It isn't one hundred percent anything. If it was, this old cowboy would simply relinquish all worldly goods, and wander in synthetic fleece sweat clothing, while preaching the gospel of not owning anything. Which would be asinine. Unoriginal, too. Mendicants try this stunt all the time, and so rarely to much fanfare. I own some shit, and I'm not parting with much of it. But I will be donating some musical instruments, for example, to people who might want them. I digress. Working on a newfangled way of looking at collectivism. I'll start again.
The new approach to collectivism is to give away material wealth, but not completely. The big trouble with communal living is that it takes all of a person's time and posessions. This is not to disparage the concept of sharing,but in too many working models, communes can't sustain. People need at least a small amount of autonomy and control. People need their holdings. But here again, I'm seeing mounds of confusion, like puckey, accumulate as I try to make my point.
The number one problem with socialism is that people tend to act in self interest. Collectivism is a good idea, but people never get the hang of it,so it isn't worth taking one hundred percent seriously. Unless you make a few logical little adjustments. Maybe the new way of collectivism is in small parcels of time with other people, small material contributions to the common good.
I'm proposing that one of my pet projects, a stalled one, get revitalized through a talent collective. I will be inviting people to be part of the collective that produces a podcast,online. Youtube to start, maybe something more mainstream up the road, if the plan works. The podcast is called The Not-Too-Social Hour, and should be news/views/entertainment. Fun, fun, fun. Join. The project has been dormant for a while, but will re-emerge as the weather gets warmer. Peace!
The new approach to collectivism is to give away material wealth, but not completely. The big trouble with communal living is that it takes all of a person's time and posessions. This is not to disparage the concept of sharing,but in too many working models, communes can't sustain. People need at least a small amount of autonomy and control. People need their holdings. But here again, I'm seeing mounds of confusion, like puckey, accumulate as I try to make my point.
The number one problem with socialism is that people tend to act in self interest. Collectivism is a good idea, but people never get the hang of it,so it isn't worth taking one hundred percent seriously. Unless you make a few logical little adjustments. Maybe the new way of collectivism is in small parcels of time with other people, small material contributions to the common good.
I'm proposing that one of my pet projects, a stalled one, get revitalized through a talent collective. I will be inviting people to be part of the collective that produces a podcast,online. Youtube to start, maybe something more mainstream up the road, if the plan works. The podcast is called The Not-Too-Social Hour, and should be news/views/entertainment. Fun, fun, fun. Join. The project has been dormant for a while, but will re-emerge as the weather gets warmer. Peace!
No comments:
Post a Comment