As I mentioned in another post, my husband and I have toyed with the idea of starting some sort of intentional community for years. We still have not done it primarily because we are asking ourselves the same questions I see here and not coming up with suitable answers -- or at least answers that make us feel like it might work out okay.
In concept, having a bunch of people (or in our case not so many -- we are really looking at only one or two other couples so we do not overburden the
land or multiply the potential conflicts of interest too greatly) with different strengths and talents all working together to create a comfortable and sucessful community, sounds great. In reality, the very differences between people are likely to be the downfall of the community. Americans in particular are so used to the idea of individuality and personal expression that we seldom think about the big picture -- in this case, the community (village or in a sense, the hive). These sorts of things probably work out much better in places where people are used to working together for common goals from the get go. Places like Asia and in areas where small villages still practice traditional farming and other skills. People in those places are not only more likely to be reared with a traditional community point of view, but they are also more used to living closely with many other people and doing more with less. What they would take as a matter of
course, most Americans -- coming as they do from a "more (or bigger) is better" framework, where the rights of the individual are paramount -- will feel claustrophobic and frustrated in most community environments. My opinion, of course.
Originally, thinking about this, we sort of came down to the idea that we would offer a place to a couple or couples as a "free" homestead for them to build on as they pleased (within the one restriction that the home must be green, and considerate of its surroundings, both plant and animal) in exchange for help on the rest of the place. Of course that immediately
led to the question of what would be a reasonable amount of "help" for each of us to feel we got our fair share from the bargain. Then that led to the sticky question of what we -- as the original landowners -- would do if the couple turned out to be incompatible. Would we be able to evict them from a homestead they built themselves on our land? What sort of compensation would be
enough to pay them for what would then revert to us? Or would it revert to us? Would the homestead become something of a right-of-way or squatter situation where the other people would have earned right of place through their homesteading actions? How many years or how much work would it take to make that case if it came to a legal action?
The ramifications hit us like a ton of bricks and we stopped considering it that way. Years went by while we tried to sort out other ways to do this. We considered just going with a "hired hand", where someone would merely live here -- through the traditional arrangement of the landowner providing a home and a small salary in exchange for a set amount of help on the place. The problem with that is that we would first have to build a house for them and that is the sort of thing we were wanting help with in the first place, so a Catch-22. Also, we live very hand-to-mouth, so providing any salary is problematic.
We considered offering a "you scratch our backs and we will scratch yours" arrangement where we could help them build if they helped us build, but realized that was just the same thing we came up with originally -- and with the same set of potential problems.
The only thing we could think of that seemed equitable and lacking in potential legal problems was to simply
sell land to someone else -- with payment being that help we needed instead of cash. But... again, there came the little voice saying... "What is an equitable amount of help?" "What if we don't like them? Now it is their land and we CAN'T kick them out!"
So, we are still thinking about it, but we haven't been able to come up with a good solution that considers the needs of both sides (or multiple sides). Our ideal situation would be one in which 2 or 3 vegetarian/vegan singles, couples or families lived on a restricted section of this piece of land (75 acres abutting Mark Twain National Forest near Hercules Glade Wilderness in SW Missouri) -- with the majority of the land managed as a wildlife sanctuary. We would join together for
gardening enough food to allow everyone to grow enough for the vegetable needs of their family. We
might join together in an online sales of arts/crafts, possibly a small eco-tourism venture and/or farmer's market type business for our cash needs while maintaining private lives "after hours". [NOTE: My husband and I are artists and naturalists. In addition I also write and have a degree in anthropology/archaeology and have worked as a teacher. We also have extensive
experience in pretty much every aspect of homesteading -- from animal husbandry to growing gardens, preserving foods, foraging for wild foods, blacksmithing and carpentry skills, sewing and so forth -- and conservation skills (we restored the limestone glades on our land with the aid of the Missouri Department of Conservation and we are skilled with both chainsaws and controlled burn equipment). We also have broad experience with wild animals as we are both ex-zookeepers, as well as longtime rescuers of a huge number of domestic animals from abusive situations. Those are some of the things we could bring to a community relationship.]
Anyway, I am rambling, but I wanted to put in my two cents on this topic as it is one I consider almost daily. I think the secret to sucess may be as simple as finding the right people -- those folks who share your goals and aspirations. In our case, the planet is the most important thing to us. Far above personal comfort or financial sucess. We want to live as green and on as small a
footprint as possible. We want to leave this place tied to a conservation easement to prevent development when we are gone, and others would have to be like-minded and supportive of all that. If anyone reading this has any interest in discussing a possible relationship like this, PLEASE contact me.
1
(I was celibate for the duration). I learned a little about non-violent communication, and that having a community mental health counselor was immensely valuable. I learned how to remodel a 1970's singlewide (I'd hoped to learn about aquaculture and gasification). I met some really awesome people, and some people who really pushed my buttons. I learned that everyone we encounter in community is reflections of aspects of our selves, and although it was difficult, I gained the most when I could suspend judgement and really try to understand the issues I saw reflected back at me. I learned that being raised a middle class American meant I was culturalized with an unconscious attitude of entitlement and individuality that makes for a very steep learning curve in seeking community. I learned I have issues with authority figures, especially older males. (I kinda knew that already).
??: My most stated phrase at the second community was "It's SO beautiful!" 
Not that the second community was without it's drama, personal learning curve, and moments of angst. It's impossible to get a group of people living and working together and not have drama.
