beuys

JOSEPH BEUYS

THE GREAT SUFFERING OF NATURE.

This is a translation of an article by Joseph Beuys – Artist and founder member of the Free International University for Creativity and Interdisciplinary Research ( an international interest-collective of the Third Road alternative social model,).

Whoever speaks today about nature, whilst observing without any prejudice and sentiment, perceives a Great Suffering.

Our relationship to nature can be characterized as one that is disturbed through and through. The consequences of this are that the natural resources of our earth, our nature-base, has not only been 'disturbed', but rather even threatens to be completely destroyed. We are on the surest road toward the total destruction of our physical base, which is nature, through our practising of an economic system which depends on the unrestrained exploitation of nature. The unrestrained exploitation of nature base is obviously the consequence of an economic system, whose supreme guiding principle is in terms of profit-interests. So, whoever speaks today about nature cannot conceal especially this fact, because this means concealing the real heart of the matter.

     It must be absolutely clearly stated, that in this sense there is fundamentally no difference between the private-capitalistic system of the West and the state-capitalistic system of the East-block. The annihilation of the natural resources is practised world-wide, and therefore everyone whose concern is to find a way out of this dilemma, must look for completely new models, that have so far not been realized in either the East or West. Where though can this way be found? Many, in the process of reflection have found themselves confronted with precisely this clear insight, and have thus fallen into deep resignation. They simply cannot conceive how a model that does not fit into the usual 'left' or 'right' definitions could look. They see simply what is, and they see that it is moving towards destruction. And they see above all that they are destined to surrender themselves to this process, - a process that they can in no way intervene in. (Whether this is in fact true, is actually here of no importance. They don't see it any other way. They resign themselves: and the great suffering becomes a still greater suffering.

     What I am saying is that most people feel that they have surrendered themselves to a state of affairs that leads ultimately to the annihilation of nature. This feeling of powerlessness has two aspects, the first aspect relates to the existing power structure, in as much as it does not allow the majority of people any real possibility of participating in the moulding of society. The many 'citizens initiatives' of recent times nevertheless do demonstrate that there is an ever clearer consciousness and will to change this state of affairs. I too see in such initiatives a way to overcome the 'power-structures – that is, either party-dictatorships or functionaries-dictatorships. It is, however, at this point that something essential is to be seen. Of what use, for instance, is the grass-roots participation from the base up, - which is definitely rightly demanded - if people have not yet developed any reasonable model-solutions and real conceptions? Without such thought-work, every attempt at overcoming the existing power-structures will slip into total nothingness. In so saying then, one is emphasising the importance of thought-work, which is in essence creativity! Along with this comes the second aspect that so easily leads to resignation. The majority of people simply do not know how the destruction of the nature base can be kept at bay. They seem to have absolutely no idea. They think: there is no solution. This is of course a dangerous and widespread misconception, due ultimately not to people simply being mislead, but as a result of a totally unfree field of information. The information-field itself is in the hands of the power structure. I am thinking here, in the first instance, of the entire field of education that we all clearly know to be state-controlled. The fundamental deficiencies of a system based on state-control have indeed been long known about. What is said here goes for the East-block too. People know very well that state-control of the means of production leads to devastating consequences. It is the language of centralization, of management hierarchies and bureaucracies of functionaries, thus too the repression of freedom and creativity, but it is also the language of uneconomicness, in the sense that the real needs of the consumers are overlooked completely. Isn't it strange - a contradiction that cries out to the heavens - that the same phenomenon, when it appears in our own situation is stubbornly overlooked? Precisely those spheres of production in which ability goods - that is, productive human energies - should be developed, are also state-controlled in the West. Isn't it hypocritical to denounce something practised somewhere else as being the fundamental evil - to tear it to pieces through propaganda and capitalize on this - when we practice the same thing ourselves? One should just take a thorough and radical look at this state of affairs. So doing one sees through the insipid and over-moderate description dished out from the sphere of information- of which the educational sphere is an essential part - and sees a far-reaching, self-perpetuating state- control, which makes the free ‘production' of ideas and the free exchange of solutions and models impossible. And from this there emerges of itself a solution: The entire sphere of education (all training/schooling/ university education) must be freed from the clutches of the state and must be brought over to the principle of self-administration - which one must be careful not to confuse with 'privatisation.'

       Only when it is recognized that the essential goal and object of nature is freedom, will the Great Suffering of all nature, in the course of this realization, be able to be overcome.