Divide and Build New: A community to discuss Parallel Society and Strategy
(media.communities.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (18)
sorted by:
(r/200acres: It was a sub about anti-modernist homesteading. BANNED)
Interesting. That sounds similar to what me and rightsidefunding are doing in the new sub. I'm one of the mods for this forum. This is definitely good material to discuss and expand upon there.
Yeah the original reason IIRC for the "200 arces" bit was that a bunch of people would pool their resources to buy the 200 acre plot and have a self-sufficient community of independent homesteaders
Then the reason it was banned IIRC was that sometimes it was mentioned that some of those communities would be white and ethnically homogeneous, which of course is a big no-no on reddit.
Building a small community makes more sense to me than just taking your family into the boonies (forest) and then just survive out there. The life of a prepper alone is not the way to go.
The truth of homogeneous societies is that they are more safe and the folks there are more united under their culture and history. This is how human beings thrive. Reddit hates truth. Only through lies can authoritarians control others. This is why we need to build new systems away from Leftists.
I have no issue with racially homogeneous communities, and I would say to people who do take issue with it: not everyone shares your views, and people who do not should be allowed the freedom to live someplace where they are allowed to pursue their vision of a racially homogeneous community.
I simply mention it as the reason they were banned from reddit.
They cannot abide racially homogenous communities anywhere. Can't have beacons of sanity broadcasting truth to their empire of lies.
People pooling resources and buying land cooperatively is fraught with big problems down the road 10 or 40 years later, I've seen it happen.
This is actually a pretty good report on how it went in the last cycle during the back to the land movement of the 60s and 70s, and there were plenty of other places like it. Not being able to acquire title to sell and get out of a cooperative like that is a giant problem.
https://www.gq.com/story/californias-vanishing-hippie-utopias
Not that you want to be a hippie, but the problems remain the same.
I think it's probably a better idea to buy a place/some land in a small town community that already exists and has basic amenities.
It's a fair point. An idea I think is a bit neglected in our circles is to find some already existing town in a desirable area with a population of 100 or so (many exist in the middle of the country) and just settle there and integrate into the population. Think The Free State Project except on a much smaller scale. And you don't have to worry about building all of the infrastructure from scratch.
We used to drink with a friendly old geezer I really liked who was from Poplar Bluff Missouri. It sounded idyllic, he came from a farm family, so I looked it up. Typical 1920s/30s grid built little town with very productive farmland; topsoil said to be 30 ft. deep.
Those kinds of places are still comparatively cheap and the neighbors are already country.
I agree with this: the analogy I have made before is: imagine you are your ancestors first settling in America. There are other humans in this land, but their values and systems of governance are so foreign to you as to be unsuitable for use. So you do your own thing acting as though they do not exist, and only trade/deal with them as necessary.
We are those ancestors today, sadly.