Questions and Answers
|
|
                    
|
I put this together for a previous presentation of this proposal. I thought it might help to visualize what this community might look like and how it might function......or in other words, materialize. The danger is that you the reader will feel like this has to be this way or that I'm trying to spell out everything. The only thing I feel adamant about, are the ethics and the goals; other than those it is a completely democratic and consensual organization. And even the ethics and goals could be worded completely different and have other things added..... as long as the original intent was not changed.
Q: How many people would be involved and why? [top] It is hard to say what the optimal number is exactly. The Hutterites have been very successful with 150 to 200. The Farm in Tennessee, didn't get into trouble providing meals in the community kitchen until their numbers exceeded 300. Why so many? One reason is to be ecological; because we'd be more self sufficient-materially and socially, we'd save time and money attempting to get these needs meet elsewhere. For example, we feel children should have age appropriate playmates and be in a school (our own) where our principles are shared by all. Also, we feel adults would benefit and enjoy collaborating with others who share their vocational or avocation interests, such as: artists, musicians, carpenters, science, healing arts, mechanics, farmers; as well as sharing interests in such things as activism or the playing of certain sports or games. We would like a community that is vital enough and offers enough opportunity so that as children become adults, they don't have to leave if they wish to stay; and to offer a rich and supportive environment to our members as they age. A large community would offer it's older members ample opportunity to contribute and stay involved and in the end, should the community need to "carry" a few elderly or infirm for a while, this would not be a burden to a large and vital community. Note: speaking of infirm, of course anyone could become infirm or disable themselves at any time, a true community should be able to handle these circumstances gracefully and gladly; which might be harder for a smaller group.
Simply put, no. There are none that clearly take a stand on the values we do, nor any with a commitment to guarantee as much freedom for the individual member as possible. There are a few small groups that have a similar perspective, a few large secular egalitarian communities and many large religious egalitarian communities, particularly the Hutterites in the midwest and central Canada. If you come upon any large communities that are based on our principles and goal, please let us to now.
Probably several hundred acres at least and ultimately it might come down to a balance between opportunity, need, timing and resources. We would want forest for it's resources and forest just to let be natural for walking in, we'd want space for privacy and quiet, both from each other and the world around us, land for grazing community animals and growing their food, and land for those who might wish to do some commercial agriculture and for possible community commercial agricultural enterprises.
As is said, the answer often lies with in the question. As such, there are probably only so many ways this can be done. (A) We might find a land trust that likes our idea (B) Find someone who is wealthy to provide the land (C) A member may have the land (D) A small group within the community could purchase it (E) Even if we had to purchase it ourselves by say everyone putting in $5,000, that times 200, is a million dollars. This is just an example of the strength of cooperative action and what is possible. We steadfastly believe that the "problem" is not one of "getting the land or the money", but rather it is a lacking in consciousness, commitment, faith in an idea and resolve and perhaps also, a lack of courage and mutual support, as in between men and women.
Q: Is talking about free land, hoping for a handout? [top] No, we don't think so. Under ideal circumstances, land which has no human improvements on it, should have no value (of course, under those circumstances, land wouldn't ever be sold either). It is only because of overpopulation and mans/woman's desire to take advantage of his/her fellow human beings, as well as our inability to share and live cooperatively, that land itself comes to represent monetary value. As long as we maintain a certain detached attitude towards place and things (emphasizing principles, unity, wisdom, and compassion instead), and continue to think of the well being our fellow world citizens in all that we do and how we do it, what we will be doing, (given the way the world is today) will be a positive example for others. Perhaps not all in the community will have this consciousness exactly, right away, yet circumstances (the way the community is set up and it's principles) will gently encourage this consciousness. Q: Why not get a mortgage and let all community members share in paying for the land and buildings? [top] Because the financial pressure becomes too much of a burden. By the time the mortgage is paid off, the interest on the loan will be three or four times what the loan principal was initially and everyone in the community will be working for the bank in a very dedicated sort of way for years and years. We also want to create a certain detached attitude towards material things and even place; it is freedom, low cost, ecology peace and justice we wish to emphasis, not a desperate clinging to a particular place or even to people, one's tribe, or one's family. We need to both emphasis the individual more and the world as a whole. We wish to bring forth a new age of freedom and security for all, not just for ourselves; members need to understand this. There is evidence to suggest that approaching intentional community with an attitude of merely securing a place in this world for oneself is recipe for failure. If we discover a successful way for human beings to organize themselves, we must share this and create more communities.
