-Peter Thiel (on the higher education bubble) ¹

We are currently witnessing a drastic shift in higher education, the likes of which we have never seen before. It is undergoing a massive evolution from the current brick and mortar system to a more personalized and customizable alternative that will adapt to the learning style of the students. Education is one of the founding principles of communal living, and here at Valhalla we have made sure that it is an underlying theme in every one of our managing committees. But before we delve into the role of education here at Valhalla, let us first examine what’s wrong with the current system and the evidence that illustrates this so called “higher education bubble.”

In analyzing and evaluating the existence of a “bubble”, there are typically three phases to look out for: inflation, delusion, and finally devaluation. Let us simplify and explain the recent United States housing bubble with these three key phases:

Inflation: Housing prices go up

Delusion: Buyers take on increased debt and prices stabilize

Devaluation: Housing prices come crashing down

We are currently witnessing a similar sequence of events in higher education. In following I will provide you with some statistical data that supports this hypothesis.

Phase 1: Inflating Tuition Costs

The cost of a college degree in the US has increased by 1120% since records began in 1978. Let us examine some more statistics that emphasize this point:

• The 1120% increase in tuition cost is 4 times that of the Consumer Price Index increase and is drastically larger than the 600% increase in medical costs and 244% increase in food expenses²
• The cost of tuition at the average 4 year public university has increased by 15% between 2008 and 2010 and another 5.8% between 2011-2012³
• The projected average total cost of a degree at a private 4 year university by 2018 is $267,308, compared to $30,367 in 2006⁴

Phase 2: Delusion and the Accumulation of Debt

The bubble has been inflated, as witnessed by the rapid growth in tuition that has far outpaced the rate of comparable expenses. Let’s look at how this has impacted the amount of student debt:

• Currently, over 2/3rds of undergraduate students take out student loans
• Between 2008 and 2011, the average debt of a 4 year college student has increased by 17%
  • Average student debt between the years of 2008 and 2011:⁵
    • 2008: $22,650
    • 2009: $24,000
    • 2010: $25,350
    • 2011: $26,500
    • 10% of students borrowed over $40,000 in 2010
    • National student loan debt surpassed $1 trillion dollars earlier this year, roughly 20% higher than the national credit card debt⁶
    • Future student debt is expected to increase, as interest on the subsidized federal student loan is expected to double to 6.8% on July 1^st, 2013, adding on an additional $11,000 to those enrolled in the 20 year payback plans (it was expected to double on July 1^st, 2012 but the current interest rate of 3.4% was extended the day before)

    With increased student debt comes an increased default rate (housing crisis anyone?):

    • Just over 9% of students default on their loans within the first two years after they begin paying them back, with that number increasing to 13.4% within the first three years⁷
    • A report released by the NY Fed last week on Q3 2012 outlines that the percent of student loan balances 90+ days delinquent recently increased to 11%, higher than the current rate for credit cards or any other consumer loans⁸

    Phase 3: The Devaluation of the Degree

    Finally let us look at some statistics that highlight the diminishing value of the degree:

    • Half of the college graduates of the class of 2012 are either jobless or unemployed⁹
    • 56% of bachelor’s degree holders under the age of 25 were either jobless or unemployed, the highest share in over 11 years¹⁰
    • 39% of students under age 25 that do have jobs are working in position that doesn’t require a college degree. That number is 30% for 25-29 year olds¹¹
    • The average earnings for full time workers between 25-34 has dropped 14.7% since 2000¹²

    I think this graph illustrates the situation well:¹³

    

    The higher education bubble is on the brink of bursting, and as a result many students are seeking less expensive and more efficient alternatives to the traditional degree. The expensive mediocrity of higher education won’t last much longer, and innovators are already starting to push forward a revolution that will fundamentally transform the landscape of higher education in the near future.

    Here at Valhalla we embody and embrace this transformation. An integral aspect of communal living is the shared resource pool that is created when a group of compassionate individuals come together and impart their knowledge onto others. Sharing is contagious, and whether it is daily yoga or meditation sessions with X or a quick Final Cut tutorial from Rusty, the house is always abuzz with people sharing and contributing something new. As the world transitions into a knowledge-share economy, control is an illusion and relevance is derived from the co-creation of value. Valhalla is pushing us forward on this front, as we strive to create a world that is predicated on shared value for the community and not the all for one model that has plagued society in the past.

The post The Coming Evolution in Higher Education appeared first on Valhalla Movement.

Photo by Thomas Falkowski.

A Permaculture Pattern Language

Living in the Garden

Problem

Humans claim our place in nature through the garden. Our urban settlements are now for the most part desolate and eroding landscapes that produce no food. Culture in these places is inherently groundless and shallow where it survives at all. Food security and a collective sense of well-being will both be served by the planting and tending of edible landscapes everywhere people live and gather. These create useful work, shape humane spaces, heal soil ad soul at the same time and bolster physical and economic prosperity.

Solution

Therefore, plant productive trees, shrubs and other perennials along streets, in parks and around public buildings. Encourage grazing and harvesting for home use. Invite neighborhoods to take stewardship of public plantings. Give away edible perennials to support the spread of small orchards and forest gardens. Fruit gathering and gleaning is an entry-level opportunity for young entrepreneurs to build social capital. Have some patience, sponsor city food fairs and get local chefs involved.

To manifest this pattern more fully, plant and maintain a fabric of many useful and edible perennials over the broader region, encourage respectful use of the wild and public landscapes and foster development of small land care enterprises. Let all roadways and parking lots be bordered with fruits or nuts and nurture the growth of soils and ecosystems by the regenerative power of trees. Surround those crop trees with supporting plants. Also, maintain grasslands, lawns and meadows with animals whenever practical.

Help spread the psychological benefit of this pattern by making many spaces for public and private gathering out-of-doors. Ensure soil fertility by vigorous cycling of biomass.

The post Living in the Garden appeared first on Valhalla Movement.

Here are a few of examples of such movements.

Transition Initiative

A Transition Initiative (TI) is “a place where there’s a community-led process that helps that town/village/city/neighborhood become stronger and happier.” This is Valhalla for preexisting communities. What starts as a few town people coming together grows into an entire town dividing up tasks, creating a local currency and working together for the good of the collective.

TI is like Valhalla, but for preexisting towns/cities. If you don’t want to go to the extreme of creating your own community from scratch, this is a fantastic way of changing what you have now. The TI website provides mountains of material explaining how to go about starting an initiative in your town, step-by-step.

TI currently has 421 official initiatives & 1000+ registered initiatives in over 34 countries.

Charter Cities

A city created within the borders of one country, but with completely separate rules and regulations from that country. This effectively returns all power to the people, forcing city governments to compete for residents by offering the most popular set of rules.

The idea of Charter Cities was thought up by Paul Romer and presented in a TED talk in 2007. He was later contacted by some Hondurans who wanted his help to present the idea to their government. The initiative was accepted in a landslide vote and construction is currently underway.

Finca Bellavista

A sustainable treehouse community in the beautiful rainforests of Costa Rica. Enough said.

Free and Real

A group of Greek youth became fed up with their economy/government and built a sustainable community on a small island.

The Valhalla Movement

The website you’re on right now! We aim to make communal, sustainable living mainstream. We’re starting by creating our first community in Montreal, Canada on 60 acres of land. Through this first experience we will compile a template for others to do the same in their respective parts of the world.

Together we can create the world our hearts tell us is possible.

Learn more on our Mission Page or watch our videos on our Media Page.

The post 5 Amazing Community Initatives From Around The World appeared first on Valhalla Movement.

First of all, let’s re-state again what anarchism actually is. Rather than being a form of government, it’s a philosophical ideology that condemns authoritarian structures like government, church, police and anything that takes the power and freedom of one individual and transfers it to another. This seems simple, but there are some subtle implications that aren’t interpreted well and need clarification.

1. Humans Can’t Operate Without Authority

Let’s first clarify what authority and your right to self-governance means. Authority happens when someone imposes their will on you at the expense of your own free will and obligates you to obey. That obligation can be enforced directly through the use of force or punishment, or indirectly by withholding your means of living. Nearly all types of authority in the eyes of an anarchist are bad and not worth having.

Not having authority doesn’t mean that people can’t organize, assign tasks, or obey others. What it does mean is that you shouldn’t force someone against their will to do these things. It needs to be consensual. Luckily, most people realize that cooperation and following proper social customs will get themselves much further. However, if you really disagree, you can say “no.” You should always be able to say “no” and have that respected. If that’s not the case, than your humanity is being raped. The phrase “no means no!” should be applicable to more than just sexual domination.

There are obviously a few very clear exceptions that should briefly be mentioned. For example, If time prohibits and you have to make a split second act to save someone from harm using physical, or otherwise, force without their consent, yes this is authoritarian; and yes, it’s acceptable. Common sense is common for a reason, we don’t have to agree on things like this.

You may be thinking, “OK, so authority isn’t always good and it may take away freedoms, but it’s a necessary evil in order for us to live better and ultimately freeer lives.” Touche, Mr. Common Argument. It certainly seems this way. But how do you know? Have you ever experienced non-authoritarian structures to come to this conclusion? Chances are you haven’t, and so this argument is mostly an assumption when approached on a personal level. So to address this properly, we have to resort to our friends: history and science.

