While it is true that a sort of ethical
austerity and simplicity is being suggested, the puritanical denial of pleasure is most
definitely not. Please look closely at what is being proposed....and
see how dedicated the proposal is to personal freedom; the freedom to do
the work one chooses, or to
do whatever one wants beyond one's basic responsibilities
towards food and shelter. And the freedom to eat whatever one wishes, as
long as it is whole and organic.
The interesting fact is......in our
isolated pursuit of pleasure, we actually
deny ourselves far more pleasure than we would otherwise have enjoyed.
The "everybody for themselves" mentality which results in everyone
having to have their own homes and spread far apart, is so inefficient,
so expensive to acquire and maintain, and so redundant regarding resources, both human and natural, that "pursuit of pleasure" will
be a mute issue because one will be forced to spend most of one's life
just involved in the chores required to maintain basic subsistence.
Of course the clever and well positioned do find ways around this
"inefficiency"; and so does society at large, to some degree. And the
cost: injustice and exploitation of each other, and the environment .
As for possessions, this proposal does not restrict possessions,
basically. It would not judge people as to what they wanted
to possess, or do with their money, except as it relates to Usery.
It is true, all the basic necessities as in housing, basic food and land
would be provided to the individual and owned by the community.
But as related to vocations, avocations or possessions in one's room,
one would be totally free to possess what one wished.
It doesn't take too much smarts to realize what an enormous burden
possessions can be. The whole point of coming together and
doing a little bit of cooperative work, and sharing resources is so that
we may have the freedom to possess, or use those things we need, or
want, afford high-quality, and have the time to enjoy them.