We hope most will put forth the desire to live this way, above, where to live this way. There are advantages to the south and advantages to the north. We probably should be ready to follow opportunity. There is always the second community to try to locate in some specific area.
That is not the spirit in which this community is founded. This brings up issues such as the end justifying the means, simplicity and ecological issues. If a community member wanted to try living on the coast of Costa Rica for a while to see what that was like, or to see what they could put together there, that would be fine, they would always be welcomed back to the community should they choose. We want to encourage travelers, not tourists.
All human beings crave and need a certain sense of security. In the case of this community, that security would come in part from one's commitment to the values and goal of the community. Also it would come from a willingness to work out any challenges that arose along the way. It is true though, sometimes things fall apart either on a small scale or large scale. Continually creating more communities like this one would be a good idea both because that is partly the spirit of this consciousness and if that were the case, it would give one options. Ultimately though, we will have to decide which (outward society or our community) offers one and others the best hope for a better life and a better world.
Q: What about equity in the community? [top] Like security, equity should be seen as commitment to values, a goal, to one's fellow community, and to the furtherance of this idea and values. A certain detachment from "things" furthers our development as whole and mature human beings and fosters the kind simplicity and cooperation that contributes to our freedom. However, this rather spirited perspective aside, and on a practical note, if one needed to create a building, acquire machinery, or create agricultural developments such as orchards, those could be sold if one left the community (to a new or existing community member of course, if the items couldn't be moved)
All human waste will be composted and used in agriculture. Not
for vegetables we would eat raw, but rather things like corn or winter squash.
Recent developments in the art of composting toilets have made this process much
less onerous or is it odorous? Also, it will be
possible to have private composting toilet facilities close at hand, or is it
close to bottom? Q: What about recycling? [top] In the circumstances of living in this community, growing most of our food and preparing all of it, sharing resources and living more simply we would be a model for the low generation of waste. Never the less, the waste we do create, we should under these circumstances, with much peer support, and abundant time to do things right, we should aim for a 100 percent recycling loop.
Few of us have been perfect in this life and we are all to blame for this world being what it is. So, how many children people already have doesn't matter. Though it must be understood that this dedication to maintaining a stable population in the future must not be faked just to get into the community. Also note, adult children must adopt community values in order to live in the community as adults.
When people can't commit themselves to a few basic principles and the goal is cloudy, it can be difficult, if not impossible to work together. If on the other hand, these things are crystal clear, people can work together very well. People like to work together and people want to work together. This community would foster both the opportunity to work together and the opportunity to work alone.
We'd like to keep money needed by the community from the individual very low. We don't want to be unrealistic, on the other hand we wish to make our intent very clear, that low cost, low monetary needs, are part of the freedom equation. We'd like to keep it below $1,000 and do not even think $500 is out of the question. Taxes should be low, as would insurance (if we had it at all, maybe just liability). Mostly, money needed by the community would be needed for food which would be impractical to grow (grains, oil, and so on) and to contribute towards a fund to replace and maintain community facilities and equipment. Note: cash food costs would probably be higher in the beginning until we could produce all that would be practical to produce ourselves.
Q: What if the community can't grow what it wants regarding fruits, vegetables and animal products? [top] The community must take growing it's fruits, vegetables and producing it's own animal products seriously both for ecological and economic reasons and because this is a serious part of our freedom equation. We could network with farmers in the community and outside, and with other local cooperative communities to exchange surpluses. We could also sell community surpluses to purchase shortfalls. But we must not look to the option of just going out and purchasing what we didn't succeed at ourselves. In the end, doing without will be a motivating factor to succeed so remove it at our peril. That said, it will of course, take a few years to establish ourselves agriculturally, and during that time will have to purchase some of what we will, in the future, grow or produce ourselves.
