[SolarCross]

I have long seen in the mind's eye some potential for powerful social and economic advantages that could be had from being part of a collective: specialisation and division of labour, security in numbers, comradeship.. Yet in between the family unit on the small scale and the nation-state on the large scale there is not too much in between. There is no legislation, that I am aware of, throwing up artificial barriers to prevent people collectivising in the middle scale, so why aren't more people doing it?

My hypothesis is that it does not happen more because the perceived risk vs reward in forming or joining a middle sized collective is too high on the risk. Frank Zappa famously said "communism will never work because people like to own stuff". In a collective you do own stuff just you share that ownership with more people which means overall you in fact should be owning more stuff than if you were alone. So here is the rub by joining a collective you lose exclusive ownership over the few things you own before joining to gain partial ownership over the many things the collective owns. Is that a net gain or loss? Its not clear. In the absence of clarity people will be conservative, play safe and not make the leap into collectivism.

The solution seems to be to make the collective's terms and conditions in regard to property clear and accomadating to people's inclination to preserve their personal ownership.

So a question for communists.

What terms and conditions would you like to see in a collective that would encourage you personally to make the leap into collectivism?

[Dagoth Ur]

A programme of world revolution founded on global communism, aka a global collective. Anything short of this will lead to eventual dissolution of the Collective.

We are the Borg. Your biological and technological distinctiveness will be added to our own. Resistance is futile.

[Goldberk]

I would like to work on collectives that gradually replace the functions of the state and some private corporations

[SolarCross]

I would like to work on collectives that gradually replace the functions of the state and some private corporations

Ok so a collective could (and should) do exactly that but how could you persuade people to join such a collective? What are the potential deal-breakers that would cause them to say "no thanks" and carry on living the way they do now as wage earners at work and living in small families of mostly blood relatives?

[ComradeTim]

It's all just a bit of a hassle really. The bonds that once made neighbourhoods at least in poor areas basically like proto-collectives have been broken by liberal atomisation. You couldn't even really start a hippy camp where I live, let alone a real unified collective like in Anarchist Catalonia. A revolutionary worker's government would have to re-educate the proletariat from where I'm sitting to make it worthwhile to even try. For me, a collective would be more about owning and using the means of production collectively and having lots of communal activities, rather than sharing out personal property. No-one touches my stuff without my permission.

[SolarCross]

A revolutionary worker's government would have to re-educate the proletariat from where I'm sitting to make it worthwhile to even try.

Why would the proletariat support a new government that aimed to push them into doing something they didn't want to do?

I think you have to find a way to make collectivism an attractive option even without the assistance of the guns of the governors.

I am probably asking the wrong people. An ideological person has essentially superstitious or fictitious reasons for wanting collectivism which have really nothing to do with practical goals. Ordinary people from the hired floor sweeper to the middle class desk jockey to the plutocrat have real world not otherworldly concerns.. in order of importance...
1. Survival - food on table
2. Reproduction - raise a family
3. Pleasure - have fun
Ideology doesn't even come into their calculations when assessing the usefulness of an activity. A collective needs to tick those boxes first and foremost or no one (with any sanity) will be interested.

[ComradeTim]

Why would the proletariat support a new government that aimed to push them into doing something they didn't want to do?

Of course they want collectives, they're nothing but good for them. Some may resist due to government brainwashing and propaganda but once they see the success , they're sure to want to join.

Ordinary people from the hired floor sweeper to the middle class desk jockey to the plutocrat have real world not otherworldly concerns.. in order of importance...
1. Survival - food on table
2. Reproduction - raise a family
3. Pleasure - have fun
Ideology doesn't even come into their calculations when assessing the usefulness of an activity. A collective needs to tick those boxes first and foremost or no one (with any sanity) will be interested.

Are modern human beings animals to have no higher instincts than that? Human history, with it's many political and religious experiments, proves you wrong.

[Goldberk]

Persuade by example, use demonstrations of sustainable self help that gives people the incentive to join

[SolarCross]

Are modern human beings animals to have no higher instincts than that? Human history, with it's many political and religious experiments, proves you wrong.

The political experiments gain interest where they are making promises that address some or all of those 3 primary concerns. The religious ones are otherworldly and tend to attract the crazy people rather than the down to earth. I don't think collectivism will work with too many of the crazy people taking interest so its better not to go down the otherworldly avenue.

A lot of people have been pushed into supporting political and religious experiments with a dose of terror which is in fact making leverage out of the survival goal, though in a negative way, as in "Worship my God! or you will be the first against the wall come the rapture!". I don't like that sort of thing, just speaking for myself.

