Communal Living - All Things in Common
Truly equitable communities have existed in the past, as recorded in ancient historical texts, from both the Old World and the Americas.1. Such utopian communities took the form of communal associations. Those communal associations that succeeded did so because their members governed themselves in humility with an unshakable singleness of mind for the common good. Certain socioeconomic conditions and criterions were met, however, before such a community could eliminate corruption, avarice, crime, poverty and inequality. These detrimental factors have their basis in pride, arrogance and, not the least, greed for material wealth.
It is proposed that collective communities were comprised of interdependent members and had little need for money, as they had limited exchange of commerce with outside communities. However, once introduced, the use of money in some form, as a substitute for real goods, was a principal cause of failure in nearly all experiments in communal living due to its tendency to illicit competition and status. Additionally, it is proposed that the expertise of medical practitioners, attorneys, etc. are at least as important as the skills and physical labor required to operate a sustainable farm. In real life practice this is a difficult concept to master. Thus, the placing of higher status on highly skilled professions over the more essential common labor functions actually required to sustain a community created caste divisions, which, when combined with the inherent inequities of money, caused envy, malice, and eventually, the dissolution of nearly every communal experiment to date. Modern civilizations are unsustainable in terms of governments, economies, resources and the environment for much the same reasons. It must be remembered that the success of any civilization is dependant not on ideology but on man’s ability to govern his emotions and actions. It is the natural desire of reasoning individuals to enjoy those freedoms which were so self-evident to the forefathers of the United States of America, whose original constitution has been a divine model of human equality for two hundred thirty years. A sustainable solution to the problems relating to the association of large numbers of people and the balance between government on various levels is earnestly sought by the lay sectors of many nationalities, and often proposed and cited from historical texts by clergy of many faiths as well. The communal association proposed in this thesis is a departure from those associated with economic development or political activism, seeking instead, a peaceful and simplified agrarian coexistence with nature.
Arguably, the greatest evil to grace civilization during any age is government. The original intent of a people in establishing a government is to secure their safety and liberty. However, unless restrained by a constitution of the people, undefiled by government excess, governments and individuals in positions of authority predictably seek for undue power and inordinate wealth by exploiting human weaknesses, either by revolution and coup, or corporate intrigue, despite philosophical ideology. Further, due to these natural propensities, national and local governments invariably evolve to favor special interests which deprive the majority of citizens of their most basic liberties. The hallmark and sustaining fuel of a corrupted government is ever increasing tax revenue. Ultimately, the multitude of taxes assigned to every aspect of living consigns people to a life of servitude due to its pervasiveness and severity. As an example, the freedom of the people of the United States of America has been severely compromised and degraded since the Bill of Rights was penned. The next seventeen amendments that follow, with the exception of emancipation and voter suffrage, are suspect because they are written for the intent of consolidating power to a centralized government. The sixteenth amendment, which is perhaps the most damaging to the liberties of a free person, states, “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.” Despite official statements, this amendment was never legally ratified by a majority of the states. Simply put, the sixteenth amendment, as it pertains to taxes on personal income, is unconstitutional. 2. Passive resistance is effectual through sustenance communal living, having minimal interaction with government agencies.
Rivaling taxation in its debilitating effect on human peace and happiness is the ill perceived want of non essential commodities and luxury with its attendant usury. Advertising, which adeptly exploits our perceived needs, is the keystone of consumerism. Typically, the working life of the average individual is spent acquiring a lifestyle of insatiable appurtenances, and in doing so they spend their strength for nothing, in that they work to create wealth for employers and manufacturers. In truth, they work to pay interest, taxes, utilities, mortgage brokers and insurance companies, with little compensation or consideration in kind. In short, they work for things they think they need, but in reality only want. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are, today, equated with a much different set of values than once existed. People have been deluded by vanity and the promise of luxury and ease to their own detriment. Their lives are compromised by the misuse of liberties, and they are far removed from the happiness that comes from simplicity.