Q: What about attitude towards ones community work requirement? [top] We recognize that we human beings, under the most desirous of circumstances, like to be in position to decide for ourselves what and when, we shall do what we wish to do, including or partially when it comes to work. That is a big reason for living this way. We recognize living cooperatively offers us many advantages for accomplishing this personal goal of freedom. In this spirit we want to keep the "required work time" very low-only 4 to 6 days per month, so that we do not feel encumbered or oppressed in any way. In this light, one would be expected to do one's work cheerfully, efficiently and at a realistic pace.
Yes, but at the same hourly pay rate or based on the yearly income of the "employer" member. This of course would be predicated on finding willing community member "employees". Some might say this could open up class-ism issues, we don't think so because income levels will vary greatly anyway, even under idealistic circumstances; also, we share the same important values, live in the same basic housing units, eat the same food or have easy access to such and finally, work requirements and money requirements are extremely low for everyone. And all community resources are shared. We feel the need to "be real", some people are going to need some money, if some could afford to pay others to do their work, that one "shift" alone might be enough to meet another members total monetary needs. So a total of only 8 to 12 days would be all that was necessary to meet all one' s needs. There need be no sense of denigration by doing gardening, cooking or maintenance for "one's work". And finally, this "cash work" would be totally optional anyway on everyone's part.
No. There will be a men's and a woman's side to the community bath house. It would be state of the art, just like the best state park bathing facilities; beautifully constructed, spacious, airy, well lighted and warm. Many sinks, some private shower stalls, and all the necessary hot water. Note: because all human waste will be composed, there will be no toilets, composting or otherwise in the community bathing facility.
We expect we will earn money just as we do now with one notable exception. By needing much less money to survive, two possibilities present themselves that we can think of immediately (1) Because the money needs will be so low, it won't matter particularly how one earns it or (2) with money needs so low, one will be able to do something one feels is important but might not yield a lot of money or one will be able to do what one loves to do for work to earn money, but that isn't necessarily that remunerative, such as farming, art or music. As for restrictions, again the need to be "real", ultimately we will have to do, what we have to do; isn't that what survival always comes down to? This cooperative approach is the best idea we can think of, to put us in the "driver's seat" so to speak, of our own economic and time wise freedom. To take us from being driven by outside forces, to creating our own reality.
Yes and this is a key component to "leveling the playing field" as it were; this part is essential to eliminate class-ism and unfairness. Money one earns cannot be used in an usury fashion such as CD's, annuities mutual funds, retirement funds, stocks, bonds or to personally loan for profit. (see the usury page for exceptions) Further, no property may be acquired for any purpose except for use by oneself. And finally no money may be used in the market manipulation act of buying low and selling high. This is how we feel differences in income levels can coexist to everyone's peace and satisfaction and how incentive and reward can remain intact as the positive motivator it can be in our actions and our economic realms.
Q: Will the community use consensus or democracy for decision making? Will there be any processes in place for conflict resolution? [top] At this point, we are not sure which decision making process will be the one which will best serve the community, although we realize that this is probably going to be one of the very first decisions! :) Currently, we are not very well educated in decision making processes or conflict resolution, although we have bought books and are reading. We understand how vitally important these issues are to community. We are committed to learning and becoming skilled in these areas. For decision making, we are leaning towards the Twin Oaks model of planners and managers with community input www.twinoaks.org. For conflict resolution, we are leaning towards the non-aggressive communication technique.
Q: Is a honest and sincere belief in the values essential? [top] Absolutely. One should realize that if it were discovered that one was behaving in a way not consistent with these values, one likely would be asked to leave the community.
We might suppose, any business started by an individual member, who invited any other member to participate, might be called a community business. This not with standing, "community businesses" could be a good idea, as long as participation was voluntary and not mandatory. None are being planned for at this time.
Jealously and envy are powerful emotions not easily given to reason or control. It would be Pollyannaish to expect these to be absent 100 percent of the time. On the other hand, it is very important to minimize them. We feel the values and their inherent rules, and the structure/physical setup of the community will greatly minimize jealously and envy. It is a balancing act, because we can't have reward and incentive without differences. Now if the dentist in the community has a widescreen plasma TV in his room and a huge array of solar cells on his roof, and some other members are envious, it needs to be pointed out, that given the low cost for everyone to live in this community and the huge amount of free time each member possesses, whatever it is that they are envious about, it is easily within their reach also.
