I am always being asked how we resolve our planetary problems so that we can live sustainably. Initially, I said the same old things that you can get from any environmental group – things like green energy, the three R’s, organic farming, etc. I knew that it would require much more, but people like to hear simple platitudes and cliches that make them feel good and seem resistant to answers that point a finger at them. Too often, it is always the magical ‘they’ that should solve the problems. I realized many years ago that it would require us all to do something very different from how we currently live in the developed world and how the developing world would like to live – It is a simple answer – consumerism is our problem, and with it the corporate economic system that drives it. This is what I have been saying for years and throughout this blog. During my sabbatical trip in 2010 that led to my writing the Principles of Sustainable Living text, I wanted to see many of those outlier communities that had already begun the transition to sustainability and lived outside the normal consumer paradigm as well as they could.
At the time I had watched many videos about alternate communities, such as those found Stephan Wolf’s 2010 film A New We: Ecological communities and ecovillages in Europe and several documentaries that reviewed the ‘hippy counterculture’ in 1980s and 1990s. Back in the 1960s, the counterculture was the way that many young people sought to reject the mores (the essential or characteristic customs and conventions of a community) of mainstream American life. While the movement began in the USA it quickly spread to other countries. The main theme that they all shared was the desire to live more in harmony with nature and outside what they viewed as the economic slavery of consumerism. The movement survived but it did morph somewhat losing many idealistic people along the way who found the transition hard when compared to the enticing opulence of consumerism.
The biggest problem I have seen in promoting a sustainable lifestyle has been the perceived loss of luxury and comforts associated with consumerism. I found this a real problem in my research (see early post, Richard’s Research on Worldviews and why he is optimistic about a transformation {June 2018}) but it was one of perception about sustainability based on what people perceived about the counterculture of the 1960s and illusions about hippy communes of that time. I realized some 20 years ago that to promote a sustainable future we needed to promote a different vision of what sustainable living could be and how it still had the desired comforts, but also that it required a different way of thinking that was alien to consumerism.
As I looked at the various ‘transition or intentional communities’ I visited and/or read about, I was looking for what these principles and attributes these communities shared and what made them successful. I had done extensive academic reading about community and wanted to see theory and practice compared. There is no cookie cutter answer to the transition to sustainable living and all communities are unique, yet all share some basic ideas that I summarized as twelve main principles within my text. When I was visiting transition communities, I was also aware of how people living in a consumer world might think about making such a move. I was concerned how to convince the 40% of ‘Logical Idealists’ and 30% of ‘Utilitarian Conservationists’ (see my research post given in last paragraph) that living sustainably could meet their needs. I assumed at the outset that most people already living in transition communities were ‘Ecocentrics’ already on-board. For more information try https://transitionnetwork.org/about-the-movement/what-is-transition/ and https://www.ic.org/
There are still many counterculture communities from the 1960s, who live quietly, that are no longer communes, but thriving well in areas away from large urban centers. Many transition communities were less than 30 years old (in 2010) and it was these that interested me since they represented a new counterculture that saw benefit of living sustainably outside the consumer system as possible. I had read about many transition communities that ranged from people who were professionals in the consumer system representing the center groups from my research to those that still sang Kumbaya My Lord every night around a campfire. In my text I offer examples of sustainable living that would appeal to people from all walks of life within the consumer mindset. I’ll cover the principles again in the next post, but for now I’ll briefly explain why I chose the intentional communities I did for inclusion within my text.
In places that were existing town trying to transition to sustainability, to visit the small town of Maleny, Australia, today you might be disappointed to see little that expressed sustainability. I felt that when I was there in 2015. The transition community is now a small ecovillage outside the main town. Totnes, England is a small ancient market town, and while it has a ways to go yet, as you wander through the town you can feel the sense of community and the efforts underway to make it a full transition community. Cloughjordan ecovillage, Ireland, is an example of a newer growing and thriving ecovillage that exists directly alongside the ancient old village. Torri Superiore, Italy, is an excellent example of converting a 14th century village into a modern ecovillage and tourist resort for those wanting to understand sustainable living in action. Sadly, CADISPA in Scotland was a foundation that assisted villages in becoming transition communities. A shining example is the Sleat Community Trust in Skye, Scotland. The foundations results were effective and encouraging but since the death of its champion, it still waits for another leader to take up the mantle for the many small communities still considering transition. Yet the successful communities are still contacted as excellent resources for process on what to do to transition. New Urbanism, as demonstrated by Stapleton, Colorado, is thriving within the consumer paradigm and yet expresses many benefits of sustainability. It is recognized as one of the best neighborhoods in Denver, but has fallen short of some of its diversity and long-term sustainability goals. However, it still has made the effort and will continue to thrive as it can.
I’ll finish this post on one of my favorite intentional communities – Findhorn, Scotland. I visited in 2010 and then again in 2017 and it seems that the old fishing village a short distance (3 miles – 5 Km) up the coast is gaining benefits from being in the ecovillage’s proximity as the Findhorn Foundation runs business for eco-businesses all around the region as well as three newer Scottish communities in the past few years. Findhorn is showing how a larger foundation can support regional growth for sustainability while co-existing within the consumer paradigm. On the Vision-Mission page for Findhorn is, “The Common Ground is a statement of the common values of the Findhorn Foundation and the New Findhorn Association (NFA). It’s a living document, a code of conduct, and it’s used as a tool for transformation for ourselves, the community we live and work in and the world. Everyone who works for the Foundation or who joins the New Findhorn Association agrees to abide by this statement of Common Ground” that serves to keep people from being coopted back to a consumer only mindset.
0 Comments