: The idea that Twin Oaks is a "successful" example of such a pilot test study, as stated here, was dead before it came off Stoller's typewriter, having been gainsaid by Stoller's prior discussion of Twin Oaks' "dependency upon capitalism".
Skinner showed his lack of understanding of economics in the 1976 introduction to Walden Two. Small in NOT beautiful, Sam. It doesn't pollute very much, granted, but it doesn't produce much either. We have many centuries prior to the Industrial Revolution to remind us of that. If Twin Oaks were truly independent, all they would have would be their tofu and their hammocks and their lovely 700 acres.
A confederation of communities...
Which one is going to drill the oil?
Which one will manufacture the machinery necessary to drill the oil?
Small is NOT beautiful, Sam. It's a pipe dream. It's a utopia.
Twin Oaks uses plenty of oil. They have to. Solar power doesn't remove tree stumps yet.
All that's possible within the structure of an intentional community is to save a lot of money to buy some land, get some compatible people to work very hard on that land, and to hope lots more money will be coming in real soon... because the land alone isn't enough for a start when the community is 500, 1000, or even 10,000 people. All it could hope to be is an agricultural backwater.
Unless it bought things from the capitalists---who possess a monopoly on all the advances of the Industrial Revolution---that is.
Twin Oaks started out working day jobs in Louisa.
They're still working for someone else.
Please explain to me how it could be otherwise on such a small scale.
Wouldn't a federation of communities need roads to transport goods to one another?
Which community will build those roads?
Which intentional community is going to be in charge of providing the oil necessary to mix the concrete?
Or will we call people removing tree stumps and making roads by hand a utopia?
Your other interesting points at a later date...