This will vary greatly we would suppose. Many it might be expected, will spend a lot of their time doing the sort of work they love to do and doing it as a business right there at the community. Some might be continuing careers working "in the system"; others might, if necessary, be working at whatever job is available in "town". Others might be engaged in learning new skills, scholarly work, writing, creating art or music. It is also hoped that people will engage in activism, as in figuring out creative ways to bring the message of this perception of reality to the world at large. It will also be important to work on creating new communities. At different times people might be expected to be taking it easy, resting, fasting, meditating and maybe for some, for an extended period of time. Maybe this being the first time in their lives when they were this free and yet, at the same time had this much support both physically and for one's spirit.......and perhaps a big rest or healing is in order.
Living in this way is religion and spirituality expressed, is there really anything else that need be said. In other words, living the truth is far, far more important than giving it a name.
Alcoholism, public drunkenness, and recreational marijuana or other illegal drugs will not be tolerated. The daily drink seems out of place here, but like tobacco and caffeine we think it best left up to the individual how, when or if they can or will refrain. We think the "daily drink" should be a private not public affair. If the community feels it important to enjoy alcohol as a community, we think it should be beer or wine which we have brewed ourselves and consumed by those who wish at dances or celebrations.
Yes. This is a primary value of the community. Having more children than is allowed should be regarded as grounds to be asked to leave. Still, realistically, it would be a case by case situation; circumstance and intent being considerations. Certainly an accident could happen and that would, of course, be considered.
Yes, and they may be sold or taken with one if one leaves the community.
All that we can think of now are some basic consideration for others regarding one's cleanliness of body and clothes in the dining room. Also, piles of personal "stuff" could not he tolerated. If it doesn't fit in one's room or business building or business area, it belongs in the appropriate community faculty such as library, shop, garage, media center and so on. There may need to be some sort of community storage building. While we wish for this to be a broadminded and accepting community, we also feel opinions range too widely about these subjects not to choose the middle path. There should be a special area for being nude removed from the community center and residential areas. The one exception might be a swimming area in which case restricting nude swimming could be more difficult. Perhaps the community could assign special swim times if it felt that best.
Q: What about sexuality issues? [top] Like nudism, we consider ourselves broadminded, yet would want to take the middle ground out of consideration for all perspectives. We feel the committed couple may well be the foundation of the community and that living in this community will make partnership and marriage between men and women easier and better. Still we don't claim to have all the answers. Different people have different ideas about sexuality and relationship. We'd like to accommodate all perspectives and yet at the same time respect all. What does all this mean: consideration and sometimes, it may mean discretion. There is no policy at this time. Many intentional communities don't allow pets, period. With ample farming opportunities we might hope those who love animals might find expression of that love in the care and raising of farm animals. Obviously, everyone probably couldn't bring their dog and many might prefer chipmunks and birds on the ground in front of their residence, as opposed to seeing a cat. How about a few barn cats? Certainly there would be room for a few dogs, but think of the feedlots and factory farming that go into providing everyone with their own personal pet. Never the less, we want to try to accommodate.
One of the reasons or advantages to living light should be flexibility. This community would encourage and support it's members in travel near and far, and for short periods or long. Relationships and friendships with people either in one's local society or on the other side of the world, is an important part of creating peace. Community work requirements and expenses only apply when one is living in the community and do not apply to time when one is away.
Q: What about personal growth, maturity and our imperfect selves? [top] Reading a book about co-housing several years ago I was struck by something I read describing how, like it or not, living cooperatively will force one to observe oneself, to be more aware of oneself, in other words, to grow. We think this will work fine despite the fact that we may not be perfect human beings in everyway. However we should look upon this opportunity to grow as a positive side benefit to living this way. And realize that in some respects it may not be an option. Living this way may ask us to grow, may ask us to try to rise above and go beyond our addictions, neuroses, and our character flaws. We should try to be grateful for this opportunity and go with the flow.
