Thank you for this article. This is something i have been trying to gather my thoughts about for a while and it is a great feeling when you find that some of the thinking has already been done for you!
I was left wondering about the ways there might be to communalise this idea. Redirecting pension contributions to planting trees as an individual is admirable. But imagine if enough people could be convinced to do this together. A community degrowth “pension fund” could then be invested in larger long-term projects such as old age care work, food sovereignty, nature recovery, climate resilience and adaptation etc. that don’t produce a monetary “return on investment” but would bring tangible benefits to local pensioners in the future. It would also operate as a gift economy of abundance - those who didn’t choose or have the means to contribute wouldn’t be excluded from the benefits, as they are currently.
Thanks for the kind comment. I think you perhaps have more hope than me. Not that I don't admire the idea. But I can't help but feel that communities need to bound to themselves by something more than an idea -- the idea of "community degrowth" or of the "gift economy" -- for the commitment necessary to make something like this possible. Historical communities that organise in such a way to manage shared resources (commons in England, for example) don't seem to act to for ideals or for utopianism: management of shared resources was a brute fact of their existence, not a choice to opt into or out of. Perhaps our hands will be forced in the not so distant future, but all the while that it remains an optional ideal, I think it best do what you can without feeling disheartened that you might be alone. The mad farmer liberation front, if you will. Is that unduly cynical?
No, I think you’re probably right. Maybe the withdrawing from pensions and investing in community resources need to separate campaigns. The former bound by an ideal of degrowth on a national/global scale; the latter is obviously already being done everywhere all the time on a local scale - whether for ideology or necessity - but the more the better! As individuals, we can still campaign for and be committed to both.
I guess the exception would be if you were living in some sort of commune, where everyone is already on the same page.
Thank you for this article. This is something i have been trying to gather my thoughts about for a while and it is a great feeling when you find that some of the thinking has already been done for you!
I was left wondering about the ways there might be to communalise this idea. Redirecting pension contributions to planting trees as an individual is admirable. But imagine if enough people could be convinced to do this together. A community degrowth “pension fund” could then be invested in larger long-term projects such as old age care work, food sovereignty, nature recovery, climate resilience and adaptation etc. that don’t produce a monetary “return on investment” but would bring tangible benefits to local pensioners in the future. It would also operate as a gift economy of abundance - those who didn’t choose or have the means to contribute wouldn’t be excluded from the benefits, as they are currently.
Would be interested to hear your thoughts
Thanks for the kind comment. I think you perhaps have more hope than me. Not that I don't admire the idea. But I can't help but feel that communities need to bound to themselves by something more than an idea -- the idea of "community degrowth" or of the "gift economy" -- for the commitment necessary to make something like this possible. Historical communities that organise in such a way to manage shared resources (commons in England, for example) don't seem to act to for ideals or for utopianism: management of shared resources was a brute fact of their existence, not a choice to opt into or out of. Perhaps our hands will be forced in the not so distant future, but all the while that it remains an optional ideal, I think it best do what you can without feeling disheartened that you might be alone. The mad farmer liberation front, if you will. Is that unduly cynical?
No, I think you’re probably right. Maybe the withdrawing from pensions and investing in community resources need to separate campaigns. The former bound by an ideal of degrowth on a national/global scale; the latter is obviously already being done everywhere all the time on a local scale - whether for ideology or necessity - but the more the better! As individuals, we can still campaign for and be committed to both.
I guess the exception would be if you were living in some sort of commune, where everyone is already on the same page.
Can’t wait for the Feds to read this first paragraph
Getting to the stage now where you can naturally hyperlink your previous work- how nifty
I love this Leon.
Am I becoming your top commenter :D
Haha thanks Hannah, yes by far the number one fan!