Historically

Historically, as mentioned in An Intro to Anarchism, authority often arises to a certain level. It’s only natural. Does that mean it should be the cornerstone of humanity? Absolutely not. It’s a primitive urge that demonstrates lack of maturity in a social environment.

Let’s go back to where authoritarianism was minimal and examine whether an authoritarian system was necessary or beneficial. Today, we are mostly governed by official governments put in place by democracy, dictatorship, revolution, socialism, or through empires. How they got there doesn’t really matter – it’s all authoritarian nowadays. So let’s go back further. The Middle Ages, Roman Era and even Ancient Greece all had authoritarian governments. It may be thought that Ancient Greece was governed through direct democracy with little authoritarian structures, but this isn’t accurate. It had many governments and a class dominated attitude. Even if the Aristocrats overtook local Kings, it was still dictatorship for the people who often didn’t get a say. Later on, Athens invented democracy which gave some say to citizens (except women, children, slaves, and foreigners). Still pretty authoritative. To see truly liberal societies, we need to look at indigenous cultures. There’s obviously a lot of variance within different tribes, so I’ll be making generalized statements here.

A tribe is just another word for community. In these communities, life is simple. There is no organized structure for government. People cooperate, help each other and exist happily in their environment. Still, decisions have to be made on a communal level, and in this respect, tribes are often aristocratic. The wisest, Chief, makes the final decision. However, on such a small scale, opinions are actually heard. So it looks like there’s authority. But here’s the kicker, if you don’t like the decision that was made, you’re free to leave. The consequence is that your communal support is cut off and you have a harder time living. However, unlike today, each individual had the means of survival due to being intimately familiar with their environment. They weren’t a slave to their tribe. There’s no reason to impose any authority in a system like this. And it works just fine. Humanity is preserved and flourishes.

Scientifically

Hobbes once said, life in the state of nature would be “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” That isn’t necessarily the case if you own the means of survival, as you should, like we saw in the tribal example. But what Hobbes was actually referring to by “a state of nature” is life without societal constructs. What he failed to realize, is that societal constructs are built into nature! Humans are inherently social animals. It is to our benefit, on an individual level and evolutionary level, to help each other. In a state of nature, unlike the solitary existence we live in today, humans operate as a group, not as competing individuals.

As social animals that naturally want to coordinate to help further the existence of the community, an external authoritative force that makes sure we do such is redundant and dangerous. At a very fundamental, biological level, we don’t need authority to survive, or to write social contracts, nor to enforce consequences of being anti-social.

These social animals seem to be getting along just fine without an external authority.

If we are social by nature, a solitary existence would be punished by the laws of nature. Just as we saw with the rebellious tribesman that didn’t like the chief’s decision, he retained his freedom but was punished to a solitary existence. Maybe he made his own tribe and found his communal ways again, or maybe a lion ate him. The point is that without an external authority, order arose through nature. Since when has order necessitated a maker?

2. How can there be order without authority?

Order is not manufactured. This is another one of those egotistical human attitudes that thinks, “I order things in the world around me, therefore any order that arises must’ve been ordered by something else.” It’s the same reason we have those burning questions like “what made the Big Bang?” There’s this urge to know what made something so we can connect it with our own existence. So we tend to disregard anything that self assembles. We hate chaos, yet from chaos comes order. So we look for something else, because chaos isn’t a good enough answer.

Our overwhelming urge to force order onto nature sometimes manifests in obvious ways

Tell me something, who puts together atoms and molecules? How, from all of this chaos do they miraculously come together and make chemicals and cells and us? We keep looking for that guiding hand and come up with answers like, “well, there’s this strong and weak nuclear force that holds the atoms together and their consequent polarity attracts other atoms to make molecules and so on.” But that’s still kind of chaotic, there must be a reason for that behaviour? So we ask where these forces come from, and we get stumped. It’s that curiosity to know where order comes from that blinds us from the reality in front of us. I’m not saying it’s bad, it fuels scientific progress. But it also makes us forget that nature is chaos and the more chaotic something is the more chance we have for order to arise from the simplest random directives, or possibly no directives at all.

Atoms and molecules order themselves to form chemicals which order themselves to form the miracle of life. At any given moment we are alive due to an immensely complicated network of communication between different cells in our body, the majority of which don’t contain our own DNA – the supposed code for building who we are. Still we sit and think of where this order must’ve came from while we hurtle through the ordered chaos that is our solar system within a universe that knows no bounds. Chaotic order is not an oxymoron, it’s the mutually dependent parents of nature.

Whether or not we understand the simple rules that emerge from chaotic patterns, it’s been shown time and time again that you only need very simple rulesets to create incredibly complex and evolutionary products. Ever wonder how flocks of birds navigate so eloquently and coordinated without any one leading bird? Well it was replicated in 1986 by Craig Reynolds with only three simple rules. The same goes for our social evolution. Through very simple naturally occurring rules, we coordinate in all of our best interests to form societies. A society is not made by authority, it’s formed through its own internal mechanisms.

Look at where that attitude of not accepting the existence of self-order has brought us. We couldn’t figure out where we came from or what our purpose is and so that burning curiosity evoked ideas in people of Gods that filled the role of puzzle makers instead of the etherial chaotic order of the natural world. These Gods soothed the questions at the expense of reality. Then men (yes, explicitly men) came together to solidify this answer in the form of religion. By the nature of its conception, religion was the authoritarian excuse for the order around us. With the advancements of science, many of the original questions were answered and many of us have come to realize the inutility of religion and counter-productivity of these authoritarian structures dictating our lives. And yet, that attitude hasn’t seeped into the opinion on government even though it’s the natural extension to religion.

Religion became embodied by certain crafty individuals who “interpreted” and distributed the word of God. This is how Kings arose. They were people that provided the certainty of religion to others who ate it up to fill that curious void with a false fantasy. Kings eventually formed monarchies which accumulated wealth and resources due to their “divine right” as King, or God’s interpreter. Religion and government has always been closely tied and are basically the same thing. The attitude of a top down order of things, this false belief stemming from our active imagination, is what allows us to give up our natural self-ordered existence for a more concrete story. Our imagination creates these magical things like Gods, Mythical Creatures, and Good Government because it’s a nicer answer to why things have order.

One of the simple rules that has helped order society has been that all powerful term “self-interest.” It’s in our self-interest to form societies. This does not make us selfish, on the contrary it means we’re naturally altruistic. Unfortunately, religion and government arose from the very same self-interest principle in order to fill the gap we felt due to our overactive imagination. Ironically, it’s the same principle that means there can never be a Good Government since it exists to serve its own self-interest not ours. It will continually grow at the expense of the people that gave it life and power.

I guess you can say government was inevitable, but that’s why we exist. To learn from our mistakes and evolve as people. We seem to have figured it out with religion. There are growing numbers of atheists and anti-theists that realize its origin is in a false belief that limits our growth as humans. The same is true for government. The necessity of government is a false belief. Scientific advancement has discredited most of the need for religion by answering many of its previously unanswerable questions. So then it is with government that our realization in our natural ability to self-order should trump the need for top down order through government.

3. Justice in Anarchism is Impossible Because it’s Authoritative

No, justice is not inherently authoritative. You don’t need someone else to impose a punishment for there to be justice. Karma is one means for justice that is not authoritative. Here’s a practical example: There’s no law against being mean. So, presumably, there’s no reason why everyone isn’t mean, since our justice system is the only thing keeping people in order, right? Then how come very few people are out-right mean to your face? It’s because there are social consequences to being an asshole. If you’re mean to everyone, no one will want to associate with you, and you’ll be lonely. Humans don’t like being lonely and disliked and so that’s enough incentive for most of our population to be civil and amicable.

Being apart of a community is a privilege we all need (with the exception of psychopaths) and for which we should be thankful. Meaning, it can also be revoked without being authoritative. This type of karmic social justice can be very effectively used. In fact, there are tons of studies backing up its effectiveness versus our traditional prison and fining system. Social inclusion is a prime motivator for life and revoking some of its privileges are a powerful form of anti-authoritarian justice.

Justice consists of so many scenarios it would be impractical to address most of them here. However, I have a certain amount of trust in the anarchism’s self-regulation that stems from analyzing a few extreme cases. Just like our current justice system, it’s assumed that if it works for the extreme cases it can be applied down to the little things. These cases will be addressed in detail in future articles. Again, trust is necessary, because it would be naive to think that any system could produce perfect justice. It’s an impossibility, because people do not act rationally and/or predictably. The best we can do is find justice in a system that beneficially addresses as many scenarios as possible while not imposing justice through injustice and maintaining the humanity it’s there to support.

“Liberty can and must defend itself only through liberty.”

- Bakunin

4. Anarchism Doesn’t Account for the “Bad Apples”

It shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone that there are bad apples in any society. People who take advantage of good will, who don’t pull their share, or commit crimes. How do we address that in anarchism?

Pictured Above: Capitalist Apples

One must realize there will always be bad apples in a society. There are two ways of addressing them: control them through the use of authority and/or prevent them. What must be realized too is that we’re a product of the system in which we’re raised. Capitalism, for example, actually breeds people to be selfish and criminal. It quite literally rewards people for taking advantage of others and emphasizes individualistic competition rather than community. Therefore capitalism must resort to mostly physical and psychological control in order to keep the bad apples in line. The bad apples are not natural, they’re a product of the dirty cesspool of a system we call capitalism. The numbers are clear: more capitalism equals more crime.

