21 votes

Libertarian communes, new tribes, socialism as a lifestyle, sharing and picnics.

Once again the DP Chat brings up an interesting topic. More of you people should jump on the chat and just watch it scroll, some really intriguing and amusing things happen.

ANYWAYS the subject came up about if there was such a thing as a libertarian commune, what would that look like?

OK first of all, I'm one of the few of us that has lived in commune. Twice. Next, I have been consulted on a number of such projects and man oh man have I seen them fail.

In fact there's been at least a half dozen attempts to do this. There's been minimal success. The Galt's Gulch Chile thing is going. I'll stay off that topic as it's an active project and a microscope is neither wanted nor needed. Besides it's the only bright spot.

ALL OTHER ATTEMPTS HAVE ENDED IN TOTAL CATACLYSMIC DISASTER, UTTER TRAIN WRECKS.

The output of these has been universally charactarized by:

1. An initial outpouring of joy and wealth.

2. Mega massive arguments about who owns what.

3. Class action lawsuits, old friends becoming enemies and a major dose of bitterness and regret.

This is the fault line: we can't do anything without private property and ownership and when we combine to do a project or initiative, everybody says "unless I have an ownership stake in the resultant product, why should I bother contributing?"

This seems to be a perfectly legitimate question but successful communes just blow it off. Hippies, for example, don't care a whit about who OWNS anything, it's presumed that WE ALL OWN IT AND WE SHARE IT. And I gotta say, the hippies have it over all of us on this one. I can give you a dozen examples of hippy communes that have lasted beyond decades, they are actually GENERATIONAL at this point. Earth People's Park in VT comes to mind as does The Farm (RIP Steven Gaskins) and Oak Ridge Commune and a newer one called Dancing Rabbit in MO and they are part capitalist. They really got it going on, I'm a total admirer.

Most of these successful hippy communes have a founding donor, a person that simply gives the people land and they assert no ownership or control of it whatsoever so thing happen, in our parlance in kind of an anarchistic state where those who lead lead and those who follow follow.

All of our arguments about socialism and conformity and submission to group-think are instantly dismissable due to the fact that these are VOLUNARY ASSOCIATIONS and anybody can leave at any time.

Now why is this important to us? Why am I pushing this on you?

Smart people. By now you know that Uncle Smudge always has an agenda.

Here's what I saw in Tampa.

Paulfest 2012, Tampa Florida we had a camp ground and while I was busy running around trying to secure the largest political action area I have ever had to worry about in my semi professional life, I saw the people coming together and sharing and it was one of the most beautiful things I have ever seen in my life. These attempts were so faultering and tentative like is it OK for libertarians to share? To just walk up to a camp fire and say hey guys, mind if we joing in? Or we're making breakfast, are you hungry?

There was this line for one of the few showers we had available but this one guy as I am blasting by on a golf cart emerges and the guy looks so radient that I could just smell the soap on him from 20 yards and he raises his arms in triumph and shouts FREE SHOWERS FOR FREE PEOPLE! and everybody gave him a rousing cheer and I just saw it. Especially in you young people. You are ready for a LIBERTY LIFESTYLE. And you want to LIVE TOGETHER and you want to FEED AND CARE FOR ONE ANOTHER and you want to HAVE FUN DOING IT.

Elders, this is what our youth are geard for and WE MIGHT BE STANDING IN THEIR WAY.

As a former tribal person (last of my line, the tribe is no more), this all just comes naturally to me. When I do large event security I'm functioning as a warrior protecting my tribe and it's a great honor and blessed responsibility, it's literally SACRED to me because you are Wichasha Wakan, Oyate Washte Wakan, the Holy Men, the Holy And Good People. That at least was my station (retired warrior) but others had their stations in feeding people and others provided just endless pouring streams of booze and a few others turned us onto some smoke that had us all dancing on clouds....right in the middle of the PD and security footprint of like every law enforcement agency in Florida and like 52 flavors of feds because they were mobilizing to protect the RNC. That was un-phreaking-believable. There were VERY NEARLY some major conflicts and some mega diplomacy happened...

Anyways I just saw it in our youth. And this who-owns-whatism is an obstacle to our happy enjoyment of life. Just in the same way that our young people consider gayness to be UTTERLY IRRELEVANT IN DAILY LIFE, just in the same way that DOING DRUGS AND SMOKING POT ARE UTTER, TOTAL NON ISSUES, just in the same way that some of us listen to heavy metal or whatever, TOTAL NON-ISSUES.

And who owns what, our youth understand to not be mooching, it's GIVING. And doesn't it make sense that as we have these kids totally prepared for TEOTWAWKI that they should have a sense of coming together, relying on each other and knowing there's gonna be somebody there to love them tomorrow?

As preppers we say to get your preps together first and then "push out the perimiter" by networking and making trust relationships with other preppers?

So when is that actually gonna happen people? And when are we, as elders, gonna rededicate to our youth? Maybe as soon as you accept them as OUR YOUTH. And that's called taking responsibility.

One thing I have learned is that responsibility is like a commodity and it's just like plucking an apple from a tree: you just TAKE IT. You SELF-AUTHORIZE and say "that is mine".

To rock this tangent, taking responsibility is a magic thing: you get endless access to this commodity and you get it for free, all you have to do is take it. And if you do it well PEOPLE LITERALLY GIVE YOU POWER and you can use this power to do or get just about anything you want. They will feed you, they will put a roof over your head, they will drive you places and pick you up from airports IF YOU ARE A GOOD THING IN THEIR LIFE.

Oh and if people get the idea, if you actually show them you love them?

PEOPLE WILL DO PRACTICALLY ANYTHING FOR YOU.

And this I would call the true definition of wealth. And POWER.

Do you want power?

Well I just told you how to get some.

In this movement we have all talent, skill and capability.

We are the motivated people. We are healers, engineers, scholars, we are every trade and every talent. And another thing I'll tell you for nothing, have you noticed that many of the most successful and energetic scholars and influence makers have spouses that support their mission?

Just like anybody else, we're stronger together.

And it's often been noted that LIBERTARIAN ISN'T A RECIPE FOR LOVE OR HAPPINESS. Well it just so happens that living together in harmony is.

I'm gonna leave this one open ended and NOT tell you guys what to do. I'd like to entertain questions, I can tell you about the communes I have lived in and how they were successful, hear whatever on this topic. And it would be neat to hear from you young people about how you might see or not see what I'm talking about.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

It will never be

As Michael Badnarik pointed out most Libertarians agree on 98% of the issues but spend 98% of their time ARGUING ABOUT THE OTHER 2%!!

Until you find a workaround for this perennial dilemma, you aren't going to see many 'Libertarian Communes'.

Ed in Phoenix

Rights are like muscles; you must exercise them to keep them fit, or they will atrophy and die.

I think of a, "strong

I think of a, "strong community," as being like my front and backyard lawn.

It looks beautiful and lush because each blade of individual grass was carefully grown using thousands of single seeds, sowing them with my own bare hands. Such work is not easy, and nobody else besides myself would invest their time and money on my lawn.

Some people could care less about their lawn, and let the weeds grow wild and ugly all over to the dismay of the neighbors and the rest of the community.

The community can not grow together as a whole without strong, individual blades of grass, and individual hands that are willing to do the work.

Never be afraid to ask simple questions.

Combining Ideals

Liberty and Socialism. I too have spent time in communal environments, and enjoy the collective, synergistic power of combining the two ideals. It's interesting how some people are challenged of ideals

liberty |ˈlibərtē| noun ( pl. liberties )
the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views: compulsory retirement would interfere with individual liberty.

socialism |ˈsōSHəˌlizəm| noun
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

"A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote to keep things the same", Buckminster Fuller..
A choice for liberty is always a choice for liberty.

Statists gave Socialism a bad name.

I posted this provocative Boaz quote below in another comment, but it belongs here alongside the Mises quote...

“Given their simultaneous and equal concern for civil society and free markets, had the term not been wrongly appropriated and utterly corrupted by Statists, the right term for Libertarian would be Socialist.” -David Boaz

jrOICUR12, your post is bizarre.

Libertarians (Ludwig Von Mises) believe in Individualism, Private property, Free Markets and Free Minds.

Socialists believe in Collectivism, Central ownership / control of property, Government Markets and group think.

I am not sure what you are trying to say here...?

Why would you attempt to link completely opposite philosophies?
Your statement: "Statists give Socialism a bad name" is like saying snowmobiles give snow machines a bad name. They are one in the same. Peas in a pod...

Is this the twilight zone?

whirled peas in a pod

"Statists give Socialism a bad name" is like saying snowmobiles give snow machines a bad name. They are one in the same.

"Statists" and "Socialism" are not the same. "Statists" refers to people.

"Statists give Socialism a bad name" is like saying those who shoot coyotes from snowmobiles give snowmobiling a bad name.

I would have done better actually to say "Socialists give socialism a bad name". :D

Is BillRow's comment any less bizarre than mine? Is Smudge's OP any less bizarre than my comment? Smudge is suggesting something quite natural and traditional here. Bill added contemporary terminology. I attempted to add insight on Bill's terms. He posted a dictionary definition of "Socialism" for a reason.

Mises' first published book was against Socialism, or at least against that which the term "Socialism" had come to commonly mean by 1920. Both quotes in my comment bare conscious irony [perhaps even paradox] from their authors. It is evident from Mises in his quote that he shares the same sympathy with Boaz, that there was nothing inherently wrong with the original purely economic conception of Socialism, but that it erred in its active inception. Mises was essentially saying there that we already had socialism before the Socialists got ahold of it. Socialists from Marx onward steered it 180 degrees in the wrong direction. Socialists actually destroyed real socialism. Marx didn't invent the term. He merely used it. As he used it, it became tarnished, deformed and damaged, making it difficult for the likes of Smudge, Bill, me and you to use.

One last note...

"Libertarians (Ludwig Von Mises) believe in Individualism"

Mises never flirted with religious worship of the Individual as perhaps Ayn Rand might have flirted as such. I point this out because I consider myself thoroughly libertarian, yet I fall short of belief in Individualism. Perhaps you and I fall into different factions here at the Daily Paul, and we need to duke it out on Thursdays. No wait, OMG it's Thursday! o_o ...grrr!

Case in point as dictionary definitions are down-voted.

;-)

"A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote to keep things the same", Buckminster Fuller..
A choice for liberty is always a choice for liberty.

Socialism?

If you only have a minute to listen, cue to 28 minute mark.
If you have two minutes to listen, cue to 27 minute mark.
If you have a few minutes to listen, cue to 22 minute mark.
If you have any patience whatsoever for this kinda stuff, press play and do the dishes...

http://youtu.be/6RDoYeXCoSE

Sorry jr but that was way beyond me.

I must not be up to the intellectual lecture. Maybe it was a long day but it sounded like Greek to me.

"A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote to keep things the same", Buckminster Fuller..
A choice for liberty is always a choice for liberty.

Stone is a very dry speaker. Uffda!

I'm hip to most jumping into this lecture from the beginning finding it unbearable. BUT, I have narrowed down the 60 seconds of it, most relevant to your comment and this post in general. I admit to personally adoring this particular lecture. As Stone basically sums up Nisbet's life work [and then adds to it], he essentially lays out everything dear to me regarding my views on society and politics. It also happens to coincide heavily with Smudge's post here and your comment. Should you cue to the 28 minute mark and listen for 60 seconds to the 29 minute mark, here is what you'd find...

"Given their simultaneous and equal concern for civil society and free markets, had the term not been wrongly appropriated and utterly corrupted by Statists, the right term for Libertarian would be Socialist." -David Boaz

"He's not being perverse there. He's simply saying that if we made a legitimate distinction between society and the state, and terms were used appropriately [we didn't allow Statists to choose the term Socialism], it would be an apt description for Libertarian." -narrator(Brad Stone)

The entire lecture basically revolves around that particular point in a way. There certainly exist libertarians that wish to be left alone and isolated [so they think ;)], but I am certainly not one of them. I am a heavily social creature. I poke my head into my neighbors' business everyday. I participate and contribute to every circle that invades my day. I am warm, personable and human. I see state bureaucracy as my opposite. State institutions are bitterly cold, impersonal and inhumane. The State doesn't simply provide an alternative, the State displaces that which is humane and good. Thirty years ago I had friends humble enough to tell me they were hungry. I would help feed them and sometimes take them with me to work the next day. Nowadays it's like pulling teeth. Friends don't tell me that kind of thing any more. They apply for food stamps and hide in their secret little worlds. They sink lower than they used to as they indulge their cold and impersonal State aid. They don't knock on my door when they're hungry anymore, instead they wait and wait and eventually phone me from jail, or the psyche ward, or the treatment center, or I get a call from their relatives with worse news.

