BrightFadedDog

Oh, of course. Poor people just need to get enough money to own property and build everything required to create an autonomous society.

You have a wildly different definition of poverty to me.

What you are proposing is that “poor people” should all band together and create a new separate society, which is basically communist. Like some sort of left-wing Sovereign Citizen movement.

One big problem with this concept is that you cannot create a new separate economics whilst living in wider society. You still need to live somewhere, and you will need to pay the landlord with money. You will need to pay the electricity bill with money. You will still need to use joint facilities like roads, and the State is not going to happily provide all that to you for free, they will be looking at your new little economy and working out exactly how to value it to send you a tax bill.

While you are dealing with all of these issues, you also have to deal with the people within the group. How are you running it and making sure it is fair? It takes a massive amount of work to manage something like this on even a small scale. So you will need some sort of tax on transactions so that the people putting the time in to running it can be covered. Who is actually going to join if everyone’s time is valued equally - it will be a great deal for people whose skills are not valued on wider society, but a bad one for anyone with more valuable skills. So you won’t end up with a wide skill set involved, and can’t cover the requirements to do everything needed. So for example if you found a farmer who wanted to provide all their produce through this scheme, you could not provide the resources they need to produce and transport the produce. There is a massive difference between “making food” (ie, working at McDonalds) and actually creating food.

Plus what happens when things go wrong? When the person you arranged to come over to help you with something falls and hurts themselves, or they do substandard work that damages your property? Is your mutual aid group providing some sort of insurance coverage? Do you have some sort of dispute resolution process to mediate problems?

Having a strong community that supports members and shares resources can definitely be a good thing, and help to improve the lives of everyone involved. But “quit your shitty job and create a mutual aid network” is not at all a viable path to prosperity (or even to survival).

I’ve been thinking a lot about what makes for a good group since I moved to Lemmy. Small and engaged is what I came up with, and authentic is definitely part of that. A lot of people’s normal response is to look for the biggest group for everything, but I believe once a group passes a certain size it loses the ability to have good constructive discussions - at best you get a core group participating and a lot of people who just watch, but more often you lose the space for anything exept superficial conversations as everything that is not new gets lost in the volume.

It’s a pity Lemmy does not allow for subgroups, as that would be a good option for larger groups. The best options I have come up with so far are including weekly themed posts, and ongoing posts for specific topics linked from the sidebar so they can be kept visible. I think moderating a group well involves being part librarian, not just the rules enforcement most people focus on.

I agree completely with both those points.

It is less important that our hobbies are something that we are “not obliged to do” than that we are actively engaged in them.

Many people spend their free time in activities of passive consumption - watching TV, shopping and doing packaged, purchased “activities”. The only active component is searching for the next thing to consume.

An actively engaging hobby is very different, it involves growth and learning. Many hobbies can be engaged in either passively or actively - think of the difference between a photographer who goes out every weekend to take photos and improve their technique, compared to one who spends hours researching and purchasing equipment but rarely “finds” the time to actually take photos.

The real difference between them is the mindset, and that can be applied to things you are obliged to do as well. My hobbies tend to be extensions of things that are necessary - cooking, gardening, sewing. All can be approached as necessary chores, but an approach of active engagement turns them into hobbies. Even scrolling the internet can be turned into a hobby - although I’m not sure if moderating a group and trying to learn enough javascript to automate things will make me a better person or lead to madness at this point!

I guess my argument is that it is not doing things outside of what we are obliged to that is important, it is doing more than we are obliged to do. It does not matter whether that “more” is different things, or things we need to do done in a different way.

Thanks for posting this, it was an interesting read.

I have been thinking a lot about the question in the first post here, what is Simple Living? In the context of moving to Lemmy and thinking about how the sites are structured I have realised what I really value is the time to do things fully, and to be fully in the moment.

Our society is built around consumerism, and constantly chasing the next new thing to aquire. Once we have it we just start looking for the next thing to reach for. The way we consume media is the same - a constant search for the new post, with the fastest replies get rewarded and by the time anyone has been able to craft an actual thoughtful response the conversation has moved on.

I would like my life to have more depth, to focus on learning about things deeply and thoroughly, to be present in the moment more often and enjoy what I have around me. In moving to Lemmy I am hoping to be able to be able to find/develop some communities that foster that.

I envisage the flow of information and communication as being like a river. There are fast-flowing rapids that can be fun and exciting, but most of the river is actually deep pools full of amazing and wonderful resources. Those fast flowing rapids have a place, but also have the potential to wash you away from all the important things underneath. The challenge of creating an online community is to be able to create a way to anchor people into deep and ongoing conversations, without the flow of new things constantly pulling them away.

Reddit always felt to me like it was preventing those deeper conversations from really flourishing. I think the challenge for a moderator here is to find ways of balancing different types of conversations so they can all have a place - some topics can be talked about slowly and thoughtfully for weeks, months, even years. I believe to have a place in a simple living lifestyle the focus needs to be on encouraging those slow conversations. To create a place where you can drop in maybe once a week and not feeling that you are “out of the loop” because you have taken time to engage with the real world.