[pugsville]

I have. Well a housing Co-operative, 18 flats (1-4 bedrooms, typical modern flat with their own living areas) large common hall, office, guest room, music room, large common garden , chickens. (it is in a suburban setting). we have common meals 2-3 times a week, whole group meetings once a month. A proportion of rent is retained for maintenance, rent is semi- based in income ( low side of commercial rents but not much) once you are in you are in for life, they you can be expelled and we have for not contributing. There is a fair bit to be done around the place (cooing,gardening, maintenance, fiance) and everyone is expected to do their bit. Only 3 years old, it's a a learning curve. We do network we a bunch of similar communities throughout the world.

[SolarCross]

I have. Well a housing Co-operative, 18 flats (1-4 bedrooms, typical modern flat with their own living areas) large common hall, office, guest room, music room, large common garden , chickens. (it is in a suburban setting). we have common meals 2-3 times a week, whole group meetings once a month. A proportion of rent is retained for maintenance, rent is semi- based in income ( low side of commercial rents but not much) once you are in you are in for life, they you can be expelled and we have for not contributing. There is a fair bit to be done around the place (cooing,gardening, maintenance, fiance) and everyone is expected to do their bit. Only 3 years old, it's a a learning curve. We do network we a bunch of similar communities throughout the world.

Great stuff. Since you have practical experience:
- What persuaded you to join / found this co-op?
- What concerns did you have before joining?
- What advice would you give to someone thinking of founding a similar enterprise?

[pugsville]

My GF was living there. But in principle I was pretty much keen anyway. But is is a major shift in the way you look at things and some people are not up for this style of living. It is different to how most people have spent all their lives, so I would say people have to be up the challenge and realize it's not going to be easy, this co-op community has had 40% change of people over just 3 years. (though some moves have been due to other circumstances, but some people moved in and then realized it was not for them). The kids adapt really well, they get along really well, it's the Adults that have the problems.

People's contributions in work around the place is never going to be equal. But long as people make the effort things are Ok.

[Eauz]

I do not want to join a collective. I want to join a society that places importance upon collective ownership over the means of production and collective ownership and responsibility of production.

If that is not possible, at least let make sure this collective serves Kool-Aid.

[SolarCross]

I want to join a society that places importance upon collective ownership over the means of production and collective ownership and responsibility of production.

And how would you do that without actually rolling up your sleeves, spitting on your hands and making a collective? At some point you have to stop dreaming and start acting, or nothing will happen.

[Dagoth Ur]

You can't just collective your way to socialism. Any microcosm of "socialism" in a capitalist society will eventually deteriorate and fall apart. Anything short of widespread systemic change is pissing in the wind.

I'm confused why you don't know this about us Tax. We aren't liberal anarchists.

[SolarCross]

You can't just collective your way to socialism. Any microcosm of "socialism" in a capitalist society will eventually deteriorate and fall apart. Anything short of widespread systemic change is pissing in the wind.

I'm confused why you don't know this about us Tax. We aren't liberal anarchists.

There are co-ops in England that were founded before the Soviet Union and unlike the SU are still going... You are spouting dogma disconnected from reality. Widespread systemic change won't happen globally all in a day, it has to be built one brick at a time. This is the difference between doers and dreamers; doers do what they can, dreamers are full of excuses.

[ComradeTim]

On a slightly related note, are you still a monarchist and reactionary, taxizen?

[Dagoth Ur]

Those collectives that have been around since before the USSR, what change have they effected? Any? How many more of their version of collectives have sprouted up elsewhere? You say I'm disconnected from reality when I support what got us a third of the world even though the Soviets were actually shitting on foreign revolutions. You're the dreamer here with your irrelevant collectives that have changed nothing but themselves.

Also which ones are you talking about? I'd like to see their original charters and what their charters look like today.

[SolarCross]

On a slightly related note, are you still a monarchist and reactionary, taxizen?

Monarchy is probably the best kind of governance there has ever been, though these days it's a bit unfashionable due to relentless and raving propaganda spewed forth by religious and political demagogues over the last few centuries. Demagogues who, truth be told, are little more than scam artists or unhinged crypto-religious maniacs.
I don't know about what it means to be a reactionary, it's a propaganda term, like "heretic" or "unbeliever", I think it doesn't have any tangible meaning, just a kind of crypto-religious smearing as would be done by those wonky nutbags that ran around calling people "heretics" as an excuse for murders. Murder has its place, if you have a mortal enemy then sure killing them makes sense but why do it under stupid pretences? It seems discourteous and dishonourable.

Dag - The Co-operative Group is now a constellation of dozens of different co-ops but was founded in 1844. To date they have hardly killed anyone, which in your eyes no doubt makes them crashing failures, but they are 165 years of working class people helping working class people live better, which in my eyes makes them quite admirable.

[ComradeTim]

Fair enough.