It is the opinion of the author that no progress is the best progress, in terms of governmental social controls and the development of non-sustainable products and energy. The sole intent of industry and government is not as we would wish to think, to secure and ensure our health, safety and happiness, but rather, to acquire profits and gain power. Progress, in terms of Gross National Product, is contrary to the best interests of a sustainable community. The GNP is driven by annual profits to the total disregard for the environment and the peace of the community and individual. The law of supply and demand is a concept contrived of greed and is applicable only in the context of a society grounded in avarice. It can be argued that the fiduciary system, or money in some form, was invented and manipulated for the purpose of creating inequality. Money once represented a gold standard in this country as a tangible commodity. Aside the perceived numismatic value, gold is actually useful only as a medium of exchange based on its industrial value. As the result of governmental manipulation in recent years, this standard no longer exists, rather, money is based purely on the faith that business will continue as usual. At the conception of this nation people had the control of government and government served the people. However, as people now no longer control government, government no longer serves the people, and the government is unsustainable because people and government have become enemies one to another. As these conditions currently exist, both economy and government must unavoidably collapse at some point. Though these statements are presented as axiomatic and prophetic they are nevertheless borne out by history. Environmentally and socially sustainable communities, in the form of small, agrarian communal associations, best serve the needs of the many, and the few.
Individual communal associations are historically most successful when limited to several hundred members, with perhaps two hundred being optimum. In a community of this size everyone knows their neighbor and life revolves around the church and community hall. Communication through these portals facilitates knowledge of the welfare of the community and is essential to its success. Such communities, historically agrarian, still exist wherein honest labor, self-reliance and interdependence meet virtually all the needs of the people. 3. Such communities have little need for “Leaders” outside of clergy, who, ideally, support themselves through the labor of their own hands. They have no need of government social programs because they manage the affairs of their own homes and community. They have no need of taxes because they manage and repair their own infrastructure, and also rise to the special needs of their neighbors in times of distress. Money is unessential for the everyday affairs of life. Food, clothing, shelter and the medical services and commodities necessary to sustain life are obtainable by mutual exchange in a community comprised of a people possessing diversified skills. However, as an exceptional case, conventional currency may be obtained through cottage industry, or outside employment, being used only for outside and nonmember transactions, as in the case of real estate acquisitions, and for necessities normally unavailable to the core community. Additionally, the community may also elect to be self-insured against catastrophic medical expenses for its members by the accumulation of such funds. Nevertheless, barter, as a mutual system of exchange, is, in fact, universally and commonly practiced today to the benefit and satisfaction of the parties involved. Common property and mutual exchange is the core mechanism of every family because each family member works for the common good, and a small community knit together for a common purpose can function as well as a family. Such communal associations are entirely feasible and compatible with the Constitution of the United States of America and Bill of Rights.
It is understood that land ownership is, unavoidably, the crux of temporal freedom. Land is, however, unobtainable outside the current fiduciary system. As historically recorded, the more successful communal associations allocated land by the authority of an ecclesiastical leader, whom the community members believed reflected the will of their God. The participants of a moneyless lay communal association may likewise find respite from this system within their association and on their duly obtained properties. Thus, the association of like-minded individuals may, for the sake of ethical conviction, embrace a simplified life, denouncing contemporary values which are based on the accumulation of wealth and status associated with income, that they may be free and on equal ground with their neighbor. Thus also, education, which has heretofore been a source of pride and status due to competition generated by commercial industry, ceases to be viewed as more than the pursuit of knowledge for the sake of self improvement. Opportunities are then opened to each member of a community to use their knowledge to benefit and enlighten their fellow being, rather than view that knowledge as their sole possession to be used for gain.
The natural tendency of man, in coveting or possessing property and accumulating wealth, is contrary to the best interests of a community when that property consumes the individual. Communal experiments are historically documented wherein property ownership, strictly speaking, was nonexistent. Except a body of people embrace a firm internal conviction sufficient to view personal property as common to a community family, a moneyless society cannot exist. A contemporary application of this principle may include the following elements, comprising a community constitution:
1. A community of individuals and families is organized for the purpose of establishing an interdependent association, wherein all transactions for goods and services are exchanged in kind, by mutual consent, without regard for individual status or specialized trade, recognizing every skilled and unskilled trade which is essential to the operation of a functional and sustainable agrarian community.
2. The community at large agrees upon a condition that, accepting an acknowledged disability that is accommodated by the good will of the populace and not by external government policy, no individual is accepted into the community except he or she works within their respective roles for their own self support and the support of their families. All participants covenant and agree to give of their substance and provide labor to the benefit and common good of the community, not by compulsion but as the need arises.
