The following is a post by a person on my friend's list. I friended him not because I knew him, but because I heard about him and what he is doing. He is creating something very like what I would like to create - an independent homestead in the country that has sacred spaces and festival grounds. VERY interesting blog.

But I'm adding his post here because it says, far better than I have been able to articulate, why I'm doing what I'm doing. I'm not looking to wall myself away, or create some mythical place where everyone is happy all the time, or turn my back on the world. I'm looking to be independent to limit the amount of control "the system" has over me. To no longer be a wage slave. And to help others do the same - either by joining my merry band or by learning through my successes and fuck-ups. (although I do not believe there is any collapse of civilization coming - that would mean that we are now civilized and I refute THAT notion)



Thoughts on Forming New Perceptions of Utopianism, Survivalism, and Their Inherent Buddhist Underpinnings

Note; I'm likely to produce a few writings along these lines, I don't think I can get the whole thing down in one shot. Basically I am starting to see Utopianism, survivalism and Buddhism as all being entertwinable in a way that fills in a lot of holes in my thinking that have persisted over several years. I'm going to write this in "order of operations", or as experienced, but might likely come back and re-write it in a form more proper to essay.

Recently I read on the internet a post by a fellow who, like many other Pagans/survivalists/ and other types is looking for land. This person wants to form a "Utopian Ecovillage". It was typical in that his plan for this village was based on the premise that in the future there will be mass hunger, pandemic disease, fuel shortages, and generally a collapse of society, driving people out into rural areas to live in these villages.

My initial complaint was practical. Their mandate was to be stocked on food and sustainable, which are excellent things. However, no guns (They're dangerous), no dogs (not Vegan), and they want their land in Berkeley. For those of you not geographically familiar with the bay area, this is next to Oakland, which is on the short list for being one of the most violent, gang ridden cities in America. My response was along the lines of "Living out here without a gun is not only dangerous its irresponsible, living out here in that kind of scenario would be suicidal."

But, what triggered my to write this today was not their post but a response to my reply. One short line, that pushed several back burner thoughts to the front of the stove. "Utopia doesn't survive around urban hunger." This simple set of words unpacked several things in my mind and at the same time tied them together. I thought I'd share.

First; Yes! It doesn't and it shouldn't. It never has and it never will. We see this in nature. Anything with enough abundance eventually becomes fed on. Even if the feeding have to evolve to take advantage. The hungry Red Tail Hawk will take territory and resources from another, and it will kill or die trying to do so. People are the same way, even to the point of it being often stated " All wars are fought over resources." In a scenario where people are starving, and have no idea how to get more food, can we possibly expect to have years of the stuff stored just out of their reach and not have to defend or prepare to defend ourselves with equal force? Of course not.

But that aside, consider this; I live about an hour drive from the nearest thing that passes as civilization. Yet, just down the street from me there was a gang murder. These guys came all the way out here for kicks, met each other and killed each other for nothing. People come all the way out here to tag rocks. Seriously, they spray paint rocks. Do you think that they would come this far out if they were starving? Or to rob empty vacation homes for stuff to sell? I tell you the latter already happens. How much more so if things really get desperate? Defending your eco-friendly, vegan, utopia from hoards of starved inner city gang members with a semi-automatic assault rifle doesn't sound like utopia to me. And pretending like it won't happen is sheer foolishness. Simply look at the world today and through history. The human animal in America is different than the human animal in Rwanda in one respect; Access to resources.

So, it doesn't, but it also shouldn't. This latter is more of a personal opinion than a statement of fact, such as the former. I have often said to my friends "I am not a utopianist, but I'd like to be". I would like to believe in some happily ever after scenario. Where everyone finally figures "it" out. I used to be a big "back to the land, hide from the apocalypse" type guy. And then I got tired of waiting. But the phrase "Utopia doesn't survive around urban hunger" led me to realize something else. You know that little voice in the back of your head, the quiet one that when you ask it direct questions you can't seem to hear it? That one has always quietly been uncomfortable with these various "tune in, drop out, live happily ever after" utopian visions of the future. The phrase "No utopia exists..." has given that voice some volume. What I realized is that even if I could survive on an island of plenty and security, surrounded by urban hunger, and unrest. I wouldn't want to, and I would never call that a utopia. In fact I would call it a tragedy.

When I was in Morocco, I was a one man utopia. Everywhere I went this was confirmed for me in the sunken faces of those who could barely afford food, let alone dentistry, clothing, automobiles, cigarettes. I had it all, I never looked at the prices of anything because I knew I could afford it. And by the way, I'm sure there were a couple instances where the only thing protecting me from being robbed forcibly was the threat of the man with the assault rifle, but I digress. I was that self-sufficient, sustainable utopia surrounded by poverty, and you know what? I hated it. It was stressful. Try eating a meal in front of somebody that is a month of their salary. And then going outside to smoke a cigarette, and telling a flock of rag clad children that you can't spare any change. Try feeling good about that.

