Obviously, my current fascination with, and desire for, creating an intentional community, stems from my psychology as an extrovert. I often think, and write, that the reason for creating such a community is driven mainly by a desire to be resilient in the event of some external force being brought to bear upon us from outside our sphere of influence. But I haven't yet written about the compelling case for this more social perspective.
If the current political and social environment weren't the toxic shit-show that they are, a compelling case for the establishment of a community could still be made, convincingly. But the fact that the dumpster is, in fact, on fire only strengthens this position. The need for a community that creates a broad base of support for people has been well documented.
Rhaina Cohen wrote a piece in the Atlantic about people who have unusually tight, platonic bonds with friends, such that they fill the roles traditionally occupied by a spouse or romantic partner. From one of the subjects in the article:
"Throughout this evolution, Americans started relying more and more on their spouses for social and emotional support, with friendships consigned to a secondary role.
John Carroll, who met his platonic partner, Joe Rivera, at a gay bar, describes this type of romantic relationship as “one-stop shopping.” People expect to pile emotional support, sexual satisfaction, shared hobbies, intellectual stimulation, and harmonious co-parenting all into the same cart. Carroll, 52, thinks this is an impossible ask; experts share his concern. “When we channel all our intimate needs into one person,” the psychotherapist Esther Perel writes, “we actually stand to make the relationship more vulnerable.” Such totalizing expectations for romantic relationships leave us with no shock absorber if a partner falls short in even one area. These expectations also stifle our imagination for how other people might fill essential roles such as cohabitant, caregiver, or confidant."
David Brooks has also written extensively about this. The collapse of the family unit, according to Brooks, plays a large part in the decline of social stability. Despite his reasoning that the decline of religious belief (and practice) is a net negative, with which I disagree, I do agree that it has contributed to this collapse. I reject the notion that superstition is good for us, but I accept that we have not been able to forge something else to replace the community aspect of religious life that I believe is essential to the psychological well-being of the human animal.
I believe that we need to return to this community-centered way of life or the sense of alienation and depression that pervades our society will continue to worsen. I think that we will begin to see a renaissance in the intentional community movement, as people recognize that their needs are failing to be met in isolation.
The scariest thing about attempting to create such a community is that people are fucking crazy. I think that, when faced with the idea of absconding to some other person's idea of a utopian society, people get the willies and reject the idea. But the fact is, yes people are crazy, and part of living in a community is accepting some of that crazy and even embracing it. Right now, people marinate in their crazy without ever having their crazy exposed, until it spirals out of control. That might be in the form of anxiety or depression, or joining the Proud Boys or ISIS.
Currently, we live in the richest country in the history of humankind, and we are in the unique situation that we actually have the means to completely start from scratch, should we deem it necessary. I think that, as our society continues to fracture, more and more people will deem. They will deem the shit out of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment