Everyone has heard of Woodstock, August 15-18 1969, but how many have heard of the first Nambassa February 1978 [ NZ ] which was a arts and crafts alternative lifestyle festival. The 1979 Nambassa festival, and later ones , were more of a music festival and had gone away from the alternative lifestyle that the original festival idea was set up for. After living in a commune on and off for a few years [ 1968/69 ] this was a part of my lifestyle that stays with me to this day.

Beware, if nudity offends you.

Duncan wrote: Beware, if nudity offends you.

Only male nudity is offensive. That and fat chicks. I can't imagine anyone ever seeing Elle MacPherson (in her prime) naked and saying "cover that body at once, it is an offense to the eyes!"

The whole hippy thing was well-intentioned but naive. It wasn't really an attractive lifestyle in the long term, was it?

Soi Dog wrote:

Duncan wrote: Beware, if nudity offends you.

Only male nudity is offensive. That and fat chicks. I can't imagine anyone ever seeing Elle MacPherson (in her prime) naked and saying "cover that body at once, it is an offense to the eyes!"

The whole hippy thing was well-intentioned but naive. It wasn't really an attractive lifestyle in the long term, was it?[/quote]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Unfortunately consumerism and governments don't want people to get out of the system . Governments give things that people don't want, and without asking and demand that you use what they offer. This makes living a alternative lifestyle very hard. By that I mean try having a home birth and opt out of the health care system. Or try teaching your kids at home. In many countries you cannot make your own beer or grow your own tobacco, let alone have your own business manufacturing and selling these and many other products .
No, you must have a licence or permit to contribute $$$$ to a system that a alternative life styler does not want..

One thing that still sticks in my mind from my commune days is we were told that in past history, families were very big and as the years have progressed families have got smaller and smaller and will get even smaller still, eventually a family will consist of just 2 people living together, [ unmarried ] then 3 or more people living together, [ think of flatmates ] . A future family may consist of up to 10 people , all unrelated to each other. Ok , we are not at that stage yet but think of the benefits in that sort of life style.
Thinking back to the 1968 years our leader was well ahead of his time, when most people were still thinking marriage and 4 babies

http://ri.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrSbhr ... Eljnp0hj4-
http://ri.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0SO81H ... iuQxVhBo8-

Duncan wrote:

Soi Dog wrote:

Duncan wrote: Beware, if nudity offends you.

Only male nudity is offensive. That and fat chicks. I can't imagine anyone ever seeing Elle MacPherson (in her prime) naked and saying "cover that body at once, it is an offense to the eyes!"

The whole hippy thing was well-intentioned but naive. It wasn't really an attractive lifestyle in the long term, was it?[/quote]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Unfortunately consumerism and governments don't want people to get out of the system . Governments give things that people don't want, and without asking and demand that you use what they offer. This makes living a alternative lifestyle very hard. By that I mean try having a home birth and opt out of the health care system. Or try teaching your kids at home. In many countries you cannot make your own beer or grow your own tobacco, let alone have your own business manufacturing and selling these and many other products .
No, you must have a licence or permit to contribute $$$$ to a system that a alternative life styler does not want..

One thing that still sticks in my mind from my commune days is we were told that in past history, families were very big and as the years have progressed families have got smaller and smaller and will get even smaller still, eventually a family will consist of just 2 people living together, [ unmarried ] then 3 or more people living together, [ think of flatmates ] . A future family may consist of up to 10 people , all unrelated to each other. Ok , we are not at that stage yet but think of the benefits in that sort of life style.
Thinking back to the 1968 years our leader was well ahead of his time, when most people were still thinking marriage and 4 babies

http://ri.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrSbhr ... Eljnp0hj4-
http://ri.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0SO81H ... iuQxVhBo8-

Tinfoil hat time.

Duncan wrote:Unfortunately consumerism and governments don't want people to get out of the system . Governments give things that people don't want, and without asking and demand that you use what they offer.

You don't think such things need some regulation? Should there be no standards enforced for home-schooling? Should there be no health and safety guidelines for goods manufactured in people's homes. No sanitary inspections and licenses for places making anything edible? The unregulated world free of government interference that you pine for existed for ages. Sometimes "freedom" means free-to-piss-in-the-home-made-soup the lady down the street sells from her porch. The honor system didn't work.

..and if every couple produced 4 or more children for eternity, the population would double every 25 years. I thought the hippy ideals were all about sustainability. Such population growth is not sustainable. There is only so much arable land and fresh water to go around. Historically, large families were required to work the fields and then help financially support the elderly parents and grandparents. Using one's children as a retirement plan and workforce seems pretty selfish to me.