Now, I wasn't talking about the sort of mind-changing people do every day- deciding to have lunch at the sub shop instead of the taco joint. What I am talking about is a fundamental transformation in the way the people of our culture view our place in the world. In other words, we have to turn our backs on the cultural vision which has driven us for some 10,000 years- a vision which has been summed up by author/teacher Daniel Quinn as follows: "The world was made for Man, and Man was made to conquer and rule it."

This sort of thinking is new to most people, and certainly appears to be new to the Sierra Club. I've never read any Club policy which challenges the myth that the world belongs to us. The most the Club argues for is that we need to be better stewards of the Earth; in other words, we need to take better care of our property.

I bring you good news, folks: Humans have no more business trying to be stewards of the world than do porcupines or porpoises, bluebirds or baboons. What a relief! We can stop working our butts off trying to conquer and rule the joint, stop trying to both exploit and conserve it, and again live the way humans lived for millions of years (and the way some still do): as one species among many in the community of life.

Is this really what it's going to take to avoid global catastrophe? I know what I think; let's find out what you think.

As I pointed out in my earlier article, we've been mud-wrestling over our so-called "environmental problems" for about 35 years now (since the publication of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring). During that time, all the big green groups have employed basically the same medicines to cure this disease: legislation, regulation, and technological fixes.

Problem is, nothing has been cured, and we're running out of time. The air and water still aren't clean and healthy, species are still being wiped out all around us, we've done next-to-nothing about climate change or population growth, and on and on.

Maybe it's just me, but this strategy doesn't seem to be working. I don't think it ever will work, either. As long as we have a culture which is founded on a lifestyle dedicated to perpetual growth-growth of our food supply, of our population, of our economy, of our territory, of our "standard of living" (defined, of course, as our collection of possessions)-then the world cannot be saved. If we continue to pursue a cultural vision that says this planet is our property, that no limits apply to us, that we have every right to go on turning ever-more of the world's biomass into human bodies and human products from one year to the next, we'll never be able to pass enough laws or create enough whiz-bang technologies to prevent the death of the world. Time for an analogy:

If you are the mayor of a village, and you find yourself having a problem with arson, what can you do? Well, if you only have a few firestarters, you can stop them, for the most part, by passing and enforcing laws against arson.

Sure, you could hire more firefighters, and purchase a fleet of top-of-the-line fire engines, and start altering your homes and businesses so that they're flame-resistant. You could pass laws that restrict how big the fires that are set intentionally can be, and how long they can burn, and you could require devices to collect the smoke and remove the worst of the pollution before spitting it back out.

Let's face it, though: There's no way you'd ever be able to spend enough money to put out all the fires and clean up all the smoke. You could reduce the damage, but, if everybody is starting fires, and they don't know how to stop, there will always be too many to put out.

But then you discover something: Your ancestors had a way of life that didn't cause all these fires. Not only that, but there are people in other villages who even today are living another way, a way of life that doesn't start fires either, and they seem quite happy. In fact, their way of life seems to bring them more of the kinds of wealth, or wellness, that humans truly need to be happy than your way of life does.

With this knowledge in your possession, what do you do? Do you just ignore it, and go back to hiring firefighters and filling out orders for fire engines?

Maybe, just maybe, if you're wise, you and your neighbors learn from your ancestors, and from the people of those other villages. You figure out a way to live happily that doesn't cause fires, instead of spending your time and resources trying to put out the ones you can, and struggling to control the ones you can't-a struggle you are certain to lose, in the end.

I tell you this story, my friends, because the Sierra Club is in the firefighting business. But don't feel picked on: all the "environmental" (what a sterile word for such a beautiful, real world) organizations I know of are in the firefighting business. This isn't a bad thing; in fact, it's helpful, even essential, while we work out a new way to live, because it limits the damage in the meantime. Our only hope for the future, though, lies in finding a way of life that doesn't set the world on fire.

And this much I know: Our cultural vision-that the world was made for us, and we were made to conquer and rule it-is napalm. We have no choice but to abandon it if we want the world, and our species, to live.

If you're interested in learning more, I suggest you begin by reading Daniel Quinn's Ishmael or The Story of B (both of which are available from your local library and most bookstores), or visit his website, www.ishmael.org. Daniel has been a great inspiration to me, and to many thousands of other people. He has changed all our minds, and our numbers are growing. There is a new worldview coming, and we're the ones spreading it.

Also, those of you who live in the Kansas City area may be interested in participating in a group I have brought together to begin exploring these ideas. Give me a ring at (816)753-6081, or send a message to dsdnt@kctera.net, if you'd like to know more.