Hi to you,

I stumbled over this very interesting conversation between you and dwinblood. I like to give my view and also put forward some questions to you. I remember you being respectful and reasonable within our encounters and like to express my appreciation to you in this regard. You are one of the rare personalities who seems to have strong convictions but also are open to other perspectives and doubts.

Here is what I think from my perspective:

There is no reality in which someone does not have control over the use of land and means of production. Whoever does the organizing and planning over land and means of production is like someone who owns the land and means, even if it is not officially terminated that way. The moment the decision-making power rests on this organization, it is as if they were land and means of production owners. The horse's foot of planned economy is to want to do equal justice to all who work with the land and the means. But it is impossible to do justice to all, because not all people are equal in their possibilities and talents. In general, I doubt the usefulness of a small group of decision makers over a very large group - read, nation - of people to penetrate and understand their way of life. I see it as impossible to try to achieve this through the quantitative distribution of land and means of production.

What I find difficult to comprehend with you is that, as mentioned here, there are niches within what we currently have (without naming it), or you could create such a niche yourself. If you can raise enough capital and people who share your ideals, there is nothing to stop you from investing your energy and time there.

My question would be: What are you waiting for? I see multiple realizations of communities and recently individuals seem to be setting out to live offgrid, for example. Of course, they can only do that if they have the seed money. But I would argue that here in my country, for example, there are enough people who would have done or could still do the same if it were important enough to them. If I'm not mistaken, you're my European neighbor, right? It might be similar for you.

A main argument I hear is that poor people don't have this opportunity and that it is unfair that they don't have it. Such I consider a killer argument and does not help in the least to focus on the real goal, not to think about the many anonymous poor, but to think that if you already care about helping the destitute or weak, you could do something for them today. By "them" I don't mean the "many", but exactly those who are in your reachable environment and with whom you might want to establish or already maintain a personal connection. For example, what would hold you back from becoming part of a community, such as Tamera in Portugal or Findhorn in Germany or others that exist? And, for example, asking your mother, who is too old to care for herself on her own, if she would come along?

No matter what we call the forms of government under which we exist, as long as the possibility of ownership exists, it would be foolish indeed not to use it, wouldn't it? However, if you seek to save the whole world or the many others alike, or if you seek political change or paradigm shifts, your whole life may pass in this pursuit without you ever knowing what it would have felt like to live in a way that is more in line with your lifestyle and desire. What do you think?