3. Property, in the form of physical land, may be procured collectively for the purpose of establishing a sustainable community, which is then equitably apportioned by consent of a majority of the community population according to family or individual need for an inheritance and livelihood by legal contract. In the case of real estate that is not geographically connected property, as may occur in new community memberships, the property is retained by the community member who purchased it and commodities and services are exchanged in kind.
4. All decisions and actions affecting the community are agreed upon by common consents, and sustained by a ninety percent majority of community members of accountable age in open assembly, with not less than eighty-five percent of the community population participating, with the understanding that a simple majority is historically unsustainable and tends to divide a community.
5. The government of the community shall never fall to an individual, or group of individuals, wherein a council may be secretly sought over the voice of the majority, the majority always has precedent over special interests.
6. No commercial or corporate interests, whether part of, or outside the community, must be allowed to legislate, administrate or enforce policies which affect the common good of the community.
7. The community, a total member populace of accountable age, may appoint, by common consent through a majority vote, without compensation or tenure, as the need arises, judges, who field grievances and moderate conflicts between members of the community. Such judges have authority to call and schedule meetings in such a manor that, subject to section four, a majority of members may attend, and chair community meetings for issues and decisions affecting the common good of the community. Offenses of a grievous nature will be judged by the law of the land.
8. The community-government shall have no power to discipline an individual, only by censure or disassociation.
9. The community-government shall recognize freedom of choice or liberty to act in all matters of life. Each individual is an agent unto themselves and is responsible for his or her own choices and actions. Freedom to choose must never interfere with the agency or liberty of another individual. All members of accountable age are on equal ground.
10. The community is, strictly speaking, a voluntary association for common good. Individuals may associate or excuse themselves from association of their own free will and choice. In cases of disassociation, property that has been acquired by legal contract is nevertheless binding and may not be separated from the individual or family, only by consent or the legal owner by legal contract and for fair market value.
1. http://byuh.edu/academics/domckay/Speeches/Mckay/year.html. 1992 Max E. Stanton “All Things Common”: A Comparison of Israeli, Hutterite and Latter-day Saint Communalism
2. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE ID=17398
http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/qa/17398.html
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/4/9/204435.shtml
3. http://www.communa.org.il/commu2000.htm
http://www.communa.org.il/faq.htm
Copyright February 2007. This article may be reproduced when the author’s name is included.
It is proposed that collective communities were comprised of interdependent members and had little need for money, as they had limited exchange of commerce with outside communities. However, once introduced, the use of money in some form, as a substitute for real goods, was a principal cause of failure in nearly all experiments in communal living due to its tendency to illicit competition and status. Additionally, it is proposed that the expertise of medical practitioners, attorneys, etc. are at least as important as the skills and physical labor required to operate a sustainable farm. In real life practice this is a difficult concept to master. Thus, the placing of higher status on highly skilled professions over the more essential common labor functions actually required to sustain a community created caste divisions, which, when combined with the inherent inequities of money, caused envy, malice, and eventually, the dissolution of nearly every communal experiment to date. Modern civilizations are unsustainable in terms of governments, economies, resources and the environment for much the same reasons. It must be remembered that the success of any civilization is dependant not on ideology but on man’s ability to govern his emotions and actions. It is the natural desire of reasoning individuals to enjoy those freedoms which were so self-evident to the forefathers of the United States of America, whose original constitution has been a divine model of human equality for two hundred thirty years. A sustainable solution to the problems relating to the association of large numbers of people and the balance between government on various levels is earnestly sought by the lay sectors of many nationalities, and often proposed and cited from historical texts by clergy of many faiths as well. The communal association proposed in this thesis is a departure from those associated with economic development or political activism, seeking instead, a peaceful and simplified agrarian coexistence with nature.
Arguably, the greatest evil to grace civilization during any age is government. The original intent of a people in establishing a government is to secure their safety and liberty. However, unless restrained by a constitution of the people, undefiled by government excess, governments and individuals in positions of authority predictably seek for undue power and inordinate wealth by exploiting human weaknesses, either by revolution and coup, or corporate intrigue, despite philosophical ideology. Further, due to these natural propensities, national and local governments invariably evolve to favor special interests which deprive the majority of citizens of their most basic liberties. The hallmark and sustaining fuel of a corrupted government is ever increasing tax revenue. Ultimately, the multitude of taxes assigned to every aspect of living consigns people to a life of servitude due to its pervasiveness and severity. As an example, the freedom of the people of the United States of America has been severely compromised and degraded since the Bill of Rights was penned. The next seventeen amendments that follow, with the exception of emancipation and voter suffrage, are suspect because they are written for the intent of consolidating power to a centralized government. The sixteenth amendment, which is perhaps the most damaging to the liberties of a free person, states, “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.” Despite official statements, this amendment was never legally ratified by a majority of the states. Simply put, the sixteenth amendment, as it pertains to taxes on personal income, is unconstitutional. 2. Passive resistance is effectual through sustenance communal living, having minimal interaction with government agencies.