Wow, I really digressed there. I just meant to say that the State has grown into an obstacle that separates good people from each other. We are all social, communal and tribal, and it's very natural and good to be these things. There has never been anything more destructive to our tribes, communities and society at large than the State endeavor. I better end this before I rant again. :D

I'd like to see an experiment. Maybe we could model this

intellectually.

Here's Vermont and New Hampshire side by side. About the same size, about the same natural resources, about the same level of manufacturing and industry. Vermont leans liberal and New Hampshire leans conservative.

Take away all federal control and let them both go totally polar. Vermont turns into a socialist worker's paradise and NH goes totally libertopian.

I can't begin to guess which one would be more economically successful and in which one would people be happier. I'm guessing some people would be happier in one rather than the other.

I think some of the un-appeal here is some of us are just absolute rugged individualists and solitary types. I have a couple of buddies who have never and probably will never just call me cause if the entire rest of the world suddenly ceased to exist that would just be hunky-dory. I would go insane first out of boredom and next out of loneliness. Perhaps it's being the youngest of a large family or because I'm Aquarian but for whatever reason I just generally like people. Although even I must admit that anything over 3-4 visitors in a single day can make it difficult to get anything accomplished.

There is nothing strange about having a bar of soap in your right pocket, it's just what's happening.

It would be interesting indeed.

A pure experiment however would be virtually impossible though, as both states are so addicted to Federal corruption.

The pendulum swings wide on all the points you mentioned, with lots of grey areas in-between. I speak from, my own experiences, beliefs, and perspectives as I have lived at the extremes swings of each point at one time or another.

Freedom of choice at the local level to live, and produce as one sees fit would be a utopia.

"A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote to keep things the same", Buckminster Fuller..
A choice for liberty is always a choice for liberty.

Smudge This might be your best post ever.

Resonates

One day, I'm gonna' change my name to Dale Lee Paul

Sometimes I wouldn't mind a return of polygamy

I don't have much to lose by saying so. Half the time when I tell my wife I love her she says YEAH BUT YOU LOVE EVERYBODY ELSE TOO.

Not much I can do in the way of denial, my specific order is supposed to do exactly that. I took a vow. My life is not my own and I am in submission to.....

SMACK!

Oh I'm sorry honey did you want my attention? By the way, ow that hurt.

OK I understand the frustration, you want to know that I am YOURS AND ONLY YOURS. But I'm not. There's like a half dozen dudes and people that if they call me I must come. No matter where I am or what I am doing,

"we come when we are called and we go where we are sent".

Perhaps be thankful that while I still live "in submission to the elders" that there aren't that many of them left. I'm kind of on easy street as far as that goes. There's almost nobody left to do the calling, my order is OUTA HERE BABIES. Clyde Bellecourt is still kicking. Leonard Peltier is still in jail. Dennis Banks won't ever call me because he doesn't even talk to part breeds like me...

Not a lot of people know that R3VOLUTION March in 08 was carefully and precisely timed to coincide with Grandfather Banks' walk across America. A little Smudge Pot secret: how do I protect and defend 10,000 of my people with 40 raw recruits?

I PUT US SMACK IN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BEST SPIRITUAL PROTECTION NO MONEY CAN BUY. Aw hella yeah babies THIS IS WHAT WE DO. Only the very best is even remotely good enough for you people.

I HAVE BEEN TAKEN INTO THE FUTURE by my father in what some call "death regression" and I have seen my light path and my dark path. They could not contrast more starkly. My dark path is alone and dying in an alley with nobody to bring me a drink of water. And worst of all, nobody will bear my bones to lie with my ancestors. That is such a huge priority in our value system so you see that part of our life objectives we only get in death.

My light path is I am in a house by water and I am in a chair in front of a fire and I can hear children playing. And these children are a new tribe. I'm not sure who's they are. Genetically that is. But when you do this...ceremony you have a new awareness that every step you take in life from that point forward is either taking you towards or away from your light path.

My light path involves my wife, to be sure but it also involves others and I must find those others and I must do something so special, so worthwhile that they will give me this house where I will die and then they will bear my bones to lie with my ancestors.

Just now that seems like a lot to ask for. And it is. One would only do this for one they truly love.

Thankfully I see a path to do this. I think I am going to build that house and herit it to the people. And I don't think Suze and I are gonna make those babies but somebody is.

And that is what I see.

There is nothing strange about having a bar of soap in your right pocket, it's just what's happening.

Killer post man

Incidentally - did any one ever point out to Dennis Banks the irony of his stance on "part breeds", given his name?