This is not building humanity, it’s tearing it down. When people are subject to social anarchism where cooperation and community are rewarded, where property doesn’t exist and resources are common, its people are raised to reflect these same attitudes. People don’t take advantage of each other because it would be a form of masochism when you synonymously associate yourself with your community. Hurting your community would be hurting yourself. Stealing isn’t even a concept since ownership doesn’t exist in anarchism.

Of course there are extreme exceptions like psychopaths, who by definition don’t have a concept of socialism or empathy. This is inevitable, but we mustn’t sacrifice the freedom of everyone else for the exceptions. Psychopaths are sick people. Putting them in prison does nothing for them or the community. If an attempt at helping them adapt to society doesn’t work and they can’t live among the rest of us without causing harm, exile would be an appropriate punishment. It isn’t authoritative, it simply revokes the privilege of societal living from those who don’t really want it to begin with.

“Bad apples” can also refer to the argument that, some people just aren’t bright enough to govern themselves. The argument that we need some sort of aristocracy to keep society advancing, or else stupid people will tear it down. The problem with this train of thought is that no one ever makes this argument against their self, because it’s not in their own self-interest. Meaning, nobody ever categorizes themselves as one of the stupid ones. No one ever says, “I’m too stupid to make my own decisions, please make them for me.” Nobody should be the judge of who is to determine who’s inadequate, no matter how short the bus they ride on is.

Another reason why this isn’t a valid concern is that people in a social anarchist society live in community. Community is an integral part of anarchism and consists of all sorts of skills, abilities and intelligence that ranges from both ends of the spectrum. As such, shortcomings in one area are made up for by strengths in another. The less logical decisions can be dissuaded by the better logic of another.

In the next part of this series, we’ll look at the more important question of why anarchism is essential to a good life.

The post Anarchism: The 4 Most Common Misconceptions appeared first on Valhalla Movement.

People always ask questions about How?, What?, Where?, When? and Who? but never Why.

Where is Valhalla?
Who is involved?
What are you trying to build?
When do you plan to start construction?
How are you going to build this community center?

Then it dawned on me. I was reminded of a particular TED talk about the “Golden Circle” something discussed by Simon Sinek in one of the top 10 most popular TED talks of all time. (Video embedded below) He eloquently says:

He couldn’t be more right. Now Valhalla isn’t selling you anything – or looking to have you buy some products or services at its core. At its true core Valhalla is about changing the world. About making sustainable living mainstream – about building the world that we know is possible in our hearts today and not waiting for others to build it for us.

We advocate nothing more or less then action, community, and sustainability as the pillars to successful change.

We believe that each and every human contains their own inner superhero – and Valhalla is merely the training grounds for people to be able to unleash and further develop such. We believe that change starts within the self and is our responsibility – a duty – OUR WHY.

So what struck me? The simplest way I can truly explain it is as follows:
You – ya YOU – have understood our why and it resonates with you.
You also see this as your duty and can no longer wait for change to happen.
You cannot ignore your inner superhero any longer.
You are doing your part to take action.
You believe what we believe!

For this we thank you. I leave you with this quote and inspiring video – simply…

“…because there are leaders and those who lead. Leaders hold a position of power or authority but those who lead inspire us. Whether they are individuals or organizations we follow those who lead – not because we have too – but because we want too. We follow those who lead, not for them, but for ourselves.”
-Simon Sinek

The post Why Valhalla? Simply Because… appeared first on Valhalla Movement.

No one can deny capitalism has encouraged the development of many advanced technologies and effort-saving conveniences. But I wonder how much we’ve actually improved our quality of life? In the capitalist nations of the world, it seems most people are provided with basic necessities, and usually a good deal more. Yet, there are still many in these nations left without enough material wealth to survive. And it seems that most of the people with enough material wealth have little to no wealth in other parts of life. No happiness, no passion: no spiritual wealth.

If capitalism models nature, why isn’t it yielding positive results? Shouldn’t this model, in mimicking nature, provide incentive for the “evolution” of the human condition? Shouldn’t it also sustain itself? I would say capitalism models nature so completely that if you violate certain laws you throw the system out of balance.

As just one example, a basic ecological principle is that diversity supports survival. When an environment contains a wide variety of species then the system as a whole can handle shifts in balance. But, if an ecosystem has limited diversity then even a small shift in balance can have drastic effects. The lack or excess of one species could eventually destroy the entire ecosystem. The less diverse an ecosystem, the more vulnerable the species within it.

Humans violate this through species genocide. Plenty of animals kill for food. But they kill only enough needed for survival. The human is the only animal that kills other species entirely; sometimes we wipe out whole ecosystems. We do this directly when we kill a certain animal. We also do this indirectly by taking resources from the environment so rapidly that the system is thrown out of balance, killing animals in the process.

This rule, and how we violate it, can be applied analogously to capitalism. If there is a large diversity of owners with means of production then the system will be able to weather something happening to a few of them. Now, I feel this picture does justice to what we do instead:

Imagine found on http://wildtreemeals.wordpress.com/  Check out Wildtree for delicious  nutritious food & recipes!

There are still some small brands left; between mom-n-pop stores, farmers’ markets, and starving-artist types. But how much profit goes to them compared to the brands in this picture? I’d be concerned about the answer to that question. It’s no wonder our system is so unstable! By buying so much from, and in doing so giving so much power & support to, so few companies, we make our entire system dependent on these companies! Low diversity, high vulnerability.

And it gets worse! What do businesses have in common with houses, cars, weddings, and a college education? They’re expensive. More importantly, they’re so expensive that most people take out loans to get them. We make our economy incredibly dependent on banks. So much money, and thereby so much power, goes to so few places. The fate of our economy then rests on a small number of powerhouses.

Lastly, a diversity of flourishing businesses would encourage creativity. In turn, this promotes innovation, and inherently more of an evolution in our material condition! Instead we use our money to support economic genocide. These huge brands squash, or simply buy out, any smaller business that has a chance at competition with the big players.

So where do we go from here? First of all, we must make ourselves less and less dependent on these economic powers-that-be. When we become independent of these brands for what we need to survive, we no longer have to buy from (in other words, support) them and the perpetuation of an unsustainable economy. Even buying from the farmers’ market, as opposed to feeding from the hand of Nestle, is a step forward. An even bigger step, which eventually we will have to take, is the ability to provide all of our own necessities. I think it’s needless to say adopting the lifestyle Valhalla aspires to is one way of accomplishing this.

I believe humans could flourish under capitalism. But collectively we have proven ourselves far too immature to do so in the present. Imagine if the majority of humans were to start making purchases consciously – that is with an awareness of which companies practice ethics toward environment, labor, economy, et cetera. Eventually a capitalist economy would make the ethical companies rich and leave unethical ones bankrupt. Also, for a capitalist system to be truly sustainable, economies would need to be more localized (but still connected!) to prevent the current lack-of-diversity predicament.

Unfortunately, we are so deep in, this option seems to be a hope for the far future. Regardless, it would be intelligent for us to acknowledge how much sway capitalism and the companies on top have. If we acknowledge this we can see the importance of working both from within and without this system. At first, by taking ourselves out of this system as much as possible – either through communities such as Valhalla or through other methods – we can escape our dependence on this system. After our independence is established we can start working within the system to transform it. I envision a time when Valhalla-esque communities and like-thinkers can selectively boycott the businesses doing the most harm to our environment and our humanity, and support businesses doing the most good. We can both “create our own grid” economically, while transforming capitalism from within with the intent of molding it into a new, more benign capitalism!

Ultimately, I don’t pretend to know what the “best” system is. Humanity will always be evolving and progressing, and I am sure our idea of how an economy should be run will change along with us. I don’t think there is as much of a “best” system as there are systems which are relevant to the time period and culture. What I am sure of is that if we are to tell ourselves capitalism is good because it models nature, then we need to start acknowledging that how we use capitalism, just as how we use nature, produces results corresponding to how responsible and respectful we have been to the system. I am sure that it is time to start using the capitalism we have built more responsibly, and I am sure that it is time to start experimenting with new economies which might be a more complete representation of nature.

The post Our Capitalism & The Natural World: A Mirror Image appeared first on Valhalla Movement.

Before you start:

• Arm yourself with a reusable water bottle, a couple grocery totes, a few cloth bags and reusable jars and bottles.
• Get your 4Rs right. Refuse-Reduce-Reuse… Recycle only as a last resort.