Rivaling taxation in its debilitating effect on human peace and happiness is the ill perceived want of non essential commodities and luxury with its attendant usury. Advertising, which adeptly exploits our perceived needs, is the keystone of consumerism. Typically, the working life of the average individual is spent acquiring a lifestyle of insatiable appurtenances, and in doing so they spend their strength for nothing, in that they work to create wealth for employers and manufacturers. In truth, they work to pay interest, taxes, utilities, mortgage brokers and insurance companies, with little compensation or consideration in kind. In short, they work for things they think they need, but in reality only want. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are, today, equated with a much different set of values than once existed. People have been deluded by vanity and the promise of luxury and ease to their own detriment. Their lives are compromised by the misuse of liberties, and they are far removed from the happiness that comes from simplicity.
It is the opinion of the author that no progress is the best progress, in terms of governmental social controls and the development of non-sustainable products and energy. The sole intent of industry and government is not as we would wish to think, to secure and ensure our health, safety and happiness, but rather, to acquire profits and gain power. Progress, in terms of Gross National Product, is contrary to the best interests of a sustainable community. The GNP is driven by annual profits to the total disregard for the environment and the peace of the community and individual. The law of supply and demand is a concept contrived of greed and is applicable only in the context of a society grounded in avarice. It can be argued that the fiduciary system, or money in some form, was invented and manipulated for the purpose of creating inequality. Money once represented a gold standard in this country as a tangible commodity. Aside the perceived numismatic value, gold is actually useful only as a medium of exchange based on its industrial value. As the result of governmental manipulation in recent years, this standard no longer exists, rather, money is based purely on the faith that business will continue as usual. At the conception of this nation people had the control of government and government served the people. However, as people now no longer control government, government no longer serves the people, and the government is unsustainable because people and government have become enemies one to another. As these conditions currently exist, both economy and government must unavoidably collapse at some point. Though these statements are presented as axiomatic and prophetic they are nevertheless borne out by history. Environmentally and socially sustainable communities, in the form of small, agrarian communal associations, best serve the needs of the many, and the few.
Individual communal associations are historically most successful when limited to several hundred members, with perhaps two hundred being optimum. In a community of this size everyone knows their neighbor and life revolves around the church and community hall. Communication through these portals facilitates knowledge of the welfare of the community and is essential to its success. Such communities, historically agrarian, still exist wherein honest labor, self-reliance and interdependence meet virtually all the needs of the people. 3. Such communities have little need for “Leaders” outside of clergy, who, ideally, support themselves through the labor of their own hands. They have no need of government social programs because they manage the affairs of their own homes and community. They have no need of taxes because they manage and repair their own infrastructure, and also rise to the special needs of their neighbors in times of distress. Money is unessential for the everyday affairs of life. Food, clothing, shelter and the medical services and commodities necessary to sustain life are obtainable by mutual exchange in a community comprised of a people possessing diversified skills. However, as an exceptional case, conventional currency may be obtained through cottage industry, or outside employment, being used only for outside and nonmember transactions, as in the case of real estate acquisitions, and for necessities normally unavailable to the core community. Additionally, the community may also elect to be self-insured against catastrophic medical expenses for its members by the accumulation of such funds. Nevertheless, barter, as a mutual system of exchange, is, in fact, universally and commonly practiced today to the benefit and satisfaction of the parties involved. Common property and mutual exchange is the core mechanism of every family because each family member works for the common good, and a small community knit together for a common purpose can function as well as a family. Such communal associations are entirely feasible and compatible with the Constitution of the United States of America and Bill of Rights.
