So so true. The free choice part seems like the key here.
I’ve realized that I have no desire to spend hours gardening and “working the land” every day. But I think I would be happy roaming the countryside foraging, tracking, and hunting all day.
Yes, I think everyone would agree that all members of a community should contribute fairly - the health of any community relies on this balance of giving and taking. But so much of what I’ve seen on the WWOOFing websites sounds like “hired hand” type situations, with the people not just working to contribute to the people living on the land, but working to produce things for sale. This is where it gets unequal, I feel. Of course there wouldn’t be anything untoward about a group of people selling (essentially trading) food they’ve grown in order to obtain other things they need to live. But the group would need to share the resources equally, which isn’t the case when the process of selling the food (and receiving the $$) is kept separate from the exchange of labor for meals and lodging.
This is exactly what happens in capitalism, whereby workers are removed from what they produce - the workers get wages, while the employer gets exclusive ownership of the goods produced, and gets to pocket the whole value of those goods when sold. This is the definition of capitalist exploitation, because the wages paid are invariably less than the value of the goods, with the surplus being pocketed by the employer as profit.
So, to make a long story short, in order to remove capitalist employer-employee relations from the picture, it seems essential to me that all the resources of the community - generated from the members’ various contributions - be shared equally. And this relates to another thing that has been bouncing around in my head - whether or not this would require the members of the community to live the same lifestyle (the same standard of living). In other words, would it work if the people owning the land lived in a nice house (with electricity and whatever), while those who didn’t own lived in a trailer or in tents? Would this arrangement make it impossible for everyone to consume the same amount of resources, or would it necessarily be unequal?
I’m wondering this because personally I would feel awkward living in any community with such a disparity. To me, a true community means everyone fundamentally sharing their lives, which includes sharing living spaces (and having the same type of living spaces). And even more fundamentally, I just don’t feel that true sharing of life can happen when everyone’s living spaces are separated from each others, as in modern homes (thinking about how much of life is spent inside these living spaces).
But I know that lots of other people would want to continue living in their current homes, for example, so I’m not sure how this would all end up working. Probably this network would include the whole spectrum of living arrangements - just wondering how that would work out.
Jessica