Here's and apt quote from the late great Robert Nesta Marley:
"I don't have prejudice against myself. My father was a white and my mother was black. Them call me half-caste or whatever. Me don't dip on nobody's side. Me don't dip on the black man's side nor the white man's side. Me dip on God's side, the one who create me and cause me to come from black and white."

On to the light path, brother.

anarcho capitalist to libertarians and anarcho pluralist to

everyone else.

No one has all the answers. But we shouldn't hate those who try alternatives, successful or not....As long as they adhere to NAP. That is all I hope for in life any more.

Anarcho pluralist....

it's bending my mind trying to conjure up what that would look like.

There is nothing strange about having a bar of soap in your right pocket, it's just what's happening.

Give, Trade, Barter and Receive,,,

Live and enjoy the day, as if it were your last.

NOSHEEPLE

OMG new thoughts! We need more vocabulary!

OK so there's communes, collectives, co-ops, intentional communities, one of this is part of our taxonymy, what the heck does this all mean?

Ok so very basically:

1. Commune: emphasis on shared property, everybody owns everything.

2. Collective: sharing of certain resources for strategic objectives but the rest is your private property.

3. Co-op: combining buying power or work to gain efficiency and satisfy mutual needs.

4. Intentional community: aggregating skills to achieve a shared objective, privatre property still exists outside of this stated objective.

5. Tribe: all of the above and the presumption that when one of us has a problem it's all of our problem.

6. Marriage: dedicating your life to one individual.

7. Parenting: dedicating your life with someone else to another individual or many of them.

8. Gay marriage: you get to wear teal and pink plus all of the above. Plus you get to affect a lisp.

9. Polygamy: good move or big mistake?

10. Smudge Pot: one day you will need one but we can keep that our little secret.

There is nothing strange about having a bar of soap in your right pocket, it's just what's happening.

Polygamy: probabaly usually a big mistake

Monogamy with concubines: not sure of the reality, but the brochure looks nice.

Calling something a: "Libertarian Commune",

...is like calling the North Pole the South Pole. It's a shocking and fundamental ignorance of the words Libertarian and Commune and their definition.

Finally another perspective

and who better than a poster called GALTSGULCH?

I'll iterate what I hope is my central point: if one engages in this basically socialistic lifestyle but it's VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATION, then do we have a mega idiological problem?

PLEASE I BEG YOU TO ELABORATE IN EVERY DIMENSION. And I stayed off Galt's Gulch Chile not just for lack of qualification, if you have comments on that PLEASE ELABORATE.

There is nothing strange about having a bar of soap in your right pocket, it's just what's happening.

Karl Rove, George Bush, Mitch

Karl Rove, George Bush, Mitch McConnell and Mitt Romney, to name a few, are very worried about the Libertarian party. That's why they keep throwing the idea out there that Libertarians represent some form of socialism. It's an age old strategy and it's obviously effective.

Do you think Ron Paul would equate Libertarians with Communists?

It would be more accurate for you to say: "Conservative Commune", as Conservatives are certainly less concerned about private property rights than Libertarians are.

As a Libertarian, I would have no problem with a group of people who decided they wanted to form a commune, so long as they did not use force or coercion at any point in the process and allowed people to leave freely - have at it, just don't come crying to me in the end.

However, if I were to throw out my beliefs concerning private property and go and join a commune, then I, by definition, am no longer a Libertarian.

Note: Galts Gulch in Chile is not a commune. You must buy your parcel. Private property is probably the most precious principle of it's residents.

Correct me if I'm wrong Smudge, but...

I believe the right honorable Mr. Pot was using the term "Commune" somewhat loosely and perhaps for shock value. There are lots of voluntary sharing/cooperating models wherein private property is respected. I would favor a co-housing ecovillage in which each inhabitant held a land patent/allodial title to their land, but contractually agreed to steward said land within parameters developed and voluntarily agreed upon by the community. IMO, this can be in line with libertarianism, as long as the ethos of maintain a purely market-driven macro-society as "level ground" one can evacuate to, if they choose. Actually, it seems to me even voluntary Microcommunism would be in line with Libertarian ideals as long as that free-choice-based attitude were maintained toward the world beyond.

Appreciated

"Just don't come crying to me at the end"

lols no sweat boss, you aren't on the line for this one. It's on me.

There is nothing strange about having a bar of soap in your right pocket, it's just what's happening.