KITCHEN

1. Welcome alternatives to disposables (paper towels, garbage liners, wax paper, aluminum sheets, disposable plates, cups, etc….): Swap paper towels for reusable rags, swap sandwich baggies for kitchen towels or stainless containers, drop garbage liners all together (wet waste is mostly compostable anyways).
2. Buy in bulk or at the counter (see Zero Waste Grocery Shopping), bring reusable bags (dry goods), jars (wet items such as meat, deli, fish, cheese, oil, peanut butter) and bottles (liquids: oil, soy sauce, shampoo, conditioner).
3. If you cannot find it in bulk, find a supplier (bring your jar to the ice cream shop, a pillow case to the bakery for your bread, or your bottles to the winery/brewery)… or make it ( mustard, salad dressing, hot sauce, jams, OJ, hummus, cookies, canned tomatoes).
4. Shop the farmer’s market: they’ll take the egg carton and the berries baskets back for reuse. Your veggies will also most likely be free of plastic and stickers.
5. Learn to love your tap water.
6. Use bulk castile soap as a dish/hand cleaner, baking soda as a scrubber (in a stainless Parmesan dispenser) with a compostable cleaning brush (a wooden one with natural hair). Choose dishwasher detergent in a cardboard box.
7. Turn your trash can into a big compost keeper. Use your tiny compost keeper as a trash can (on the market, the sizes for these seem to be reversed).
8. Reinvent your leftovers before they go bad. Go thru your recipe binder/box and only keep the recipes that can be achieved with zero waste in mind.
9. Invest in a pressure cooker (halves the cooking time).
10. YOU CAN ALSO… Reuse single-side printed paper for grocery shopping and errands list, use your lettuce cleaning water to water plants, open your oven after baking in the winter (cool your oven, warm your house)…

BATHROOM

1. Use 100% recycled and unbleached toilet paper individually wrapped in paper (if you have solar you could install an electrical washlet to your toilet seat).
2. Use a solution of baking soda/water/lavender essential oil in a spray bottle or an alum stone or straight baking soda (most effective) as antiperspirant.
3. For shaving, (re)use a safety razor and shaving soap (any rich soap, such as Alep soap will do).
4. Refill your bottles with bulk shampoo and conditioner. If your hair is short, you also have the “no-poo” option: rinse your hair, massage baking soda in, then rinse, with vinegar for shine. Or use a shampoo bar. Instead of hairspray, switch to lemon water in a spray bottle (see Recipes). To go longer between washes, substitute dry shampoo for cornstarch (in bulk).
5. For body/face soap, find a package-free solid soap or bulk liquid castile soap. To exfoliate, switch to bulk baking soda or oatmeal for the face and salt for the body. For a mask, switch to bulk clays (French, Kaolin, Bentonite, etc…), mixed with water or apple cider vinegar.
6. Switch from toothpaste to homemade tooth powder (see Recipes), in a glass parmesan dispenser. And until we see a wooden compostable toothbrush “made in the US” on the market, there are no right answers out there yet.
7. Reduce your cosmetics and consider homemade substitutes such as cocoa powder as bronzer and homemade balm that works on eyes, lips, hair and nails (see Recipes) and in lieu of disposable feminine products, invest in menstrual cup and reusable liners.
8. All you need for your nails is a nail clipper, stainless steel file and the homemade balm for moisture and shine.
9. Forget about Q-tips, they are not good for you anyways. Do your research.
10. YOU CAN ALSO… compost hair and nail clippings, put a brick in your toilet tank, collect water in a bucket while your shower heats and water your plants with it, and use zero waste cleaning: microfiber cloths for mirrors, vinegar for mold, baking soda as scrub, a mix of baking soda and vinegar as drain cleaner (see Cleaning and Recipes)…

LAUNDRY AND CLEANING

1. Welcome natural cleaning alternatives: Castile soap on floors and sinks, homemade all purpose cleaner (see Recipes), baking soda for scrubbing jobs, and vinegar for mildew.
2. Welcome alternative house cleaning tools: a metal scourer on stainless, a wooden brush for light scrubbing, an old toothbrush for hard to reach places and microfiber cloths for everything else (counters, floor, fridge, etc… for mirrors and windows, just add water… no window cleaner needed).
3. Sweep your floors with a boar bristle broom, wash with a wet microfiber mop and a few drops of castile soap.
4. Use worn-out clothing items made into rags on your un-washable messes (wax/auto grease/glue/caulk).
5. Buy bulk dishwasher detergent or in a dishwasher detergent in a recyclable cardboard box and use white vinegar as a rinsing aid.
6. Let houseplants absorb toxins and clean your air. Open a window instead of plugging in an air freshener.
7. Laundry washing once a week saves time and dryer energy costs, use eco-friendly laundry detergent, full loads, and cold water cycles as much as possible. Savon de Marseille, dishwasher detergent, lemon or vinegar work great on stains.
8. Dry on a line when possible.
9. Iron fewer things and use a homemade starch in a stainless spray bottle (see Recipes).
10. YOU CAN ALSO… find a sustainable dry cleaner (one that offers a reusable garment bag and non-toxic cleaners), compost dryer lint and dust bunnies…

DINING AND ENTERTAINING

1. Remember to bring extra jars to the grocery store when shopping for company (including take-out).
2. Make finger foods for larger parties and consider serving tap water with lemon slices instead of fizzy water.
3. Use ceramic dishes, cloth dinner napkins and cloth cocktail napkins at all times.
4. Avoid the use of serving platters/dishes: When serving straight onto dinner plates, it simplifies, saves water from extra cleaning, and it allows for a plate presentation.
5. Find creative ways to decorate your table with few napkin folding tricks, discarded leaves/branches from the yard, or just seasonal fruit…
6. Reuse empty votive tins (and the wick base) to make new votive candles for company with bulk beeswax and lead-free wick.
7. Stop buying CD and DVD’s – download music and videos online.
8. Bring a jar of a homemade consumable, or your favorite bulk item wrapped in Furoshiki as a hostess gift. Give the gift of an experience as a birthday present.
9. Educate your friends about your zero waste efforts (so they don’t bring waste into your home)
10. YOU CAN ALSO… bring your own container for leftovers when dining out, use rechargeable batteries for those remote controls, try living without TV for a while…

OFFICE

1. Refuse, and therefore help stop the madness of the free-pen / free-pencil give-aways.
2. Use refillable pens, fountain pens, pencils, white board markers and highlighters and donate extra office material (paper, pencils) to your public school’s art program.
3. Start your personal junk mail war, cancel your phone directories, and sign up for electronic bills and statements.
4. Reuse single-side printed paper for printing or making notepads held by a metal clip, reuse junk mail response envelopes and buy recycled paper products, packaged in paper.
5. Ditch the trash can, strive to use your compost and recycling bins exclusively.
6. Use, Reuse and Request recyclable paper packing material when shipping (incl. paper tape), print postage and addresses directly on your envelopes, use surface mail, use a return address stamp instead of stickers.
7. Reuse paper clips (available in bulk) instead of staples, or a staple-free stapler.
8. Use your library to read business magazines and books, sell your books or donate them to your library for other people to enjoy.
9. Use memory sticks and external drives instead of CD’s.
10. YOU CAN ALSO… use a power strip on your equipment, recycle your printer cartridges and cell phone, donate your unused computer to Goodwill, make paper with double-side printed paper, take unused packing material to your local shipping center…

CLOSET

1. Stick to minimal wardrobes, shoes and purses.
2. Only shop a couple times a year to avoid compulsive buys.
3. Buy mostly second-hand.
4. When buying new, buy quality with minimal tags (leave the shoe box at the store).
5. Be ruthless on fit, if it fits well, you’re most likely to wear it.
6. Bring a reusable bag for your purchases.
7. Donate unworn pieces (the most forgiving rule of thumb deadline being one year).
8. Keep some of your worn-out clothes for rags and label the rest as “rags” for Goodwill to recycle.
9. Learn of few sewing tricks (like shortening a hem).
10. YOU CAN ALSO… take it to the tailor to fit it better so you’ll actually wear it, and keep a handkerchief in each one of your purses/bags…

MEDICATION

1. Keep only a minimal supply, so you can see what you have.
2. Ask your pharmacy to reuse your prescription jar. It’s illegal for pharmacies to refill them in CA, but your state might allow it..
3. Choose tablets (pain reliever, for example) in a glass or at default a plastic jar (usually a recyclable #2), instead of the tablets individually wrapped in aluminum/plastic and a box.
4. Do not buy jumbo size medication jars, they expire way before you can finish them.
5. Choose metal tubes instead of plastic.
6. Invest in a Neti pot: Great to clear out your sinuses with just water and sea salt.
7. Consider a few natural alternatives: a corn silk tea for prostate relief, a senna leaf tea for constipation relief or an oatmeal bath for skin relief.
8. Clean cuts and scrapes with soap and water, forgo the plastic band-aids and let air-dry.
9. Do not use everyday antibacterial products, they make bad bacteria stronger.
10. YOU CAN ALSO… reconsider your true need for vitamins (as opposed to a healthy varied diet) and use sunscreen moderately…

GARDENING

1. Use drought tolerant and native plants, replace your lawn with short native grasses.
2. Make room for compost, pee in your citrus and compost. Consider a worm composter for liquid fertilizer, a separate pet composter for your dog’s feces.
3. Return plastic containers to the nursery.
4. Find bulk seeds.
5. Give away plants (also, landscaping rocks, fencing, irrigation piping, etc…) that you do not want anymore. Post them on the free section of Craigslist.
6. Find a bulk garden center, and get your dirt, rocks, compost, etc… in reusable sand bags.
7. Consider investing in an irrigation controller with a rainwater sensor.
8. Install rainwater and gray water catchments (check your city ordinances for the latter).
9. YOU CAN ALSO… Keep a minimal and quality tool selection made of metal and wood (which can be repaired more easily)…

The post Simple Ways to Become More Sustainable NOW appeared first on Valhalla Movement.

Pm Press has released a second edition of John Curl’s 550 page history of “cooperation, cooperative movements, and communalism in America,” In this interview, Michael Johnson talks with John about what is new in the second edition, the surprisingly long history of co-operatives here in the US, and what his history has to tell us about building a 21st century movement for a co-operative/solidarity economy.

