Down with the Cities Part 8

The city: Is it not the crystallization of human greed and wickedness? (Convenience and extravagance and ease. Trinkets and gewgaws and amus.e.m.e.nt. Progress and change and expansion.

Plundering and destruction and contamination...)

Therefore we should not feel a sense of loss at the disappearance of the city. It will, in the near future, perish anyway because of dwindling natural resources and nuclear war. So we must realize that it would not be such a terrible thing to get rid of the cities.

Supplementary Remarks

In just the last 5,000 years human beings have achieved rapid progress. Even the Jomon Period was a mere 10,000 years ago. When we consider it in the light of the millions of years since humanity appeared, 10,000 years is only the most recent few moments of our existence.

It is extremely unusual that we should have achieved such fatal development in this short a time. Perhaps we should a.s.sume that the G.o.ds have, during this short time, allowed humanity this rapid progress. Let us note the fact that wild animals have shown no progress in millions of years, for foxes and racc.o.o.ns are still living the same lives as foxes and racc.o.o.ns. The rapid changes, increasing complexity of social structure, and urbanization achieved by humanity in the last 5,000 years must seem extremely unusual when considered in the light of Nature's timeless cycle. The city: the final, transient bubble of human history. It would not be strange at all if the G.o.ds had chosen the city as the means to destroy humanity.

The city is the explosive that will bring about the ruin of humanity. If we a.s.sume that in order to cause the manufacture of that explosive, Nature took the unusual step of allowing us a single great leap in progress in a short period of time, then this was either done on a whim of Nature (the G.o.ds) or a severe test by the laws of evolution (yes, I will say evolution here).

The G.o.ds gave human beings wisdom (by means of evolution), and that wisdom built the city. The city has visited us with a crisis. When the laws of evolution led to wisdom, the G.o.ds perhaps decided to use humanity in an experiment to see what would happen. The G.o.ds are no doubt grinning and watching to see what happens to the human beings who think themselves so clever since they have invented jet planes and computers, recombined genes, and made nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants. [28]

To the G.o.ds: You granted humanity wisdom, but I don't believe you meant that wisdom to be used in vain for progress, expansion, and prosperity.

To the people: How about giving up the use of this wisdom for the attainment of convenience and development, and using it instead now for regression and austerity? And how about, if not eradicating the cities, at least resolving to shrink the cities?

Let us get rid of nuclear weapons. And while we're at it, let's tear down the nuclear reactors. Let's remove escalators and automatic doors. Let's drastically reduce the numbers of jets and automobiles. Let's give up traveling abroad (and that goes for trips within the country as well -- being one with the land also means that we remain stationary). Let's cancel the construction of airports. Stop using moving walkways and walk with your legs instead. Stop using pulp to make idiotic comic books, handbills, and wrapping paper. Let's stop the manufacture of cigarettes, detergents, and food additives. Let's stop taking so much medicine. Reduce further the amounts of agricultural chemicals and chemical fertilizers. Let's stop building so many roads.

Let's leave the seash.o.r.e in its natural state. In order to shrink the cities let's send the extra labor to the farms. Let's promote the redistribution and further division of land. Let's all work hard for the production of food that isn't poisoned. Weed the fields and gardens by hand, and return compost to the soil.

There is no limit to that which we must do for scaling down, regression, and austerity. It is for these things that humanity must use the gift of the G.o.ds (wisdom) to its fullest extent.

People! (a.s.suming that the G.o.ds are even a little bit good), they know that wisdom is a double edged sword, and they are testing us to see how we will use it.

CHAPTER IV NOTES

24

Domination and exploitation are actually two sides of the same coin. But if we must make a distinction, then domination is a means of exploitation. It also follows that the city does not come into being by means of domination without exploitation.

25

The scale and form of the modern city is basically different from that of the ancient city, but in essence they are basically the same. We should note that both the ancient and the modern city are organizations for plunder and domination; the modern city, by means of industrialization and technological innovation, has grown to huge proportions.

26

In this instance, instead of saying that it transcends the differences between developed and non-developed countries, we should say that urbanization itself const.i.tutes the efforts of the non-developed countries to overtake the developed countries by progress and development (or by means of living beyond their means).

27

"World of Laws" and "Natural World" are terms from Ando Shoeki.

(Translator's note)

28

Truth is absolute, but good is relative. Since the G.o.ds are absolute they are truth, but they cannot be good. To the farmers the rice weevil is an evil, but to the manufacturers of agricultural chemicals, it is a good. And to the G.o.ds the rice weevil is, just like the farmers and manufacturers of agricultural chemicals, merely another form of life.

It is nothing more than the arbitrary decision and wishful thinking of human beings to believe that the G.o.ds are on the side of good. This is where we find the fundamental error of religion.

CHAPTER V Down with the Cities!

"Down with the cities!" means that the people of the cities will survive, and "Prosperity for the cities!" means that the people of the cities will perish.

If We Do Not Halt Urbanization, There Is No Future for Humanity or the Earth

There is no problem with turning the entire planet into country, but we must not turn it all into cities. If the entire planet is country then, even though we cannot hope for an extravagant and convenient life, the survival of humanity (as well as the lives of all other living things) is completely a.s.sured. However, if the entire planet is urbanized, then we cannot hope for our own survival or that of any other living thing. This is because it is impossible for the city to survive even for a day unless it depends upon the country.

Anyone should be able to understand this much. Unless one has gone completely bananas, it should be impossible to believe that the city can keep itself alive. Yet in spite of this fact, every day sees the loss of the country, and the expansion of the cities. Just look at the donut phenomenon (the building of more apartment complexes) occurring around the big cities. Just look at the plastering of everything with concrete and the leisure facilities along train lines and roads. Just look at how the polluting industries are evacuating to the country. Just look at the rise in tourism all over the country (tourist facilities represent urbanization: cable cars, scenic roads, parking lots, rest facilities, hotels, stores). And look also at the centers of towns and villages that are now halfway between the city and the country.

The cities continue their amoebae-like expansion. This limitless prosperity of the cities means the decline and fall of the country, which is the city's life line, and that means the strangling of the city's prosperity, and the end of life for the city.

If at this time people do not find the courage to curb urbanization and begin the return of the city to the country, we will have eternal regrets. Time has all but run out, and it may already be too late. Still, we must do what can be done to exercise the little remaining hope for humankind and the Earth.

We must get rid of the cities.

In Saving the City We Will Lose Everything

No matter what counterargument, no matter what reason there could be, we cannot expect to save ourselves while preserving the city.

If we exterminate ourselves we will lose everything. [29] What could be more important to us than our own survival?

Freedom? Will we still have to defend it even after we are gone?

Progress? Must we continue with it even if it means self-destruction?

Scholars.h.i.+p? Must we still pursue it even if it drives us to catastrophe?

Culture? Must we maintain it even if it brings about a crisis?