So the religious commune: live in submission to one another

So below in comments here I told you a bit about the hippy commune which really was this totally freewheeling affair where you'd be in the shower and suddenly like 5 more naked people just jump in with you, we shared EVERYTHING including food, clothing and each other.

WHICH_WAS_SO_PHREAKING_AWESOME

but from there I jump to this radically orthodox commune that did not call themselves Christians, they viewed ALL OTHER CHURCHES TO BE THE HARLOT, they were THE ONE BODY, THE CHUCRCH and they were hierarchically organized under an "Appostle" and beneath him were the "appostolic workers" who were his executives and who enacted his policy and below them were the Community Leaders (there were several of them, there are more now) and the elders. But it was a core value to "live in submission to one another" which paradoxically meant that anybody could be a leader.

So I lived in the Woodsman's household because all of the houses were organized around some kind of economic activity. The Cobbler's House, they made shoes and did leatherwork, the Mechanics House fixed all our stuff, the Luthier House made guitars and instruments, all these different houses and we all worked blazingly hard and nobody ever saw any money. All of the excess went to building new communities.

I loved everybody in my house and I certainly got a lot of love in return but there was ABSOLUTELY NO HANKEY PANKY GOING ON AT ALL. And we were busy raising these children that were unlike all others. They only ate 100% natural foods, they were under strict discipline but they were little adults. You could have a deep esoteric spiritual conversation with an 8 year old.

One time somebody accused us of child abuse and every law enforcement agency and most of the social care network shows up and just packed up all the kids and took them and man, man oh man, these people are 100% non violent, they don't have weapons but that was the one thing that was gonna make something happen because those children were looked upon as the literal bride of Messiah, these are HIS CHILDREN AND YE SHALL HAVE NO DOMINION OVER THEM.

I don't think I've been scared like that many times because the sheer REPRESSED FURY that happened among the men was just terrible to behold, they would have walked up to the school building they kept the kids in and they would have taken it apart brick by brick with their bare hands and their teeth.

And no, the world did not understand. That we have already laid down our lives. We are already dead, our lives are not our own, we live in submission, you can't kill us.

FORTUNATELY BY THE GRACE OF Y~H, all these cops and social workers, the people that actually deal with screwed up kids, not the politicians and the loud mouths in the press, they are the ones that said HOLD EVERYTHING, STOP THIS MADNESS because they themselves, who deal with real abused kids every day, were like no, this is not what abuse looks like, these are the happiest and healthiest kids we've ever seen. And they returned the kids without further ceremony.

So what did you think of that? we asked the kids when they returned?

They thought it was neat. They got to ride on a school bus. They had never ridden on a school bus before, we educated them ourselves. And they got to eat pizza. They had never eaten pizza before. Funny thing is first the law people brought in pepperoni pizza and the elder children instructed the youngers not to eat it because it might have pork in it. Pork is prohibited so they had to send out for plain pizza and then the elder children told the youngers it's ok, go ahead and eat. AFTER THEY BLESSED IT.

Can you imagine our pride? As parents? Because I was one in that community. They were ALL OUR KIDS. And they were not only taught OBEDIENCE, they were also taught to ACCEPT AUTHORITY. They just filled in the roles that us adults set for them and they did a smashing job of it.

ANYWAYS so here I am in the Woodsman's House and we wake up before dawn and we cut until dark and there's these two kinda odd hippy dudes hanging out and after work sometimes we'd have these deep conversations and I was like ok, we just happen to have these two ancient hippy wasteoids hanging out cause that happened too: some people were not officially part of the community, they were just allowed to "live the life". I actually had that role, I was never baptized into this community, I was allowed to life the life. But the whole time I was curious about whoever is in charge, the man at the top, the Appostle I kept hearing about.

Imagine my amazement when I found out that the big man, the head honcho was none other than one of these hippy dudes. In his tattered slippers and the beat up old Subaru he drove around in. I was like YOU HAVE GOT TO BE SHEEP DIPPING ME MAN NO WAY.

His church name is Yonech. It means "Tender Young Shoot" in old Hebrew. And I guess he's the first Appostle I've ever met. Once I got over the fact that he did't wear a white robe and a funny hat, I have to say I'm pretty happy with my overall Appostolic experience, I don't know the specific criteria or job description but he made a pretty good one. And I miss him, I miss them all quite dearly.