John’s life has been steeped in co-operatives. He has been a member for over 30 years in the Heartwood Co-operative Woodshop in Berkeley, CA, where he lives. He has belonged to numerous other co-operatives and collectives. In addition to being a historian of extensive research, he is a poet, woodworker, social activist, and has even been a city planner. He is also co-writing a book on how worker co-operators in the Valley Alliance of Worker Co-operatives are harnessing the power of the co-operative difference. Janelle Cornwell and Adam Trott, VAWC staff person, are fellow co-writers.

[Editor's Note: Throughout the text we will spell the word for "co-operative enterprises" with a hyphen and the word for "being cooperative" without it.]

On the second edition of For All the People

MJ: John, let’s start with how the second edition of For All the People differs from the first one.

JC: The second edition has three additional pieces.

1) A foreword by novelist and essayist Ishmael Reed.

2) A new preface by myself that discusses developments of the last four years. The first edition came out just as the economy was collapsing into the Great Recession. In the second edition I discuss the United Nations study which shows that worker co- operatives and all cooperatives around the world have fared better than standard capitalist corporations during these hard times. I discuss the reasons why the UN declared 2012 the International Year of Cooperatives. I discuss the limited equity co-operatives created through squatting in the urban homestead movement in New York City. I discuss the Food Hub movement, a spontaneous rural cooperative movement on a national scale. I discuss the United Steel Workers Union’s partnership with Basque Spain’s Mondragon International to develop manufacturing cooperatives in the US and Canada. Finally I discuss the World Social Forum’s movement to reclaim the world commons, and cooperative management of the commons.

3) The second edition has an additional section of almost 100 pages containing my in-depth investigative report on the rise and demise of the Food System movement of the 1970s, focused on its two most successful centers: the Bay Area and the Minneapolis Twin Cities. The Food System movement was integral to the beginnings of natural and organic food in the US. This movement was particularly revealing because on the one hand it was a spontaneous grass-roots movement that arose in many locations around the country, and also because in those two urban centers it was entered into by small outside groups with ostensibly radical ideologies, which tried to take it over, and involved government undercover agents. Both of those entryist groups caused intense internal strife that sped the movement’s demise in those locations. In comparison I also discuss the movement’s rise and fall in locations not affected by those small radical groups. I look at the successes and shortcomings of that movement as a whole.

MJ: “Entryist?”

JC: Yes. A political group is accused of “entryism” when it enters into another group and tries to take it over or transform it.

MJ: How well would the metaphor of “the 1%” and “the 99%” fit the story you tell of the ups and downs of co-operative economics in the US?

JC: Leaving the 99% metaphor aside for the moment, I would say that co-operative economics today can become an important option for about half the population, those with more limited wealth or income. Co-operatives mean that people with insufficient resources pool what they have in order to get onto a more level economic playing field.

Historically, the metaphor of “the 1% and the 99%” is redolent of the decades after the American Civil War, an era of great social upheaval and strife. Wealth was being consolidated into increasingly fewer hands, while working people were becoming impoverished. American capitalism was consolidating its domination of the country, and that was emphatically opposed by the vast majority of the working population of industrial workers and farmers. The two latter groups set up organizations based in co-operatives, and at first challenged capitalism on economic terms, trying to build counter institutions that they hoped would supersede capitalism. When the plutocracy destroyed their co-operatives, they made an effort to gain power though electoral politics. This era culminated in the defeat of all the working people’s organizations and the triumph of the “Robber Barons.” Nonetheless, the era is filled with inspiring dramas of ordinary people daring to follow their dreams, endeavors that still resonate with relevance.

Today’s metaphor of “the 1% and the 99%” arises from the reality that wealth in the US is quickly being redistributed again from a larger number of people into the hands of a tiny elite. While large numbers of people are increasingly impoverished and marginalized, a handful is amassing power in the form of money and capital.

MJ: I like the phrase you just used: “the working population of industrial workers and farmers.” For two reasons. First, we tend to forget that both groups have very strong connections, which I am going to ask about later. Second, it’s refreshing to hear them referred to beyond being an economic class without that fact being brushed aside.]

JC: Independent self-employed small farmers and wage earners had a close relationship throughout the later 19^th century. That was before the age of corporate farming, and the overwhelming majority of farmers were very small. Today it’s still hard to make a living as a small farmer, and many of them have another job on the side these days, so most still know what it’s like to be a wage worker.

But, as you state, “the 1% and the 99%” is a metaphor. Those are not really statistics. The numbers are there to make certain points, and bear no relationship with any statistical class analysis. The concept of class in the US is subjective, tricky, and constantly changing. To imply that there are two economic classes in the US, the 1% and the 99%, is to muddy up the waters very badly, rather than shedding light where it is sorely needed. Does the 98^th percentile have more in common with the upper 1% or the lowest 20%? Compare the metaphor of “the 1% and the 99%” with Romney’s metaphor of “the 47%.” If 99% were really opposed to the 1% seizing the wealth, then this could not possibly continue; but in fact a much larger percentile than 1% actually support it and just want to get in on the action. There are a lot more shameless predators out there than just 1%. To grossly underestimate the strength of the opposition seriously weakens you.

The long history of co-operatives in the US

MJ: One of the most interesting discoveries for me in reading For All the Peoplewas how early on co-operatives and worker co-operatives emerged in the US, even before 1800. Does this reflect something special about our history or just how integral cooperation is in human life?

JC: Both. Cooperation is the basis of human society. However, most societies today have been deformed and oppressed by small authoritarian groups for a very long time. But the dynamics of cooperation do not die, because they are so essential to a decent life. I would say cooperation is the norm because it can be suppressed but it cannot be destroyed. The essential concepts of cooperation are instinctive to most people, particularly when they are young. Look at the way kids get together in the park and organize a game. Or groups of musicians get together regularly as improvised cooperatives. Or young parents form play groups for their kids. In all of these situations people spontaneously self-organize activities based on freedom, direct democracy, and a general equality. Many people only experience cooperation outside of their work lives, in their private lives, with family, friends, and associates. But cooperative instincts always remain there inside the human condition like seeds waiting for the right conditions. When an oppressive society reaches a dead end, a new generation rejects the dying husk and reinvents its world, and that creative act is always based on mutual aid and cooperation.

MJ: Before you go on to your answer to the second part of the question—that is, how cooperation has been an important part of American history—I want to challenge you a bit on your saying “most societies today have been deformed and oppressed by small authoritarian groups for a very long time.” It touches an issue that is very central to how we strategize as a movement.

Basically, I find that thinking about oppression is a very tricky thing. Frequently we assume that it is the “oppressors” that cause oppression. Some very acute thinkers like Paulo Freire in his classic “The Pedagogy of the Oppressed” argue very strongly that oppression is a joint project of the ‘oppressor’ and the ‘oppressed’. And it would seem that every liberation movement—civil rights, gays and lesbians, women, etc.—is essentially the story of people empowering themselves by not accepting the role of the ‘oppressed.’

JC: Human nature is very complex, and we all have seeds of the oppressor in us. Power really does corrupt. Historically many leaders of rebellions have wound up as oppressors. But that is no reason to eschew rebellion or power. Chickens really do have a pecking order. It is instinctive. Dogs really do run in packs, and become instinctively submissive to the pack leader. People, on the other hand, have many conflicting instincts. I agree that oppressed majorities are enablers of ruling elites. That is the role they have been educated to play. When large numbers of ordinary people refuse to accept the submissive role, societies change. But people need to believe that social change is possible. If they think their only option is to exchange one oppressor for another, they will usually choose to accept their victimization and try to make the best of it. That is why counter institutions are so important, because they are living demonstrations that better social relationships are possible and within our grasp. They are possible because, besides the seeds of the oppressor within us, we also have the seeds of mutual liberation within us, the instincts of cooperation, of sharing, democracy, equality, extended family.

Now, to your question about “how cooperation has been an important part of American history.” America’s unique history did encourage mutual aid and cooperation. Indigenous America was largely based on cooperation and tribal collectivity. Every wave of immigrants to America, arriving from different parts of the globe, had to start from scratch. They pooled their resources and through mutual aid lifted themselves from poverty and oppressive situations. Most of the wagon trains headed west were cooperatives. When settlers built new towns it was primarily through mutual aid and cooperation. No one came to America with the goal of becoming a wage slave. Industrial workers were trapped into oppressive situations by circumstance. They turned to mutual aid in order to form unions which were usually also cooperatives. Many workers saw a path to liberation through worker cooperatives in their industries. This culminated in the Knights of Labor’s plan to build a cooperative commonwealth that would supersede the capitalist system.

However, while the government eventually recognized the importance of co-operatives and promoted them in rural areas, particularly during the New Deal, government policy at the same time did not facilitate worker co-operatives in industrial areas, since worker co-ops challenge the wage system and thereby threaten the power of the establishment.

Farmer and labor movements and Co-operatives

MJ: Another very interesting finding for me was a) the extensive connections between farmers and urban workers in the late 19^th century when industrialization, the “Robber Barons,” and the dominance of bankers hit America full force, and b) the major role that both worker and consumer co-operatives played in connecting farmers and workers at that time. Can you expand on that a bit? Also, what can we take from this history that would help us move out of our marginality? For example, is there a way suggested by that history to connect the new, local, ecologically-minded farmers with today’s worker co-operatives and labor movements?