We're not spring chickens. We've been around the block. We've read a lot, had many experiences, and have followed this intentional community movement for many years. This is our best shot at what we think would be the very best way to live and what would not just work, but flourish. Ultimately and honestly through, it is still a theory that cannot be said unequivocally to work until it has actually proved itself. But then what has, capitalism? the eco-village concept? hardly! What do we have to lose? We're dying younger and younger and our children are getting sicker and weaker. We have little to lose and everything to gain. If this works as well as we think it will, who knows, we could end up changing the course of history. How many things can you think of doing that might equal that? What about the risk? This can be done in ways that would minimize risk.
Q: What if it takes a few more days a month than expected to take care of our food and community maintain needs? [top] If we are really serious about achieving this goal it seems within reason. However should it take a few more days than this, we don't feel this should be looked upon as a serious short coming. The value of such a good diet, consistently available, the rich social atmosphere, the opportunity to do what is meaningful for oneself and others, and to be ecologically and economically responsible are all substantial gains themselves.
Q: What about taking care of other needs as a community, such as clothing? [top] We want to keep our ambitions as simple as we can, and also as a means to preserve our personal individual freedom. Many things may be possible as long as it is voluntary or all wish for something to be. Clothing is interesting in that organically raised cloth could be purchased perhaps more inexpensively in bulk and by making the clothes ourselves, they could be unique and made without sweat shop labor.
Q: What about fun and music and celebrations? [top] We certainly want these things. It would be nice to be on a body of water for easy access to swimming. Certainly a large field to play some games on would be fun. A community movie room and a sauna and hot tub perhaps; and of course, music, dances and celebrations. Who knows what might be possible, group singing, drumming, a play or some comedy? Hopefully, having abundant time and freedom from worry about money, security and health issues, we might loosen up some of those Puritan genes, some of us carry around and let loose once in awhile.
Q: What about art and esthetics? [top] Abundant art would be wonderful. Yet just as important is to provide the freedom so all can be as creative as one wishes. Esthetics are very important, as form and function would support our goal. In order to achieve this ambitions goal of such low cost and abundant free time; order, simplicity and efficiency are supremely important. Interestingly, some of the most admired esthetically pleasing furniture, buildings and communities are those of the Shakers. There is great beauty and esthetics in pursuing this goal of freedom.
Q: What about travel and adventure? [top] One of the advantages to living light, is that travel would be easy. We would want to encourage traveling and the making of friends and contacts world wide. Members would not be required to meet time and at least most, monetary expense requirements when not in the community.
Q: What about total self sufficiency? [top] We think self sufficiency is an important goal and need in many areas, but not all. Practicality, complexity, efficiency and skill levels are all considerations; as are the energy, resource and ecological ramifications. We think self sufficiency in our vegetables, fruits and animal product needs, very important. Also important, to be mostly self sufficient in social needs for children and adults, education for the children, most energy needs, most entertainment, and providing as many as possible, community based opportunities to make some money.
Q: Do you anticipate any potential challenges? [top] The dietary will probably be the most challenging because opinions about what constitute a healthy diet range so far and wide. The idea so far would be to take the middle ground and offer a varied whole foods diet of vegetables, fruit, grain, beans and other easy to produce and inexpensive foods, along with a small amount of animal foods and more difficult to grow and pick (like some fruits), produce or prepare foods. Special foods like wheatgrass juice and the consumption of some labor intensive foods, particularly of animal origin, might be handled by coops within the community kitchen/dinning room itself. Everyone would have the option to participate in those coops if they so wished and perhaps even occasionally purchase those foods from the coops. A lot of people think the moderate diet is best, regardless that it is less work, yet others may feel more dairy for instance, is important.
Q: Is the way the goal of low cost living to be achieved, "written in stone" as the saying goes? [top] Yes it is, more or less. We're open to suggestions, however we do not see how the goal could be reached in any other way. And also, the way the community would be set up, it is intended to foster relationship between men and women, generate far more freedom at a far lower cost than generally thought possible and to foster a consciousness of non attachment and service to the world. Please study the "Our Goal" page carefully.
