patrick.net

New Renter says

Still I would have grave concerns regarding the long term prospects of some extreme types of small communities.

Anecdotal Hollywood example - I watched Easy Rider for the first time a year or so ago. I was struck by the scene where Peter Fonda and Denis Hopper visit the hippie commune and are impressed with the free love and communal lifestyle. As the riders leave Fonda looks over the valley at sunrise and states" They're gonna make it".

All I could think was:

Oh Hell no!

One harsh winter, one epidemic, one person who realizes they are doing more work than anyone else or worse one charismatic leader turned brutal dictator is all it would take to turn that little paradise to a living hell.

What I am talking about is intentional living based on human needs vs corporate needs. Community needs vs. Elite needs. Living in smaller communities, technologically capable, organized for productivity to benefit the community and individuals, not to benefit a corporation. This is a major change in thinking. Much of what benefits and is useful in the corporate structure would become obsolete, eg. advertising. This is not communism. Don't look up intentional community on wikipedia, because this is not what I mean. No hippie-dippy, no spiritualism, no cult leader.

The community is organized in a structure where no one single person is in charge, and there is a series of checks and balances so it is impossible for one charismatic individual or group to take power. This presents the largest hurdle, which is eliminating the threat of the psychopaths/sociopaths and even narcissists that are now roaming freely in our world. Currently, a huge percentage of the non-local government (as well as the corporate elites) are full of sociopaths and narcissists. Power, selfishness and greed define these beings. The use of fear, control, violence, manipulation, usury, and enslavement are merely tools to get them what they want. Once these people are safely tucked away and out of the picture, the people who actually care about themselves, about their families, about their grandchildren, and about the future of humankind can get about the business of leading a life based on the needs and wants of humans.

Your "job" will be what you can do to contribute to the community. Why? Because you care about yourself and want the best for yourself and by extension, for others. What are your talents and gifts? Everyone can contribute and do what they enjoy. Men and women are different, yet equal in power and contribution, whether spending their days taking care of children, running a restaurant or creating computer software.

We have all taken a mega-dose of the corporate kool-aid about what is possible for humans and our world. I don't have all the intricate answers for all steps of this -- how people are compensated, how the economy is structured, etc. but this is food for thought about how THINGS CAN BE DIFFERENT.

jojo says

@indiana

Im not on board with your thesis. Have a look here:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/740_Park_Avenue

How does this fit with what you are saying?

Please explain your questioning in relation to this building.

Okay, I think I get it. These billionaires have many residences. You don't honestly think this is their only home? I am sure this building is convenient for these elites when they need to be in the city to ensure their "own and control" paradigm. They can spend time soaking up the city vibe, eating at lavish restaurants, getting driven around by their limo driver and when they are done ensuring their power and money they are off of their private jet to their favorite villa in Spain or carribean island.

bgamall4 says

Well, Indiana Jones is a Utopian.

Thanks for getting that out there straight away. We are headed for a dystopia unless we switch gears and start to head for an utopia.

Please don't group me with Zionist. Zionist are not utopians. They call themselves that to make themselves feel better. They are akin to Emperor Palpatine talking to Anakin Skywalker:

"Once more, the Sith will rule the galaxy. And, we shall have peace".

Indiana Jones says

What I am talking about is intentional living based on human needs vs corporate needs. Community needs vs. Elite needs. Living in smaller communities, technologically capable, organized for productivity to benefit the community and individuals, not to benefit a corporation. This is a major change in thinking. Much of what benefits and is useful in the corporate structure would become obsolete, eg. advertising. This is not communism. Don't look up intentional community on wikipedia, because this is not what I mean. No hippie-dippy, no spiritualism, no cult leader.

It sounds like you are describing a - bgmall4 - cover your ears - Kibbutz:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kibbutz

I met someone who had grown up on one in Israel. He had good things to say about it.

I just read another article about "Adjustable Mortgages" popping up. It's a sign that affordably is gone, and banks know it. Surprisingly it's still easy to sucker people into "adjustable" rates... so I guess "you can't teach stupid".

New Renter says

life everywhere else in the world sucked too, that is unless you were a member of the aristocracy.

And a man.

From wikipedia:

"With time, the kibbutz members' sense of identification with the kibbutz and its goals decreased. This process originated both from personal frustrations among the kibbutz members as a result of internal processes and from the growing stratification and inequality due to the growth of capitalistic practices.[13] Over the years, some kibbutz members established professional careers outside the kibbutz, accumulating power, privileges and prestige.[14] The balance between individual values and values of the kibbutz began to tip, and work motivation was affected. An emphasis was placed on social compensation to encourage productivity."

Basically, the kibbutz was destroyed because capitalism still exists. Like the example of the Tiaga above, a utopian concept implemented within the larger context of a capitalistic society is doomed for failure.

turtledove says

New Renter says

life everywhere else in the world sucked too, that is unless you were a member of the aristocracy.

And a man.

There were a few exceptions:

Indiana Jones says

From wikipedia:

"With time, the kibbutz members' sense of identification with the kibbutz and its goals decreased. This process originated both from personal frustrations among the kibbutz members as a result of internal processes and from the growing stratification and inequality due to the growth of capitalistic practices.[13] Over the years, some kibbutz members established professional careers outside the kibbutz, accumulating power, privileges and prestige.[14] The balance between individual values and values of the kibbutz began to tip, and work motivation was affected. An emphasis was placed on social compensation to encourage productivity."

Basically, the kibbutz was destroyed because capitalism still exists. Like the example of the Tiaga above, a utopian concept implemented within the larger context of a capitalistic society is doomed for failure.

An imperfect model - learn from what happened there and try to improve on it.