It is understood that land ownership is, unavoidably, the crux of temporal freedom. Land is, however, unobtainable outside the current fiduciary system. As historically recorded, the more successful communal associations allocated land by the authority of an ecclesiastical leader, whom the community members believed reflected the will of their God. The participants of a moneyless lay communal association may likewise find respite from this system within their association and on their duly obtained properties. Thus, the association of like-minded individuals may, for the sake of ethical conviction, embrace a simplified life, denouncing contemporary values which are based on the accumulation of wealth and status associated with income, that they may be free and on equal ground with their neighbor. Thus also, education, which has heretofore been a source of pride and status due to competition generated by commercial industry, ceases to be viewed as more than the pursuit of knowledge for the sake of self improvement. Opportunities are then opened to each member of a community to use their knowledge to benefit and enlighten their fellow being, rather than view that knowledge as their sole possession to be used for gain.
The natural tendency of man, in coveting or possessing property and accumulating wealth, is contrary to the best interests of a community when that property consumes the individual. Communal experiments are historically documented wherein property ownership, strictly speaking, was nonexistent. Except a body of people embrace a firm internal conviction sufficient to view personal property as common to a community family, a moneyless society cannot exist. A contemporary application of this principle may include the following elements, comprising a community constitution:
1. A community of individuals and families is organized for the purpose of establishing an interdependent association, wherein all transactions for goods and services are exchanged in kind, by mutual consent, without regard for individual status or specialized trade, recognizing every skilled and unskilled trade which is essential to the operation of a functional and sustainable agrarian community.
2. The community at large agrees upon a condition that, accepting an acknowledged disability that is accommodated by the good will of the populace and not by external government policy, no individual is accepted into the community except he or she works within their respective roles for their own self support and the support of their families. All participants covenant and agree to give of their substance and provide labor to the benefit and common good of the community, not by compulsion but as the need arises.
3. Property, in the form of physical land, may be procured collectively for the purpose of establishing a sustainable community, which is then equitably apportioned by consent of a majority of the community population according to family or individual need for an inheritance and livelihood by legal contract. In the case of real estate that is not geographically connected property, as may occur in new community memberships, the property is retained by the community member who purchased it and commodities and services are exchanged in kind.
4. All decisions and actions affecting the community are agreed upon by common consents, and sustained by a ninety percent majority of community members of accountable age in open assembly, with not less than eighty-five percent of the community population participating, with the understanding that a simple majority is historically unsustainable and tends to divide a community.
5. The government of the community shall never fall to an individual, or group of individuals, wherein a council may be secretly sought over the voice of the majority, the majority always has precedent over special interests.
6. No commercial or corporate interests, whether part of, or outside the community, must be allowed to legislate, administrate or enforce policies which affect the common good of the community.
7. The community, a total member populace of accountable age, may appoint, by common consent through a majority vote, without compensation or tenure, as the need arises, judges, who field grievances and moderate conflicts between members of the community. Such judges have authority to call and schedule meetings in such a manor that, subject to section four, a majority of members may attend, and chair community meetings for issues and decisions affecting the common good of the community. Offenses of a grievous nature will be judged by the law of the land.
8. The community-government shall have no power to discipline an individual, only by censure or disassociation.
9. The community-government shall recognize freedom of choice or liberty to act in all matters of life. Each individual is an agent unto themselves and is responsible for his or her own choices and actions. Freedom to choose must never interfere with the agency or liberty of another individual. All members of accountable age are on equal ground.
10. The community is, strictly speaking, a voluntary association for common good. Individuals may associate or excuse themselves from association of their own free will and choice. In cases of disassociation, property that has been acquired by legal contract is nevertheless binding and may not be separated from the individual or family, only by consent or the legal owner by legal contract and for fair market value.
1. http://byuh.edu/academics/domckay/Speeches/Mckay/year.html. 1992 Max E. Stanton “All Things Common”: A Comparison of Israeli, Hutterite and Latter-day Saint Communalism
2. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE ID=17398
http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/qa/17398.html
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/4/9/204435.shtml
3. http://www.communa.org.il/commu2000.htm
http://www.communa.org.il/faq.htm
Copyright February 2007. This article may be reproduced when the author’s name is included.
posted by Howard | 6:15 PM
2 Comments:
Communal living is not possible on a large scale basis. There are simply too many people in the world
Yes, you're right, That Crazy Guy, I wouldn't even try with a group of more than a few hundred. It would be essential that everone be like-minded.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home