JC: Key to understanding the extensive connections between farmers and industrial workers in the late 19^th century is the Homestead Act of 1862, when Abraham Lincoln, in the middle of the Civil War, opened hundreds of millions of acres of western land to people who were willing to settle and farm it. That was a payoff waiting for eastern workers fighting the war. After the war large numbers of returning Northern soldiers flooded west and became farmers. So these were people who knew both worlds. If not themselves, then others in their families had been industrial workers. Workers and farmers knew they were up against the same enemies. In the post-war world that emerged, Robber Baron industrialists were driving eastern workers into the pits of wage-slavery, while railroad barons held farmers hostage to exorbitant freight rates and banks manipulated them to steal their land. Meanwhile, new waves of immigrants filled the eastern factories. But these too did not come to America to be wage slaves, and the dream of large numbers was to become farmers. So they were natural allies.

Both groups turned to co-operatives in their struggle. The farmers formed cooperatives in every aspect of supply, production, and distribution that otherwise had been dominated by banks, corporations, and railroads. Industrial workers turned to worker cooperatives in their industries, and consumer co-ops for home consumer goods, in order to break out of the corner that employers and the business community had trapped them in. When the co-operatives of both groups came under fierce attack, they allied with each other, turned to electoral politics and came together in the Populist Party, the most successful “third” party in American history.

But we can’t re-create that history today. History is an always unique set of circumstances. Today ecologically-minded farmers, worker cooperatives and the labor movement meet in the larger movement for sustainable social and economic justice. For example, many ecologically-minded farmers are involved with the “food justice” movement to bring good food to today’s “food deserts” in poorer communities. Much of that is done through farmers markets and co-op stores. Farmers’ markets themselves are largely cooperative, usually in conjunction with local communities and community non-profits. It is unrealistic to expect a direct organizational connection between (for example) a small organic farm and a co-operative print shop. But both might have a natural tendency toward using each other’s products and services, and that is mutual aid. Organizational networks like the Bay Area Network of Worker Cooperatives (NoBAWC) organize email listservs where large amounts of information connecting groups closer together are distributed. Groups devoted to assisting connections between disparate cooperatives perform a very valuable role, but the connective tissues and channels are by nature in continuous flux.

The mammals and the dinosaurs: getting down to the right size

MJ: Okay, drawing this cooperative connection between the working population of today and 125-50 years ago brings up another set of key questions. The co-operative movement and radical unionizing seemed to have peaked in the US in this same earlier 19^th century period. For sure their vitality and size stands in stark contrast to what is happening now. Today worker co-ops play a minimal role socially and economically, and unions are in their 4^th decade of steep decline.

• Is this an accurate reading?

• If so, are accurate future prospects bleak? Upbeat? Unknown?

• Or do we need to think about these kinds of questions in larger frames, like a multi-generational time frame?

• Also, is the recent collaboration between Mondragon and the United Steel Workers an indication of a new emerging vitality or just another positive effort?

JC: Government promotion of rural and farm cooperatives became national policy as part of the recovery efforts of the New Deal. Rural America was transformed by co-operatives in the 1930s. Besides farmer supply and distribution, co-ops brought electricity and water for drinking and irrigation to most of the rural US. Co-operatives are still strong in many rural areas and a part of everyday life today, and are still promoted by the government there.

Yes, unions continue to be in steep decline, due in large part to anti-labor legislation. Severe legal restrictions keep unions weak. And the current electoral system, based on the domination of money, is geared to produce legislators dedicated to keeping it that way. Only a complete breakdown of the current system will open the window wide enough for large-scale change today.

Yet large-scale change is inevitable in the 21^st century. The current economic system cannot deal with the population continuing to explode, with climate change severely altering the situation, with the accelerating disparity between rich and poor. An enormous gulf is opening between a tiny elite and a mass of marginalized people. It is among the marginalized that the new shape of the co-operative movement will emerge. They will form economic and political organizations based on mutual aid and cooperation, because they will have to, in order to survive.

Meanwhile, social activists and visionaries are creating the backup. Unified through auspices of the United Nations, a world co-operative movement is emerging, based on an alliance of co-op activists, the labor movement, civil society nonprofits, and governments promoting co-operatives as an economic development strategy. It is only through this type of mutual aid that the new century can shape a successful and sustainable world.

And yes, the recent collaboration between Mondragon and the United Steel Workers is an indication of a new emerging vitality. Many unions are rethinking their structure, goals and missions. The straight jackets that have suffocated unions can be broken by new creative strategies. After all, unions are, at their core, organizations of mutual aid among workers. Their larger goal is not to make the deck chairs on the Titanic a little more comfortable, but to create the bases for a good life for their members and for the entire working population.

MJ: John, you’re sketching some awesome pictures here: “Large-scale change is inevitable in the 21^st century,” and it will require “a complete breakdown of the current system.” It seems terrible and wonderful at the same time. Please, say more.

JC: The only way this economic system can be maintained in the long run, is through widespread repression. Repression can take place almost invisibly, behind closed doors, one person at a time. That’s the way it’s taking place today. Like all those people evicted one by one from their homes. There doesn’t have to be tanks in the streets. The current world economic system is dysfunctional. The future it offers is increasing enrichment for the tiny elite at the top and increasing impoverishment for large numbers who were once “middle class.”

Many social rebellions have started under similar circumstances, when large numbers who once knew a fairly good life find it suddenly pulled out from beneath them. On the other hand, people will almost always accept bleak circumstances when they see no alternative. Once in a while they may riot, but that is usually just a tantrum, and usually accomplishes almost nothing constructive. Only when radical visionaries convince large numbers that another economic system is possible, can a constructive rebellion be set in motion.

Ours is essentially a non-violent rebellion, because our means need to always reflect our ends. We need to build the new world and to the degree we are successful, the old system will collapse by its own weight. That is not to say that we will automatically win. In times of great social change there are no sure bets. The world could sink into an era of barbarism. But I don’t think that will happen. I think a generation will rise to the challenge and create a better world for our great grandchildren.

MJ: John, one last follow-up on this. You say that we need to be nonviolent and that “We need to build the new world and to the degree we are successful, the old system will collapse by its own weight.” Are you pointing to a strategy of building a “co-operative system”—if you will—parallel to the oppressive system we are struggling within right now. If so, does the way co-operatives transformed rural America in the 1930s suggest how to approach this?

JC: The worker cooperative movement in the US should follow the United Nations directive to forge a partnership with allies in government and civil society, because only with deep backing from those sectors can cooperatives grow extensive enough to transform our world.

Yes, the New Deal alliance that institutionalized cooperatives in rural America is a role model. Even the banking sector participated constructively in it, with the rural Banks For Co-operatives program. We need to build counter institutions not as an isolated sector, but integrated into the existing economy as we build them one by one. They are basically institutions for the increasingly large numbers of our people who are being marginalized and excluded from the mainstream capitalist system, as well as people alienated and disgusted by the oppressive working conditions. When people learn to work together, pool resources and help each other through mutual aid institutions, we will all be stronger and more prosperous. A strong co-operative movement among marginalized people can be a transformative social force. I don’t expect the mainstream capitalist system to disappear soon. We have to plan to live with it as much as possible. But it inevitably goes through cycles of boom and bust. The co-operative sector is affected by those booms and busts, but not as much as capitalist enterprises. Bust times, like now, are a stimulus to the co-operative sector. The Great Recession may be a new normal, a situation that will persist through this generation at least.

I’ll try to clarify what I meant when I talked about the old system collapsing of its own weight. I think the world is changing so that the current mainstream economic system is becoming like those gigantic dinosaurs that became increasingly unable to cope. Scientists tell us that during the age of dinosaurs mammals began as small furry creatures, and birds began as little feathered dinosaurs. The gigantic dinosaurs collapsed of their own weight when they became irrelevant to the new emerging world. This can be a model for the co-operative movement in this century.

MJ: Your reference to the dinosaurs and mammals reminds me of something I have just been reading. It was a talk by John G. Bennett, who died in the 1970s. He was a guy who seems to have done a lot of deep thinking about almost everything. He refers to one of the overarching values in our culture being the conviction that “more is better.” He uses the example of the dinosaur not only to refute this idea, but, just as you have, to point to the inevitable collapse of our dinosaur institutions. He then goes on to identify the mammals as the alternative, again as you have. He emphasizes two things about the mammals. One is that it is driven to become the “right size,” not bigger and bigger. Evolution favors the “fittest” not the “biggest.” His second point is about community, that mammals are internally small communities of cells and organs that are the ‘right size’ and that the most evolved thrive in small communities that are of the right size.

JC: Maintaining growth at a sustainable size is a key to success for individual co-operatives and the movement. Capitalist enterprises are typically swept up into the unending spiral of “grow or die.” Historically many co-operatives have gotten caught in that destructive cycle, including the old Berkeley Co-op, which collapsed after 50 years in 1988. [MJ: John tells this story in rich detail in the book.] To be sustainably successful, the co-operative movement needs to reject that model. Centralized, top-down, vertical growth of any co-op system invariably leads to collapse, whether by bankruptcy or being swallowed by capitalism. The structure of an extensive and sustainable movement involves horizontal growth of interconnected autonomous co-ops. Each individual co-op needs to find its “right size,” and be satisfied with that important accomplishment. Co-operatives are a movement with not one but thousands of centers and an unlimited periphery. Numerous people throughout America and around the world are now coming to realize the transformational possibilities of co-operatives, particularly worker co-operatives. It is a family of ideas whose time has come. With thousands of creative minds approaching the work from different perspectives, a dynamic moment is upon us; where it will lead is limited by only our practical imagination.