Q: What if one likes and wants to spend a lot of time alone, would living in this community be a good place for that? [top] Yes. In fact, this may be the only place one could spend a substantial amount of time alone, for instance, doing things like studying and learning new skills or pursuing solitary production or creative endeavors. Why? Because economic need forces us into the peopled, work a day world and robs us of much of our life. If this was essential, it would be easy to accept, but not only is this excessive economic need/desire not essential, it creates all sorts of problems itself. Also, as many men and women ore more or less dependent on each other for companionship, going off by oneself is not always an option.
Q: Do we get accused of being inflexible about needing to be in 100 percent agreement regarding the stated values and the simple yet specific means by which we would accomplish our goal of abundant freedom and very low cost? [top] Sometimes yes and we understand the pros and cons of both opposing approaches, flexibility verses uncompromising commitment to values and a plan. And yet, at the same time, often we are amazed at how little many people really think about what is involved in this sort of endeavor, how little they are willing to study about it and sometimes, it seems the sincerity level at wanting to do it in a way that will realistically work, comes into question. We have tried very, very hard to absolutely strip down to the bare minimum "what has to be". What you see is that result. The values represent what we must share philosophically with our fellow community members and regarding the physical set up, we see little other way to accomplish the goal of low costs and abundant freedom, still if you do, let us know.
Q: Why does one only get a bedroom? Why can't one own or build a small home which one could then sell if one left the community? [top] We don't want to be caught up in (all) the considerable and unnecessary costs of owning one's own home AND we don't want our fellow community members caught up in those costs either. We want to do other things with our time AND we want our fellow community members to be doing other more important and worthwhile things with their time as well. Such things as starting more communities, writing books, learning new skills, doing fasts and taking special healing breaks to (do nothing for a while at times), traveling, doing worth while things for money that one loves and is good for people, and the environment, being aware by talking, reading and watching. And also having fun, meditating and sometimes not doing anything at all and feeling good about it for oneself and others.
Q: Once we have the number of members we need and have established the community, how will we determine who gets to join and who does not if more members want to join than we have room for? I ask this because in looking at other established communities it looks like some are very selective in who they allow to join and in my opinion, that high selectivity goes against the spirit of most communities. It creates a competition between those wishing to join when the goal should be to eliminate that kind of competition. [top] I strongly agree about communities seemingly being so selective and have found myself dismayed and annoyed at both the selectivity of financial cost in say co-housing or eco-village communities and the grueling screening process of communes such as Twin Oaks or East Wind. I believe this does go against the spirit of community as I believe it to be, and goes against the respect and sanctity of the individual. How would we be different and wouldn’t our insistence in the sharing of several principles, a goal and a means to achieve that goal be restrictive also? At least it would be much simpler and less “personal”. I believe this would be more respectful and honoring of us as individuals. As for being restrictive, I believe community means essentially, some common values and goals: could community be completely utilitarian, and so without valves or goal? Possibly, but that doesn’t interest me, someone else will have to try that experiment. As for the question of size and running out of room for new members that is an easy one and one which is related to something so vital important to this community concept, I’m glad to repeat it. There is substantial evidence which I, along with a community collaborator uncovered in our research, that clearly indicates that the success of intentional communities are directly related to their ability to give birth to other communities. Either we grow into other communities, or we eventually die; it’s really that simple. And this ties into what Eric Fromm refers to as cults of blood and soil. As I understand this, true community transcends place and even the group; true community is about creating maximum freedom for the individual and respecting the sanctity of that individual. But it doesn’t stop there. A community cannot possibly care about each other in this way and not care about bringing these benefits to the world at large, it’s just not possible. The only people whom this will shock, will be those who are looking in a self centered way, for “cults of land or blood” in other words tribalism i.e., “their” tribe. They are looking for a solution to their needs only, without real concern for the larger world-community. It’s not that we all can’t be self centered to some degree or even that we shouldn’t, but if we succeed at starting an intentional community, ours in particular, it will because we overcame to some degree that self centeredness. And if we were to last, we’d have to continue with our self awareness enough, to get beyond our self centeredness, sufficiently at least, to bring this consciousness and opportunity to some other people and other places. Q: When should we start collaborating as a group? [top] As a community belongs to its members, that decision is of course, up to the group. It is also quite obviously I think, collaboration is dependent on the whole group or smaller groups reaching some kind of consensus about what specific action to take. My personal opinion is that group action (can be) exceedingly difficult unless the goal is simple and clear. It is also my opinion that group accomplishment is, to some degree, dependent on the willingness of individuals to take action in a self directed, self motivated and in a generous way themselves as individuals. Obviously to act in this way, the individual must be highly motivated either through belief, as in the “cause” and or through some prospect of personal reward. My particular vision for this community is for a community that functions well without a great deal of painful decision making. In other words, once set up, it should run well, more or less on auto pilot. This would be so because of very careful planning and because, in the case of this community, we’re not coming together to be a “tribe”, we’re coming together to achieve maximum individual freedom and to have the OPTION of collaborating or NOT collaborating. I see a lot of collaborating in this community, but not as the whole community; and I see some individuals who will do very little collaborating. As for doing something now as a group, that is why we have each others contact information, to make collaboration possible. Individuals are free to collaborate as one is so moved. As for what to do at this particular point, all I can see to do is what I’ve stated on the member page in relation to reaching out. I would personally feel a lot more embolden to approach a potential “community backer” with two hundred committed adults who have met at least once nationally and clearly have enough conviction to make their dream a reality either with a helping hand or without.