I could not be baptized. Sadly. I wanted to be baptized but for whatever reason good or bad, as a native spiritualist, I don't have an inner awareness of Messiah. I believe in God, same God everybody else does, there's only one of them but the Lord Jesus is just a name to me, it has no resonance at all, I can't FEEL IT. So in order to try to explore this and find out why, I had to leave. And that was a sad departure. I love these people and they love me.

A shortage of love was not the problem.

They bought me all new clothes and a suitcase and gave me $200 and said if you need more let us know. And the whole house gathered around me and asked "is there anythign else we can do for you?" and I said yes.

You can sing me that children's song. So they all sang it for me and I was sobbing uncontrollably. One day I'll sing this song for you if I can do it without sobbing uncontrollably.

So what did I learn from that experience besides how to sleep with a chain saw for a pillow?

UNDER VERY PRECISE CONDITIONS, LOVE IS NOT THE ANSWER FOR EVERYTHING.

Or sometimes love requires us to walk away from love itself. Sometimes if you love something so much you have to walk away so it stays what you love.

I still don't have this one all figured out. Maybe some day the Holy One will pull the scales from mine eyes and I will see and taste that the Lord is good and I will rejoin them and be baptized and I shall end my days in the House Of The Lord.

Or maybe not. I cannot tell you what I do not know.

There is nothing strange about having a bar of soap in your right pocket, it's just what's happening.

Thanks

Great Prophetess of The Lakota Nation
I see you
At the apex of The Black Hills
I hear you
You are beautiful and wise
You are White Buffalo Calf Women
I love you

On this sacred hill we smoke
We smoke your pipe of harmony
We bridge this realm and the next
Our ancestors come in this dreaming

For I am Wakanda
For I am the sun and the wind
Born from Her eternal light
White Buffalo Calf Woman
You are Her eternal light

I wear these peace talismans of wampum
Which you gave me on this earthly plane
To honour your love and wisdom
Great Souix Priestess

Thus you ascend
With your coat of many colours
My Creatrix;

You love all of humankind
You have shown me The Way
You are fore`er in my vision quests
My guardian spirit

For we have lived and loved many times
I await The Prophecy of Peace
I shall tarry hither, tending your fire
I shall smoke your pipe; connecting Sky and Earth
Til The White Buffalo Calf Woman returns

With you, balance shall return

Lady Rainmaker speaks
I listen..............................with a full heart

-Steve Trimmer

Séamusín

this is synchronistic.

I've been thinking of this a while now. Not have any experience with communes or researching the successes or failures of past communes, this is what I was thinking; feel free to sharpshoot. Smudge pot already mentioned the original donor part. If I were to have enough money to buy a large fertile plot of land; i'd make it available to all my liberty loving friends. More specifically ironically, an initial litmus test would have to take place. The understanding that all unresolved conflict will be arbitrated by a mutually agreeable 3 party. Secondly, must demonstrate a willingness to learn and apply Non-Violent or compassionate communication. Thirdly, be willing to either directly or indirectly contribute to mutual defense. Fourth, an understand the Non-Aggression Principle, UPB and if not agreeable, MAYBE an unstanding of market morality as an alternative. In return after demonstrating and adhering to the above principles for a year, then an individual name would be placed as a co-owner in trust. I do not know the legalese tools, but essentially place the land i a trust and amend ownership periodically. People can can come and go as they will. Ostracism being the tool used for non-compliant residents. New tools needed for tilling the land, defense, maintenance, etc, could be raised in various ways. There would still be personal property, as some could work remotely or have online business. We'd may be communally anarchistic in some respects on the property but as long as we are required to pay the state its fees, and subject to zoning issues, we'll have to pay the demon its dues.

Oh man sometimes i feel like we are so close

when we talk about Detroit....getting some land, maybe pooling resources...what you want to understand is that WE BRING SUCCESS WITH US.

We're capitalists. We can self-fund.

The religious commune I describe below was large enough to have it's own INTERNAL ECONOMY and there was CAPITALISM HAPPENING.

OK for example, the mechanics house, if one of the other houses needed a car worked on, they got an up front price for cash just like anybody else. In our Woodsman's House we would sell fire wood to all the other houses. The Luthier House was getting their special hardwoods from us to build guitars.

See how this is not non-capitalist at the functional level?

There is nothing strange about having a bar of soap in your right pocket, it's just what's happening.

Internal economy. Thats the

Internal economy. Thats the notion exactly that I was envisioning. Thanks for posting.