21^st Century: bringing on a Co-operative America

MJ: In a short section titled “Does It Have To Be This Way?” you raise the issue of worker co-operatives having in fact been not only marginalized but actually “planned out of the economy” in our country. Planned out of the economy! That’s a big claim. However, you didn’t expand on that. Can you do that here? I am asking for that because it cuts to the heart of a major issue for co-operative economy and all of the movements for a new kind of economy. Namely: Is it possible for our small, marginalized worker co-op movement here in the US to become more than a passionate outcry against economic injustice and become a real hope for creating an economy “for all the people”?

JC: While urban and industrial worker co-operatives were planned out of the US economy, rural and farmer co-operatives were planned into the economy by the New Deal. The contrast is stark. In the rural case, there was a general national consensus that rural America could prosper only if the government promoted co-operatives. And so it happened. The opposite took place in urban and industrial areas, the stronghold of the wage system. The New Deal stopped their promotion of co-operatives at city limits. They were trying to save and revitalize industrial capitalism, not replace it, and that required not doing anything to threaten the labor pool.

Now we are in a very different situation. For many decades Americans have known a thriving flexible “middle” class and a general prosperity. That prosperity came about at the end of World War II, because all the other nations were flat on their backs and the US was the only one left standing. There was so much US wealth at the end of the war that for a while all ships rose. However, Americans were told the lie that prosperity was brought about by the capitalist system. Now that lie has finally played itself out. We are in the end game. Capitalism in America has always been geared to bringing prosperity to a tiny elite and oppression and poverty to everyone else. Now almost all ships are sinking and will continue to sink under this system. The system has to change, and the path of greatest benefits with least dangers is to promote mutual aid and worker co-operatives as national policy. That means opening the economic system to large numbers of worker co-operatives and other social enterprises, so that many more millions of people can have good jobs providing goods and services for each other. The worker co-operative movement of recent years may have started as a passionate marginalized voice crying in the wilderness, but we are now entering a world where large numbers of people realize that all the old answers have failed and if we want a decent world for our children and grandchildren, we must all become visionaries and reinvent the economic system of the future.

If you examine areas in the world where cooperatives are a significant, permanent sector of the economy, such as the Emilia-Romagna region of Italy, you will see that the government there has organized the economic playing field to make that possible, with advantages granted to co-operatives in recognition of their promotion of social justice and prosperity. There is no such thing as a “free market.”  Markets and economic systems are always organized and regulated by governments. In a just society, the government’s role is to level the playing field as much as possible. In this situation, where wealth is vastly unequal, the government can help to balance that inequality through advantages to co-operatives. It will be a struggle to get there from where we are today in the US, but at some point soon the social fabric will become explosive, and perhaps that will prompt the government to act.

MJ: John, I just want to go a little further into this because the possibilities you are discussing here are big. From the little that I know, it seems that the New Deal’s rural co-operative achievements got substantially reversed. For sure it has worked well in helping create credit unions and utility cooperatives in rural areas—electric, telephone, etc., and maybe some farmer co-ops. However, haven’t many, if not most, of the agricultural co-operatives the New Deal helped create been flipped into giant industrial agricultural businesses? Businesses that are undemocratic, wage-based “co-operatives?” This certainly seems to be the case just looking at the list on the Wikipedia page.

JC: Michael, even very large agricultural co-operatives are not corporate agribusiness farming as practiced by giant vertically integrated firms such as Monsanto, Dow, and DuPont, which dominate much of American agriculture today. Agricultural co-ops, small and large, are owned by their members for services, while agribusiness corporate farms are owned by investors and stockholders for profit, like all capitalist corporations. Typical members of farm co-ops are still family farms. Large agricultural co-ops can have organizational problems similar to those of all large democratic organizations. For efficiency sake they can concentrate power in a small board, which can sometimes act like a corporate board alienated from members. But a co-op doesn’t have to be enormous to have those kinds of problems. One of the knottiest issues is labor: a farmer co-op can wind up acting in its narrow self-interest just as an employer. Even Mondragon in many of its international enterprises, where it has not been organizing workers to become member-owners, has slipped into that contradictory role as an employer, although it seems to be generally a benevolent boss.

That said, let’s take a look at a few typical agricultural co-ops on the Wikipedia list:
“Southern States Cooperative is an agricultural supply cooperative owned by more than 300,000 farmers…” “Ocean Spray… currently has over 600 member growers.” “Dairy Farmers of America, Inc… is owned by and serves nearly 16,000 dairy farmer members representing more than 9,000 dairy farms in 48 states.” “Riceland Foods, Inc [has] 9,000 members who are farmers in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Texas.” “The Tillamook County Creamery Association (TCCA)… includes 110 dairy farms, mostly within Tillamook County.” Sunkist Growers, Incorporated is… composed of 6,000 members from California and Arizona.” “Land O’Lakes is a member-owned agricultural cooperative [with] about 3200 producer-members, 1000 member-cooperatives…”
None of these, as far as I know, has abandoned its co-operative structure and been changed into a corporate farming operation. All are still serving real farmers. Co-operatives are still a core support of the continued viability of family farming.

Behind the familiar labels of those produce brands on the Wikipedia list, there really are numerous independent farms which use the co-operative structure to market their crops, and prevent corporate agribusiness from totally taking over.

MJ: Okay, let’s move on. John, this may be a bit of a stretch for you in your role as a historian: if it is possible for worker co-ops and the co-operative/solidarity movement to become a significant force in American politics—if, for example, worker co-ops and other forms of urban co-operatives were a publicly supported economic institution as you were just suggesting—can you imagine what that would look like? You are a woodworking artist. Can you look at the raw wood of these co-operative institutions and the current American landscape and visualize what could be?

JC: Actually it’s not that much of a stretch for me. In my opinion the world economic system is collapsing and will continue to collapse in the near future. The existing system cannot deal with the magnitude of problems that confront us. Historically a state of collapse can often result in a stark authoritarian regime. But it can also result in an energized population re-envisioning and redesigning the system. In the US, where we have a highly developed civil society, the latter is very possible. I think the landscape would look complex and multi-sourced. I see nonprofits and foundations becoming a major supplier of back-up and organizational tools to help worker cooperatives get off the ground and be successful. I see communities getting involved, with social enterprises, mixed organizations where the worker co-operative is one stakeholder and the community is another. I see communities turning to these types of co-operatives as an economic development strategy, to reduce or eliminate poverty. I see major nonprofit institutions such as schools or hospitals in the interest of community giving preference to local worker co-ops for goods or services. I see cutting-edge environmental organizations helping worker co-ops to find and invent new niches to fill. I think it can be a broad project under a big umbrella that will inspire the youth, offer them new creative possibilities.

Accepting the difficulties of cooperating

MJ: Finally, I have a question that looks at how the movement—co-operators, co-ops, and our networking institutions—have failed. How we contributed toward our own marginality. 

My question has nothing to do with finding blame. It comes from wondering what might happen if we were learning more and more how to cooperate more deeply than we do. To manage our own rivalries and conflicts with each other better than we do. To empower ourselves personally and collectively in greater ways. I think our potential for cooperation and self-empowerment is far greater than we think, and we desperately need it to move forward.

For example, many co-operatives struggle with doing worker self-evaluations horizontally. That kind of honesty is a real challenge, but failing at it can be very costly. Or: the tension between some managers in food co-ops and workers who want to form worker co-ops. This kind of situation can get real heavy.

So I am asking if you have thoughts on how this played out over the past 200 years here in the US, and how important it may be now. Also, please speak from your own long experience as a worker co-operator.

JC: I think activists need to accept the reality that not everybody is very political, and never will be. You have to start with people as they are, and not demand more than they can freely contribute. This is, after all, mutual aid. In the variety of human consciousness, some people cannot see beyond their own skin. Those people are not good material for co-operatives. Some others just relate to their immediate family, or extended family, and everyone beyond those is an outsider to them. Some people identify strongly with groups such as ethnicity, nationality, religion, or even dog lovers or fans of a certain musician or a type of music or a certain sports team.

On the other extreme are people who are multi-cultural and international, who see themselves as part of a global human family. Or even larger, a great family of all life on earth. Or beyond earth: feeling at one with the universe. Most of us are somewhere in between. We each need to make the contributions that feel right to us and not be harsh on each other for shortcomings. Unrealistic expectations can result in bitter disappointment. And for no good reason since unrealistic expectations doom the situation from the beginning.

You have to accept that in a group or one-on-one not everybody is compatible. In my co-operative woodshop, which we started in 1974, I have seen quite a variety of personality types. Some fit in better than others. For example, one issue that was hard for a handful of people was territoriality. These people simply appeared to have a ‘territorial gene,’ and there was nothing they or anybody else could do about it. I’m talking about bench space. In my shop we share bench space. But that was extremely painful for these people. They appeared to need their own space clearly defined and had great difficulty sharing that space with anybody else. For the most part, these people just stayed in the shop briefly, and found another location where they did not have to share bench space. To generalize from that, members of a successful co-operative each need a space where they feel comfortable. Not every combination of people works. It’s not very different from a sports team or a band. If two people can’t work together, the group has to find another arrangement, or one of them should probably leave. That’s not a big deal. It’s just the way of human society. Co-operatives are not for everybody. Diversity is good, and there should be places in society for lone wolves, but they should not be permitted to take control of society.