Q: Why "new" communities? [top] One might very well, and fairly, ask why we need new communities when we clearly already have "communities" in a multitude of forms. There are of course physical towns, planned housing developments, neighborhoods, and cities, but our most significant "communities" are those of a social and economic nature. These would involve identifying oneself as being a member of a certain named group and having relationships with others in those groups, such as American, democrat, republican, a certain religion or philosophy or ethnic or economic class, personal interests-either particularly significant or just recreational or, (and the following are perhaps the strongest delineation of community of all, these days), institutions, branches of government employment (i.e. education and military particularly come to mind), corporate employment, professions and finally, everyday places of employment, either self employment and so having a community of customers, or small business, and so a community or family of fellow employees. What's wrong with all these communities? And here we speak not only nationally, but globally. Nothing is "wrong" with them. It is simply the consequences of these community's existence that troubles us. People dying at younger ages of cancer and other preventable diseases, the dis-ease so many in this world find themselves in-manifesting in the need for antidepressants, and drug and alcohol abuse, the difficulty which so many find themselves in finding happiness, meaning and pleasure in healthy ways, the wars and other violent conflicts humanity almost continually finds itself in, the huge numbers of people in prisons and resorting to crime, the terrible environmental degradation happening all over the planet, the terrible treatment of farm animals, the resorting to such dangerous substances as radioactive waste to generate our electricity and using genetically modified living organisms for farming and industry, the lack of meaning and isolation in modern living and the shallowness of human relationships these days; and in general, a host of rather unfortunate results from mankind's lack of wisdom, particularly in defining everything in mere economic terms. But even though this way of living would offer far more of everything important and beneficial to us as individuals: the best health, the most free time, the lowest cost of living, many social opportunities, the best environment for the children, the best opportunity to do something to earn a living that we can love to do and care to do and that is meaningful-needed-good for people and the environment......and to enjoy a meaningful and deep connection to others. Still, all this, in all probability will make little difference to us if we do not also want these things for our fellow human beings as well. And to care in such a way as to passionately desire to see all war ended forever, see injustice and the causes of crime abolished, see an end to the pollution and destruction of our environment as well as the abuse of animals and finally to seek justice, fairness and superb health for all people. Or put in another way, if one is consumed by self interest without regard to consequences, no matter how hidden from view those consequences might be (we are not saying self interest is wrong, only self interest that hurts others or the environment, is wrong) what we are suggesting will probably not make much sense. Are we nuts for suggesting such radical change? We'll, some pretty intelligent people are saying if humanity doesn't wake up pretty soon and make some drastic changes, not only might everything get a lot worse, we could, potentially do ourselves in as a species. We believe the change we propose, is the change that must take place. Some of us must have the courage and heck, the selfishness to want to enjoy for ourselves, in this, possibly our only crack at life, a really, really fine way to live, and possibly lead and show the world a better way to live as well.
|
Miscellaneous |
|
home Phone 352-505-8082 email cooperativecommunity@cox.net last update - October 13, 2008
|
