talk about the scientific implications of this for hours, I am instead going to focus on the connection to spirituality, and how religion shapes our attitudes toward the environment and agriculture. There is a direct correlation to cultures that have high levels of environmental stewardship and care and those that have an Earth-based spirituality. Many indigenous religions, for example, are centered around the relationship with "the creator" and the concept that all of life around them is sacred. "Earth-care" is not just done to provide food, it is woven into the fabric of their religions. Of course, each tribe has its own unique traditions, but there is a common theme of pursuing a deep connection with the Earth. This shapes attitudes toward the environment, in particular agriculture and resource management. Instead of an extraction-based, dominator worldview where resources are plundered and not replenished, earth-based spirituality stresses the importance of a regenerative, partnership model. This is a stark contrast to many Western spiritual traditions, that believe that mankind was placed on Earth to rule over the natural world. This forms a man/nature dichotomy, where the two are seen as opposites, opposing forces. As we are seen as being created in god's image, we view ourselves as something emerging from--but not a part of--nature. Because Westerners believed themselves to be above nature, this also permitted them to "other" native people by "lumping them in" with non-human nature (hence the idea of the "wild savage" that had to be "tamed" in a similar way to animals that persisted throughout manifest destiny). This contributed greatly to the annihilation of the native people, buffalo, and complex environmental systems they had built. This humancentric environmental egotism still continues today, despite most of the Western population being non-religious. Recently, some Christian groups have begun to advocate for environmentalism. However, many people are calling for a return to earth-based spirituality as being a catalyst for societal/environmental change. I don't believe this means that we all have to abandon our previous religions (many religions, such as Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, etc are deeply tied to cultural identity), appropriate indigenous spirituality/culture, or "worship" nature per se (unless you want to)--but I believe it means weaving ideas of "oneness" with nature and environmental stewardship into previously existing religions. For the atheists and agnostics, I believe it simply means recognizing nature as a living, intelligent force, and adopting ideas of regeneration and partnership with the Earth. One thing is for certain--we must attempt to dissolve the man/nature dualism and remove ourselves from the "pedestal" above all other living things that we have historically placed ourselves on in Western society. Only then can ideas of regenerative agriculture truly begin to take root.