Utopia shouldn't exist on an island surrounded by poverty. I realize that my fundamental agreement with this idea comes from a sort of Bodhisattva-esqe view of utopia. One that critiques strongly many of these attempts at creating utopian islands. It isn't about culling a group of like minded individuals from society and hiding away while everyone else goes to hell. That isn't utopia, its escapist survivalism. Real utopia can only be achieved through the survival of all people. As long as there is an "outside" to your utopia, regardless of size, you will have to forcibly defend your utopia from the outside. And, well, as far as I'm concerned using force against your fellow man, your desperate, starving neighbor, even in defense, is not much of a utopia is it?

So, like the Bodhisattva who realizes that because we are all interconnected, until we are all truly enlightened, none of us are truly enlightened, it seems also the case that until we all live in a true utopia, none of us live in a true utopia (if in fact the two are different concepts at all). If this is also true for utopias, than the goals and tactics of the "Bodhisattva utopianist" will differ from the goals of what I will call a "Bubble Utopianist". For example, the former is not primarily concerned with their peer group, they are rather, concerned primarily with those just outside their peer group. Living on a compound in the middle of nowhere is fine, but can we teach the inner city to grow their own food in organic gardens? Is it more truly utopian to grow your own food, in preparation for food shortages, or is it more utopian to try and prevent those food shortages from ever taking place?

I would like to appear to change directions a bit, although I hope to demonstrate that I have not. What do I mean when I say survivalist? Unfortunately survivalists, like other marginal groups, have been given quite the distorted image from mainstream culture. The image of "The Survivalist" that most people are aware of is one generated by a cultural system that does not want true freedom and independence. Simply put, if you are prepared for anything that is practically possible, if you are self-sufficient, if your life is sustainable, then you don't need "the system", the insecurities and fear it would like you to subscribe to, and the control it attempts to exert over you. The last thing the government wants is a nation of people who say "I don't need your intrusion, I can take care of my self". The last thing industry wants is a person that will tell them "I don't need your stuff, I can take care of myself". A survivalist is one who prepares for unforeseen circumstances of any nature in a way that is independent, sustainable and beneficial.

Survivalism can be a lot of things. "Prepping" can be a lot more wholistic, ecological, and sustainable that "Beans, Bullets and Bunkers". A survivalist, at least as I understand the term, prepares for utopia and dystopia simultaneously. What do I mean by that? What is the downside to buying twice as much non-perishable food when it is the kind that you like to eat anyway? You can eat it before it expires, and you'll still be enjoying your normal diet. You'll feel more secure, knowing that should say a flu epidemic cause a city-wide quarantine, or maybe if you lose your job, or get a surprise medical bill, you'll have a few weeks of your favorite food on store. Having extra cash, precious metals, what is the downside? Permaculture, non-chemical farming, learning wilderness survival, sustainable water harvesting/conservation, all things that will both create utopia, and prepare for dystopia.

But Utopian Survivalism is more than simply enhancing your own world, and preparing for the unforeseen (regardless of scope). Recognizing that utopia cannot exist on an island surrounded by suffering, the utopian survivalist bodhisattva seeks to eliminate the suffering of those outside the individuals utopia. Teaching others to prep. To store food, to produce their own, situational awareness, what to do in an emergency. Teaching other survivalism is an act of compassion and is individual survivalism as well. Imagine the impossibility of food riots in a society where each home has two months of stored food and small group (if not individual) food forests. This might sound like a pie-in-the-sky fantasy, but it is not. How long ago in America did everyone grow and store at least some of their own food? Look into the small community gardens that cropped up during WW2. The liberty garden. An idea that said it was patriotic and a civic duty to grow your own food. Its happened before, it can happen again.

Utopianism, Survivalism, Buddhism, the thing they have in common is that they all begin at the center, the self. From there, the family, the peer group, the community, the town, city, state, country, and world. The goal is to start with the enlightenment of utopia through preparedness, and spread the island as far out as we can, devouring the possibility of unenlightened, desperate, dystopia until it no longer exists.

So, yes, move to the country if that is what you like. Learn sustainable agriculture, harvest rainwater, live simply. But understand that no utopia can exist surrounded by a sea of suffering, nor should it. And yes, prepare, prepare for food riots. But prepare by both protection and prevention. Life is impermanant, all realities change, this reality requires we prepare for the alleviation of suffering, both ours and others, for they are one in the same. Prepare in a way not that is paranoid and fearful, xenophobic and pessimistic. Prepare in a way that prevents. Prepare in a way that builds confidence and security, that improves the lives of yourself and the world around you.


http://dionysusdevotee.livejournal.com/238086.html