Looking at the big picture, the option of working in a co-operative could improve the lives of the vast majority. Life passes too quickly to squander it in an oppressive work situation. In contrast, a life spent in cooperation and mutual aid in daily activities is a life well spent. Besides, it makes you feel good.

** This article was originally published on Geo.coop **

The post Lessons for Building a Co-operative Movement appeared first on Valhalla Movement.

Grasses are great at feeding grazing animals. This was their primary cultivated use throughout history. Afterwards, they became more of an ornamental feature in 16th century gardens because of their uniformity – bitches loved uniformity in the 16th century. Fast forward to today and we haven’t changed anything. Don’t get me wrong, there’s nothing wrong with an ornamental lawn; but at least choose a plant that’ll serve its purpose well. Unless you keep grazing animals beside your pool, your lawn is almost completely useless and in some cases harmful.

So without further ado, here are 6 reasons why grass lawns suck and a great alternative that actually makes sense.

1. They Need Constant Trimming

If you want a lawn that remains a short length, why on earth should you continue to use a plant that grows several feet high. This makes no sense. You need to cut it every week or so using a lawn mower. This is laborious and contributes to noise and air pollution.

At Valhalla, we use white clover as our all purpose lawn plant. It grows to a maximum of about 6″ so we never have to cut it.

At Valhalla, we opted for white clover.On the right is X laying out a path with bricks near some clover patches. We didn’t even need to cut it! 

2. It Destroys Your Soil

Why are we throwing these heaps of great organic matter away?!

Grass in itself doesn’t deplete your soil, but the way we treat it does. It’s a pretty intensive plant and as such requires a lot of soil nutrients and water. At the end of its life cycle it’s supposed to fall back to the ground and eventually degrade back into the soil, serving its purpose and keeping the soil rich. Unfortunately, we end up cutting the grass and throwing it away along with all the nutrients it took from the ground.

Clover not only doesn’t deplete your soil, since you don’t throw it away, it enriches it by turning nitrogen in the air into a usable form for plants in the earth. Nitrogen is one of those soil nutrients that help grow big and healthy plants. So merely by growing clover you can fertilize your lawn.

Which brings me to my next point:

3. Grass Lawns Usually Need Fertilizing

Most people need to fertilize their lawns to keep it looking healthy. Many use synthetic fertilizers that cost more money, kill your soil’s microbial life, and pollute water. ‘Nuff said.

4. They Also Require Frequent Watering

Grass requires a lot of watering to stay healthy. This once again adds to the labour required for upkeep.

Clover, on the other hand, has deeper tap roots that can access more water and is therefore more drought tolerant. It’ll stay green during a hot dry summer long after your grass has turned a dusty yellow. It’ll also survive further into the winter than grass. Also, unlike short grass, a clover lawn will provide a nice canopy for surface water so it won’t evaporate as fast.

5. Grass Doesn’t Get Along With Other Plants

Grass grows very tightly together which is why it’s great for high foot traffic or playing fields. It also spreads fast and well. So if you need a soccer field, this is your choice. But that’s not we’re talking about when we think of a lawn. A lawn doesn’t get that much aggressive traffic. In fact, like we’ve established, it’s more of an ornamental feature that’s often paired with a garden. So why would we use grass, a plant that acts like a weed and chokes out and kills other plants we’re trying to grow? It’s a horrible choice for most situations.

Unlike grass which leads to soil compaction, clover has a root system that actually aerates the ground and allows other plants to grow. Its roots go deeper than most other plants and flowers and so it won’t compete with them for space or nutrients. Clover will actually help your other plants grow due to its nitrogen fixing qualities. In a clover lawn, you can easily dig a hole with your hands, drop a flower in it, and be confident that it’ll grow well.

In most yards there are a few well trafficked paths that clover may not stand up to too well. In this case, I suggest ground oregano. Much like grass, it grows very tightly and stands up to a pounding. However, it doesn’t spread as easily as grass and can therefore be trained into nice fragrant paths that release a faint sent of oregano every time you walk on it. It also feels amazing to walk on. If you find the oregano can’t stand the foot traffic either, just make wood chip or other types of paths. Defining and making paths is something you should be doing anyway. Your entire lawn is not a path and doesn’t get walked on everywhere.

6. Grass Lawns Are Ugly

Not particularly interesting, if you ask me.

This may be a matter of personal taste, but a bland uniform lawn that looks the same as 99% of your neighbours’ isn’t particularly attractive. It also discourages plant diversity and gardens. Where are the accent colours? Where’s the personality?

Once again clover reigns supreme in its ability to encourage an awesome and unique looking lawn tapestry. It has a deep green colour, darker than most grass and puts out a decent looking white or red flower spotted throughout its even growth. These flowers also attract bees which adds to the personality of your yard and helps pollination. You can easily plant other flowers and plant life to create your own yard masterpiece which requires little effort to make and maintain.

The post 6 Reasons Why Grass Lawns Suck appeared first on Valhalla Movement.

Kitty Hawk, NC (North Carolina), December 17, 1903.
Orville Wright’s famous first airplane flight.

So what the hell does this have to do with Valhalla? If you’ve read Ishmael, you probably know where I’m going with this

In the book by Daniel Quinn, an enormous ape named Ishmael discusses with a young man how human civilization has erred. He talks about the cultures of the “Takers” and the “Leavers”. The Takers are those who have subscribed to the currently prevailing cultural paradigms of mankind’s dominance over nature and the need for incessant “progress”. The Leavers are the humans who have recognized their place in nature among the rest of the biological community and have made attempts to live harmoniously, and thereby sustainably, with this fact. Unfortunately, because of the Takers’ prominence as well as their imperialistic approach to spreading their culture and control there are hardly any Leavers left in the world, and those who are left have no power in the system the Takers have set up. Worse yet, this system is about to leave extinct the entire community of life on earth.

Ishmael the Giant Ape
from the story by Daniel Quinn

“When you want to fly, the laws governing flight become relevant… And when you’re on the brink of extinction and want to live for a while longer, the laws governing life might conceivably become relevant.”

– Ishmael, pages 100-101

The fact is that Taker culture is destroying the ecology of our home planet. We strip our land of resources faster than the rate at which they regenerate. We emit a disgusting amount of gaseous pollutants which harm the quality of our air and accelerate climate change. We destroy entire ecosystems to keep up the lifestyle we’ve developed; and then somehow equate the furthering of this culture of consumption and speed as progress! To top it all off, in addition to ensuring the extinction of life on earth, our current system makes most humans miserable. We choke the soul & spirit either through poverty or a rat race which brings no fulfillment. There are obviously “laws governing life” which the Takers fail to follow. Ishmael notes that the Takers have quite successfully used the scientific method to deduct the laws governing flight, as well as biology, chemistry, physics, engineering and a slew of other disciplines. But no one has ever bothered to try to figure out what laws a civilization should follow to flourish among the community of life on earth.

“The early aeronauts had to proceed by trial and error, because they didn’t know the laws of aerodynamics – didn’t even know there were laws… The people of your culture are in the same condition when it comes to learning how they ought to live. They have to proceed by trial and error, because they don’t know the relevant laws – and don’t even know that there are laws”
Ishmael, page 97

In the face of how poorly our current model of civilization works, and how much destruction it causes, it is only rational to recognize it as an “error” and begin another “trial”. Valhalla seems to be a trial worth taking. The level of awareness and consciousness which will be put into the community will certainly make it a model that brings an important amount of progress. Human civilization as it stands has made enough recognizable failures to make sure that there will be much to learn about these laws simply from Valhalla’s first few re-attempts.

“[The Leavers were] building and abandoning one civilizational contraption after another, trying to find one that would fly. Done this way, it’s slow work. Proceeding simply by trial and error, it might have taken them another ten thousand years – or another fifty thousand years. They apparently had the wisdom to know there was no hurry. They didn’t have to get into the air. It made no sense to them to commit themselves to one civiliazational craft that was clearly headed for disaster, the way the Takers have done.”

Ishmael, page 120

Valhalla, especially as it is first attempted, will not be the final utopian model of civilization. Valhalla will try methods of running itself which will fail, it will learn from these failures, try again, and probably fail again and have to try a few more times. But a community such as Valhalla will have the awareness and versatility to recognize and fix problems when they arise. This is opposed to how the current nations of the world function, which recognize problems only after they have been brewing for generations, and then take several more generations of bickering to even scratch the surface of the issue. Yes, there will be disagreements within Valhalla. Yes, there will be problems which will present formidable challenges. But these problems will turn into lessons instead of quarrels, growth instead of self-destruction. The goal seems to be for Valhalla to work out enough about the laws of civilization to set a solid template for the next like community. And then hopefully that community can start off with enough knowledge to improve the model even further! No matter what happens, one thing is certain: we need to start trying new methods of organizing how we live as a community. And if we don’t take the first step, who will?

The post Valhalla & The Law of Flight appeared first on Valhalla Movement.