Ch. 3 - All for One, One for All

Dissident Heart · Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 3:31 pm Post subject: Neighborliness

McKibben's challenge is to reorient ourselves away from autistic economies of "hyper-individualism" toward local economies geared for "neighborliness" and ecological sustainability, what he calls "post-autistic" economic systems.

Our dominant economic model creates an autisitc world of hyper-individualistic self-absorption and increasing isolation: less time with family and friends, working longer hours, hidden away in internet alcoves, profound disconnect from those who farm, harvest, transport and deliver our food supplies, or make our clothes, or own the businesses in our community, or make the decisions in our political arenas...and a general growth apart and away from each other. In 1920 we could expect to find 10 neigbors per acre; by 1990 it has reduced to 4. New homes have doubled in size since 1970 with a decreasing density of 2 homes per acre. We are occupying 8 times more developed land (per capita) than 80 years ago.

Economists view human beings as primarily individuals, and not as members of a community. Their ideal of the human being is a self-contained want machine bent on maximizing utility. This has created a surplus of individualism and a deficit of companionship. I like how McKibben puts it:

Quote:
We don't need each other for anything anymore. If we have enough money, we're insulated from depending on those around us- which is as much a loss as a gain. By some surveys, 3/4 of Americans do not know who their neighbors. That's a novel condition for primates; it will take a while to repair those networks. (117)

RaulRamos: McKibben’s main argument in favour of communities relies on the fact that they allow a sustainable economy and they have a positive influence on our mental health. To some extent or other both assertions are true, but they – especially the second – require deeper analysis than the one provided by McKibben.

I agree that Mckibben does not provide an exhaustive examination of what definitively, precisely and universally a community is and how they influence economic systems, and vice versa. But, I don't think that's necessary for this book either. I think McKibben relies upon many of those kinds of studies, and the lion's share of his argument rests upon the conclusions drawn from those more extensive examinations. I think the strength of his book involves the very many examples of really existing practices that confirm the more extensive conclusions he builds upon. I am not so interested in "deeper analysis", but in inventive practices that reflect an intelligent grasp of ecological, communal, and individual necessities. I think the examples and arguments that McKibben provides reflect good science and practical wisdom....and considering the ecological urgencies we face, that is good enough for me.

irishrose: I just don’t appreciate the unjustified causal relationship McKibben attributes between his perceptions of “community” and “happiness.”

I think it's clear that human happiness is difficult to measure and calculate, and I agree that McKibben does not spend as much time defending his hedonics as I would like. I think his connections between participatory economics, communal responsibility and individual health and happiness are sound within the context of his narrative. He doesn't offer alternative findings that reach different conclusions. Then again, I don't think it necessary to prove that selfish, greedy, self-absorbed narcissism is devastating for families, communties and economic systems. I think his plea for neighborliness is eminently sound; and I think the examples he offers supports his plea.

Giving McKibben the last word here, supporting his efforts not to "discard individualism for some drab collectivist future; instead, we reimbed individuals in some context where our impulses make more sense and create less damage."


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	TRANSCRIPTS	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CONTACT