So everything is an emergency now.

Hot take: it’s ok for actual rural residents to use sensible trucks and cars.

I wonder at what point will the renewables industry will start lobbying for itself the way oil and gas does. Where’s Big Wind? Where’s the country songs about heartland Working Joes working solar farms?

But you see this easy they would be getting an …undeserved benefit (gasp!!) and we can’t have those.

I kid you not, this is what the conservative brain thinks.

“Lower profits for the utilities” is a nonsensical phrase.

Both.

Links to either, please?

And it is secondary to the economic conditions. If you live all your life under alienating economic conditions then you have little shared purpose left and there is no such thing as communities where you live.

I don’t think this is accurate. It can be, at specific places, but given that alienating economic conditions is the literally the norm everywhere, I don’t buy the argument that the world is a place without communities without shared purpose. On the contrary, some of the most vibrant communities are those created by exploited working people. Anyway, I’m not sure what the argument here is any more, thanks for your answer regardless.

Cool, thanks!

Thank you.

Good point, you’re right, the social network should help mediate this beyond formalistic notions. Thanks.

Feel free to ask questions here.

Literally on the sidebar.

I don’t think my behaviour in this thread has been smarmy or antagonistic, as your cartoon implies, but if it has, I apologize.

I got my answer from Flora, so I’m thanking good faith responses and I’m outta here, glossing my eyes and back with the other nonanarchists. Checkmate, I guess.

But you don’t have a long beard and a black and white photo portrait! How could I have known! /S

Thank you for your time to put together a thoughtful answer. I of course understand that conflict arises and needs to be addressed in all human interactions.

I guess the next step is to ask whether authority or compulsion would be any better at helping a community navigate such differences, and the answer is meh probably not.

Thanks!

I don’t know where you’re going with this. People grow up and live in the places that they do, in a network of friends, relatives and extended family. Before becoming “human capital”, the only people that traditionally uproot themselves to leave and intentionally join a community would be monastics.

I haven’t lived in a suburb, but even in cities there are neighborhoods with their community and extended social networks. That’s the common complaint against gentrification for example, that it uproots urban communities.

Living somewhere just because you grew up there is not some byproduct of capitalism, it’s what humans do.

I’m literally thinking of Greek island villages.

Because the were born there? Because they have lived there for 40 years?

But also we might not be talking about an individual, but one or more groups. In keeping with my setting, in any given Greek village there are multiple groups with super volatile competing agendas.

As an answer this comes close to what I’m asking. But I’m not sure. For example, always getting outvoted can mean eventually getting being pushed out of a place can be tyrannical. I don’t think direct democracy has some magical ability to fix things on its own. In any case what I’m asking is if people have thought through these dynamics over time.

Any pointers to essays would be welcome.

That said, I think you’re sidestepping the problem with a no true Scotsman fallacy. Anarchist groups disintegrate due to petty shit all the time. Why would anarchist communes be immune to the same things?

Could you please fix the link? It goes to the creative commons license text.

The vast majority of communities are exactly random collections of people. Even a carefully put together intentional community will become random 1-2 generations down the line.