Thinking more about community today. I linked to the participatory city document yesterday. That had been on my mind for a while now. It appears overly optimistic. And for all I know, it well could be.
Participatory cities, co-op, and other communities are called intentional communities 1. I was unaware of this classification. This is good. Now a direction has opened to where I can learn more.
The idea of a participatory city intrigued me. It is unlike anything I have experienced, but it feels wholesome. Is it too wholesome to exist? There are small scale demonstrations of this in practice. Clearly, it can exist. I like the idea of generating an activity or projects that benefit the community as a way of centering neighborhoods. That sounds doable. I love the trade school idea. Many of us have skills that we are proud of, and would enjoy teaching to others. This could open ways to a form of childcare where the community round robins classes / teach and learns and subsequent parents get a day/night off. That’s the community meeting a need. What else would that provide? It would bring up an aspect of interdependence. You need to do your part, because you expect your neighbor to do the same. This requires vulnerability. It requires letting go of a portion of your freedom / letting go of the expectation of total self-reliance (that we are taught in the west from a young age is a virtue).
Broad strokes speaking, communities seem to need one of three things: 1. Interdependence 2. Shared Goals 3. Share experiences / activities My cursory exploration in the topic shows that the first is the most important.
The concept of a participatory community, takes into account all of these. However, it builds interdependence through shared activities. Very clever.
I appreciate the pages on “why don’t people participate”. These are things I have experienced. Even if you want to, it does not feel like there are opportunities. Or the ones that exist, are far and in-between. How to make it more accessible and known in the community?
I talked about this a bit yesterday. But I think social media and tech in general give us the feeling that we can live independent of others. Times like this, I come back to Byung-Chul Han’s philosophy 2. There are many aspects of life where we can get adequate results without interacting with another. If in a library, we can opt to use our smartphone to search for the location of a book instead of asking the librarian. Despite the fact that a librarian would be more informed on the topic and potentially lead you to superior resources. The result notwithstanding, speaking with the librarian could open trajectories to interactions. But if we opt for efficiency, why would we do this? If we think we know the best course of action, why would we do this? Han’s thinking goes against a lot of the assumptions we take for granted. I think understanding these assumptions will be important in community building.
I’m a bit obsessed with the topic of community right now. I’m on the search for books and articles to read on the topic.
A few books have come my way that I may read.
Elinor Ostrom and the Bloomington School of Political Economy - Google Books
Wrong Planet - Searching for your Tribe by Karl Wiggins Goodreads