"Communes"

Excerpt from Rudolf Bahro, "Building the Green Movement"
(London: GMP, 1986) pp. 87-91


"The decision in favour of a commune perspective assumes a considerably longer path than the 'march through the institutions', and envisages a much deeper reorganization than any which is possible via the state. Under the Damocles sword of the Bomb, and looking at the clock with its hands pointing almost to midnight, we still trust that we have time, in the end by refusing to let this be determined by mechanical clockwork. We dare to make an experiment, not ultimately for the sake of this or that particular commune - although we won't move so easily as from one shared apartment to another - but for the principle of a life beyond the currently valid norms and career paths of civilization.

Moreover, we recognize in a relatively autonomous basic unit of social life which is no longer economically expansive (self-reliance) the only chance in the long term of tearing up the roots of the East- West conflict and above all of our opposition to the Third World. With a pinch of salt one might say (and indeed with the accent much more on the cultural than on the economic-technological aspect and with regard to the seeds of human community which are still present there), that the path of reconciliation with the Third World might consist in our becoming Third World ourselves. The existing techno-bureaucratic structure here can in no way be reformed in such a way that the rest of humanity could live with it. If we allow ourselves to be guided by the fear of 'poverty', we continue to apportion naked misery to the others.

Yet however far we may be led by the insight that communes are the main way to uproot the exterminist peril, deeper seated still is our motivation by the psychological reward which we promise ourselves from the accompanying self-transformation. We build on the fact that the commune organization is anthropologically favourable, in comparison with other arrangements - corresponds more to or human nature, among other things by avoiding both the neurotic- making family and the alienating big organization, while the inner pressure to conform can still be balanced by sufficient external contact. It is also the social form which most readily permits the control of social power.

The commune is the basic social form for a new, more economical way of life (a 'domestic' way of life, as it has been called). Its purpose is not the production of means of subsistence - whether of the agrarian or industrial type, whether in the country or in the town - but the reproduction of the commune-type community. Economic efficiency is not negated, but subordinated to ecological demands and above all to the development of social relationships and the self-development and transformation of individuals. In the ideal case the commune network is socially so strong that all material and institutional infrastructure on any but the local levels remains dependent upon it, instead of the other way round as formerly.

Historical and recent experiences show that this produces a structure in which the feminine element permeates the regulation of community affairs from the bottom up; within a large organization and with the prevailing type of rationality and division of labour women's liberation is impossible.

Externally, too, the function of the commune is not primarily economic. Neither are job creation, taking the burden off the welfare state, producing food, etc. its purpose from the point of view of society as a whole. But among other things it also does all that. Since in this respect it represents a constructive alternative to the crisis of the society of labour and the danger of an escalation of violence which is unfavourable in every respect for our objectives, there is the prospect of winning public support so that we can divert aid from the formal sector towards setting up a commune-type mass movement. The fact that such means would reach us principally via the state is in itself no counter-argument, since the resources concentrated there belong to society, as whose organ we are acting - especially as most of these resources are otherwise deployed either directly or indirectly in a destructive way, in order to continue the present overall course. The achievement of conditions under which any type of deforming state control is out of the question will depend on the social power relationship. The autonomy of the commune movement is the highest priority...

The real alternative which the commune poses to the industrial Goliath is not of an economic but of a cultural nature. The subordination of economics to living is only the first condition. Basically we are talking about a system of values which is new for modern Europe and also modified in comparison with medieval Christian Europe...

If we take a look in history at the foundations on which new cultures were based or existing ones essentially changed, we always come up against the fact that in such times people returned to those strata of consciousness which are traditionally described as religious. In order to be at all capable of a new definition of their culture, and thus of their behavior, they must find a practice to dismantle their previous psychological structures and be socialized anew. Psychotherapists sometimes go part of this way, but it could hardly be completed by the individual man or woman without reference to those horizons which were symbolized by people like Christ or Buddha.

With such a horizon the alternative reaches back to historical experience with modernity - particularly where it calls itself 'left' - has systematically suppressed, so that it no longer even has any direct familiarity with it.

Almost one and a half thousand years ago the Benedictines gave the new western culture emerging from the collapse of Antiquity not only a very significant economic impulse, which at its peak involved up to 30 per cent of the population. Above all, they guaranteed the cultural synthesis of the new order which was current at that time, on a meditative basis - hence 'pray (first) and work' - upon which the whole social radiation of their practice was dependent. The intellectual impulse from the monasteries which is acknowledged in all historiography was essentially a spiritual one. It came into being by people getting involved in communicating so intensively with 'God' as the epitome of our transpersonal, generic essence which ultimately originates in the universe, that they found their own true selves beneath the rubble and the character armour of their socialization - the energy source of their charismatic effect.

We need a new Benedictine order. It can only flourish in a socially effective way within a commune-type framework. At the moment, those who must come together in it are still divided up into religious (and sometimes also pseudo-religious) sectarianism on the one hand and political sectarianism on the other, and one of the most important reasons might be that between these two poles the load-bearing social centre, the real context of life, is lacking. Certainly, for a preparatory phase in which the model is crystallized, separation or dissociation from the remainder of society will outweigh association with it, that is internal contact will outweigh external. (In this connection our Third World debate is to a greater degree than we think also about our own alternative to 'development'.) Without a retreat at times there will be no transformation of ourselves and no radical influence on the general consciousness.

This new Benedictine movement will be different from the old in at least the following two respects, both of which concern the break with the foundations of patriarchy:

The spiritual culture will not be linked to a repressive monotheistic idea of God, which stems from oriental despotism and is designed for a hierarchical church. On this point the Judeo-Christian tradition must be broken. Happily Christ himself breaks out of this line at the deepest level of the image of him which has been handed down.

Social organization will not be linked to the separation of the sexes and sexual oppression, which corresponded to the Near Eastern and also the Hellenic origin of Christianity, a tradition which Christ likewise seems partially to have broken with.

"God" will be for both sexes simultaneously male and female, in some respects more the one, in others more the other. Community life will be based on the natural equilibrium between separation and communication of the sexes, and will give space to the uninhibited development of sensuality and sexuality.

For the beginning it comes down to one thing: that there should be some initiators (men and women) who make a personal decision, begin by preparing themselves and a project and gather around them a circle of fellow strivers. When, if not now, would the time be ripe?"