Pete
25th August 2003, 04:05
As you may know, or may not know I just spent 9 weeks working in a provinical park up in North-Eastern Ontario, and during that time in the 'wilderness' a few thoughts of the communist theories came into my head. Mostly these ideas and theories fall short when it comes to the hell of urbanization, which I disgust utterly (the summer nurtured my dislike), but that has nothing to do with forest communal living, which was probaly the first stage of human development.
Small groups of semi-nomadic humans would be best suited for Ontario north of Sudbury, where the forest is thick and rich and the farm land is poor. Berries, rabbit, moose (if you're lucky), and fish would become stables, and these are abudant if you know where to look. Also yellow spruce can make a good wine. Most communist theories fall short when it comes to sustenance outside of the capitalist urbanization which requires a bounty of agricultural land, where as when the people live off the land they are truly free and do not rely on the State for support.
That is the downfall of both this theory and most urban communist theories. As long as the people rely on others for their means of life they cannot be truly free! Susetance is then the only true way of freedom, and in the lands of Northern Ontario it is quite easy, if you are knowledgable, to learn to survive and to become free. On a wide scale this would be hard to do, but locally it would be beautiful.
Tribalism. That is a problem. Modern communication networks would have to be upkept inorder to keep the past from repeating itself, so we would not revert to an ancient stage but step forward into a new age where technology is integrated with nature. Industry, though, for the most part would become unnecassary as it today provides mostly consumer goods which can be created easily from the home while still providing ample luxury time.
For example, one kill of say a moose (if you can master that) would last weeks if not months if properly stored (ie smoked or salted), and after the kill is in you have all that time for rest and relaxation, assuming the shelters/fields don't need repairs. Children would learn as they wanted to both hands on and theory (since the modern information network would be carefully upkept). Shelters would be on sheltered hill sides, in valleys, or dug into the ground where possible.
Life would and could be provided for, assuming those city dwellers are willing to throw off all their chains. A step into our naturaul habitat and away from waste and want. Education, food, shelter, and child rearing would be forced into becoming communal, and the community would grow strong and selfsufficent, yet always in contact with others.
Forest communism, it cannot support the world, but it is freer than city dwelling.
-Pete
Small groups of semi-nomadic humans would be best suited for Ontario north of Sudbury, where the forest is thick and rich and the farm land is poor. Berries, rabbit, moose (if you're lucky), and fish would become stables, and these are abudant if you know where to look. Also yellow spruce can make a good wine. Most communist theories fall short when it comes to sustenance outside of the capitalist urbanization which requires a bounty of agricultural land, where as when the people live off the land they are truly free and do not rely on the State for support.
That is the downfall of both this theory and most urban communist theories. As long as the people rely on others for their means of life they cannot be truly free! Susetance is then the only true way of freedom, and in the lands of Northern Ontario it is quite easy, if you are knowledgable, to learn to survive and to become free. On a wide scale this would be hard to do, but locally it would be beautiful.
Tribalism. That is a problem. Modern communication networks would have to be upkept inorder to keep the past from repeating itself, so we would not revert to an ancient stage but step forward into a new age where technology is integrated with nature. Industry, though, for the most part would become unnecassary as it today provides mostly consumer goods which can be created easily from the home while still providing ample luxury time.
For example, one kill of say a moose (if you can master that) would last weeks if not months if properly stored (ie smoked or salted), and after the kill is in you have all that time for rest and relaxation, assuming the shelters/fields don't need repairs. Children would learn as they wanted to both hands on and theory (since the modern information network would be carefully upkept). Shelters would be on sheltered hill sides, in valleys, or dug into the ground where possible.
Life would and could be provided for, assuming those city dwellers are willing to throw off all their chains. A step into our naturaul habitat and away from waste and want. Education, food, shelter, and child rearing would be forced into becoming communal, and the community would grow strong and selfsufficent, yet always in contact with others.
Forest communism, it cannot support the world, but it is freer than city dwelling.
-Pete